Discussion on the Holocaust
From minor research and posts made here, I have made a list of the main sources of contention that don’t align with the official holocaust narrative. This is an attempt to identify the largest most controversial anomalies, contradictions or poorly publicized points. Starting from a knowledge base of zero, I wanted to compile them to give a launch pad, so to speak. I hoped a simple list might be of interest to anybody wanting to orientate themselves quickly.
1.) The constant revision in official figures. This quotation below agrees with David Cole in that official Auschwitz numbers of Jews killed began around 4 million. Where are they today? 1.4m! However, the number has never changed in the public conscious.
“Source: Cited on April 20, 1978 by the French daily, Le Monde. Also cited on January 23, 1995 by the German daily Die Welt. By September 1, 1989, Le Monde reduced the figure to 1,433,000”.
2.) David Coles formidable tour of Auschwitz that shows how each piece of evidence (for the deliberate killing of Jews) is easily explained with another rationale explanation. Piles of hair were removed for control of lice (supported by Dr. Piper). Shoes and clothes removed to provide a camp uniform (the stripes), gas canisters for administering zyklon B for lice prevention, pictures of the sick from typhoid, and artwork of kids shown to be in relatively good condition. An inspection of the gas chamber is clearly a bunker (reinforced and subterranean in appearance) and shows indisputable signs of having being altered at some stage from a divided room with shower and toilet facilities into a single open room. Alterations were made, post WW2 in the roof (as admitted by the official Auschwitz guide) to adopt or support or agree with the narrative that gas crystals were dropped in from above! Doors are either incompatible with administering gas (wooden and glass paned) or missing (an empty space with no fittings indicating no door existed in that spot)! The Auschwitz camp curator (Dr. Piper) is interviewed on camera to say that a) the gas chamber was used as both a gas chamber and air raid shelter! And b) the holes in the ceiling were added after WW2. This incredible revelation (on camera) is exactly what David Irving (the UK’s most notorious holocaust denier) was fined for telling the world in 1992. Turns out David Irving was correct on this issue.
3.) Zyklon B gas was routinely used to delouse Jews. This is accepted (on camera) by Dr. Piper. This seems contradictory in that the Germans made a big effort to preserve the health of people that they would then exterminate!
4.) The last taboo. The ubiquitous law against holocaust denial. The more you contemplate this, the more absurd it becomes. Why would you need a law to ban the denial of something that is so demonstrably obvious? It adds to the mystique and forcefield around the entire event. It adds to the psychological sense of guilt whenever I contemplate the discussion of its narrative. The idea of free speech is that it holds a candle up to absurd notions and that if people want to deny then they can be mocked openly. To have an open and honest debate about an issue is surely much better than pushing it underground.
5.) Dr. Ralph Hilberg (the world's preeminent scholar on the holocaust) on the stand answered in reply to the question, “how do we know Hitler gave the order”? And the reply, “Hitler gave the order verbally and so his exact wording cannot be known”! In addition to their being no written evidence of Hitler's final solution, Raul Hilberg goes on to admit that he cannot provide a reference to a scientific report that establishes gas chambers! This aligns with the much maligned Leuchter report.
6.) I’m not an antisemite! The foil of anti semitism feeds into this whole issue. You cannot argue over the internationally appalling apartheid and glacial ethnic cleansing of the palestinians. You cannot criticise the wall and you cannot discuss the controversial manner in which the state of Israel was granted to the Jews without consulting either the British, the Jews or the Palestinians! Any critique of the state of Israel or even policy invokes the ‘anti semitic’ badge of dishonour. People feel that no matter how badly they the State of Israel behave or how bad their policies are it is because they wish to protect themselves from future persecutions and pogroms.
7.) The psychological wall of tears, cannot be crossed and remains centre stage. You will not find this discussed in public because it crosses the boundaries of polite or acceptable chat. However, if you venture online you will find that people are brave using their online anonymity and there are many comments that disagree vehemently with the official narrative, which I find very interesting. Perhaps the illegality of discussion, doubt or denial has indeed pushed the whole issue underground!
8.) Image manipulation. Why is there such an incidence of fakery in the imagery related to the holocaust? Clear abuse of some of the flagship images, (inserting or changing the imagery, adding a body or a noose or adding smoke to imply incineration)! This leads us to question, ‘who made the changes?, why and when’? Or, more worryingly, ‘which is the original image’?
9.) What happens to people who question the holocaust in? Two people spring to mind. Firstly, David Irving went to prison (after being fined) and is regarded as a disgusting anti semitic disinformation spreading liar in the eyes of the world (a viewpoint disseminated via mainstream media). If you watch interviews with David Irving, he is discredited and maligned to the point that viewer is blinded completely. The BBC Hardtalk interview with David Irving (2000) is one such case. It is borderline unwatchable such is the attack and discredit from the BBC. Interesting that attack is the modus operandi if his assertions are such nonsense, why not just let them be aired and laughed at by a discerning public? Another interesting character is Professor Norman Finkelstein. His book, ‘The Holocaust Industry’ (a reflection into the Jewish suffering through the period) is fascinating. His premise is that, ‘the holocaust today is used as as’ a) a racket to extort money from Swiss banks and b) as a propaganda tool to defend policies or behaviours from the state of Israel. Despite being a renowned academic and colleague of Prof. Noam Chomsky, this did not halt his ultimate destruction as an academic. It should be made clear that he does not in anyway deny the holocaust, but decried the abuse of it as a media tool. He was denied tenure at his university, and is now fully unemployed for 10 years, such is the power of the Jewish lobby that pursued him. This is what happens if you question the holocaust. You are discredited, destroyed financially and potentially jailed. This seems a curiously aggressive reaction.
10.) The holocaust maintains a central stage in our hearts and minds, despite being dwarfed by others calamities such as the American holocaust as detailed by historian David E. Stannard (American Holocaust) with the destruction of between 90-180 million people who lived there (pre arrival of Columbus).
11.) If you google ‘Holocaust films’, despite google having a list of holocausts, you are given only films relating to the Jewish holocaust. This is interesting, as if it has achieved the ‘top spot’ in terms of importance or that no other event is labelled as a holocaust. There is even a list of the ‘50 most moving holocaust films’ and again, they seem to be all Jewish related. So, there has been a huge drive to keep this issue in our conscious. Hollywood have used the narrative extensively almost to the exclusion of other calamitous historic events.
12.) A number of reports into the holocaust have been discredited, which can mean one of two things. A) they were a complete charade or
they got far too close to information that authorities would rather did not come out. The official report on September 2001 attacks was conducted by the renowned authority, NIST and its findings were widely accepted by all. However, NIST failed to mention building 7. This is how indescribably shaky the notion of ‘credible’ is. A report can be credible if it supports the desired official narrative. Similarly, the Leuchter report (very interesting piece of material based on the lack of Prussian blue found in the walls of the gas chambers indicating a lack of Xyclon B gas) was discredited because the author was not an engineer, nor a chemist nor a toxicologist and has not worked with the substance. It is described as a, “pseudo-scientific document”. The judge in this case ruled somewhat amusingly that the report was, "no greater value than that of an ordinary tourist". Interestingly, the follow up report aimed at discrediting the Leuchter report produced the same results! The tool of discredit is an ultimate foil as it basically means you become a societal leper. Two notables who come to mind who have had a taste of this are, George Galloway and Jeremy Corbyn for very different reasons, I hasten to add.
13.) The Leuchter report author (Fred A Leuchter), which concluded 'it is ridiculous to believe that these facilities could have been used as gassing chambers'. The reply to this comes from a newsman who sweeps away the statement saying, 'but we all know that there are many survivors who corroborate and whose accounts.... This is a lovely little waft away of anything other than the official narrative.
14.) A follow up report, attempted to refute the Leuchter report (above). In 1990, the Institute of Forensic research (Krakow) decided to conduct their own forensic tests to see if they could discredit Leuchter with Dr. Pipers help. The results were the same as Fred Leuchter! Incredibly Dr. Piper explains this away by saying that there was no residue of Zyklon blue because, ‘the gassings of people only took between 20-30 minutes per day’. Moreover, Dr. Piper contradicts himself shortly after and says that multiple gassings occurred each day. So it seems, not only are the official numbers changing, but so is the official narrative coming out of the mouth of the Auschwitz camp curator!
15.) The numbers. How could Nazi Germany have located and routed 6 million Jews from Europe at a time? Let’s sidestep the issue of how many Jews lived in Europe at that time as we are never likely to find a number agreed upon. The question is….in the 1940’s, was the identification, transport and logistics in place to locate, identify and transport this raw number of people in the middle of a war?
16.) Practical considerations following on from above, where are the bodies? Where are the remains? Where are the ashes? How many have been exhumed? Francis Connolly notes some surprising elements (observable in Auschwitz) such as a swimming pool with diving blocks for racing, a theatre, football pitch and the existence of musical groups. Connolly posits the idea that Jewish bodies were burnt after dying of labour, disease or hunger! He also notes (as mentioned earlier) that instead of the Jews working and becoming a practical tool (of labour) they actually became ‘work’ in themselves and detracted from the German war effort, by requiring resources (time, organization, German manpower, transport, trains, planners, Zyklon B, record keeping, fuel, trench digging and so the list goes on. These gruesome practical elements to ‘dispose’ of 6 millions bodies will have attenuated the war effort to a measurable degree, surely. And yet it proceeded during all out, total war! Arno Mayer (Professor of History, Emeritus, at Princeton University) agrees with this ‘work camp’ narrative (posited by Connolly) in his book, ‘Why did the heavens not darken’? He says,
“Sources for the studies of the gas chambers are at once rare and unreliable”
He also went on to posit (agreeing with Connoly) that more Jews died of natural causes than gassings and shootings!
17.) The 6m figure cropped up in a number of newspaper articles in the years and decades before WW2. Why?
18.) Well documented named individuals lying about fantastical or romantic stories that solidify the official holocaust narrative or profit or both. Wider official, often repeated stories such as, creating a soap or lampshades out of the skin of Jews were constructed. These were official claims and narratives. Alleged shrunken heads were also exhibited at the Nuremberg trials and highly publicized, again fabricated and fanciful. Why would one need to enhance or ‘sex up’ an event that was so abhorrent? Surely the horror would be apparent without artistic additions? In fact, the more minor lies and fabrications that are added the more it serves to discredit the narrative. Notable embellishments were made by (but not limited to) the following people, (Fred Schiefler, Moshe Peer, William J Lowenberg, Arnold Friedman, Rabbi per Josef Hertz).
19.) On the stand, witness (56 year old, Arnold Friedman) had to admit that whilst he had seen people going to be cremated, he had seen them going somewhere, but only "guessed" or imagined why they were going! This is a stop and think point for the use of witness testimony or many witness testimonies.
20.) The events of WW2 was hidden behind a screen of total control militarily and famous propaganda of the era. The public believe that propaganda was used exclusively on the enemy, whilst those more informed understand that propaganda has been omnipresent since time immemorial and used against civilian populations. There should be no expectation of truth whatsoever when war or military is concerned or the news emanates from the military, intelligence or Governmental sources.
21.) The Book, ‘The Fourth Reich’ by Ladislas Farago shows that a number of top Nazis managed to flee Germany at the end of WW2. Moreover, an ongoing theatre was played out that the Allies were desperately hunting these top level Hitler aides. Fargo shows that the whereabouts of certain top level HItler aides such as Martin Bormann was well known and documented by the Intelligence services of his new host countries. Why was this diplomatic game played out in the media?Is this is clue to how Western intelligence genuinely felt about Boorman et al culpability in relation to the holocaust?
The Canadian writer and historian James Bacque caught my eye with his book, ‘Other Losses’ (which relates to the holocaust indirectly) for two main reasons. Firstly, he was a best selling author, now discredited, persona non-grata directly because of Other Losses and the research and direction it takes the reader. Secondly, his main thrust suggests another holocaust (of sorts) which has never been mentioned!
From Wikipedia: James Bacque (born 19 May 1929) is a Canadian novelist, publisher, and book editor. He was born in Toronto, Ontario.Bacque was a mainstream fiction writer and essayist before turning his attention, in 1989, to the fate of German soldiers held as POWs by the Allies after World War II.
A quick summary of his controversial thesis from his book, ‘Other Losses’
In Other Losses (1989), Bacque claimed that Allied Supreme Commander Dwight Eisenhower's policies caused the death of 790,000 German captives in internment camps through disease, starvation and cold from 1944 to 1949. In similar French camps some 250,000 more are said to have perished. The International Committee of the Red Cross was refused entry to the camps, Switzerland was deprived of its status as "protecting power" and POWs were reclassified as "Disarmed Enemy Forces" in order to avoid recognition under the Geneva Convention. Bacque argued that this alleged mass murder was a direct result of the policies of the western Allies
One wonders whether the holocaust narrative was brought centre stage and remained for so long was in part the obscuring that which James Bacque had finally found.