Scotland: Funeral Held for Six-Year-Old White Girl Raped and Murdered on Haji-Enriched Island

Michael Byron
Daily Stormer
July 22, 2018

In 2015, the British government made plans to force 20,000 bearded Syrian children into the United Kingdom over a five-year period. In true Kalergi style, those Moslems weren’t merely to be injected into major cities and towns, but also sparsely populated islands far removed from the beaten path.

One island that was hit particularly hard (in proportion to its tiny population of 6,500) was Bute. Located off the shores of western Scotland, Bute forcibly received an initial 15 “migrant” families to “invigorate” its shrinking native population, with more presumably intended thereafter.

The Daily Mail made a big fuss about it at the time. Here are two paragraphs that stood out from that first report:

Although this is one of the most impoverished parts of the UK, the Home Office says each adult migrant is eligible for £200 emergency cash to tide them over until they are given National Insurance numbers which will entitle them to claim state benefits. Under a settlement programme funded by Whitehall, the families also get free heating, lighting and their council tax bills are being paid.

Indeed, nothing is too much trouble. A specially appointed imam is to be ferried from Glasgow each week to lead Friday prayers. A local supermarket has promised to sell halal meat from animals slaughtered according to rules set out in the Koran, after the renowned butchers, MacQueens of Rothesay near the seafront, refused to supply it.

So, while the Scottish locals continued to remain impoverished (with the local government undoubtedly citing “budget cuts” and other excuses reserved for white people seeking aid), that same government unhesitatingly rolled out the red carpet for these camel-faced invaders, giving them access to a bottomless well of resources that didn’t seem to exist before.

Almond-activating stuff.

Anyway, at the beginning of this month, three years after the first Moslems arrived on Bute’s shores, six-year-old Alesha MacPhail was found dead.

She was raped and murdered in the woods by a 16-year-old boy whose name “cannot be identified for legal reasons.”

Now, while it’s possible that a teenage Scot raped and killed her despite living in a close-knit community where everyone knows each other (and where nothing like this has ever happened before), I’m going to assume that it was a haji.

Because 2+2 usually does equal 4.

Little Alesha’s funeral occurred this week. As you can imagine, her murder deeply affected the community.

Daily Mail:

Alesha MacPhail’s mother has led the tributes to the tragic six-year-old who was killed on the Isle of Bute as mourners wore pink at her funeral today.

Georgina Lochrane said that ‘every single day will be harder than the day before to walk this earth without you by my side’ and added: ‘Goodnight my sweetie’.

The schoolgirl’s family carried her little pink coffin to the waiting hearse, a white carriage drawn by two white horses with pink feathers and pink drapes.

Alesha was staying with relatives on the island in the Firth of Clyde at the start of the summer break when she was found dead. A 16-year-old boy was charged with rape and murder following the discovery of Alesha’s body in woodland on July 2.

A piper played as mourners entered Coats Funeral Home in Coatbridge, North Lanarkshire, on Saturday, with dozens of bows tied to the railings of the building while cuddly toys including teddies and unicorns lined the wall outside.

After the ceremony Alesha’s family carried her little pink coffin to the waiting hearse, a white carriage drawn by two white horses with pink feathers and pink drapes.

Mourners lined the street as the hearse set off for Coltswood Cemetery, followed by two black carriages carrying flowers, and family members in cars.

The natives of Bute have just been given a very small taste of what’s occurring on a much greater scale on the mainland. Millions of Pakis and other genetic abominations are pouring into UK at the behest of a government controlled by pedophiles and Jews, then granted carte blanche to rape and murder the white natives at will.

Fortunately for these locals, they’re still in a position to protect their small island from further tragedies. But if they fail to act, and remain meek and passive in the face of conquest like their mainland kinfolk, then they’d better start preparing for the next child’s funeral.

A “Fact Of Common Knowledge” Did Not Require Proof To Execute Germans; Propaganda & Torture Provided The Legal ‘Evidence’

A “Fact Of Common Knowledge” Did Not Require Proof To Execute Germans; Propaganda & Torture Provided The Legal ‘Evidence’

From Wear’s War

Each week we bring you a quote from one of the many fine men and women of various nationalities and professions, including senior military personnel, who were openly appalled by the dispensation of normal military and/or criminal evidentiary processes expected in a trial. These people were highly respected and prominent in their field, at least until they spoke out against the Nuremberg trials.

Rudolf Höss was the first of three successive commandants of the Auschwitz concentration camp… He appeared before the International Military Tribunal as a witness… To the amazement of the defendants and in the presence of journalists from around the world, he confessed to the most frightful crimes that history had ever known. He said that he had personally received an order from Himmler to exterminate the Jews. He estimated that at Auschwitz 3,000,000 people had been exterminated, 2,500,000 of them by means of gas chambers. His confessions were false. They had been extorted from Höss by torture, but it took until 1983 to learn the identity of the torturers and the nature of the tortures they inflicted upon him.  IHR

German Judge Dr. Wilhelm Stäglich, who visited Auschwitz several times during World War II, wrote:

The Nuremberg IMT trial transcripts likewise cannot—as we have seen in another connection—be considered a reliable historical source or even merely a standard of comparison for other documents, as here in the case of the Höss memoirs. For the testimonies produced under Nuremberg “law” contained anything but historical truth. This is the conclusion which has been reached by all objective and unbiased observers of this judicial farce. We have already expounded on the fact that Höss, after his capture, was subjected to the most inhumane treatment and at every stage of his imprisonment placed under various kinds of pressure…

…In the Nuremberg trials, the basic rule was that a “fact of common knowledge” did not require proof. It was enough for the court to take “judicial notice” thereof. The same device was employed in the Auschwitz Trial. Since the post-war “re-education” of the German people, founded on Zionist and Bolshevik atrocity propaganda, had made the “gas chamber” legend into a “fact of common knowledge,” the judges in the Auschwitz Trial had to take “judicial notice” of it, in a certain sense, since otherwise they would have been subjected to the most grievous professional disadvantages and personal attacks

Source: Stäglich, Wilhelm, Auschwitz: A Judge Looks at the Evidence, Institute for Historical Review, 1990, pp. 200-201, 259.

 

The Biggest Murder Trial In History! Did The American-Run Einsatzgruppen Trial Use Forged Documents To Convict Germans Of Genocide?

By John Wear

Benjamin Ferencz, Chief Prosecutor:

“I once saw DPs [Displaced Persons] beat an SS man and then strap him to the steel gurney of a crematorium. They slid him in the oven, turned on the heat and took him back out. Beat him again, and put him back in until he was burnt alive. I did nothing to stop it. I suppose I could have brandished my weapon or shot in the air, but I was not inclined to do so.”

…official Holocaust historiography, however, claims that the Einsatzgruppen had the additional task of committing genocide against Soviet Jews. The Einsatzgruppen reports… are the primary proof of this alleged genocide. The Einsatzgruppen reports that have been produced are copies which show clear signs of postwar additions, inaccurate and inflated figures, and rare signatures which appear on non-incriminating pages.

Benjamin Ferencz immigrated to America as a baby with his Hungarian Jewish parents, he graduated Harvard Law School in 1943. He then joined the U.S. Army as a Private in the 115th AAA Gun Battalion. He was discharged Christmas 1945. Within a few months he was selected as Chief Prosecutor for “The Biggest Murder Trial In History”. Out of thousands of highly experienced American lawyers – young, inexperienced Benjamin Ferencz was chosen. In the following video Benjamin Ferencz describes liberating concentration camps and the known effects of Typhus. At the 5:40 minute mark he mentions how the Nazis used the fat of Jewish victims to make soap. At the 10 minute mark he justifies his interrogation methods stating “There’s a war going on! They’ll kill you if they could!”. The war had finished. Germany was in ruins and occupied by the Allies.

Switching from one myth to another. This is why it is illegal to question the evidence of the so-called Holocaust in 22 countries. The implications if this narrative collapsed would be staggering. Truth does not fear investigation.

The Einsatzgruppen Trial

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

The Einsatzgruppen trial was the ninth of 12 American-run trials held after the International Military Tribunal (IMT) at the Palace of Justice in Nuremberg, Germany. The trial was officially titled “The United States of America v. Otto Ohlendorf et al.” and lasted from September 29, 1947 to April 10, 1948. The court indicted 24 Einsatzgruppen leaders on three counts of criminality: crimes against humanity, war crimes, and membership in organizations declared criminal by the IMT. Only 22 defendants were tried because one committed suicide and another had to be excluded for health reasons.[1]

Benjamin Ferencz, a 27-year-old Harvard-educated attorney, was appointed by Telford Taylor as chief prosecutor in the case. The prosecution’s case was based primarily on the Einsatzgruppen reports his team had discovered in Berlin. Ferencz later said about the Einsatzgruppen reports:

So we had the names of each town and village, the date, the number of people killed, the name of the unit, the officer in charge, and other officers. I sat down in my office with a little adding machine, and I began to count the people that were murdered in cold blood. When I reached a million, I said that’s enough for me. I flew from Berlin to Nuremberg, to see Telford Taylor, who by then was a general. And I said, we’ve got to put on another trial.[2]

Ferencz said the Einsatzgruppen trial probably would not have taken place if his team had not had the extraordinary luck of finding these reports.[3]

The presentation of the prosecution’s evidence lasted less than two days and consisted mainly of excerpts from the Einsatzgruppen reports. Ferencz and the four attorneys assisting him called no prosecution witnesses and presented no films during the trial. Thus, the Nuremberg prosecutors set out to prove by documentation alone that the defendants had participated in some of the worst crimes of the National Socialist regime.[4] Since the Einsatzgruppen reports were crucial to the prosecution’s case, we will examine the validity of these reports.

THE EINSATZGRUPPEN REPORTS

The Einsatzgruppen sent reports of their activities back to Berlin by radio. These reports were transcribed and edited by civil servants and distributed in summary format to non-SS offices such as the German Foreign Office. None of these reports exist today in the original—all of them are copies.[5]

That the Germans let copies of the Einsatzgruppen reports fall into the hands of the Allies is strikingly odd. They could have easily burned these few stacks of incriminating papers before the Allies conquered Germany.[6] The authenticity of the Einsatzgruppen reports has also been questioned because, like so much other “evidence” of Nazi atrocities, the documents emerged from the Soviet occupation zon.[7]

The Soviets murdered up to 22,000 Poles in Katyn Forest & other locations. Until 1990 Germans were blamed for this atrocity by the Soviets.

The copies of the Einsatzgruppen reports which have been produced show clear signs of postwar additions. A typical example is Einsatzgruppen Report No. 111. Peter Winter writes that this report contains not only completely garbled wording, but also a clear addition to the end of a paragraph (highlighted in italics below):

These were the motives for the executions carried out by the Kommandos: Political officials, looters and saboteurs, active Communists and political representatives, Jews who gained their release from prison camps by false statements, agents and informers of the NKVD, persons who, by false depositions and influencing witnesses, were instrumental in the deportation of ethnic Germans, Jewish sadism and revengefulness, undesirable elements, partisans, Politruks, dangers of plague and epidemics, members of Russian bands, armed insurgents—provisioning of Russian bands, rebels and agitators, drifting juveniles, Jews in general.[8]

Dr. Arthur Robert Butz also questions the authenticity of the Einsatzgruppenreports. Butz writes:

They [the documents] are mimeographed and signatures are most rare and, when they occur, appear on non-incriminating pages. Document NO-3159, for example, has a signature, R. R. Strauch, but only on a covering page giving the locations of various units of the Einsatzgruppen. There is also NO-1128, allegedly from Himmler to Hitler reporting, among other things, the execution of 363,211 Russian Jews in August-November 1942. This claim occurs on page four of NO-1128, while initials said to be Himmler’s occur on the irrelevant page one. Moreover, Himmler’s initials were easy to forge: three vertical lines with a horizontal line drawn through them.[9]

Carlo Mattogno has shown that the figures quoted in the Einsatzgruppen reports are inaccurate. Mattogno writes:

For example, in the summary of the activity of Einsatzgruppen A(October 16, 1941, to January 31, 1942) the number of Jews present in Latvia at the arrival of the German troops is 70,000, but the number of Jews shot is reported as being 71,184! Furthermore, another 3,750 Jews were alive in work camps. In Lithuania, there were 153,743 Jews, of which 136,421 were allegedly shot, whereas 34,500 were taken to the ghettos at Kaunas, Wilna, and Schaulen, but the total of those two figures is 170,921 Jews![10]

The British trial of German Field Marshall Erich von Manstein in Hamburg, Germany also proved the inaccuracy of the Einsatzgruppen reports. The prosecution’s case was based on the reports showing that Einsatzgruppe D under the command of Otto Ohlendorf had executed some 85,000 Jews in four and one-half months. Manstein’s defense attorney, Reginald T. Paget, wrote that these claims seemed quite impossible:

In one instance we were able to check their figures. The S.D. claimed that they had killed 10,000 in Simferopol during November and in December they reported Simferopol clear of Jews. By a series of cross checks we were able to establish that the execution of the Jews in Simferopol had taken place on a single day, 16th November. Only one company of S.D. was in Simferopol. The place of execution was 15 kilometers from the town. The numbers involved could not have been more than about 300. These 300 were probably not exclusively Jews but a miscellaneous collection of people who were being held on suspicion of resistance activity…

It was indeed clear that the Jewish community had continued to function quite openly in Simferopol and although several of our witnesses had heard rumors about an S.D. excess committed against Jews in Simferopol, it certainly appeared that this Jewish community was unaware of any special danger…

By the time we had finished with the figures and pointed out the repeated self-contradiction in the S.D. reports, it became probable that at least one “0” would have to be knocked off the total claimed by the S.D. and we also established that only about one-third of Ohlendorf’s activities had taken place in von Manstein’s area. It is impossible to know even the approximate number of murdered Jews, for not only was Ohlendorf lying to his superiors but as we were able to show his company commanders were lying to him.[11]

Von Manstein testified that he had no knowledge that the Einsatzgruppe D or the German army had a policy of murdering Jews. The court believed Manstein and found him innocent of murdering Jews.[12]

BENJAMIN FERENCZ’S CREDIBILITY

Benjamin Ferencz has made statements that call into question his independence and integrity. For example, the defense counsel at the Mauthausen trial in Dachau insisted that signed confessions of the accused, used by the prosecution to great effect, had been extracted from the defendants through physical abuse, coercion and deceit.[13] Benjamin Ferencz admits in an interview that these defense counsel’s claims were correct:

You know how I got witness statements? I’d go into a village where, say, an American pilot had parachuted and been beaten to death and line everyone up against the wall. Then I’d say, “Anyone who lies will be shot on the spot.” It never occurred to me that statements taken under duress would be invalid.[14]

In the same interview, Ferencz admits that he observed the torturing and execution of a captured Nazi at a concentration camp:

I once saw DPs [Displaced Persons] beat an SS man and then strap him to the steel gurney of a crematorium. They slid him in the oven, turned on the heat and took him back out. Beat him again, and put him back in until he was burnt alive. I did nothing to stop it. I suppose I could have brandished my weapon or shot in the air, but I was not inclined to do so. Does that make me an accomplice to murder?[15]

Ferencz, who enjoys an international reputation as a world peace advocate, further relates a story concerning the interrogation of an SS colonel. Ferencz explains that he took out his pistol in order to intimidate him:

What do you do when he thinks he’s still in charge? I’ve got to show him that I’m in charge. All I’ve got to do is squeeze the trigger and mark it as auf der Flucht erschossen [shot while trying to escape]…I said “you are in a filthy uniform sir, take it off!” I stripped him naked and threw his clothes out the window. He stood there naked for half an hour, covering his balls with his hands, not looking nearly like the SS officer he was reported to be. Then I said “now listen, you and I are gonna have an understanding right now. I am a Jew—I would love to kill you and mark you down as auf der Flucht erschossen, but I’m gonna do what you would never do. You are gonna sit down and write out exactly what happened—when you entered the camp, who was there, how many died, why they died, everything else about it. Or, you don’t have to do that—you are under no obligation—you can write a note of five lines to your wife, and I will try to deliver it…” [Ferencz gets the desired statement and continues:] I then went to someone outside and said “Major, I got this affidavit, but I’m not gonna use it—it is a coerced confession. I want you to go in, be nice to him, and have him re-write it.” The second one seemed to be okay—I told him to keep the second one and destroy the first one. That was it.[16]

Peter Winter asks the question: “Is this the sort of ‘objective’ legal person who can be relied upon to produce evidence at a major trial?”[17] The fact that Ferencz threatened and humiliated his witness and reported as much to his superior officer indicates that he operated in a culture where such illegal methods were acceptable.[18] Any lawyer knows that such evidence is not admissible in a legitimate court of law.

DEFENDANTS’ TESTIMONY

Otto Ohlendorf testified at the IMT that Einsatzgruppe D, the mobile security unit he commanded in the Crimea between June 1941 and 1942, was responsible for the murder of approximately 90,000 people. Ohlendorf’s testimony horrified the court and had a depressing effect on the defendants. Dr. Gustav M. Gilbert, the American prison psychologist, wrote that Ohlendorf’s testimony established

the inescapable reality and shame of mass murder…by the unquestionable reliability of a German official.”[19]

British attorney Reginald Paget, however, questioned the validity of Ohlendorf’s testimony at the IMT. Paget wrote:

Ohlendorf had reported that not only Simferopol but the whole Crimea was cleared of Jews. He was clearly a man who was prepared to say anything that would please his employers. The Americans had found him the perfect witness.”[20]

Otto Ohlendorf at the Einsatzgruppen trial retracted his earlier testimony at the IMT that there had been a specific policy to exterminate Jews on racial or religious grounds. Under cross examination, Ohlendorf testified that any Jews and gypsies killed by his group D were killed as part of anti-partisan activities. Ohlendorf also testified that only 40,000 people had been executed by his group D instead of the 90,000 that he had testified to at the IMT.[21]

Another defendant at the Einsatzgruppen trial, Walter Haensch, claimed he knew nothing of the murder of the Jews and denied any criminal wrongdoing by his Kommando while he was its leader. Haensch claimed he first learned of the murder of Jews in July 1947 when his interrogator at Nuremberg told him of the Final Solution. Haensch claimed that the Einsatzgruppen reports that contradicted his testimony were inaccurate. After the trial, Haensch became so obsessed with proving his innocence that he refused to apply for parole, hoping that American officials would see their error and grant him the clemency he deserved.[22]

Benjamin Ferencz claims the Einsatzgruppen reports were definitive proof that the Einsatzgruppen had mass murdered Jews. Ferencz states:

Michael Musmanno, the presiding judge, provided the defendants with wide latitude in their presentation of evidence in the Einsatzgruppen trial. However, Ferencz writes that Musmanno was convinced early on of the defendants’ guilt:

The judge handed down worse sentences than I would have imposed. So he had made up his mind, early on, that he wasn’t going to be deceived. For him the question was how to sentence them. He was a devout Catholic, and he went into a monastery for a week before sentencing. He convicted all 22 people, and of these he sentenced 13 to death by hanging. During the trial, he had let everyone say whatever they wanted to say. He gave so much leeway; he was leaning over backwards to show the world that it was a fair trial.[24]

“There were times when I felt outraged. For example, the day one defendant, a colonel, said: ‘What, Jews were shot? I hear that in this courtroom for the first time.’ We had the records of every day that man was out murdering, and he had the gall to say that. I was ready to jump over the bar and poke my fingers into his eyes.”[23]

Four Einsatzgruppen units altogether numbering 3,000 men—including non-combat troops such as drivers, interpreters, and radiomen—became operational soon after the German invasion of the Soviet Union. One of their missions indisputably consisted of fighting against partisans, and in this regard they committed numerous mass shootings.[25]

Michael Musmanno, the presiding judge, provided the defendants with wide latitude in their presentation of evidence in the Einsatzgruppen trial. However, Ferencz writes that Musmanno was convinced early on of the defendants’ guilt:

The judge handed down worse sentences than I would have imposed. So he had made up his mind, early on, that he wasn’t going to be deceived. For him the question was how to sentence them. He was a devout Catholic, and he went into a monastery for a week before sentencing. He convicted all 22 people, and of these he sentenced 13 to death by hanging. During the trial, he had let everyone say whatever they wanted to say. He gave so much leeway; he was leaning over backwards to show the world that it was a fair trial.[24]

The defendants at the Einsatzgruppen trial did not receive a fair hearing. The shootings carried out by the Einsatzgruppen were not nearly as extensive as claimed at the trial, for the numbers mentioned in the Einsatzgruppen reports cannot be objectively confirmed and in many cases are demonstrably exaggerated. These reports should not have been used to convict the Einsatzgruppen defendants of genocide against Soviet Jewry.[27]

The Nuremberg Trials are critical to defending the slaughter of more than 9 million Germans post-WWII. Known as History’s Most Terrifying Peace.

Read Germany’s War

ENDNOTES

[1] Earl, Hilary, The Nuremberg SS-Einsatzgruppen Trial, 1945-1958, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp. 1, 9-11.

[2] Stuart, Heikelina Verrijn and Simons, Marlise, The Prosecutor and the Judge, Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2009, pp. 14-15.

[3] Ibid., p. 14.

[4] Earl, Hilary, The Nuremberg SS-Einsatzgruppen Trial, 1945-1958, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp. 179-180.

[5] Winter, Peter, The Six Million: Fact or Fiction?, The Revisionist Press, 2015, p. 24.

[6] Mattogno, Carlo and Graf, Jürgen, Treblinka: Transit Camp or Extermination Camp?, Washington, D.C.: The Barnes Review, 2010, p. 204.

[7] Winter, Peter, The Six Million: Fact or Fiction?, The Revisionist Press, 2015, p. 25

[8] Ibid., pp. 24-25.

[9] Butz, Arthur R., The Hoax of the Twentieth Century: The Case Against the Presumed Extermination of European Jewry, ninth edition, Newport Beach, CA: Institute for Historical Review, 1993, p. 198.

[10] Rudolf, Germar and Mattogno, Carlo, Auschwitz Lies: Legends, Lies & Prejudices on the Holocaust, Washington, D.C.: The Barnes Review, 2011, p. 243.

[11] Paget, Reginald T., Manstein: His Campaigns and His Trial, London: Collins, 1951, pp. 169-172.

[12] Ibid., p. 174.

[13] Jardim, Tomaz, The Mauthausen Trial, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2012, p. 6.

[14] Brzezinski, Matthew, “Giving Hitler Hell”, The Washington Post Magazine, July 24, 2005, p. 26.

[15] Ibid.

[16] Jardim, Tomaz, The Mauthausen Trial, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2012, pp. 82-83.

[17] Winter, Peter, The Six Million: Fact or Fiction?, The Revisionist Press, 2015, p. 24.

[18] Jardim, Tomaz, The Mauthausen Trial, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2012, p. 83.

[19] Earl, Hilary, The Nuremberg SS-Einsatzgruppen Trial, 1945-1958, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2009, p. 72.

[20] Paget, Reginald T., Manstein: His Campaigns and His Trial, London: Collins, 1951, p. 171.

[21] Butz, Arthur R., The Hoax of the Twentieth Century: The Case Against the Presumed Extermination of European Jewry, ninth edition, Newport Beach, CA: Institute for Historical Review, 1993, p. 202.

[22] Earl, Hilary, The Nuremberg SS-Einsatzgruppen Trial, 1945-1958, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp. 162-163.

[23] Stuart, Heikelina Verrijn and Simons, Marlise, The Prosecutor and the Judge, Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2009, p. 19.

[24] Ibid., pp. 19-20.

[25] Mattogno, Carlo and Graf, Jürgen, Treblinka: Transit Camp or Extermination Camp?, Washington, D.C.: The Barnes Review, 2010, pp. 203, 205.

[26] Ibid., pp. 203-211.

[27] Ibid., pp. 208-211.

All these things that happened so long ago, are very relevant to the current narrative promoted today, and the genocide of the white race.

 

How the British Obtained the Confessions of Rudolf Höss

Robert Faurisson

Rudolf Höss was the first of three successive commandants of the Auschwitz concentration camp. He is often called “the Commandant of Auschwitz,” and the general public knows of him from a book published under the title Commandant in Auschwitz.

He appeared before the International Military Tribunal as a witness on 15 April 1946, where his deposition caused a sensation. To the amazement of the defendants and in the presence of journalists from around the world, he confessed to the most frightful crimes that history had ever known. He said that he had personally received an order from Himmler to exterminate the Jews. He estimated that at Auschwitz 3,000,000 people had been exterminated, 2,500,000 of them by means of gas chambers. His confessions were false. They had been extorted from Höss by torture, but it took until 1983 to learn the identity of the torturers and the nature of the tortures they inflicted upon him.

The confessions of Rudolf Höss supply the keystone to the theory which maintains that systematic extermination of the Jews, especially by means of homicidal gas chambers, was a historical reality. These confessions consist essentially of four documents which, in chronological order, are the following:

1. A written deposition signed on l4 March (or l5 March?) l946 at 2:30 in the morning; it is an 8-page typed text written in German; I do not think, under normal circumstances, a court in any democracy would agree to take into consideration those pages lacking as they did any heading and any printed administrative reference; and crawling with various corrections, whether typed or handwritten, uninitialled and without a notation at the end of the total number of words corrected or deleted. Höss signed it for the first time after having written: “14.3.46 230.” He signed again after two lines which are supposed to have been handwritten but which were typed, and which say:

I have read the above account and confirm that it is corresponding to my own statement and that it was the pure truth. (Official translation.]

The names and the signatures of the two witnesses, British sergeants, follow. One did not note the date, while the other indicated 15 March. The last signature is that of a captain of the 92nd Field Security Section, who certifies that the two sergeants were present throughout the entire proceedings, during which the prisoner Rudolf Höss made his statement voluntarily. The date indicated is 14 March 1946. Nothing indicates the place!

The Allies numbered this document NO-1210.

2. An affidavit signed 22 days later on 5 April 1946. It is a typed text, 20 pages long, written in English. That is surprising: thereby Höss signed a declaration under oath, not in his own language but in that of his guards. His signature appeared three times: at the bottom of the first two pages, then on the third and last page, after a text of four lines, still in English, still typed, which reads:

I understand English as it is written above. The above statements are true: this declaration is made by me voluntarily and without compulsion; after reading over the statement, I have signed and executed the same at Nurnberg, Germany, on the fifth day of April 1946.

There follows the signature of Lieutenant-Colonel Smith W. Brookhart after the statement: “Subscribed and sworn before me this 5th day of April 1946, at Nurnberg, Germany.”

In its form, this text is, if possible, even less acceptable than the preceding one. In particular, entire lines have been added in capital letters in the English style, while others are crossed out with a stroke of the pen. There is no initialling in the margin next to these corrections, and no summary at the end of the document of the words struck out. The Allies assigned this document the number PS-3868.

In order to hide the fact that Höss had signed an affidavit that was in English when it ought to have been in his own language, and in order to make the crossed-out words and the additions and corrections disappear, the following trick was used at Nuremberg: the original text was recast and presented as a “Translation” from German into English! But the person responsible for this deception did his work too quickly. He thought that a handwritten addition to paragraph 10 (done in an English handwriting style) was an addition to the end of paragraph 9. The result of that misunderstanding is that the end of paragraph 9 is rendered totally incomprehensible. There are, therefore, two different documents that bear the same file number, PS-3868: the document signed by Höss and the “remake.” It is the “remake,” really a glaring forgery, that was used before the Nuremberg tribunal. One historical work that claimed to reproduce document PS-3868 by Höss in fact reproduced the “remake” but omitted (without saying so) the end of paragraph 9 as well as all of paragraph 10: see Henri Monneray, La Persécution des Juifs dans les pays de l’Est présentee à Nuremberg, Paris, Center for Contemporary Jewish Documentation,1949, pp.159 – 162.

3. The spectacular oral deposition, which I have already mentioned, made before the IMT on 15 April 1946, ten days after the writing of document PS-3868. Paradoxically, it was a lawyer for the defense, Kurt Kauffmann, Ernst Kaltenbrunner’s attorney, who had asked for Höss’s appearance. His obvious intention was to show that the person responsible for the presumed extermination was Himmler and not Kaltenbrunner. When it came time for the representative of the prosecution (at that point the American assistant prosecutor, Col. Harlan Amen) to question Höss, he seemed to be reading from the affidavit signed by the latter but, in fact, he was reading excerpts from the “remake.” Col. Amen gave an excuse for not reading paragraph 9 (and, at the same time, paragraph 8). Stopping after reading each excerpt, he asked Höss if that was in fact what he had stated. He received the following responses: “Jawohl,” “Jawohl,” “Jawohl” “Ja, es stimmt,” a two sentence response (containing an obvious error about the Hungarian Jews supposedly having been killed at Auschwitz as early as 1943 even though the first convoy of them did not arrive at Auschwitz until May 2 of 1944), “Jawohl,” “Jawohl,” “Jawohl,” a one-sentence response, “Jawohl,” and “Jawohl.” [IMT, XI, pp. 457-461]. Höss is quoted according to the text of the German-language edition of the IMT series.

In a normal murder case there would have been a hundred questions to ask about the extermination and the gas chambers (that is to say about a crime and an instrument of the crime which were without precedent in history), but no one asked those questions. In particular, Colonel Amen did not ask for a single detail nor for any additional information about the frightening text which he had read in the presence of journalists whose stories would make the headlines in newspapers around the world the next day.

4. The texts generally collected under the title Commandant in Auschwitz. Höss is alleged to have written these texts in pencil under the watchful eye of his Polish-Communist jailers, while in a prison at Cracow awaiting his trial. He was condemned to death on 2 April 1947 and hanged at the Auschwitz concentration camp fourteen days later. The world had to wait 11 years, until 1958, for the publication in German of his alleged memoirs. They were edited by the German historian Martin Broszat without regard for scholarly method. Broszat went so far as to suppress several fragments which would have too clearly made it appear that Höss (or his Polish jailers) had offered outrageous statements which would have called into question the reliability of his writings in toto.

The four documents that I have just enumerated are closely connected in their origin. Looking at them more closely, there are contradictions among their respective contents, but, for the most part, they are internally consistent. The eight pages of NO-1210 are in a sense summed up in the 2º pages of PS-3868; that latter document served as the central document in the oral testimony before the IMT; and, finally, the memoirs written at Cracow crown the whole. The base and the matrix are thus document NO-1210. It was in the Cracow memoirs, written under the supervision of Polish examining magistrate Jan Sehn, that Höss was to give particulars about how the British had obtained that very first confession.

Höss’s Revelations about His First Confession (Document NO-1210 of 14 or 15 March 1946)

The war ended in Germany on 8 May 1945. Höss fell into the hands of the British, who imprisoned him in a camp for SS men. As a trained agronomist, he obtained an early release. His guards were unaware of the importance of their prey. A work office found him employment as an agricultural work at a farm near Flensburg, not far from the Danish border. He remained there for eight months. The military police looked for him. His family, with whom he succeeded in making contact, was closely watched and subjected to frequent searches.

In his memoirs Höss recounts the circumstances of his arrest and what followed. The treatment that he underwent was particularly brutal. At first sight it is surprising that the Poles allowed Höss to make the revelations he did about the British military police. On reflection, we discover that they might have done so out of one or more of the following motives:

  • to give the confession an appearance of sincerity and veracity;
  • to cause the reader to make a comparison, flattering for the Polish Communists, between the British and Polish methods, Indeed Höss later said that during the first part of his detention at Cracow, his jailers came very close to finishing him off physically and above all morally, but that later they treated him with “such decent and considerate treatment” that he consented to write his memoirs;
  • to furnish an explanation for certain absurdities contained in the text (NO-1210) that the British police had had Höss sign, one of these absurdities being the invention of an “extermination camp” in a place which never existed on any Polish map: “Wolzek near Lublin”; confusion with Belzec is not possible since Höss talks about three camps: “Belzek (sic), Tublinka (sic) and Wolzek near Lublin.” Farther on, the spelling of Treblinka will be corrected. Let us note in passing that the camps of Belzec and Treblinka did not yet exist at the time (June 194l) when Himmler, according to Höss, told him that they were already functioning as “extermination camps.”

Here are the words Höss uses to describe, in succession, his arrest by the British; his signing of the document that would that would become NO-1210; his transfer to Minden-on-the-Weser, where the treatment that he underwent was worse yet; his stay at the Nuremberg tribunal’s prison; and, finally, his extradition to Poland.

I was arrested on 11 March 1946 (at 11 pm).

My phial of poison had been broken two days before.

When I was aroused from sleep, I thought at first I was being attacked by robbers, for many robberies were taking place at that time. That was how they managed to arrest me. I was maltreated by the Field Security Police.

I was taken to Heide where I was put in those very barracks from which I had been released by the Bntish eight months earlier.

At my first interrogation, evidence was obtained by beating me. I do not know what is in the record, although I signed it. Alcohol and the whip were too much for me. The whip was my own, which by chance had got into my wife’s luggage. It had hardly ever touched my horse, far less the prisoners. Nevertheless, one of my interrogators was convinced that I had perpetually used it for flogging the prisoners.

After some days I was taken to Minden-on-the-Weser, the main interrogation centre in the British Zone. There I received further rough treatment at the hands of the English public prosecutor, a major.

The conditions in the prison accorded with this behaviour.

After three weeks, to my surprise, I was shaved and had my hair cut and I was allowed to wash. My handcuffs had not previously been removed since my arrest.

On the next day I was taken by lorry to Nuremberg, together with a prisoner of war who had been brought over from London as a witness in Fritzsche’s defence. My impnsonment by the Intemational Military Tribunal was a rest-cure compared to what I had been through before. I was accommodated in the same building as the principal accused, and was able to see them daily as they were taken to the court. Almost every day we were visited by representatives for all the Allied nations. I was always pointed out as an especially interesting animal.

I was in Nuremberg because Kaltenbrunner’s counsel had demanded me as a witness for his defence. I have never been able to grasp, and it is still not clear to me, how I of all people could have helped to exonerate Kaltenbrunner. Although the conditions in prison were, in every respect, good — I read whenever I had the time, and there was a well stocked library available — the interrogations were extremely unpleasant, not so much physically, but far more because of their strong psychological effect. I cannot really blame the interrogators — they were all Jews.

Psychologically I was almost cut in pieces. They wanted to know all about everything, and this was also done by Jews. They left me in no doubt whatever as to the fate that was in store for me.

On 25 May, my wedding anniversary as it happened, I was driven with von Burgsdorff and Bühler to the aerodrome and there handed over to Polish officers. We flew in an American plane via Berlin to Warsaw. Although we were treated very politely during our joumey, I feared the worst when I remembered my experiences in the British Zone and the tales I had heard about the way people were being treated in the East. (Commandant in Auschwitz, Introduction by Lord Russell of Liverpool. English translation, Weidenfeld and Nicolson,. 1959, p. 173-175.)

Revelations in 1983 About the British Torturers of Rudolf Höss

The Revisionists proved a long time ago that the various confessions of Rudolf Höss contained so many gross errors, nonsensical elements, and impossibilities of all kinds, that it is no longer possible to believe them, as did the judges at Nuremberg and Cracow, as well as certain self styled historians, without any prior analysis of their content and of the circumstances in which they were obtained.

In all likelihood, Höss was tortured by the British soldiers of the 92nd Field Security Section, but a confirmation of that hypothesis was necessary. Confirmation has come with the publication in England of a book containing the name of the principal torturer (a British sergeant of Jewish origin) and a description of the circumstances of Höss’ arrest, as well as his third-degree interrogation.

The book is by Rupert Butler. It was published in 1983 (Hamlyn Paperbacks). Butler is the author of three other works: The Black Angels, Hand of Steel and Gestapo, all published by Hamlyn. The book that interests us is entitled Legions of Death. Its inspiration is anti-Nazi. Butler says that he researched this book at the Imperial War Museum in London, the Institute for Contemporary History and Wiener Library, and other such prestigious institutions. At the beginning of his book, he expresses his gratitude to these institutions and, among others, to two persons, one of whom is Bernard Clarke (“who captured Auschwitz Commandant Rudolf Höss”). The author quotes several fragments of what are either written or recorded statements by Clarke.

Bernard Clarke shows no remorse. On the contrary, he exhibits a certain pride in having tortured a “Nazi.” Rupert Butler, likewise, finds nothing to criticize in that. Neither of them understands the importance of their revelations. They say that Höss was arrested on 11 March, 1946, and that it took three days of torture to obtain “a coherent statement.” They do not realize that the alleged “coherent statement” is nothing other than the lunatic confession, signed by their quivering victim on the l4th or l5th of March 1946, at 2:30 in the morning, which was to seal Höss’ fate definitely, a confession which would also give definitive shape to the myth. The confession would also shape decisively the myth of Auschwitz, the supposed high-point of the extermination of the Jews, above all due to the alleged use of homicidal gas chambers.

On 11 March 1946, a Captain Cross, Bernard Clarke and four other intelligence specialists in British uniforms, most of them tall and menacing, entered the home of Frau Höss and her children.

The six men, we are told, were all “practised in the more sophisticated techniques of sustained and merciless investigation” (p. 235). Clarke began to shout:

If you don’t tell us [where your husband is] we’ll turn you over to the Russians and they’ll put you before a firing-squad. Your son will go to Siberia.

Frau Höss broke down and revealed, says Clarke, the location of the farm where her husband was in hiding, as well as his assumed name: Franz Lang. And Bernard Clarke added:

Suitable intimidation of the son and daughter produced precisely identical information.

The Jewish sergeant and the five other specialists in third degree interrogation then left to seek out Höss, whom they surprised in the middle of the night, sleeping in an alcove of the room used to slaughter cattle on the farm.

Höss screamed in terror at the mere sight of British uniforms.

Clarke yelled “What is your name?”

With each answer of “Franz Lang,” Clarke’s hand crashed into the face of his prisoner. The fourth time that happened, Höss broke and admitted who he was.

The admission suddenly unleashed the loathing of the Jewish sergeants in the arresting party whose parents had died in Auschwitz following an order signed by Höss.

The prisoner was torn from the top bunk, the pyjamas ripped from his body. He was then dragged naked to one of the slaughter tables, where it seemed to Clarke the blows and screams were endless.

Eventually, the Medical Officer urged the Captain: “Call them off, unless you want to take back a corpse.”

A blanket was thrown over Höss and he was dragged to Clarke’s car, where the sergeant poured a substantial slug of whisky down his throat. Then Höss tried to sleep.

Clarke thrust his service stick under the man’s eyelids and ordered in German: “Keep your pig eyes open, you swine.”

For the first time Höss trotted out his oft-repeated justification: “I took my orders from Himmler. I am a soldier in the same way as you are a soldier and we had to obey orders.”

The party arrived back at Heide around three in the morning. The snow was swirling still, but the blanket was torn from Höss and he was made to walk completely nude through the prison yard to his cell. (p. 237)

So it is that Bernard reveals “It took three days to get a coherent statement out of [Höss]” (ibid.). This admission was corroborated by Mr. Ken Jones in an article in the Wrexham Leader. (October 17,1986):

Mr. Ken Jones was then a private with the fifth Royal Horse Artillery stationed at Heid[e) in Schleswig-Holstein. “They brought him to us when he refused to cooperate over questioning about his activities during the war. He came in the winter of 1945/6 and was put in a small jail cell in the barracks,” recalls Mr. Jones. Two other soldiers were detailed with Mr. Jones to join Höss in his cell to help break him down for interrogation. “We sat in the cell with him, night and day, armed with axe handles. Our job was to prod him every time he fell asleep to help break down his resistance,” said Mr. Jones. When Höss was taken out for exercise he was made to wear only jeans and a thin cotton shirt in the bitter cold. After three days and nights without sleep, Höss finally broke down and made a full confession to the authorities.

Clarke’s statement, obtained under the conditions just described by bullies of British Military Security under the brutal inspiration of sergeant-interpreter Bernard Clarke, became Höss’s first confession, the original confession indexed under the number NO-1210. Once the tortured prisoner had begun to talk, according to Clarke, it was impossible to stop him. Clarke, no more conscious in 1982 or 1983 than in 1946 of the enormity of what he forced Höss to confess, goes on to describe a series of fictitious horrors presented here as the truth: Höss went on to tell how after the bodies had been ignited, the fat oozing from them was poured over the other bodies (!). He estimated the number of dead during just the period when he was at Auschwitz at two million (!); the killings reached 10,000 victims per day (!).

It was Clarke’s duty to censor the letters sent by Höss to his wife and children. Every policeman knows that the power to grant or withhold permission to a prisoner to write to his family constitutes a psychological weapon. To make a prisoner “sing” it is sometimes sufficient to merely suspend or cancel that authorization. Clarke makes an interesting remark about the content of Höss’s letters; he confides to us:

Sometimes a lump came to my throat. There were two different men in that one man. One was brutal with no regard for human life. The other was soft and affectionate. (p. 238)

Rupert Butler ends his narrative by saying that Höss sought neither to deny nor to escape his responsibilities. In effect, at the Nuremberg tribunal Höss conducted himself with a “schizoid apathy.” The expression is that of the American prison psychologist, G.M. Gilbert, who was in charge of the psychological surveillance of the prisoners and whose eavesdropping aided the American prosecution. We can certainly believe that Höss was “split in two”! He had the appearance of a rag because they had turned him into a rag.

“Apathetic”, writes Gilbert on page 229 of his book; “apathetic, he repeats on the following page; “schizoid apathy,” he writes on page 239 (Nuremberg Diary, 1947, Signet Book, 1961).

At the end of his trial at Cracow; Höss greeted his death sentence with apparent indifference, Rupert Butler comments as follows:

[Höss] reasoned that Allies had their orders and, that there could be absolutely no question of these not being carried out. (ibid.)

One could not say it any better. It seems that Rudolf Höss, like thousands of accused Germans turned over to the mercy of conquerors who were totally convinced of their own goodness, had quickly grasped that he had no other choice but to suffer the will of his judges, whether they came from the West or from the East.

Butler then quickly evokes the case of Hans Frank, the former Governor of Poland. With the same tone of moral satisfaction he recounts the circumstances of Frank’s capture and subsequent treatment:

Celebrity status of any kind singularly failed to impress the two coloured GIs who arrested him and made sure he was transported to the municipal prison in Miesbach only after he had been savagely beaten up and flung into a lorry.

A tarpaulin had been thrown over him to hide the more obvious signs of ill-treatment; Frank found the cover useful when he attempted to slash an artery in his left arm.

Clearly, no such easy way out could be permitted; a US army medical officer saved his life and he stood trial at the International Military Tribunial at Nuremberg. (p. 238-239)

Rudolf Höss and Hans Frank were not the only ones to undergo treatment of that kind. Among the most celebrated cases, we know of Julius Streicher, Hans Fritzsche, Oswald Pohl, Franz Ziereis, and Josef Kramer.

But the case of Rudolf Höss is by far the most serious in its consequences. There is no document that proves that the Germans had a policy of exterminating the Jews. Léon Poliakov agreed with this in 1951:

As regards the conception properly called of the plan for a total extermination, the three or four principal actors committed suicide in May of 1945. No document has survived or perhaps has ever existed.

(Bréviaire de la haine: Le IIIe Reich et les Juifs, Calmann-((((((((((((Levy)))))))))))), 1951, Livre de Poche, 1974, p.171 )

In the absence of any document, historians à la Poliakov have repeatedly returned, primarily, to doubtful confessions like those of Kurt ((((((((((((Gerstein)))))))))))) or Rudolf Höss, sometimes modifying the texts to suit their convenience.

Bernard Clarke is “today a successful businessman working in the south of England” (Legions of Death, 1983, p. 235). One can in fact say that it is his voice that was heard at Nuremberg on 15 April 1946, when Assistant Prosecutor Amen read, piece by piece, to an astonished and overwhelmed audience, the supposed confession of Rudolf Höss. On that day was launched a lie of world-wide dimensions: the lie of Auschwitz. At the origins of that prodigious media event: several Jewish sergeants of British Military Security, including Bernard Clarke, “today a successful businessman working in the south of England.”

The Testimony of Moritz von Schirmeister

During the war, Moritz von Schirmeister had been the personal press attaché of Joseph Goebbels. On 29 June 1946, he was interrogated before the IMT as a defense witness for Hans Fritzsche. His deposition was particularly interesting regarding the actual personality of Dr. Goebbels and the attitude of the official German news services toward the flood of atrocity stories about the concentration camps spread during the war by the Allies.

At the end of the war, Moritz von Schirmeister had been arrested by the British and interned in a camp in England, where he was given the task of politically “re-educating” his fellow prisoners. Before testifying at Nuremberg, he was transferred by plane from London to Germany. At first he was kept at Minden-on-the-Weser, which was the principal interrogation center for the British Military Police. From there he was taken by car (31 March — 1 April 1946) to the prison at Nuremberg. In the same car rode Rudolf Höss. Moritz von Schirmeister is precisely that “prisoner of war who had been brought over from London as a witness in Fritzsche’s defense about whom Höss speaks in his “memoirs” (see above, p. 393).

Thanks to a document that I obtained from American researcher Mark Weber, who gave me a copy of it in Washington in September of 1983 (a document whose exact source I not yet authorized to indicate), we know that they were able to talk freely in the car that took them to Nuremberg. In that document, slightly more than two pages long, Schirmeister reports, as regarding the charges hanging over Höss, that Höss confided to him:

Gewiss, ich habe unterschrieben, dass ich 2 Millionen Juden umgebracht habe. Aber ich hätte genausogut untershrieben, dass es 5 Millionen Juden gewesen sind. Es gibt eben Methoden, mit denen man jedes Geständnis erreichen kann — ob es nun wahr ist oder nicht.

“Certainly, I signed a statement that I killed two and a half million Jews. But I could just as well have said that it was five million Jews. There are certain methods by which any confession can be obtained, whether it is true or not.”

Another Confession Signed by Rudolf Höss

The British torturers of Rudolf Höss had no reason to exercise any restraint. After making him sign document NO-1210 at 2:30 in the morning of the l4th or l5th of March 1946, they obtained a new signature from him on March 16, this time at the bottom of a text in English, written in an English handwriting style, with a blank in the space where the name of the place ought to have been given. His guards made him sign a simple note written in English:

Statement made voluntarily at ______ Gaol by Rudolf Höss, former Commandant of Auschwitz Concentration Camp on l6th day of March 1946.

I personally arranged on orders received from Himmler in May 1941 the gassing of two million persons between June/July 1941 and the end of 1943 during which time I was commandant of Auschwitz.

signed.
Rudolf Höss,
SS-Stubhr.
Eh. (?) Kdt. v. Auschwitz-Birkenau

(even the word “signed” was written in an English hand).

The Auschwitz Myth

We have known for some time that the Auschwitz myth is of an exclusively Jewish origin. Arthur R. Butz has related the facts in his book, The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, as has Wilhelm Stäglich in The Auschwitz Myth. The principal authors of the creation and the peddling of the “rumor of Auschwitz” have been, successively, two Slovaks, ((((((((((((Alfred Wetzler)))))))))))) (or Weczler) and ((((((((((((Rudolf Vrba)))))))))))) (or ((((((((((((Rosenberg)))))))))))) or ((((((((((((Rosenthal))))))))))))); then a Hungarian, Rabbi Michael Dov Ber Weissmandel (or Weissmandl); then, in Switzerland, representatives of the World Jewish Congress like Gerhard Riegner, who were in touch with London and Washington; and finally Americans like ((((((((((((Harry Dexter White)))))))))))), ((((((((((((Henry Morgenthau)))))))))))) Jr. and Rabbi ((((((((((((Stephen Samuel Wise)))))))))))). Thus was born the famous World Refugee Board Report on Auschwitz and Birkenau, published in Washington in November 1944. Copies of this report were included in the files of the judges advocate general in charge of prosecuting the Germans involved in the Auschwitz camp. It constituted the official version of the story of the alleged gassing of the Jews in that camp. Most probably it was used as a reference work by the inquirers-interrogators-torturers of “the Commandant of Auschwitz.” All the names here mentioned are those of Jews.

Moreover we now see that Bernard Clarke, the first British torturer, was a Jew, The second British torturer, Major Draper (?), may also have been a Jew. The same for the two Americans: psychologist G.M. (Gustave ((((((((((((Mahler))))))))))))) Gilbert and Colonel Harlan Amen. Finally, in Poland, Höss was faced with Polish Jews who treated him more or less the same way. When he wrote his “memoirs” it was under the supervision of instructing magistrate Jan Sehn, who was also probably a Jew.

Establishment historians dispute that Höss had been tortured and had confessed under duress. Since the publication of Rupert Butler’s book in 1983, however, it is no longer possible for them to contest that. The Revisionists were right.

Since 1985 it is even less possible. In January-March 1985, the trial of Ernst Zündel, who was accused by a Jewish association and by the Crown of spreading Revisionist literature, took place in Toronto (Canada). ((((((((((((Rudolf Vrba)))))))))))) testified as a Crown witness. (He lives now in British Columbia). Affirmative and self assured as long as he answered the questions of the Crown, he suffered a spectacular rout when cross-examined by Ernst Zündel’s lawyer, Doug Christie. For the first time since 1945 a Jewish witness to the alleged gassings in Auschwitz was asked to explain his affirmations and his figures. The result was so terrible for R. Vrba that finally the Crown itself gave a kind of coup de grace to its key witness. That unexpected event and some others (like the leading specialist of the Holocaust, ((((((((((((Raul Hilberg)))))))))))), being caught red-handed in his lies) really made of the “Toronto Trial” the “Trial of the Nuremberg Trial.”

The unintentional revelations of Rupert Butler in 1983 and unexpected revelations of the “Toronto Trial” in 1985 succeeded at last in showing entirely and clearly how the Auschwitz myth was fabricated from 1944 to 1947, to be exact from April 1944, when ((((((((((((Rudolf Vrba)))))))))))) and ((((((((((((Alfred Wetzler)))))))))))) are supposed to have escaped from Auschwitz to tell their story to the world up until April 1947, when Rudolf Höss was hanged after having supposedly told the same world his own story about Auschwitz.

It is remarkable that from beginning to end that story comes from essentially or perhaps even exclusively Jewish sources. Two Jewish liars (Vrba and Wetzler) from Slovakia convinced or seemed to have convinced other Jews from Hungary, Switzerland, United States, Great Britain, and Poland. This is not a conspiracy or a plot; it is the story of the birth of a religious belief: the myth of Auschwitz, center of the religion of the Holocaust.

This photograph was published after p. 161 of Lord Russell of Liverpool’s Geissel der Menschheit, Berlin, Verlag Volk und Welt, 1960. The title of the original book in English is The Scourge of the Swastika. The caption of the photo says: ‘The Confession of Rudolf Höss.” It is not NO-1210 or PS-3868 but only a very short text of 16 March 1946. You will note the difference between the handwriting of the text of the confession and Höss’s own handwriting. In his introduction to the English edition of Commandant in Auschwitz Lord Russell claims to furnish some information on the conditions in which Höss had to sign that note, but, since he commits errors in the chronology of the events in that regard, his information is to be received with reservations. (See Commandant in Auschwitz, p.18.)

The second photo was published as photo #22 in Tom Bower, Blind Eye to Murder (Britain, America and the Purging of Nazi Germany — A Pledge Betrayed), Granada: London, Toronto, Sydney, New York 1981. The caption of the photo says: “Colonel Gerald Draper of the British War Crimes Group photographed as he finally secured the confession of Rudolf Höss, the commandant of Auschwitz, to the murder of three million people.” As one remembers, Höss said in his “memoirs”: “I received further rough treatment at the hands of the English public prosecutor, a major” (Commandant in Auschwitz, p. 74). Did this major become a colonel and was his name “Draper”?


From The Journal of Historical Review, Winter 1986-87 (Vol. 7, No. 4), pages 380-403

Statistical Proof Anglo Culture is Deadly and The Last Act: The Rise and End of The Machine Culture

by

Check out his blog at https://relampagofurioso.com/

Census data prove Anglo culture (the most extreme offshoot of Faustian machine culture) is killing its hosts. Red-shaded areas indicate counties where whites are rapidly dying off

If there’s one fact that rings clear since beginning my adventures abroad several years ago, it’s that my instincts telling me something was wrong were correct. Anglo culture is deeply troubled. It is sick. And, it’s statistically deadly. This could be the reason I’ve been thinking, “Please don’t send me back!” since beginning my latest series of adventures abroad.

Anglo culture has become so mechanical and myopic it is literally killing its founding population. This is why legislators and the corporate-government complex have to bring in wave after wave of immigrants to keep machines running and money flowing. Anglos are dying off due to their anti-life, anti-living, anti-sex, technology-obsessed, shopping and eating out-worshiping way of life.

Of course, the fact white women have shunned family since feminism is also a factor as to why whites are vanishing at an ever-increasing rate. But, it goes deeper than that. As TNMM has reported in the past, another symptom of the deadliness of the culture is the fact drug addiction – chemical escape from the madness –  is killing more people annually than the Vietnam War and terrorism combined.

Even the mainstream Daily Mail has picked up on these trends:

While Latino, black and Asian populations continue to grow, soaring death rates among white middle-aged Americans – combined with the fact that white families are having less children – mean certain states are seeing falling Caucasian populations. 

White Americans are also reportedly dying faster thanks to a silent ‘epidemic’ of deaths from suicides, drug and alcohol poisoning.

Faustian machine culture is killing its creators. German historian and philosopher Oswald Spengler predicted this strange world we find ourselves in nearly a century ago:

All things organic are dying in the grip of organization. An artificial world is permeating and poisoning the natural. Civilization has itself become a machine that does, or tries to do, everything in a mechanical fashion.

The corrupt media and Hollyweird have tricked the world into believing this lifestyle is the most effete, wonderful way of living life ever devised by humanity. When in fact, turning people into rats running in an endless financial wheel, chained to machines and a 70-hour clock – and in which the only outlet for the Freudian id is through consumption –  is killing foreign cultures the Faustian machine ingests almost as fast as it’s killing the host population. Those cultures that are assimilated into the American way of life are doomed to become just as nihilistic, demographically moribund, obese, and spiritually dead as Anglos have become.

Now, that’s a jagged little Red Pill if there ever was one. That said, America (and Western Europe and Australia) enjoy a marvelous quality of life if judging by material standards. But, this materialism comes at the cost of culture and the non-material quality of life. These societies are becoming bereft of culture and spirituality making their sleep-work-spend habits literally deadly.

Enter this crumbling kingdom at your own risk, immigrants.

The Last Act: The Rise and End of The Machine Culture

by

In Man and Technics, Spengler prophesized Western man would try to remove his biology and turn himself into a machine in order to become God

The New Modern Man | Spengler’s Decline of the West Series

The prophetic predictions in Spengler’s Civilization Model for the Western world have been discussed in previous articles here at The New Modern Man. In a later book he published titled Man and Technics Spengler went into further detail about how technology, Western culture’s main obsession would arise and further debase humans from their life-giving biology. This ultimately leads to the end of Western culture.

These predictions ring truer today than they have at any point in our history. Technology worship is everywhere, and people have certainly become debased from their traditions and their biology in service of the God of Technology and “the machine” in the modern age. As Spengler said would happen, life has become a problem to be solved instead of something to be lived. One of the trends representing this philosophical crisis, seen in all past High Cultures Spengler studied, is when people in a culture cannot think of a “reason” to have kids because their lives have become based only on economic theory and technical organization, rather than tradition and religion. After reaching this tipping point, the civilization sterilizes itself.

The reason a civilization moves away from tradition and religion and towards economic theory and technical organization are as follows. All High Cultures ultimately desire to see the fulfillment of their Prime Symbol. In Western civilization, the quest to realize Infinity has resulted in man attempting to turn himself into a machine to achieve perpetual prosperity. This will lead to catastrophe if history is any guide. Egyptian culture attempted to embalm itself to realize fulfillment of its Prime Symbol, The Path, a path that led to immortality in their minds. Of course, Egyptian culture now lies in ruins.

Looking back to see what history may reveal about where we are headed as society becomes based only on economic and theoretical philosophy, we learn the average life span of a High Culture in Spengler’s survey was 1,000 years. We are reaching the end of that period going by Spengler’s model. In the following excerpt from Man and Technics, he details the millennium-long long arc of civilizations and how, in the end of a civilization, the mechanical, technological city cannibalizes the life-giving population of the countryside:

On this soil from 3000 BC onwards, there now grew up, here and there, the High Cultures…each filling but a very small portion of the Earth’s space and each enduring for hardly a thousand years. This group of passionate life-courses invented for its Prime Symbol and its ‘world’ the city, in contrast to the village of the previous state – the strong city in which is housed a quite artificial living, that has become divorced from Mother Earth and is completely anti-natural – the city of rootless thought, that draws the streams of life from the land and uses them up within itself.

Indeed, today’s reality corresponds with this prediction as the vast majority of population in America and Europe has shifted from being a “Rural Intuitive” population to being a “Metropolitan and Uninspired” population today. As man becomes uprooted from Nature in the artificial environment of the city, he is no longer able to reproduce himself, he turns nihilistic and atheistic, and the end of his High Culture draws near.

Nature

Rather than live in harmony with nature, Western man tries to enslave it

The Beginning of the End

In 1931, when Man and Technics was published the “last act” of Western Man was just beginning. Spengler thought Utopian dreams of Western man that drive his technological development will never be realized as the last act plays out.

Every high culture is a tragedy. The history of mankind as a whole is tragic. But the sacrilege and the catastrophe of the Faustian (Western) man are greater than all the others, greater than anything Aeschylus or Shakespeare ever imagined. The creature is rising up against its creator.

Spengler saw man’s attempt at dominating Nature as futile, but saw no way out of that development.

Today we stand on the summit, at the point when the fifth act is beginning. The last decisions are made. The tragedy is closing.

Man’s lust for power makes him lose touch with his biology and the natural laws which he thinks do not apply to him, but still do, which leads to tragedy. This is a pattern Spengler saw in previous High Cultures, and prophetically predicted in our own:

The cultures of speech and enterprise – we are at once in the plural, and several can be distinguished – in which personality and mass begin to be in spiritual opposition, in which the spirit becomes avid of power and lays violent hands on life, these cultures embraced even at their full only a part of mankind, and they are today, after a few millennia, all extinguished and replaced. Man, evidently, was tired of merely having plants and animals and slaves to serve him, and robbing Nature’s treasures of metal and stone, wood and yam, of managing her water in canals and wells, of overcoming her obstacles with ships and roads, bridges and tunnels and dams. Now he meant not mere to plunder her of her materials, but to enslave and harness her very forces as to multiply his own strength.

It goes beyond enslaving nature. As the Final World Sentiment of Western man spreads (which Spengler said was the quest for a Socialist Utopia from the year 1900 onward) the Socialist longing turns into a desire to become God. This is a profound commentary on anti-religious Marxists of today and what they really want to accomplish by removing all biology from man. Cultural ((((((Marxism))))))’s goal of stripping man of all traditions, individuality, religion, family, and even his gender – making both sexes androgynous as the sickness of feminism is attempting to do with catastrophic results – represents Western man’s longing to achieve infinity: He must become a machine himself in order to become God.

In other words, Marxists hate God because they themselves want to become God. To them, “progressing” into a Socialist Utopia would bring about an infinity; a heaven on earth. Spengler continues:

This last idea never thereafter let go its hold on us, for success would mean the final victory over God or Nature – a small world of one’s own creation moving like the great world, in virtue of its own forces and obeying the hand of Man alone. To build a world oneself, the oneself God – that is the Faustian (Western) inventor’s dream, and from it has sprung all our designing and re-designing of machines to approximate as nearly as possible to the unattainable limit of perpetual motion.

The quest for perpetual motion springs from this longing for the infinite in Western culture. Indeed, the search for infinity is what all art and knowledge in the society have been based on:

  • Architecture: Soaring cathedrals and soaring skyscrapers, rising towards infinity
  • Engineering: The search for perpetual motion and perpetual energy
  • Exploration: Manifest Destiny, exploring the universe/space exploration
  • Finance: Infinite economic growth, globalization
  • Music: Polyphony, or two or more simultaneous melodies, infinity-seeking sound
  • Mathematics: Infinitesimal calculus
  • Science: Infinities of space and time, evolution of biology and the universe
  • Politics: The quest for an infinite Socialist Utopia

Spengler says the quest for infinity which resulted in these achievements stretches all the way back to the beginning of the study of nature by empirical methods in Spring:

With Roger Bacon begins the long line of scientists who suffer as magicians and heretics.

Unfortunately, the more powerful and “magical” man becomes the more of a danger he becomes to himself. Machines begin to dominate his life and he eventually becomes a slave to the machines he created rather than the machines serving him.

Machine_Man

Western man’s obsession with technology begins to conflict with his biology

Machines Extinguish Life

Life in the 21st century has definitely taken on a mechanical quality to it. Men often quip they are just another cog in the machine, but this statement actually has a profound philosophical implication to it. Continuing from Man and Technics:

All things organic are dying in the grip of organization. An artificial world is permeating and poisoning the natural. Civilization has itself become a machine that does, or tries to do, everything in a mechanical fashion.

As Western culture ultimately tries to turn not only society but mankind into a machine, people begin checking out of such a sadistic, inhuman system. Echoes of ((((((Ayn Rand))))))’s Atlas Shrugged come to mind as man grows tired of an existence which micromanages every aspect of his life and his conduct and strangles his freedom with mechanical precision; he eventually abandons the Machine Culture.

The Faustian [Western] thought begins to be sick of machines. A weariness is spreading, a sort of pacifism in the battle with Nature. Men are returning to forms of life simpler and nearer to Nature; they are spending their time in sport instead of technical experiments. The great cities are becoming hateful to them, and they would fain get away from the pressure of soulless facts, from enslavement to the Machine, and the clear cold atmosphere of technical organization.

As he abandons the Machine Culture his accomplishments will wither and fade away, along with his once dominant culture. Someday, the West’s greatest accomplishments will lie in ruin as is the case with the Egyptian pyramids and Great Sphinx of Giza, the Indian Pushpagiri Viharathe, the Chinese Great Wall, the Babylonian Ishtar Gate, the Greek Parthenon, the Roman Colosseum, and the Mesoamerican pyramids.

Pyramid

Just as other High Cultures’ achievements now lie in ruin, Spengler thought Western man’s great works will see the same fate

Western Technology in Ruins

It is reasonable to think that Western man’s tech gadgets and machines will not carry on once his culture reaches a tipping point. After passing that point of no return, his machines and technology will either not be used by other cultures, or they will be adapted to serve their own world views. From Decline of the West:

As the idea of the Babylonian or that of the Indian world was remote, strange and elusive for the men of the five or six Cultures that followed, so all the Western world will be incomprehensible to the men of Cultures yet unborn.

As Spengler saw it, the cultures who use the West’s technology see it as a luxury, it does not represent a cultural and spiritual necessity for them the way it does for Western man.

Only Faustian Man thinks, feels, and lives in its form. To him it is a spiritual need – not its economic consequences, but its victories.

Just as the West cannot understand the Point-Present Prime Symbol of Classical civilization, the Rhyming Time Prime Symbol of Mesoamerican (Mayan/Aztec) civilization, or The Path Prime Symbol of Egyptian civilization, the culture that supersedes ours will not be able to understand our Prime Symbol of Infinity and our obsession with limitless gadgets and machines. So, what to do when faced with an outcome that seems to be predetermined?

Faced with this destiny, there is only one worldview that is worthy of us, the one of Achilles: better a short life, full of deeds and glory, than a long and empty one. Only dreamers believe in ways out. Optimism is cowardice.

Spengler thought knowing about and bravely following the arc of civilization to its end would bring those who could understand his concepts to a better end than those who believe man can ultimately win in his battle against Nature find a way out of the monstrous drama of the rise and fall of civilizations. Indeed, thinking one can break out of cycles that have ended all past High Cultures is highly optimistic.

While the people comprising the culture go on to survive once it collapses, they will not dominate the world nor culture the way they once did.

The Egyptian denied mortality. Today, pathetic symbols of the will to endure, the bodies of the great Pharaohs lie in our museums, their faces still recognizable. On the shining, polished granite peak of the pyramid of Amenemhet III we can read today the words “Amenemhet looks upon the beauty of the Sun.”

The West is also attempting to deny mortality. However, according to the study of history no culture escapes its ultimate fate. The West’s rabid pursuit of a Socialist Utopia by attempting to turn human beings into perpetually running machines is its last gasp as it reaches out towards infinity, meanwhile while the soul and demographics of the society implode as it has lost touch with its life-giving religion and traditions. As the life of man is organic, so is the life of his culture.

An interesting footnote is Spengler thought Russia could be the next High Culture to arise. Russia’s Prime Symbol is The Plane Without Limit.

We can certainly feel an “elective affinity” between the Russian and the Magian souls, but as yet the Prime Symbol of Russia finds no sure expression either in religion or in architecture. It is not yet a style, only the promise of a style that will awaken when the real Russian religion awakens.

If this is correct, as the West fades a distinct Russian High Culture will arise. The epic cycle of the rise and fall of civilizations continues. The Machine Culture ends, making way for a new cultural pursuit.

Victor Davis Hanson; Explains why California is Failing Despite Silicon Valley and all it’s Wealth

The left coast is so leftist is because they have the luxury of not having to suffer the cost and consequences of their idiotic agendas they want to impose on everyone else. They have the luxury of indulging in “muh feels” and virtue signaling, while the rest of us suffer. There is only one way to stop these marxists, we burn and raze these communities to the ground, and slaughter everyone. Victor Davis Hanson talks about assimilation, but history shows us that only ethnic groups part of the same race can assimilate with one another, niggers and indians have been here far longer than beaners, and they still have not assimilated. They ALL need to leave, civil war is coming, fight of die. Blood and Soil. Race matters, its real, the natural order will always win.

EXPOSED: The Alt-Right has Appropriated NATO Psy-War Tactics to Brainwash the Masses

Andrew Anglin
Daily Stormer
October 26, 2017

A study has finally exposed the darkest secret of the Alt-Right: NATO psychological warfare tactics being used to make people think mass nonwhite immigration is lowering their quality of life and that different racial groups have different levels of intelligence and behavior patterns.

This is the big one, folks.

The big reveal.

Newsweek:

Far right groups under the banner of the so-called ‘alt right’ are using psychological warfare techniques learnt from leaked NATO and British intelligence documents to spread white supremacism across the world, according to a new report.

In a study by the the Institute of Strategic Dialogue—titled ‘The Fringe Insurgency’—((((((Julia Ebner)))))) and Jacob Davey argue that activists are “weaponising internet culture” to spread their ideology online and subvert democracies.

After spending several weeks undercover on online alt-right forums, the authors identified the tactics that users adopted to radicalize people online and mobilize support for the far-right groups, targeting anxieties over immigration, terrorism, and race.

They used “crowd-funding platforms, custom-made social media platforms and even the use of leaked military and intelligence resources from [U.K. intelligence agency] GCHQ and NATO to run campaigns against their own governments,” the report said. 

In August, radical right-wing groups gathered in Charlottesville, Virginia, for their largest show of strength in decades, while in European far-right organizations have used crowd-funding platforms to raise money for boats to patrol European waters and intercept refugees.

The extreme right also had an influence the German federal election, which saw a huge spike in suport for the extreme party Alliance for Germany (AfD).

The actual translation of “Alternative für Deutschland” is “Alternative for Germany.”

But hey – I don’t expect every random blogger to know the German language. A mistake like that shouldn’t discredit this totally real information.

In large-scale and well-organized online campaigns, U.S. and European extremists have worked together: “Their strategic, tactical and operational convergence has allowed the extreme right to translate large-scale online mobilisation into real-world impact,” write the authors.

The report exposes how the U.S. ‘alt-right,’ responsible for trolling campaigns in support of President Donald Trump during the 2016 election, shared tips and tactics with European extremists—techniques gleaned from military psychological operations—to disrupt the democratic process.

Ahead of the AfD success in the German federal election—in which it secured 26 percent of the vote and marked the first time that far-right party has won seats in the German parliament since the Second World War—U.S. ‘alt-right’ activists spreads tips on messaging board 4chan.

Instructions from the U.S. elections on how to obfuscate and manipulate the media space were recycled and adopted to a German audience: this included memetic warfare albums such as ‘normie memes’, and psychological operations resources, such as a ‘step by step how to manipulate narratives’ that links to GCHQ online deception and disruption playbooks,” according to the authors.

The authors warn that the tactics used by the far-right are “more reminiscent of state-led psychological operations than that of terrorist groups” and urge policy makers, technology companies, practitioners and activists to adopt counter-strategies that match the sophistication of the far-right.

In February, civil rights nonprofit the Southern Poverty Law Center warned of the growth of extreme right-wing groups on the internet, which organize “troll storms” of abuse towards political opponents, and spread racist memes to mobilize support.

“It’s clear that more and more of these people are operating only on the internet, except when the moment comes to start shooting,” said ((((((SPLC)))))) expert ((((((Mark Potok)))))).

And the blog regains credibility after having translated the German word “alternative” as “alliance” by citing the authoritative expert ((((((Mark Potok)))))).

I was listening to TDS last night and found them to be claiming that these researchers are exaggerating the idea that the Alt-Right learned its tactics from NATO handbooks.

False.

I learned everything I know about memes from NATO handbooks.

Before I ever made my first Pepe, I studied in-depth the entire catalog of military literature of psychological warfare, so that I could use it to manipulate the minds of young people and make them believe that Jews are over-represented in media and academia, that the Holocaust never happened and that George Zimmerman did nothing wrong.

Without these NATO techniques, I would be nothing.

Srsly Tho

This is some kooky stuff right here.

But let me explain to you how this actually happened.

In part, it is what Mike Enoch said on TDS – that we hit on the same tactics as them through trial and error.

In particular, /pol/ has been a mass platform for trying and erroring all sorts of things for years. I have also used this website – which will celebrate its five year anniversary in July – to test out all sorts of psychological techniques on all sorts of people. I have done this both by doing it myself, as well as giving general instructions to others to rustle people and watched what happened.

Furthermore, the fundamentals of trolling – and yes, it is psychological warfare – were developed on 4chan (mainly /b/) in the 00s when people like weev were active in apolitical (or at least less politicized) trolling. “Lulz,” as the kids call it, is simply a type of malicious humor that comes mainly from causing people emotional distress on the internet.

Combined with the ability to transfer information through memes, you have a situation where you can force people to look at you, then influence their thinking directly using compressed information transfers. The informational packets within memes effectively created new neural pathways.

When you have an internet with this many people on it, testing out stimulus-response is not particularly difficult. In fact, it happens automatically, you just have to be smart enough to catalog valuable stimulus-response protocols in your mind (hint: you don’t really have to be that smart to do that).

As far as formalized technique goes, I have continually promoted ((((((Saul Alinsky))))))’s Rules for Radicals (which is much more useful than any NATO guidebook). And presumably, people who write NATO guidebooks on psychological warfare have also studied that and studied the behavior of people who have studied that.

But saying “these guys are using Jewish cultural revolution techniques from the 1960s” is far less sexy than claiming we are using NATO psychological warfare guidebooks.

With regards to the NATO psychological warfare guidebooks that are circulating in these spheres that are referenced in the study: I only saw these in 2015, when Alt-Right trolling and meming had already developed into a pretty clear system. I then went on to read quite a bit of military literature about using the internet and electronic communications generally in psy-war, and found that their systems – at least as recorded in these texts – are much less developed than our own.

Presumably, the reason for that is that we are devoted to this, doing it ourselves, and that gives us more drive to understand it. We are also constantly processing feedback from our systems and updating them – often in real time – to make them more effective.

Using Meme Warfare Against Us

The study suggests that our methods need to be countered – apparently by military intelligence.

To that I say: good luck.

There isn’t any way to do that.

Meme warfare is an undermining of existing abstractions within the public mind by directly attacking the weak points with the energy of the victim itself. And this only involves words and images on the internet.

This is guerrilla psychological warfare.

That is why they tried to kick The Daily Stormer off the internet, why they are locking down Twitter and other social media platforms – we have been very successful with meme warfare, and that is the “counter” strategy.

Ultimately, this is a counter-revolution to the Jewish revolution against us. We are still living in the aftermath of the 1960s revolutionary movements, under a revolutionary government. That’s the importance of ((((((Alinsky)))))) – the Alt-Right is simply the first counter-revolutionary movement to adopt the techniques of the revolutionaries.

Our job is actually a lot easier than the Jews’ job in the 60s, because unlike people of the 60s, modern youth were raised to believe nothing is sacred, whereas the Jews had to directly undermine sacred, ancient institutions and cultural norms.

And it’s good it’s easier. Because we don’t have trillions of dollars to fund this operation, given that we didn’t take over the banking industry or any other industry before launching this counter-revolution (please do donate to us). We also don’t have control of the mass media in the way that 60s Jews did. So ultimately, our job is at least as hard, but the actual psych-war itself is fought on much more fertile ground.

However, They Can Totally Screw Us

The fact that they can’t use meme warfare against us doesn’t mean they can’t screw us, mind you.

Indeed, they can totally screw us. Because now, we are off the internet, in the real world, where they can use tried and true human intelligence, disruption and entrapment techniques to crush the movement completely.

I am sounding the alarm on everyone in this movement: all of these existing IRL groups are set up, to a virtually incomprehensible degree, to be setup by the feds and RICO’d. And that is going to happen if something doesn’t change. There is nothing stopping it, because no one wants to listen to me. I live in Nigeria, and so I can’t talk to them in real life, which creates a communication problem, and whenever I just publish the problems here on the site people just attack me as “infighting” (even though I am very careful not to call anyone out and certainly not to attack anyone in the movement), apparently hearing absolutely nothing I am saying.

Through the internet, we have created a movement involving tens of thousands of people using the most advanced psychological warfare techniques ever developed, and now the people leading the IRL movement are going to have the whole thing taken down by cops using the same primitive methods they use on 80 IQ Moslems. The level of frustration I have over this is indescribable. But hey – don’t let it get you down. The meme warfare will continue either way. And I am going to attempt, as I have said, to lay some groundwork for a more workable IRL movement.

Jews Are Using “The Holocaust” Against Us Whites

By Carolyn Yeager

HOLOCAUST WAS INVENTED BY JEWS, is a tool used by Jews, and Jews have no intention of giving it up … ever. In the Jewish view of criminal antisemitism, holocaust denial is the worst antisemitic crime of all. They unleash all their forces to combat it. Look what they did to the recently deceased Ernst Zundel (right), whom they saw as the most effective spokesman/activist against their official narrative of all the revisionists. The type and level of persecution this man suffered (eight years in prison, much of it in solitary confinement) was noticeably out of proportion to his simple publishing of a book that questioned the number of 6 million “Jewish victims.” In response to their taking him to court in Canada under that nation’s “hate laws,” the enterprising Zundel sent execution specialist Fred Leuchter to Poland to prove the “homicidal gas chambers” were a fraud, which Leuchter did. Because he exuded sincerity and decency, Zundel was able to raise hundreds of thousands of dollars from his supporters. This all made Zundel enemy #1 to the Jewish Power club.

With Zundel now deceased, and his Internet presence being slowly eroded (I have noticed), Jews are trying to convince Americans that they and other minorities will never be safe as long as people are free to question “proven facts” like the extermination of six million Jews by the Nazis in World War II.

Americans should be informed that the real reason Jews don’t want the “proven facts” of the Holocaust questioned is because they are not proven. They are not even convincing!

Here are some facts Americans should know before they allow Congress to take away any of their freedoms associated with the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

  1. Nearly every pro-Holocaust book or article written since 1945 has been written by a Jew – and we’re talking about huge numbers here. Clearly, Jews have an inordinate investment in a subject that is billed by them to be of universal importance to all people.

In connection with that, the US Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington DC was the brainchild of an all-Jewish committee headed by Elie Wiesel and has always maintained a close to all-Jewish staff. Not only that, it openly promotes pro-Israel political positions.

  1. Even though Jews try to convince all minorities that Holocaust Remembrance is also for them, Jews cry “foul” whenever specific mention of Jews being the main victims of the Holocaust fails to occur.

To this point, a plaque placed at Canada’s brand new national Holocaust memorial building did not specifically say Jews or Jewish when referring to the victims. After many apologies, the plaque was changed to satisfy the Jews. The same uproar resulted when the Trump Administration’s annual statement on “holocaust remembrance day” January 27th also failed to specifically name Jews. Trump was accused of being an antisemite, along with his spokespeople who said they didn’t intend to change the wording to please the critics. And they didn’t, but the next time they wrote a statement on Holocaust, Jews were given the front and center stage they wanted.

Does that seem petty for people who sell the idea that the Holocaust represents universal values that all adhere to?

  1. The number 6 million is not based on known information or credible research. It was picked for its propagandistic and symbolic value. There are no credible lists of victims that comes even close to that figure.But yet, those who disagree with that number should be prosecuted for “hate speech” and as “holocaust deniers” by new laws and guidelines the Jewish lobby is working toward?

Case in point: The Jewish Forward ran a story Oct. 12 by Nathan Guttman accusing Republican Congressman Dana Rohrabacher of bringing a “holocaust denier” to a Capitol Hill meeting. The man referred to was a conservative journalist named Charles C. Johnson, who had once expressed some views on WWII on a discussion forum as follows:

what are your thoughts on the Holocaust, WW2, and the JQ in general?

From Fall of western man:

The perfect society can be defined as a homogeneous group of people who come together with shared morals, shared values and wish to move forward as one, working together for the good of the community whilst not forgetting the rights and importance of the individual. This community cohesion relies on a shared sense of consciousness held by the people who make up that society. When individuals in a society adopt moral and ethical codes that are similar, it ensures that said society is more likely to succeed as the individuals in that society are more likely to move in unison to achieve goals together and to advance society for the greater good. The shared moral codes and traditions that have been passed down by generation after generation of Western man have given rise to a shared form of consciousness known as the Western superego. Conversely, a society made up of lots of different groups and individuals who are solely focused on the selfish pursuits of individualistic happiness and hedonism is destined to crumble. If a society had no shared consciousness it would cease to be cohesive and would no longer work as a well-functioning group.
Culture are morals, values and heritage passed from generation to generation, parents to children. It is related genetically in that only members of a culture can pass its culture to future generations, in a continuum, its this unbroken continuum over time that creates and establishes a heritage. Making culture indirectly and inherently genetic. Whereas DNA passes down physical and biological traits from parent to child, the imparted individual superego (and superego as a group manifests to form a culture) is the way morality and shared values are passed down from generation too generation. A complete human being is not simply a group of cells and tissues, but also a highly mentally-complex life form that is able to pass down far more from generation to generation than simple biological traits.
When parents pass down their superego to their children, they are passing down more than just morals. They are passing down who they are, their way of life, their traditions, their outlook, their heritage and generations of knowledge that bind the future generations to those of the past. This allows a sense of history and tradition to be retained and passed down to future generations. It is clearly advantageous for a society and the individuals that make up that society to have a sense of shared morality that stretches back over generations – as this not only binds people together but also helps form customs and traditions which build a rich heritage that helps strengthen society’s bonds even further. This shared heritage binds the old to the new and allows traditions held dear by one’s ancestors to live on and flourish in the modern day. In this way culture is related generically to a people and cannot be transferred to aliens. Strong societies also develop additional role models that help shape the young. Teachers, scout leaders, community figures, religious leaders and other upstanding role models all played a vital role in the development of young people. As young people grew up and left the home they found themselves surrounded by strong individuals who would impart advice, morality and discipline where necessary.
These individuals are role models who would teach, nurture and ensure the next generation developed along the right path. Further to this there were other healthy role models that emerged on a national level – role models who emphasized hard-work, diligence, dedication to a cause and strength. These role models were athletes, painters, writers, inventors, explorers, great military heroes, captains of industry and the men and women who built and shaped Western nations in a genuinely meaningful sense. These national role models were held up in schools and by the entire nation as beacons of virtue. The notion of these shared ideals and moral values across Western society gives rise to the theory that whilst each individual has their own superego – the community also has its own societal superego. Society’s shared morals, traditions and heritage are what bind us together and what society seeks to pass on to the next generation of that society, in effect giving rise to the notion of a collective consciousness or collective superego.
The enemies of the West know that Western man’s strength lies in the fact that he formed a strong culture and set of traditions which in turn allowed Western man to build a cohesive society that worked in such a harmonious manner that it built the greatest civilization the world has ever known, a homogeneous society of individuals who work for the success of the whole. The enemies of the West also know that to assault Western civilization and Western culture head-on would be fruitless and would invariably end in crushing defeat. However if the mind of the individual was attacked, if the individual superego was undermined, then eventually the Western superego too would be weakened.
Once the Western superego was weakened, the very collective consciousness of Western man and the glue that bonded individuals together and made them a community would begin to falter, and the cohesive, strong and moral Western society would start to fracture. The enemies of the West have embarked on a mission to attack the psyche of Western man – their aim is to see the destruction of the Western superego in order to fracture Western society and bring about the fall of the West.