If there's a hell, Ernst Zundel is now burning in it
(too old to reply)
2017-08-07 12:34:05 UTC
Raw Message

Good riddance.
Dave Smith
2017-08-07 15:33:10 UTC
Raw Message
Post by M.I.Wakefield
Good riddance.
We have Kixi to fill the vacuum.
2017-08-07 19:36:28 UTC
Raw Message
Post by Dave Smith
Post by M.I.Wakefield
Good riddance.
We have Kixi to fill the vacuum.
And the abominable Topaz.
2017-08-07 16:28:53 UTC
Raw Message
MANNHEIM, Germany (AP) - A defense lawyer of far-right activist Ernst
Zundel, charged with denying the Holocaust, was physically carried
from the courtroom Wednesday after defying a ruling banning her from
the trial on grounds she tried to sabotage the proceedings.
Two police officers had to carry Sylvia Stolz from the Mannheim
courtroom after she refused the judge's order to leave.

"Resistance! The German people are rising up," Stolz shouted as she
was taken from the room.

Some of the scores of supporters of Zundel, a 66-year-old German
deported from Canada, also quit the courtroom. Zundel, who emigrated
to Canada in 1958 and lived in Toronto and Montreal until 2001, has
been standing trial since November on charges of years of anti-Semitic
activities including denying the Holocaust - a crime in Germany - in
documents and on the Internet.

The presiding judge halted the trial on March 9 to ask for Stolz's
removal after she denounced the court as a "tool of foreign
domination" and described the Jews as an "enemy people" in earlier


www.tomatobubble.com www.ihr.org http://nationalvanguard.org

Greg Carr
2017-08-07 17:08:32 UTC
Raw Message
He was convicted and spent 5 years sucking Turkish penis in prison. Topaz aka Kenneth Strom sucked Black dick in South Carolina jail while serving time for child porn. He has been unemployed for years.
2017-08-07 21:19:12 UTC
Raw Message
Post by Greg Carr
He was convicted and spent 5 years sucking Turkish penis in prison. Topaz aka Kenneth Strom sucked Black dick in South Carolina jail while serving time for child porn. He has been unemployed for years.
Why are you so "hung up" on dicks? Perverted thinking perhaps? Did you ever
live a "normal" life?
Greg Carr
2017-08-07 21:53:30 UTC
Raw Message
It happens in custody it's a fact of life. Mine is bigger than yours. You don't even use your real name for fear that ppl will know your IRL past and present. You leap to defend Karen Eileen Gordon and Kenneth Strom and Ernst Zundel. If only your neighbours knew.
2017-08-09 20:51:58 UTC
Raw Message
Greg Carr wrote...
Post by Greg Carr
It happens in custody it's a fact of life. Mine is bigger than yours.
Can I hazard a guess... you both have schnauzers?
Greg Carr
2017-08-09 22:26:48 UTC
Raw Message
David Johnston
2017-08-07 21:35:31 UTC
Raw Message
Post by M.I.Wakefield
Good riddance.
I think that's unduly harsh. He was just a nutter who committed educational malpractice. There are worse things.
2017-08-07 21:41:14 UTC
Raw Message
Post by David Johnston
Post by M.I.Wakefield
Good riddance.
I think that's unduly harsh. He was just a nutter who committed educational malpractice. There are worse things.
In February 2007, Zundel was convicted in Germany for 14 counts of
inciting hatred for years of anti-Semitic activities, including
contributing to a website devoted to denying the Holocaust.

Upon his conviction in Germany in 2007, the chief executive officer of
the Canadian Jewish Congress called Zundel “one of the most renowned
2017-08-09 02:32:49 UTC
Raw Message
Jews say that being "anti-Semitic" is a terrible crime. Do they say
being "anti-Arab" is a terrible crime? What about "anti-Christian", or
"anti-German"? Of course the Jews think
they are special. Any other group could be our enemy, but not the
Jews, they say. The Jews tell us the Arabs are our enemies. The
Jewish controlled media tells us that the Jews are America's only
friend in the Middle East. The truth is that before these Jews America
didn't have any enemies in the Middle East.

No one is moaning because America once fought the British. But
suddenly Jews can not be the enemy under any circumstances. Why is
that? Because the Jews control the media. Think outside the box.

Now that America is ruled by the Jews it is no insult to be called
"anti-Semite". The insult is that they think we care about their self
serving verbiage.

The Jewish controlled media said the French were "cheese eating
surrender monkeys". Why can't the French howl "anti-French" like the
Jews howl "anti-Semite"? Because the French don't control the media,
Jews do.

This is what President Nixon said:


"There may be some truth in that if the Arabs have some complaints
about my policy towards Israel, they have to realize that the Jews in
the U.S. control the entire information and propaganda machine, the
large newspapers, the motion pictures, radio and television, and the
big companies. And there is a force that we have to take into

www.tomatobubble.com www.ihr.org http://nationalvanguard.org

2017-08-07 21:56:58 UTC
Raw Message
Post by David Johnston
Post by M.I.Wakefield
Good riddance.
I think that's unduly harsh. He was just a nutter who committed
educational malpractice. There are worse things.
If we'd put him in a cattle car for three days, stripped him naked, tossed
him in a room, and gassed him with Zyklon B, it wouldn't have been unduly
harsh, IMHO.
Dave Smith
2017-08-07 22:55:21 UTC
Raw Message
Post by M.I.Wakefield
Post by David Johnston
Post by M.I.Wakefield
Good riddance.
I think that's unduly harsh. He was just a nutter who committed
educational malpractice. There are worse things.
If we'd put him in a cattle car for three days, stripped him naked,
tossed him in a room, and gassed him with Zyklon B, it wouldn't have
been unduly harsh, IMHO.
And then we could deny that it had happened.
2017-08-09 02:35:44 UTC
Raw Message
By Faurisson

The Unraveling of the Witnesses at the First Zündel Trial (1985)

The important victory won by revisionism in France on April 26, 1983,
would go on to confirm itself in 1985 with the first Zündel trial in
Toronto. I would like to dwell a moment on this trial in order to
underscore the impact on one's point of view, and especially as far as
the testimonies on the Auschwitz gas chambers are concerned: for the
first time since the war, Jewish witnesses were subjected to a regular
cross-examination. Moreover, without wanting to minimize the
importance of the second Zündel trial (that of 1988), I should like it
to be understood that the 1985 trial already contained the seeds for
all that was attained in the 1988 trial, including the report by
Leuchter and all the scientific reports which, in the aftermath, would
proliferate in the wake of the Leuchter Report.

In 1985, as also afterwards in 1988, I served as advisor to Ernst
Zündel and his lawyer, Douglas Christie. I accepted this heavy
responsibility only under condition that all the Jewish witnesses
would, for the first time, be cross-examined on the material nature of
the reported facts, bluntly and without discretion. I had noted, in
effect, that from 1945 to 1985, Jewish witnesses had been granted
virtual immunity. Never had any defense lawyer thought or dared to ask
them for material explanations about the gas chambers (exact location,
physical appearance, dimensions, internal and external structure), or
about the homicidal gassing (the operational procedure from beginning
to end, the tools employed, the precautions taken by the executioners
before, during and after execution).

On rare occasions, as at the trial of Tesch, Drosihn and
Weinbacher,[5] lawyers formulated some unusual questions of a material
nature, hardly troublesome for the witness, but these always found
themselves on the fringes of the more fundamental questions which
should have been asked. No lawyer ever demanded clarifications on a
weapon which, indeed, he had never seen and that no one had ever shown
him. At the major Nuremberg Trial of 1945-46, the German lawyers had
manifested total discretion on this point. At the proceedings against
Eichmann in Jerusalem in 1961, the lawyer Dr. Robert Servatius had not
wanted to raise the question; in a letter on this subject dated June
21, 1974, he wrote me: "Eichmann hat selbst keine Gaskammer gesehen;
die Frage wurde nicht diskutiert; er hat sich aber auch nicht gegen
deren Existenz gewandt" [Eichmann himself had not seen any gas
chamber; the question was not discussed; but neither did he raise the
issue of their existence].[6]

At the Frankfurt Trial of 1963-65, the lawyers showed themselves to be
particularly timid. I should mention that the atmosphere was rather
inhospitable for the defense and the accused. This show trial will
remain as a blot on the honor of German justice as on the person of
Hans Hofmeyer, initially Landgerichtsdirektor, then Senatspräsident.
During more than 180 sessions, the judges and juries, the public
prosecutors and the private parties, the accused and their attorneys,
as well as the journalists who had come from around the world,
accepted as a complete physical representation of the 'crime weapon' a
mere map of the camp of Auschwitz and a map of the camp of Birkenau,
whereupon five minuscule geometric figures were inscribed for the
location of each of the alleged homicidal gas chambers, with the
words, for Auschwitz: "Altes Krematorium", and for Birkenau:
"Krematorium II", "Krematorium III", "Krematorium IV", and
"Krematorium V"! These maps[7] were displayed in the courtroom.

The Revisionists have often compared the Frankfurt trial with the
1450-1650 trials against witchcraft. Nevertheless, at least during
those trials, someone sometimes bothered to describe or depict the
witches' sabbath. At the Frankfurt trial, even among the lawyers who
made difficulties for a witness like Filip Müller, not one asked of a
Jewish witness or a repentant German defendant to describe for him in
greater detail what he was purported to have seen. Despite two
judicial visits to the scene of the crime at Auschwitz, accompanied by
some German lawyers, it seems not one of the latter insisted on any
technical explanations or criminological expertise regarding the
murder weapon. To the contrary, one of them, Anton Reiners, a
Frankfurt lawyer, pushed complacency to the point of having himself
photographed by the press while raising the chute cover by which the
SS supposedly sprinkled Zyklon B granules into the alleged Auschwitz
gas chamber.

And so at Toronto in 1985, I had fully decided to do away with these
anomalies, to break the taboo and, for starters, pose, or rather have
Douglas Christie pose, questions to the experts and Jewish witnesses
as one normally poses in every trial where one is supposed to
establish whether a crime has been committed and, if so, by whom, how
and when.

Fortunately for me, Ernst Zündel accepted my conditions and Douglas
Christie consented to adopt this course of action and to pose to the
experts and witnesses the questions that I would prepare for him. I
was convinced that, in this manner, all might change, and the veil
woven by so many false testimonies could be torn away. While I was not
counting on Ernst Zündel's acquittal and we were all resigned to
paying the price for our audacity, I nevertheless had hope that with
the aid of this far-sighted man of character, and thanks to his
intrepid lawyer, history, if not justice, would at last carry him into
historical prominence.

From the moment of the first cross-examination, a tremor of panic
began to creep its way amid the ranks of the prosecution. Every
evening and throughout most of the night, I would prepare the
questions to ask. In the morning, I would turn over these questions,
accompanied by the necessary documents, to lawyer Doug Christie who,
for his part and with the aid of his female collaborator, conducted
the essentially legal aspects of the effort. During the
cross-examinations, I maintained a position close to the lawyer's
podium and unremittingly furnished, on yellow notepads, supplementary
and improvisational questions according to the experts' and witnesses'

The expert cited by the prosecution was Dr. Raul Hilberg, author of
The Destruction of European Jews. Day after day, he was subjected to
such humiliation that, when solicited in 1988 by a new prosecutor for
a new trial against Ernst Zündel, Prof. Hilberg refused to return to
give witness; he explained the motive for his refusal in a
confidential letter wherein he acknowledged his fear of having to once
again confront the questions of Douglas Christie. From the
cross-examination of Dr. Raul Hilberg, it was definitively brought out
that no one possessed any proof for the existence either of an order,
a plan, an instruction, or a budget for the presumed physical
extermination of the Jews. Furthermore, no one possessed either an
expertise of the murder weapon (whether gas chamber or gas van), or an
autopsy report establishing the murder of a detainee by poison gas.
However, in the absence of evidence regarding the weapon and victim,
did there exist witnesses of the crime?

A testimony must always be verified. The usual first means of
proceeding to this verification is to confront the assertions of the
witness with the results of investigations or expert opinion regarding
the material nature of the crime. In the case at hand, there were
neither investigations, nor expertise relative to the alleged
Auschwitz gas chambers. Here is what made any cross-examination
difficult. Yet, this difficulty should not serve as an excuse, and one
might even say that a cross-examination becomes ever more
indispensable because, without it, there no longer remains any way of
knowing whether the witness is telling the truth or not.

Jewish Witnesses Finally Cross-Examined:
Arnold Friedman and Dr. Rudolf Vrba

For those persons interested in the technical and documentary means by
which we were nevertheless in a position to severely cross-examine the
two principal Jewish witnesses, Arnold Friedman and Dr. Rudolf Vrba, I
can do no better than to recommend a reading of the trial
transcript.[8] Pages 304-371 cover the questioning and
cross-examination of Arnold Friedman; the latter breaks down on pages
445-446 when he ends by acknowledging that he in fact saw nothing,
that he had spoken from hearsay because, according to him, he had met
persons who were convincing; perhaps, he added, he would have adopted
the position of Mr. Christie rather than that of these other persons
if only Mr. Christie had been able to tell him back then what he was
telling him now!

Dr. Vrba was a witness of exceptional importance. One might even say
about this trial in Toronto that the prosecution had found the means
of recruiting 'Holocaust' expert number one in the person of Dr. Raul
Hilberg, and witness number one in the person of Dr. Rudolf Vrba. The
testimony of this latter gentleman had been one of the principal
sources of the famous War Refugee Board Report on the German
Extermination Camps - Auschwitz and Birkenau, published in November
1944 by the Executive Office of President Roosevelt. Dr. R. Vrba was
also the author of I Cannot Forgive,[9] written in collaboration with
Alan Bestic who, in his preface, declares with regard to him:

"Indeed I would like to pay tribute to him for the immense trouble he
took over every detail; for the meticulous, almost fanatical respect
he revealed for accuracy." (p.2).

,Never perhaps, had a court of justice seen a witness express himself
with more assurance on the Auschwitz gas chambers. Yet, by the end of
the cross-examination, the situation had reversed itself to the point
where Dr. R. Vrba was left with only one explanation for his errors
and his lies: in his book he had, he confessed, resorted to "poetic
license" or, as he was wont to say in Latin, to "licentia poetarum"!

In the end, a bit of drama unfolded: Mr. Griffiths, the prosecutor who
had himself solicited the presence of this witness numero uno and yet
now apparently exasperated by Dr. Vrba's lies, fired off the following

"You told Mr. Christie several times in discussing your book I Cannot
Forgive that you used poetic license in writing that book. Have you
used poetic license in your testimony?" (p. 1636).

The false witness tried to parry the blow but prosecutor Griffiths hit
him with a second question equally treacherous, this time concerning
the number of gassing victims which Vrba had given; the witness
responded with garrulous nonsense; Griffiths was getting ready to ask
him a third and final question when suddenly, the matter was cut short
and one heard the prosecutor say to the judge:

"I have no further questions for Dr. Vrba" (p. 1643).

Crestfallen, the witness left the dock. Dr. Vrba's initial
questioning, cross-examination and final questioning filled 400 pages
of transcripts (pp. 1244-1643). These pages could readily be used in
an encyclopedia of law under a chapter on the detection of false

The Prosecution Gives up on Calling Witnesses

Three years later, in 1988, during the second trial against Ernst
Zündel, the public prosecutor deemed it prudent to abandon any
recourse to witnesses. Canadian justice had apparently understood the
lesson of the first trial: there were no credible witnesses to the
existence and operation of the 'Nazi gas chambers'.

Little by little, every other country in the world has learned this
same lesson. At the trial of Klaus Barbie in France, in 1987, there
was talk about the gas chambers of Auschwitz but no one produced any
witnesses who could properly speak about them.[10] The attorney
Jacques Vergès, courageous yet not foolhardy, preferred to avoid the
subject. This was a stroke of luck for the Jewish lawyers who feared
nothing so much as to see me appearing at the side of Mr. Vergès. If
this gentleman had accepted my offer to counsel him, we in France
might have been able to strike a tremendous blow against the myth of
the gas chambers.

All the while in France, during several revisionist trials, Jewish
witnesses sometimes came to evoke the gas chambers but none of them
testified before the court as to having seen one or having
participated in a homicidal gassing by hauling bodies out of the 'gas

Today, gas chamber witnesses are making themselves extremely scarce
and the Demjanjuk trial in Israel, which once again has revealed how
much false testimony is involved in the matter, has contributed to the
suppression. Several years ago, it happened that I was aggressively
questioned at the rear of a law court by elderly Jews who presented
themselves as "living witnesses to the gas chambers of Auschwitz",
showing me their tattoos. It was necessary for me only to ask them to
look me in the eyes and to describe for me a gas chamber that
inevitably they retorted:

"How could I do this? If I had seen a gas chamber with my own eyes I
would not be here today to speak with you; I myself would have been
gassed also."

This brings us back, as one can see, to Simone Veil and her
declaration of May 7, 1983, about which we already know what we should

www.tomatobubble.com www.ihr.org http://nationalvanguard.org

2017-08-09 02:34:52 UTC
Raw Message
by Theodore J. O'Keefe

Nothing has been more effective in establishing the authenticity of
the Holocaust story in the minds of Americans than the terrible scenes
US troops discovered when they entered German concentration camps at
the close of World War II.

At Dachau, Buchenwald, Dora, Mauthausen, and other work and detention
camps, horrified US infantrymen encountered heaps of dead and dying
inmates, emaciated and diseased. Survivors told them hair-raising
stories of torture and slaughter, and backed up their claims by
showing the GIs crematory ovens, alleged execution gas chambers,
supposed implements of torture, and even shrunken heads and
lampshades, gloves, and handbags purportedly made from skin flayed
from dead inmates.

US government authorities, mindful that many Americans who remembered
the atrocity stories fed them during World War I still doubted the
Allied propaganda directed against the Hitler regime, resolved to
"document" what the GIs had found in the camps. Prominent newsmen
and politicians were flown in to see the harrowing evidence, while
the US Army Signal Corps filmed and photographed the scenes for
posterity. Famous journalist Edward R. Murrow reported, in tones of
horror, but no longer of disbelief, what he had been told and shown,
and Dachau and
Buchenwald were branded on the hearts and minds of the American
populace as names of infamy unmatched in the sad and bloody history
of this planet.

For Americans, what was "discovered" at the camps -- the dead and the
diseased, the terrible stories of the inmates, all the props of
torture and terror -- became the basis not simply of a transitory
propaganda campaign but of the conviction that, yes, it was true: the
Germans did exterminate six million Jews, most of them in lethal gas

What the GIs found was used, by way of films that were mandatory
viewing for the vanquished populace of Germany, to "re-educate" the
German people by destroying their national pride and their will to a
united, independent national state, imposing in their place
overwhelming feelings of collective guilt and political impotence.
And when the testimony, and the verdict, of the Nuremberg Tribunal
incorporated most, if not all, of the horror stories Americans were
told about
Dachau, Buchenwald, and other places captured by the US Army, the
Holocaust could pass for one of the most documented, one of the most
authenticated, one of the most proven historical episodes in the
human record.

A Different Reality

But it is known today that, very soon after the liberation of the
camps, American authorities were aware that the real story of the
camps was quite different from the one in which they were coaching
military public information officers, government spokesmen,
politicians, journalists, and other mouthpieces.

When American and British forces overran western and central Germany
in the spring of 1945, they were followed by troops charged with
discovering and securing any evidence of German war crimes.

Among them was Dr. Charles Larson, one of America's leading forensic
pathologists, who was assigned to the US Army's Judge Advocate
General's Department. As part of a US War Crimes Investigation Team,
Dr. Larson performed autopsies at Dachau and some twenty other German
camps, examining on some days more than 100 corpses. After his grim
work at Dachau, he was
questioned for three days by US Army prosecutors.

Dr. Larson's findings? In an 1980 newspaper interview he said: "What
we've heard is that six million Jews were exterminated. Part of that
is a hoax." And what part was the hoax? Dr. Larson, who told his
biographer that to his knowledge he "was the only forensic pathologist
on duty in the entire European Theater" of Allied military operations,
confirmed that "never was a case of poison gas uncovered."

Typhus, Not Poison Gas

If not by gassing, how did the unfortunate victims at Dachau,
Buchenwald and Bergen-Belsen perish? Were they tortured to death or
deliberately starved? The answers to these questions are known as

As Dr. Larson and other Allied medical men discovered, the chief
cause of death at Dachau, Belsen and the other camps was disease,
above all typhus, an old and terrible scourge of mankind that until
recently flourished in places where populations were crowded together
in circumstances where public health measures were unknown or had
broken down. Such was the case in the overcrowded internment camps in
Germany at war's end, where, despite such measures as systematic
delousing, quarantine of the sick and cremation of the dead, the
collapse of Germany's food, transport, and public health systems led
to catastrophe.

Perhaps the most authoritative statement of the facts as to typhus and
mortality in the camps has been made by Dr. John E. Gordon, M.D.,
Ph.D., a professor of preventive medicine and epidemiology at the
Harvard University School of Public Health, who was with US forces in
Germany in 1945. Dr. Gordon reported in 1948 that "The outbreaks in
concentration camps and prisons made up the great bulk of typhus
infection encountered in Germany." Dr. Gordon summarized the causes
for the outbreaks as follows:

Germany in the spring months of April and May [1945] was an
astounding sight, a mixture of humanity travelling this way and that,
homeless, often hungry and carrying typhus with them ...Germany was in
chaos. The destruction of whole cities and the path left by advancing
armies produced a disruption of living conditions contributing to the
spread of the disease. Sanitation was low grade, public utilities were
seriously disrupted, food supply and food distribution was poor,
housing was inadequate and order and discipline were everywhere
lacking. Still more important, a shifting of populations was occurring
such as few countries and few times have experienced.

Dr. Gordon's findings are corroborated by Dr. Russell Barton, today a
psychiatrist of international repute, who entered Bergen-Belsen with
British forces as a young medical student in 1945. Barton, who
volunteered to care for the diseased survivors, testified under sworn
oath in a Toronto courtroom in 1985 that "Thousands of prisoners who
died at the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp during World War II
weren't deliberately starved to death but died from a rash of

Dr. Barton further testified that on entering the camp he had credited
stories of deliberate starvation but decided such stories were untrue
after inspecting the well equipped kitchens and the meticulously
maintained ledgers, dating back to 1942, of food cooked and dispensed
each day.

Despite noisily publicized claims and widespread popular notions to
the contrary, no researcher has been able to document a German policy
of extermination through starvation in the German camps.

No 'Human Skin' Lampshades

What of the ghoulish stories of concentration camp inmates skinned for
their tattoos, flayed to make lampshades and handbags, or other
artifacts? What of the innumerable "torture racks," "meathooks,"
whipping posts, gallows, and other tools of torment and death that are
reported to have abounded at every German camp? These allegations, and
even more grotesque ones proffered by Soviet prosecutors, found their
way into the record at Nuremberg.

The lampshade and tattooed-skin charges were made against Ilse Koch,
dubbed by journalists the "Bitch of Buchenwald," who was reported to
have furnished her house with objects manufactured from the tanned
hides of luckless inmates.

But General Lucius Clay, military governor of the US zone of occupied
Germany, who reviewed her case in 1948, told his superiors in
Washington: "There is no convincing evidence that she [Ilse Koch]
selected inmates for extermination in order to secure tattooed skins
or that she possessed any articles made of human skin." In an
interview General Clay gave years later, he stated about the material
for the infamous lampshades: "Well, it turned out actually that it was
goat flesh. But
at the trial it was still human flesh. It was almost impossible for
her to have gotten a fair trial." Ilse Koch hanged herself in a German
jail in 1967.

It would be tedious to itemize and refute the thousands of bizarre
claims as to Nazi atrocities. That there were instances of German
cruelty, however, is clear from the testimony of Dr. Konrad Morgen, a
legal investigator attached to the Reich Criminal Police, whose
statements on the witness stand at Nuremberg have never been
challenged by proponents of the Jewish Holocaust story. Dr. Morgen
informed the court that he had been given full authority by Heinrich
commander of Hitler's SS and the dread Gestapo, to enter any German
concentration camp and investigate instances of cruelty and corruption
on the part of camp personnel. As he explained in sworn testimony at
Nuremberg, Dr. Morgen investigated 800 such cases, resulting in more
than 200 convictions. Punishments included the death penalty for the
worst offenders, including Hermann Florstedt, commandant of Lublin
(Majdanek), and Karl Koch (Ilse's husband), commandant of Buchenwald.

While German camp commandants in certain cases did inflict physical
punishment, such acts had to be approved by authorities in Berlin, and
it was required that a camp physician first certify the good health of
the prisoner to be disciplined, and then be on hand at the actual
beating. After all, throughout most of the war the camps were
important centers of industrial activity. The good health and morale
of the prisoners was critical to the German war effort, as is
evidenced in a January 1943 order issued by SS General Richard Glücks,
chief of the office that supervised the
concentration camps. It held the camp commanders "personally
responsible for exhausting every possibility to preserve the physical
strength of the detainees." Camp Survivors: Merely Victims?
US Army investigators, working at Buchenwald and other camps, quickly
ascertained what was common knowledge among veteran inmates: that the
worst offenders, the cruelest denizens of the camps, were not the
guards but the prisoners themselves. Common criminals of the same
stripe as those who populate US prisons today committed many
villainies, particularly when they held positions of authority, and
fanatical Communists, highly organized to combat their many
political enemies among the inmates, eliminated their foes with
Stalinist ruthlessness. Two US Army investigators at Buchenwald, Egon
W. Fleck and Edward A. Tenenbaum, carefully investigated circumstances
in the camp before its liberation. In a detailed report submitted to
their superiors, they revealed, in the words of Alfred Toombs, their
commander, who wrote a preface to the report, "how the prisoners
themselves organized a deadly terror within the Nazi terror."

Fleck and Tenenbaum described the power exercised by criminals and
Communists as follows:

The trusties, who in time became almost exclusively Communist
Germans, had the power of life and death over all other inmates. They
could sentence a man or a group to almost certain death ... The
Communist trusties were directly responsible for a large part of the
brutalities at Buchenwald.

Colonel Donald B. Robinson, chief historian of the American military
government in Germany, summarized the Fleck-Tenenbaum report in an
article published in an American magazine shortly after the war.
Colonel Robinson wrote succinctly of the American investigators'
findings: "It appeared that the prisoners who agreed with the
Communists ate; those who didn't starved to death."

Additional corroboration of inmate brutality has been provided by
Ellis E. Spackman, who, as Chief of Counter-Intelligence Arrests and
Detentions for the US Seventh Army, was involved in the liberation of
Dachau. Spackman, later a professor of history at San Bernardino
Valley College in California, wrote in 1966 that at Dachau "the
prisoners were the actual instruments that inflicted the barbarities
on their fellow prisoners."

'Gas Chambers'

In December 1944 US Army officers Colonel Paul Kirk and Lt. Colonel
Edward J. Gully inspected the German concentration camp at
Struthof-Natzweiler in Alsace. They submitted their findings to their
superiors at the headquarters of the US 6th Army Group, which
subsequently forwarded their report to the US War Crimes Division.
While, significantly, the full text of their report has never been
published, it has been revealed, by a historian supportive of
Holocaust claims, that the two investigators were careful to
characterize equipment exhibited to them by French informants as a
"so-called lethal gas chamber," and to claim it was "allegedly used as
a lethal gas chamber." (Emphasis added)

Both the careful phraseology of the Natzweiler report, and its
effective suppression, stand in stark contrast to the credulity, the
confusion, and the blaring publicity that accompanied official reports
of alleged gas chambers at Dachau. At first, a US Army photo depicting
a GI gazing at a steel door marked with a skull and crossbones and the
German words for: "Caution! Gas! Mortal danger! Don't open!," was
identified as showing the murder weapon.

Later, however, it was evidently decided that the apparatus in
question was merely a standard delousing chamber for clothing, and
another alleged gas chamber, this one cunningly disguised as a shower
room, was exhibited to American congressmen and journalists as the
site where thousands breathed their last. While there exist numerous
reports in the press as to the operation of this second "gas chamber,"
no official report by trained Army investigators has yet surfaced to
reconcile such problems as the function of the shower heads: Were they
"dummies," or did lethal cyanide gas stream through them? (Each theory
has appreciable support in journalistic and
historiographical literature.)

As with Dachau, so with Buchenwald, Bergen-Belsen, and the other camps
liberated by the Allies in western Germany. There was no end of
propaganda about "gas chambers," "gas ovens," and the like, but so far
not a single detailed description of the murder weapon and its
function, not a single report of the kind that is mandatory for the
successful prosecution of any assault or murder case in America at
that time and today, has come to light.

Furthermore, a number of Holocaust authorities have now publicly
decreed that there were no gassings, no extermination camps in Germany
after all. (We are now told that "gassing" and "extermination" camps
were located exclusively in what is now Poland, in areas captured by
the Soviet Red Army and made off-limits to western investigators.)

Dr. Martin Broszat of the Munich-based Institute for Contemporary
History, which is funded by the German government, stated
categorically in a 1960 letter to the German weekly Die Zeit: "Neither
in Dachau nor in Bergen-Belsen nor in Buchenwald were Jews or other
prisoners gassed." Professional "Nazi hunter" Simon Wiesenthal stated
in 1975 and again in 1993 that "there were no
extermination camps on German soil."

Dachau "gas chamber" No. 2, which was once presented to a stunned and
grieving world as a weapon that claimed hundreds of thousands of
lives, is now described in the brochure issued to tourists at the
modern Dachau "memorial site" in these words: "This gas chamber,
camouflaged as a shower room, was not used."

The Propaganda Intensifies

More than 50 years after American troops entered Dachau, Buchenwald
and other German camps, and trained American investigators established
the facts as to what had gone on in them, the government in
Washington, the entertainment media in Hollywood, and the print media
in New York continue to churn out millions of words and images
annually on the horrors of the camps and the infamy of the Holocaust.
Despite the fact that, with the exception of the defeated Confederacy,
no enemy of America has ever so suffered so complete and devastating
defeat as did Germany in 1945, the mass media and the politicians and
bureaucrats behave as if Hitler, his troops, and his concentration
camps continue to exist in an eternal present, and our opinion makers
continue to distort, through ignorance or malice, the facts about the

Time for the Truth

It is time that the government and the professional historians reveal
the facts about Dachau, Buchenwald and the other camps. It is time
they let the American public know how the inmates died, and how they
didn't die. It is time that the claims of mass murder by gassing are
clarified and investigated in the same manner as any other claims of
murder. It is time that the free ride certain groups have enjoyed as
the result of unchallenged Holocaust claims be terminated, just as it
is time to end the scapegoating of other groups, including Germans,
eastern Europeans, the
Roman Catholic hierarchy, and the wartime leadership of America and
Britain, either for their alleged role in the Holocaust or their
supposed failure to stop it.

Above all, it is time that the citizens of this great Republic have
the facts about the camps, facts they have a right to know, a right
that is fundamental to the exercise of their authority and their will
in the governance of their country. As citizens and as taxpayers,
Americans of all ethnic backgrounds, of all faiths, have a basic right
and an overriding interest in determining the facts of incidents that
are deemed by those in positions of power to be significant in
determining America's foreign and educational policy, as well as its
selection of past events to be memorialized in our
civic life.

Today the alleged facts of the Holocaust are at issue all over the
civilized world. The truth will be decided only by recourse to the
facts, in the public forum: not by concealing the facts, denying the
truth, stonewalling reality. The truth will out, and it is time the
government of this country, and governments and international bodies
throughout the world, make public the evidence of what actually
transpired in the German concentration camps in the years 1933-1945,
so that we may put paid to the lies, without fear or favor, and carry
out the work of reconciliation and renewal that is and must be the
granite foundation of mutual tolerance between peoples and of a peace
based on justice.

The conclusions of the early US Army investigations as to the truth
about the wartime German concentration camps have since been
corroborated by all subsequent investigators and can be summarized:

1.The harrowing scenes of dead and dying inmates were not the result
of a German policy of "extermination," but rather the result of
epidemics of typhus and other disease brought about largely by the
effects of Allied aerial attacks.
2.Stories of Nazi supercriminals and sadists who turned Jews and
others into handbags and lampshades for their private profit or
amusement were sick lies or diseased fantasies; indeed, the German
authorities punished corruption and cruelty on the part of camp
commanders and guards.
3.On the other hand, portrayals of the newly liberated inmates as
saints and martyrs of Hitlerism were quite often very far from the
truth; indeed, most of the brutalities inflicted on camp detainees
were the work of their fellow prisoners, in contravention of German
policy and German orders.
4.The alleged homicidal showers and gas chambers were used either for
bathing camp inmates or delousing their clothes; the claim that they
were used to murder Jews or other human beings is a contemptible
fabrication. Orthodox historians and professional "Nazi-hunters" have
quietly dropped claims that inmates were gassed at Dachau, Buchenwald
and other camps in Germany. They continue, however, to keep silent
regarding the lies about Dachau and Buchenwald, as well as to evade an
open discussion of the evidence for homicidal gassing at Auschwitz and
other camps captured by the Soviets.

Institute For Historical Review
Post Office Box 2739
Newport Beach, California 92659

www.tomatobubble.com www.ihr.org http://nationalvanguard.org

2017-08-09 02:31:45 UTC
Raw Message
By Richard Edmonds

The facts on the "Holocaust" have been exposed years ago in a
trial in Toronto, Canada. The defendant in the dock was the
German-Canadian, Ernst Zundel, accused by the State prosecutor of
disputing the claim that during the Second World War the Germans had
murdered millions of Jews in purpose-built gas-chambers.

This trial, held in 1985 against Ernst Zundel, is of greatest
importance due to the evidence given at the court by an expert
witness. Professor Raul Hilberg of the University of Vermont, USA,
was recognized by the court to be the world expert on the alleged
"Holocaust". In open court and under oath, Professor Hilberg stated
that he knew of no independent, forensic scientific for the existence
anywhere of a gas-chamber, planned built and operated by the Germans
during the Second World War for the purpose of killing, murdering or
executing Jews or any other persons. Professor Hilberg further stated
that with regard to causes of death in the whole extent of
German-occupied Europe during the Second World War, he was unable to
supply the court with a single autopsy certificate, stating the cause
of death of a single individual to be due to poisoning by cyanide gas.
Cyanide gas was the highly toxic gas allegedly used in the alleged
German gas-chambers.

The origin of the "Holocaust" allegation is to be found in the
trial that the victorious Allies organized against the defeated
Germans foes in the years following the War, at the German city of
Nuremberg. The victorious allies were, of course, the United Stated of
America, the Soviet Union of Josef Stalin, Great Britain and France.
At this trial of the defeated German leaders, the Allies were
simultaneously Judge, Jury, Prosecutor, and Hangman in their own case
and in their own court. The Allies' Nuremberg trial was publicly
condemned at the time by principled, leading Americans. The Chief
Justice of the US Supreme Court, Judge Harlan F. Stone, condemned the
trial as a "lynching". US Senator Robert Taft condemned the Allies'
trial, as a "travesty and a perversion of justice". Taft described
America's participation as a blot on the honor of the United States.
Senator Taft predicted that in the future Europeans would condemn
America for its participation in a "lynching".

The standard rules of evidence were discarded. For example, the
Allies held that their allegations of German atrocities, printed and
published to saturation point in the Allies' war time-time press, were
to be accepted at face value as "Public Knowledge" and were of such a
notoriety that without any further independent, judicial
investigation, the Allies' court could accept them as of probative
value. If the Allies said it, then it could not be questioned.

To their undying shame, the Allies employed torture to extract
self-condemning confessions of guilt from their helpless prisoners. I
will present here two notorious examples of vicious torture.

We know that Rudolf Hoess, a former Kommandant at the Auschwitz was
captured by a special unit of the British Army at the end of the
Second World War, and we know that Hoess was tortured and beaten
almost to the point of death, and then given a choice: either to
confess to committing the murder of millions of Jews as Auschwitz, or
else, he and his family, wife and children would suffer the
consequences. Hoess' statement obtained under torture was presented
and accepted at the Allies' court as proving the claim that Auschwitz
in Poland is the location of the mass murder of millions. In response
to rumors of abuses inflicted on German prisoners of war held captive
by the US Army in post-War Germany, the American judge, Edward van
Roden was commissioned by the US Army to investigate the situation.
Van Roden examined German prisoners, and found that many had been
tortured; that more than a hundred had had their testicles crushed
beyond repair. These men had been tortured, as in the case of the
Auschwitz Kommandant Hoess, in order to extract from them the
self-condemning confessions of guilt that the Allies needed to
buttress their propaganda-lies. On his return to the USA, Judge van
Roden published his findings at press-conferences held in New York and

The "Holocaust" allegation is nothing but a propaganda-lie concocted
by the war- time Allies Nuremberg lynching by the cynical trampling on
all the principles of American and British jurisprudence.

The disgrace that remains is that 70 years later across most of
mainland Europe it is a criminal offense to question the findings of
the Allies Nuremberg trial.

www.tomatobubble.com www.ihr.org http://nationalvanguard.org

2017-08-09 03:00:34 UTC
Raw Message
M.I.Wakefield wrote...
Post by M.I.Wakefield
Good riddance.
There's another one here in Vancouver - probably about 70 - even looks like Ernst.
Constantly rattling on about how if only the Wehrmacht had listened to the Fuhrer, Russia
could have been beat. A walkking encyclopedia of revisionist German history going all
the way back to Bismarck. I've wondered what kind of noises he'd make if he happened to
fall down a long flight of stairs.
2017-08-09 03:35:21 UTC
Raw Message
Post by Eric©
There's another one here in Vancouver - probably about 70 - even looks
like Ernst. Constantly rattling on about how if only the Wehrmacht had
listened to the Fuhrer, Russia could have been beat.
We should be thankful that the Wehrmacht listened; at worst it shortened the
war, at best, it prevented a nazi victory.
2017-08-10 01:33:42 UTC
Raw Message
Here is a quote from The Nameless War, by Captain A. H. M. Ramsay:

"The urgent alarm sounded in 1918 by Mr. Oudendyke in his letter
to Mr. Balfour (see page 25), denouncing bolshevism as a Jewish plan,
which if not checked by the combined action of the European powers,
would engulf Europe and the world, was no exaggeration. By the end of
that year the red flag was being hoisted in most of the great cities
of Europe. In Hungary the Jew Bela Kuhn organized and maintained for
some time a merciless and bloody tyranny similar to the one in Russia.
In Germany the Jews, Liebknecht, Barth, Scheidemann, Rosa Luxemburg,
etc., made a desperate bid for power. These and other similar
convulsions shook Europe; but each country in its own way just
frustated the onslaughts.

In most countries concerned a few voices were raised in the
endeavour to expose the true nature of these evils. Only in one,
however, did a political leader and group arise, who grasped to the
full the significance of these happenings, and perceived behind the
mobs of native hooligans the organisation and driving power of world
Jewry. This leader was Adolf Hitler, and his group the National
Socialist Party of Germany.

Never before in history had any country not only repulsed organized
revolution, but discerned Jewry behind it, and faced up to that fact.
We need not wonder that the sewers of Jewish vituperation were flooded
over these men and their leader; nor should we make the mistake of
supposing that Jewry would stick at any lie to deter honest men
everywhere from making a thorough investigation of the facts for
themselves. Nevertheless, if any value liberty, and set out to seek
truth and defend it, this duty of personal investigation is one which
they cannot shirk.

To accept unquestioningly the lies and misrepresentaions of a
Jew-controlled or influenced press, is to spurn truth by sheer
idleness, if for no worse reason."

www.tomatobubble.com www.ihr.org http://nationalvanguard.org


2017-08-10 01:32:30 UTC
Raw Message
Here is part of the Leuchter Report:
"Thirty-one samples were selectively removed from the alleged gas
chambers at Kremas I, II, III, IV and V. A control sample was taken
from delousing facility #1 at Birkenau. The control sample was removed
from a delousing chamber in a location where cyanide was known to have
been used and was apparently present as blue staining. Chemical
testing of the control sample #32 showed a cyanide content of 1050
mg/kg, a very heavy concentration. The conditions at areas from which
these samples were taken are identical with those of the control
sample, cold, dark, and wet. Only Kremas IV and V differed, in the
respect that these locations had sunlight (the buildings have been
torn down) and sunlight may hasten the destruction of uncomplexed
cyanide. The cyanide combines with the iron in the mortar and brick
and becomes ferric-ferro-cyanide or prussian blue pigmentation, a very
stable iron-cyanide complex.
"The locations from which the analyzed samples were removed are set
out in Table III.
"It is notable that almost all the samples were negative and that the
few that were positive were very close to the detection level
(1mg/kg); 6.7 mg/kg at Krema III; 7.9 mg/kg at Krerma I. The absence
of any consequential readings at any of the tested locations as
compared to the control sample reading 1050 mg/kg supports the
evidence that these facilities were not execution gas chambers. The
small quantities detected would indicate that at some point these
buildings were deloused with Zyklon B - as were all the buildings at
all these facilities"

www.tomatobubble.com www.ihr.org http://nationalvanguard.org