typhus – katana17

Monika Schaefer – The Flipside with Monika – Ep 04 with Oscar – Jul 20, 2024 – Transcript

admin — Tue, 23 Jul 2024 08:24:25 +0000

Monika Schaefer

The Flipside with Monika

Ep 04 with Oscar

Sat, Jul 20, 2024

[In this weekly podcast episode on Republic Broadcasting Network, Canadian nationalist and author, Monika Schaefer talks with long time fellow Canadian nationalist and founding member of the Truth and Justice for Germans Society, Oscar.

This discuss historical events, especially WWII, the “Holocaust”, 9/11, conspiracy theories, the demonization of Germans, race relations, democracy, nutrition, etc., from the perspective that we have been deceived about these topics, by the (((usual suspects))).

And btw, Monika very graciously gives myself and this blog a plug! Thank you Monika!

– KATANA]

https://www.republicbroadcastingarchives.org/the-flipside-with-monika-july-20-2024/

https://freespeechmonika.com

https://gab.com/MonikaSchaefer

Published on Sat, Jul 20, 2024

Description

Print this article Send e-mail
The Flipside with Monika, July 20, 2024
RBN
By RBN
July 20, 2024 20:18
Related Articles
The Flipside with Monika, July 13, 2024 2 13.Jul
The Flipside with Monika, June 29, 2024 13 29.Jun
The Flipside with Monika, July 6, 2024 4 06.Jul
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Subscribe: RSS
Episode 4 of the Flipside with Monika show notes: Today’s guest is Oscar, one of the founding members of the Truth and Justice for Germans Society.
Social media
Share this article
Print this article Send e-mail
RBN
By RBN
July 20, 2024 20:18

_____________

TRANSCRIPT QUALITY = 5 Stars

1 Star — Poor quality with many errors, contains nonsense text 2 Stars — Low quality with many errors, some nonsense text. 3 Stars — Medium quality with some errors. 4 Stars — Good quality with only a few errors. 5 Stars — High quality with few to no errors.

NOTE: Users can help improve the quality of this transcript by putting corrections in the Comment/Leave a Reply section. Thanks.

TRANSCRIPT

(Words: 6,303 – 1:00:00 mins)

[Intro music]

[01:05]

Monika Schaefer: Good evening. It is Saturday, the 20th of July in the year 2024, and you are tuned into the Republic Broadcasting Network. I am your host, Monika Schaefer, and this is episode four of The Flipside with Monika. I’d like to encourage you, first of all, if you have the means, to support RBN. It does cost money to run a network such as this and they are doing a summer fundraiser in which you can get something in return for your donation. Well, you always get something in return. That is a wonderful free speech network!

But more specifically, they do have some special T-shirts to give away. You can find the information how to donate like the telephone number on their website, Republicbroadcasting.org. Before I introduce today’s guest, and I am hoping he does show up, I just talked to him less than 2 hours ago, but I think we’re having a hard time reaching him right now.

But anyway, before I do that, I have some other things to say. So I’d like to give a shout out to a patriot whose online persona is Katana. He has a website, katana17.com. And I’ve been acquainted with Katana since just days after I made my video in 2016. That was that fateful video called Sorry Mom, I Was Wrong About the Holocaust. And the reason I got acquainted with him then is because he transcribed it right away, and he put that transcription onto his website with memes and images. It was really nice. I was quite surprised, actually, that that showed up.

So then I was introduced to his work. And what he does is he transcribes a lot of videos and interviews, which he thinks are important to preserve in this other format, the written format or the printed word. There are many advantages to having things in a written form, and he had a section back then – I’m sure he still does on his website – that explained the many different advantages to having things like videos and interviews in the written form.* I mean, you could print it off and read it. It does give it some degree of permanency. Some people prefer to read things rather than listen to an interview. There’s all kinds of reasons.

Anyway, then, over the years, since 2016, I have received a tremendous amount of support and encouragement and assistance from Katana.

In fact, his encouragement for me to write a book was absolutely critical! And I don’t think I ever would have written that book that I wrote without Katana’s encouragement. And the book that has the same title as my fateful video, the Sorry Mom, I Was Wrong About the Holocaust. The video was just six minutes long the book is a little bit longer than that! [chuckling]

Anyway, so I just want to say thank you, Katana. Oh, and of course, and the reason I wanted to do this shout out now, I’m very grateful to him for also having transcribed the first three episodes of this show, The Flipside with Monika.

So thank you to Katana!

Okay, now I would like to introduce my guest. I’m wondering if he’s had any luck getting on or., …

Oscar: I’m on now.

Monika Schaefer: Okay, good.

Okay, so I’d like to introduce my guest, who was one of the founding members of the Truth and Justice for Germans Society back in 2014. And his online persona is Oscar.

Now, through the years, I have learned so much from this man. Every time we had conversations together, he shared his insights with me, not only on historical events, but about race relations, about democracy, and even about nutrition.

So I think we might connect some of the dots on these seemingly disparate topics tonight.

But first, let me welcome Oscar onto the broadcast and ask you if you could please tell us, just give us a little bit of background. What led you and what motivated you to become a founding member of the Truth and Justice for Germans Society? Which, by the way, just before you do that, I just wanted to mention that I am involved in that society. So is of great interest to me. And the title of that society does say it all, really, what it’s about. I mean, obviously there’s lots to it, but the Truth and Justice for Germans Society. Okay. Welcome Oscar onto the show.

Oscar: Hi, Monika. Can you hear me okay?

Monika Schaefer: Yes, I can. Thank you.

Oscar: Okay. Yeah. Thanks for having me on. So I joined the Truth and Justice for Germans Society, I believe it was 2014. The society was started by a German fellow who had been, … This was kind of like a project he’d been working on for a long time. He put a lot of information together in a website, and then he wanted to create, like, an organization, a society to go along with the website. So he approached myself and a couple other people, a couple of friends, and asked us to help them set up this society. So that’s sort of how it started.

Now, myself and the two other people that he approached to help set it up, I mean, we all knew each other. We were sort of, I guess, at that point called “conspiracy theorists” because we were discussing, and 9/11 and all sorts of other things, and the direction society is going in. And, of course, you know, World War Two plays a big part in that. So that’s sort of how it initially got started.

[08:15]

Monika Schaefer: Yeah. And obviously, if you were friends with him and he asked you to help with the founding of the Truth and Justice for Germans Society, it means that you had opened your eyes to what is going on in the world.

And you mentioned the word “conspiracy theorists”. Yeah, that’s a great term that was foisted on us, I think probably back in, after the Kennedy [JFK] assassination, because they noticed that too many people were noticing that something was wrong with their assessment of things. So they turned that term into such a derogatory term. And it’s been used ever since to make fun of or belittle people who are actually seeing, noticing patterns.

But, yeah, go ahead.

Oscar: It’s just to discredit people who are interested in finding out the truth and what’s really going on.

And also researching and discovering that most of what we’ve been told about history is a lie! You know, most of everything we’re told in society is a lie! You know, whether its history, nutrition, immigration, “Holocaust”, everything!

Monika Schaefer: Exactly!

Oscar: It’s all a big lie!

Monika Schaefer: That’s why I thought we might connect some of those dots today. Because even if it sounds like those topics that I mentioned, that I have personally learned a lot of things from you, and that was including nutrition, sounds like that doesn’t really have that much to do with the other topics like history, Holocaust, race relations. What does nutrition have to do with that?

But then, …

Oscar: Well, …

Monika Schaefer: Go ahead, please.

Oscar: Nutrition has a lot to do with it because really, I mean, what our enemy is doing is weakening us! And they poison our food, and then they give us an upside down food pyramid. When you’re not eating a nutritionally sound diet you’re going to be weaker physically and mentally. So it’s part of the overall war against White people.

Monika Schaefer: Exactly!

Oscar: Nutrition factors in very, very much. I mean you have the vegan and vegetarian cults which ensnares, like, most young women, and this creates more health problems. It makes it harder for them to conceive. So it’s also an attack on White fertility.

Monika Schaefer: I agree.

And you mentioned against the White race in particular. Do you think that the nutritional attack or the assault on us through false information about nutrition, do you think that is specifically aimed at European people, at White people?

Oscar: Completely! Because pretty much every young White female girl is ensnared in the vegetarian-vegan cult. They get them young and they get them in this cult, and it creates nothing but health problems. And like, I said, it’s going to make it very difficult for these people to conceive children.

Monika Schaefer: Yeah, I mean, I would agree with you. And they, I think they can do it through taking advantage of the empathy, we love nature, we love animals. Isn’t that part of it?

Oscar: Yeah. Yes, very much so! The whole thing about the cruelty to animals and, it’s like the vegans are all about:

“Oh, you know, we’re against the killing and torture of animals!”

And meanwhile, that person has like a nice watch with a leather strap and leather jacket. And I mean, there’s a lot of hypocrisy that goes along with this whole agenda as well. But, at the end of the day, it is what it is. And it’s just one of the many weapons of used to attack the White race.

Monika Schaefer: Yeah, I agree. You know, the other day we were talking on the phone in anticipation of this, and we were talking about diseases in the past, and specifically we talked about the plague.

And I think that many of us have reached different conclusions now about that. Do you want to talk a little bit about that?

Oscar: Well, again, I mean, we were told that the plague was this highly contagious disease that was spread from human to human.

And I think certainly the Covid scam has opened a lot of people’s eyes to the fact that viruses are not real and like, human contagion is not a thing. You know, the concept that humans pass disease to one another. I mean, if that was true, we would have gone extinct a long time ago.

So this brings you back to the other theory of poisoning of the wells, which now seems to have a little more legitimacy once we start realizing that it wasn’t a contagious outbreak spreading from human to human, it was something else.

I mean, there is some documented evidence of people being caught poisoning wells, and tried and executed. But the six o’clock news is not going to talk about stuff like that.

Monika Schaefer: No, and neither are they going to teach that to the children in school what the real causes of the plague were. And they probably won’t mention the (((tribe))) that, who were these well poisoners. These are things that were not taught in the mainstream sources nor in our public education system!

And interesting. I’m glad you brought the, made the connection between then and now. This Covid, the bio-weapon, which they coerced through very strong measures. Like people were fired, people were not allowed into places, young people were not allowed into universities, or institutions like that, if they didn’t roll up their sleeve and get that bio-weapon. Oh, excuse me, they called it the “vaccine”. But even now it’s like that has disappeared from the news cycle because they’ve got other things to distract the public from.

Like, for example, Trump’s ear supposedly being shot and everybody’s talking about that now. And this other huge matter which is affecting millions of people who are either dying or are severely injured, that’s just gone away. It’s like it’s being forgotten. Or is it being forgotten? Do you want to comment about that? And bring then to now?

[16:57]

Oscar: The mainstream news is not going to ever address the number of vaccine injuries or the number of people who’ve died from the vaccine. They’re just going to ignore it. The only place you’ll get any news about that or information is on the alternate media.

And like you said, they’re just going to move on to their next pandemic or their next crisis or whatever, like the supposed assassination of Donald Trump. I mean, all these events are very fishy.

Monika Schaefer: Oh, yeah, that’s definitely an understatement. I would say! [chuckling] It’s a piece of theater. And even at that, even if it was real, we’re talking about a governance system, which we touched on this in our pre-show conversation the other day, too, about democracy.

And I hope we’re not jumping topics here too much, but I do think this is all related, and we can tie this all together then. But this governance system that I was taught in school:

“Oh, it’s government for the people, of the people, by the people!”

And this was hammered into our brains! And we just thought it was so great because they always told us it was the best system, really the only system. Like, it was so solidly implanted into our psyche that really we could just think:

“Well, how can it be any other way? Of course this is the best system.”

But what do you think about that, Oscar? Should we even be paying attention to voting and democracy? And is this working for us? Do you think this is really working for us? [chuckling] Go ahead.

Oscar: Well, no, it doesn’t work. Your vote doesn’t matter, really. I mean, democracy is just a, just a warm up round for full on communism. You know, we certainly saw that with the Covid pandemic. We all had this notion that we live in a democracy, and you wake up the next day and you’re not allowed to leave your house, and if you don’t take an injection, you’re going to lose your job. It’s like, how did that happen overnight? That’s, well, so much for our democracy!

Monika Schaefer: Actually, I find that a really interesting statement to say that democracy is actually a stepping stone to communism. To me, that’s a new idea. It’s really, really good, actually. We should expand on that a little bit more. We should explore that a little bit more. How does that happen? You’re right. Like, going from, … yeah, go ahead.

Oscar: Well, your vote doesn’t matter. I mean, let’s say you run a business and you have a family, you own a house. You have a vested interest in the state of the economy. You have a vested interest in the health of your country s But when you go vote and then let’s say this 20 year old girl with pink hair and she’s a transgender lesbian. Well, your vote carries the same weight as her vote. She has no stake in the economy. You know, she just wants to tear everything down!

So that’s another problem.

Monika Schaefer: I guess that is a communist idea, isn’t it? That everybody is equal, so everybody has a vote! No matter what position you have in life. That right there is, …

Oscar: Well, again, I mean, this notion of “everybody and everything is equal”, that’s a communist ideal, because nothing is further from the truth!

Monika Schaefer: Exactly!

Oscar: People that have no vested interest in the economy, the state of the nation, whatever, their vote carries the same weight as people that have a very definite vested interest in the economy and the nation. So this is a problem.

And Western countries are all multicultural now, and different cultures have different values, different outlooks on life and they’re going to vote for the party that’s soft on immigration so they can bring all their relatives into the country. Democracy doesn’t work. It creates, like, a mob rule.

Monika Schaefer: Yeah. No, this is a very profound idea, I have to say. I mean, I was so into the whole “democracy thing” all my life, and then I even ran as a candidate, and please don’t hold it against me, but I ran in that Green Party, which I now understand to be “watermelon party”, which is really the worst of them all!

And what I mean by “watermelon”, it’s green on the outside and red on the inside. It is really a communist party!

But now we’re talking about the whole idea of democracy is communist, but the Green party legitimizes it. Go ahead.

Oscar: The hidden agenda of the Green Party, and like because about the same time, Green parties appeared in pretty much every Western country. But the Green party was used as a vehicle to start introducing all these crazy “green initiatives”. And then over time, all these ideas eventually became adopted by the mainstream parties. But they used the Green party to float these ideas out into the public sphere. And then over time, the mainstream parties just eventually adopted all these policies.

Monika Schaefer: Bingo! You nailed it! Because this is the idea that’s been percolating in my head, too. This very idea that the Green Party actually sets the agenda, even though they are still, and they have been very much just on the fringe. Took them a long time before they even got a single seat. Then they got a few seats, and yet they are setting the agenda, all the way!

In fact, I’ll just tell you a little quote from Elizabeth May. And I used to think it was so noble! Elizabeth May, the leader of the Green Party of Canada back then, when she said this, and now still she says:

“I will always.”

Sorry. No, this is a different quote. She said:

“I don’t care if they steal our ideas, as long as they implement them! I don’t care if they don’t give us credit for their ideas. I just care that they use our ideas and put them into practice, like implement them.”

So I thought that was really noble because I thought:

“Wow, she’s so modest. She doesn’t need to take the credit.”

And yet what I see is that she was basically encapsulating exactly what happens, is that the Green party sets the agenda. They bring forth the ideas, and then the main parties, the big parties, the “gray parties”, as the Greens used to call them, they implement them. Isn’t that interesting?

Oscar: Yeah, well, once they’ve, you know, been floating around in, out there on the media for X number of years, people get used to hearing this and then over time they just become more acceptable to these ideas. When you look at these green policies they’re trying to implement, like this Green New deal right now. I mean, really it just ties into Agenda 2030.

So it’s not about going green. It’s about going without!

Monika Schaefer: Indeed.

Oscar: You know, we have an abundance of energy and resources. But those who pull the strings, want everyone to be equally poor. And that includes being energy poor.

[26:53]

Monika Schaefer: Through a big, big fat lie about carbon and carbon dioxide. I mean, that like, … Go ahead. Sorry.

Oscar: That’s the biggest lie of them all, is the CO2 is going to destroy the atmosphere and kill us all!

Monika Schaefer: And yet CO2 is the stuff of life! [chuckling]

Oscar: Like the pre-industrial CO2 levels of 280 parts per million. I mean, that was dangerous. Dangerously low!

Monika Schaefer: Exactly!

Oscar: That’s approaching extinction level.

Monika Schaefer: Exactly!

Oscar: So now it’s up to, like, around 400, or more. But the result of that is the earth is getting greener and agricultural yields have improved. And when plants get more CO2, they can survive with less water. So it’s an all around better situation if there’s a bit more CO2 in the atmosphere.

Monika Schaefer: Yeah, I think it’s interesting that you say:

“That’s the biggest lie of all.”

Because I think you’re right. And it took me longer to dissect that lie or to come to terms with it than the Holocaust lie, even though the Holocaust has been drummed into us since we were born, basically. And the Holocaust lie is punishable if you question that one.

Whereas if you questioned their narrative on climate change, so far anyway, you don’t go to jail for it. Although they start inserting words like:

“Oh, climate denier!”

And we know that that weaponized term has its power from the “Holocaust denier” term. So who knows in future what all they will deem us criminal for disagreeing with their narrative on.

But, yeah, that one is a huge lie because they are using that narrative of climate change and that we are burning up and we are responsible for ruining the planet. They are using that for their 2030 agenda or whatever all these other agendas are called.

And I think we are going to a break now, but we will be right back.

[29:21]

[music]

[29:44]

[ad]

[36:10]

[music]

[37:00]

All right, I would like to welcome you back to The Flipside with Monika. And I would like to also invite you, if you would like to call in, the number is 512-248-8252. And there’s also a 1800 number if you can’t call on that number, it’s 1800 313 9443.

But first, I’d like to just make some more observations with my guest, Oscar. And you probably know what song that was on the bumper music after the ads, before and after the ads there. And the fact that there are many German people who have been so brought down to their knees that they flinch when they hear that music because they have been made to feel badly about their national anthem. Do you want to comment on that, Oscar?

Oscar: Well, I guess that’s all part and parcel of the, … After World War Two, they instituted the so-called de-Nazification program. You know, pretty much every school book, every book published between 1933 and 1945 was destroyed by the Allies. They were the real book burners of history!

So that was part of the de-Nazification process. I mean, everything about National Socialism had to be destroyed, because it was the most effective form of governance that the modern world has seen! It wasn’t just the economic miracle. It was also a cultural and spiritual revolution as well. And if it wasn’t squashed with World War Two, it would have spread to most of the Western world.

So this is one of the main reasons for World War Two, what Hitler and what the Germans were doing. It was showing everyone that there’s a better way! You know, it was really a struggle of European nationalism versus jewish globalism.

And unfortunately, the end result, the bad guys won and the good guys lost. I’m referring to the Germans. They were the good guys in World War Two!

Monika Schaefer: Indeed, indeed! Everything been turned on its head, hasn’t it?

Oscar: Yeah, I like to quote what Goebbels said once. He said:

“If we are to lose this war, the world will fall into a state of eternal darkness.”

And, well, right now things look pretty dark in the Western world! [chuckling] You know, we’re being massively overrun with third world immigrants. Our economies are being trashed. We just went through this whole Covid scam where they injected 80% of the population with some mysterious poison.

Now they’re throwing this climate change green agenda at us. And there’s the digital currency looming on the horizon somewhere.

So, yeah, I mean, this is everything that Hitler and the Germans were fighting against. This is exactly what they were fighting against!

Monika Schaefer: Exactly! Yeah. It makes me weep to know that, to learn that! And then to have Hitler be so demonized! I’m telling you, it took a long time, even after I learned the truth about World War Two and that the Holocaust didn’t happen. And actually, everything was kind of backwards and reversed in terms of what they told us. Even then, it took a while before I could decontaminate myself from those lies about Hitler. Because even though I then understood that he was a good guy, not this devil incarnate, I would still flinch when I saw him portrayed in a positive light.

I have, in the meantime, been very successful at decontaminating myself from that mind poison, so I do not flinch any longer! And I really think he was one of the greatest men that ever lived!

And I will just say the jews, they head up making the curriculum, and they own the media, the mass media, and they have poisoned us with their lies and deceptions about Hitler. And I guess it’s because of that fantastic way of governing, the National Socialist way, and what you just described that was really, really great.

And I think you could expand on that. It was spiritual in addition to their attitude towards the environment, everything about it was so good! Like you say, it would have spread to many more countries. Go ahead.

Oscar: It definitely would have, especially when they can see that Hitler circumvented the international bankers, that the German economy was thriving. And other countries could have easily followed that same program and achieved similar levels of success. Because Germany was thriving in the middle of The [Great] Depression.

Monika Schaefer: Exactly!

Oscar: The United States and England were mired deep in the recession, mass unemployment, poverty, misery. And by 1935, the German economy was booming. The standard of living was rising dramatically. People were happy. People were optimistic about the future. So yeah, I mean this why, …

Monika Schaefer: And brought., … Go ahead, finish your thought there.

Oscar: Oh, yeah. I sort of lost it!

Monika Schaefer: Okay, no problem. He brought the Germans out of a state of poverty and suffering. Like after World War One, there was hunger in Germany. I know that from firsthand. Well, actually, I guess I should call it secondhand, it’s from my parents. Does one call that firsthand or secondhand?

Anyway, my parents, they lived that poverty after World War One. My dad was born in 1919. And, I mean, his mom took him to the doctor at age four because he was bow-legged*. So malnourished and he hadn’t started talking yet, and she was concerned about him. The doctor said:

“No, don’t worry, he’s fine.”

[* Rickets is a condition that results in weak or soft bones in children, and is caused by either dietary deficiency (Vitamin D) or genetic causes. Symptoms include bowed legs, stunted growth, bone pain, large forehead, and trouble sleeping.]

But that was the poverty that he was born into. And my mother, well, she was born a little bit later, 1928. But Germany after World War One was so poor that so many suicides took place. All kinds of things like that.

And then after Hitler came to power in 1933, things really, really changed!

And like you said, the middle of [The Great] Depression in the rest of the world, and Germany was doing very well, and leaders from various countries went to Germany to see:

“How did they do that here?”

And to see how he was doing that economic miracle.

So, yeah. Did you want to just comment? And then after that we could take a caller.

Oscar: Yeah, well, it’s actually not a complicated formula. He freed his people from the clutches of the jewish banking cartels. And of course, he also got rid of all the jewish sponsored degeneracy that was going on in Germany in the late twenties and early thirties, the Weimar Republic, I mean, so, …

Monika Schaefer: So, yeah, I like what you say. It was not a complicated formula! [chuckling] Get rid of jewish influence, jewish power! That is not complicated formula. Yeah.

Oscar: You have to get rid of the jewish money power and the jewish influence over your society. And I mean you just look at the United States today. Well, that’s like Weimar 2.0.

Monika Schaefer: It certainly is. And here in Canada, too.

Oscar: Yeah, but I mean, I’m not sure there’s a Hitler in the waiting to get us out of this mess!

Monika Schaefer: Yeah!

Oscar: I think this time every individual’s gotta see their own way out of it. And hopefully enough will do that it’ll create a big enough movement and change in society.

Monika Schaefer: Yes, that’s right. Everybody needs to act. And if you’re looking for leadership, just look in the mirror, and don’t wait for somebody else to do something. I think we’re at that stage. You’re absolutely right!

Oscar: Donald Trump, unfortunately not the savior of the White race.

Monika Schaefer: That’s right. I agree 100% with you.

Oscar: Anyone who’s put their hand on the Wailing Wall* is not someone you can trust.

[* The Wailing Wall, also referred to as the Kotel, the Western Wall, or Solomon’s Wall, and whose lower sections date to about the first century BCE, is located in the Old Quarter of East Jerusalem in Israel/Palestine. Built of thick, corroded limestone, it is about 60 feet (20 meters) high and close to 160 feet (50 meters) long, though most of it is engulfed in other structures. A Sacred Jewish Site: The wall is believed by devout jews to be the Western Wall of the Second Temple of Jerusalem (destroyed by the Romans in 70 CE), the only surviving structure of the Herodian Temple built during the realm of Herod Agrippa (37 BCE–4 CE) in the first century BCE. The temple’s original location is in dispute, leading some Arabs to dispute the claim that the wall belongs to the temple, arguing instead that it is part of the structure of Al-Aqsa Mosque on the Temple Mount.]

Monika Schaefer: I agree with you. Well, let’s take a caller, Bradley in Texas.

Oscar: Okay.

Monika Schaefer: Can you, …

Bradley: Hello. Great to speak with you.

Monika Schaefer: Well, welcome to the show. So do you have a question, or a comment?

Bradley: A comment, I guess. It’s just very enlightening to hear, very refreshing enlightening people talk about the history that we’ve been denied. [chuckling] You know, the big book burning that happened in Germany, though they didn’t show you the books, they were perversion books. Kind of like what’s going on now with what they’re pushing LGBTQ, all this crap!

[49:41]

Oscar: Yes, that’s correct. Yeah.

Bradley: Yeah. And I’m very aware of the Holohoax. You know, it was garbage too. And so few people are aware of these things. Most of the stations I listen to are limited hangouts. I met John Stadmiller back around, 2000, under Lisa Beeth and her husband, Bill Beeth. We’re at a conference with Ron Paul. Really interesting to meet him, and I love his network.

And so I thought I’d tune in, listen to what show he has playing. And lo and behold, some really enlightened people. It’s really refreshing. I enjoy your talk.

Monika Schaefer: Well, thank you so much! And did you have a question for our guest?

Bradley: I can’t think of one, really. [chuckling]

Monika Schaefer: Okay. Well, it’s really, really nice. It’s very refreshing to have your call. Thank you so much!

Bradley: Okay, thank you.

Monika Schaefer: Okay.

Bradley: Bye bye.

Monika Schaefer: So, Oscar, is there anything in particular you want to lead the conversation into, or carry on with?

Oscar: Well, I’ll just touch on the Holocaust for a minute.

Monika Schaefer: Yes, very appropriate. Because I do see that as the linchpin lie, underlying jewish power. That’s how I see it. Anyway, do, …

Oscar: But, yes, I mean, that’s correct. I mean, in a way, they very much predicated their future on the Holocaust lie. And that’s probably one of the reasons they so fiercely protect the Holocaust lie. I mean, pretty much every Western country now has laws against denying the Holocaust. I mean, even in Russia, it’s against the law to deny the Holocaust.

But there’s a very simple formula I use, and this applies to any agenda!

So when you have any agenda that requires censorship, you know it’s a lie! Whether it’s the Holocaust, Covid, 9/11, whatever! If it requires censorship, it’s guaranteed to be a lie! The truth never requires censorship!

Monika Schaefer: I agree. I agree 100%! The truth does not fear investigation and it does not fear debate about it. Yeah, that’s absolutely true!

And I would say that the Holocaust epitomizes the jewish narrative of always being the persecuted people and that everybody’s out to get them. And the Holocaust is the modern day, like, it epitomizes that narrative that goes back a long ways! I think they’ve been crying the blues about being the persecuted people for a long time! But now, Holocaust is the modern episode of that.

And why are they making all these laws in all our countries? It’s because if that, it’s not a matter of if, it’s when, because it’s already happening big time. The Holocaust lie, when that falls and really falls, their whole house of cards tumbles down!

This is what I think. Because boy, oh, boy, I think the Holocaust lie underpins everything! I mean, when we object to immigration, they shout:

“Oh, racist! That’s Holocaust is gonna happen! Another holocaust is gonna happen [chuckling] because you’re racist!”

I mean, that’s just one example, but it underpins their power, let alone all the money they’ve extorted for it.

We have another caller, Ed, in Iowa. Would, would you like to bring in Ed?

Oscar: Sure.

Monika Schaefer: Mr producer. Do we have? Okay, Ed.

Ed: Hello?

Monika Schaefer: Hello. Welcome to the show.

Ed: Okay. I wasn’t sure. I didn’t know I was on.

Monika Schaefer: Okay, go ahead. Do you have a question, or a comment?

Ed: I have a comment. And it’s a extremely important for everybody to listen to this. What do you think is the biggest lie that we’ve been told to keep us in check? What do you think it is?

Monika Schaefer: Go ahead, Oscar, if you want to answer that.

Ed: Do you guys know what it is?

Monika Schaefer: I mean, me, I think it’s the holocaust, but go ahead, Oscar.

Ed: No, no, it’s not even close! The biggest lie that they’ve told us is that they are the sovereigns. Okay? Here, what I’m saying. They have told us over and over and over and over that they, the government, and of course, the people that will operate the government are the sovereigns. That’s what they’ve told us over and over and over.

And so what does that do to the mindset of all the people? It makes them believe, obviously, it makes them believe that they don’t own anything, that they are serfs, I guess, if you want to call it that.

But the truth is, Donald Trump has said this several times. And I guess it goes in one ear and out the other. But he said many times:

“This country belongs to you guys!”

And that is absolutely, 100% correct!

Monika Schaefer: Yeah, I guess in terms of thinking that we are governed, who has the right to govern us. That’s what you’re saying, right? In effect.

Ed: Right!

Monika Schaefer: Oscar, do you want to comment on that? Because we only have a little bit of time left, and I’d like to give you the chance to comment on that, Oscar.

Oscar: Well, that’s a very good point, because most people, you know, look to government to solve all our problems, and they’re the ones creating all the problems. So it’s, again, it’s kind of an upside down situation. We have to stop being so dependent on the government. But the government, that’s one of the things they do is they want to make us more and more dependent on the government. You know, they want to bring in Universal Basic Income and all that stuff.

Monika Schaefer: Very communist. So we only have a minute left, and I would just like to thank you so much for coming on, Oscar. That was really, really interesting. I enjoyed it a lot.

I also want to tell the listener that next week, Blackbird9 is going to be taking my spot. This was a commitment I had even before I took on this show. So he’s going to be gracious enough to extend his Snack Shack to 2 hours. So I will see you all in two weeks from now. But thank you, Oscar!

And if you want to have a last word, you have about a half a minute. And thank you also to Ed and the other callers for calling in. Thank you. Go ahead, Oscar.

Oscar: Okay, Monika. Yeah, thanks for having me on. I would just say that from what we’ve seen, especially with Covid, don’t comply with the next fake agenda that they try and push on us. You know, don’t comply with digital ID, digital currency, don’t comply with bird flu, or don’t comply with anything to do with the Green New Deal. Vote with your dollar. It’s much more effective than your vote at the ballot box.

Monika Schaefer: Thank you. Those are really good last words. Thank you so much! Okay, bye for now!

[58:27]

[music]

[58:49]

[ad]

[59:59]

END

top

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

RBN Comments

top

(Comments as of 7/21/2024 = 0)

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

PDF Download

top

Total words in transcript = 6,303

Total words in post = 6,863
Total images = xx
Total A4 pages = xxx

Use your browser to download/export a PDF of this post.

Version History

top

Version 5:

Version 4:

Version 3:

Version 2:

Version 1: Tue, Jul 23, 2024 — Published post. Includes RBN comments (0).

The Realist Report – John Friend with Germar Rudolf – Nov 5, 2020 — TRANSCRIPT

admin — Mon, 09 Nov 2020 01:15:51 +0000

[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.

__________________________

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

TRANSCRIPT

(55:25)

[00:00]

John’s Introduction

top

John Friend: All right folks welcome back to another edition of the Realist Report. This is your host, John Friend. Today is Thursday, October [November] 5th, 2020.

Of course my website is therealistreport dot com, where you will find an extensive archive of these podcasts as well as other programs I’ve participated in. You will also find all of my blog posts and articles, a contact page, my twitter feed, which is embedded in the right hand sidebar of the website, and many other useful and important links.

I am a regular reporter for American Free Press, America’s last real newspaper. And I also contribute to the Barnes Review, the bi-monthly revisionist history magazine. Please do subscribe to these fine print publications. Check out American Free Press dot net and Barnes Review dot org for all the details.

All right with that said let me introduce our special guest today. The one and only Germar Rudolf is joining us for the very first time! Germar, welcome to the program! How are you this morning, sir?

Germar Rudolf: Well, thank you for having me. I’m doing fine. And yourself?

John Friend: I’m doing good! I’m doing good! The past couple of days have been crazy with this election going on. This still unresolved election. I think it’s pretty clear that there are trying to steal this thing from Trump. So we will have to kind of wait and see what happens with that.

But we have a number of other important topics to discuss here this morning, so it’s really an honor to have you here. I’ve been very much influenced by your writing and your work over the years. I’ve heard you interviewed on other programs. And I’ve always wanted to have you as a guest here. So I’m glad that you are able to join me this morning, and I thank you for taking the time.

To get started could you maybe just introduce yourself a little bit? Give us a little bit of background and explain your experience in the revisionist movement and what lead you into critically investigating the World War Two narrative and specifically the alleged Jewish “Holocaust” of six million Jews during this monumental period of history.

Germar’s Background and His Start in Revisionism

top

Germar Rudolf: Yes! Well, that’s a question that the answer to which could take an hour already! [chuckling] I’ll make it shorter than that.

I’m a native German. So I grew up in Germany and I got my school and university education in Germany. I finished with a Masters degree, or an equivalent of that in Chemistry, back in 1989. And then started a year later after doing my compulsory military service, I started working on a PhD in Chemistry.

And it was around that time that the Leuchter Report was issued. That was in 1988. I found out about it in 1989. And was curious about it. I had a keen interest in German history for years, but I never touched upon the “Holocaust”. That was too hot a topic, too unpleasant a topic for Germans, I would say. Maybe a number of them would make a career out of it, of doing the “mea culpa” thing. There are a lot of them actually in Germany. But that wasn’t my thing.

So I stayed away from it. German history, for me it was, of interest, was the Kaiser time, First World War, the run up to the Second World War, and how the Second World War got started, and the aftermath. So I kind of stayed out of the war itself. Because it’s just too bloody a topic, and of course in particular the “Holocaust”.

Paul Rassiner, the French Founder of Holocaust Revisionism

top

What changed it was a book that I read just a few months before I found out about the Leuchter Report. And that was a book by French historian Paul Rassiner, who is considered the founder of historical revisionism.

He himself had been in a concentration camp because he had helped Jews get illegal papers to get out of occupied France. And he ended up in the Buchenwald camp, and after the war wrote about it. And was not pleased by the exaggerations and lies that was spread by his fellow inmates. And that was his starting point.

And when I obtained the book of his in, I think it was spring 1988, 1989, I was amazed! Up to that point anyone who was questioning the orthodox “Holocaust” narrative for me was just a Nazi, a Right-wing extremist, an anti-semite, and all the kind of labels that are put on people who question the “Holocaust”. And I was among those mainstream people who automatically, in a Pavlovian reflex, threw these words at people who would dare to doubt.

[05:03]

But this guy, I couldn’t do that with him because he was a victim of National Socialism! He had been inside a concentration camp as a prisoner. He had suffered terribly. And yet there he was doubting the whole narrative and bringing up arguments against the gas chamber claims, which opened up my mind. Allowed me to have doubts, to question the thing itself. I did not yet do it, but the preparation of my mind, the opening up of my mind was there.

[Image] Fred Leuchter holding up his copy of the original Leuchter Report for the second Zundel Trial in Canada, in 1988.

Discovering the Leuchter Report

top

And then a few months later I happened to stumble over the Leuchter Report. Which of course in one of its sections talks about taking wall samples and analyzing them chemically.

Now of course I had just graduated in chemistry a year before, roughly a year before. And that was my field of expertise. History had been a hobby, a field of interest, but I never felt like I could contribute in any way to it because I’m not an historian by any stretch of the imagination. I was just a consumer, an aficionado, if you wish.

But there was a topic where I thought:

“Well, I can understand it, I can verify that, I can actually maybe even contribute to it.”

And that is how I got going on that.

Starting My PhD at Max Planck Institute in Stuttgart

top

And while I was doing that, a year later starting my PhD at Max Planck Institute for Solid State Research in Stuttgart, I realized that they have a fine research library, and they had an online research.

Back then in 1990, 1991, there wasn’t no such thing as the internet yet. But there was intranet of libraries that were already connected and communicating in a similar fashion, as it was then expanded to encompass everyone in the world wide web.

So there was a pre-existing web, and it was fantastic! I could use it without getting charged. I could do all the research that I wanted.

And in my spare time when I was not working on my PhD, I went there and had the librarians work for me on that topic of, well, what chemicals are being formed, how are they being formed, and what kind of chemistry is going on, and what conditions had been prevalent and would be needed. And all these questions that were raised, I started to answer.

The Leuchter Report — Jumping the Gun

top

Not because I was planning on doing anything with it. I was just curious. It was just pure curiosity. Because in my mind it was too important a topic to ignore it, and to leave it half done! Because that was my impression when I read the Leuchter Report. He just took those sample, had them analyzed, got the results and then said:

“Well, because the results are not as I expect them, that proves that there was not any mass gassings going on in Auschwitz.”

But my opinion back then and still today, he kind of jumped the gun. Because there were so many questions the were not properly answered.

Like the chemical compound that he had been looking for in his analysis. Could they be long-term stable enough to survive forty years? Because between the end of the war and the time he took the samples — we’re talking about roughly forty years — would they be able to survive? Unless you can give a definitive answer to that, it makes little sense to take samples.

And then the next question is; well of course if we have established — and I did that then by doing a lot of research — that they do survive forty years or more, so that it makes sense to look for them analytically, could they form in the first place? What were the conditions that are claimed to have been present during those mass gassings? The physical conditions, the chemical conditions, the actual conditions of what happened exactly, what concentrations were used, how quickly was it ventilated? Could it have been ventilated?

All these questions that came up to my mind and I think had to be answered. And I couldn’t find the answer in the Leuchter Report. So he left me high and dry, and thirsting for more. And that was what I was doing for my own curiosity sake.

Zyklon B — How Stable over Time?

top

But I knew that a lot of people out there who would be interested in these findings. And as soon as I had my first findings, in early 1991, that showed that the chemical which was analyzed, which was detected by those analyses, called, … There’s an umbrella term term called “iron blue”, and there is some subsets of it called “Prussian blue”, and “Turnbull blue” and all kinds of other names are used for it. But it’s a blue pigment essentially that is a combination of iron and cyanide.

[10:08]

And cyanide is the part which comes from Zyklon B, which is the infamous product said to have been used to mass murder jews in Auschwitz.

So I found out with a number of peer-reviewed papers that had been published in the fifties, sixties and seventies, that this pigment is indeed is extremely stable and should survive with ease those forty years between World War Two and the time that Leuchter had taken his samples.

And I sent those papers, I made copies of the papers and sent them to a list of people and institutions that I had received from a friend of mine who told me that they might be interested. I didn’t know any of these people. I just sent it out. It was some twenty people, or so.

A Trip to Auschwitz for Samples

top

And one of them must have become interested in me expanding that research, because he contacted me, and invited me, and then asked me whether I would be willing to myself go to Auschwitz, take samples and do a similar analysis. And I happily agreed to do that.

I took a few days off from my employment as a PhD student to go on an extended weekend to Auschwitz. And we did our research there and took samples and had them analyzed.

Fortunately at Max Plank Institute also had a nice engineering department where you could get, as a PhD student, you could get your own machinery built. So if you were doing some experiment, or were planning on doing some novel experience [experiment?] you needed some novel machine, some novel setup to do your experiment, they would actually construct it for you.

Having Max Planck Institute Build a Little Gas Chamber

top

So I had an engineer friend of mine make construction drawings of an experimental little gas chamber that we could use to expose building material to hydrogen cyanide, to Zyklon B fumes, essentially. To see how they react to verify that my chemical findings were accurate.

And Max Plank Institute actually built it for me, at their expense. As a matter of fact it sounds a little bit spurious that I did that, but I had a contract with the Max Plank Institute, the Max Plank Society. Actually the full name is “Max Plank Society for the Furthering of Science”. So what they do, their mission is to further science in any which way possible. And the contract I had with them allowed me to do my PhD, but allowed me also, expressively [explicitly] in a chapter it says:

“That any student who wants to do his own research on his own initiative is encouraged and invited to do so and use the Institute’s resources for it.”

Bingo! [chuckling]

John Friend: Wow!

Germar Rudolf: At the end of the day they didn’t like what I did with it, and then they eventually wanted to fire me because I had done that. And it went to court because I thought:

“You can’t do this, because I have the contract here that says explicitly I’m allowed to do it.”

And we settled then out of court and the contract with them was resolved [?] two or three months before it would come to a normal end. Anyhow it was only a limited contract of three years.

So anyway that was the setup. And the guy who actually contacted me and asked me whether I wanted to do that research and take my own samples, he was in contact with a lawyer who had clients who were on trial, or were prosecuted and soon to be on trial for quote, unquote, “holocaust denial”. And they then asked me to get all my results together, write an expert report that could be presented in court in Germany. Which I did.

And then I appeared in some seven or eight court cases as an expert witness. However I was never heard by the court because they basically violated German penal code. Because it said that:

“If an expert witness is already in the court room.”

So to say, there’s no expense and no time wasted for the court to get this witness. The witness is already there. He is an expert by his education, which I was. You don’t need a PhD degree to be an expert. Already if you have a diploma degree, which is somewhere between a Master’s degree and a PhD degree in the US. If you have that already you are considered an expert in chemistry and you can testify. And if you are in control of your mind, so you are not under the influence of some drugs or so, or unconscious, then you can’t testify of course.

[15:14]

And if what you have to say is relevant to the case, which it is, because those people were on trial for denying that there were gassings in Auschwitz, and I could prove, or explain, to the court what could and could not happen according to the material evidence that I had found. So what I would testify was relevant.

German Court Breaks the Law and Denies Expert Testimony

top

Under these circumstances the German penal code forces a court to hear the evidence. They cannot reject it! It’s already there, it’s relevant, it’s possible, do it! But no! They broke the law and denied me to testify anyway. And in one case the judge actually threatened me!

Now this is a crime under German penal law to threaten a witness in the witness stand, or in the courtroom, that if he testifies to his best knowledge that he would get prosecuted for it. And that is exactly what that judge did. He said:

“Witness, are you really going to testify along the line as the motion of the defense suggests?”

I said:

“Well you will hear, when I’m in the stand.”

So I didn’t even answer to that. But then he said:

“Well if you do testify along those lines, you are making yourself liable to prosecution because it’s going to be a crime!”

[chuckling] So he was threatening me as a witness that if I testify in a certain way that I would be prosecuted! But that is standard procedure in Germany. Back then actually you could still file a motion as a lawyer to have evidence like that introduced.

That changed in the mean time because of me. Because of my appearances they wanted to put a stop to it, so they changed the case law by a supreme court decision. That a lawyer who files a motion to introduce evidence which by its content denies the “Holocaust”, the lawyer actually commits a crime, and will be prosecuted. Merely for filing the motion! That does not even include the evidentiary statement itself, but only suggests that the statement would go along this line, and then this is already considered a crime.

German Lawyers Prosecuted for Filing “Holocaust Denial” Motion

top

And several lawyers were prosecuted and sentenced in Germany for having done exactly that. And the first case that set the precedent was when a lawyer filed a motion to have me testify.

John Friend: Yeah, it’s pretty unbelievable where literally in Germany if you present evidence that questions, or criticizes the official “Holocaust” story, it’s literally a crime. For presenting authentic, legitimate, evidence. It’s totally tyrannical and Orwellian to a degree that I can’t even express!

Germar Rudolf: Right. It is the step before. They don’t even get to present it! They just file a motion:

“I would like to present this evidence.”

That is already a crime! You don’t even get to present the evidence! Yeah, it’s ridiculous!

So initially the first couple of years I was doing that, I was chasing the system ahead of me, they were panicking, judges were panicking. It was a big upheaval, and they were trying to stop me. They would do anything to stop me.

Fleeing Germany and Starting a Publishing Enterprise

top

And they did eventually. They dragged me in court for my expert report and sentenced me. I left the country before it actually became valid, because an appeal was pending and I had not been arrested for it, because they thought there was no danger that I might flee because I was married, I had children, I had a job, I had a home. So they thought:

“No, I’m not going to run.”

And I did.

And I lived abroad for a number of years, expanding my activities in this regard. Turning what was initially only a research on a small level into a publishing enterprise that was focusing on this issue. Expanding more, and more the research horizons. Not just Auschwitz, but all the camps. Not just the camps, but the whole topic of the “Holocaust”.

Italian Scholar Carlo Mattogno World’s Foremost Expert

top

Not just me. I mean, I’m a minor contributor at this point. I’m primarily editing and publishing other authors, particularly the Italian scholar Carlo Mattogno. Who I consider to be the world’s foremost expert in matters of “Holocaust” in general.

[Image] Jurgen Graf, Carlo Mattogno and Germar-Rudolf.

He has published monographs on pretty much anything you can imagine of — with a few exceptions maybe. But he’s covered the whole territory and he has a knowledge that is rivaled by no one! Not even mainstream historians! They cannot touch him with anything with the depth and intensity of knowledge that he has. He would blow any orthodox historian out of the water with ease!

[20:17]

John Friend: Yeah.

Germar Rudolf: And I have the pleasure and the honor to publish his material.

And actually right now I’m working on getting another one of his books translated from Italian to English. I’ve turned into a translator and editor mainly. I’m doing translations, and I have been doing for the past 2, or 3 years, from Italian on some regular basis. So I have passive knowledge of Italian [words unclear]. That is what I’m doing now days!

John Friend: Very good! You are doing a great job! You have been doing a great job for a number of years. So I wanted to ask you. So your main forensic and chemical investigations into the alleged “Holocaust” really focuses on Auschwitz, correct? That was the main camp that you kind of focused on?

Why the Focus on Auschwitz?

top

Germar Rudolf: Yes. I exclusively focused on Auschwitz simply because back then I was a student that didn’t have the means of travelling to other camps and doing research on them as well. Auschwitz is kind of the big elephant in the room anyhow, if we are talking about the “Holocaust” in terms of propagandistic importance from the orthodox side in terms of number of victims, in terms of the documentation that has been left. Because pretty much most of the camp archives from the Construction Office, as well as from the Headquarters has survived.

Also when it comes to the number of witness statement we have, because there are so many Auschwitz survivors. They go into the hundreds of thousands after the war, which already tells you a lot about how successful an extermination could have been, said to have happened there. If hundreds of thousands are left after the war, allowed to survive and tell their story to the world.

Gas Chamber Stories from a Tiny Number of Survivors

top

As a matter of fact, had the things that are claimed happened, you would have hundreds of thousands, or even two hundred thousand, testimonies pretty much saying the same thing. But we don’t have that! We have maybe 50 that are relevant in terms someone claiming he actually saw something in person. We have a lot more that repeat rumours and that regurgitate what has been published in the media. But actual people who claim:

“I was there! I did that and I saw that!”

There’s maybe 50, maybe a 100. But if you consider you have 200,000 survivors and a 100 of them come up with a story, and the other 199,900 don’t! Then you have a pretty good statistical idea of where the truth is.

Under 200,000 people you find a 100 pathetic liars! And they are!

Your Main Conclusions About Auschwitz?

top

John Friend: Yeah, exactly! Well, I wanted to ask you, and it’s kind of a broad question, but what are the main conclusions that you have come to regarding Auschwitz and how it fits in to the overall “Holocaust” story.

Germar Rudolf: Well, pretty much the same as Leuchter’s.

They are based on a much broader basis of evidence. And I’m not blaming Leuchter for not having been able to do that, because he was asked, in the middle of a trial [Zundel Trial II] to do, within a few days, which normally you wouldn’t do because the topic is so complex, you couldn’t have done the preparatory research on any level to actually allow him to come to these conclusions. So I think he was pushing it a little bit.

[Image] Fred Leuchter (second from left) with the Zundel team for the second Zundel Trial (1988).

But basically I’m saying the same thing. If we look at the facilities where it is claimed to have happened, we look at the technical, the engineering, the architectural design, and capabilities, you can say that already from that point of view these facilities would not have been able to do what is claimed to have happened in them.

And then you come to the chemical part, and I prove with a lot of research. That first of all, the components that we analyze are so stable that we need to find them to this day. And they actually would have formed, because there are numerous factors, chemical and physical in nature, which I can back up with a lot of expert literature from normal chemical and physical peer-reviewed journals — you know, mainstream journals that publish that kind of research — showing that this stuff would have formed under the circumstances. And actually the homicidal gas chambers would have been the primary place where we should expect them, because of their chemical and physical makeup.

[24:58]

So, basically coming to the same conclusion on a much wider evidentiary basis.

Also because I happened to revise my report, getting more and more access to material that is in the archives of the Auschwitz Museum, in the Moscow archives, because the Red Army came and took most of the documents they found in Auschwitz and took them to Moscow. And they revealed them only in the mid 1990s.

And we got a hold of them. And Carlo Mattogno has done analysis of a lot of this material from all these archives. And I have a good working relation with him, so I get a lot of the material that is interesting and have used them for newer editions of my report, to further substantiate the conclusions that I had already come to in my first edition of 1992.

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

top

Basically, the facilities couldn’t have done it, and the chemical evidence shows that it didn’t happen.

Auschwitz was a Death Camp, but Not a Murder Camp

top

John Friend: Right. So Auschwitz is presented as this like mass extermination centre, right, at least by the mainstream court historians. So what was going on at Auschwitz then? If it wasn’t this death camp what was really going on there?

Germar Rudolf: It was a “death camp“. But not a “murder camp“! They’re different!

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

top

Auschwitz initially was just a normal concentration camp where primarily Polish political prisoners and resistance fighters were incarcerated. And that changed after the start of the Soviet-German war in the summer of 1941. At which point they wanted to build in the vicinity of Auschwitz a huge POW camp. Where they planned on housing 100,000, or even 200,000 Soviet prisoners of war.

Now if you look into the history of war the Germans had millions of Soviet POWs, but they were all grounded somewhere in Russia. And there was no logistical means for them to actually get millions of people back west. Because their transport infrastructure to get soldiers, munitions, and supplies to the front and back, were so strained that they just didn’t have the capacity to get any of the Soviet people, Soviet prisoners out of there, or very few.

And of course then winter broke, it broke out relatively early that year in October and November already, things were completely shut down. And then those Soviet prisoners of war in those, they were not really prisoner of war camps, they just put them in a spot, put some barbed wire around them and some people with machine guns and guarded them that way, because they were just not prepared for this sudden huge amount of prisoners. And they started dying like flies.

So the plans to have that POW camp near Auschwitz, which was then called Birkenau [Auschwitz II] filled with Soviet POWs didn’t work out. They wanted to use those POWs to work in the chemical factories that were being constructed at that time, nearby. Which was absolutely crucial for the German war effort, because basically Germany manufactured the most important things for conducting war, there’s fuel, ammunition, and all kinds of basic chemicals that are used to run any kind of machinery, rubber, lubricants, everything. They were synthesizing it out of air and coal.

So they had plans on using the coal mines in Upper Silesia to get the coal, get them into coal liquidfication and gasification plants near Auschwitz, which they were building there. Because there is a lot of process water [needed]. The rivers Vistula, the Sola. There’s a lot of water, for the processes you need water. And they wanted to build these huge factories which would then produce fuel, lubricants, and other chemicals to fuel the machinery. And they needed workers for them. So they planned on using the POWs for working in those factories. And they didn’t come!

[Image] Map of the Auschwitz complex. (click image to enlarge)

Plan B — Use Jews as Forced Labour

top

The Plan B was, which they switched to early 1942 when they knew they can’t get the Russian POWs out of Russia, to use the jews. The jews of Europe. They started deporting from Czechoslovakia, and then from France. Jews and put them in the POW camp, instead. It took them two years actually to rename the camp from “POW” to “concentration camp“. So initially they kept the name even though it never really was a POW camp. It was filled with jews.

[30:12]

And when they started filling it up with jews in early 1942, there wasn’t much of a camp. It was pretty much similar like with all the other camps. Initially they put a barbed wire fence around an area, threw the people in there and gave them some boards and some hammers, and some nails, and told them:

“Build your own barrack. Build your own huts. Build your own bed, and that’s it!”

Lack of Sanitary Facilities Leads to Typhus and Catastrophe

top

Not a nice situation for anyone. So up to the end of 1942, the first three quarter years basically no sanitary facilities worth mentioning. No proper toilets, no showers at all, no de-lousing facilities. And you can imagine if you cram people together in an area that is only developing housing, that is only developing sanitary installations, the hygienic conditions are going to be catastrophic! Which they were.

And right from the beginning they were infested with lice and fleas. Inevitably, if you cram people together and they can’t wash and shower, and then their clothes don’t get de-loused, then you have these vermin spread like crazy! And it’s only a matter of time, during wartime, that diseases are spread by these pests.

You know fleas spread the plague, lice spread typhus! The plague, fortunately, did not break out in those years, even though we can see from the documents that the German authorities were afraid it might.

Hundreds Die Each Day

top

But the lice did introduce typhus. And right from the beginning people started dying like flies in that camp, because of hygienic situation, because of typhus spreading like crazy. It reached it’s peak in August and September of 1942. So just not even half a year they started shipping jews into that camp. And the peak, I think, was that 500 inmates died on one day! I think it was in late August or September. I can’t remember exactly. But it stayed around several hundreds from July into October, when it subsided a little bit, but it re-surged again in early 1943.

They got it under control only towards the end of 43, early 1944. So during that time for large stretches, hundreds of people died every day from this typhus epidemic.

[33:04]

SS Personel Succumb to Typhus

top

It was so bad that actually the SS guards and SS officials, they were supposed to run the camp, at least remotely, getting some inmates in charge inside who would run it for them inside. But of course there had to be some interaction between the SS and the inmates. And the SS people succumbed to typhus as well.

It was the very first garrison physician of Auschwitz, Dr Schwela who got sick of it in April, or May of 42. And he died in May. And the next one put in charge, Dr Uhlenbroock got sick of it too in September, and he barely survived. He was incapacitated for a month.

And the next physician they put in charge, he came from the Dachau concentration camp, was put in charge in September. He took over. And he described in letters that he wrote after the war, what situation he found when he came to Auschwitz. That there was no sanitary facilities, people were filthy, they were covered in lice, and fleas were everywhere. He could see everything crawling in the huts. He said that:

“It looks like the wood everywhere is moving because there just are lice and fleas everywhere! It was absolutely horrific! Dead inmates lying in bunks, not being removed for sometimes days, because there was no organization, no structure.”

Dr Wirths

top

Dr Wirths was the third garrison position who then moved heaven and earth to get things improved. It took him two years to get it under control. When you consider the completely chaotic conditions were completely out of control! They had so many people die there. They had only one crematoria, an old one in the main camp, the original concentration camp [Auschwitz I]. And they couldn’t burn it [the bodies] because they just didn’t have the capacity, and then they overloaded that and it broke down anyhow.

High Ground Water Levels Require Bodies to Be Burnt

top

So they had to bury most of these victims for a period of time in the second half of 1942 in mass graves. And as I mentioned this is an area where the rivers Vistula and Sola flow together, so it’s a low lying meadow land, and it’s swampy. And if you dig up mass graves there and throw thousands of people in there, they are going to be in the ground water, they are going to rot, and they are going to poison the ground water.

And that was the danger that the ground water in the entire area would get poisoned and that other diseases caused by, that get transferred through drinking water, typhoid fever, and cholera, and whatever else that can get into it. You have not only typhus, but typhoid fever, which is a different thing. And then you have cholera, all things can happen! So they were freaking out. And then they had inmates actually excavate those mass graves again and try to incinerate the rotting left overs of those typhus victims, to make sure they wouldn’t poison the ground water.

So it’s a complete nightmarish scenario that I’m describing to you here. And it’s allegedly also the same time when mass gassings are supposed to have happened. Now if you imagine how completely out of control the situation was for the SS, where the SS men themselves are dying, and have no means of getting a hand and a control of the situation!

It is unfathomable that on top of all this they would start mass murdering jews that were being shipped to Auschwitz! As a matter of fact we know from the documentation that all the jews up to July 1942 that were ever shipped to Auschwitz, and can be proved to have been shipped there, were properly registered there and entered the camp as normal inmates. So they were not mass murdered. So mass murder claims for the first half of 1942 are completely bogus! There’s no documentary evidence for it.

[37:20]

But considering how completely out of control the situation was, the SS could not possibly have had the logistical means to organize, to implement, and then to clean up such a mass murder program, because they were completely unable to handle the quote, unquote “natural death” cases they had on hand.

Introduction of Delousing Facilities Including Microwave Devices

top

So you can see that, yes, Auschwitz during that phase was a death camp, but not because of murder, but because of mass dying due to the absolutely outrageous conditions that prevailed in the camp during the first year. It got better only, as I said, when Dr. Wirths came. He had showers built, delousing facilities built. He actually saw to it that the most modern delousing device ever created was installed at Auschwitz. It was a microwave delousing facility.

The Germans had discovered microwaves during the Olympics in 1936 with their strong TV emitters that had a broadband spectrum that went into the microwave, and they were frying flies that were getting near to the emitters. And they suddenly realized:

“Oh! Look at this! At that frequency range radiation actually does something that radio waves don’t do. It heats up water and kills every bug.”

So they started developing — it was Siemens — started developing delousing devices based on microwave radiation. And the first one was ready in 1943 and eventually got sent to Auschwitz. And then Auschwitz got a stationary installation in 1944.

Roughly a month, the same time they also got the first DTT, which as you know, was invented by a Swiss chemical company. And they licensed it out to German companies, to American companies. And they all started using it in 1943, 1944.

Auschwitz got it’s first tons of DTT in May of 1944. And at that point things were under control. Not talking about DTT being a good thing. As we know, down the road, it has very detrimental environmental effects, but at that point it saved the lives of thousands of people, if not tens of thousands of people. And got all the epidemics that were raging in Europe under control.

John Friend: Wow!

Germar Rudolf: And among them also the ones in Auschwitz. In addition to the microwave systems they had built there.

John Friend: Very interesting! That’s probably the best explanation of Auschwitz that I’ve heard, ever! So thank you for explaining all of that.

And it really kind of shows you that the Germans did not, absolutely did not have this State sanctioned policy of murdering jews. They were just dealing with very chaotic situation with all these people in their control, right? I mean I think that’s what it really boils down to. They weren’t prepared, they didn’t have the resources.

[40:33]

Germar Rudolf: Yeah.

John Friend: Is that what you were getting at?

Responsibility for the Deaths Lies with the Reich

top

Germar Rudolf: When we are talking about the local people at Auschwitz they have at numerous times, both Dr. Wirths and the camp command said:

“Stop shipping jews to us. We can’t handle the situation!”

The responsibility for what evolved there lies clearly with the Reich government [words unclear] The main office in charge of [word unclear], basically Nazi Germany’s “Department of Homeland Security”, who decided that we have to have people working in our factories, all our men are at the front, we have no workforce anymore, and now we’ve tried to get volunteers from foreign countries and they are not enough.

So jews were the primary scapegoat of the National Socialists. So they picked those:

“You are going to be our slave laborers.”

And then they ship them to Auschwitz, even though they were informed sooner. There’s some responsibility of the SS at Auschwitz. They tried to cover it up, the disastrous situation, they were not screaming “bloody murder” loud enough, if at all, earlier on. They should have done it. It was only Dr Wirths who started doing that.

But still then, the Reich government wouldn’t stop shipping jews down there!

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

top

Starting in July and August of 1942, most jews that were deported to the Auschwitz region were not admitted to the camp anymore. And that’s where the mainstream narrative comes from, that says:

“Okay, we have this train. We know it left Compiègne, let’s say, in France, with 1,000 jews. And we see them in the camp records that say only 150 had been admitted to the camp. So, we conclude that 850 of them were killed on arrival in gas chambers.”

That’s not true. We have found document that shows very clearly in July the typhus epidemic was completely out of control, and it was decided then to not send the jews into the camp anymore, but to but to take them off trains in other places and let them work in factories. And let the factories set up little workers’ camps in their vicinity. So there were a lot of them in the vicinity of Auschwitz where the inmates were temporarily housed, because the Auschwitz camp was completely out of control and it would be just irresponsible to send people there.

Still they did admit a lot of people. If you look at the people, the French jews who sent to Auschwitz in 1942, all of them who were sent there until early July were properly registered. We have their names.

Death Book Records vs Four Million

top

And we see also in the Death Books where all inmates that died are recorded as one after one of these people died. So most of these French jews, indeed, were shipped en mass to Auschwitz, even though the conditions there were terrible! The Reich government just didn’t care. They wanted them there. They wanted them to work. If there were bad conditions, too bad! Just see to it that it gets better. We need to get this done. And then they died like flies.

And at the end you can see all the names. Not a single one of these 70,000 jews who were deported were killed in a gas chamber. We can see it! They died of typhus and all the other bad things that happened there, because of the conditions.

But most of the them did die, and within a year.

John Friend: I’m curious, because most people are aware that Auschwitz originally, I think up until the early 90s, if I’m not mistaken, I mean the official narrative was that 3 million people were murdered!

Germar Rudolf: Four.

John Friend: Oh was it four? OK, I’m sorry.

Germar Rudolf: Yeah.

John Friend: And then they reduced it down to one million, I think now is the official narrative. So how many people in total? I mean, do you have any idea of how many people actually died during the war at Auschwitz? It certainly wasn’t four million! It probably wasn’t even one million! How many people do you think actually died there?

Germar Rudolf: The Death Books, which officially recorded every death case in the camp of inmates that were registered in the camp, have, … Let me rephrase that.

The volumes of the Death Books that have been released to the public have recorded around 68,000 death cases. Roughly half of them are jews. And the rest of mainly Poles, Christian Poles who were there.

Now this set is incomplete. We know from an accompanying letter of the Russian archives that they do have more. But it seems like they have not released those, and they keep them hidden. Or they have been destroyed in the meantime. So there is a set missing that goes, if I’m not mistaken, from the end of 43 to the end of 1944. And there are a few volumes, here and there, missing at the beginning, too.

Now from the conditions that prevailed we can see that probably the death rate shrank dramatically towards the end of 43 and into 1944. And that is maybe one reason why they are hiding them and not releasing them, because they clearly show that Auschwitz camp got the situation under control and they were relatively little death cases during that time.

But we can set an upper limit of what is possible by a number of logistical factors that if we extrapolate things, if we look at the conditions. If we look at what would have been possible to destroy when we come to talking about cremation.

Because evidently Auschwitz with the situation there, they couldn’t bury people in mass graves, so they had to cremate them.

And they built crematoria. And we know what capacity they have. We know for good stretches what fuel they got delivered. We know how much fuel you need. And we can make calculations what is the maximum number of people that could have been cremated there. And we know that there aren’t huge mass graves. And the narrative doesn’t even claim that after the initial typhus victims that there were any people buried in mass graves.

Total Auschwitz Deaths About 100,000

top

So they all need to have been cremated in those crematoria. But there are technical limits of what they could have achieved in that time, with that fuel, with the equipment they had.

And so the upper limit is is maybe roughly double the amount that is recorded in those Death Books. So we are talking 140,000 as an upper limit.

But this is definitely really an upper limit. It’s probably a little less. We’re talking about an order of magnitude of 100,000, plus or minus a few 10,000 up or down.

If you consider this in comparison to what has been claimed, one million, or even four million, it sounds like little, it sounds like a minimization, a trivialization of what happened in Auschwitz.

But give me a break! We have one camp that existed basically only during a few years during the war, and roughly 100,000 people die there, because of prevailing catastrophic conditions. For which the SS and the Reich government is responsible. And if they can’t provide proper amenities for the inmates to be able to survive, they ship them there anyway, it’s their responsibility.

A 100,000 people, is a huge number! And I find it shocking that people don’t find such a number shocking, but consider that it is a trivialization and a mockery! No it’s not! It’s a 100,000 individual fates of death!

In the realm of the concentration camps that existed in Germany. You know Buchenwald, you know, Mauthausen, Dachau, and all the other ones. They all had their their death talk. None of them are claimed to have had mass gassings going on there. Some minor claims of test gassings, here and there, but not numerically significant.

None of these come anywhere close to the death toll that Auschwitz has. So, even if we take the revisionist narrative of it, this camp’s still has been the main location of loss of life, of catastrophic, of tragic loss, of tragic loss of life in the concentration camp system.

So that’s why I’m saying, it was a “death camp” in that term. Not because of murder. Not because of gas chambers.

Genocide Does Not Require Gas Chambers

top

Just the other day I mentioned to an acquaintance of mine, who was not familiar with my views on that. And we got to talk about it. And I said:

“Genocide does not require gas chambers.”

In fact the whole history of mankind is riddled with genocide! And not a single one of them included mass gassings in gas chambers! So why do you insist on this one, of having had gas chambers?

[50:20]

The Genocide Charge Doesn’t Go Away

top

If you look at the definition of genocide:

“When you persecute a defined group in a way that its numbers, its population numbers, shrinks due to your measures of preventing births, of preventing families to form, of putting them under conditions where they die in masses.”

This is today’s definition. And today’s definition still applies even if you take out gas chambers. So the genocide charge, ethically speaking, not legally speaking, because the law didn’t exist back then, but today it does. But ethically it’s always been there, the genocide charge doesn’t go away.

John Friend: Right. Yeah, and I mean even a 100,000, as you mentioned, is itself a tragedy. A 100,000 people, that is a small city just dying in one camp in these horrible conditions. And that really is important to understand and to consider that it really was a horrific situation.

Not a State sanctioned policy by the Germans, but just given the environment and given the conditions, given the war, and just how strained the German government was, it probably was a pretty irresponsible thing to do. And it did lead to a lot of deaths.

Germar Rudolf: Right. And of course now days Germany has to deal with it morally, but they of course pile up stuff on top of it which is inaccurate and is just exaggeration, or outright lying. This is just not right either.

John Friend: Yes, exactly. Well we could probably spend another two hours discussing this, or even more.

Your Current Legal Problems

top

I know you are going to have to run here in just a minute. I wanted you to briefly kind of just promote your website and also your fundraiser. I know you have had a, … Well you have had a number of legal challenges and legal issues over the years, both here in the United States and of course in Germany. And I know recently you’re sort of facing a legal situation that I wanted you to talk about briefly, if you have just a couple more minutes?

Germar Rudolf: Sure. Well, I actually don’t want to spend too much on it. I have my own personal website where you can find a brief introduction to it, and then a short video I did, I posted on YouTube. You can find the link there.

Personal Website and Holocaust Handbooks Website

top

And my website is just my name, germarrudolf dot com. And right on the home page there you will find a little attention catcher, paragraph, that explains the trials and tribulations that I’ve been going through. And a video where it explains it gets you also to a GoFundMe page, and gives you other options there on the website to donate if you feel so inclined.

But also, what I also want to point out that is more to the topic is that there are other websites that are of more interest to those that are curious about the topic we’ve been talking about. And the main one is probably Holocaust Handbooks dot com, where we have posted for free download as e-books, PDFs, Kindle and epub, almost all of the volumes of the Holocaust Handbook series, which comprises 40 volumes by now. And it keeps growing. [Now 41, with “Carlo Mattogno: The Making of the Auschwitz Myth”]

And it also has some documentary movies there that you can watch in case moving pictures are more your thing, rather than reading. And you’ll find links there to purchase hard copies of them. And the shop that I’m actually operating is connected with CODOH, the Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust. The website is shop dot codoh dot com.

But, you’ll find the link on Holocaust Handbook dot com website. That’s probably the best point to start at. It has recommendations on what to read if you want an introduction, starting with simple leaflets, to brochures, to booklets, going to lengthier books, and actually thick tomes, depending on what you are looking for.

And then we have the documentaries there and links too, if you want to buy something. And you can go from there. That is probably the best starting point.

John Friend: Very good! I will definitely have that link. And I will also have your personal website link, and your GoFundMe pages as well. And I would encourage people to support you, whether that is by donating directly to the GoFundMe, or purchasing books from your website.

So yeah! Thanks a lot man! I appreciate you taking the time. We’ll have to do this again, and maybe spend a little bit more time discussing the “Holocaust”. There’s no shortage of information to discuss, that is for sure!

Germar Rudolf: I’m already on the call that I was expecting now. So I have to run.

John Friend: Okay! Thanks Germar! Have a good one. I’ll talk to you soon!

Germar Rudolf: Yep. Bye!

[55:25]

END

___________________________

Comments at the Realist Report

top

22 COMMENTS

Jim Rizoli

November 5, 2020 1:34 pm

Just to add to the discussion…..not all the inmates in the camps were Jews of the 70k or more who died in the camp half were Jews. Auschwitz was a major transit camp for all over the German Reich for camp labor.
Birkenau was the biggest camp mainly a camp for older people and children who didn’t work.
Germar blames the Germans for something that they had no control over. It All was the collateral damage of war. Auschwitz was not a planned genocide, the deaths happened sorry to say because of the trials and tribulations of war.

Reply
Monika Schaefer

November 5, 2020 4:46 pm

Great interview! I want to say a big big “thank you” to Germar Rudolf for years and years of hard work, in order to get the truth out there.
Thanks for having him on your show John.

Reply
AJ

November 5, 2020 5:18 pm

Great job, John. Always good to hear from Germar.

Reply
Jim Rizoli

November 6, 2020 8:08 am

Monika
You should be very concerned on how Germar is blaming the Germans for something that was out of their control. No amount of Jew appeasement is going to make him look any better to the Jews. By the way the Germans suffered way more then the Jews when the final results were tallied up. Where is the outcry against the allies for what they did. The Jews actually were saved by being in the camps because the camps were for the most part no bombed by the allies. The Germans were open targets in all their so called peaceful cities. Germar might want to think about what he is doing by his careless statements. If you want to criticize the Germans for their lack of care of people in the camps you might want to look at the Allies for their wanton destruction and “Genocide” of the Germans that lasted for several years AFTER the war. Having a cold floor to sleep on doesn’t match the incendiary burning the Germans had to put up with by the Allies.

Reply
Diane K King

November 6, 2020 8:11 am

It seems Germar attempts to AGAIN denigrate the Germans, specifically the NS Germans, criticize them which is clearly JEW-SPEAK. Fails the Hitler test. Which means, he fails to TRULY understand what occurred in the THIRD REICH and also by consequence, the events of today.

It WON’T ingratiate him to the jews since he already came against their GOD (the holohoax)

THE HOLOCAUST IS THE JEWS’ GOD
https://www.bitchute.com/video/rjQWR16XdjIX/
with his chemical findings.

Germar ALSO spoke against the Germans in his interview with Jim in 2017 like he’s on a campaign to redeem himself with the jews!!!! (AIN’T GOING TO HAPPEN as I stated above)

JIM INTERVIEWS GERMAR RUDOLF, 2017
https://www.bitchute.com/video/SMEHvBvGPQy2/

We need to police ourselves, take each other to task when we egregiously erroneously assault the Germans.

Can’t wait for your interview with JIM RIZOLI

Reply
- Realist Report
  
  November 7, 2020 5:45 pm
  
  I think Germar’s main point was that the German government was not prepared to handle the sheer amount of people that ended up at Auschwitz and that the camp itself was not equipped or established for such large numbers. I don’t want to speak for him, but that was my big take away.
  
  Perhaps it was irresponsible or dangerous for them to do such a thing? That’s for people to decide for themselves. The Jews openly declared war against Germany and made known their intentions, so I could care less about their suffering (real, imagined, or exaggerated), frankly. Everyone suffered and experienced tremendous hardships and tragedies during WWII, including the Jews. The Jews have just made their tragedies (again, real and imagined) the focus of our entire understanding of the war.
  
  I think Germar’s nuanced explanation was very insightful and made a lot of sense. I don’t think he was being too hard on the Germans, he was just explaining the reality of the situation, and I certainly don’t think he’s trying to ingratiate himself to the Jews.
  
  Reply
  - Thaddeus Noble
    
    November 7, 2020 7:07 pm
    
    Well stated !
    
    Jews started the Second World War by their goods boycott. This is indisputable fact.
    
    Up until supply of vital supplies begin being interrupted camp inmates received adequate nutrition, medical care, delousing was scrupulously maintained and deceased inmates were properly disposed of. This is empirical record. The Red Cross records affirm this.
    
    When supply lines to camp facilities were severely interrupted vital supplies were stopped. Medicine and food are essential to a highly concentrated group of humans.
    
    When supply lines to camp facilities were severely interrupted vital support products were stopped. This included chemicals necessary for Delousing function and coal for proper sanitary operations of Cremation services.
    
    Immune impaired camp population + lack of adequate nutrition and medication + cessation of proper delousing ability + inability to properly dispose of deceased bodies = rampant spread of life threatening diseases resulting in the unnecessary loss of inmate lives.
    
    Note here: The Allies were WELL AWARE of the conditions in these camps as a result of their intentional disruption of needed supplies BUT DID NOTHING to intervene even though they were well aware that it was causing unneeded deaths of inmates.
    
    Germans were NOT to blame here, but allied guilt is unequivocal.
    
    Reply
    - michael
      
      November 8, 2020 8:26 pm
      
      “Jews started the Second World War by their goods boycott. This is indisputable fact.”
      
      The boycott that lasted 1 day?
      
      The fable of the sensationalistic headline, “Judea Declares War on Germany” that no one has even bothered to read was a 2-page article made in response to attacks on Jewish businesses starting in January 1933 that eventually led to this March 24, 1933 appeal being raised against Germany, 2 days ironically after the Dachau concentration camp was opened. Some of the first political prisoner just happened to be Jewish store owners.
      
      “Continued anti-Semitism in Germany is likely to react seriously against her. A move is on foot on the part of Jewish financiers to exert pressure to force anti-Jewish action to stop. ” — The Daily Express, “Judea Declares War On Germany” (March 24, 1933), page 2.
      
      How did “the Jews” influence Hitler to keep breaking his own treaties throughout the 1930s leading into his then broken 1938 Munich Pact to breaking his 1934 Non-Aggression Pact with Poland with his invasion in 1939, that then caused Hitler to ignore Chamberlain’s last appeal for peace and for Hitler to leave Poland which being ignored on the eve caused War on Germany to be then declared against Germany?
      
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wh2X1dTMFsY
      
      Reply
      - DM
        
        November 13, 2020 7:05 pm
        
        Ha!
        
        It’s nice to you kvetch here with bullshit.
        
        We have endured 70 years of a “boycott”.
        
        Not just “one day”.
        
        Piss off anti-christ.
- michael
  
  November 8, 2020 8:36 pm
  
  “Germar ALSO spoke against the Germans in his interview with Jim in 2017 like he’s on a campaign to redeem himself with the jews!!!! (AIN’T GOING TO HAPPEN as I stated above)
  
  JIM INTERVIEWS GERMAR RUDOLF, 2017
  https://www.bitchute.com/video/SMEHvBvGPQy2/”
  
  Unfortunately this is the same interview and reason why you and Jim censored Germar’s remarks that caused him to instead be interviewed a week later by Brian Ruhe. see, “The Mistakes of Adolf Hitler” https://www.bitchute.com/video/h2bgkBxqlrIU/
  
  “In early July 2017, Jim Rizoli and Diane King [editor’s note: “Free Speech campaigners”] interviewed me, but they cut out a 20-minute section where I touched briefly upon the mistakes of Adolf Hitler. I wasn’t happy about that censorship, so my next interview partner, Brian Ruhe, a confessing National Socialist, got to feel the heat of my wrath.” -Germar Rudolf
  
  Reply
Monika Schaefer

November 6, 2020 10:00 am

I totally agree with you, Jim, that the conditions which led to the death (by disease) of many people in the camps was “collateral damage of war”, and also, that many inmates were non-jews. Those are things which were left out of the discussion unfortunately.

However, I want to give Germar Rudolf his due for publishing, translating, and distributing many excellent books in the Holocaust Handbook series, as well as his work on the codoh.com website, not to mention his own legal battles, incarceration and persecutions that he has endured.

Reply
- BrendanO
  
  November 10, 2020 8:57 pm
  
  A huge number of jews were saved by being in Auschwitz rather than in German civilian centers which, if they had 50 thousand or more inhabitants were all fire-bombed incinerating most of the people in them .
  
  Reply
Fred Leuchter

November 6, 2020 2:10 pm

Dear John,

I would like the opportunity to discuss several points in Germar’s interview in which he does not understand the Job I had to do in the preparation of my report. He corroborates my report but discusses short comings that do not exist. Further, I do not believe his understanding of the History of the Auschwitz complex is correct and he has a complex as a German that causes a self-flagellation issue for him and the German People. I am an American who should be biased against Germany since I had family involved in the war. I review the historical facts and, even with this bias, have a clearer understanding of what happened medically at Auschwitz. I think the blame for these issues lay equally with the Allies and the Red Cross. Therefore, I request equal opportunity in an interview to speak of these matters.

Thank you

Fred Leuchter

Reply
- Realist Report
  
  November 7, 2020 9:50 am
  
  I would love to have you on! I’ll be in touch via email soon!
  
  Reply
Alison Chabloz

November 7, 2020 11:16 am

Thanks for the interview.

It’s more than a little disheartening to read criticism towards Germar Rudolf, not from the “usual suspects”, but rather from fellow travellers on the rocky road of historical revisionism.

Those ready to counter-signal might remember Germar’s unfortunate encounter earlier this year with a creature of the forest, which sprang shortly after his recent legal battles, with all the implications of eventual extradition.

Germar is first and foremost a scientist. When asked precise questions, he will answer precisely, yet comprehensively. This was not a discussion on the reasons for the war, on Allied war crimes, or on state-sponsored persecution of revisionists. The fact that Germar did not want to dwell on his own persecution, yet provided his expert opinion on the reasons for so many deaths at Auschwitz in particular, sheds light on his unassuming seriousness and dedication to the revisionist cause. He has my utmost respect.

I look forward to listening to Fred Leuchter.

Reply
Jim Rizoli

November 7, 2020 11:58 am

Fred and I will respond shortly with a video. Part of true revisionism is NOT denigrating and blaming the Germans, Germar has to be re-educated on this point.
Fred and I will not hold back on our video, stay tuned.

Reply
- Jim Rizoli
  
  November 7, 2020 12:38 pm
  
  Here is our reply
  https://www.bitchute.com/video/Rt2cOdOZsgVJ/
  
  Reply
  - A Reader
    
    November 7, 2020 7:59 pm
    
    How are German readers/listeners supposed to watch the video of Jim Rizoli? Why doesn’t Jim Rizoli publish his videos on his own site or on US server-based video platforms?
    
    Jim Rizoli’s Bitchute channel can no longer be viewed from Germany since September 01, 2020, when the following message appeared: “CHANNEL UNAVAILABLE[,] This channel is unavailable as the contents have been deemed illegal by the authorities within your country.”
    
    I think the company Bitchute is located in England, so it was obvious
    from the beginning that sooner or later the censorship would strike.
    
    Bitchute has become useless as an alternative to Youtube: Countless of the films and channels published there can no longer be viewed from Germany. Bitchute is in any case no longer an alternative.
    
    Reply
    - Saggy
      
      November 16, 2020 8:00 pm
      
      I just got a VPN so I’m new to this, but won’t a VPN allow German’s to view whatever vids they want? Proton VPN has a free option !!!
      
      For my money, BitChute rules.
      
      Reply
Thaddeus Noble

November 7, 2020 6:41 pm

Firstly, I want to commend Germar for his past contributions. He has provided much clarity to the complexities of the “Hoax”.

I see many famous contributors here such as Fred Leuchter who’s Leuchter Report is undoubtedly the Gold Standard in empirical evidence debunking the outright lies, deceit and mass fabrications connected to the Holahoax scam.

Jim and Diane, Monika and Alison, all truth seekers with outstanding credentials and many more lesser known, but just as commendable, truth seeking Revisionist who plow ahead regardless of the screeching Jews.

Jews LOVE to create dissension in the ranks. This is a tool they employ to encourage in-fighting therefore weakening an opponent. DON’T FALL FOR IT !!
Germar has been under constant assault from the Elves Of Satan for his failure to heel and role over. He needs our support, not condemnation.

Keep up the fact finding, expose what you find, support each other, NEVER STOP ! We are making more than just a dent or the rabid Piglets would not be oinking so loudly.

Reply
katana

November 8, 2020 5:24 pm

I’ve started a transcript of the interview here:

https://katana17.com/wp/2020/11/09/the-realist-report-john-friend-with-germar-rudolf-nov-5-2020-transcript/

Thanks John and Germar.

Reply
- Realist Report
  
  November 8, 2020 5:35 pm
  
  Thank you!

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

PDF

top

PDF Notes

* Total words = 11,241
* Total images = 16
* Total A4 pages = xx

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

(Available later)

Version History

top

Version 5: Apr 4, 2021 — Added the comments at The Realist Report.

Version 4: Nov 29, 2020 — Corrected various typos, missing words. Added 2 more images. Added time codes. Added Table of Contents with Links.

Version 3: Nov 26, 2020 — Added graph of Auschwitz death totals 1941 to 1943. Added image of microwave delousing machine.

Version 2: Nov 10, 2020 — Added more images. Completed remaining transcript. Transcript now complete.

Version 1: Nov 9, 2020 — Published post. Total transcript so far = 40/55 mins.

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

admin — Sun, 10 Feb 2019 23:53:27 +0000

[A guided photo tour of Auschwitz, focusing on the facilities provided for the inmates. Contrary to the propaganda that has been inflicted upon us and saturated our minds by the jewish controlled media that dominates all Western countries, Auschwitz was a labor camp system for the war effort.

Although many thousands of inmates, both non-jews and jews died as a result of typhus outbreaks, the camp was not an “extermination camp” with “gas chambers” as we have been brainwashed to believe.

These images should give great pause to anyone who still believes in the official story of Auschwitz and other camps containing “homicidal gas chambers” for the purpose of killing jews and others. Such claims are diabolical lies being used to create a Jew World Order through the propaganda mantra that Whites asserting their right to majority White societies somehow leads to gas chambers in Auschwitz.

Additionally the “holocaust” lie is used as a “shield and weapon” against anyone pointing out the horrendous crimes of Organized jewry throughout the 20th century, and now the present century, what with them carrying out 9/11 and engineering the mass Third World invasion of all White countries.

— KATANA]

_______________________

Inside Auschwitz

You’ve Never Seen

THIS Before

Jan 2019

Click the link below to view the video at YouTube:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUMnFMA1T-c

Silver Thoughts

YouTube Description

Published on Jan 28, 2018

A virtual tour of the Auschwitz Concentration Camp, with photos of the facilities and the inmates hard at work in factories and on the farm. Surprising content and scenes never before seen!

__________________________

INSIDE AUSCHWITZ

WELCOME TO AUSCHWITZ

ADMISSION TO AUSCHWITZ

NEW ARRIVALS, 1944 THE COMMANDANTS HOUSE

AUSCHWITZ BARRACKS

AUSCHWITZ CENTRAL HEATING PLANT

WATER PURIFICATION AND SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANTS

GROWING AND STORING FOOD

AUSCHWITZ FARM AND GREENHOUSES

FARM BUILDINGS AND FARM WORK

FOOD AND MEALS

DAILY LIFE

HORSES AND STABLES

INMATES AND GUARDS

INMATES WERE WORKERS

WORK: THE DAW FACTORY

WORK: THE KRUPP FACTORY

A DAY’S WORK

AUSCHWITZ BABIES

CHILDREN AT AUSCHWITZ

HEALTH CARE

DOCTORS AND FACILITIES

MEDICAL FACILITIES

HYGIENE

THEATRE AND PERFORMANCES

AUSCHWITZ ORCHESTRAS

PROFESSIONAL ENTERTAINMENT AT AUSCHWITZ

AUSCHWITZ SWIMMING POOL

SPORTS AT AUSCHWITZ

CELEBRATIONS

LEARNING

POSTCARDS AND LETTERS

GOING HOME

NOTES

See Also

Version History & Notes

TRANSCRIPT

(13:55)

[00:00]

[NOTE: Click on any image to enlarge]

INSIDE AUSCHWITZ

top

What was life like inside the infamous camp?

If you arrived at this page you have undoubtedly heard about Auschwitz and know what has been said about this concentration camp in the years of World War Two. This presentation seeks to present only the physical properties of the camp. A virtual tour, if you will, to inform discussions about this important subject. In this way we hope that all who see it will gain an appreciation of the hardships of everyday life endured there, and the very human spirit that is evident in the scenes of daily life.

The photos and documents in this presentation were, for the most part, obtained from so-called “Holocaust” memorial sites, and from private collections.

[Add. image] Map of the Auschwitz complex (click image to enlarge)

[Add image] Layout of Auschwitz I —main camp (click image to enlarge)

WELCOME TO AUSCHWITZ

top

Most people came to Auschwitz by train with whatever belongings they could carry. They left behind their homes, lives, and other possessions, along with their communities and beloved friends and family. With respect to jews, who are the main group discussed in reference to the concentration camps, while all jews in Germany were given the opportunity to migrate to Palestine and other locations in the 1930s, with their money and all possessions, many chose not to leave.

Not everyone then went to the camps. Some jews enlisted in the German army, a few rising to the high officer ranks, others continued their lives as usual in Germany, and in other countries.

ADMISSION TO AUSCHWITZ

top

Auschwitz was a huge operation, with more than one camp, and many large buildings, and major installations. The camp had an “Absorption” building, presumably to process inmates on arrival, taking note of identifying information and physical characteristics. All inmates had to undergo showering after the arduous journey, head shaving to remove lice, which caused typhus, and wear camp clothing.

NEW ARRIVALS, 1944 THE COMMANDANTS HOUSE

top

Inmates worked with camp guards and officers to welcome and process new inmates. As part of the camp’s amenities there was a facility that inmates could use for religious services and purposes.

Here [bottom right] we also have a photo of the camp Commandant’s house.

AUSCHWITZ BARRACKS

top

The familiar red tiled roofs of the Auschwitz barracks are shown here.

The camp was enlarged as it’s planned population grew. The black and white photo shows the new barracks under construction. Inside each of the three levels had double, or triple decker, bunks for inmates in separate men’s and women’s barracks.

AUSCHWITZ CENTRAL HEATING PLANT

top

Auschwitz had a massive central heating facility for camp buildings. The central heating plant was constructed in 1941.

WATER PURIFICATION AND SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANTS

top

Like any large community, or town, Auschwitz required massive systems for sewage treatment and water purification. Here you can see the extensive piping that was eventually put in place, along with canals, ponds, and other facilities to clean and transport water.

Some of these systems match those in use today.

GROWING AND STORING FOOD

top

Auschwitz had a working farm scene here in part on the bottom right.

It also had a series of green houses, allowing the cultivation of fresh produce throughout the cold winter months in Northern Europe.

In the two left photos, a massive food storage facility is seen under construction in 1941.

AUSCHWITZ FARM AND GREENHOUSES

top

Inmates tended the farm, taking care of the crops they would later consume. They were also able to plant their own food, caring for those gardens themselves.

In addition the Auschwitz farm grew Kok Sagis a relative of the dandelion plant which contains latex. This was used instead of rubber to make tires and other war essentials, as rubber was scarce during the war.

[Add. image] The Kok Sagis plant.

The women in the upper-left corner picture are working with the fields of Kok Sagis. An agronomist, in the middle photo on the right, is seen here visiting the farm facility, accompanied by Theis Christopherson, a farmer and German officer who worked on this program of Kok Sagis.

It was a model program at Auschwitz that other camps wanted to emulate. Also shown are a pigsty on the farm in the lower left, and the interior of one of the green houses.

FARM BUILDINGS AND FARM WORK

top

These photos appear to show farm storage facilities were grain and perhaps water. An inmate is shown plowing the fields, almost completely hidden behind the workhorses.

[05:00]

FOOD AND MEALS

top

The camp bakery was an important building equipped with giant ovens. Bread was an important part of the camp diet to increase calorie intake in the face of little available protein.

Inmates received a set amount of protein weekly, and soup was featured at most meals, along with coffee.

Inmates doing heavy labor, and pregnant women, were to receive bigger food rations.

DAILY LIFE

top

The multiple chimneys on the first photo designated a camp kitchen. This “Holocaust” source says that there were 12 kitchens in the camp. There must have been many dining rooms as well, and one is shown here.

A photo from inside the women’s barracks shows the casual nature of the interior..

The camp Complaints Office is shown where inmates could express concern about any matter directly to the camp commandant.

There was also a court on-site and a jail for anyone who severely transgressed camp policies.

HORSES AND STABLES

top

Horses were an important part of life at Auschwitz, powering farm implements, and transporting officers and visitors throughout the facility.

There were inscriptions above the entrances to the stables. This one had some lines from an old folk song:

Depression Horseman song:

“Your son’s land in the east,
At the border guard’s last post,
Stand your hand on the pommel,
That every rider shall be,
Your noble horses grew,
From the homeland up.”

INMATES AND GUARDS

top

Here we start to see more inmates at work in this case, apparently moving food and barrels on carts. Inmates interacted with the guards and there were many female guards responsible for female inmates.

INMATES WERE WORKERS

top

Auschwitz was very much about work. The camps were surrounded by factories and the inmates were put to work if they were of age and able. Here we see men in the iron works. Inmates returning from their workday and a vehicle garage with tools laid out, presumably for repair work.

WORK: THE DAW FACTORY

top

Here is construction work on the DAW* Factory 1941.

[* The Deutsche Ausrüstungs Werke (DAW) was an SS controlled firm with several factory and workshop buildings in the Auschwitz industrial area, using prisoner labor to produce furniture and other woodwork items and woven goods. Three of the workshop buildings remain today in somewhat changed condition, but showing the characteristic side windows. Source: http://www.thirdreichruins.com/auschwitzzoneofinterest.htm]

WORK: THE KRUPP FACTORY

top

Construction of the Krupp Factory also in 1941. There must have been several buildings in this complex of the Krupp Factory, because each photo seems to show a completely different kind of building.

The information on each photo was taken from official “Holocaust” Memorial websites.

A DAY’S WORK

top

Here are workers doing assembly and electronics work at the Siemens Brobuck factory and the Siemens airplane factory. Inmates labor was crucial to the war effort for Germany with all it’s working aged men off to war, the inmates clearly filled the gap in wartime production requirements.

As you can see in the top right, the inmates are making rifles at the Krupp Factory.

AUSCHWITZ BABIES

top

There were 3,000 babies born at Auschwitz, and all lived to liberation.

There were nursery and daycare facilities. With nurses caring for infants and children, while their mothers were at work.

CHILDREN AT AUSCHWITZ

top

While there are a few photos of children in Auschwitz, the ones available show children robust and healthy, including at the end of the war, as shown in the photo on the right, which was taken at the camp’s liberation.

HEALTH CARE

top

Auschwitz had extensive healthcare facilities. A hospital is shown on the bottom right, with an interior shot, top left.

Inmate care was divided by type of condition. With infectious diseases isolated and separate ward’s for various kinds of ailments and conditions.

The bottom left photo shows some of the doctors meeting informally.

The two other photos show a storage room for medical equipment, and a clinical treatment room.

DOCTORS AND FACILITIES

top

Auschwitz had a fully operational operating theater, and an isolation room for infectious diseases.

More of the camp doctors are shown here. For particularly difficult cases experts were brought in.

MEDICAL FACILITIES

top

More medical facilities included a laboratory, an x-ray machine, and a dental office. Auschwitz’s nurses are also shown.

HYGIENE

top

Cleanliness was mandatory at Auschwitz to prevent outbreaks of deadly typhus. In the top-left photo, inmates are shown wheeling racks of clothing out of disinfection chambers, where Zyklon B, and steam, were used to kill any lice and their eggs, on clothing and other camp materials.

[10:00]

The huge laundry boilers, on the top right, used heat to destroy pathogens on sheets, and towels, and other materials. The sign on the wall of the bathroom bottom-left, says.

“Dirtiness is the basis of every disease.”

Pretty blunt! But I guess it needed to be.

As shown on the bottom right Auschwitz had modern plumbing.

THEATRE AND PERFORMANCES

top

Auschwitz had a grand theater equipped with a grand piano. Musical instruments were provided to inmates along with other facilities and tools to create enjoyable performances of dance, theater, and song.

There were events for children as well. And one former inmate recalls painting a mural of Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, for the children in the theater.

AUSCHWITZ ORCHESTRAS

top

There may have been up to 16 Auschwitz orchestras, playing classical, jazz, blue, ragtime, and other types of past popular music. Here a band plays outdoors on a winter day. An orchestra of practices outdoors, and an orchestra puts on a full performance on a Sunday, apparently for SS.

PROFESSIONAL ENTERTAINMENT AT AUSCHWITZ

top

Auschwitz has had its share of famous people living there, including jazz musician, Louis Bennet, a group called the Kubu Orchestra, from Cuba, and the Ovitz family, a performing family of seven little people. All of whom survived the war.

AUSCHWITZ SWIMMING POOL

top

Another famous Polish Auschwitz resident was French jew, Alfred Nakache, an Olympic swimmer. Whenever possible, he put on swimming displays in the Auschwitz pool. He wrote about his experiences at Auschwitz after the war.

[Add image] Auschwitz Main camp’s swimming pool.

The Auschwitz pool was made available to inmates who were considered high performers. It featured a diving platform, and racing blocks.

SPORTS AT AUSCHWITZ

top

Sports were featured at Auschwitz, along with other fitness activities. This fencing match appears to be a major affair, with lots of spectators.

The prisoners of war, housed in separate facilities on the camp’s grounds, formed football, or soccer, teams.

In the later years of the war, inmates playing soccer, we’re often joined by the guards. It was said by some inmates that the guards were more relaxed in the final months of the war, as it became clear Germany was losing.

[Add. image] British POW soccer team at Auschwitz.

CELEBRATIONS

top

Because inmates were free to roam around the camp, there were romances and marriages.

There were celebrations of major holidays, as well. Here we see a Christmas tree by a camp barrack.

LEARNING

top

Inmates wishing to maintain, or expand, their knowledge and intellectual skills had access to a library on the camp’s grounds, as well as to Auschwitz University, to which local professor were invited, and indeed came to lecture. The facility pictured here looks well used, indeed.

POSTCARDS AND LETTERS

top

Inmates could receive up to two letters, or postcards, monthly. The first postcard they sent out, as shown here, listed the camp’s rules. All correspondence had to be in German and clearly written. Letters were subject to a maximum length and could contain no inserts.

However, food packages could be received, in any quantity and size, at any time.

GOING HOME

top

As Auschwitz was an internment camp, prisoners were released at the end of their sentence. Here is shown a release card. And, of course, when the war ended everyone was released.

Inmates, generally, had to go to Displaced Persons camps, until they could find a country, and a home, to go to.

[Add. image] The Plaques of Auschwitz (click image to enlarge)

[13:55]

END

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

NOTES

— [Add. image] = Additional image not contained in the video.

— Carolyn Yeager has a booklet that is also a guided photo tour of Auschwitz. The title is: Auschwitz: The Underground guided Tour – What the Tour Guides Don’t Tell You at Auschwitz-Birkenau.

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

PDF Notes

Version 1 —

* Total words = 2.876
* Total images = 45
* Total A4 pages = 54

Click to download a PDF of this post (5.5 MB):

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

Version History

Version 6: Jan 27, 2020 — Re-uploaded images and PDF for katana17.com/wp/ version.

Version 5: Feb 16, 2019 — Added image (Britsh POW soccer team).

Version 4: Feb 15, 2019 — Added Table of Contents with links.

Version 3: Feb 14, 2019 — Added PDF for download. Added DAW image and notes.

Version 2: Feb 12, 2019 — Added See Also links.

Version 1: Feb 11, 2019 — Published post.

Probing the Holocaust: The Horror Explained — TRANSCRIPT

admin — Thu, 28 Dec 2017 11:34:58 +0000

[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

Germar Rudolf, Eric Hunt

Dec, 2017

__________________________

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:

Download subtitle files:

__________________________

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.

Camp	Jewish Gas Chamber Victims
Auschwitz/Oświęcim	900,000*
Treblinka	900,000
Bełzec	500,000
Sobibór	210,000
Kulmhof/Chelmno	240,000
Lublin-Majdanek	unknown (thousands)*
Total:	2,750,000 + thousands
* The total Jewish death toll of these camps is higher than the number given due to deaths resulting from other causes (diseases, exhaustion, executions etc.)

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)

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

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.

Andrew Hitchcock with Monika Schaefer on “Sorry Mom” — TRANSCRIPT

admin — Sat, 08 Jul 2017 23:39:48 +0000

[In this interview Andrew Hitchcock talks with Monika Schaefer, who went public a year ago telling the world in a YouTube video that she now knows that the “Holocaust” is in fact a fraud being perpetrated on the world for sinister purposes by organized jewry. She discusses her journey of realization, starting with her shocking discovery that 9/11 was an “inside job” carried out by those same people behind the “Holocaust” fraud, and concludes that it is imperative that more people start telling the truth about these events if we are to avoid a future of total tyranny — KATANA.]

Andrew Hitchcock

with

Monika Schaefer

on “Sorry Mom“

Click here for the audio:

Monika Schaefer– Sorry Mom, I Was Wrong About The Holocaust

Click here for: Andrew Carrington Hitchcock webpage for this interview

Click here for Monika’s website:

Free Speech Monika

Published on July 7, 2017

Andrew Hitchcock’s Description

The Andrew Carrington Hitchcock Show (380) Monika Schaefer – Sorry Mom, I Was Wrong About The Holocaust

On today’s show I was joined by Monika Schaefer, to discuss her 6 minute YouTube entitled, “Sorry Mom, I Was Wrong About The Holocaust,” that you can view below.

We also discussed: Monika’s experience in, “Ritual Defamation,”; Joseph Ribakoff’s ADL prizewinning paper on legislating against hate speech in 1988; how Monika has been denied a busking permit due to her political beliefs; how the Jews expect you to be tolerant of their beliefs whilst they are intolerant of differing beliefs; and many other topics.

Special thanks to Alfred Schaefer for putting Monika and I in touch, so we could record this show.

TRANSCRIPT

(62 mins)

[00:22]

You are listening to TBR radio, brought to you by The Barnes Review.

Now the Andrew Carrington Hitchcock Show with your host, Andrew Carrington Hitchcock.

Andrew: Hello everybody. I have another new guest on today. I am delighted to have her on. Many of you will be aware of Monika Schaefer, and also that I interviewed her brother, Alfred, on my show recently. She’s got an excellent website. And the website is: freespeechmonika.worldpress.com. That’s, freespeechmonika.worldpress.com. And the “Monika” is spelt with a “k”. And, of course, I’ll be including a link to the website in the post for this show. And also the title of the show is “Sorry Mom, I was Wrong about the Holocaust”, which is a very famous YouTube, an excellently presented YouTube

that Monika is well-known for, in our movement. So, without further ado, I’m going to bring Monika up. Monika are you with me?

Monika: Yes! Hello Andrew! Thank you so much for bringing me on to your show. It’s an honor.

Andrew: Well, thank you so much for joining me. And one of the things I like to do, is people that have been oppressed by this, you know, international group of jewish bandits — would be a fair way of describing them — to actually give these people a platform on my show to explain how they have been oppressed, the things that be done to them. Just for basically expressing your thoughts and opinions. No acts of violence or anything like that.

But before we get into that side of things, could you please run through for the listeners, your background, your personal background, in as little, or greater detail as you would like.

Monika: Yes. I was born in Edmonton, Alberta in Canada in 1959. The fourth of five children. My parents came from Germany in 1951 and ‘52 respectively. And we grew up in a very, wonderfully traditional household of rich German traditions.

And we got out camping a lot. We grew up with a very deep appreciation for nature, for the natural world. That was something that we got from our parents. We had a huge vegetable garden even though we grew up in the city, so he could say we were a little bit like urban farmers with our vegetable garden, which fed our family of seven, largely. And, you know, then I went to university, I got a degree. I kind of did normal things like that, and then I became a park warden. And that’s in a national park, some years later. I mean, I had lots of different jobs before that, but I won’t go through that.

But the significant thing I would say for me and my life, was my career as a park warden. I got into the back country. I had a huge back country district for a number of seasons, where I would have three horses. Travel in the wilderness basically and take care of this large district. And, you know, you’d be on your own for long periods of time, and I would say this is one of the real highlights of what I did in my life. You learned a lot of self-sufficiency out there. When things go wrong you basically have to take care of yourself!

Yeah, so that’s kind of, in a nutshell, my background, and I guess I’ll leave it at that for now.

Andrew: Excellent! Well, I think now’s an opportunity, … I mean the title of this show is “Sorry Mom, I was Wrong about the Holocaust”. And so, we can look at the political side, … I wouldn’t really call it political, it’s just your views on historical events, which for some reason is unacceptable in our so-called “tolerant society” today. So it’s tolerant of what these jews want you to be tolerant of, and intolerant of things that they don’t like, obviously.

So I’m going to play your YouTube

and now again, I’m going to include this in the post for our show. So I’ll just get this lined up here. I think I have it so, let me just play it now for the listeners.

[05:26]

__________________________

Hello! I’m Monika Schaefer. I was born and raised in Canada, first generation Canadian citizen of German heritage. My parents both came from Germany. They immigrated to Canada in 1951 and ‘52, respectively.

There was a bit of a disconnect between what I experienced in the home life and what I felt outside the home. I love the rich German traditions and culture that I grew up with and yet, I felt ashamed of my Germanness when I was at school, or outside with my friends. I learned very quickly to hide my heritage.

It started in the first week of school. Day one, I wore my beautiful little dirndl, a traditional German dress and on day two, children were taunting me:

“Oh you forgot to take off your apron! Ha ha ha!”

as they were running away, or

“Heil Hitler! Ha ha!”

again taunting me.

[Image] German women wearing dirndl. A dirndl is a type of traditional dress worn in Germany, especially Bavaria; Austria; and the South Tyrol, based on the traditional clothing of Alps peasants.

I didn’t exactly know the meaning of that, but I knew it was not friendly. They were being cruel. That was very clear to me.

I’m reminded, just now, of the plight of the indigenous peoples of North America. They were also made to be ashamed of their culture.

I would like to share with you now a deep regret that I have for something which I would like to apologize to my parents for, but cannot, because they are no longer alive.

Many years ago, I reproached my mother. You see I had been thoroughly indoctrinated as we all were. The stories seemed to be all around us, in school, in television in the very air, and the evilness of Adolf Hitler was as deep and diabolic as imaginable.

I said to her, to my mother:

“Why didn’t you, your friends, your folk, your family. Why didn’t you do something to stop these bad things from happening! Stop Hitler and stop these death camps! You should have done something! You must have known!”

I was really upset, my reproach was bitter. She listened and she paused and very quietly and in a sad tone of voice, she said:

“We didn’t know about any of that. We just did not know. We did not hear about anything like that!”

Well, now I know why she did not know. It is, because these things did not happen! It is only since the last couple of years, since about 2014, that I have begun to understand that this is the biggest and most pernicious and persistent lie in all of history!

Everything has been turned upside down on its head!

Yes, there were detention camps. Nobody denies that there were camps! And yes, the prisoners were kept against their will. Again, nobody denies that. But these were work camps. The prisoners of the camps were being kept as healthy and as well fed as was possible in those terrible war years. They needed to be kept healthy. How else could they perform the work? It was war, and so the camps were basically armaments factories.

And how much sense does it make, by the way, to have a hospital in a death camp?

[Image – Click to enlarge]

There were no gas chambers there. The only gas that was used was to get rid of the lice! Lice carried typhus and typhus was a deadly and rampant disease. So they had to delouse the clothing to keep the people healthy. Now, why would they do that if the goal was to just exterminate the Jews? Makes no sense. That is the “Six Million Lie”, as I now like to call it, in a nutshell.

There is so much more to learn about this, and this is all readily available now in 2016 thanks to the digital age, with, or without the “thought laws”.

Back to my family. What a relief it is for me to learn that my parents and grandparents were not part of a people that suddenly became monsters overnight!

The reproach which I directed at my mother, I wish I could apologize to her for this. I am, in effect, apologizing to her now, to her spirit. I would like to invite you to find out more by searching the following titles that had such a meaningful and healing influence on me.

Thank you.

END

_________________________

[10:36]

Andrew: I’m going to read some of these titles as they come up, folks.

“Questioning the Holocaust — Why We Believed”

“The Greatest Problem of Our Time” by Ursula Haverbeck.

“Off Your Knees Germany” by Ernst Zundel.

The music was “Don Messer’s Breakdown” and the video was produced by Alfred Schaefer, Monika’s brother, who, of course, I’ve had on this program before.

I’m now going to bring Monika back. That’s an excellent video Monika. Of course, YouTube says it’s had 133,000 views [currently 144,892 as of Nov 2, 2017], just to let the listeners know. When I went into Google yesterday to get a copy of this, it gave me the top link to a video with 324 views. So for some reason it has not brought up the top viewed YouTube, which it should do, because that was Alfred Schaefer’s YouTube channel that has the 133,000. And then when I went on the one with 324 [views] today in preparation for the show, I saw that it had been removed, overnight. So I’m pleased Alfred’s is still there. And the reason that I found Alfred’s is — I’ve promoted this before folks — they should really be giving me a commission, but it’s the website Duck Duck Go. That’s “Duck Duck Go“. It’s a search engine essentially and it says that it doesn’t track you., but I think most importantly, it doesn’t manage it’s results. So when I typed in Monika Schaefer’s “Sorry Mom, I was Wrong About the Holocaust” the top entry that came up was the most viewed YouTube on the subject, which is the one I just played, off of Alfred Schaefer’s YouTube channel, which I have included in the post for this show. So I just want to clarify that for everybody.

Now back to you Monika. We now move on to your political awakening. Can you explain to listeners how you first came up with the real truth, sorry, not came up with, how you first stumbled upon the truth about the “Holocaust” rather than the official lies that we’ve been told by the mainstream media?

Monika: Yes thank you. How I reached my conclusions? Well, it began just a few years after 9/11, I ran into somebody who was telling me that there’s this thing called the “Truth Movement” in the United States, primarily. And that the people who are in this Truth Movement, they did not believe the official story of what happened on 9/11. And I was very interested in what he was telling me. And I listened with wide open eyes and I went home and would have liked to know more.

[Image] WTC Tower in the process of being destroyed in a top-down controlled demolition (click image to enlarge).

See: Organized jewry Did 9/11

But, you know, I didn’t even own a computer back then! I could have gone to the library and looked it up. But you know, how things go, life is busy and you just get on with your day-to-day. But it always stayed in my mind. So then a few years later, and I would say this was now ten years after 9/11 happened. So maybe in 2011 when my brother, Alfred, started to send some e-mails to family members about 9/11. And he was already then well-informed about who did it and, you know, not just that the official story couldn’t be true, but going, you know, much further than that. And I was really wanting to know and I just said:

“How do, you know, this? Where did you get this? ”

So, he obliged, steering me in the direction to learn a lot more. And then I couldn’t stop! Of course, by then I had a computer as well at home, so that made researching this much, much easier.

[Image] One of the WTC Towers being blown to bits by top-down massive controlled demolition (click image to enlarge).

So really, my awakening started with 9/11. And I have to say it was very, very difficult time for me, because I felt kind of nauseous, for weeks at a time.

[15:03]

Because I was figuring out that what we grew up believing, that is, that government is for the people, by the people, of the people, that was this mantra that we learned and really came to believe. That was simply not true! That they are not on our side! And if the government could be lying to us about something so big, that just turns your world upside down. So even though now I look back at the story of 9/11 and I think it’s a kindergarten level of entry to realize that we’re being lied to. Because when you do look at it, it is just so elementary to figure out that with they told us about it is completely a fairy tale!

[Image] Ernst Zundel and the Toronto “Holocaust Trials” of 1985 and 1988 (click image to enlarge).

So then after that, maybe a couple of years later, I started to come up against, well come up against — I resisted at first — you know, the “Holocaust”. Like that this is a big lie! And it’s not brand new because, you know, growing up in Canada during the eighty’s, Ernst Zundel was in the news during those Toronto trials, ‘85 and ‘88, and that was daily news for a while there. And it was, more or less, background noise for me. Because, first of all, the way the media presented him, one just thought he’s a crazy guy! He’s probably a bad man, or that’s the way they presented him. And at that time I was really asleep at the wheel and it was, like I say, it was a bit of background noise. [I] didn’t really pay too much attention.

In retrospect I wish I had of paid attention, because if you had of read the articles and actually read them, you would have learned a lot, because in the newspapers they did actually have to report to some degree what took place in those trials. And it was astonishing what came out in those trials! It’s monumental what came from those trials!

[Image] Newspaper article on the Toronto “Holocaust Trial” of 1985 (click image to enlarge).

Anyway, but that was back then and the “Holocaust” I mean, how can somebody say it didn’t happen? It’s like this huge, huge thing, that how could they lie about something so big? Those are the thoughts that go through your head. So then when I started to be confronted with, that this might be a lie and when I finally dared to look! Oh! It didn’t take long at all Andrew, before I realized:

“Oh my goodness! There is a lot here to be seen!”

And once I started, once I just let myself look, I realized very, very quickly:

“Okay, there’s something wrong with this story! Very wrong with it!”

And then I also just researched and researched, because I wasn’t going to just go on, you know, day one of research and say:

“Okay, didn’t happen!” [laughing]

Something I believed all my life, that everybody else believes all our lives and:

“Okay, didn’t happen!”

No, I did a thorough investigation into it! And I became very satisfied and yes! We are not wrong when we are saying this is the biggest lie! It is a lie and it is a hoax! And we have truth on our side.

So yeah, I’ll leave it at that for the moment.

Andrew: Well, it’s very interesting and I’m pleased that you brought up 9/11, because it’s come to my attention that the recently released sequel to the film “Trainspotting”, I think it’s called “T2 Trainspotting”, or something. It’s twenty years after the original, and there’s a bit in it where Ewan McGregor character — I don’t know what he’s called in the film — but he says:

“Choose to believe that 9/11 was a hoax, or if it did happen, the jews did it!”

And I was astonished to hear that! So obviously they put that in there to try and ridicule those of us who say that it was the Jews that were behind it. But the volume of our information has got so loud, that even in mainstream films they’re having to address this now. And they’re having to try and tell people it’s a ridiculous concept that we’re putting forward. Which goes to show why they’re doing so much work in censoring things like Google, which I just gave the example of. And You Tube, or what have you, taking different things down.

And this next section of the show I know that you’re an expert on “ritual defamation” based upon what’s been happening to you. And I’ve read this section of my book on a different show before — I forget which one — but it’s very important. It’s from 1988, it’s from “The Synagogue of Satan — Updated, Expanded, and Uncensored“. And this is what it says:

[19:49]

“The Anti Defamation League, the ADL, initiated a nationwide competition for law students to draft anti-hate legislation designed to protect minority groups. That competition is won by a man named Joseph Ribakoff, who’s proposal stipulate that not only must hate motivated violence be banned, but any words which stimulate suspicion, friction, hatred, and possible violence must also be criminalized.”

This ADL prize-winning paper suggests that not only should state agencies monitor and restrict free speech in general, but they should also censor all films that criticize identifiable groups. Furthermore, even if the person making the statement can justify it, for example, Christians criticizing homosexuality, because the Bible expressly forbids it, Ribakoff asserts that the truth is to be no defense in court — sounds like the “Holocaust” laws, doesn’t it folks — the only proof a court will need in order to secure a conviction of hate speech, is that something has been said and the minority group, or member of such group has felt emotionally damaged as a result of such criticisms.

Therefore, under these proposals which the ADL will have forced into law, all over the world, less than fifteen years later through their bought and paid for politicians and media, Jesus Christ would have been arrested as a “hate criminal”! This law is designed to protect the Rothschild conspiracy from being revealed, in that if you criticize the Rothschild’s criminal cabal, you will be targeted as anti-semitic and thus risk imprisonment. It is also interesting to note that say, for example, a rabbi torches his synagogue to collect insurance money, because it is in need of repair, as opposed to someone else perpetrating the crime who was found to have an interest in anti-establishment media, the latter would receive a stiffer sentence for the same act!

[Image] The Elements of Ritual Defamation by Dr. Fredrick Toben (click image to enlarge).

So, Monika, just to bring you in regarding ritual defamation. When you look at this, and this was from 1988, this competition, so we’re looking at thirty years ago, it was put together by the Jewish ADL. It’s pretty clear isn’t it, who’s behind all this restriction on free speech, all this censoring of things on Google and Facebook, and taking videos down on YouTube. They’ve pretty much shown themselves that it’s been the Jews all along, haven’t they Monika?

Monika: It is astonishing! That this can exist! This, whatever this “hate speech” what is that? You know, it is, “truth is hate to those who hate the truth“, in a nutshell, is what you could say about it. And I mean, when they even say:

“The truth is to be no defense in court.”

If people understand that, how can they not wake up to the fact that something is so deeply wrong with this? You know, “hate speech” legislation, what does that actually mean? It just means that this group of people does not want you to expose their acts, their criminal acts, what they are doing! And I think, because of the psychological warfare that has been conducted on us for a very, very long time, people are not able to come out of this.

I mean, some people are, why do some people have the capacity to come out of it? And yet others would just say:

“Oh no! I’m not going to discuss this! I’m not going to debate it. We can’t talk about this!”

But, you know, we’re going to shun you anyway. We are going to ostracize you anyway! How much sense does that make? But you find out that it’s not about logic and that is a real disappointment to me. I always just thought that if you explain things to people, or they find out what, you know, logically, and truthfully, and with evidence what happened, in any situation, whether it’s about 9/11, or about some local event that has happened, whatever it is, or something so large as World War Two history and the “Holocaust” story, you would just think that they would then be able to look at that themselves and understand!

But it doesn’t work that way! I’m sure you have found that yourself, that it just doesn’t work that way. You can shower the people with evidence like Yuri Bezmenov has famously said. That KGB defector whose job it was to, … Well I’m not exactly sure what his job was, but it was about fooling the people basically. That he understands this, that you can shower the people with all the evidence in the world and it might not make a difference. Because if they have been thoroughly demoralized, and that is what has happened to us, we have become demoralized with all the false information and the undermining of culture and what not.

[25:07]

So I could talk a little bit about the ritual defamation aspect of this, and this is not something I set out to become an expert on! It is has come to me, because of my video. I live in a town of approximately five thousand people, Jasper, Alberta, in Canada. This is in the middle of a national park, and this national park, Jasper National Park is also contiguous with a few other national parks and wilderness areas, and it is World Heritage Site. It’s a very significant place on this beautiful earth, and we get millions of tourists every year. But the town itself, five thousand people, it’s like this little bubble! Because people who live here, they work here, they play here. It’s not a bedroom community. It’s not really a commuter community, so people really do live here. It’s quite encapsulated.

[Image] Jasper, Alberta Canada (click image to enlarge).

And, you know, I’ve always thought well, it’s got a strong community and Jasper prides itself on “embracing diversity”. [laughing] I mean, there’s all kinds of buzzwords in this town that, you know, where we have a huge festivals. And one of them is the Pride Festival and all these things that happen here that make people here believe that we have just such a wonderful, you know, we embrace everything, we’re tolerant and all.

Well, I have found out to my chagrin what this community, the true colors actually of this community, and it’s not pretty. It’s not pretty at all!

Basically, after my video came out there were some key people who declared publicly on social media that:

“Monika Schaefer is no longer welcome in this community, in this town”.

And they’ve banned me from this and that. The other thing, one of the local establishments, the Legion, which is in this town, it’s actually a venue for many activities, musical activities, community events, it’s actually a hub of activity there. They have banned me outright! I have not been able to set foot in that place, since a year now. And it has been a year now since my video came out. I just, you know, it’s one year anniversary on June 17th, from when that happened. So that was a little bit of a significant date in my life. It’s like, you know, giving birth, or something! [laughing] Anyway, so that’s one story, is the Legion.

[Image] The Legion in Jasper, putting its reputation in the gutter (click image to enlarge).

But another story is busking. This is an activity which has recently been sanctioned in this town, and largely due to my efforts years ago when I approached the town council to say, look, busking is when you go out and play on a public sidewalk and open your case, play music, and passersby they can throw a coin in if they so choose. And this used to be illegal here, funny enough! I mean, it’s a perfect place for such an activity, you know, lots of tourists come and it’s in a setting, a beautiful setting. So it would be a perfect place for it. So finally, they did allow it for the first time last summer. And lo and behold, when I went to apply for my busking license, they said:

“Because of your non-inclusive beliefs, actually your publicly proclaimed non-inclusive beliefs, we are denying you a busking permit”.

[Image] Monika talking about her violin playing (Click image to enlarge).

And they told me to take a look at the “Values and Principles” statement of this art institution here, called the Habitat for the Arts. And, because of this principles and values statement that supposedly I was not adhering to, I would not be given a busking license! I thought this was quite, quite upside down, because they themselves broke every statement in that “Values and Principles” statement by denying me a busking permit!

You know, they talk about:

“We embrace new challenges and ideas! And we learn from each other, we help each other grow through knowledge exchange, and support!”

These are things right in their “Values” statement. And I mean, don’t you think that by denying me a busking permit, because of my video, “Sorry Mom, I was Wrong About the Holocaust”, they’ve broken all those values! So lo and behold, just yesterday, I learned that this summer, after a long winter of meetings and procedural reviews on, … Okay, they said this summer the vetting process for who’s to receive a busking permit would be based on talent. When they said that to a town council meeting at which I was present, and I also gave a presentation.

[30:08]

I thought, I interpreted that as an admission that they had erred last year when they denied me a Busking Permit due to my publicly proclaimed “non-inclusive beliefs”, quote, unquote. And, they said that this summer, yes, they would base it on talent, and I mean, the people all along, always said:

“Oh! It’s not about your musical ability, we all know you can play”.

You know, they stated it in the newspapers, they stated it at the town council meeting, … I mean they made it very, very clear that they didn’t want me playing my violin on the streets of Jasper, because of my views!

[Image] A wonderful portrait of Monika Schaefer with her violin.

Now, what do my views have to do with my violin playing?

And a little bit of background to that, I have played in this town for many, many years. I’ve lived here for thirty-five years and I have been asked to play at fundraisers and I do so, I have done that many, many times. I play for the seniors, I play for the children, I play at community dinners, I play all over the place in this town. I have given my music to the people here, and they have always been very appreciative of my music. So it’s not about, you know, playing squeaky notes or anything, that they have denied me my Busking Permit, … They have all appreciated my music over the years.

But now, they would like to, basically, drive me out of town, and they are really pulling out all the stops to keep me off.

So, yesterday I received the email, after this long process of the audition, which was really full of, you know, all kinds of fancy rules. Well, they broke all their own rules! And I won’t get into the details of that, because it’ll take way too long. But, they did make all kinds of rules, and a process, … And really that this is just garbage! Because they didn’t follow any of that!

They sent me an email saying, oh:

“I didn’t get enough points in their point system, with this Committee.”

Faceless, nameless people, on a committee to determine the busking [licenses]. So basically, I didn’t get my Busking Permit! This is brand new news to me! I was reeling yesterday when I found it out! I mean, I wasn’t surprised, I kind of knew that they would find some way to keep me off the streets to play my violin, but that just happened. — Yeah, so there you go!

Andrew: Well, the jews expect you to be tolerant of their beliefs, while they are intolerant of yours! And the fact is, is that applying to play a violin — if they’re worried about you saying anything — they just need to say:

“Well the permit is just for you to play the violin. You are not allowed to air any views, or what have you, that we don’t like”.

Which again, isn’t acceptable to me, but the fact is you are applying to play a violin.

But this is typical jewish behavior, and what they do, … If you do anything that upsets them, they will do all that they can to hurt you in any way that they can! And so they know that there is no risk of you exposing them anymore by playing the violin, but they think:

“Oh, she said something about us, so we’re going to get her here, we’re going to get her there, we’re going to get her everywhere!”

And this is their nature; that countless people through history, … I mean, Martin Luther talked about this, … This people being, you know, basically:

“Deplorable, ruthless, vindictive!”

I think was the word that he used:

“This vindictive race!”

Harry Truman even said — and there’s questions over his ethnicity — he said he’s always found the jews to be quite a “cruel people”. They have to have everything their own way and they don’t care who they hurt to get it.

And of course, because we’ve let this group of “bandits” essentially take over the world, they now think:

“Right! We own the media. We own the politicians. So, we’re just going to do a little sweep-up operation here. We’re going to put laws in place, so anyone that tries to expose us, we’ll just make laws and throw them in jail!”

This is the arrogance, and the deplorable behavior of this race in general! And I refer to them as “a race in general”, because I never see any jews who seem to be speaking out against it, … You’ll get the odd one, like a Gilad Atzmon. But again, … They’re so few and far between, and I question their significance, because when you can only pick out one or two, it goes to show how many of them go along with it.

And it is shocking to me that the world we live in today, … It’s not a world that I want to really be in! Because my freedoms are being taken away. I see the darkening of my country. I see the promotion of all this race-mixing, and, if I go out and speak out about it, and say:

“Oh, by the way, don’t you realize that by doing this you’re destroying your own race?”

We’re the only species on the planet that does this!

[35:03]

You see penguins that march across the South Pole to migrate, to literally go through these terrible conditions for months in order to hatch one egg! That they then take turns looking after, as they walk seventy-miles to feed. But they do that, and they put up with these conditions, because they see that their sole purpose in life is to keep their species going.

What the White people are doing is they’re actively killing their own species at the behest of these jews! Because they believe everything that they see and hear in the media. And people that try and point out that they’re wrong, they’re fast looking to enact laws to shut up, and that’s people like you and I.

And this is the peril that we’re in, and this is why I say to people: Get Monika’s video, download it, you can get, … I think you can get add-ons to Firefox where you can actually download YouTubes [videos], so you’ve got them yourselves, so whenever they take them down, it doesn’t matter, you’ve got your own copy.

Save my shows! Because you don’t know how long they are going to be available and when they either shut us up, put us in prison, taken the web-sites down, whatever; … Because, I gave examples earlier in this show, about the YouTube [your video], it was there yesterday, gone today! I had to find it on another channel! And it goes on and on, and on. Over to you Monika for your thoughts on this?

Monika: Yes, I also encourage people to get physical books! As great as it is to be able to get the resources on the Internet, and online, and even read books online, I think it’s also a good idea to have books in people’s homes, in as many people’s homes as possible! Because like you say, we don’t really know how this is going to unfold in the future. And just for the sake of future people, that to understand what is really going on, the more books exist, in the more places, the more chance there is that the truth will really be exposed, you know, be out there, and that the lies’ exposed. And so that’s another aspect of it.

And you know, you talked about the poisoning of the mind, … Well actually that’s something I want to bring into this, that how does it, how does it come to be that people are so afraid to look into these matters?

I think that the poisoning of the mind by all this weaponized language, the weaponized words, and when you read that piece, you know, when the ADL had their competition about hate speech legislation. It was right in there about “weaponizing” the language, really. It’s not only acts of violence that they were going to criminalize, but they’re going to criminalize speech! Criminalize words! “Criminalize words” — I mean, that’s George Orwell one hundred percent!

People should watch that movie again, or read the book 1984. It is chilling how it rings true for right now, what is going on. And George Orwell was actually trying to give a warning to us with that futuristic novel that he wrote back in 1948 or 1949. And when all of the poisoning of the minds, is what keeps people from being able to see, and look, and even when presented with evidence, that is what has happened.

And like, back to this small town here where I live, with five thousand people. You know, many people treat me very, very friendly. They know that there’s something deeply wrong with how I am being treated in the community, and shunned and ostracized. And they know there’s something wrong with that, and they’ve known me for a long time, and they will greet me very friendly. I mean, you see people at the post office, in the grocery store, and basically you’re always running into familiar faces, and many treat me with great friendliness.

[Image] The postcard image of a beautifully “tolerant and diverse” town of Jasper, Alberta, Canada, hides something quite sinister. There lurks, below the everyday surface of normal life, a force, a power, that is absolutely intolerant of any challenge to its authority (click image to enlarge).

But people are still afraid to look into the issues and to, … I think there must be some who do, and I hope that I’ve actually made an impact on some people, and that they actually will, and do look into it, and maybe question what we’ve been taught all our lives. But you see, they’re made afraid to publicly talk about these things, because they see what happens to somebody like me who comes out very publicly, and they don’t want to lose their jobs, they don’t want to lose their friendships, their family relations, this kind of thing.

And that’s how it is done to us! That’s why ritual defamation happens! The purpose of it is to make it very clear to the general population that you just don’t break this taboo, by, …basically, that’s what it is: The “Holocaustianity” — It’s become the new religion and if you violate this taboo, well you’re going to be in deep trouble and your life is not going to be that good anymore! So that’s why people are afraid to look at it.

[40:09]

But, you know, having said that, I want to make it very, very clear that I am not looking for sympathy here, or anything like that! I have a very good life! I’m at peace with what I’m doing. I feel very happy really with where I’m at, because I know that I have truth on my side, and this is a deeply, … It’s a good thing! It gives one a very deep sense of peace and tranquility when, you know, that you have truth on your side. It doesn’t matter if you’re in a minority. It really doesn’t!

That becomes irrelevant, because we are working for the greater good, we are working for peace! We are at the core of the peace movement when we seek to speak the truth. Don’t you think that’s true, Andrew?

Andrew: Yes I do. And you know, what you said about getting physical books, this is what I’ve always said to people.

Something like a book, … If there’s an EMP attack [electromagnetic pulse] the book will still work for you! But anything that you have to play electronically may not work for you, so you can downloading shows and burning them to disc, or drives, or what have you — whilst I still encourage it — they could be taken out by that. And the other thing is a lot of people are depending on Kindle [an electronic Reader, made by Amazon] recently, and what you have to bear in mind — I don’t own a Kindle so I may be wrong here — but to my mind they could dip into that Kindle, and as soon as they, say, Amazon don’t offer a book for sale anymore, the next step will be: — well anyone who’s got it on their Kindle, we need to wipe it off there because we don’t support that anymore — and they’ll be into your Kindles, wiping things off!

I know recently, I had, … I got a new phone and I had to download my Apps, again. And one of them I had actually paid for:

“Oh, this App’s not available in your country”.

Well it was when I bought it a year or two ago. But now I can’t put it back on my phone, because they’ve changed it and said it’s not available, even though I already paid for it! So, you know, they could mess about with all this sort of stuff, any way which they choose.

I think that the real situation that we need to face, is getting the message out to people. And I mean I still use Twitter and Facebook, but I don’t know how long I’ll have them, and I certainly feel that both have had their, … Certainly the Twitter, I think, it’s having it’s followers hemorrhaged, judging by the feedback that I get. And Facebook is having it’s posts hemorrhaged, because so many people, … Some can see some posts, some can’t see others. And they check their settings and made sure that they’ve got it set up to “see all posts”, not just posts from friends. So I’m talking about when I put a post out and people comment on it, so I’m actually referring to comments on posts, sorry folks, … A bit confused there. And I know what they’re doing there. All sorts of stuff.

And funnily enough recently I went to post a show about, … It was Harry Cooper’s show about Hitler in Argentina, and it automatically posts from my site to Twitter, [and] to Facebook. And for some reason it didn’t post to Twitter, that one! Didn’t like that one! I think because it had the word “Hitler” in it — they said: “Ooh! We can’t have that!” And so I had to post it manually. And I posted it, because these people, you see, what they do is they stop it there, because they think that you won’t check. But of course each time, it goes back to what Teresa May [British Prime Minister] said:

“Oh, we will frustrate these people any way we can! ”

But if you have to double-check everything, then that’s adding extra things that you have to do on to your day, and it’s very easy to miss stuff when you’ve got everything else to deal with.

[Image] Yad Vashem Holocaust Museum, Israel. A major source of “Holocaust” brainwashing and indoctrination for jews.

And so they’re definitely doing this even though it’s illegal. The way that they removed these books from Amazon, because the “Yad Vashem Holocaust Museum” didn’t like them. And they went bleating to Amazon saying:

“Oooh! We’ve had all these threats against synagogues, and so you’ve got to take these hateful books down!”

Well, they took them down and then they found out that the threats were made by a jew in Israel!

Monika: Exactly!

[Image] “Amazion” complies with jewish pressure and bans books that actually tells the truth about the “Holocaust“.

See: Amazion Bans 100s of Holocaust Revisionist Books!

Andrew: What did they do? Did they write back to Amazon and say:

“Oh, you can put the books back up, because it was one of our people?”

No! It was “jewish lightning” over and over again! This was all orchestrated so that they could get this thing in play. If, what we’re saying, is so ridiculous, then you’d be happy to let people say it, because you’d be:

“Well, it’s so obviously not true! But why are we even bothered about it?”

[Image] “Jewish lightning” is a term used to describe deliberate acts of arson by jews for insurance fraud purposes.

See: THE AMERICAN JEW AN EXPOSE OF HIS CAREER — Part 4. (click image to enlarge).

Monika: Exactly!

Andrew: But they know that it’s true, they know that it’s true! And they know that people are waking up to this jewish control, which goes back to me mentioning a mainstream film [which] even included the line about the jews did 9/11. So, it’s far bigger than anything we’re aware of at the moment.

[45:15]

I think that there’s millions of people that know this information, and that’s why you’ve got the government leaders running around like headless chickens trying to push this legislation through, so that people stop talking about it. But that’s not going to happen! Even if they get rid of us, because as soon as they start silencing people, people smell a rat! And it’s a giant jew rat! I would add. So in that sense, I think that it’s much of the same folks who’ve got to keep getting the information out, spreading it to other people. And that’s the way I see going forward. How about yourself, Monika?

Monika: Oh that is so absolutely true! There were so many things that I want to address here, what you just talked about Andrew.

First, I’ll start with the fact that many, many more people know and understand the truth, than is apparent. And it is really important for us to know that, and to spread even just that truth! That many more people are awake than is apparent! And there is an obvious reason for that. People who know and understand, but for reasons of, you know, that they, … Just, for economic reasons and whatever the situation is in life at that point in time, they can’t come out with such a public video like, “Sorry Mom”. You know, they are still there and they are helping in other ways.

I know this, because I received a lot of correspondence, and letters, and comments from people who are very well aware and wide awake, but they’re not necessarily saying this in their own small town, or in their communities, for those reasons. Because they can’t afford at this time, maybe they have young children they’re still raising, whatever, they can’t afford to have their lives turned upside down.

And you see, it’s really part of this psychological warfare against us. To make it look like we are just a very isolated few “nut-cases” that have these crazy ideas. We are social animals, so people will go along, you know, with what it looks like, what everybody else believes.

Now if the masses, many people saw that, “Gee, there’s, …” Maybe five percent of the population, or ten percent of the population, actually no one understands how many, they’re going to go:

“Oh, okay, maybe I should take a look at that?”

Whereas if they think it’s just one out of, you know, ten thousand people that have these ideas, well they’re not going to bother looking at us. That’s an important part of the psychological warfare! It’s to make us think that we are very alone, and very isolated, and just a few of us! That, you know, that they’ll make us look crazy, or something! But that’s an important aspect of it.

And what you also said about these things that happen, like the swastikas on synagogues, or in gravestones being turned over, and then they take down books at Amazon, … That’s all part of this false-flag narrative! So they’re doing it themselves, then they achieve their goal, which might be the burning of the books, or it might be a new piece of legislation, and then we find out:

“Oh! It was them that did it all along!”

Yes! It’s all part of the false-flag narrative. They do something to make it look like it was the other, and then they achieve their goal, and then we find out the truth, or some of us find out the truth. And of course, they try to suppress that, or they make hate speech legislation, they throw us in jail, or whatever they want to do!

Now, I also want to say that the fact that they are so hysterically trying to suppress the truth, is proof that they need us to be ignorant, in order to achieve what they’re doing. In other words, there is hope that if more people were to understand, and to open their eyes, and to wake up to what is going on, that basically takes away the jewish power. That’s the conclusion I have reached.

Because when people say,

“Ahh, there’s no hope! We can’t do anything about it anyway! And what can one person do?”

Well, if that was really the case, that there’s no hope and what can one person really do, then they wouldn’t bother trying to drive people like me out of town, or to do bad things to those of us who are awake! I mean, they wouldn’t bother! They wouldn’t care, right? It just wouldn’t be important.

So, that is proof! That this giant awakening which is happening is just so important and we need to really be working harder than ever [laughing] to make this happen, to wake people up, to educate people, educate ourselves, educate others! And to carry on and to do so with hope and positiveness! Yes! We can bring this out. Light always trump’s dark, doesn’t it?

[50:25]

Andrew: Yes. Of course, what you said about the way that they do these things, and they’re behind the attacks, and then they blame someone else to get things passed, like legislation, it takes me back to the Mossad motto:

“By way of deception thousand shalt do war”.

And the other thing is, if they know what we say about the “Holocaust” — I would say that they know exactly what we say about the “Holocaust” being false, is actually true. They know that six million didn’t die. They know that there were no gas chambers. And the reason that I can tell that to the listeners, is that if they didn’t know that, then why would they insert:

“The truth is no defense”, in their hate-crimes legislation?

Why do they always like that Ribakoff piece that I read earlier on? It specifically said:

“The truth would be no defense in regard to the hate crimes legislation?”

So they’ve been geared up to the fact that there’d be a few of us out there that will try and get the truth to the masses. As they exert a greater level of control, and when they get to that stage, where they’re at now, that’s when they need to exert that level of control and make sure that when they get us in court they can’t be thrown out.

Like what happened in the trial, … I think one of the Rothschild’s in the early 1900s sued a particular publication for reporting the 1815 story of how Nathan Rothschild pretended Napoleon had won the war. And as a result got all the traders on the London Stock Exchange to sell all their consuls. And then he instructed his agents to surreptitiously buy them all back when they had gone right down in value. And then miraculously found out that Wellington had won the war, when Rothschild already knew this, because he had one of his couriers sent over there, reporting back quickly! And that story was run about a hundred years later, and a Rothschild sued on it, and was told:

“No, that story is true! ”

And he had to pay the legal costs.

And so, they don’t want that to happen again. And the jews are like elephants, folks, they never forget. And so they think:

“Right, we didn’t have enough control there, so what we need, we need to cause a situation in which it doesn’t matter what evidence you have!”

In the recent international definition of anti-Semitism, … Again it states that if you say, for example:

“The jews control the media! ”

[Image] Jewish control of our media admitted by jews (click image to enlarge).

Even if you can go to court, and you can produce the list of all these giant companies that are owned by jews that control the media, they’ll say:

“No, truth is no defense!”

And so it’s an absolute nonsense! And then they talk about living in a democracy, with justice, and all this, … These people are so, so evil!

And the politicians that do their bidding are even more evil, because they’re literally against the citizens that they pretend to be working for. And I think that the whole system will come crashing down, but not without casualties on either side beforehand.

So that’s where I think that we are at the moment. What are your thoughts, Monika?

Monika: Oh yes! I’m so glad you brought up the Mossad motto! I mean, when I tell people that, if a country’s motto, or their secret intelligence agency motto, you know, the Mossad, is to deceive, and make war. I mean, what does that say? Shouldn’t the motto be something about upholding justice; or defending our people; or you know, standing up for a Right, No! It’s:

“By way of deception, make war!”

Like, come on! It’s all right there!

And then this thing about jewish identity. The “Holocaust” really is what the jews have, that is their whole identity! I mean, from the day they’re born, there are themselves very indoctrinated in that:

“Oh, we are the persecuted people, and we’ve always been persecuted all through history! ”

And the “Holocaust” is the big one! And that’s their whole identity! Now without that, what do they have, what do they actually have? I mean, it’s been said that they have nothing without the “Holocaust”. So, that is why it’s such a grave threat to them, to expose the fact that this is all a big lie, a big hoax. And what that makes me think too, is all through history, you know, this persecution, … I mean, why were they thrown out of all these countries?

[55:04]

Well we know that they go in, they undermine, and they infiltrate, and they basically destroy from within. But they become chameleons doing so, and that’s the enemy within, that is so much more dangerous than the enemy at the gate, that come with guns and is very visible.

And you know, about the politicians, I didn’t mention the fact that I, prior to my awakening, to first of all 9/11, and then all these other bigger deceptions. I had run in several elections. I used to be in the Green Party, and I ran in four elections, three of them were federal, one provincial, and you know, I was good friends actually with the leader of the Green Party of Canada, her name is Elizabeth May. And, you know, she always said she will “speak truth to power” no matter how unpopular it is, or how it might affect anybody. Whatever the Truth is she will always “speak truth to power”.

And I believed her. And I think she was sincere, but since then I think she has become very compromised and I think she has been able to rationalize everything away by this and that, saying:

“Oh well now I’m responsible to the membership, and the media is going to jump on me for this, or that, or the other thing.”

Because I have talked with her extensively about 9/11, and she knows that the official story is wrong, but she will not say so publicly now, because she knows that she will be damaged by that. So therefore, of all the politicians in Canada, Elizabeth May, I thought that she really would speak truth to power, but she can’t!

[Image] Elizabeth May denounces Monika for her views on 9/11 and the “Holocaust” (click image to enlarge).

Because the “cabal”, who brought us 9/11 and who is lying to us about everything else, and that’s, basically the Rothschilds, the bankers, and that’s the jewish cabal. They control every single politician! So really, every single politician is a puppet! I have found that out firsthand, so I can say that with a great deal of confidence.

Because if none of them can address the crime of 9/11, then that means that the people who brought us 9/11 are in power. That is just as direct as it gets! There it is!

Andrew: Thank you very much. Yeah, we’re coming up to time of the show, though as I said, we can over-run if there’s any topics that you want to address that we haven’t covered, then we can overrun. Otherwise you can give a closing statement. Up to you, whichever you wish to go.

Monika: Yeah, thank you so much again Andrew for having me on. It really is an honor to be on your show. And I just want to say I’m carrying on with a smile on my face. When I go downtown in this little town, I greet people, even if the people who have told me to my face they will not talk to me, or they look the other way, I still greet them by name. And I think that at some point they have to deal with the cognitive dissonance in their brains that say well:

“Geez, what’s this friendly person doing? And she’s being called such a hater, and we don’t like what she’s saying.”

And I’ve also found out that a lot of people in this town who are jewish, who I never even thought, if they’re jewish or not, but they’ve kind of revealed themselves, even before I started talking about the “Holocaust”, and somebody says to me:

“Ah! You’ve gone too far, talking about 9/11! You’ve gone too far, you’ve gone too far!”

And then I find out, well they’re jewish! And I just can’t understand the logic behind that. Like they can’t look at these things, because they’re jewish. Well isn’t there something wrong with the logic of that? I mean, whether you’re jewish or not, can’t you look at the evidence and the facts?

Anyway, so that’s in this town. I’m carrying on and standing my ground and I’m happy to do so. And I’m also very happy to, … If I’ve been able to inspire other people elsewhere to talk more about these issues, to educate themselves, to educate others. I think that the more people do come out and publicly state their opinions, not their opinions, their conclusions that they’ve reached after doing the research, the better it is. Because then they will affect others around them and it’s not just one, or two people who have these, have reached these conclusions.

There’s a whole bunch of us really, [laughing] there’s many, many people, and you see that through the Internet, you see it through the comments section, you see it by the hysteria with which the jewish media is trying to silence us. I mean, you see that it is there is an explosive rate of awakening and that gives me great hope!

I’d like to leave it on that note. I think we really are at a good point right now — I think that the light is coming through!

[60:10]

Andrew: Thank you so much Monika. Great show! Wonderful having you on today. And I’m going to close the show myself, by, … I just thought of this while Monika was speaking and it’s in my book “Synagogue of Satan: Updated, Expanded and Uncensored”. Again, it’s from 1972. Here you go — it’ll give you something to look up when you’ve finished listening to this:

1972: The October twenty-fifth edition of “Psychiatric News” published by the American Psychiatric Association, states:

Evidence that jews are carriers of schizophrenia, is disclosed in a paper prepared for the American Journal of Psychiatry by Dr. Arnold A Hutschnecker, the New York psychiatrist who once treated President Nixon. In a study entitled “Mental Illness, The Jewish Disease” Dr. Hutschnecker said that:

“Although all jews are not mentally ill, mental illness is highly contagious and jews are the principal sources of infection.”

Dr Hutschnecker stated that:

“Every jew is born with the seeds of schizophrenia.”

I’ll leave it there folks, I hope you enjoyed the show. I’ll be back with you all soon, and bye, for now.

You have been listening to the Andrew Carrington Hitchcock Show on TBR Radio. Brought to you by The Barnes Review. Andrew’s book, The Synagogue of Satan is now available on his website, Andrew Carrington Hitchcock dot com in an updated, expanded and uncensored edition.

[61:50]

END

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

PDF Notes

* Total words = 10,404

* Total Images = 30

* Total pages = 65

Click to download a PDF of this post (3.5 MB):

Andrew Hitchcock – Monika Schaefer on Sorry Mom — TRANSCRIPT

Version History

Version 8: Mar 1, 2025 — Re-uploaded images and PDF of post. Improved formatting.

Version 7: Sep 8, 2018 — Added links to Andrew Hitchcock transcripts.

Version 6: Nov 2, 2017 — Added PDF of post for download.

Version 5: Jul 15, 2017 — Proofed last 17 more minutes (with many thanks to Helena). Added some images. PROOFING OF TRANSCRIPT NOW COMPLETE!

Version 4: Jul 14, 2017 — Proofed 15 more minutes (with thanks to Helena). Added some images. Total proofed = 45 minutes.

Version 3: Jul 12, 2017 — Proofed 10 more minutes. Added more images. Total proofed = 30 minutes.

Version 2: Jul 11, 2017 — Fixed link to audio file (with thanks to Helena for that). Proofed 10 more minutes. Total proofed = 20 minutes.

Version 1: Jul 9, 2017 — Published post.

Red Ice Radio – Germar Rudolf – Persecution of Revisionists & Demographic Disaster – Part 2— TRANSCRIPT

admin — Sat, 06 May 2017 02:57:46 +0000

[In this very informative two part audio interview (126 mins — Parts I & II) Henrik Palmgren talks with the well known revisionist Germar Rudolf. We learn of Germar’s reluctant inquiry into the issue of the Third Reich and the taboo subject of the so-called “Holocaust”. As a student of chemistry he ends up examining the chemical evidence, or lack of, for the alleged homicidal gas chambers. This leads him to conclude that it doesn’t exist and that the gas chambers are a product of Allied [jewish] black propaganda. Ultimately, he spent several years in German jails for daring to deny the existence of the “Holocaust” and where, against all normal legal practice: “The truth is no defense.“

He and Henrik go on to discuss the perilous demographic decline in birth rates among White countries, that will, if nothing is done, lead to disaster. Both the fraudulent “Holocaust” claims and the denial of White nationalism are interlinked in jewish propaganda, in that any claims for White self-determination are cast as something that leads directly back to the dreaded, “evil Nazis” and the “gas chambers“! — KATANA.]

Red Ice Radio

Germar Rudolf

Persecution of Revisionists

&

Demographic Disaster

https://redice.tv/red-ice-radio/persecution-of-revisionists-and-demographic-disaster

Click on the above link, or copy the link into your browser to listen to the audio.

NOTE: You need to be a member of Red Ice to listen to Part II.

Published on Jul 29, 2016

Red Ice Radio Description

Germar Rudolf was born in Limburg, Germany. He studied chemistry at Bonn University, where he graduated in 1989 as a Diplom-Chemist, which is comparable to a U.S. PhD degree. From 1990-1993 he prepared a German PhD thesis at the Max Planck Institute for Solid State Research in conjunction with the University of Stuttgart, Germany. Parallel to this and in his spare time, Rudolf prepared an expert report on chemical and technical questions of the alleged gas chambers of Auschwitz, The Rudolf Report. He is the founder of the small revisionist outlet, Castle Hill Publishers.

Mr. Rudolf joins us to share the story of his life’s work as a revisionist researcher and writer and the ostracizing and persecution he has endured for daring to tread into the controversial topic of the German holocaust. Germar talks about the process of awakening that led him to question the “official” version of holocaust history in his mid-20s, when he stumbled upon the notorious Leuchter Report while preparing an expert report on the chemical and technical questions of the alleged gas chambers of Auschwitz and Birkenau for the trial of a “Holocaust denier.” We discuss the longstanding and brutal suppression of evidences that refute the cherished narrative of gas chambers used to systematically exterminate 6 million jews, and we look at the undeniable proof that the powers that be have been using this “miracle weapon” to psychologically trounce German and Western European identity. Then, Germar gives a straightforward definition of a “revisionist,” underscoring that in the case of the “Holocaust“, the general issues of persecution and unjust treatment of Jews is not denied. He highlights some of the chemical, structural and biological evidence that points to a starkly contrasting story than what has been painted throughout 70+ years of political propagandizing. Germar also touches on the thought crimes that sent him to prison for 44 months and the blatant lawlessness of court proceedings he’s witnessed, and he gives a rundown of his latest book, Resistance is Obligatory.

In the members’ segment, Germar goes deeper into exposing free speech hijacking and human dignity suppression that is at the core of revisionist work. We consider the massive power structure upheaval that would need to occur in order for Western civilization at large to achieve a complete paradigm shift and accept the fact that we have been lied to and manipulated on so many levels concerning WWI/II. Then, we talk about the establishment’s grave fear of the rise of nationalism despite the recent terrorist attacks by hostile foreign invaders in Germany and France, and Germar gives a grim picture of the migration statistics for Europe, which is seeing many of its best and brightest indigenous populations fleeing the monster and taking up residence elsewhere. We discuss the most critical extinction level crisis that is plaguing Europe – the demographic decline of natives resulting from the shrinking birth rate. Germar emphasizes the financial implications of Europeans allowing themselves to be bred out, and we debate whether or not the government’s (dis)incentivizing having larger families is really the issue. We give some thought to the role of the 1960s sexual revolution, the advent of birth control, and the lost sense awareness that we live in a chain of generations that keeps the social order on course. At the end, we weigh up how the crisis the West is spawning many religious zealots and a rising core of radical traditionalist who may or may not be able to rescue the vanishing European civilization.

Transcript — Part 2/2

[56:00 min]

NOTE: PART I is here:

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

[00:00]

Henrik: Welcome back ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for joining us here in the second hour. Always a pleasure to have you with us. We are speaking with Germar Rudolf, the, well, “thought criminal!” The enemy of the state, if you will. We’re talking about his work, his struggles as a revisionist, his persecution by government and the authorities for daring to do research and have an interest and a passion in history that very few others have.

Now, I’ve always been very interested in these kinds of areas, in these kinds of cases where there is intense pressure from authorities, from the judicial, or justice system, and to go after people that hold dissenting views. I think we should all, as you said, in the first segment, Germar, interest ourselves for those cases, to try to see what it is that they are really are actually covering up, if you will. But I think we’ll probably never get people in office, in, you know, official positions to recognize much of this work. They might just have to be, I don’t know, replaced by a younger crowd that are willing to listen. But it’s very difficult, because the pressure and the programming and the propaganda is so strong.

In fact, if we look at so-called, you know, “Holocaust education“, that has gotten more intense over the decades, I would say. But before we talk more about what happened at some of the camps, what the data say, what your findings point to, let me just ask you:

What do you think it would take for the scales to tip and for people to actually open their eyes and have a more curious approach to history and the kind of things that you’re focusing on?

And what would the consequences of something like this, be, if people started looking at this?

Germar: Well, we are in the area of speculation, now. And I’ve been wrong with what I thought it takes before, so I’m very careful with predictions in this regard. Historically speaking, Arthur Butz once said, if all the political circumstances are right, things will start falling into place. He has the comparison with the Donation of Constantine, where a forgery, a medieval forgery by the Church claimed that in the year 300 AD something, when the emperor Constantine converted to Christianity. He handed over the Roman Empire to the Christian church and therefore everything is owned by the Christian Church. There was forgery and has been known for a long time, well documented, but it came to the fore and started a snowball effect only when there were a lot of political, influential parties, disgruntled with the power abuse by the Christian church towards the end of the fifteenth, early sixteenth century.

Together with the Reformation that was one of the reasons for Luther to finally be convinced that the Catholic Church, that the papacy is evil and something has to be done about it. It was also the forgery of the Donation of Constantine. So he says:

“Well, as long as the power structure is firm in place and political motivations, political agendas of those in power and influence are aligned with the myth, it’s not going to change.”

They have the mass media, the educational system, the judicial system, everything pretty much in every single country on the planet with very few exceptions, under tight control. And there is just nothing you can do much about it. To believe that there is a popular movement possible that can overthrow the control by mass media and political systems, in my eyes, is a delusion that assumes that people are, by and large willing to educate themselves to judge critically, to pay attention to what’s going on, what’s important. And that’s just not the case!

Let’s be honest and let’s be realistic about what’s going on in this world. The fact is that ninety-five percent of the people staring for hours on end at the TV, believe the virtual reality that they watch on the screen. That’s just the way it is! And unless something genetically, dramatically, evolutionary changes in humanity that we actually become the homosexual sapiens that we claim to be, which we are obviously not, I can’t see that change.

So, we have to deal with the human material that we have, which for the most part just runs with the crowd, and whatever, they have been told to do. Then it depends on some political powerful groups and maybe even countries, finally have had it and won’t take it anymore and they wise up to the thing and get themselves informed and then they get a critical mass and things can change.

[05:10]

I’m rather pessimistic when it comes to popular grassroots movements, I must say.

Nowadays, of course, an example that I know from own country, the Green Movement was kind of a grassroots movement and it did prevail and against a lot of mainstream resistance. But, on the other hand, it was aligned with internationalism, with globalism. It was aligned with a lot of their left-wing media, that were very favourable. So, you have at least some support in these areas, ideological sympathies with some of the mass media and some powerful groups, non-governmental organizations, to get a foothold and to make progress. If don’t have that, it’s not going to happen. Nothing of that is the case here! We’re complete pariahs! Except for Ahmadinejad [the sixth President of Iran from 2005 to 2013] — and that’s a kind of a friend you can do without. [laughing]

Henrik: Right, right!

Germar: So, truth be told, all we can do for now is hang in there and hope for the extremely unlikely that people have had enough and don’t run with the crowds anymore and don’t listen to Big Brother on the TV screen. Or, something phenomenal, something apocalyptic has to change on the global political scene.

Like for instance, what could happen if we have a major financial collapse? Because the whole financial system, being built on debt is bound to collapse at some point and then comes major political upheaval. People looking into the whole financial thing. It’s a big elephant in the room that everyone seems to be ignoring and trying to ignore. And come to terms with the lies that we have been fed with decades and centuries even, about what money is and what it isn’t and how we’re being manipulated and ripped off by the system, by the banking system, the monetary system, whatever you want to call it.

And then people start to rethink other things and interconnect concepts and ideas and then the cards can be mixed anew, you know, and who knows what comes out of it.

Henrik: You’re saying there needs to be, for someone to have an incentive, a reason to go into this area? There needs to be some kind of catalyst, a catastrophe almost that pushes them in a direction. Is that what you’re saying?

Germar: Right. Something has to shift some paradigm on a societal, global level, has to shift for people to see a need to be, … You know, basically, the system is so much married to the concept of the “Holocaust” and all the moral lessons that it tells and all the political agendas that use it to push for certain policies.

Henrik: Yep.

Germar: To have that change for them, to no longer to depend on this, to welcome it, but actually to see it as a major obstacle, [there] needs to have [be] a paradigm shift in what leaders want. It’s not enough on a national level., you know, Germany says, well the Germans are the first, because they have a, should have an interest in getting rid of that “Mark of Cain“. Yes, in theory it would be a relief for them, but then again, if they ever dared, they are surrounded by their enemies still, all over the world. They are a tiny country, and they are going to be just throttled so quickly, suffocated by boycotts and whatever. It’s not going anywhere. You have to have these things happen on the continental, if not global level, so that counter measures of all kinds of monetary system, the business system, boycotts. You know, you’re on your head one nation, a big nation, Iran standing up and saying:

“Well we want that investigated. It looks like it’s not true. It’s been overblown and inflated!”

And where did that go?

Henrik: Right.

Germar: It’s just painted as an “Axis of Evil”. And any nation that is doing that ends up in the same corner. So, it’s not enough for one to do it. Iran may have hoped that other Muslim nations will follow, but most of them are bought out of the US, or are in complete turmoil, because they couldn’t be bought, like Gaddafi [assassinated on 20 October 2011, by proxy forces of NATO and the US] .

[09:57]

So, how do you get, how do you align, let’s say twenty-three, kind of important countries, not any banana republics loved ones with a lot worse on them to want to use to be and apparently doesn’t go anywhere, either!

Henrik: Right, right.

Germar: So, what does it take? It really takes a dramatic paradigm shift in the world and any cataclysm can cause that. Of course, cataclysms are predictable. They can go extreme either way, doing even more harm to the farmer who for one Right now, that’s the only way I think things could change.

Henrik: And, I mean, I’ve noticed somewhat of an interest in this topic from, you know, truth seekers, the alternative movement that has arisen, that seeks to counter some of the mainstream media on these kinds of things. Not on a huge scale, of course, mass scale, but at least there has been a willingness for some of those people to look in this direction. Which I think has been good.

I would say that there’s more people interested in these questions today than they were ten years ago. And for the fact as well, of course, that we’re back to our original point, that as Europe is pretty much being invaded and flooded and we are basically in a position where we morally can’t, you know, make any claim. We can’t resist on any level at all. It usually ends back in this position, in that place, you know, because despite the fact that Europeans are now dying on, you know, European soil, but just, in fact, had at the time we are recording this, just had a shooting in Munich. We, of course, had the terrorist action in Nice and all these kinds of things.

Despite the fact that we are, Europeans are dying, we are still in a position where the establishment is afraid of, for example, nationalism to rise in Europe. They’re afraid of it. They call anybody a fascist. To immediately say, wait a minute this is no good, our culture is being eroded, our identity is completely out of the picture, you know, why use this? What is the root of this? Why can’t we have any of this? And it usually goes back to this very question, that you’ve been fighting for so many years.

Germar: Yeah. A professor in Germany who is completely beyond suspicion of having anything to do with a right-wing, said, the future for Germany, for instance, lies in becoming like Brazil. And that in part of all kinds of races, declining to a second, or third-rate country where the economy goes down the drain, because educational standards just vanished and there is no creative culture and identity anymore. This is going to be the future of Brazil, the future of Germany and whoever doesn’t like it, in Germany, the indigenous population, they have an option to leave and they will! They are highly educated, they’re highly welcome in many other countries.

And if you look at migration statistics, Germany has one and a half million people migrating INTO the country, but they have also five hundred thousand people migrating OUT of the country and they are mainly ethnic Germans of the younger age, highly educated. In other words, if you want to exist in Germany as a German in any way, you are being called a Nazi, you know.

Henrik: Yep.

Germar: Nobody wants that. So this is just the worst thing that can happen to you, being called a Nazi, a Right Wing extremist, or whatever. So you can’t put up a defense. You can’t get involved in any movement, or you are getting ostracized to the point where your life is miserable, your career is ended and what have you. So, if you don’t like what’s going on in the country, with the country going down the drain, what do you do? You leave! You go to New Zealand, to Australia, to the United States. There are red carpets rolled out for highly educated Germans and they are leaving in masses!

Henrik: Wow! Well that’s just so sad. That is the same in Sweden I believe. There’s money for entrepreneurs and inventors and things like this and, … I mean, that’s going to devastating! I mean, even think of Germany as the, as a powerhouse economically and the fact, even if you recognize the official picture of what’s happening here, the fact that Germany has, … We don’t we don’t have to talk about the “Holocaust Industry” as Norman Finkelstein called it in terms of how much money that this is generated. Germany pays out massive amounts, of course, every year., but even just the fact that Germany is able to help other countries in aid and bring in people, this economic engine is going to be disrupted and destroyed to the point where they won’t be able to help anyone else, maybe not even themselves, eventually.

[15:00]

Germar: That’s right. All the help that’s being done is generated with tax revenue produced by the productive German population and that’s the one that’s draining away. So it’s not only that more people with needs come, but there will be less and less, people that will actually produce any revenue that can be, … So, you know, it’ll just take, you know, another ten, or twenty years and the whole thing comes collapsing down like a house of cards. But then the German is of the younger generation will be in a minority. And democratically speaking if all the migrants get voter status, sooner of later, which they will, eventually. You wouldn’t even be able with the elections to turn that thing around. The tipping point comes very soon. And it’s a similar, it’s just Germany is just the biggest case and the most dramatic, because it’s the biggest country and this most affected by this propaganda, completely, morally and intellectually defenseless because they don’t attack that core issue. But it’s the same with any European country.

The most ironic, ironic is even the wrong word, … The dramatic situation is actually Poland. Poland is ethically speaking very close to Germany and have an intermingled history, not just historically, but ethnically too. And if you look at the Polish population, a lot of Germanic blood flowing through there, and Slav. Their population is collapsing just as much. They don’t have that much, as many immigrants, because they are pretty poor and immigrants don’t want to go there, but the fact still is that their population collapse is just as much, because the birth rate is down the drain!

And they are, of course, the ones who right after the Second World War were apart from the jews the main beneficiary of the Holocaust. They occupied some twenty percent of German territory and threw out all the German is and justified that with German crimes. So, that’s basically their way of justifying the post-war Polish territorial gains. And all this stuff done with German ethnic cleansing by Poles and Russians. But now they have supported for seventy years this propaganda and they are still doing it.

But it turns out to be self-destructive, because they have work by nurturing and feeding this monster, created a creature that will destroy their own identity and makes them helpless and defenseless to do something about their own identity. They are not quite as defenseless as the German is, but at the end of the day, it’s a similar situation.

You can look wherever you want, even Russia. The Russian European population is collapsing just as much. You look left and right, there are very few countries that can still hold their head above water. Ireland is kind of, but that is pretty much it. Italy’s collapsing. Spain is. Everywhere, the whole of Europe’s going down the drain and demographically speaking it’s a natural phenomenon. If you look at the surface and if you don’t have babies and other population groups on the planet have babies, that’s just a natural law you’re going to be replaced.

There is not the policy of the leaders in Europe that causes the migration. They could do this against it, but if you have a vacuum, a population vacuum in one part of the world and overpopulation in the other part of the world, that leads to the population moving, sooner, or later. We had that in the seventy’s, eighty’s, ninety’s.

Up to the early twentieth century, when Europe was producing millions of people they couldn’t feed and housing Europe anymore. Where did they go? They populated Australia, New Zealand, America. Everywhere Europeans were breeding like rabbits and were populating the whole planet!

Now the First World War came and the whole thing collapsed and Europe has never recovered from that and with all the ideology, and the wealth, afterwards, later on, and chemistry, to say contraception methods, we’ve come to the point where Europeans don’t have babies!

Even if you add politicians that would prevent it, with weapons, migrants for certain period of time to come to Europe. If you don’t change the fact that Europeans have no babies, at the end of the day, who is going to guard the borders?

Henrik: Right.

Germar: There are no young men anymore who can defend them, because the women don’t have babies! It’s by natural law, the Europeans replace themselves, by deciding, “I don’t want to have babies!”

[20:01]

Henrik: Right.

Germar: And many people come up with pseudo-logical reasons why they don’t want to have babies. At the end it’s hedonism. It’s just the delusion that I can live a nice wealthy life without bothering with all the stuff that comes my way if have to take care of children. Which is such a burden financially and then whatever reasons you can come up with.

But, this life-style that Europeans have led over the past two generations, and mine primarily, my generation was the strongest generation, of course, with Germany 1964. Most babies in the post-war history ever born in Germany by ethnic German mothers. It’s my year, my generation! My generation has completely failed! Because they have not reproduced in every generation afterwards, either.

Henrik: So, what’s at the root of that? Is it the same kind of ethnic masochism, there is a hatred, self-hatred?

Germar: No! You have the same thing in South Korea, the same thing in Japan. Every highly developed society that produces wealth and a lot of education, that allows women to be highly educated and to go into the workforce as highly educated women, they have the alternative between “kitchen and career”.

[It should be noted that these countries have NOT resorted to importing anyone from the Third World despite outside pressure to do so — KATANA]

You give them that alternative and give them all the education incentives and they go to the career and that’s when they stop having babies. And with all the wealth if you make them xxx, and you’re educated enough they don’t have babies. I get two people who have big careers and make a lot of money. I marry, okay, I don’t have babies, but my husband and I, or the other way round, the husband and my wife, we both have careers and we both make money, we don’t have to raise children.

If you compare that with a husband that goes to work, but only halfheartedly, because he wants to spend time with his family and the mother stays at home has two, or three, four kids and doesn’t have a career. Then the couple who has no children has three, four times the income! All for themselves, than the family has for themselves, plus the kids.

So per capita, they end up four, five, six times the amount of money you can consume in your lifetime and you don’t have children. So what are you going to do? First, if you’re smart enough to figure that out. Second you have the means to prevent pregnancy and third the society doesn’t do anything against you for making that choice. And that’s everywhere the same!

All highly industrialized, highly educated population on this planet go that route! Humanity, as it gets highly educated and wealthy, extinguishes itself. Unless something dramatically is done. This has nothing to do with the “Holocaust”, because there is no such propaganda going on in South Korea or in Japan.

Henrik: Right. Okay, yeah that’s a fair point. I definitely get that.

There are some that would argue, obviously though, that Europe as it exists now, is already very, very overpopulated, that the density is very high. It’s just farmland and then it’s cities. And this aspect that there is a rise and fall of populations.

I always return to that point when this argument comes up that, you know, we can’t just have endless growth, either. I think that there is a natural cycle to it now, of course, it’s artificial through modernity, if you will, to a certain extent. But nonetheless, these are still, I guess, forces of nature, to a certain extent, since we are part of nature. Right?

Germar: Yeah, sure. That’s one thing that a lot of people forget. At the end of it we are not humans here and nature there. A lot of people come to think, you know, I sit in the car, I sit in my house, that’s not part of nature. Nature is out there. And I can live my life this way and that way and everything is going to be fine. No!

Sure! Oh Europe has been overpopulated, but at the rate the population is collapsing — and we have to look at it accurately. Germans have statistics out there that distinguish the birth rates between ethnic German mothers and mothers with migration background. Now they show that, I’ve seen the figures from the last couple years ago when the German Federal Office of Statistics, saying that German ethnic women between the age of sixteen and thirty-six have an average of 0.33 babies.

Henrik: Ufffph! [shocked]

Germar: Now, we need 2.1 something to reproduce and they have 0.33 on average between sixteen and thirty-six. Now you have to double that, because the sixteen year olds, of course don’t have babies. But by the time they reach thirty-six, they will have, so if you kind of double it, 0.33 you come up to what they all will have had by the time they are thirty-six. So, you come up with some 0.66 and then you have some years left until they can’t have babies anymore.

[25:05]

So, just basically speaking there is 0.7 to 0.8 babies when they need 2.1. In other words, every generation the population goes down by 60%. The following generation has only 40% of the previous one. And if you go down that fast, in three to four generation your population pretty much is gone! And we are already in the second generation, doing that now!

Now I’m not opposed to reducing population where there’s over population, but you have to do that at a small pace, so that society can deal with it.

And I would tell you what that means concretely. I’ve been discussing that migrant situation with my mother, who is in her middle-seventies and my father has turned eighty. My father had a stroke and he is now in a nursing home. Now, who do you think takes care of my parents? Migrants! The doctors, the nurses, wherever my parents go in the nursing home, or a hospice right now, for the majority of people that have these jobs are migrant, because in that generations there are so few Germans.

My parents, the older generation have an open attitude toward the migration, because they see, nobody’s going to take care of us. We had hardly any children. Our children have no children of our own. Actually, it’s the grandchildren’s generation that should take care of my parents, because they are at the age, in the twenty’s, when they are nurses and so forth. Right? Twenty’s and thirty’s. I’m already in my fifty’s. But there are hardly any Germans left of that age and for the most part they are migrants now. Particular for those kind of jobs that are not very easy to do when it comes to nurses.

You can’t run a society when 60% of the population you need to sustain what you have built, the society, just suddenly disappears! There’s only 40% of the people you need to keep running the engine, the economic engine you have built. And with the next generation you have 40% of 40%, so you’re down to, what is that 18%, and you need one hundred [percent] ! How do you run a society with 18% of the labor force? COMPLETELY IMPOSSIBLE!

Henrik: Right.

Germar: That’s not a reduction that is welcome, because we have too many people in Europe. That is the collapse of a society! And you can prevent that from completely collapsing ONLY by having massive influx of migrants! That’s the only way Germany and any other European politician can prevent their societies from COLLAPSING!

I’m justifying it here! And I’m saying something more! Every person out there who is listening and thinks the migrant situation is bad and the migrants should go back and we want to be left alone, should ask themselves this question, depending on age:

“Do you plan on having children, or did I have children or do I have children?”

Anyone out there who doesn’t plan on having children or who have no children, is a parasite on society and does not deserve any better than what’s happening now! And that applies to 80% of the population. They have only one child, or no child at all.

They think they can have it all! Rake in all the money for themselves, have a nice life. Don’t get any children into the society. This society can run only, and any society can run and function only if there is a generation coming afterwards that keeps it up! If we don’t see to it that there is a generation, it will collapse! And we go down, our society goes down with us!

And whose fault is that? It’s the fault of the egotists, of the hedonists who wanted it all for themselves. Who don’t want the burden of raising children. These are PARASITES, clearly speaking!

Henrik: Does Germany keep statistics on demographics, race basically?

Germar: Well, they distinguish, maybe they will stop doing in the future, but, up to now they have done it between ethnic Germans and German is with migrant background and actual foreigners. So migration background, but who are German citizens, their birth rate is going down too. It’s below reproduction too. It’s only the migrants that have come here to the country more recently that have a viable reproduction rate.

Any population that you expose to this kind of egotistic, hedonistic, materialistic society takes a generation or two, children who are growing up in this kind of society, they think about gadgets and they think about a nice car, a nice home. And you can have all the stuff only and enjoy it, if you don’t have children. You can keep the money for yourself and have a career without bothering.

Any society that raises people like that, has their migration population stop having children a couple of generation later.

[30:09]

Henrik: One point here to add into it as well, is how potentially simple it could be to actually fix the situation. There are two different examples in Europe alone. One, the positive one is Denmark that has to a certain extent reduced some level of the migration. Actually to save money, obviously, …

Germar: Right.

Henrik: Because it’s also a drain on the system to have a lot of people coming into the country that can’t join the workforce, etc. But then they have done campaigns such as, “Do it for Denmark” and “Do it for Mom” in these funny commercials together with, actually travel agencies and things like this. But it’s sponsored by the government and this is actually resulted in a boom of babies! Which is interesting. And it shows how simple it would be, if the governments were sincere about truly wanting to have more of the native population having birth. I’m not saying that this would work in every single country, but what I’m saying is, that we’re not even seeing it remotely, ambitions of trying to economically make it easier for people to have children.

For example in Belgium, that’s another case where one of the Flemish politicians that’s working there, details how very difficult it was for the Flemish people to have to have children, because of the economic situation with the government and how it’s dis-incentivized, right? So there’s measures that could be adopted to change this fairly easy.

Germar: I wouldn’t, … You know, if I look at the world as a whole picture, I see that the impoverished populations have a lot babies and the rich countries with the rich people have few babies. To say that it is economically challenging nowadays to have babies is bullshit! Excuse my English.

But in our countries, most people, they have to prioritize. What is important? Do I want to have a gadget, do I want to have a TV in every room, do I want to have two cars? We have completely different priorities here then people have, let’s say in central Uganda, where they have six babies per woman. Not that they have much of a chance, because the way they live their life, they just happen to get pregnant and they don’t think about what are the alternatives. No, I’m not saying we should get back to that. That’s not what I’m saying.

But economics is not the issue. If I look at the amount of money that the German government throws at people, so that they have babies, so that they, you know, you have children money. You get two hundred fifty, three hundred euros a month per child. And you get three years of off work after having a baby, either mother, or father for education purposes. And your position will be kept and you can go back into the labor force after those three years. And all these incentives that are already being given and they have made no dent, whatsoever, in the indigenous population. Which is much more wealthy than the migrant population on average. And the migrant population is the population that has the babies and take advantage of those incentives!

So, in terms of the more incentives, the more incentives you throw in the population, equally the indigenous as well as migrant population, will lead to the migrant population out-breeding the indigenous even faster, because they have taken advantage of it and they are breeding.

The indigenous population, no matter, if you throw a million at them, maybe then they will consider it, but then they have the wrong incentive to have children, to be honest.

But, no, money isn’t the reason. It’s the general attitude of the population and there is in my eyes, you know, if you want to implement real radical solutions, say OK, you have to make people aware and you have to have the right kind of message going through all channels of your society, in media, politics, schools, education, whatever.

Say:

“He who is not having any children is a parasite! For that and that reason, you are just taking all the money for yourself. You’re not investing in society, in the next generation! Therefore, you are breaking the basic generational contract that this country needs to have with everyone for it to operate!”

Henrik: Right.

Germar: If you are such a kind of parasite, there comes consequences. For instance, you can make voting rights — every parent gets as many voting rights as they have children. They create the next generation! They should have more voting power than those that are completely egotistical and don’t do anything that this society needs to continues.

Or say: “why should you have pensions?” You know, I retire at old age and I expect the next generation to finance my pension, but I haven’t done anything for next generation to come into being!

Henrik: Right.

Germar: So the rule should be, if you did not get kids into this world, for other reason than you are incapable and couldn’t even adopt any. If you didn’t get any children, then I’m sorry, you’re not getting any pension!

Because you have violated, broken the generational contract. There’s no generation coming after you that you have produced, therefore you’re not entitled to get anything! End of story! You have to work until you drop dead. That would be fair and that would be so radical that people get the message!

Henrik: Right.

[35:17]

Germar: And you need a kind of radical xxx right now. All the incentives they’ve thrown at people already, monetary with educational holidays and whatever, has shown no dent, no change in attitude. There needs to be a completely different way of doing it to get the message across. You can’t just violate a generational contract and live like a parasite in a society and expect to be rewarded by it by living the life of a millionaire!

I have two children I have to pay alimony for, and I have three more children with my second wife. And I keep track of what I pay for my children and I can tell you, at the end of my life I would probably have paid something between seven and eight hundred thousand dollars for my kids to raise.

Henrik: Yup.

Germar: Something about a hundred and two hundred thousand dollars that a kid costs you. Had I not had any children, with all the money that I made on top of it, I would be a millionaire. So everyone who decides not to have children, can have instead the life of a millionaire! That’s the option we have. Live the life of a millionaire with no kids, or have kids!

Henrik: Only that one, or two generations that can economically keep up with it on that level, because, …

Germar: Yes! It’s collapsing! But that people don’t think that way.

Henrik: No.

Germar: That’s what I see, it’s just the mindset. It’s very narrow-minded, they’re just thinking about themselves, their own generation until they reach old age and they figure there is nobody there to take care of them, which is situation my parents are in. Even though you can’t blame them, they had three children.

Henrik: Let me ask you, … How did they raise you Germar? Did they, … I’m just trying to get a sense of how things operate within the different generations. Because I know a lot of people in my generation, if you will, that didn’t have parents that really underlined, or stressed the importance of children. They didn’t really instill that in their children! It’s that somewhere along the line, this was almost like, dropped! I’m not saying that you shouldn’t need to, it’s kind of weird, educate people to have children, but to a certain extent it’s a cultural value that needs to be part of our discourse, right? And I feel it’s not there.

Germar: There would have been a need to introduce it at the latest in, what was that 1968, when the anti-baby pill was introduced and everybody ever since has had fornication with impunity.

Henrik: Right.

Germar: To say it bluntly. Up to that point, the normal situation was, you can have sex only if you are married, because if you have sex, the probability is, you know, you’re going to get that girl pregnant and then you have a problem at hand. So you get married first, have sex next and children will be the inevitable outcome of it. That has been this way ever since the inception of genders, a billion years ago!

We have changed that in 1968 when we introduced the anti-baby pill and said, “Now everybody can have sex as they like!” and they don’t have to think about babies anymore. And nobody thought about what’s going to happen next.

World population is still rising, but our long-term goal is that every person on the planet will be able to have their smart phone and their car and we’re all going to be wealthy and live in suburban dreamland and stop having babies and that’s the end of human civilization!

We need a new paradigm that gives people the understanding that we have, that we live in a chain of generations that keeps society up and civilization up! And our commitment is:

To all parents — be grateful to them and who gave us, equipped us with the tools we need to do our part.

And our second obligation is to see to it that there is going to be an upcoming generation that can take over the “staff”, from us.

Henrik: And then you have a layer on top of this, which makes it even worse, this nightmare, already nightmarish situation. Which is, we live a lifestyle health wise that is so poor that many people are actually getting infertile. We bathe in a chemical soup. The food and the nutrition is just nonexistent in some cases. People are getting sick and one of the first things that go from this is fertility itself. That’s why you see a whole industry popping up around, you know, fertility centers and these kinds of things. But this scenario is that catastrophe to an extent that you spoke about earlier. The question is, as you say, if there’s going to be manpower enough to do something about the catastrophe when it really hits, or sets in.

[40:10]

Germar: Right. It doesn’t have to. You get Germany and all the rest of Europe down to the level of Brazil. Brazil isn’t, you know, isn’t teetering at the brink of extermination, or a complete collapse. It’s just a different lifestyle. You have to accept that things are a little chaotic and not as good in general, but life keeps going on. There’s no need for a revolution. The question is, …

Henrik: It’s very violent in Brazil. Very violent, high racial tensions.

Germar: Yeah. Life adjusts. The people who have problems with a new lifestyle that may be chaotic, violent and not as nice are the ones that come from a generation having the experience in a different world. Ourselves, who have grown up in still ethnically dominated by European people, the indigenous people and with the culture, more or less intact. And now we all run head on into an age when things are radically different and plus this dissonance, this extreme contrast, hurts! For the new generation that goes into it, it’s not going to be a problem, because they don’t know any other, they don’t know any other way.

Henrik: I wonder if, at least the European stock will settle for lower standards, if you will? What I’m saying is, what happened is that we’ve created a society, we did something which was radically different. Western civilization is different. There’s a uniqueness to it. It doesn’t mean that there had been other civilizations, or whatever, but in the way that it’s been developed, it’s different. I’m thinking if it’s partially also the success of Western civilization that has led us to this point, ironically. That it’s the modernity, the comfort that we’ve managed to create, as you say, the materialism is what has led to this level of decadence. So it’s a circle, it’s going to come around on itself eventually, right?

Germar: Sure. There are two ways around a society collapses to the point where this materialism is simply not there anymore. We drop back to a lower standard where people just have babies by accident. It seems [?] to be that already today. The less educated populations in the highly developed society, they have more babies, because they are less organized, let’s say it that way.

Henrik: Right.

Germar: And that’s one way. The other way is there are always subgroups within a population that don’t follow the general trend.

And I look here in the US, right here where I live in Pennsylvania. And there’s the Amish who refused the modern trend, not just on the technological level, but also on that level they keep their women in the kitchen and in the churches and in the bedroom, so to say, to a high degree. But also the men, they follow a very traditional [role]. So it’s for the whole family, very traditional role, family role as it was common in the seventeenth and eighteenth century. And their birth rate doesn’t come down! They, in the long run, will be one of the dominant groups of Europeans if they also don’t mix with others outside of their own community. They stay very loyal to their own community.

So you have those religious people who refuse to go down materialistic and technological ways. So you have them among Christians, you have them among jews, among Muslims. Of course, the majority of Muslims who refuse to go that way, and that’s why we have them dominate Europe very soon.

So, you have a real radicalization on a religious level, because they are just taken over folks by pure statistics, by having the babies. Not just Islam, judaism is being radicalized in Israel over the decades. It has become more and more radical, because the Orthodox and the fundamentalist jews reproduce, whereas the secularized jews, they have the same tendency as all the other Europeans, because with they are Europeans. They make themselves go extinct, because they don’t have babies. So, what you end up with is just religious fanatics that dominate the world.

Henrik: Yeah! Exactly! That’s true. The conservative mindset, I think there’s a small window of opportunity where people who are both realizing this and also want to do something about this. I think out of the crisis that Western Europe in particular is going through now, we’re going to have a much more hardened core of very traditional minded people, whether they are religious, or not. But they are going to have both an ethnic awareness, which is largely lacking today in the majority, and also an interest in maintaining life as it exists in many of these European countries.

I think it’s a very dark picture, obviously, but I still think out of that, there’s going to be a core group of people which are going to be much more radical traditionalists to a certain extent. Right?

Germar: Right.

Henrik: Coming out of it.

Germar: Yeah.

[45:28]

Germar: So we see that right now with religious people. And you can have other motivations to be fundamentalists other than religious. Could be political, could be any kind. And that’s Darwinism on a societal level. Those who reproduce will succeed, for whatever reason.

Henrik: Yeah. So what else do you have in terms of solutions for that situation? What do you think would need to happen for this to change? Is it simply that the collapse is just inevitable? People are not going to choose away their modern comfortable lifestyle, I guess. What do you think?

Germar: Well, I don’t think so. Right now, you know, what can I do? If I think too much about it, I get sleepless nights, because I’m invested in my own ethnic group, my culture, my civilization, if you want. And it hurts to see it go down the drain, as it does. So I can’t spend too much too thought on it. Or getting obsessed over it. It’s just dragging me down.

I just take a seat in the back-seat and observe, because life is interesting. It’s completely in vain to stand changes on that global level that come with such natural force. One population who grows by the millions, out-breeding the other! What can I do? Just sit back and enjoy the ride! [Henrik laughs] xxx give my few cents of advice, whatever it’s worth. But I have no conclusion [?] that I’m basically an observer rather than anyone who could take any active part in changing things.

Henrik: Right. OK. Granted that, that’s true, and also, of course, on the opposite side of that you do have individuals that do change history, in the course of world history. And in many cases it doesn’t take a majority to shift something in a new direction as we’ve seen. So this can be very interesting to see what is going to happen in the future of Europe. And we obviously we have to fight for it. We have to do what we can! We have to try to awaken people, we have to make them realize and understand this is our responsibility, I would say, as awakened individuals.

Most people they never think of the stuff! It never dawned on them! No one has ever brought it to their attention. I’m not clearing them of any responsibility, despite that, but it makes it, … It makes the burden is obviously on us, on those who know about these things, right?

Germar: Right. At the end of the day, those who don’t give up the fight, and give it a good fight are the only ones worthy of victory. And if you give up, well, don’t complain if you get trampled under.

Henrik: Yeah. That’s true. That is true!

Germar: I was interviewed at some point by some White supremacist group who wanted to find out whether I was “one of them”, quote, unquote. And I said, “Do I think that the White race is superior?” And I said:

“Well, superiority, it’s difficult to define. But there’s a universal way of doing it when it comes to biological subgroups like, whether you call a subgroup a race or not. Whatever you want to call it. Superiority, at the end of the day is defined by, whether you prevail in competition with other groups, …”

Henrik: Sure. Yeah.

Germar: …

“and that is mainly spelled out by the ability to raise and successfully raise the next generation. And to keep your ground, Keep your territory defended and defend your culture. And then that is what superiority is about. If you are superior in doing that, then others are in the long run, whatever means you apply for it, than you are superior.”

But if I look at what’s going on right now, it is very clear that the White race as it has been developing over the past, say, whatever. Well, ever since the First World War or after the Second World War at the latest, has been inferior in the end result of things! I’m not talking about intellectual abilities, their culture achievements and what have you. All these things are nice, but at the end of the day, what counts is birth rates.

I’m sorry, that’s the brutal truth of planet earth as a biological biome.

Henrik: This is a big question, and we’re coming up at the end of our time together, so I don’t want to be too long winded. But, in consideration to what we’ve been speaking about here, primarily in the second hour.

[50:01]

The big question is, okay these things are happening and to a certain extent we have ourselves to blame for this, because of the fact that we haven’t taken responsibility and for whatever reason. Modernity has produced a very different mentality, ecetera. But I also see that there’s also an active elite, an establishment, a group, globalists, bankers, whatever. Call them what you will. That also is, seems to me, actively engaging in making sure that this continues. That the path that we are on now is underlined. That this proceeds forward as planned. That we are, to a certain extent, they see us as a kind of enemy in all of this!

Nationalists, or people who want to preserve their own culture and their heritage, that somehow they see this globalist elite, they see that they want to have a “blended world” in the future. They want to have a homongenized human being and a mono-culture of sorts. And therefore, educationally they have prevented us, if you will, from getting in touch with our true culture and heritage. Would you agree with that?

Germar: Yeah, sure.

If you have just one kind of man on the whole planet, seven billion people with the same needs, the same wants, the same products you can sell to, then you have the absolute maximization of profits. So, that’s what’s driving it. It’s all about the money for them. And if you can just sell one brand to all people on the planet, because they are all the same, then that’s perfect for them. And that’s the driving engine behind that.

If you have a word to divided into four thousand different entities, who all have somehow different needs, you have to custom tailor to four thousand different cultures, that makes it pretty much impossible to even trade on an international level for most products. So that destroys your attempts of monopolizing and maximizing profits.

That’s what’s behind it! And, of course, everybody should oppose that, because having a uniform human being all over the planet, … Everybody being the same, would be terribly boring and it would be, … Any mono-culture. Mono-cultures are bad news for any system. They tend to collapse, they’re not sustainable.

Henrik: Yeah.

Germar: And therefore it’s bad news. We need to have multi-culture in terms of different cultures. Not one everything mixed together, because it’s not multi. It tends to be homogenized after a while.

Henrik: Mono. It’s true. It’s definitely true. Well this has been a very interesting conversation. A dark conversation, a gloomy report on the future that we are faced with here. And I think you’re right too, in many ways. We might argue a bit about some of the mechanics behind the scenes, or whatever, but still, I think that the main prognosis that you have given is unfortunately, more or less, correct.

Germar: One final word.

Henrik: Yeah! Go ahead.

Germar: “Holocaust” for me is the cork in the bottle!

If you want to have any solution for this, if you want to radically discuss all kinds of things on an ethnic level, on birth rates, then as long as you have the “Holocaust” in the way as a super weapon for all our enemies or adversaries, that they can use against us, we will not make any progress in any of these discussions, if you want to implement any radical changes.

And therefore, I think that’s a very important topic, because it clogs any discussion and any attempt to have a real proper solution!

Henrik: Very good! Well, I’d love to have you back in the future and continue our discussion. I think there’s much more we could talk about. We can discuss some of the mechanics, of course, of some of the science that you found. We really didn’t get time for that today. But there’s definitely an opportunity to do that again in future.

But, why don’t you give us your websites again here, so people know where to go if they want to find your books and your material and everything that you available.

And yeah, it’s been it’s been great having you here!

Germar: Well, when it comes to the “Holocaust” and everything around it, again it’s “Holocaust Handbooks dot com”. The two words together, nothing in between Holocaust Handbooks dot com [holocausthandbooks.com]. My personal website is just my name together, Germar Rudolf. Germar Rudolf, like the red-nosed reindeer, only with an “f”, not a “ph”. Germar Rudolf dot com [germarrudolf.com]. And that’s a personal website. It also has stuff about my work, my scientific research, my publications, about my persecution, my personal background and things like that.

Henrik: Well, very good. Well thank you so much Germar and again I just want to say thank you for your work and for your continued heroism, if you will, that’s what this is. Of daring to speak out about this important historical event and taking the hits that you have, it’s just incredible, the perseverance and the fact that you still to this day continue to do it.

So, I just want to say:

“Thank you for being brave and thank you for doing it for all the people who actually really care about history.”

Germar: Well, I don’t know how to respond to that.

Henrik: [laughing] Right!

Well, that’s the last show for this July, 2016!

Thank you so much for being here and thank you for your membership and your continued support of the work that we do!

More coming with Richard Spencer next week.

For now, we say thank you for listening, ladies and gentlemen, wherever you are.

We will be back again before, you know, it. Until then, take good care and we’ll talk to you soon.

[55:57]

END

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

Click to download a PDF of this post (1.1 MB):

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

__________________

PDF Notes

* Total words = 9,995

* Total pages = 41

* Total images = 1

__________________

Version History

Version 4: May 9, 2017 — Proofed the last 11 minutes. Transcript now finished. Added PDF of post for download. Total complete = 56 minutes.

Version 3: May 7, 2017 — Proofed 10 minutes. Total complete = 45 minutes.

Version 2: May 6, 2017 — Proofed 10 minutes. Total complete = 35 minutes.

Version 1: May 6, 2017 — created post. Proofed 25 minutes.

Book – The Myth of German Villainy – Part 02 – Aftermath of the War in Germany

admin — Mon, 03 Oct 2016 05:11:13 +0000

[Part 02]

[Benton Bradberry’s 2012 book, “The Myth of German Villainy” is a superb, must-read, revisionist look at how the German people have been systematically, relentlessly and most importantly, unjustly vilified as the arch criminal of the 20th century. Bradberry sets out, coolly and calmly as befits a former US-Navy officer and pilot, to show why and how the German people have been falsely accused of massive crimes and that their chief accuser and tormenter, organized jewry is in fact the real party guilty of monstrous crimes against Germans and the rest of the world.

In Part 02, the events surrounding the end of World War 1 are described. How after the armistice was implemented Germany was forced, under the threat of continuing starvation, brought about the British naval blockade, to sign the outrageously harsh and unjust Versailles Treaty that imposed crippling terms and conditions. Also outlined is the history of the causes of the war and how America’s involvement under jewish pressure ensured disaster for Europe and “precipitated an irreversible decline in Western Civilization” — KATANA.]

NOTE: The author has very generously given me permission to reproduce the material here — KATANA.

The Myth of

German Villainy

by

Benton L. Bradberry

[Clicking on a link in the Contents here will take you to that Part, in a separate post]

[Part 01]

Preface

Chapter 1 – The Myth of Germany as an Evil Nation

Germany’s Positive Image Changes Overnight

[Part 02]

Chapter 2 – Aftermath of the War in Germany

Introduction

The Versailles Treaty

Effect of the Treaty on the German Economy

Was the War Guilt Clause Fair? Did Germany Really Start the War?

[Part 03]

Chapter 3 – The Jewish Factor in the War

Jews at the Paris Peace Conference

Jews in Britain

[Part 04]

Chapter 4 – The Russian Revolution of 1917

Bolsheviks Take Control

Jews and the Russian Revolution

Origin of East European Jews

Reason for the Russian Pogroms Against the Jews

Jews Leave Russia for America

Financing the 1917 Revolution

Jews in the Government of Bolshevik Russia

[Part 05]

Chapter 5 – The Red Terror

Creation of the Gulag

Bolsheviks Kill the Czar

Jews as a Hostile Elite

The Ukrainian Famine (Holodomor)

[Part 06]

Chapter 6 – The Bolshevik Revolution Spreads Throughout Europe

Jews in the Hungarian Revolution

Miklos Horthy Saves Hungary

Jews in the German Revolution

The Spartacist Uprising in Berlin

Jewish Bolsheviks Attempt to Take Italy

Jewish Bolsheviks Attempt to Take Spain — The Spanish Civil War

Czechoslovakia in Danger of Communist Takeover

The Comintern’s Aim? World Domination!

[Part 07]

Chapter 7 – The Nation of Israel

History of the Expulsion of Jews

[Part 08]

Chapter 8 – Jews in Weimar Germany

Jews Undermine German Culture

[Part 09]

Chapter 9 – Hitler & National Socialists Rise to Power

The 25 Points of the National Socialist Party

[Part 10]

Chapter 10 – National Socialism vs. Communism

National Socialism

Jews Plan Marxist Utopia

[Part 11]

Chapter 11 – Jews Declare War on Nazi Germany

Text of Untermeyer’s Speech in New York

The Jewish Persecution Myth

Effect of Boycott on the German Economy

Jewish Exaggerations are Contradicted by Many

[Part 12]

Chapter 12 – The Nazis and the Zionists Actually Work Together for Jewish Emigration out of Germany

The Nuremberg Laws – 1935

The Zionist Movement

[Part 13]

Chapter 13 – Life in Germany Under Hitler

Night of the Long Knives

1934 Annual Nazi Rally at Nuremberg

Hitler Revives the German Economy

Hitler Becomes the Most Popular Leader in the World

[Part 14]

Chapter 14 – Hitler Begins Reclamation of German Territory

Chapter 15 – The 1936 Olympics

[Part 15]

Chapter 16 – “Anschluss”. The Unification of Austria and Germany

Austrian Economy Revived

Austria’s Jews

[Part 16]

Chapter 17 – Germany Annexes the Sudetenland

[Part 17]

Chapter 18 – War with Poland

The Polish Problem

Hitler’s Proposal to Poland

Kristallnacht

German-Polish Talks Continue

Jews Influence both Roosevelt and Churchill

British and American Political Leaders Under Jewish Influence

Roosevelt’s Contribution to Hostilities

Lord Halifax Beats the War Drums

Germany Occupies Bohemia and Moravia

Roosevelt Pushes for War

Anti-war Movement Becomes Active

Poles Murder German Nationals Within the Corridor

[Part 18]

Chapter 19 – The Phony War

Russo-Finnish War

The Norway/Denmark Campaign

German Invasion of Denmark and Norway

Churchill Takes Chamberlain’s Place as Prime Minister

[Part 19]

Chapter 20 – Germany invades France Through the Low Countries

The Phony War Ends.

Churchill the War Lover

The Fall of France

Hitler Makes Peace Offer to Britain

[Part 20]

Chapter 21 – The Allied Goal? Destruction of Germany!

[Part 21]

Chapter 22 – Germany as Victim

Rape and Slaughter

Jewish Vengeance

The Jewish Brigade

[Part 22]

Chapter 23 – Winners and Losers

Bibliography

Chapter 2 Aftermath of the War in Germany

Introduction

top

The long stalemate which World War I became would most likely have ended in a negotiated peace with no winner and no loser if the United States had stayed out of it. But the combined weight of British, French and American armies in October, 1918 was more than the Central Powers could withstand, and one after another began to seek a way to pull out of the war. Bulgaria signed an armistice on September 29, Turkey at the end of October, and Austria/Hungary signed on November 3.

Stalemate — 1918

The British starvation blockade of Germany was taking a terrible toll, which eventually caused Germany to begin to crumble from within. Faced with the prospect of putting to sea to fight the British blockade, the sailors of the German High Seas Fleet stationed at Kiel mutinied on October 29. They had been persuaded by agitators that such an attack would be a suicide mission. Within a few days the entire city of Kiel was under their control and the revolution then spread throughout the country. On November 9 the Kaiser abdicated and slipped across the border into exile in the Netherlands. A German “republic” was declared to replace the monarchy and peace feelers were then extended to the Allies. At 5 A.M. on the morning of November 11, 1918 an armistice between Germany and the Allies was signed in a railway car parked in a French forest near the front lines. At 11 A.M. that same day, the armistice became effective. After more than four years of bloody fighting, the Great War had come to an end.

Peace comes at last with the Armistice of 11/11/1918 [at 11:00 am]

But what had it all been for? No combatant nation gained from it, at least nothing remotely worth the sacrifices made. The accumulated wealth of Europe, the result of decades of peace, was completely dissipated and replaced by crushing national debt. The war had been a horrific experience unlike anything Europeans had ever experienced before, leaving them psychologically, economically and politically devastated. Before the war, all of Europe had come to believe that a steady, continuing improvement in the conditions of life was the inexorable trend of history. That generalized belief was replaced by a feeling of pessimism and cynicism. There was the feeling that Europe had been profoundly and permanently damaged, a feeling that turned out to be highly prescient, in retrospect. Ancient empires — the Austro/Hungarian Empire, the Ottoman Empire, the Russian Empire, the German Empire — crumbled as a result of the war. These empires had been the source of political and social stability, and now chaos reigned throughout Europe. The Paris Peace Conference after the war did a very imperfect job of putting it all back together again. It is clear from the perspective of today that World War I precipitated an irreversible decline in Western Civilization.

In addition to these adverse psychological and political consequences, there was also a considerable amount of physical destruction. Vast areas of northeastern France had been reduced to rubble. Flanders in Belgium had been all but destroyed, and the ancient city of Ypres was completely devastated. The homes of 750,000 French people had been destroyed and the infrastructure of the entire region had been severely damaged. Roads, coal mines and telegraph poles had been destroyed, greatly hindering the area’s ability to recover and begin to function normally again.

[Add. image — Ypres, Belgium. Soldiers of the Australian 2nd Division clear a road in the devastated town of Ypres in October, 1917. Behind them lies the shell-blasted ruins of Ypres’s Cloth Hall.]

But all of that was insignificant compared to the massive, industrialized slaughter of human beings. Nearly every family in Europe had lost a family member, if not a father, son, brother or husband, then a cousin of one degree or another. All combatant countries suffered casualties never experienced before in all of history. The British, for example, suffered 50,000 casualties in a single afternoon at the Battle of Passchendaele, and 350,000 casualties before the battle finally ended. The battle ended with no ground gained and no ground lost. The entire trench war was characterized by mass suicidal attacks against entrenched machine guns, and by massive artillery barrages which blew their targets to smithereens. This was mechanized, industrial death. Nothing on this scale had ever happened before. The scale of the slaughter can be appreciated by the lists presented below.

Allied Casualties:

Britain: 885,000 soldiers killed; 1,663,000 wounded

France: 1,400,000 soldiers killed; 2,500,000 wounded

Belgium: 50,000 soldiers killed; 45,000 wounded

Italy: 651,000 soldiers killed; 954,000 wounded

Russia: 1,811,000 soldiers killed; 5,000,000 wounded

America: 117,000 soldiers killed; 206,000 wounded

Central Powers Casualties:

Germany: 2,037,000 soldiers killed; 4,250,000 wounded

Austria/Hungary: 1,200,000 soldiers killed; 3,600,000 wounded

Turkey: 800,000 soldiers killed; 400,000 wounded

Bulgaria: 100,000 soldiers killed; 152,000 wounded

The number of soldiers killed on all sides totaled 9.7 million with 21 million wounded. Of the wounded, millions were maimed for life and unable to work. Nearly 7 million civilians on all sides lost their lives.

The Versailles Treaty

top

The lurid anti-German propaganda campaign conducted by Britain and America throughout the war had created such hatred for the Germans that a harsh peace was virtually inevitable. Germany, rightly or wrongly, was to be held accountable for the war, including all the death and destruction resulting from it, and Germany would be required to pay for all of it. As if the war itself were not enough, during mid-1918, Europe was hit by Spanish flu, causing the deaths of an estimated 25 million more Europeans. That comes to some 41 million Europeans who died from all causes during the war — a sizable percentage of the European population. Death on this scale had not occurred in Europe since the “black plague” of the Middle Ages. This added to the feeling of bitterness and gloom that ran through Europe and this anger was primarily directed at the hated and despised Germans — hated and despised as the result of the anti-German propaganda. Europe wanted to punish Germany and would do so with the Versailles Treaty.

The terms of the treaty, as finally hammered out by the victors of the war — Britain, France and the United States — were harsh by any standard. The idealistic President Woodrow Wilson had presented his “Fourteen Points” as the basis for a fair and just peace settlement but they were mostly ignored after the armistice was signed, especially by the French. The French had no interest in a “just” peace. What the French wanted was revenge!…that, and their two provinces back. The provinces of Alsace and Lorraine had been taken from France by the Victorious Prussians after the Franco/Prussian War of 1871. French Prime Minister Georges Clemenceau considered Wilson sanctimonious and naïve, and privately ridiculed his Fourteen Points. He sneered that “God almighty only had ten.”

Basically the terms of the Versailles Treaty were as follows: 28,000 Sq. miles [approximately 10-15%?] of Germany’s territory and 6.5 million of her people were handed over to other countries. Alsace-Lorraine went to France; Eupen and Malmedy were given to Belgium; Northern Schleswig went to Denmark; Hultschin to Czechoslovakia; West Prussia, Posen, Upper Silesia and Danzig went to Poland (Danzig was placed under Polish management but was designated a “free city” under League of Nations supervision); Memel to Lithuania; and the Saar, Germany’s industrial heartland, was put under the control of the League of Nations. All of Germany’s overseas colonies were taken away.

Severe military limitations were imposed. Germany’s army was reduced to 100,000 men, and was not allowed to have tanks or armored cars. Germany was not allowed an air force, and was allowed to have only 6 capital naval ships and no submarines. The west of the Rhineland and 50 kilometers (31 miles) east of the Rhine River was made into a demilitarized zone. No German soldier or weapon was allowed into this zone. The Allies (meaning Britain and France) were to keep an army of occupation on the west bank of the Rhine for 15 years.

Financial penalties were equally severe. The loss of vital industrial territory would impede all attempts by Germany to rebuild her economy. Coal from the Saar and Upper Silesia in particular was a vital economic loss. The coal went to France and England. Germany’s richest farmland was given to Poland. Reparations were to be paid to the Allies in an amount to be decided by the Allies at a later time. It seemed clear to Germany that the Allies intended to bankrupt the country.

Germany was also forbidden to unite with Austria to form one large German state (even though both Germany and Austria wanted it), in an attempt to keep her economic potential to a minimum.

General terms of the treaty included three vital clauses:

1. Germany had to admit full responsibility for starting the war (The War Guilt clause – Clause 231).

2. Germany was thereby responsible for all the damage caused by the war, and was therefore required to pay reparations, the bulk of which was to go to France and Belgium. The amount of reparations was not set at Versailles, but was to be determined later. In other words, Germany was to sign a blank check which the Allies would cash when it suited them in whatever amount they decided. The amount was eventually put at $33 billion (in 1919 dollars).

3. A League of Nations was set up to keep world peace, though Germany was not allowed in as a member.

After agreeing to the Armistice in November, 1918, the Germans believed that the peace treaty to follow would be based on President Wilson’s “Fourteen Points” which would have ensured a fair and just peace, and that they would participate in drawing up the peace treaty. They had, in fact, signed the Armistice and laid down their arms with that understanding. Instead, the treaty was drawn up without German participation and then handed to them as a diktat, which the Germans were required to sign without discussion. The term “armistice” is generally understood to mean, “a cessation of hostilities while a peace treaty is worked out.” That is what Germany signed onto, but the Allies treated Germany as a defeated foe instead. According to the accepted meaning of an armistice, Germany should have had full participation in the peace conference.

The German delegation at Versailles. They were forced to sign the Treaty.

The German delegation was astonished at the harshness of the treaty. They were particularly offended by the charge that Germany had started the war. In the minds of Germans, Germany had been fighting a defensive war imposed upon her by Russia and France, and soon afterwards by Britain. The way Germany saw it, France and Russia started the war. The officer sent to sign the Versailles Treaty refused to do so. “To say such a thing would be a lie,” he said. The German Chancellor Phillip Scheidemann resigned rather than accept the treaty, saying, “May the hand wither that signs this treaty.” He characterized the terms of the treaty as “unbearable, unrealizable and unacceptable,” and proclaimed that the treaty would make the German people “slaves and helots.”

The German people were both shocked and outraged over the terms of the treaty. As a symbolic protest against it, all forms of public entertainment throughout Germany were suspended for a week. Flags across the country were lowered to half mast. Some wanted to start the war again, but Germany’s leaders knew that that was impossible. There was nothing they could do. The German army had disintegrated and gone home after the Armistice was signed and Britain was maintaining a starvation blockade around Germany, letting nothing in and nothing out, causing the deaths of thousands of German civilians every day. Britain declared that the blockade would be maintained until the German representatives signed the treaty. Finally, Britain and France gave the Germans an ultimatum. Sign the treaty within four days or be invaded. The British and French armies were still intact. A German representative finally signed the treaty in the Hall of Mirrors at the Palace of Versailles on June 28, 1919. (He was later assassinated under mysterious circumstances; no doubt the result of having signed the treaty.)

The Treaty was signed, but only reluctantly, and without the slightest intention of actually cooperating in its imposition. In the words of the British historian, AJP Taylor, in his book, The History of the First World War (1963):

“Though the Germans accepted the treaty in the formal sense of agreeing to sign it, none took the signature seriously. The treaty seemed to them to be wicked, unfair, dictation, a slave treaty. All Germans intended to repudiate it at some time in the future, if it did not fall to pieces of its own absurdity.”

In one last gesture of defiance, after the treaty was signed, the captured German naval ships held at Scapa Flow were scuttled by their crews.

Effect of the Treaty on the German Economy

top

The German economy was the most powerful in Europe going into the war, but like all the other combatant countries (except the United States), Germany was bankrupt by the end of it. Reconstructing her ruined economy after the war would have been a daunting task under the best of circumstances, but it was made doubly hard by the crushing impact of the Versailles treaty. Under the treaty Germany was forced to pay exorbitant reparations payments to the victorious powers at the same time that her ability to do so was drastically reduced by other terms of the treaty. Under the treaty, Germany lost 13 percent of her territory, 10 percent of her population, 25 percent of her potato and wheat production, 80 percent of iron ore, 68 percent of zinc ore, 33 percent of coal production, the entire Alsatian potash and textile industries, and the communications system built around Alsace-Lorraine and Upper Silesia. Her entire merchant fleet was confiscated along with numerous shipping facilities. Moreover, for 5 years, Germany’s shipyards were required to produce ships to be given to the victorious powers. She was also required to surrender 5,000 locomotives, 150,000 railway cars and 10,000 trucks. All German property abroad was confiscated.

Map showing German territory taken by the Versailles Treaty. The dark or shaded areas were taken from Germany.

Because of Germany’s weakened state the reparations payments demanded by the victorious powers were completely beyond her ability to pay. The confiscation of Germany’s coal mines was particularly devastating because the resultant coal shortage severely limited industrial production. Her agricultural production was also drastically reduced because she had no merchant fleet with which to import the phosphates necessary to produce fertilizers. She could not import other necessary raw materials because her colonies had been taken away as well as her merchant fleet. This caused factories to shut down resulting in increased unemployment. All those who had previously worked in shipping and trade were also now unemployed.

A million German civilians, mainly women, children and old people, starved to death as the a result of the British naval blockade.

A million Germans, mainly women, children and old people, starved to death as the result of the Royal Navy’s food blockade, but millions of others were reduced to a weakened state from lack of food. A plague of malnutrition caused diseases affected Germany’s children; many with permanently stunted growth, and disfiguring bone development. The war was over, but the starvation blockade continued to be imposed on an entirely helpless civilian population for seven more months, to force the unwilling Germans to sign the peace treaty. It was cruel beyond belief, yet it was imposed by the saintly British against the savage Hun. In fact, the main force behind the blockade was the much admired Winston Churchill.

The confiscation of Germany’s merchant fleet exacerbated an already disastrous situation. Germany was an industrial nation with a very dense population, closely integrated into the economic system of the world. She was therefore required to import enormous quantities of food and raw materials. The loss of her merchant fleet and the restrictions on trade imposed by the Versailles Treaty produced chaos in Germany, and served to extend the famine which existed as a result of the blockade.

Adolf Hitler wrote in Mein Kampf:

“Germany suffered most as a consequence of this Peace Treaty and the general insecurity which was bound to arise from it. The unemployment figures rose to a third of the number usually employed in the nation, which means, however, that by counting the families of the unemployed as well there were 26 million people in Germany out of a population of 65 million faced by an absolutely hopeless future.”

Was the War Guilt Clause Fair? Did Germany Really Start the War?

top

The chain of cause and effect in international relations is interminable, but if one is to make a point, one must begin somewhere. To a considerable extent, WWI had its genesis in the Franco-Prussian War of 1870/71. But the Franco-Prussian War itself was the culmination of years of tension between the two states, which finally came to a head over the issue of a Hohenzollern candidate for the vacant Spanish throne. France believed it was being surrounded by Prussian Hohenzollerns, and declared war on Prussia to prevent it. Prussia, under Chancellor Otto von Bismarck won the war, and without going into detail here, that victory made it possible for Bismarck to unite all the various German states, principalities, and estates into one unified German confederation. Included in this new German confederation were the two provinces, Alsace and Lorraine, taken from France as war booty and annexed to Germany. There was, of course, historical justification for Germany’s annexation of the two provinces, as France had previously taken them from Germany during the reign of Louis IV. Moreover, the populations of Alsace and Lorraine were still majority German speaking, ethnic Germans. As mentioned above, the chain of cause and effect is interminable.

The German annexation of Alsace-Lorraine, whether justified or not, left France humiliated and seething with anger over their loss. France had grown accustomed during her 400 years of war making and aggression to humiliating others — Germany in particular — and this role reversal was hard for France to swallow. Revanche (policy to regain lost territory) became a major French goal, and revenge against Germany became a French national obsession, particularly among the political and military elite. France’s determination to have a war of revenge against Germany was a factor in all of the diplomatic maneuvers that ultimately led to war in 1914. According to J.S. Ewart, in his book, “The Roots and Causes of War,” 1925.

“The Alsace-Lorraine annexation by Prussia in 1871 was the principle factor in the counter-alliances, ententes, and antagonisms which perturbed continental Europe for forty-three years…. Not France only, but all Europe, kept in mind, between 1871 and 1914, with varying intensity, the prospect — one might say the assumed certainty — of the recurrence of the Franco-Prussian war.”

After unification into a single state in 1871, Germany experienced an extraordinary period of economic growth and development.

Industrialization progressed rapidly and German manufacturers began to take markets away from Britain. Germany produced more and more of her own consumer products, and imported less and less of British made products. But Germany also began to compete with British commerce abroad, particularly in the United States. German textile production and steel production quickly surpassed those of Britain. Germany invested heavily in research and development, to a far greater extent than Britain, which produced impressive technological advances, especially in chemistry, electricity and electric motors, and in devices driven by electric motors. Germany was dominant in physics and chemistry to the extent that one-third of all Nobel Prizes went to German inventors and researchers. By 1913 Germany produced 90% of the world’s dyestuffs and began to excel in other areas of chemistry such as pharmaceuticals, photographic film, agricultural chemicals and electro-chemicals. With a population of 65 million, Germany became the dominant economic power on the continent and was the world’s second largest exporting nation after Britain. (The populations of Britain and France were 45 million and 40 million respectively.)

No one had worried much about Germany prior to its unification in 1871. Up to then “Germany” was only a geographic expression, referring to the multiplicity of German speaking kingdoms, principalities, city states and sovereign estates located in Central Europe. But Germany’s rapid rise in power after unification created anxiety amongst her neighbors. The old balance of power system, worked out by Prince Metternich at the Congress of Vienna in 1815 at the end of the Napoleonic Wars, had served as the basis for European relations until thrown off kilter by Germany’s growing power after unification.

Germany quickly displaced France as the dominant power on the European continent, causing consternation among the British elite. Britain had always seen France as her traditional enemy and rival on the continent, but British power had already long eclipsed that of France, and France was no longer in a position to challenge British dominance. The extraordinary growth of Germany as an industrial power, however, was beginning to challenge that of Britain. As a result, Britain began making efforts to develop friendly relations with France as leverage against Germany. It appeared to Britain that the entire continent was about to become organized as a single economic union under an all powerful Germany, which threatened to sideline Britain into insignificance. The more powerful Germany became, the more apprehensive British leaders became, to the point that they began to speculate on how to cut the “upstart” Germany down to size. An eventual war with Germany began to seem inevitable.

On April 8, 1904 Britain entered an “Entente Cordiale” with France, followed by an “Anglo-Russian Entente.” France and Russia then forged the “Franco-Russian Alliance.” Thus the “Triple Entente” of Britain, France and Russia was formed for the purpose of containing the growing power of Germany.

To ameliorate this developing hostility against her, Germany made vigorous efforts in the years before World War One to arrive at an understanding with Russia and France, and particularly with Britain, but got nowhere because the real problem was Germany’s very existence as a growing super power. Each had interests of their own which put them in conflict with Germany. First, Russia wanted control of the Bosporus Straights leading out of the Black Sea, as a warm water outlet for her Navy and merchant fleet, and was willing to go to war to get it. The Bosporus Straights were at the time controlled by Germany through her alliance with the Ottoman Empire. Next, Britain saw Germany as a threat to her economic dominance and wanted only to reduce Germany’s power. Then, France wanted revenge for the loss of the Franco/Prussian War in 1871, and also wanted her two provinces, Alsace and Lorraine, back. All three powers wanted to reduce Germany’s economic power, and the only way they saw to achieve that was by military force. All of Germany’s diplomatic efforts were frustrated by these factors. Germany’s very existence as a unified nation state was the problem, and it seemed that nothing short of dissolving itself would satisfy these rival nations. France and Russia together began to scheme against Germany and to develop plans for an eventual war. Britain was also looking for a pretext for war against Germany. Yet, Germany was guilty of nothing except becoming too successful.

A cartoon in 1904 from the German perspective. John Bull, as the symbol of Britain, is walking off with the harlot, Arianne, symbol of France, in what is supposed to be a tri-colored dress, turning their backs on the Kaiser.

Britain and Germany have often been called the “identical twins” of Europe. They were the same race, with similar, highly organized, high achieving cultures, both Protestant (in the main), both aggressive in pursuing their aims, and both with a history of constitutional monarchies. Britain had no quarrel with Germany, nor Germany with Britain, except that Britain became obsessed with Germany’s growing economic power. Britain, though smaller than Germany in size and population, headed the largest empire in the world; in fact, the largest empire in history. Yet, Germany was eclipsing Britain as an industrial power. Moreover, Germany was building a navy which threatened to rival that of Britain. Britain was also painfully aware of the comparative trajectories of the economic power of Britain and Germany. Britain’s was trending downward, while Germany’s was trending upwards; and this did not bode well for Britain’s future. The British believed that they needed to act against Germany while they were still powerful enough to do so.

Between 1912 and 1914, the Russian Ambassador in Paris, Alexander Izvolsky and President Raymond Poincare of France entered into an agreement to go to war against Germany, “in event of any diplomatic crisis that would bring Britain in on their side.” Such a crisis soon erupted with the Serbian assassination of the Austrian Archduke Franz Ferdinand in June, 1914. Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia after obtaining Germany’s unqualified backing (the blank check). The “blank check” was given because Germany’s governing elite believed that by doing so, Russia would be discouraged from intervening against Austria-Hungary on behalf of Serbia. Germany reasoned that If Austria-Hungary were to be defeated by Serbia and Russia, then Germany would be left completely surrounded by enemies. Propping up Austria-Hungary was crucial to Germany’s security. But Russia, who considered herself Serbia’s mentor and protector (Serbia was Russia’s “little Slavic brother”), ignored Germany’s “blank check” and threatened war against Austria-Hungary anyway. Germany tried mediating with Russia to prevent war, but Russia and her ally France, seeing this as the opportunity they had been waiting for, refused to be conciliatory. Instead, Russia abruptly ordered a general mobilization. Such a mobilization had long been recognized in European capitals as tantamount to a declaration of war. After urgent demands for Russia to cancel her mobilization, to no avail, Germany declared war on Russia on August 1, and immediately began her own mobilization. France began mobilizing three days later, but, in fact, had already informed the Russians that she had decided on war a day before Germany declared war on Russia and three days before Germany declared war on France. France’s mobilization was not, therefore, the result of Germany’s declaration of war on Russia. The mobilization had already been decided on. Germany, instead of being the aggressor in this case, was reacting to Russian and French initiatives.

Germany is located on a flat plain in the heart of Europe without natural defenses, completely surrounded by potential enemies, and therefore uniquely vulnerable to invasion from two or more sides. She was in no position, therefore, to wait and see before mobilizing her own armed forces. Germany was well aware of the plotting and scheming between France and Russia to create a pretext for war against her, and was, therefore, on continuous alert. The worst nightmare for Germany’s military leaders was a two front war with France on one side and Russia on the other. To counter that likelihood, Germany had worked out a military strategy called the “Schlieffen Plan.” The plan called for rapid mobilization, concentration of Germany’s armed forces, and a lightening attack through Belgium to first knock France out of the war, after which the German army would wheel around and take on Russia, thus avoiding a two-front war. Even though the Schlieffen Plan called for a pre-emptive attack, first on France and then Russia, the plan was, at bottom, a defensive strategy and not an aggressive one. To wait to be attacked first, from two sides, would be suicidal. On August, 3, 1914, when war seemed unavoidable, Germany swept through Belgium and into France, but was unable to deal France the quick, knock-out blow strategized in the Schlieffen plan.

[Add. image (click to enlarge) — The “Schlieffen Plan.”]

Britain then declared war on Germany on August 4, on the pretext that Germany had violated Belgian neutrality, though Britain’s actual reason for war against Germany was to destroy Germany as an economic rival. On that basis alone, Britain’s leaders decided to join France and Russia in a war against Germany. In reality, Belgium had not figured into the British cabinet’s discussion at all when war with Germany was decided upon. Belgium was used only as a pretext for war. Moreover, had Germany not invaded Belgium, Britain would have done so without a second thought.

Soon after pouring into France through Belgium, Germany became bogged down in the Battle of the Marne, just short of her goal of reaching Paris, which quickly brought an end to the “war of movement.” Stalemate and trench warfare followed in which neither side could predominate. This condition remained until the American forces came in to break the deadlock.

Germany eventually lost the war, and for that reason alone, was blamed for starting it. Article 231 of the Versailles Treaty formally blamed Germany for starting the war, which then served as the basis for all of the punitive measures taken against Germany. After the war was over and passions began to cool, a number of historians — known as “revisionists” — began to look through the intemperate propaganda to uncover the real facts. Scholars like Harry Elmer Barnes, Charles Beard, et al, began to tell a different story. Barnes argued in his book, The Genesis of the World War, 1926, that , on the record, Serbia, Russia and France bore a greater responsibility for starting the war than did Austria and Germany, and Germany’s responsibility was less than Austria-Hungary’s. In Barnes view, German “war guilt” was about equal to that of Britain. The most pro-German view was that Germany was forced into a war she did not want and was required to defend herself against rapacious foes out to destroy Germany as an economic power. President Wilson had sent his personal representative, Colonel Edward Mandel House, to Europe to study the situation three months before the war began. The view that Germany was being threatened by military aggression from Russia, France and Britain was supported by Colonel House’s report. He wrote in his report that, “when England consents, France and Russia will close in on Germany,” which is precisely what eventually happened. Germany was, in fact, the “defender” against Allied aggression.

Germany did not want war, had nothing to gain from war, and everything to lose from it. After all, Germany was obtaining everything she wanted without war, that is, economic expansion and the acquisition of colonies from which to obtain raw materials and to which to sell industrial products. But France did want war, as revenge against Germany for the Franco-Prussian War of 1870/71 and to regain her lost provinces of Alsace and Lorraine. Russia also did want war with Germany in order to obtain the warm water Bosporus Straits which Germany controlled, and Britain did want war in order to crush a commercial competitor. All three of these Allied powers believed that Germany was becoming too big and too powerful. The Versailles Treaty itself proves that, in that its main effect was to reduce the physical size of Germany and to reduce her economic and military power. The treaty took away large portions of German territory and gave it to other countries, along with 6.5 million German people,. A separate clause barred Austria form combining with Germany. During the peace deliberations, Georges Clemenceau, President of France, is supposed to have said, “Germany has 20 million too many people.”

Germany not only did not want war in the beginning, but put out peace feelers as early as 1916 to try to bring the war to an end, even though Germany appeared at that time to be about to win the war, but the Allies had no interest in bringing the war to an end. What the Allies wanted was to destroy Germany, as they had set out to do from the beginning, and so, Germany’s peace feelers were ignored. Clearly Germany was the victim and not the perpetrator of aggression. The United States had no reason whatever to enter the war against Germany. Germany had done nothing to the United States and was not a threat to the United States in any way. Moreover, German-Americans along with British-Americans constituted the very core of the American culture.

The United States had had only good relations with Germany, and American citizens had always looked upon Germany with warmth and admiration. Though the British anti-German propaganda campaign conducted in the United States had influenced public opinion, the vast majority of Americans were still opposed to entering the war. That could not be said, however, of America’s ruling elite. America’s ruling elite was strongly Anglophilic, with an attitude towards Great Britain not unlike that of Canada and Australia, innately predisposed to go to the aid of the “mother country.” America was virtually a vassal state to Great Britain in those days.

These were all factors, but the deciding influence in taking America into the war was the pressure on President Wilson by American Jewish financiers. It was these powerful Jews who had financed Wilson’s political career. Without their financial and media support, he probably would never have become president. These Jews exerted extreme pressure on Wilson to take the United States into the war on the side of Britain to ensure an Allied victory, in exchange for the Balfour Declaration which promised the Jews a homeland in Palestine after the war (of which more in the following chapter). Jews controlled most of the large newspapers and they controlled Hollywood, so they had all the means necessary to control American public opinion. The sinking of the Lusitania, the Zimmerman telegram, etc. were not reasons to go to war, only fabricated pretexts.

The German people had every reason to be outraged over the shameful peace treaty imposed upon them by the victorious powers. The Versailles Treaty was unfair and immoral, and had been imposed by force by the victors upon the vanquished. Germany was forced into signing the hated treaty by a “food” blockade imposed by the British navy, which caused a million Germans to starve to death, and by a threat of military invasion of Germany. Therefore, the imposed treaty had no moral or legal force and Germany was in no way obligated to adhere to the treaty and had every moral right to abandon it as soon as she was militarily able to do so.

Though America’s entry brought a quick end to the carnage, entering the war was actually disastrous in its long term consequences for Western, Christian Civilization. Had America stayed out of it, it is almost certain that the war would have ended in a negotiated peace with neither side achieving a victory. There would therefore have been no Versailles Treaty. Germany would not have been dismembered. Germany would have maintained her army intact and would have maintained her peace agreement with Russia (Treaty of Brest-Litovsk). The Czar would likely not have abdicated and the German Empire would have remained intact. Bolshevism would most likely have been nipped in the bud instead of taking control of Russia. The Austro-Hungarian Empire would have remained intact. So, also, would the Ottoman Empire, which would have precluded the creation of the state of Israel and all of the negative consequences resulting from that. There would have been no Communist revolution in Germany, Hungary or Italy. The Spanish Civil War would not have occurred. There would have been no World War II, no Cold War, and Communism would not have taken control of Central and Eastern Europe. A unified Europe, not unlike the European Union of today, except much larger and much more prosperous, would almost certainly have formed with Germany as its dominant member. In short, Europe would have stabilized and become a dynamic economic power in the world. America’s entry into the war was perhaps the greatest disaster in European history in its unintended consequences.

_______________________

[END of Part 02]

PDF Notes

* Total words = 7,107

* Total pages = 34

*Total images = 9

*Note: Images not in original book are indicated as “Add. image” (Additional image).

*Text in [square brackets] is not part of the original book.

*Special thanks to reader “mblaine” for providing the text for this book.

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

Click to download a PDF of this post (2.6 MB).

The Myth of Germany Villainy – Part 02

Click on a link to go to another part:

[Click images to enlarge]

Part 01 — Cover text; About the Author; Preface; Chapter 1: The Myth of Germany as an Evil Nation

Part 02 — Chapter 2: Aftermath of the War in Germany

Part 03 — Chapter 3: The Jewish Factor in the War

Part 04 — Chapter 4: The Russian Revolution of 1917

Part 05 — Chapter 5: The Red Terror

Part 06 — Chapter 6: The Bolshevik Revolution Spreads Throughout Europe

Part 07 — Chapter 7: The Nation of Israel

Part 08 — Chapter 8: Jews in Weimar Germany

Part 09 — Chapter 9: Hitler and National Socialists Rise to Power

Part 10 — Chapter 10: National Socialism vs Communism

Part 11 — Chapter 11: Jews Declare War on Nazi Germany

Part 12 — Chapter 12: The Nazis and the Zionists Actually Work Together for Jewish Emigration out of Germany

Part 13 — Chapter 13: Life in Germany Under Hitler

Part 14 — Chapter 14 & 15: Hitler Begins Reclamation of German Territory; The 1936 Olympics

Part 15 — Chapter 16: “Anschluss” The Unification of Austria and Germany

Part 16 – Chapter 17: Germany Annexes the Sudetenland

Part 17 – Chapter 18: War with Poland

Part 18 – Chapter 19: The Phony War

Part 19 – Chapter 20: Germany invades France – The Phony War Ends

Part 20 – Chapter 21: The Allied Goal? Destruction of Germany!

Part 21 – Chapter 22: Germany as Victim

Part 22 (last) – Chapter 23: Winners and Losers

Version History

Version 4: Mar 11, 2021 – Added new Go2 Cover images (3).

Version 3: Jan 14, 2020 — Re-uploaded images and PDF for katana17.com/wp/ version.

Version 2: Oct 8, 2016 — Expanded Table of Contents.

Version 1: Oct 3, 2016 — Created post.

Book – The Myth of German Villainy by Benton Bradberry – Part 01

admin — Sat, 01 Oct 2016 06:06:14 +0000

[Part 01]

[Benton Bradberry’s 2012 book, “The Myth of German Villainy” is a superb, must-read, revisionist look at how the German people have been systematically, relentlessly and most importantly, unjustly vilified as the arch criminal of the 20th century. Bradberry sets out, cooly and calmly as befits a former US-Navy officer and pilot, to show why and how the German people have been falsely accused of massive crimes and that their chief accuser and tormenter, organized jewry is in fact the real party guilty of monstrous crimes against Germans and the rest of the world — KATANA.]

NOTE: The author has very generously given me permission to reproduce the material here — KATANA.

The Myth of

German Villainy

by

Benton L. Bradberry

Front and Back Cover Text

Neither Kaiser Wilhelm nor Adolf Hitler wanted war. Both WWI and WWII were thrust upon Germany by the Allied powers. Germany’s great sin was emerging too late as a consolidated nation-state and upsetting the long established balance of power scheme in Europe. The already established great powers, Britain, France and Russia, joined together in 1914 to destroy this new rival. When Germany rose phoenix-like from the ashes of WWI to again become a great power, they finished. the job with World War II. The deliberate destruction of Germany during the Second World-War can only be compared to the Roman destruction of ancient Carthage, and it was done for the same reason — to destroy a commercial rival. The “official” history of World Wars I & II, the story we learned in school, is a myth.

As the title “The Myth of German Villainy” indicates, this book is about the mischaracterization of Germany as history’s ultimate “villain“. The “official” story of Western Civilization in the twentieth century casts Germany as the disturber of the peace in Europe, and the cause of both World War I and World War II, though the facts don’t bear that out.

During both wars, fantastic atrocity stories were invented by Allied propaganda to create hatred of the German people for the purpose of bringing public opinion around to support the wars. The “Holocaust” propaganda which emerged after World War II further solidified this image of Germany as history’s ultimate villain. But how true is this “official” story? Was Germany really history’s ultimate villain? In this book, the author paints a different picture. He explains that Germany was not the perpetrator of World War I nor World War II, but instead, was the victim of Allied aggression in both wars. The instability wrought by World War I made the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution in Russia possible, which brought world Communism into existence. Hitler and Germany recognized world Communism, with its base in the Soviet Union, as an existential threat to Western, Christian Civilization, and he dedicated himself and Germany to a death struggle against it. Far from being the disturber of European peace, Germany served as a bulwark which prevented Communist revolution from sweeping over Europe. The pity was that the United States and Britain did not see Communist Russia in the same light, ultimately with disastrous consequences for Western Civilization. The author believes that Britain and the United States joined the wrong side in the war.

About the Author

Benton L. Bradberry served as an officer and aviator in the U.S. Navy from 1955 to 1977, from near the beginning of the Cold War to near its end. His generation was inundated with anti-German propaganda and “Holocaust” lore. Then, in his role as a naval officer and pilot, he was immersed in anti-Communist propaganda and the war psychosis of the Cold War era. He has had a life-long fascination with the history of this period and has read deeply into all aspects of it. He also saw much of Europe during his Navy years and has travelled widely in Europe since. A natural skeptic, he long ago began to doubt that the “propaganda” told the whole story. He has spent years researching “the other side of the story” and has now written a book about it. The author is a graduate of the Naval Post Graduate School in Monterey, California with a degree in Political Science and International Relations.

____________________

[Clicking on a link in the Contents here will take you to that Part, in a separate post]

[Part 01]

Preface

Chapter 1 – The Myth of Germany as an Evil Nation

Germany’s Positive Image Changes Overnight

[Part 02]

Chapter 2 – Aftermath of the War in Germany

The Versailles Treaty

Effect of the Treaty on the German Economy

Was the War Guilt Clause Fair?

Did Germany Really Start the War?

[Part 03]

Chapter 3 – The Jewish Factor in the War

Jews at the Paris Peace Conference

Jews in Britain

[Part 04]

Chapter 4 – The Russian Revolution of 1917

Bolsheviks Take Control

Jews and the Russian Revolution

Origin of East European Jews

Reason for the Russian Pogroms Against the Jews

Jews Leave Russia for America

Financing the 1917 Revolution

Jews in the Government of Bolshevik Russia

[Part 05]

Chapter 5 – The Red Terror

Creation of the Gulag

Bolsheviks Kill the Czar

Jews as a Hostile Elite

The Ukrainian Famine (Holodomor)

[Part 06]

Chapter 6 – The Bolshevik Revolution Spreads Throughout Europe

Jews in the Hungarian Revolution

Miklos Horthy Saves Hungary

Jews in the German Revolution

The Spartacist Uprising in Berlin

Jewish Bolsheviks Attempt to Take Italy

Jewish Bolsheviks Attempt to Take Spain — The Spanish Civil War

Czechoslovakia in Danger of Communist Takeover

The Comintern’s Aim? World Domination!

[Part 07]

Chapter 7 – The Nation of Israel

History of the Expulsion of Jews

[Part 08]

Chapter 8 – Jews in Weimar Germany

Jews Undermine German Culture

[Part 09]

Chapter 9 – Hitler & National Socialists Rise to Power

The 25 Points of the National Socialist Party

[Part 10]

Chapter 10 – National Socialism vs. Communism

National Socialism

Jews Plan Marxist Utopia

[Part 11]

Chapter 11 – Jews Declare War on Nazi Germany

Text of Untermeyer’s Speech in New York

The Jewish Persecution Myth

Effect of Boycott on the German Economy

Jewish Exaggerations are Contradicted by Many

[Part 12]

Chapter 12 – The Nazis and the Zionists Actually Work Together for Jewish Emigration out of Germany

The Nuremberg Laws – 1935

The Zionist Movement

[Part 13]

Chapter 13 – Life in Germany Under Hitler

Night of the Long Knives

1934 Annual Nazi Rally at Nuremberg

Hitler Revives the German Economy

Hitler Becomes the Most Popular Leader in the World

[Part 14]

Chapter 14 – Hitler Begins Reclamation of German Territory

Chapter 15 – The 1936 Olympics

[Part 15]

Chapter 16 – “Anschluss”. The Unification of Austria and Germany

Austrian Economy Revived

Austria’s Jews

[Part 16]

Chapter 17 – Germany Annexes the Sudetenland

[Part 17]

Chapter 18 – War with Poland

The Polish Problem

Hitler’s Proposal to Poland

Kristallnacht

German-Polish Talks Continue

Jews Influence both Roosevelt and Churchill

British and American Political Leaders Under Jewish Influence

Roosevelt’s Contribution to Hostilities

Lord Halifax Beats the War Drums

Germany Occupies Bohemia and Moravia

Roosevelt Pushes for War

Anti-war Movement Becomes Active

Poles Murder German Nationals Within the Corridor

[Part 18]

Chapter 19 – The Phony War

Russo-Finnish War

The Norway/Denmark Campaign

German Invasion of Denmark and Norway

Churchill Takes Chamberlain’s Place as Prime Minister

[Part 19]

Chapter 20 – Germany invades France Through the Low Countries

The Phony War Ends.

Churchill the War Lover

The Fall of France

Hitler Makes Peace Offer to Britain

[Part 20]

Chapter 21 – The Allied Goal? Destruction of Germany!

[Part 21]

Chapter 22 – Germany as Victim

Rape and Slaughter

Jewish Vengeance

The Jewish Brigade

[Part 22]

Chapter 23 – Winners and Losers

Bibliography

Preface

I served in the United States Navy from 1955 until 1977, mostly as a Navy pilot, and saw a lot of the world as a result. Aircraft carriers on which I served regularly visited European ports, as well as other ports around the world. I have also traveled extensively in the years since leaving the Navy.

After traveling around most of Europe, Germany emerges as my favorite country. During our visits there we found the German people to be pleasant, industrious, disciplined and civilized with many similarities to traditional Americans. They in no way resemble the stereotypes depicted in all the anti-Nazi movies, books and articles we have been subjected to over the years.

I was born in 1937, my generation grew up virtually inundated with anti-German propaganda. We were taught, quite literally, to hate the Germans as a people. Yet, Germans I have met or befriended through the years seem no different from other Europeans, or even Americans, and they seem no more inclined to violence and militarism than anyone else; if anything, less. I have never detected anything that might be considered intrinsically “wrong” with the German character. They are a highly cultured, highly civilized people in every respect. When studied objectively, even Germany’s leaders of the 1930s and 40s were essentially no different from other European leaders. They were only made out to be different by the relentless hate propaganda directed against them.

Germany suffered more than any other country by far as a result of World War II. Some 160 of her largest cities and towns were completely destroyed by the Allied bombing campaign and more than 21 million Germans lost their lives as a result of the war. Yet, no one wants to hear their tales of suffering, and no sympathy has been allowed the defeated and disgraced Germans. The anti-German propaganda has cultivated the general feeling that they got what they deserved.

The entire responsibility for starting both World War I and World War II, and for all the death and destruction resulting from them has been assigned to the Germans (though the facts don’t bear that out). Because they were the losers of both wars, they were never permitted to present their case before the world court, nor to tell their side of the story through any medium. The winners of wars, after all, write the history books. Neither did the true story of what happened during the war come out in the Nuremberg Trials. The Nuremberg Trials were nothing more than Soviet style show trials which violated every standard of traditional British and American justice. Their purpose was not to discover guilt or innocence, but to spread a legal gloss over a decision which had already been made to execute Germany’s leaders. The entire Nuremberg circus was a sham and a travesty.

The anti-German propaganda, used to create the climate of hatred that made the massive destruction and the mass slaughter of German civilians possible, continued relentlessly long after the war was over when it would seem natural for sober minded historians to begin to moderate their extreme views about Germany. The fantastic atrocity stories continue even today. One needs only to tune in to the History Channel to see them repeated again and again. In contrast, World War I was not long over before the atrocity stories attributed to the Germans during that war were exposed as the deliberate lies they were. Responsible men conducted thorough investigations and found that none of it was true. All the lurid stories were deliberately fabricated to win British public support for the war against Germany and also to bring America into the war.

But a different factor was in play after World War II to keep the phony horror stories alive which did not exist after World War I. After WWII, the Jews exploited the anti-German world sentiment, which they themselves had largely created with their propaganda, to justify the creation of their long sought after state of Israel as a homeland for the Jewish people. These manufactured horror stories also served to disarm critics of Jews as they set about to regain power and control in Europe.

Through manipulation of the international information media, the Jews won worldwide sympathy for themselves with their sensational stories of unique Jewish suffering at the hands of the cruel Germans. They claimed that Germany had followed a systematic plan to exterminate all of Europe’s Jews and that by war’s end had managed to kill 6 million of them. The alleged method was to round the Jews up from all over Europe, haul them in sealed trains to so-called “death camps” where they were herded into gas chambers and killed, and their bodies then burned in giant crematoria, with, conveniently, no forensic evidence of what had happened left behind. In the absence of forensic evidence, eye witness testimony, no matter how bizarre, sufficed to convict Germany and to make her the pariah of civilized nations.

The judges at the Nuremberg Trials were themselves not immune to the torrents of anti-German hate propaganda, and were already predisposed before the trials ever began to believe any horror story, no matter how fantastic, about the Germans. Another factor which preordained the outcome of the trials was that the accusers also served as investigators, prosecutors and final judges. Moreover, the trials were also permeated throughout with an atmosphere of Jewish vengeance seeking. Just behind the Gentile front men, most of the lawyers, prosecutors, and investigators were Jews. Hundreds of Jews who could barely speak English disported themselves in American Army officer uniforms. Two of the eight Nuremberg judges were Jews, Robert Falco of France, and Lt. Col. A.F. Volchkov (real name Berkman) of the Soviet Union. The General Prosecutor for the “High Court” was Dr. Jakob Meistner, a Jew. Their dominance and control of the trials was blatant. Even the hangman for the 10 Nazi leaders sentenced to death, Master Sergeant John C. Woods, was a Jew. As a demonstration of just how blatant their dominance was, they scheduled the hangings to take place on October 16, 1946, the Jewish holiday of “Purim.” In the Book of Esther, the 10 sons of Haman, an enemy of the Jews, were hanged on Purim day. On Purim day in 1946, 10 German leaders were hanged. This was obviously not a coincidence.

According to Louis Marschalko, a wartime Hungarian journalist who wrote about the trials:

“Out of 3,000 people employed on the staff at the Nuremberg Courts, 2,400 were Jews.”

The Holocaust story that we all know so well today was developed during the Nuremberg Trials.

By skillfully cultivating and propagating this Holocaust story, the Jews have been able to extort hundreds of billions of dollars out of Germany, as well as the United States, much of which was used to fund the new state of Israel. The claim that the Jews in Israel “made the desert bloom” was true. They did it with German and American money. They are now hard at work extorting more billions out of other European countries in what has been contemptuously but correctly called “the Holocaust industry.”

Even today, 70 years after the war, more than half a million so-called “Holocaust survivors” living mainly in Israel and the United States receive lifetime pensions from the German government. And what is a “Holocaust survivor?” Any Jew who lived anywhere in German controlled territory at any time during the war, whether living in a concentration camp or in the lap of luxury, is a Holocaust survivor and therefore eligible for a German pension. Moreover, any Jew who was forced to leave Europe during the Nazi era (even if he is a Hollywood producer) is a Holocaust survivor, and also eligible for a German pension. Some 4.39 million Jews were originally designated “Holocaust survivors.” Christian survivors of the war, no matter how horrific their experience are not eligible for pensions. “Shoah” is the Hebrew word for Holocaust. It has been joked around that “there’s no business like shoah business.” The entire Holocaust racket has become nothing so much as a vast shakedown of European countries, especially Germany. The Holocaust story has other uses as well. It is routinely invoked to disarm the general public from defending itself against Jewish predations. Prime Minister Netanyahu regularly invokes the Holocaust to justify Israeli attacks upon its neighbors, and the confiscation of its neighbors’ lands.

Keeping this gravy train moving requires the continued legitimization of Jews as history’s ultimate victim group, which, in turn, requires an ultimate victimizer of the Jews, and Germany has been designated to fill that role in perpetuity. The Jewish controlled History Channel, or the “Hitler Channel,” as it is sometimes derisively called, owes its success to endlessly repeating these anti-German propaganda programs. Any modification or revision of this carefully cultivated image of Germany as the evil monster of history, and particularly as the evil victimizer of the Jews, would threaten the entire Holocaust story. Therefore this image is jealously and carefully guarded by the Jewish controlled press and information media, and woe upon anyone who dares to question it. Anyone who does so is immediately attacked and smeared as a deranged anti-Semite. As a result of Jewish pressure, some 17 countries have made questioning, or even investigating, the Holocaust a crime which can get one a prison sentence.

The Jews are also unwilling to relinquish or even to moderate their quest for revenge. Old men who have suffered all their lives as fugitives, are still being tracked down as “war criminals,” and either “brought to justice,” or summarily murdered on the spot. (The MOSSAD, Israel’s equivalent of our CIA, is an assassination organization.) The only crime these old men may be guilty of was being an officer or soldier in the German army during the war.

But, why, one might ask, amidst all the carnage, death and destruction that occurred during World War II, has the so-called Holocaust emerged as the central atrocity story? Approximately 55 million people died during the war, only a tiny percentage of them Jews ― surely only a fraction of the 6 million claimed. All other combatant nationalities have long since put the war behind them and have tried to make peace with their former enemies, but not the Jews! More than two thirds of a century has gone by, but the Jews are still nourishing their grievances, still building Holocaust museums and memorials (not at their own expense, but at the expense of host governments), and still investigating new ways to extort money out of various countries as “compensation.” But why should only the Jews be compensated? Scores of millions of other people across Europe lost everything in the war.

The “Holocaust” has evolved over the years to become the national myth of the Jewish people with all the characteristics of a religion, complete with its very own Satan ― Hitler. The Holocaust myth is the glue that holds the Jewish people together as a distinct nationality, and because of that they carefully guard and protect it. As a consequence, the poor Germans are consigned in perpetuity to the role of history’s evil monster, regardless of what the actual facts may be.

But even if all the stories of German atrocities during WWII were true in every detail (which they are not), they would still not compare in their inhumanity to the atrocities committed against the Germans. The indiscriminate saturation bombing of German cities, the brutal expulsion of entire German populations after the war, the Allied imposed postwar deprivations, the Soviet massacres and political liquidations, simply dwarf the Holocaust in their destruction of human life and their destruction of the accumulated works of human civilization. Any final accounting and balancing of the conduct of all combatants during WWII could only result in the exculpation of Germany as “uniquely” barbarous in her methods of waging war, or in her treatment of subject populations.

The German people were devastated by the war, to a greater extent than any other participant, including the Jews, while at the same time they have been stigmatized as the evil, predatory perpetrators of the war. They have been made to pay a terrible price for atrocities during World War II which very probably never occurred, or at least, never occurred to the extent alleged. It is becoming clearer as time goes by that the Germans were the real victims of both World Wars I and II, and continue to be.

Chapter 1 The Myth of Germany as an Evil Nation

As the result of losing two apocalyptic world wars, Germany has acquired a reputation as the evil nation of Europe, and, perhaps the evil nation of all time. Just mentioning the word “German” still brings forth an image in the mind’s eye of robotic, goose-stepping storm troopers, under the command of stiff-necked Prussian officers, ready to march off to inflict gratuitous murder and destruction upon their peace loving neighbors. We have been brainwashed by relentless propaganda to regard the Germans as intrinsically militaristic, aggressive, brutish, racist and anti-Semitic, with a predilection for blind obedience to authority figures. Hundreds of Hollywood movies, relentless Holocaust propaganda, and countless books and magazine articles have permanently reinforced this negative image of Germany in the popular mind. Rational motives for the inexplicable horrors Germans are accused of having routinely committed are not required. It is axiomatic that their evil nature explains it all.

Consider the movie, “Schindler’s List,” by the Jewish director, Stephen Spielberg, for example. The Nazi commandant of the concentration camp (supposedly the Plaszow camp outside of Krakow, not far from Auschwitz), is standing shirtless on the balcony of his house with a hunting rifle over his bare shoulders. The rifle is equipped with a telescopic sight. In the movie, the house is located on a hill above the camp so that he can look down on the throngs of prisoners milling around in the compound below. He lifts the rifle to his shoulder and through the telescope begins casually scanning from one prisoner to another. The image through the telescope now fills the movie screen. The crosshairs of the scope stop on a randomly selected prisoner. He pulls the trigger and the prisoner drops to the ground, dead.

[Add. image — The actor Ralph Fiennes as Amon Goeth in the fictional story Schindler’s List, picking off camp inmates from his balcony.]

The screen then cuts back to the Nazi commandant to show bored insouciance as he actuates the bolt of his rifle and casually raises it back to his shoulder. He fires again, and again a prisoner drops to the ground, dead. Bored with his “target practice,” he turns his attention to the beautiful, sexy, naked woman lying on a bed just inside the house from the balcony. The woman is purportedly one of his Jewish housemaids selected from the camp, who also apparently serves as his sex slave. His face expresses disdainful, though lackadaisical, cynicism.

The point of the shootings, as well as bringing in the naked, Jewish housemaid, is to show the Nazi officer as totally depraved, without conscience, morality, or empathy for other humans; in short, a psychopath. It is presumed, of course, that the murdered prisoners were all Jews. Two popular Jewish themes are combined here: Nazi evil and Jewish persecution.

This episode is entirely fictional, based on a novel by Thomas Keneally, an Australian, who only visited the concentration camps once in 1980. No such actual event as described above has ever been recorded, yet the vast majority of movie goers swallow it whole and accept it as actual history.

The real Plaszow camp was located on the other side of a hill from the commandant’s house, and completely out of sight from the commandant’s balcony. It would have been impossible for him to shoot down into the compound as shown in the movie even if he had been inclined to do so, which is highly unlikely. The actual commandant of Plaszow, Amon Goeth, on which the character in the movie was based, lived in the house with his fiancé Ruth Kalder, with whom he had a child. Ruth said that they intended to marry but were unable to do so due to the chaos at the end of the war. She had her name and the child’s name changed to Goeth after the war with the help of Amon Goeth’s father. Amon Goeth was hanged after the war by the Polish government primarily for being a member of the Nazi party and a member of the Waffen-SS, not for shooting prisoners. Ruth described Amon Goeth as a cultured man who had a beautiful singing voice. Goeth did, indeed, have two Jewish housemaids, selected from the camp while he was commandant, but there is no information that he had untoward relations with them. That story was only included to add spice to the movie.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RaPBzhEsCL0

[Add. image — Screen shot of the movie Sophie’s Choice.]

Another example is the movie, “Sophie’s Choice,” by another Jewish director, Alan J. Pakula, in which “Sophie” and her two small children are sent to Auschwitz (Auschwitz is the holy temple of Holocaust lore). During the “selection” process (the “selection” is now one of the “stations of the cross” of the Holocaust religion) immediately after their arrival, Sophie is told by a stereotypically evil Nazi officer (supposedly Dr. Joseph Mengele of Auschwitz notoriety) that she can only keep one of her children and that the other must go to the gas chamber. She is forced to choose which one to keep and which one to be sent to the gas chamber, hence, “Sophie’s choice.” The evil Nazi officer provides no reason or explanation for requiring one child to die or for forcing her to make this heart rending choice. That he is an “evil” Nazi is presumed to be explanation enough. This preposterous movie was based on a novel by the American Southern writer William Styron, who had no firsthand knowledge of the camps. Auschwitz was simply used as the setting for a tale which came out of his imagination. Nothing of the sort ever happened in real life. Yet, evil Nazi stories such as these have long been a staple in Hollywood. The movie-going public has been so conditioned by this poppycock that fiction has become fact in the public mind. We have all been brainwashed to accept such absurdities without skepticism. Germans are “evil,” so they do “evil” things. No further explanation needed.

Yet, Germany was not always seen in this light. The image of Germany as a sinister, predatory, warlike nation only took root in the twentieth century. Nineteenth century Germany, by contrast, was seen as a place of peace and enlightenment. The English historian, Frederic William Maitland, described the way the English people saw the Germans during the nineteenth century:

“…it was usual and plausible to paint the German as an unpractical, dreamy, sentimental being, looking out with mild blue eyes into a cloud of music and metaphysics and tobacco smoke.”

The highly influential French writer and Salon matron, Madame de Stael, portrayed the Germans during the period of the Napoleonic Wars as a nation of;

“poets and thinkers, a race of kindly, impractical, other-worldly dreamers without national prejudices and disinclined to war.”

The Americans also held a benign opinion of the Germans prior to the twentieth century. The American historian, Henry Cord Meyer, wrote;

“…whether seen in their newly united nation [Germany was united into one nation in 1871] or in this country [German immigrants in the United States], the Germans were generally regarded as methodical and energetic people who were models of progress, while in their devotion to music, education, science, and technology they aroused the admiration and emulation of Americans.”

In 1905 Andrew Dickson White, a noted American historian, educator, and United States Ambassador to Germany, wrote just nine years before the outbreak of World War I:

“Germany, from a great confused mass of warriors and thinkers and workers, militant at cross-purposes, wearing themselves out in vain struggles, and preyed upon by malevolent neighbors, has become [after consolidation] a great power in arms, in art, in science, in literature; a fortress of high thought; a guardian of civilization; the natural ally of every nation which seeks the better development of humanity.”

The German people have historically made great contributions in every sphere of cultural, intellectual, and scientific achievement. In the field of music, there were such eighteenth century geniuses as Bach, Hayden, Mozart, Beethoven, Schubert and Schumann, to name a few. This musical genius continued in the nineteenth century with the Strausses, Mahler and Richard Wagner. There were the literary contributions of Goethe and Schiller; the historical works of Ranke and Niebuhr; the philosophical studies of Kant and Hegel; and the great scientific contributions of Alexander von Humboldt and William Conrad Roentgen. These are only a few examples of a very long list. The Prussian system of higher education and the cultural flowering which characterized Prussia during the years following the Napoleonic wars greatly influenced both Europe and America. The American public school system as well as our university system was deliberately modeled after the Prussian public school system and university system. Germany was admired by the world as a center of learning, for its high culture and for its achievements in every field; but also for its culture of honesty, hard work, orderliness and thrift, which existed even at the lowest level of society.

British scholars and journalists had been very favorably disposed toward all things German, including their history, culture, and institutions throughout the nineteenth century. The highly respected Cambridge historian Herbert Butterfield commented extensively on Britain’s high regard for Germany.

“In England the view once prevailed that German history was particularly the history of freedom, for it was a story that comprised federation, parliament, autonomous cities, Protestantism, and a law of liberty carried by German colonies to the Slavonic east. In those days it was the Latin States which were considered to be congenial to authoritarianism, clinging to the Papacy in Italy, the Inquisition in Spain and the Bonapartist dictatorships in militaristic France. The reversal of this view in the twentieth century, and its replacement by a common opinion that Germany had been the aggressor and enemy of freedom throughout all the ages, will no doubt be the subject of historical research itself someday, especially as it seems to have coincided so closely with a change in British foreign policy … Up to the early 1900’s when historical scholarship in England came to its peak in men like Acton and Maitland, words can hardly describe the admiration for Germany ― and the confessed discipleship ― which existed amongst English historians.”

And then British author Thomas Arnold (June 13, 1795 – June 12, 1842) saw Germany not as a nation with a unique predisposition toward authoritarianism and regimentation, but rather as a “cradle of law, virtue, and freedom,” and considered it a “distinction of the first rank” that the English belonged to the Germanic family of peoples. The following photos and drawings represent the way in which the world saw Germany during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, right up to the beginning of World War I. Pre-WWI Germany was seen as a peaceful land of fairy tales and dreamy castles, and of industrious, law abiding, disciplined people.

Germany’s positive image changes over night

This view of Germany was to change almost overnight with the outbreak of World War I. After the war began in 1914 a grotesque image of a rapacious, bloodthirsty and uniquely aggressive Germany quickly took form and became the stereotypical image of Germany in Europe and America. This new image of Germany was the direct result of a virulent anti-German propaganda campaign conducted by the British government and later joined by the United States government in which deliberate and systematic lies, distortions and false atrocity stories were disseminated to the British and American publics. The emotions of both the British and American publics were deliberately whipped up to a fever pitch of hatred for the “Hun.” A pathological hostility towards all things German, which later became such a familiar and integral part of Western thinking about Germany, had its birth in this skillful propaganda campaign. After World War Two, historian Harry Paxton Howard examined this transformation of Germany’s reputation which began immediately after the start of WWI.

It was made out, he said, that Germany was not only evil but had always been that way, and that Germany, contrary to the facts, had always been the historical enemy of Europe and America. He wrote:

“Actually, in the literal sense of the word, the biggest job of revising history was done during the First World War when our ‘histories’ were completely revised to show that Germany had always been our enemy, that Germany had started the war in 1914, that Germany had even started the Franco-Prussian War in 1870, and that in the Revolutionary War we had not been fighting the British but the Hessians ― not to mention such things as the Germans cutting the hands off Belgian babies, instead of the Belgians cutting off the hands of Congolese. This was a real revision of our histories which has distorted the American mind for more than forty years.” Harry Paxton Howard.

All belligerents, of course, including Germany, used propaganda against their enemies, as all belligerents have done in all wars throughout history, but the propaganda efforts of Germany and the Central Powers were amateurish and ineffectual compared to the British. In their propaganda efforts, the Germans tended to appeal to reason instead of to the emotions.

They never portrayed their enemies as bloodthirsty, inhuman beasts. The Allies, Great Britain in particular, by contrast, proved themselves masters at adroitly manipulating world opinion by widespread propagation of fantastic tales of German villainy. From the beginning of the war, stories of German atrocities filled British and American newspapers. (American newspapers depended at that time on British news services for most of their news stories about Europe, which came across undersea cables controlled by Britain. The Germans had no access to the American media. Great Britain made sure of that by cutting Germany’s six trans-Atlantic cables to America.)

The first atrocity stories came out of the German march through Belgium at the beginning of the war. Germany’s purpose was not to attack Belgium, per se, but to pass through Belgium in order to outflank French defenses and then make a drive toward Paris. This strategy was known as the Schlieffen Plan, which the Germans believed was the only way to achieve a quick victory over France.

Germany’s “violation” of neutral Belgium served as Britain’s pretext for going to war against Germany, though the decision to go to war for other reasons (mainly economic) had already been made. Belgium was only a pretext. To enter the war, it was necessary to win public support, and the propaganda opportunities resulting from Germany’s invasion of Belgium, as well as the fabricated stories of German atrocities in Belgium served that purpose. “Eyewitnesses” were found who described hairy knuckled Huns in Pickelhaube helmets tossing Belgian babies in the air and catching them on their bayonets as they marched along, singing war songs. Stories of German soldiers amputating the hands of Belgian boys were widely reported (reputedly to prevent them from firing rifles). Tales of women with their breasts cut off multiplied even faster. There were also tales of crucifixions of Allied soldiers. Europeans and Americans were more religious then than they are today and the crucifixion stories aroused outrage. (It should be mentioned that of all forms of evidence accepted in modern courts of law, eyewitness testimony is considered the least reliable.)

But rape stories were the favorite of all atrocity tales. One “eyewitness” described how the Germans dragged twenty young women out of their houses in a captured Belgian town and stretched them on tables in the village square, where each was raped by at least twelve “Huns” while the rest of the soldiers watched and cheered.

After being fed a steady diet of this kind of propaganda, the British public veritably demanded revenge against the loathsome Hun. A group of Belgians toured the United States (at British government expense) telling these stories to Americans. (Britain wanted to draw the United States into the war.) President Woodrow Wilson solemnly received the group in the White House.

The propaganda portrayed Britain as “a knight on a white horse” coming to the defense of violated, neutral Belgium. This was cynical manipulation of public opinion, of course, because if Germany had not violated Belgian neutrality, Britain would have done so without a second thought.

Germany angrily denied all of these stories. So did American reporters who were with the German army and knew that they were lies. But these denials did not find their way into American newspapers. The British controlled what went into American papers and it was the British who were generating the atrocity stories. To enhance the credibility of these fantastic atrocity stories, the British government asked Viscount Bryce early in 1915 to head a royal commission to conduct an investigation. The British government, of course, intended that Bryce would support this false propaganda, which he obediently did. Bryce was a well known historian with a good reputation in America. He not only had served as the British ambassador in Washington, but had written several complimentary books about the American government. The British knew that he was highly respected and admired in America, and that he had a reputation for rectitude and honesty. America would believe whatever he said. Bryce was also intensely loyal to his own country and therefore perfect for the job.

False anti-German propaganda poster of World War I

The propaganda poster shown at left [above] and in the following pages are examples of the way in which the British portrayed their German foes — always as brutish, barbaric murderers of women and children.

Following these British propaganda posters are German propaganda posters against the British, French and Russians. Note the different styles. The Germans do not portray their foes as barbaric murderers.

An innocent Belgian girl about to be raped by a Hun.

Following are German propaganda posters directed against the British, French and Russians. Note that the Germans use ridicule against their enemies but do not portray them as inhuman beast.

The cartoon characters represent (L to R): Great Britain, France and Russia, and far right, Germany.

[Patience! You all will get it!]

[Add. image — Beloved fatherland, relax!]

Bryce and his six fellow commissioners, all lawyers, historians and legal scholars, “analyzed,” if you can call it that, 1,200 depositions of “eyewitnesses” who claimed to have seen these German atrocities first hand. Almost all of the eyewitness accounts came from Belgians who had left Belgium for England as refugees, though some accounts also came from British soldiers in France. The commission never interrogated a single one of these eyewitnesses, but relied on their written statements instead (shades of the Nuremberg Trials after the next war). Since there was a war on, there were no “on site” investigations of any reported atrocity. Not a single witness was identified by name, including the soldiers who had provided written accounts. Yet, the commission officially confirmed that all the atrocity stories, no matter how fantastic, were true. This bogus investigation was just another part of Britain’s anti-German propaganda campaign.

[Add. image — The Bryce Report and its author, James Bryce.]

The “Bryce Report” was released on May 13, 1915, and the British government made sure it went to every newspaper in America. The impact was phenomenal, especially coming just after the torpedoing of the British liner Lusitania which caused the deaths of 135 Americans.

Americans from coast to coast were outraged. A wave of revulsion for all things German swept the country. Hatred of Germans reached fever pitch. Suddenly the American public was clamoring for war. (There is well founded suspicion that the Lusitania was set up as a decoy by the First Lord of the Admiralty, Winston Churchill, deliberately exposing it to a German submarine attack for the purpose of bringing America into the war).

But there were skeptics of the Bryce Report. In England, Sir Roger Casement called the report a lie, and wrote a report of his own refuting it, though no one paid much attention to it. The American lawyer, Clearance Darrow, was so skeptical that he travelled to France in 1915 and searched in vain for a single eyewitness who could confirm even one of the Bryce stories. Increasingly dubious, Darrow announced that he would pay $1,000, equivalent to around $25,000 today, to anyone who could produce a Belgian boy whose hands had been amputated by a German soldier, or any other Belgian or French victim who had been mutilated by German troops. None were found.

The “proofs” provided by the Bryce Committee in its investigation, as well as the methods employed in gathering them, violated every elementary rule of evidence. Careful scholars have long since demonstrated that the entire report was made up of nothing more than distortions and outright falsehoods. But Britain was determined to pull the United States into the war and Bryce and his colleagues were willing accomplices in that effort. They justified their lies and exaggerations because it served the higher cause of Mother England. After the war most historians dismissed 99 percent of Bryce’s atrocities as fabrications. One called the report “in itself one of the worst atrocities of the war.” “After the war,” recounts Thomas Fleming in his book Illusion of Victory;

“historians who sought to examine the documentation for Bryce’s stories were told that the files had mysteriously disappeared.”

[Add. image — Kaiser (to a 1917 recruit). “And don’t forget that your Kaiser will find a use for you—alive or dead.” Punch, 25 April 1917.]

As the war drew on, another fabricated story was widely circulated. It was reported that the Germans were operating a “corpse factory” where the bodies of both German and Allied soldiers killed in battle were supposedly melted down for fats and other products useful to the German war effort. The Germans were accused of making soap out of human fat. Human skins were used to make fine leather goods such as lampshades, driving gloves and riding breeches. The bones of these corpses were said to have been ground up and used as fertilizer on German farms.

A detailed account of this so-called “corpse factory” appeared in the highly respected British newspaper, The Times, on April 17, 1917.

According to the story, trains full of corpses arrived at a large factory. The bodies were attached to hooks connected to an endless chain. The article carefully described the process inside the corpse factory.

“The bodies are transported on this endless chain into a long, narrow compartment, where they pass through a bath which disinfects them. They then go through a drying chamber, and finally are automatically carried into a digester or great cauldron, in which they are dropped by an apparatus which detaches from the chain. In the digester they remain from six to eight hours, and are treated by steam, which breaks them up while they are slowly stirred by the machinery. From this treatment result several products. The fats are broken up into stearin, a form of tallow, and oils, which require to be redistilled before they can be used. The process of distillation is carried out by boiling the oil with carbonate of soda, and some of the by-products resulting from this are used by German soap makers. The oil distillery and refinery lie in the south-eastern corner of the works. The refined oil is sent out in small casks like those used for petroleum, and is of a yellowish brown color.” Note the meticulous detail.

The story was a total fabrication, but it was a “plausible” story, especially with all the detail, and it was not possible for the Germans to completely refute it while the war was still going on. After the war, of course, the story was exposed as the lie it was. No such corpse factory existed. It is interesting that the story of making soap out of bodies emerged again during World War II when the Germans supposedly made soap out of Jewish corpses. That lie is still widely believed and remains a staple of Jewish Holocaust propaganda. The “lampshades out of human skin” story also had its origin in World War I and emerged again during World War II when Germans were supposedly making lampshades out of Jewish skin. There was nothing to it, yet it also remains a staple of Jewish Holocaust propaganda.

“The purpose of war propaganda,” historian Thomas Fleming, in his book “The Illusion of Victory,” observes;

“as peddled by both the Anglo and American elite, was to create a widespread public image of Germans as ‘monsters capable of appalling sadism’ ― thereby coating an appeal to murderous collective hatred with a lacquer of sanctimony.”

“The trick,” said Fleming, “is to leave the target audience at once shivering in horror at a spectacle of sub-human depravity, panting with a visceral desire for vengeance, and rapturously self-righteous about the purity of its humane motives. People who succumb to it are easily subsumed into a hive mind of officially sanctioned hatred, and prepared to perpetrate crimes even more hideous than those that they believe typify the enemy.”

[Add. image — The Illusion of Victory by Thomas Fleming (2003)]

The Bryce Report as well as all the other anti-German propaganda unquestionably helped England win the war. It convinced millions of Americans and other neutrals that the Germans were beasts in human form, and this, as much as anything else, helped bring America into the war. But there were adverse consequences to this lurid atrocity propaganda campaign. It poisoned public opinion against the Germans to such an extent that it could not be undone. It was an obvious factor, for example, in the British decision to maintain the total blockade of Germany for seven months after the war was over, which, incidentally, was a violation of international law. The blockade caused a million German civilians to starve to death, and unbearable suffering of millions more. The blockade itself was far and away the greatest atrocity of World War I, though it receives very little publicity, and it was done, not by the evil Germans, but by the saintly British.

By creating blind hatred of Germany, the anti-German propaganda campaign also contributed to the harsh peace terms imposed on Germany at the end of the war, which then sowed the seeds of World War II. Though historians and other scholars have exposed these German atrocity stories as nonsense, the image of German villainy has remained fixed.

The benign world opinion of Germany which existed right up to 1914 was replaced overnight by the myth of unique German savagery which left a permanent residue of Germanophobia deep in Western minds. This explains why “our boys” were so willing to obliterate whole German cities and kill hundreds of thousands of German civilians with air bombardments during the Second World War. This hate propaganda, as false as it was, also had the effect of totally demoralizing the German people.

[END of Part 01]

_______________________

PDF Notes

* Total words = 7,550

* Total pages = 48

*Total images = 32

*Note: Images not in original book are indicated as “Add. image” (Additional image).

*Text in [square brackets] is not part of the original book.

*Special thanks to reader “mblaine” for providing the text for this book.

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

Click to download a PDF of this post (7.0 MB).

The Myth of Germany Villainy – Part 01 (Ver 2)

Click on a link to go to another part:

[Click images to enlarge]

Part 01 — Cover text; About the Author; Preface; Chapter 1: The Myth of Germany as an Evil Nation

Part 02 — Chapter 2: Aftermath of the War in Germany

Part 03 — Chapter 3: The Jewish Factor in the War

Part 04 — Chapter 4: The Russian Revolution of 1917

Part 05 — Chapter 5: The Red Terror

Part 06 — Chapter 6: The Bolshevik Revolution Spreads Throughout Europe

Part 07 — Chapter 7: The Nation of Israel

Part 08 — Chapter 8: Jews in Weimar Germany

Part 09 — Chapter 9: Hitler and National Socialists Rise to Power

Part 10 — Chapter 10: National Socialism vs Communism

Part 11 — Chapter 11: Jews Declare War on Nazi Germany

Part 12 — Chapter 12: The Nazis and the Zionists Actually Work Together for Jewish Emigration out of Germany

Part 13 — Chapter 13: Life in Germany Under Hitler

Part 14 — Chapter 14 & 15: Hitler Begins Reclamation of German Territory; The 1936 Olympics

Part 15 — Chapter 16: “Anschluss” The Unification of Austria and Germany

Part 16 – Chapter 17: Germany Annexes the Sudetenland

Part 17 – Chapter 18: War with Poland

Part 18 – Chapter 19: The Phony War

Part 19 – Chapter 20: Germany invades France – The Phony War Ends

Part 20 – Chapter 21: The Allied Goal? Destruction of Germany!

Part 21 – Chapter 22: Germany as Victim

Part 22 (last) – Chapter 23: Winners and Losers

_____________________

Version History

Version 7: Mar 13, 2021 – Added new Go2 Cover images (3).

Version 6: Apr 7, 2020 — Re-uploaded images and PDF for katana17.com/wp/ version. Updated See Also links.

Version 5: Dec 9, 2018 — Improved formatting.

Version 4: Oct 8, 2016 — Expanded Table of Contents.

Version 3: Oct 3, 2016 — Updated cover image. Formatting. Added Ver 2 of PDF of post for download. Added links to other parts.

Version 2: Oct 2, 2016 — Added PDF of post for download.

Version 1: Oct 1, 2016 — Created post.

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

admin — Tue, 27 Sep 2016 21:15:28 +0000

[In this article, written for the Dec. 1979 edition of the revisionist journal, Instauration, an interesting account is given of the first ever, “Anti-Holocaust” convention, with speakers including: Robert Faurisson from France; John Bennett from Australia; Udo Walendy from Germany; Louis FitzGibbon from Britain; Arthur Butz and James Martin from the US. This was held in Los Angeles and organized by the Institute for Historical Review — KATANA.]

Instauration – Dec, 1979

The World’s First

Anti-Holocaust Convention

Text

World’s First Anti-Holocaust Convention

— Instauration, Dec. 1979

A great and historic weekend — $50,000 offered for proof of gassing.

Labor Day weekend marked what may be the end of one historical epoch and the beginning of another — the end of the domination of the Six Million myth over the Western mind and the start of a new wave of historical revisionism that might well signal the reappearance of truth in history.

The Revisionist Convention of the Institute for Historical Review was held at Northrop Institute of Technology in Los Angeles. Speakers came from all over the world: Robert Faurisson from France; John Bennett from Australia; Udo Walendy from Germany; Louis FitzGibbon from Britain; Arthur Butz and James Martin from the US.

The proceedings began on Friday, August 31. Some of those present already knew each other. For the most part, however, the faces belonged to new converts to the anti-Holocaust cause. A significant proportion of the attendance were engineers — people with a liking for hard facts who instinctively resist overblown claims and sly innuendo. Also present were several physicists, a brace of computer programmers and one commercial airline pilot. The convention was dedicated to the memory of the founding father of revisionism, Dr. Harry Elmer Barnes, who passed into the realm of eternal history in 1968.*

*[Actually, Dr. Harry Elmer Barnes passed away on Aug. 25, I969]

[Image] James Martin (left) with Harry Barnes, 1954.

Saturday, the meeting began in earnest in the Northrop auditorium.

The delegates were formally welcomed by Willis Carto, one of the organizers of the Institute for Historical Review and the dynamic force behind Liberty Lobby. He then yielded to the permanent chairman George Resch, a libertarian investment counsellor associated with the Institute for Human Studies in San Francisco.

[Image] Willis Cartos (undated photo).

The first speaker was Dr. James Martin, life-long friend and colleague of Barnes, who presented a lively and informative chronology of revisionism. The only professional historian at the meeting, Martin remarked that we need not worry that very few present-day revisionists are professional historians. After all, not one of the Holocaust promoters is! Martin asserted many modern historians privately accept the truth of the revisionist argument, but are afraid to come out and say so. “There are two ‘Six Million’ atrocity stories,” Martin stated:

“In Soviet propaganda the gassed six million are Slavs, not Jews. The Kremlin uses the myth to buttress the Soviet policy of keeping Germany divided and disarmed.”

Dr. Arthur Butz, author of The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, presented a fascinating account of developments in the revisionist field since publication of his book in 1976.

[Image] Dr. Arthur Butz, author of The Hoax of the Twentieth Century.

Butz described the continuing persecution of individuals in Europe who dared to question the Holocaust. Manfred Roeder, the German attorney, was expelled from the German bar, prosecuted for writing the foreword to Thies Christophersen’s Auschwitz Lie, and had to flee the country. Christophersen himself was given a suspended jail sentence for writing the truth about Auschwitz and faces a further trial upon his return to West Germany.

[Image] Thies Christophersen’s Auschwitz Lie with a foreword by Manfred Roeder

See: https://katana17.com/wp/2013/05/05/auschwitz-a-personal-account-by-thies-christophersen/

Butz also explained that Dr. Wilhelm Staglich, author of the recently published Auschwitz Myth and a retired Hamburg judge who served in an anti-aircraft battery at Auschwitz, has also been subject to legal attack. His pension was reduced by 20% for five years for contradicting death camp atrocity tales.

[Image] Dr. Wilhelm Stäglich, (1916 – 2006) German judge and historian, was an important revisionist writer, most notably for his detailed study, Der Auschwitz-Mythos (The Auschwitz Myth). During the Second World War he served from mid-July to mid-September 1944 as an Ordonnanzoffizier (orderly officer) on the staff of an anti-aircraft detachment stationed near the Auschwitz camp. As part of his duties, he maintained contact with the SS camp command, and had unlimited access to the Auschwitz main camp, where the command was headquartered.

When he appealed, the judge ruled it was no good introducing the books, or articles of Butz and Faurisson as evidence, because Butz and Faurisson were pseudonyms! As for the German translation of the Hoax of the Twentieth Century, Butz said it has been placed on the Bonn government’s “Index“, which means that it may not be advertised, or sold to minors.

Butz went on to relate that late in 1978 a respected German historian, Professor Hellmut Diwald, had published his massive History of the Germans by Propylaen, a division of Axel Springer’s publishing combine.

[Image] Professor Hellmut Diwald’s book “Geschichte der Deutschen” (History of the Germans).

On two pages, Diwald wrote some critical things about the Holocaust story. The press shrieked for censorship. Golo Mann, Thomas Mann’s half- Jewish son, declared:

“These two pages are the most monstrous that I have yet to read in a German book since 1945.”

The publisher responded to the clamor by recalling the first edition of the book and substituting an altered version in which the offending pages were rewritten. Springer promised that this was only the start of an extensive job of rewriting and that eventually the history would be “unrecognizable.”

In the English-speaking world, Butz said, most of the efforts to suppress revisionism have been through the “curtain of silence” technique. But from time to time there had been official government intervention. Harwood’s work Did Six Million Really Die? was banned in South Africa at the behest of the Jewish Board of Deputies, which published an “Answer to Harwood” called Six Million Did Die. The German translation of Harwood’s book was placed on the German “verboten-for-young- people” Index in late 1978.

The Institute of Jewish Affairs in London published in the psychopolitical journal Patterns of Prejudice the only critique of Butz worthy of the name that has appeared anywhere in the world. In April 1977, Butz wrote the magazine Index on Censorship in London, which is supposed to defend academic freedom, and followed up his letter with a personal visit in the summer of 1977. No action was taken.

Butz concluded his lecture by underlining the unacademic behavior of academics toward the controversy. He gave as an example Professor Wolfe of New York University who wrote to the New York Times condemning a book which he called Fabrication of a Hoax. He demanded that Butz be brought up on charges of “academic incompetence.” Clearly, the man had never read the book and had only seen a New York Times mention of it, where the title had been incorrectly reported. In an afterthought, Butz philosophized:

“I’ve never been able to understand the hostile reaction from Zionist groups. Jews should be elated to discover that large numbers of their people were not deliberately destroyed.”

Next on the program was Udo Walendy, the German translator of Butz’s book, who gave his first English-language lecture. His subject was faked atrocity photographs, of which he showed many dramatic examples.

[Image] Udo Walendy, born in 1927 in Germany, is one of the most prolific revisionist researchers, writers and publishers in the world. He has written numerous books and since the early 1970s has been publishing a German periodical called Historische Tatsachen (Historical Facts), so far encompassing over 110 issues — including the German version of Did Six Million Really Die? and the German language version of the first Leuchter Report.

Walendy, who had been fired from his teaching job, because of his political views, exhibited an enlargement of one widely reproduced photograph of supposed victims of Dachau gas ovens. When it was established that Dachau never had any gas ovens, investigation proved the picture actually showed German corpses collected after the saturation bombing of Dresden.

On Saturday evening the convention members were “entertained” with a variety of Holocaust propaganda films, including Genocide (Britain), The Nuremberg Trials (USA) and Nacht und Nebel (France). Butz, Walendy and Faurisson presented a critique of each film in turn, but it was not long before viewers themselves were able to decipher the routine formula of the films, since each used almost exactly the same stills and clips.

The “martyred Warsaw ghetto boy” (now alive, well and well off in Britain) appeared in the films looking as plaintive as ever. As Faurisson pointed out, the commentary did not state that he had been arrested in a crackdown on juvenile thieves.

[Image] “Martyred Warsaw Ghetto Boy”. This photograph, perhaps the most familiar Holocaust image, shows seven-year-old Tsvi Nussbaum as he raises his hands in Warsaw in 1943. After the war, Nussbaum moved to Israel, and then to the United States, where he worked as a physician in New York State.

* D. Margolick, “Rockland Physician Thinks He is Boy in Holocaust Photo on Street in Warsaw,” The New York Times, May 28, 1982, pp. B1, B6; P. Moses, “Haunting Reminder,” New York Post, Feb. 20, 1990, p. 5.; In 1978 a London businessman named Israel (Issy) Rondel claimed to be the “Warsaw ghetto boy.” See: J. Finkelstone, “‘Ghetto boy’ lives here,” Jewish Chronicle (London), August 11, 1978, pp. 1, 2.; C. Harris, “Warsaw Ghetto Boy: Symbol of The Holocaust,” The Washington Post, Sept. 17, 1978, pp. L1, L9. This claim later proved to be untrue. See: E. Kossoy, “The boy from the ghetto,” Jerusalem Post, Sept. 1, 1978, p. 5.

Source: http://codoh.com/library/document/2499/

The audience searched in vain for shots and bodies piled up vertically/horizontally/pyramidically (depending on which Holocaust “expert” one reads) in gas chambers at Auschwitz. The gruesome shots came from Belsen, where thousands died of typhus epidemics, because no Zyklon B was available to disinfect the camp’s new arrivals.

[Image] Professor Faurisson. For more than 20 years, Robert Faurisson has been Europe’s foremost Holocaust revisionist scholar. He was born on January 25, 1929, in Shepperton, England. His father was French and his mother was Scottish. As a boy and young man, he attended schools in Singapore, Japan, and in France. He was educated at a Lycée in Paris, and at the renowned Sorbonne. For his views Faurisson has repeatedly been a victim of physical assault. Between November 1978 and May 1993 he was a victim of ten attacks, at least nine of them carried out by Jewish thugs. None of the criminal assailants in any of these assaults has ever been brought to justice.

Sunday morning, Professor Faurisson delivered an address on the fraudulent gas chambers at Auschwitz. He compared the alleged asphyxiation of inmates to the execution of murderers in American prison gas chambers, pointing out that it was the neutralization of the gas which posed the most problems. In the US a full hour must pass before the gas chamber can be opened. The prisoner’s body must then be hosed down by a clean-up squad wearing gas masks and rubber gloves. Fans expel the almost neutralized gas into the atmosphere, but even then the risk is still so high that the guards must come down from their watchtowers to avoid the possibility of receiving a fatal dose of gas. The gas chamber itself must be hermetically sealed.

[Image] Rudolf Höss (center) was born in Baden-Baden on 25 November 1900, the son of pious Catholic parents. Höss was appointed as the first Commandant at Auschwitz concentration camp on 1 May 1940 and held this position until 1 December 1943 (3 years, 7 months). Höss was arrested by British military police near Flensburg, Schleswig- Holstein, on 2 March 1946, tortured and then handed over to the Polish authorities just over two months later. He was executed by hanging on 7 April 1947, next to the house inside the Auschwitz camp, where he had lived with his wife and five children.

Faurisson asked the delegates to compare these precautionary measures with the account of Rudolf Hoss, one of the commandants of Auschwitz. In his “confession” to his Polish Communist jailers, Hoss stated the gas chamber operators entered the chamber immediately (sofort) after gassing 2,000 jews, while eating and drinking (and therefore not wearing gas masks). Faurisson demanded:

“What kind of super-powerful fan could have evacuated the room so efficiently that it even removed the hydrocyanic acid (gas) from the entire room, from the pockets of air in between the bodies and from the walls, clothing, hair and bodies?”

He then asked the audience to compare the Hoss confessions with the reality of the structures at Auschwitz. With a series of slides, some of which he obtained from the Auschwitz museum staff, Faurisson showed that the structure which is currently represented as a gas chamber is nothing of the sort. The entry to the room is not a hermetically sealed steel door, as described in Holocaust tracts. The “peephole” so frequently described is not in the gas chamber door, but in the door of an adjacent anteroom. Since there is an ordinary glass window high up in the gas chamber, Faurisson wondered why those being gassed could not have smashed their way our, or at the very least smashed the glass to allow the gas to escape.

Resolution unanimously adopted at the Revisionist Convention

We, the speakers, delegates and officers of the Institute for Historical Review 1979 Revisionist Convention, meeting at Los Angeles this September 2, after reviewing the evidence that the Germans killed six million Jews during World War II in an unprecedented act of genocide, and considering both sides of this question, as well as the evidence of genuine atrocities, resolve the following:

WHEREAS the facts surrounding the allegations that gas chambers existed in occupied Europe during World War II are demonstrably false, and

WHEREAS the whole theory of “the Holocaust” has been created by and promulgated by political Zionism for the attainment of political and economic ends, specifically the continued and perpetual financial support of the military aggression of Israel by the people of Germany and the U.S., and

WHEREAS the constantly escalating level of “Holocaust” propaganda distributed by the mass media and government agencies is poisoning the minds of the American people, especially youth, and

WHEREAS we are conscientiously concerned that this strident hate propaganda is seriously impeding the necessary peace, unity, brotherhood and understanding that we desire among all the peoples of the Western World; now therefore,

BE IT RESOLVED we urge that the Congress of the US investigate the whole question of war guilt, military aggression in the 20th century, the relationship of private political and banking interests with military aggression, deceitful wartime propaganda masquerading as fact, the real responsibility for war, twisted history, the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials, proven atrocities and genocide, such as the murder of thousands of Ukrainians and Poles at Vinnitsa in 1937 and Katyn in 1940 and the truth of the alleged extermination of six million Jews in Europe during World War II.

Most astonishing of all, Faurisson showed pictures of the far end of the gas chamber where there is an open doorway, but no door! In fact, it appears there was never a door. The doorway leads to the crematorium where corpses were incinerated. How was it, Faurisson asked, that the gas stayed in the room and did not flow out and gas the incinerator workers? And how was it that the Germans used hydrocyanic acid, which is inflammable and explosive, so near the ovens?

At regular intervals along the gas chamber walls were the remains of partitions which had previously divided the room into segments. Puzzled by this, Faurisson took the original German plans of the room to a specialist in mortuary construction in Paris, who took one look at them and said straight away that the structure was obviously a morgue. Part of it had been built underground to keep the bodies cool.

[Image] Katyn Massacre (1977). Louis FitzGibbon (1925 – 2003), a British scholar and humanitarian, was active for years in publicizing the suppressed truth about the 1940 killing of thousands of captured Polish officers by the Soviet secret police. Although the facts about the massacre are now well established, during the 1970s his efforts on behalf of justice and historical truth were considered controversial because many people still endorsed the World War II claim by the Allied powers that the gruesome wartime killings had been carried out by German authorities.

Source: http://www.revisionists.com/revisionists/fitzgibbon.html

Next on the program was Louis Fitz-Gibbon, the English author of Katyn, and half-brother of the pro-Holocaust writer Constantine Fitz-Gibbon (who translated the Hoss “confessions”). Louis presented a film about the Katyn massacre produced by the Polish Ex-Combatants Association in Britain. He then described his personal quest for 10,000 other missing Poles not found at Katyn. The author described how he had finally found what he was looking for, in the form of a KGB document which gave all the horrifying and clinical details of a similar massacre.

The final speaker of the morning session was Dr. Austin App, an elder statesman of the revisionist movement. The theme of his talk was the injustice of postwar reparations which pumped untold billions of dollars and marks into Israel – all, because of an “imaginary crime.”

[Image] Dr. Austin J. App (1902-1984) was a German-American scholar, was a major revisionist author and publicist. App was the author of more than a thousand articles, columns and book reviews, which appeared in a wide range of American and European periodicals, as well as of eight books.

In the afternoon the delegates reassembled to listen to Devin Garrity, head of Devin-Adair publishing house, who spoke about his life-long struggle against censorship in the publishing industry.

John Bennett, an Australian civil liberties lawyer, gave a short talk on what he had been up to down under, publishing his own flyers and sending Butz’s books to libraries and historians.

[Image] John T. Bennett (1936-2013) was for decades well known in Australia as a vigorous and outspoken defender of civil liberties and freedom of speech and inquiry. He is also known as a Australia’s leading revisionist writer and publicist.

Bennett was drawn into the controversy when Australian Zionists tried to force a Palestinian radio program off the air. In the course of defending the Palestinians’ right of free speech, he found the Butz book was being suppressed by the same crowd. Bennett quoted a real gem from one of his critics, a Dr. Rubenstein:

“Were the Holocaust shown to be a hoax, the number one weapon in Israel’s propaganda armory disappears.”

The convention ended with a dramatic announcement from Willis Carto. He said the Institute for Historical Review was releasing a press statement offering a $50,000 reward to any person, anywhere in the world, who could prove that Nazis had operated gas chambers to exterminate Jews.

News of the reward, Carto stated, would be forwarded to the publishers of so-called “witness testimony” with the request that the witnesses step forward to have their evidence examined by a panel of knowledgeable investigators. As of November 25, no claimants for the reward had shown up. Carto also announced that the Institute would soon be starting a new publication journal of Historical Review to provide a platform for revisionists from around the world and that the first issue in the spring of 1980 would contain transcripts of the papers presented at the convention.*

Before the convention disbanded, the delegates were unanimous in expressing their profound thanks to the organizers for their foresight and courage. They had reason to only a few years ago such a meeting on such a subject would have been unthinkable.

* Subscriptions to the Journal of Historical Review cost $20 per year. But as an introductory offer charter subscribers will only be charged $16 and will also receive at no additional charge Katyn by Louis Fitz-Gibbon. The address is Institute for Historical Review, P.O. Box 1306, Torrance, CA 90505.

END

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

Click to download a PDF of this post (2.6 MB).

World’s First Anti-Holocaust Convention 1979

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

_____________________

Version History

Version 5: Jan 24, 2026 — Fixed issue with images not appearing.

Version 4: Jan 27, 2020 — Re-uploaded images and PDF for katana17.com/wp/ version. Added See Also links and images.

Version 3: Sep 30, 2016 — Some minor additions to text. Formatting.

Version 2: Sep 28, 2016 — Added 13 images. Fixed some typos, formatting. Added PDF for download.

Version 1: Sep 28, 2016 — Created post.

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

admin — Tue, 02 Aug 2016 13:51:42 +0000

He and Henrik go on to discuss the perilous demographic decline in birth rates among White countries, that will, if nothing is done, lead to disaster. Both the fraudulent “Holocaust” claims and the denial of White nationalism are interlinked in jewish propaganda, in that any claims for White self-determination are cast as something that leads directly back to the dreaded, “evil Nazis” and the “gas chambers“!— KATANA.]

Red Ice Radio

Germar Rudolf

Persecution of Revisionists

&

Demographic Disaster

https://redice.tv/red-ice-radio/persecution-of-revisionists-and-demographic-disaster

Click on the above link, or copy the link into your browser to listen to the audio.

Published on Jul 29, 2016

Red Ice Radio Description

Germar Rudolf was born in Limburg, Germany. He studied chemistry at Bonn University, where he graduated in 1989 as a Diplom-Chemist, which is comparable to a U.S. PhD degree. From 1990-1993 he prepared a German PhD thesis at the Max Planck Institute for Solid State Research in conjunction with the University of Stuttgart, Germany. Parallel to this and in his spare time, Rudolf prepared an expert report on chemical and technical questions of the alleged gas chambers of Auschwitz, The Rudolf Report. He is the founder of the small revisionist outlet, Castle Hill Publishers.

Mr. Rudolf joins us to share the story of his life’s work as a revisionist researcher and writer and the ostracizing and persecution he has endured for daring to tread into the controversial topic of the German holocaust. Germar talks about the process of awakening that led him to question the “official” version of holocaust history in his mid-20s, when he stumbled upon the notorious Leuchter Report while preparing an expert report on the chemical and technical questions of the alleged gas chambers of Auschwitz and Birkenau for the trial of a Holocaust “denier.” We discuss the longstanding and brutal suppression of evidences that refute the cherished narrative of gas chambers used to systematically exterminate 6 million Jews, and we look at the undeniable proof that the powers that be have been using this “miracle weapon” to psychologically trounce German and Western European identity. Then, Germar gives a straightforward definition of “revisionist,” underscoring that in the case of the holocaust, the general issues of persecution and unjust treatment of Jews is not denied. He highlights some of the chemical, structural and biological evidence that points to a starkly contrasting story than what has been painted throughout 70+ years of political propagandizing. Germar also touches on the thought crimes that sent him to prison for 44 months and the blatant lawlessness of court proceedings he’s witnessed, and he gives a rundown of his latest book, Resistance is Obligatory.

Transcript — Part 1/2

[69:51 min]

[NOTE: There are a few parts (6) where the audio was unclear and I couldn’t catch what was said. These are indicated by [xxx]. Please leave a note in the comments sections of the blog post if you know any of the missing parts. Thanks.]

[00:00]

Henrik: Ladies and gentlemen welcome back. This is Red Ice Radio. I’m Henrik. Wherever you are around the world, whether you are friend, or foe and concerned, like me, about the survival of European identity, or not, I do hope that you care about true diversity and want to preserve it. We live in a world today where soulless materialism, empty consumer driven globalism and endless migration is threatening to displace and eradicate the uniqueness and the beauty of the European people. Now Sweden, where I’m from, is being ruined! As I hope you have realized by now, by a pipe dream, by politicians and internationalists who themselves never live in the neighborhoods that they claim we will benefit so greatly from. This contrived “Oneness” that they are enforcing, is actually leading to division, alienation, terrorism, displacement and unspeakable horrors of sexual assaults and violence and rape.

It’s time to wake up and realize that this version that they are pushing on us is actually not working. If you are new to the show definitely check out the website Red Ice dot tv. Beyond the radio shows we do live TV shows, we publish news and we have a members website filled with our entire archives. Plus our live show, “Weekend Warrior” that we do almost every Saturday. So sign up, if you like the show, get access to all our material and help us grow.

Well today we have a special show for you with a Germar Rudolf. He joins us to share the story of his life’s work as a revisionist researcher and writer, and the ostracizing and persecution he has endured for daring to tread into the controversy topic of the Holocaust. The few times that I’ve not made long disclaimers before shows like this, I’ve lost newcomers and that’s not a very smart move. I simply, usually, urge people to use their mind and to open their mind. We are going to be treading into a forbidden zone where so many of us never go! Ever! Not even truth seekers and those passionate about history. So many comply, like good little Pavlovian dogs, they respond to the conditioning perfectly, to a tee! Without ever asking themselves, why they react the way they do you when we violate this greatest taboo. Even for free speech advocates, they say here, but no further.

When speaking about World War Two and related subjects, I always want to give a perfect preface, you know, to entice you and dare you, urge you to follow along in an exercise that many people never do in their entire lives without ever knowing why. You know, in many countries the governments have built a legal perimeter around the subject. It’s a no go zone, a strictly forbidden enforced, “No Go Zone”. And I ask you, why that is? And out of, you know, a thousand plus shows that we have done over ten-year period, we have done maybe seven, or eight radio shows in total dedicated to this sensitive and emotionally charged subject. That’s only, what about, zero point eight percent of all the things that we’ve discussed on this show. Yet this alone grants us to be banned from iTunes and many previous guests to completely turn their back on everything that we do. For simply daring to question a historical event and come to a different conclusion than the globalists are pushing on us.

You know, I always encourage newcomers to listen to the other side, the side that they never share with you. And look at some of the research and professionally made videos and other material that we link up as companions to shows like this, to help you along in not only daring to take the plunge, but also to realize that there truly is something fishy here. Something that they are covering up. Something that they don’t want you to know about!

You know, this if nothing else, is a story of free speech and how the government has enforced restrictions on it. Tight restrictions! In fact, restrictions that will land you in jail in certain European countries. And reasonably everyone who’s concerned with social justice, this should be a concern of them, right? Why should people who have a divergent opinion be treated any different? Right? According to their own standards. So, you know, there’s a thousand things I could say. There is a thousand things I could go through and motivate, but ultimately, it is up to you if you have interest at all in history and if you have the brains to understand the weight of this topic and why it’s so important to look at it in greater detail, considering how the survival of the European people is hinged on this subject of the Holocaust and Nazism.

[04:52]

So, Germar Rudolf was born in Limburg, Germany. He studied chemistry at Bonn University where he graduated in 1989 as a “Diplome-Chemist” which is comparable to a US Ph D. Degree. From 1990 to 1993 he prepared a German Ph D. Thesis at the Max Planck Institute for solid state research in conjunction with the University of Stuttgart. Parallel to this and in his spare time Rudolph prepared an expert’s report on chemical and technical questions of the alleged gas chamber of Auschwitz, “The Rudolf Report”. He is the founder of the revisionist outlet, Castle Hill Publishers. Please stay tuned and please listen to what Germar has to say.

Henrik: Welcome to the program, Germar, it’s a pleasure to finally have you with us. I’ve been an admirer of your work for many years. It’s a pleasure for me to have you here on the show.

Germar: And it’s a pleasure for me to be on the show.

Henrik: Excellent! Now, let’s dive into this here. This is a big topic we’re going to discuss today. It’s a controversial topic, obviously. It’s a topic that many people never really dare to tread into for various reasons, actually. But, I’m curious to here a bit about your background and your interest in this topic, Germar. And why you decided to spend your time and looking into an area which, of course, at this day and age, criminalised in many European countries. Tell us a bit about your background.

Germar: Well, I’m a German citizen and I had, in school, I had to deal with the Holocaust three times, because I change schools and then it changed around my topics a little bit. And in order to graduate you had to have a minimum of history. In school, I didn’t have that so I had to take more history classes and the “Holocaust” came up again. So three times I was fed it. Until I was fed up.

As a student I wasn’t actually appreciative about that topic, since, as a German, it’s kind of getting you in a bad mood, … It’s very unpleasant for Germans, because we perceived ourselves in the situation, of course, as descendants of the perpetrators and it’s all so bad and dark what happened during the “Holocaust” and during the Second World War, that it kind of drives you away from wanting to hear anything about it. Wanting to do to hear anything about the more recent history that has led up to this.

So I was kind of deterred from it initially coming out of school, actually. I didn’t want to have anything to do it with. But, on the other hand, I was always interested in German identity and German history, apart from this topic. So I would go up to the First World War. And then kind of quit! [Henrik laughs] and get over to the Federal Republic* [post WW II]. And all the mess of the Weimar Republic, running up to the Third Reich, I would just keep it at arm’s length.

*[Weimar Republic (German: Weimarer Republik) is an unofficial designation for the German state between 1919 and 1933. The name derives from the city of Weimar (in the federal state of Thuringia), where its constitutional assembly first took place. The official name of the state was the Deutsches Reich, continuing the name from the pre-1918 German Empire.]

And that changed a little bit while I was studying. I was studying at one university chemistry and during my spare time I was reading a lot of history, of politics, philosophy and just a broad range of interests I had, trying to understand things. And that time I was more and more. Also, because I happened to become a member of the student fraternity, there was emphasizing, patriotism and German identity. That I got interested in these questions and I realized, in particular in the environment where students dominate, that national identity issues and patriotism has such negative image, such a negative connotation for intellectuals in Germany, for young intellectual students, that you are immediately an extreme minority as a student, if you insist that having an identity, having a cultural heritage and taking care of it, is something good. You’re isolated! You’re getting even attacked.

I mean, I was not a member of any group, or any movement outside of what was considered socially acceptable back then. So, I was still a part of the German Christian Democratic Union, the Germany party what’s currently ruling Germany. I considered myself more, or less mainstream from that point of view, but living it, inside a left-wing environment of students, is what gave me a completely different view. Now, I was attacked back then, some people drew a swastika and put up on the on a blackboard, or some event that my fraternity was doing. So I quickly became aware of that, even insisting on that there is the German identity and that it’s worth preserving, is something that gets you a lot of hostility in Germany. And the reason I figured out is, because of the Third Reich and all the bad things that happened there.

[10:10]

So I was aware of it, but that didn’t make me tread into this minefield of history. And that changed actually by accident, I would say, I was trying to convince other students that trying to get Germany to reunite, … At that point we’re talking about middle 80s, late 80s, when I was studying Germany was still divided. There were communists in the center of Germany and “democratic” quote, unquote, West Germany. And I insisted on Germany should get reunited and we should get going on that.

And I read books on the what’s gone on in the Soviet Union, the weakening, the economic collapse that some were predicting and I was reading these books and said, “It’s time to do something about it” as the mainstream was going the opposite way. Even the conservative party was eying the option of recognising communist East Germany as a separate country, which West Germany had not done so at that point.

Soviet Union collapsed, Germany suddenly got reunited and there was a little patriotic party “The Republicans” they called themselves [xxx]. But now they are completely marginalized. And they were trying to rekindle patriotism, German identity and then a little bit more acceptable right-wing politics, like the “Alternative for Germany”. The new party is doing right now, so twenty years and the same kind of constellation.

Henrik: Right.

Germar: And the same thing happened back then, that happens with them. Now they’re being completely ostracized and persecuted and the media just go on a campaign to destroy the party. So, history repeats itself. When I look at what’s going in Germany now, I say we had the same thing twenty five years ago. I was a member of that party and I had to experience all in that. It was the only party sticking to the constitutional demand of fighting for the reunification of Germany. They were the ones, when it actually happened, they were persecuted and marginalized and ostracized. And that upset me, but I again recognized the mechanism in particular in Germany. Later on I learned it’s not much different in other European countries. How that works is that any identity group, European identity movement, gets destroyed and ostracized by ultimately, “putting out the gas chambers”!

Henrik: Right.

Germar: Anyone saying that, if you want to have your own national way, you want to be proud of yourself, that means that in the long run, down the road you put the others in gas chambers! [Henrik laughing] If you don’t like the Turks in Germany, … I hear, I remember 1989 after the Republicans in Germany had their first electoral victory, in early 89 I think it was, in Berlin, and the leader of the party there was asked by a journalist:

“Well what are you going to do with the Turks? Are you going to shove them into gas chambers?”

[Henrik gives out a big sigh]

And that broke it for me, and I said, “I don’t believe it!” They do it over and over and it’s so blunt and so brutal and so obvious that this gas chamber weapon, this “Holocaust” weapon is used by the media, by anything on the left-wing, by anything standing for globalism, internationalism, multi-culturalism, whatever you call it, to destroy anything that tries to preserve identity, to maintain identity, what have you.

But, only in the European context. You know, left-wing trickery in Germany, they are always happy to embrace Amazon Indians, or Tibet Asians, when they are struggling for their national identity.

Henrik: Of course!

Germar: That’s fashionable, because they are not Whites, they are Europeans. And even when in South Africa, now the shoe’s on the other foot and blacks persecute Whites and kill them, and whatever is going on there. In detail, I know a little bit of what’s going on. But nobody talks about it. It’s a reverse situation as it was under apartheid regime to some degree. But black racism, you can see it here in this country. Everybody talks about racism when there was a shooting. But I wonder, you know, the big elephant in the room is that White racism is not acceptable, or racial identity, or any identity! It doesn’t even have to be based on race, it can be on culture, it can be whatever you want to call it. It’s not acceptable if White folks, European folks start with it, but if a black ghetto group here in the United States makes racist remarks, racist attitude, that is not talked about.

Henrik: That’s right.

[14:58]

Germar: And the same in South Africa. Black racism goes around. I can understand it historically why they would have that attitude because it’s been suppressed for so long. I mean, there’s always a reason why people do things and sometimes it’s understandable reasons, but it’s never a justification.

So, I saw these links and it just took an accidental encounter with credible arguments by credible individuals that made me look into, what I had avoided all these, well the first two decades of my life, two and a half, three decades, to look into the “Holocaust” about the facts, claims about it.

[Image] The Leuchter Report by Fred Leuchter.

That was when I accidentally stumbled over the Leuchter Report, a famous, or infamous Leuchter Report, depending how you look at it. So the American expert [Fred Leuchter] for execution technologies, since they have the death penalty here in the US, they have to have some experts who maintain the equipment, with which capital punishment is executed.

And the one guy who was doing it back in the late 80s was asked by a defense team up in Canada, over a Canadian-German [Ernst Zundel] who was on trial for quote, unquote, “Holocaust Denial”. He was asked to write an expert report and to testify in court as to whether or not the facilities in two camps, in Auschwitz and Majdaneck camp in Poland, as they exist today and can be understood from blueprints, … Whether these facilities would have been able to commit the mass murder as is claimed by historians, and others. So he did that.

In 1988 he submitted his report in February that year. And I found out about it a little over a year later by this Swiss political scientist who was writing about the use and abuse of, “Coming to terms with the past in Germany”, which is a big issue in Germany, … Third Reich history has been used and abused in politics to destroy opponents, competitors, to marginalize groups and individuals. We see now again with Alternative for Germany [party] . It flows like a red thread through German history after the Second World War.

Henrik: Yes.

Germar: And he has been writing about it, analyzing it and in a new edition of that book that came out in ‘89, he wrote about the Leuchter Report. And I said:

“Well, what would happen if somebody comes up and says, ‘Well I made an expert report. I investigated the murder weapon’”.

If somebody did that with the claimed murder weapon for the French Revolution, that is the guillotine. And he comes up:

“Well I think the claims about how it is supposed to functioned, how many people were murdered with it and all this. This is wrong. This is the chosen propaganda put out by royalists who were trying to blacken the image of the revolutionaries”.

Henrik: Right.

Germar: And I said:

“Well that would be a controversial thesis. Historians would organize conferences, would discuss the arguments and what are either refuted, or would not be able to refute it, would maybe have to adjust their new history books to take into consideration the new evidence”.

And there would be pretty much about it.

Objectively seen it should be the same here. Time wise it is much closer and we’re talking about more victims. But in theory it’s a historical, it’s a factual question. It’s a question of, … It should be open to scientific investigation. And if an expert comes up with a theory:

“No, the gas chambers, as they are claimed, couldn’t have worked“.

And what I’ve seen there they were not equipped in a way that would have functioned as claimed. That’s what Leuchter did.

But, of course, nothing like an objective discussion of his thesis ever happened. They just began the marginalisation, ostracism and persecution of him. When I read about this. I didn’t know about the persecution yet. You would have thought that would have probably prevented me from getting into it [laughter].

Henrik: You think so?

Germar: I don’t know! I mean I know, … I have, … My personality is a little bit of a contrarian in nature, I would say so. If I perceive something to be unjust, persecution to be unjust, appear not warranted, or just plain wrong, I have a tendency to stand up against it and to fight it.

Henrik: Right.

Germar: In general I have a history, you can ask my mother. She said I have an over-developed sense for justice. I recognize it’s a problem, because your concept of justice is very skewed and very subjective and egocentric. But as you mature you get more and more wider perspective and you can objectivize this. But my attitude hasn’t changed about this. If something is unjust I just won’t take it.

[20:23]

Henrik: Yeah.

Germar: And in this regard too, I found out about persecution of revisionists on a scale that I have not considered possible. And it hasn’t deterred me, it has made me more angry and more determined! And the same has happened with my own persecution. A lot of people around me, friends and my first wife too, at some point they have had it and they disassociate and divorce me. Even my first wife. But that’s not what I do. I don’t shrink away from the challenge. I grow with the challenge.

So one factor was definitely being, seeing the persecution going on. And there’s no rational discussion. If somebody has an argument it should be listened to, it should be verified or falsified.

Henrik: Of course.

Germar: You shouldn’t start to call the prosecutor and throw people into prison. And today it’s come to the point where you’re not even allowed to muster a defense in court. Because if you try to in the courtroom to prove that you’re right, … What you did do in the eyes of the court is “denying again” in the courtroom and using the public stage of the courtroom to spread your propaganda!

Henrik: Right, right!

Germar: And then you get another indictment and another case! Even a lawyer if he just dares to file a motion to introduce evidence, … Just filing the motion can get a lawyer in prison!

Henrik: Wow! Really?

Germar: And I have two of my lawyers that, … [sighing] You know, I ended up being an expert on Leuchter, writing up an expert report showing up in court on the request of defense lawyers. And the things I had to experience there, how judges violate the law in an attempt to prevent me from testifying was eye-opening! It made me even more angry! To see how the system breaks its own rules, its own laws, too to keep up that taboo and to prevent anyone from speaking up against it or from presenting any factual evidence.

Henrik: Yeah.

Germar: Mine was purely engineering and chemical in nature and as such nothing, no history and no politics in it at all. It was just forensics. And that’s what every crime should be subjected to.

I’ve just had an interview* with Jonas Alexis from Veterans Today. What we dealing with here we’re talking about one of the biggest crimes in the history of mankind as it is claimed. So the mass slaughter all three million plus people in chemical slaughter houses, called gas chambers, and several million more just shot or starved to death, other reasons, other ways they died. So we’re talking about a massive crime! And whether a crime is little, if it’s just one person killed, or raped or injured, or whether it’s six million that have died, it’s still a crime that should be subjected to the same standard of investigation. But it’s completely politicized and any critical investigation that ends up coming to unwanted conclusions gets brutally suppressed! And then the name calling started against me, too.

I’ve just heard a remark by someone from the outside, saying, “Well, look at this denier, and anti-semite and racist talking” meaning, talking about me! I’d say I was persecuted and prosecuted for my scholarly writings. For my expert report on Auschwitz and ascertaining chemical issues I was sentenced and eventually spent fourteen months in prison. Not being allowed to present evidence for the fact that my arguments are correct. And later on, …

*[http://www.veteranstoday.com/2016/07/18/logic-and-reason-can-and-will-destroy-the-holocaust-establishment/]

Henrik: Tell the audience when that was, by the way, so we get an idea of the time frame here.

Germar: Well, I found out about the Leuchter Report in 1989. In ‘91 I wrote a letter to the editor saying why I’m not convinced, that I’m not convinced that the Leuchter Report is the final word, because there are holes in the arguments and some flawed arguments. That a better job should be done on it. I got contacted, … Can you do that? Can you write an expert report? And I agreed, because I was happy, it was exciting.

[25:02]

That time I was doing my Ph.D in the ivory tower [on a] topic that was kind of boring because it had no application to real life. But this one was so real, it can’t get any more real, more relevant, because obviously nations in the whole world, in the United Nations, are out to suppress any consent in this context. There’s just no other topic where persecution and the will of authorities to suppress any dissent is so massive as in this area.

So that was clear evidence for me right there. No matter what you think about any politics of identity and what have you. For the authorities for the powers that be, that is the most important, so I just dig in and that is it. And I decided to do it, because it just made sense. There was nothing more that made more sense to me than going for this topic and trying to thoroughly investigate it.

I wrote the report in ‘91, in early ‘92. And it got submitted to various courts. There were seven, eight court cases in the years between ‘91 and ‘94. And I got then, … The current investigation started in ‘93 when my expert report was published, together with a preface and an appendix by the guy who actually published it. And they used that, because it was polemical in nature, it was attacking the historians, politicians and judges for suppressing the debate and for letting people go in prison without giving them a chance to defend themselves. So that was considered polemics and therefore the court that actually sentenced me for that expert report says you can’t claim “scientific freedom”, because of the preface which is not scientific [Henrik laughing] and therefore the whole expert report is unscientific, even though it is a preface that was written by somebody else. I didn’t even know that he had edited it. I found out when they started to distribute it, by as it may.

Henrik: Right.

Germar: I got then, in ‘95, sentenced to fourteen months in prison for that and, … But it was going through the revision procedure and finally the case was settled in ‘96. I was not taken into custody, because they considered it unlikely that I would flee, but I did then, before the final judgment by the higher court was handed down, I left the country. So I didn’t serve those fourteen months. I went to England instead in ‘96 and started a revisionist publishing company. Just, basically turning my passion into a profession!

So, what the German authorities tried to do, to stop me from doing, then I was doing it twenty-four seven because, all bridges were burnt and I had nothing else to do. And I dedicated my life, so to say, to that. And it has been that way ever since.

Now, eventually things got bad in England. I wasn’t sure, whether actually would extradite me or not. A lawyer I had then would say, “I stand no chance if Germany asks for extradition”. They were doing that in late ‘99. If the authorities catch me in England they would turn me over without further ado, so I decided to leave the country.

I went to the United States and eventually applied for political asylum in the United States. Which at the end didn’t go much of anywhere, because the United States has waged two world wars against Germany to get Germany to do what it’s doing now what is such destruction. And they are not going to revert that by giving me, who is Germans and Europeans in general a tool, a scientific historical that can be used politically to stop that self-destruction of the entire European civilization that being going on and on. Any identity movement needs to be able to withstand accusation of racism and intentions of mass murder. Because that’s what basically comes up each time you want to preserve the Swedish identity, the German identity, any European identity against what’s going on, that is been going on for the past decades.

Henrik: And that Germar, that proves that this is a weapon really, that it is being used against us. Which makes it one of the most important questions that we need to address and face if we are going to muster up the courage, if you will, to try to prevent what we’re seeing happening today. Would you agree with that?

Germar: Yeah! The Germans have the term, “Wunder Waffe”, “Miracle Weapon” and that is Germany had none in the Second World War, but Germany’s enemies, or Europe’s enemies have it now and that is the “Holocaust” propaganda. Which is used to beat down psychologically everyone who resists anything that the powers that be want to implement.

[30:07]

And people are aware of that this is such a powerful weapon, such a dangerous weapon that most people are terribly afraid of it and try to stay away, far away from it as they can. And I can understand that. If you have the liberty to dodge away, to get out of the way and not face it, and it’s not doing any harm to you then it’s fine to do that.

The problem is you cannot avoid it! It is like you are besieged by the enemy. You are in a small castle, so to say, you are surrounded by the enemy, they are all aiming that “miracle weapon” at you and you can’t dodge it! It is destroying the castle, the walls step by step, bit by bit! And you can pipe dream, just looking away sticking your head in the sand, making it go away. Play the infamous three apes. Close your eyes, close your ears, close your mouth and, but that’s not going away!

If you want to achieve anything in regards to standing up against the authorities, then you have to face that. And the absolute proof for it is the fact that for the powers that be, particularly in Europe, nothing is more important when it comes to discussing anything than suppressing Holocaust dissent! Because it’s the only topic in the world, in the history of mankind, when it comes to history that has ever been chiseled in stone by penal law in which dissent is mercilessly prosecuted and persecuted!

That is the only real unique thing about the Holocaust is the persecution and prosecution of dissidents. There has always been massacres, there has always been genocides, there’s always been, … There are many cases where millions and millions of people died and where high percentages of ethnic groups were killed. Nothing of it, and they were talking about technologies, the “Holocaust” was highly technological, … If you actually look into it in fact it was not! The claims of [it being] highly technological are ridiculous! If you look into what the eye witnesses claim, things are so primitive that you would say if the Germans had really intended to do something like that they would had the technology, a [technologically] leading nation back then, that would have used a different solution to what’s claimed, which is technically impossible at times, but that’s a different issue.

So, the really only unique thing about the Holocaust is the persecution of dissidents!

And that shows you already that something must be fishy with the whole thing. And that’s the Achilles’ heel of the powers that be, and they know it. And that’s why they persecute anyone so mercilessly, because they know once that breaks through, once the broader amount, a broader percentage of the normal populace finds out about the real arguments of revisionists, how logical, how self-evident they are and how convincing they are, when once enough people lose the fear, because they are angry enough, … A lot of people, when they find out how they have been lied to and cheated about this and when they first see some pretty convincing arguments, they get really angry, …

Henrik: Yes!

Germar:… And they don’t care anymore about persecution. Now, if you get a critical mass of people, just a certain critical mass that starts a snowball rolling down the hill, then they’d lose control and they know it, and that’s why they are so merciless with the persecution.

Henrik: And also let me add, Germar, that, you know, this topic, this issue that is occurring right now with this historical event. This is really the spearhead of free speech right here as well. And all those that are supposedly free speech advocates, as we know, many of them NEVER stand up in defense of people who are subjected to the kind of persecution that you’ve been talking about. In many cases, of course, it’s been very successful of them to paint many of these people who question this historical event as being somehow almost lunatics, right? That the there’s a mental problem with these people, just because of the fact that you dare to question this event! So it’s almost like a preemptive strategy that has been put in place, where you’re not even supposed to get to the point where you look at some of the material of this, right?

Germar: Right! That is the effect of seventy years of propaganda, making everyone think everything is so obvious and so well proven, how could anyone be so deluded to doubt any of this. Now, of course, everybody who talks that way has no, not even a basic knowledge about the “Holocaust”, apart from knowing the name of Auschwitz and Zyklon B, maybe. The less people know it, sometimes, I get the impression that the less people know the more dogmatic they are about it!

Henrik: That’s right!

[35:22]

Germar: And it is so easy to actually, in a debate with them, to get them to lose footage on the factual basis, because they don’t know what we’re talking about. But they instantly switch over to an ad hominem attack, to accusations, the usual stuff, Nazi extremists, anti-semite, whatever. Nothing to do with the debate, whatsoever. And sometimes it gets ludicrous, because there are some people who have a Jewish heritage who are revisionists and then they start calling those people anti-semites, you know, it gets ridiculous. But even that works for some people, he’s a Jewish anti-semite, how does that work? A self-hating Jew, whatever!

Henrik: Right, right.

Germar: I found it edifying, I found it encouraging, funny at times. To how easy it is to get the system to panic. I saw that back then, doing my Ph. D at the Max Planck Institute, appearing in front of a court with my chemical research and the system was panicking! The judges were suddenly in the middle of it, without any reason interrupt the proceedings, run out of the courtroom to get instructions on how to handle the situation, because if an expert witness is present in the courtroom, it can by German law, procedural law, … The defendant’s expert witness cannot be denied to testify. If he is indeed an expert, I had a diploma decree in chemistry and I was going for a Ph. D at the Max Planck Institute, that is recognized as sufficient expertise to testify as an expert witness. So, I was an expert witness. I was an expert. I testified on a topic that was pertinent to the case and I was present in the court room. They could not deny me to testify and yet, after getting instructions — that is to say, “cover my ass” phone call to higher up judges, or whatever — the judges came back and broke the law and denied me to [right to] testify!

So I’ve seen how they panic. What tricks they pull off their sleeves to pose this illusion, and that shores up the whole system. So, it’s just one little guy who makes the whole system panic and I’ve seen that again and again, you know! If you look how many actively researching and publishing revisionists there are in the world. Italy just introduced a “Holocaust” denial law a couple of weeks ago.

Henrik: Oh, really yeah! Because, I looked at a map and I saw that Italy was not on that map of having these laws. So that’s changed now?

Germar: The map is outdated. The map was drawn half a year ago and now just a month ago, I think, it’s relatively fresh, they introduced it. And in Italy you have one person, one person who is publishing revisionism. Just one! So they introduce a law to prevent this one person from doing what he is doing and threatening him with three years in jail! Where there’s always bloggers and people who comment and sympathizers to support the guy, but that’s not the issue. The real danger comes from the people who do the research and bring up the convincing evidence and show up in courtrooms and get the system into trouble. Because they, you know:

“Well we have free speech. We are nations under the rule of law and we abide to law and the authorities have to follow the law to”.

But if then push comes to shove you experience it yourself. They don’t give a damn about the law! They break it as they need to uphold this whole thing.

Henrik: Which would mean that, I mean in that case when you were involved and the judges just changed things on the fly like that, that means that they individually are, … I mean obviously they would be prepped before a case like this, but someone is directing them to make sure that a desired outcome is the end result of something like this. Correct?

Germar: Yes! I mean there were precedent cases in Germany. If a judge tried to be accommodating to any kind of defense strategy along that line, the judge can be prosecuted. So the judge is putting his career on the line and even his freedom if he dares to follow the law by allowing evidence, … Now they have changed the law now. Now it is actually that you are not allowed to introduce any evidence as I just earlier mentioned. Back when I was appearing in court, that wasn’t the case, yet. I could still file motions and they couldn’t prosecute. But they have changed that then. Because, actually, of what I was doing back in those years.

[40:00]

They started prosecuting lawyers and there was no case-law, or written law to prosecute lawyers just for filing a motion to introduce evidence. But, the case-law was then created on two occasions, of two lawyers who had filed motions to introduce me as an expert witness. And at the end of it, such, filing such motions has now been effectively outlawed. So, that’s one of my achievements in this business too.

Henrik: Well, very well done! What would you, let’s just give a little bit of time here to the audience that are listening and the newcomer who’s listening and people who, you know, might be at a point where they basically have never looked at any of this material. They might be listening, because they’re intrigued with your story of suppression and active, you know, how the system has been working against you. Just what you’ve been talking about. But, can you describe a little bit of what actually a revisionist is? As opposed to what it is not. I mean, because, usually what happens, as you said, that you get a kind of straw man. They set up a lie, basically of what it is that you represent, when you start going into these topics. But, what would you say really is the case? What are really some of the questions and points that you and others like you are trying to lift forward and highlight?

Germar: Well, revisionism is a broad term and we should now limit it maybe to first “Holocaust” revisionism. We should limit it also to those who actually do the research, do the actual publication to get the knowledge together. There are always people who use material that we put out, that have their own agenda and those then get used, at times to blame it back on the revisionist if there’s some racist, or some [xxx] or neo-Nazi, and these people do exist. They come up, use the material to push for their own agenda. That happens to every idea you put out there can be abused by somebody. And that’s where those false claims come to take a neo-Nazi and claim he’s a revisionist. Now if it was the other way, here’s a neo-Nazi and he uses revisionist arguments or abuses them.

So, let’s get something straight. What the media tell [us what] revisionists are is a lie! There are very broad terms like, “All revisionists deny that Jews were persecuted.” which we don’t. It’s an undeniable fact that during the Third Reich that Jews were persecuted. They were deprived of their civil rights. They were deported. They were herded into ghettos. They were put into concentration camps and they were put to forced labor in the concentration camps.

Yes! There were crematoria where the corpses of those who had died were incinerated. And, there is no doubt that Jews died in great numbers for many reasons in the camps and in the ghettos, for epidemics malnutrition, disease, even mistreatment. And all this is not denied and furthermore there is no denying that other minorities were at times persecuted too. Like gypsies and political dissidents.

Now the extent of how many died and who died, for what reasons is then again the topic of discussion. But, the general issue that what happened with all the prosecution going on, that is not denied by revisionists. Furthermore the moral level, we need to get that out of the way. Revisionists don’t say, if you’re really serious, you don’t say that the treatment of the Jews was just. If you put a minority, just because a person belongs to a certain group, you stop persecuting them, mistreating them, that’s not justifiable! Now some people out there might do it and say:

“Well, the Jews have done this and that and therefore they, …”

No, that’s not the way you can argue. If some jew did something and you can’t hold this personal jew responsible, you can hold Jews as a group responsible for something only some of them did. So, do we deny the victims dignity? No! Do we want to wipe out the memory of these victims? No! We want victims to be remembered. Not just Jewish victims, all the victims of violence, of persecution, of wars and atrocities. Do we deny showing compassion to these victims? No! Somebody is a victim, there were a lot of victims for a number of reasons and compassion is always due.

[45:00]

Do we deny that there was a systematic plan by the National Socialist government, enacted by technological means, in terms of homicidal gas chambers, to kill as many Jews as possible, ending up with a total death toll of six million? That is put into question.

Henrik: Yes.

Germar: So, it’s not about all the persecution that happened, about the many victims that died as a consequence of that and all this was unjust and bad. That is not denied. What we’re talking about is only, was there a plan to systematically wipe off the earth the Jews that the Nazis could lay their hands, primarily by means of chemical slaughterhouses, called gas chambers? And is the death toll at the end, six million? These are the questions. And I got into it by, very specifically, asking, in Auschwitz, the places that claim to have been homicidal gas chambers, were they or were they not, … I wasn’t asking about, “Did Auschwitz exist?” That’s ridiculous to ask, you know. Did Hiroshima exist? Did, does Washington exist? No, that’s a stupid question to ask.

[Image – click to enlarge] Map of Auschwitz I, II and III complex.

Of course Auschwitz existed! It was a concentration camp. It had disastrous hygienic conditions, epidemic broke out at some point in the summer and fall of 1942. Hundreds of people, every day, died, because of typhus epidemics. And for, the only person who was responsible there is the leadership of the German Reich who decided to send all these people in the camp that wasn’t prepared to receive them. Now to do that, people for no reasons other than they belong to a group, in a camp and you can’t feed them and you can’t keep them healthy that’s your responsibility.

[Image – click to enlarge] Map of Auschwitz I (Main Camp) layout.

There’s no doubt about it, but was there actually a gas chamber in that camp that was used to kill up to a million people? The death toll that is accepted by revisionists in Auschwitz lies a little bit of a hundred thousand. Now you have one wartime camp and a hundred thousand people within just three or four years, die in that camp! Can you imagine that?

Henrik: Yep, yep.

Germar: Bad! Awful! Terrible conditions! Over one hundred thousand people is bad news! But it’s better news than having a million people being slaughtered in a chemical slaughterhouse.

Herik: Right.

Germar: Just because I say:

“Well, this is truth, a hundred twenty thousand died, because of bad conditions that the Germans were responsible for, because they just didn’t handle the situation properly”.

That makes me a denier and a bad person and, because I contest that there was a chemical slaughterhouse and I’ve had a zillion enough arguments why they couldn’t have been chemical slaughterhouses to begin with, because the types of epidemics were raging there so badly at the time when those exterminations are said to have happened. Now at that time, for infrastructure reasons, for technological reasons, for a number of reasons the Germans wouldn’t have been able to handle even more dead people than they already had at their hands, because of those epidemics that were raging.

Apart from the fact that all the technology, all the forensic evidence, all the documents clearly indicate there was no such thing! It’s just made up. And we have now consistent evidence of systematic torture of people under British and American and Soviet custody after the war, of the former camp, staff members.

Henrik: Yep.

Germar: To get, to extract from testimonies, which, by just looking at the testimonies and looking at how it could be technically possible what they claim, doesn’t hold up, hold water, compared to the facts we know. We know already by what they stated and how they stated it that it can’t be true. But knowing now by book published by a British journalist just ten years ago, the British and the American actually applied systematic torture! They got all these people from the former concentration camps, put them in these camps and tortured them by the hundreds, systematically to get those confessions out of them! And that’s what history is based upon.

And then you look at the witnesses, of those survivors and you see instead a similar pattern of claims that are just as ludicrous, have nothing to do with the reality and are completely off the wall for the most part of those who have claimed this. It’s proof for, … I mean they are a lot of survivors that in and of itself shows that there was no system in it, because if you have two hundred thousand Auschwitz survivors, which we do have, documentation about. Two hundred thousand, I think half of them, more than half are actually Jews. What kind of a systematic mass murder is it if a hundred thousand or two hundred thousand of them get away and are now sent into the world to testify?

[50:06]

No! But of these two hundred thousand that got out of the camp, maybe five hundred or a thousand got public with stories that are supposed to shore up the gas chamber stories. So, out of two hundred thousand we have just, say two thousand, that’s just one percent. And, in wartime situation, there is extreme emotion and extreme political propaganda. To have one percent and of the survivors lie, exaggerate, make up stories. There’s always one percent of the population that lies, exaggerate. This is normal. But you have the 199,000 that didn’t do it!

Henrik: Aha.

Germar: And all this is taken together makes it very clear in the case of Auschwitz, and this is a very well documented case, because almost all the documentation about Auschwitz survived. Many other camps, there were destroyed by the Germans before being overrun by the Allies, but not so in Auschwitz, not so in Majdanek. We have the documents there and we can reconstruct almost every nail and every brick that was used in the camp to do this or to do that. Every pencil that was shot from one side of the desk to the other is all recorded and documented and we can reconstruct it day by day we see no such thing! No trace!

They had other problems, massive problems of trying to man the armament factories with those workers. But then they had epidemics and the whole thing collapsed, because most of the workers were unable to work, because they died like flies, including the guards. Yes they died.

Henrik: Right.

Germar: They died too because of typhus.

Henrik: Yes. Starvation, you had obviously. There were so many things that Germany was struggling with at the time as well. That eventually, specifically towards the end of the war, things just collapsed entirely. And that is where we also got starvation coming into the picture and these kinds of things. But I want to continue to talk more about the evidence that you have, you know, gathered and researched over the years, in the second hour as we continue. But I want to spend about four or five minutes talking a bit about your latest book, so people know, you know, about some of the material that you’re working on and have available for people who want to find out more. It’s called, “Resistance is Obligatory”. Tell us a bit about the book and why you wanted to write this one.

Germar: As a matter of fact, when I was put into prison eventually, my entire case in the United States went bad and they deported me to Germany and there the police arrested me at the gangway coming out of the plane and put me in a prison to serve my old 14 months for my expert report. And then the put me on trial for the publications I had done in the meantime. And eventually sentenced me. Now in the situation as I was there, I was not allowed to defend myself in the matter itself. I gave a seven-day lecture in court about:

“What is revisionism? Why is revisionism scholarly and scientific and why is the mainstream histography, the mainstream school of Holocaust research, so to say, why they are not scholarly?”

And:

“Why is it important to let scientists do their research freely and what importance does it have for our society?”

And then also:

“Who is violating laws here, is it me who is insisting on free speech, or is the government that tries to suppress something with illicit methods, or outright illegal methods?”

And then coming up to the point:

“What is a citizen to do when they see that the authorities violate the law to suppress civil rights?”

That they persecute dissidents, peaceful dissidents. And the conclusion was basically with all the theoretical work that has been done in the West during the years of peaceful resistance, you know, you have the most famous representative is Mahatma Gandhi, everybody knows about him and about peaceful resistance. That’s where I also picked up and all these nice theories that the West has developed during the Cold War when there was the peace movement opposing the armament in general, or nuclear weapons in particular. Nuclear energy even in Germany with battles going on in the seventy’s and eighty’s in the country, almost like civil war where the peace movement was confronting the authorities, not very peacefully. And the theories that were developed then about when does a citizen have the right, or even the obligation, the moral obligation to resist authority?

[55:06]

And they’ve clearly shown in some cases, you know, if it’s about minor laws you’re not allowed to do it, but I mean if it’s about major principles of civil rights, then resistance is obligatory!

And that’s why I come to the conclusion. A human is different from any other animal by its critical capacity. The way we go about to distinguish illusion from reality, an animal has impressions from its environment through its senses and, but it can’t do much about it. It just have to live with whatever he body tells it’s supposed to do. We can be critical. We can communicate with others. We can verify, whether something is an illusion, or an actual fact and that scientific approach, that critical approach that is so unique to humans, that makes us humans. That’s the place of all human dignity. It’s not that we can have sex with what we want to, eat with whom we want to, that’s animal world. The human world is different from the animal world, because we can be critical and we can communicate critically.

And if the government goes in and suppresses that very aspect of human life, they are suppressing human dignity, and that’s the very most important thing in the German constitution, human dignity. And the German government is trampling it into dust. Not just free speech, but human dignity. You want to have the right to doubt, that is where every research, every critical thinking begins! I doubt my sensory input and then I want to go about critically to find out what the truth is and if the government denies me to do that, the government denies me my humanity and then I have the obligation to resistance, to the very end!

Henrik: Right.

Germar: So, I told the court that. Here I am, I can do no other like Martin Luther* said, “Do with me what we want” but I resist, period!

So, basically that is what the book’s about it. It’s written down, my speech, my seven-day speech and then gives an explanation, documentation about of all the things that I said that I could not deliver in the courtroom. Now, I wrote it, actually, while I was in prison. I tried to publish it. While I was in prison and I got another prosecution because, of course, during my trial I was also defending myself against the accusations, that my writings are stirring up too hostile [?] feelings and that they were inaccurate and whatever. And that part of my defense speech was then used by the prosecution who intercepted my proofs going in and out of prison in preparation of the book. They interpreted that as my attempt to again deny and commit another crime! And they started prosecuting. Well, I had a good lawyer and he managed to get that case shelved and it went away. And I waited with publishing the book until I was out of prison and out of the reach of the German authorities.

But there it is, it came out just four years ago in the First Edition. However I’m on the second [edition] now.

*[Martin Luther (10 November 1483 – 18 February 1546) was a German professor of theology, composer, priest, monk and a seminal figure in the Protestant Reformation. Luther’s major works on the Jews were his 60,000-word treatise Von den Juden und Ihren Lügen (On the Jews and Their Lies), and Vom Schem Hamphoras und vom Geschlecht Christi (On the Holy Name and the Lineage of Christ), both published in 1543.]

Henrik: Is that your latest work, I mean, I know you have several, … You are also working, I think with Eric Hunt a bit, video productions and things like this. Give us an overview of some of the things that you have available for people who want to find out more and really get the meat of your work, if you will.

Germar: Well, the central place to go if you want to find out about me and my work is my own personal website, which is Germar Rudolf dot com. Rudolf with an “lf” not a “ph”. And I have a section where I introduce my views from very simple texts to more complex texts, which includes some of the things that I’ve published over the years. And, also at the end has a list of all the publication that have come out. Now that’s when you want to approach it from finding out about me. Now if you’re interested in the topic as such, independent of my person, the best place to start is probably a website called Holocaust Handbooks dot com. Where the most up to date revisionist research, and also the most concise introductions into the topic have been posted. They are both available for purchase as Kindle, or as hard copy books, but most of them are actually available for free download. So you don’t have to spend a penny. You go to this website, look what you think you want to have and just download it.

[59:58]

And we also have documentaries that have come out over the years on that topic. That’s maybe the least committing and most entertaining way of getting your feet wet, so to say, …

Henrik: It’s effective, though, I have to say! [laughing] For the newcomer, for them to easily get an overview, because obviously, whether they appreciate, you know, history, or not, this could be academically a pretty hard topic, an emotionally hard topic to get into. But these videos, I think are a very effective tool to get the newcomers eyes open to a world which has been hidden from them.

Germar: Right. I think so too. There are a number that, … They all approach the topic from a different angle. We don’t have the one documentary that you should watch there’s a lot out there. If you go to YouTube, but then that’s a dumping ground for all kind of other trash to, so you need to be careful. We tried to really limited it to the stuff that we can vouch for is accurate. And sometimes there’s a video, it’s ten years old and research goes on and not everything is necessarily hundred percent accurate anymore.

Henrik: Sure.

Germar: But, for instance, we have released a documentary, “Questioning the Holocaust. Why We Believed” which picks up from where most people are, you “believe”. Of course, why wouldn’t you, because everybody says not that you have to, but it is so obvious, because all historians agree, all politicians agree, all media agree. If all the experts agree, how can you as an amateur, or as a complete novice, disagree? That would be insane! If all the experts agree there’s coming a thunderstorm around the corner, why would you disagree? It’s insane. So, we all believe!

Now the question is how do you get from that point to a different part in life and this video, “Questioning the Holocaust. Why We Believed” eases you in by not going into the very extremes of the Holocaust, which is Auschwitz, Treblinka, the mass extermination camps as they claim.

[Image] Questioning “The Holocaust” is a multipart miniseries on “The Holocaust” and “Holocaust Revisionism.”

Some people doubt millions of Jews were gassed in fake shower rooms and have some convincing evidence to show you!

Click here to view Part 1:

Questioning the Holocaust. Why We Believed

But into minor issues where it can be easily shown how people get disinformed by media. And I’m saying “disinformed”. I’m not saying lied to, because, rest assured, most journalists have been brainwashed their entire lives until they turn into professional journalists. They had their own beliefs, they have no reason to doubt and there is no other section of the population that thinks they know it all and whose knowledge is actually so superficial, as it is the case with journalists. They have to cover so many topics in such a quick succession, that let’s say the why write about that, that day. They’ll write about that the next minute, they have to write about this and always very concise, very brief. There is no way for them and no point in getting in-depth knowledge, because the time they have to invest to thoroughly research a topic they’re writing about, the topic is gone by the time they’re done. To do their research it takes you a couple of weeks, but news events are a matter of minutes, hours, days at best.

Henrik: Yeah.

Germar: So journalists live from day-to-day, from minute to minute, and whatever they report is just it is just so superficial. But, taking you from there, we all know Dachau was a bad place, a concentration camp.

[Image] Notice informing visitors at Dachau that a room, allegedly “disguised” as a shower room was never used as a “gas chamber”.

And when the Americans went in there for the corpses and the same happened when they went to Nordhausen* and they found these mass corpses and they recorded it, they had it on film and they showed it right after the war as proof of German atrocities.

[Image – click to enlarge] Nordhausen and the surrounding city, full of innocent civilians, were bombed by over 500 British Royal Air Force planes in two days. Images of sick prisoners, bombed and shot by British planes, are exploited and twisted as proof of a deliberate, planned German “Holocaust.” Source: http://questioningtheholocaust.com/

And Eric Hunt, the documentary maker, goes from there and then shows, with all the documentation and the facts available, that these are distorted manipulated footage. That actually, when we look into the documentation to what really happened, prove something completely different than what the Allies claimed! And what is being repeated has been repeated ever since and is being dished out to this day by the mass media, because the mass media, the journalists don’t know any better!

And if there’s one, or two that do know any better they won’t be employed very long, anymore by the media.

Henrik: That’s absolutely right, Germar. I want to take a break here now and then continue in the second hour and talk more about your work, or your experiences and also tie this in as you kind of did in the beginning you spoke a bit about what’s happening in Europe right now, but I want to get your take on where Germany and Europe is in all of this, in terms of what’s happening right now. But I wanted to just give out the website here, one more time. It’s Germar Rudolf dot com. Germar RUDOLF dot com. That’s the website. And then you have, Holocaust Handbooks dot com. And we’ll add a few videos to this program page as well that you definitely want to take a look at if you’re a newcomer. If you’ve been, you know, listening this far, give it a chance, you know, hear them out. Give a look at it and see what you think for yourself.

[65:07]

I think that this will open up a topic for you which is remarkable when you when the pieces of the puzzle begins to fall in place. And as I said before, this really is the spearhead of free speech right now, as well. There are many free speech activists out there, who supposedly enjoy free speech and they they push for it. They claim they’re for it, but they would never touch a topic like this. The point is to try to get them to look at a topic like this, to make them understand that it’s legitimate. These are a very important, it’s important for, as Germar said in the beginning, for identity, for reasons of the fact that it’s being used against us as a weapon, for [against] us. To erode our culture and all of these things that we’re seeing happening in Europe and in America, for that matter too. But we’ll pick this up Germar in the second segment here. Much more to get into, so stay with us everybody, stay with us Germar.

We will take a short break and then we will be right back. Thank you so much for listening.

Stay tuned for the second hour with Germar Rudolf. A very important and frankly frightening second hour as we discuss the coming demographic winter in Europe, if current trends continue.

We begin by talking about the massive power structure upheaval that would need to occur in order for Western civilization at large to achieve a complete paradigm shift and accept the fact that we have been lied to and manipulated on so many levels concerning World War Two and World War One.

We talk about the establishment’s great fear of the rise of nationalism despite the recent terrorist attacks by foreign invaders in Germany, France and all around Europe. And Germar gives a grim picture of the migration statistics from Europe. Which is, you know, seeing many of its best and brightest fleeing Europe from the incoming population, the invasion. And they are taking up residence in other parts of the world. We discussed the most critical extinction level crisis that is plaguing Europe right now, the demographic decline that is resulting from the shrinking birth rates.

Germar emphasizes the financial implications of Europeans allowing themselves to be bred out like this, and we debate, whether, or not the government is discentivizing, or incentivizing having larger families is sort of really the issue. We talk a bit about the sixties sexual revolution, the advent of birth control and also, of course, materialism itself.

Very interesting continuation, definitely don’t miss it if you want to hear more. So the website is the red eyes members dot com. Sign up for a membership if you haven’t already. It’s only six Euros per month. You can try to out for a three month subscription, but we have memberships up to two years available. Support commercial free and independent media! Thank you so much for listening, ladies and gentleman. We’ll be right back with the second hour. Stay tuned, we’ll see on the other side.

[69:51]

END OF PART 1/2

NOTE: Part 2 is available here:

Red Ice Radio – Germar Rudolf – Persecution of Revisionists & Demographic Disaster – Part 2— TRANSCRIPT

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

Version History

Version 13: Jan 28, 2020 — Re-uploaded images and PDF for katana17.com/wp/ version. Added See Also links.

Version 12: May 16, 2017 — Fixed some missing words and typos.

Version 11: May 6, 2017 — Added link to Part 2.

Version 10: Dec 9, 2016 — Improved formatting.

Version 9: Sep 24, 2016 — Added more images. Added PDF of post for download.

Version 8: Sep 14, 2016 — Added 15 minutes of transcript (now complete). Added 3 images. Total completed = 70 minutes.

Version 7: Sep 13, 2016 — Added 10 minutes of transcript. Total completed = 55 minutes.

Version 6: Sep 12, 2016 — Added 10 minutes of transcript. Total completed = 45 minutes.

Version 5: Sep 10, 2016 — Added 10 minutes of transcript. Total completed = 35 minutes.

Version 4: Sep 9, 2016 — Added 10 minutes of transcript. Total completed = 25 minutes.

Version 3: Aug 9, 2016 — Added 5 minutes of transcript. Total completed = 15 minutes.

Version 2: Aug 7, 2016 — Completed first 10 minutes of transcript.

Version 1: Aug 2, 2016 — created post.

typhus – katana17

Monika Schaefer – The Flipside with Monika – Ep 04 with Oscar – Jul 20, 2024 – Transcript

Monika Schaefer

The Flipside with Monika

Ep 04 with Oscar

Sat, Jul 20, 2024

https://www.republicbroadcastingarchives.org/the-flipside-with-monika-july-20-2024/

https://freespeechmonika.com

https://gab.com/MonikaSchaefer

Description

TRANSCRIPT QUALITY = 5 Stars

TRANSCRIPT

“Oh, you know, we’re against the killing and torture of animals!”

“Oh, it’s government for the people, of the people, by the people!”

“Well, how can it be any other way? Of course this is the best system.”

“I will always.”

“I don’t care if they steal our ideas, as long as they implement them! I don’t care if they don’t give us credit for their ideas. I just care that they use our ideas and put them into practice, like implement them.”

“Wow, she’s so modest. She doesn’t need to take the credit.”

“That’s the biggest lie of all.”

“Oh, climate denier!”

“If we are to lose this war, the world will fall into a state of eternal darkness.”

“No, don’t worry, he’s fine.”

“How did they do that here?”

“Oh, racist! That’s Holocaust is gonna happen! Another holocaust is gonna happen [chuckling] because you’re racist!”

“This country belongs to you guys!”

END

RBN Comments

See Also

PDF Download

Version History

The Realist Report – John Friend with Germar Rudolf – Nov 5, 2020 — TRANSCRIPT

The Realist Report

John Friend with

Germar Rudolf

The Realist Report – Germar Rudolf

The Realist Report Description

CONTENTS

TRANSCRIPT

John’s Introduction

Germar’s Background and His Start in Revisionism

Paul Rassiner, the French Founder of Holocaust Revisionism

Discovering the Leuchter Report

“Well, I can understand it, I can verify that, I can actually maybe even contribute to it.”

Starting My PhD at Max Planck Institute in Stuttgart

The Leuchter Report — Jumping the Gun

“Well, because the results are not as I expect them, that proves that there was not any mass gassings going on in Auschwitz.”

Zyklon B — How Stable over Time?

A Trip to Auschwitz for Samples

Having Max Planck Institute Build a Little Gas Chamber

“That any student who wants to do his own research on his own initiative is encouraged and invited to do so and use the Institute’s resources for it.”

“You can’t do this, because I have the contract here that says explicitly I’m allowed to do it.”

“If an expert witness is already in the court room.”

German Court Breaks the Law and Denies Expert Testimony

“Witness, are you really going to testify along the line as the motion of the defense suggests?”

“Well you will hear, when I’m in the stand.”

“Well if you do testify along those lines, you are making yourself liable to prosecution because it’s going to be a crime!”

German Lawyers Prosecuted for Filing “Holocaust Denial” Motion

“I would like to present this evidence.”

Fleeing Germany and Starting a Publishing Enterprise

“No, I’m not going to run.”

Italian Scholar Carlo Mattogno World’s Foremost Expert

Why the Focus on Auschwitz?

Gas Chamber Stories from a Tiny Number of Survivors

“I was there! I did that and I saw that!”

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

“Build your own barrack. Build your own huts. Build your own bed, and that’s it!”

Lack of Sanitary Facilities Leads to Typhus and Catastrophe

Hundreds Die Each Day

SS Personel Succumb to Typhus

“It looks like the wood everywhere is moving because there just are lice and fleas everywhere! It was absolutely horrific! Dead inmates lying in bunks, not being removed for sometimes days, because there was no organization, no structure.”

Dr Wirths

High Ground Water Levels Require Bodies to Be Burnt

Introduction of Delousing Facilities Including Microwave Devices

“Oh! Look at this! At that frequency range radiation actually does something that radio waves don’t do. It heats up water and kills every bug.”

Responsibility for the Deaths Lies with the Reich

“Stop shipping jews to us. We can’t handle the situation!”