Scrapbookpages Blog

September 9, 2014

Megyn Kelly’s interview with Ward Churchill on Fox News

Filed under: Holocaust, TV shows — Tags: , , , — furtherglory @ 8:24 am
Ward Churchill as seen in his interview with Megyn Kelly

Ward Churchill as seen in his interview with Megyn Kelly

Last night, on her nightly news show The Kelly File, Megyn Kelly interviewed Ward Churchill about his controversial statements after 9/11, the anniversary of which is coming up soon.  Megyn said on her show, in her introduction of Ward Churchill, that he had compared the victims of 9/11 to “Nazis” or “little Eichmanns,” referring to Adolf Eichhmann.

You can see two videos of Megyn’s  interview with Churchill here.  You can also see the interview on Megyn’s Facebook page.

As I watched the interview, it seemed to me that Megyn was having a hard time understanding what Ward Churchill was talking about. One problem was that Megyn didn’t seem to understand the role of Adolf Eichmann in the Holocaust, so she couldn’t understand why Churchill called the people who worked in the World Trade Center “little Eichmanns.”

In her interview with Churchill, Megyn brought up a quote, which she claimed that Eichmann said while he was in Argentina. Megan said “I read his own words. He [Eichmann] said : “I will leap into my grave laughing knowing that I have the deaths of 5 million Jews on my hands…”

As far as I know, Eichmann did not say this. A witness at Nuremberg claimed that he had heard Eichmann say this.

In her interview with Churchill, Megan said that “Nuremberg found him [Eichmann] in charge of the extermination program…he was in charge of the Final Solution.”  To this, Churchill answered that “Reinhard Heydrich was in charge of the Final Solution.”

Then Megyn mentioned that “he [Eichmann] recommended Zyklon-B for the gas used in the gas chambers.”

You can read about Eichmann’s role in the Holocaust in this blog post, which I previously wrote:

On my scrapbookpages website, I wrote about the Ward Churchill controversy way back in 2005, and I am quoting what I wrote below:

As I write this on February 12, 2005, America is embroiled in a controversy about the comments of Ward Churchill, a professor at Colorado University who wrote an article in September 2001, entitled “Some People Push Back: On the Justice of Roosting Chickens,” in which he said that the people who were killed in the 9/11 tragedy were not innocent victims.

The similarities between Ward Churchill and Vincent Reynouard are uncanny. Reynouard is a former math teacher and Churchill is a professor of ethnic studies. Both blamed innocent victims for a barbaric attack.

It was over three years before Churchill was called upon to defend his writing, and six years elapsed before Reynouard was brought to justice. In both cases, it was the victims or their families who started the ball rolling. If Vincent Reynouard lost his teaching job in a French school because of what he wrote, can Ward Churchill be far behind?

Reynouard was convicted of a crime for writing essentially the same thing that Churchill did. Will Churchill eventually be put on trial for expressing an unpopular opinion, the same way that Reynouard was prosecuted in a French court? Will our First Amendment rights in America survive this latest controversy?

Churchill wrote his comments about 9/11 at a time when many people were expressing the same opinion, so his essay did not attract the attention of the mainstream media. There were far more important people, for example, Noam Chomsky, who were writing about the reasons for the 9/11 attack.

I had never heard of Ward Churchill at that time, and I am sure that most Americans had never heard of him either.

Churchill’s controversial essay can be found at this web site:

The official story of the 9/11 attack is that “terrorists” toppled the Twin Towers because they “hate our freedom.” At that time, Americans were reluctant to challenge the most important freedom in America: our Freedom of Speech. So Ward Churchill’s essay did not cause an uproar back then, and he eventually expanded it into a book, entitled On the Justice of Roosting Chickens.

The reason that Churchill’s essay finally came to the attention of the media, so many years after he wrote it, is because he was invited to speak on February 3, 2005 at Hamilton College, a small school in upstate New York. He was initially invited to speak on a subject unrelated to 9/11. But one of the Hamilton College students was appalled that his college was bringing to his campus a speaker who had insulted the victims of 9/11, which included the student’s father.

The college then decided to confront Churchill with his views on 9/11 and asked Churchill to change the subject of his speech.

The student’s objection to Ward Churchill’s views came to the attention of Bill O’Reilly, a very popular news analyst on the Fox News TV channel. The student was a guest on O’Reilly’s show, and for days after this first TV show about Churchill’s opinions, the story continued, as other people, including Bill Owens, the governor of Colorado, got into the act.

Hamilton College withdrew its invitation for Churchill to speak, and Churchill then resigned his position as the Chairman of Ethnic Studies at Colorado University.

The thing that angered Bill O’Reilly and so many other Americans was that Churchill compared the 9/11 victims to Nazis, which was O’Reilly’s interpretation of Churchill’s statement that the victims were “little Eichmanns.”

Churchill did not use the full name of Adolf Eichmann. He just assumed that everyone knew who Eichmann was.

The name Eichmann became a household word in 1961 when he was put on trial in Israel for Crimes Against Humanity for his part in the genocide of 6 million Jews during World War II.

What Churchill didn’t realize is that most people don’t know that Eichmann was not the Mastermind of the Holocaust, but rather a low-level technocrat whose job was to make sure that the trains to the camps ran on time.

Comparing the victims of 9/11 to Eichmann, Churchill wrote that the people working in the Twin Towers were the “technocratic corps at the very heart of America’s global financial empire.”

In other words, the victims were mere cogs in a big machine, the unimportant little guys behind the scene, just like Adolf Eichmann who had no authority in Nazi Germany and was not a decision maker.

Ernst Kaltenbrunner, who was 6 levels above Eichmann in the Reich Security Main Office, was put on trial at the Nuremberg International Military Tribunal and specifically charged with gassing the Jews.

Eichmann was the head of the Jewish Department in the Reich Security Main Office, but he was not important enough to make the cut. Eichmann got his job because he and Kaltenbrunner had been friends from their school days in Linz, Austria, the city that was also the boyhood home of Adolf Hitler.

So unimportant was Eichmann that he did not even leave Germany to escape prosecution until 1950.

So if Eichmann was such “small potatoes,” how did he rate a trial in Israel?

Eichmann was kidnapped in 1960 from Argentina, where he was a citizen, by the Israeli Mossad; he was sneaked out of the country on a plane, disguised as an unconscious patient on a stretcher.

There were hundreds of bureaucrats and technicians who were at the same level in the Nazi hierarchy as Eichmann. The reason that Eichmann was put on trial was because he was the man who had typed up the minutes of the Wannseee Conference, the meeting where the Final Solution was planned on January 20, 1942.

In the minutes of this meeting, a copy of which was discovered in 1947, the participants had used euphemisms such as “transportation to the East” when what the men at the Conference had really meant was the extermination of the Jews in gas chambers.

It was of utmost importance to hunt down Eichmann, put him on trial, and establish that he had falsified this key document.

After 11 months in custody in Israel, Eichmann was finally put on trial and he confessed the truth, which was that the Conference was held for the purpose of planning the genocide of the Jews. Up to that time, there had been no documentation found which showed that Hitler had ordered the killing of all the Jews. The Eichmann trial finally provided the proof of the systematic plan to exterminate the Jews; that is why Eichmann is considered by many people to be the second most important Nazi, next to Adolf Hitler.

Ward Churchill denies that the Nazis had an official policy to kill all the Jews. To Bill O’Reilly, this is like saying that 2 plus 2 does not equal 4. German law states that it is “manifestly obvious” that the Nazis had a systematic plan to genocide the Jews; this is a fact that does not have to be proved, thanks to the Eichmann trial.

Churchill assumed that everyone is familiar with “Holocaust denial” and that everyone knows that Eichmann was a low-level technocrat who never personally killed anyone and never ordered the death of anyone. This mistake on his part got him into trouble, and when he tried to explain what he meant by “little Eichmanns” his explanation fell upon deaf ears.

O’Reilly and others in the media continued to call for Churchill’s head because he had compared the 9/11 victims to Nazis.

Calling an innocent victim a Nazi is the worst thing that anyone can do. But calling someone a “little Eichmann” is not the same thing.

Eichmann implemented the transportation of the Jews to the death camps, but he also arranged the transportation of German Jews to Palestine before the war.

Churchill wrote in his essay that all Americans are to blame for not stopping the policies of their government which caused the “terrorists” to “push back.”

Vincent Reynouard got into trouble because he wrote that the victims of Oradour-sur-Glane were connected to the French Resistance, and that this was the cause of the destruction of their village.

Most people believe that both the 9/11 attack and the Oradour massacre were atrocities that were perpetrated for no legitimate reason. The German Waffen-SS Army and the “terrorists” both targeted innocent civilians, simply because both the Nazis and the “terrorists” were “evil-doers,” and anyone who says otherwise is guilty of “hate speech” in the opinion of most people.

In France, hate speech is a crime, even though French citizens technically have freedom of speech. Will the controversy about Ward Churchill and his opinions about 9/11 finally end American Freedom of Speech, as we know it?

Could Ward Churhill’s essay, some day, be called “approval of a war crime” in a court of law, just like the writings of Vincent Reynouard?


Megyn Kelly will have Ward Churchill on her show again tonight to continue her interview with him. I will write more about this tomorrow.

September 8, 2014

I visited Auschwitz twice and all I got were these lousy photos

Filed under: Holocaust — Tags: , — furtherglory @ 9:54 am
Getty Images photo shows iconic sign at Auschwitz main camp

Getty Images photo shows iconic sign at Auschwitz

I made two trips to the main Auschwitz concentration camp, in 1998 and again in 2005, but I did not see the sign which is shown in the photo above, credited to Getty Images.

I don’t see how I could have missed this sign.  I took photos of many of the details of the camp, including the photo below.

Danger sign at Auschwitz main camp

Danger sign at Auschwitz main camp

Roller used to smooth the streets of Auschwitz

Roller used to smooth the streets of Auschwitz

Fence post at Auschwitz

Fence post at Auschwitz

The Getty Images photo was taken near one of the fence posts on the streets of the main Auschwitz camp.  I don’t know how I could have missed the sign in the Getty Images photo.

Guard box in the main Auschwitz camp

Guard box in the main Auschwitz camp

Dead tree, shown in 1998 photo, has been replaced

Dead tree, shown in 1998 photo, has been replaced

A street in the main Auschwitz camp

A street in the main Auschwitz camp

There is a tiny sign in the photo above, which probably says “Keep off the Grass,” but where is the danger sign.  Has the sign, which is shown in the Getty Images photo, been added since I was there?

Update 2:45 p.m.

After seeing the map, shown below, which was provided by The Black Rabbit of Inlé, I am convinced that the sign shown in the Getty Images photo has been added since I was at Auschwitz in 2005.  The location of the sign in my photo and the location of the Getty Images sign are indicated by the two red dots on the left side of the photo.

Map of Auschwitz main camp shows location of warning signs

Map of Auschwitz main camp shows location of warning signs

My 2005 photo below shows the exit from the Auschwitz camp with Block 24 on the right. The sign in the Getty Images photo is close to Block 24.

Looking toward the exit from the Auschwitz camp with Block 24 on the right

Looking toward the exit from the Auschwitz camp with Block 24 on the right

The photo below, which was provided by The Black Rabbit of Inlé , shows the warning sign in the Getty Images photo. Note the white building on the left hand side.  This can only be the SS hospital which is close to the gas chamber.

Auschwitz photo taken by "The Black Rabbit"

Auschwitz photo taken by “The Black Rabbit”

My 2005 photo below shows the SS hospital on the left.  I took this photo from the roof of the gas chamber.

SS hospital is no the left. This photo was taken from the roof of the gas chamber

SS hospital is on the left. This photo was taken from the roof of the gas chamber

My photo of Block 24, taken in 2005, shows that there was no warning sign near this building at that time.

Block 24 at Auschwitz main camp had no warning sign near it in 2005

Block 24 at Auschwitz main camp had no warning sign near it in 2005

It appears that the Auschwitz main camp, which was a camp for political prisoners, has been made to look more sinister in recent years, by the addition of some old warning signs that were pulled out of storage.


September 5, 2014

Tips on selecting photos for news stories…

Filed under: Germany, Holocaust — Tags: , , , — furtherglory @ 11:14 am

This morning I read a news article, entitled “Holocaust survivors fear rise of anti-Semitism in the West.” The photo below was shown at the top of the article.

Child survivors of Auschwitz-Birkenau show their tattoos

Child survivors of Auschwitz-Birkenau show their tattoos

I have a similar photo on my website, which is better than the one used in the news article.

Still shot from a film made by the Soviet liberators at Auschwitz-Birkenau

Still shot from a film made by the Soviet liberators at Auschwitz-Birkenau

I am a former newspaper reporter, and a former news photographer; in my humble opinion, this is not a suitable photo to illustrate “anti-Semitism.” This photo has nothing to do with the rise of anti-Semitism.

Three children in the same family killed by Israelis in Gaza

Three children in the same family killed by Israelis in Gaza

A more suitable photo, for a news story on the rise of anti-Semitism, would be a shot of the some of the children who have been killed in Gasza by the Israelis. The photo that was used in the news article shows children, who were NOT killed, nor harmed, by the Nazis.  The actions of the Nazis is NOT what is causing anti-Semitism today.  No, it is the actions of the Jews that is causing the rise of anti-Semitism, just as anti-Semitism in the past was caused by the actions of the Jews themselves.

The photo, which accompanies the article, shows child SURVIVORS of Auschwitz-Birkenau. It is a still shot taken by the Soviet liberators of Auschwitz, who made a film in which the survivors, who had elected not to follow the Germans when they abandoned the camp, are shown as they marched out of the camp.

According to the official story of the Holocaust, which people in 19 countries are now required by law to believe, children under the age of 15 were immediately gassed at Auschwitz.  A picture of children, who are around 5 or 6 years old, cannot be a photo taken at Auschwitz; to claim that this is a photo taken at Auschwitz constitutes Holocaust denial.

Child survivors marching out of Auschwitz-Birkenau after it was liberated

Child survivors marching out of Auschwitz-Birkenau after it was liberated by the Soviet Union

Note the little girl in the center of  the photo at the top of this page. She is also shown on the far left in the front row of the photo above, which is a still shot taken from the documentary film made by the Soviet Union in February 1945, after they had liberated the camp on January 27, 1945.

This same film clip, which shows these children, is included in a film entitled “The Nazis: Nazi War Crimes,” produced by the Soviet Union. It was claimed in the film that this photo was shot by the Nazis just before these children were killed at Babi Yar, a ravine near Kiev in the Ukraine.

There were 611 children at the Auschwitz-Birkenau “death camp,” who greeted the Soviet liberators, when they arrived on January 27, 1945.  In one of the photos above, the children are holding out their arms to show their tattoos.

Notice that the boy in the front, in one of the photos, is wearing a prison uniform which looks as though it would fit an adult. The children at Auschwitz wore their own clothes, not adult uniforms.  The Soviets tried their best to show the horror at Auschwitz, but their best wasn’t good enough.

September 2, 2014

Who burned the files at Terezin, formerly known as Theresienstadt?

Filed under: Germany, Holocaust — Tags: , , — furtherglory @ 11:15 am
Records for the prisoners at Theresienstadt were stored in this building

Records for the prisoners at Theresienstadt were stored in this building

One of the regular readers of my blog is Dr. Wolf Murmelstein, the son of Dr. Benjamin Murmelstein, who was the last of the Jewish elders at Theresienstadt. I have a series of essays, written by Dr. Wolf Murmelstein on my website at

Recently, Dr. Wolf Murmelstein made a comment on my blog, which I am quoting:

“… before [the] end of WWII the nazis destructed as many archives they could burn. I myself remember [know] at Terezin at end of April a lot of files had been collected from offices, [thrown] on [a] truck and then brought to a place and burned.”

It is my understanding that the Soviet liberators of Theresienstadt burned the files of the prisoners, but I have not been able to find a source for this.  I have also not been able to find out if the Nazis really did burn the files at Theresienstadt.

A few years ago, I toured the town of Terezin, where the Theresienstadt ghetto was located.  I photographed the building where the records were held; this building is shown in the photo at the top of this page.

I wrote about the records at Theresienstadt on my website.

The following quote is from my website:

The Administration Courtyard of the Small Fortress at Theresienstadt has rooms lining both sides of a yard where the offices of the prison were located. The first room on the left side of the court is the reception room, which is shown in the photograph above. It was called the Geschäftszimmer. Here the prisoners were registered and all their records were kept. This room was managed by the deputy prison commander, W. Schmidt, who was executed as a war criminal by the Allies after Germany was defeated.

Next to the reception room was the Wachstube or Guards’ office, where the prisoners’ letters were censored and the inmates were interrogated. The next room, which is number 5 on the tour, is the Commandant’s office. The tour pamphlet says that the position of Commandant “was held throughout the war by Heinrich Jöckel who was notorious for his cruelty.” Our tour guide delighted in telling us that Jöckel was imprisoned for a year in a cell formerly occupied by Jewish prisoners where he was forced to use the toilet formerly used by them. He was executed as a war criminal in 1946.

If any of my readers has any information about whether or not the records at Theresienstadt were burned, or if they are still in existence, please enlighten us in a comment.

September 1, 2014

September 1, 2014 — the 75th anniversary of the day that Hitler started World War II

Filed under: Germany, World War II — Tags: , , , , , , — furtherglory @ 8:41 am

You can read about the start of World War II in this article in a German newspaper:

This quote is from the news article in the above link:

The fighting [in World War II] began in the early hours of September 1, 1939, when the German battleship Schleswig-Holstein fired on the Polish fort of Westerplatte. The first battle of the Second World War quickly ensued.

The attack on Poland by Adolf Hitler’s Nazi regime led Britain and France to declare war on Germany two days later.

The fewer than 200 Polish soldiers posted to Westerplatte fought bravely, holding out for a full week before their commander surrendered to the German forces.

Prior to the attack on Westerplatte, the Nazi’s had staged a number of operations aimed at creating the illusion of Polish aggression on Germany as a pretext for attack. The best know[n] of this was the “Gleiwitz incident,” an operation by Nazis posing as Poles on the German radio station “Sender Gleiwitz” in Gliwice, which was then part of Germany.

I wrote about the attack on Gleiwitz on this previous blog post:

I wrote another blog post about the start of World War II here:

Another recent news article, which you can read in full here, claims that the Germans fired the first shots of World War II at Gdansk.  It doesn’t really matter where the Germans fired the first shots to start World War, the important point is that Poland had nothing to do with starting World War II.

The Poles were planning to take Berlin with their cavalry which was the best in the world.  When the Poles started their cavalry charge, heading for Berlin, they knew nothing about Blitzkreig, nor did they know that Germany had the best tanks in the world.  They thought they could defeat Germany with horses.

This news story, which you can read in full here, also claims that the first shots were fired at Gdansk, which, to the Germans, was the German city of Danzig.

1939 photo shows ethnic Germans in Danzig saluting under a banner which says that Danzig is  a German city

1939 photo shows ethnic Germans in Danzig saluting under a banner which says that Danzig is a German city

Wikipedia mentions the Polish cavalry here:  “The charge at Krojanty, battle at Krojanty[1] or skirmish of Krojanty[2] was a cavalry charge that occurred during the Invasion of Poland in the Second World War. It took place on the evening of September 1, 1939, near the Pomeranian village of Krojanty.”

You can read this about the Polish cavalry at

This quote is from Wikipedia:

From the very first German shells fired at a Polish fort in Gdansk in the early hours of September 1, 1939, to the final days in 1945, Poland suffered some of the worst horrors of the war, chief among them the extermination of most of its Jewish population by the Nazis.

You don’t hear much about how the Germans were treated badly by the Polish people.  For example, do a search on “Bloody Sunday” and you will find this website which has lots of photos of Germans killed and mutilated by the Poles:



August 30, 2014

Deborah Lipstadt, who defeated hard-core Holocaust denial, now worries about soft-core denial

Filed under: Holocaust — furtherglory @ 8:52 am
Deborah Lipstadt gives a victory salute after defeating David Irving in his libel lawsuit against her

Deborah Lipstadt gives a victory salute after defeating David Irving in his lawsuit against her

Deborah Lipstadt is a professor of modern Jewish history and Holocaust Studies at Emory University in Atlanta; she is back in the news, speaking about soft-core Holocaust denial, which is a new threat to the Shoah (Holocaust).

You can read an article about her in The here.

This quote is from the article in The

[Deborah Lipstadt] The woman who fought one of the most high-profile Holocaust denial legal cases [against David Irving] claims it [Holocaust denial] is on the rise and taking on a new and disturbing form.

Prof Deborah Lipstadt identified the trend of equating the Shoah with modern-day events as a “soft-core” form of denegrating the Nazi genocide.

“It’s used politically, glibly, and I don’t like it. It’s a grim, cheap way of getting to your point.

“It’s much more frequent than in the past. I don’t think there’s much we can do about it,” she said

Topics as wide-ranging as abortion, animal rights and sporting defeats have been likened to the Shoah [Holocaust] over the recent months.

I am writing about this because the subject of the lawsuit, brought by David Irving, against Deborah Lipstadt, has come up recently in the comments on my blog.

This comment was made on my blog on a previous post:

You’re not forced to use the term “Holocaust denial” [...] That term [Holocaust denial] was invented by Deborah Lipstadt to demonize, belittle and ridicule Holocaust revisionists and their works. The Mainstream Mass Media then turned Lipstadt’s insult into an official term by using it systematically when they talked about Holocaust revisionists.

Isn’t it very ironic that a Jewess [Deborah Lipstadt] who has never produced anything about the “Holocaust” (her only ‘research’ topic is Holocaust revisionists, not the “Holocaust” itself) could decide that Holocaust revisionists are not researchers but only deniers? Men and women who worked very hard for decades and were persecuted very harshly for that are suddenly mere deniers because Missis Zero Contribution Talmudic Hatred Lipstadt decided so…

When Lipstadt defeated David Irving in his libel lawsuit, this was acclaimed by the media as proof that the Holocaust happened, just as the Jews claim that it did, and that “Holocaust denial” has been defeated.

Irving was suing Lipstadt for libel, and he could have won the case, but he made the mistake of including Penguin Publishing in the lawsuit. He was suing for money damages because Lipstadt called him a dangerous Holocaust denier, which hurt his reputation and his income from his books, but I don’t think he sued to have her book removed from the market. Her book was published in America in 1993 but it was not published in the UK until 1996.

It has been many years since the trial. I followed the trial on the Internet at the time, and as I recall, Irving also sued Lipstadt because she went to book stores, along with some other Jews, and demanded that Irving’s books be taken off the shelves. Irving was also suing because he had a firm contract with a publisher to publish his next book, but Lipstadt went to Irving’s publisher and persuaded him to break the contract to publish the book.

It is very clear that Lipstadt was guilty of wrongdoing with regard to preventing Irving from publishing and selling his books. Irving included Penguin in the second part of his lawsuit even though the publishing firm was not involved in preventing Irving from earning his livelihood. This was the big mistake that caused him to lose the case.

Irving and Lipstadt disagreed on the details of the Holocaust, and the judge sided with Lipstadt. The Holocaust was not proved during the trial, but Irving claimed a victory when he got Robert van Pelt to admit that there were no holes found in the roof of the two underground gas chambers that are now in ruins. This was the famous “No holes, no Holocaust” slogan that Irving claimed as a victory.

The judge was not a Holocaust expert; he ruled in favor of the defense because he did not want his life and his career to be ruined. Irving made a mistake in defending himself. He should have had a lawyer present at his table, so the lawyer could stand up and say, every five minutes: “Objection! Assuming facts not in evidence.”

Lipstadt had all of the Holocaust True Believer experts on her side, but Irving made the mistake of not asking any of the Holocaust revisionists to testify for his side.

In doing some searching on the libel trial, I found nothing about Irving’s charge against Lipstadt for conspiring with others to go to book stores and persuade them to remove his books.

Nor did I find anything about Irving’s charge that Lipstadt persuaded Irving’s publisher to break his contract to publish Irving’s new book.

The judge in the case wrote a 333 page judgment. I downloaded the judgment from the Internet at the time of the trial and read it. The judge ruled in Irving’s favor on some points, although his overall judgment was against Irving. On the subject of Lipstadt going to bookstores and on Lipstadt preventing Irving’s book from being published, the judge ruled that Irving was correct in his claims, but that Penguin was not guilty of these charges, so because of that, he had to rule against Irving.

In searching the Internet about the case, that part of the judgement was not mentioned. Everything on the Internet now is against Irving and in favor of Lipstadt.

During the trial, it appeared that Irving was winning, as far as the daily transcripts were concerned. The judge even mentioned that Irving did a good job representing himself.

The burden of proof was on Lipstadt, and in following the case from day to day, it did not seem that her side was proving it’s case. In spite of that, I didn’t expect the judge to rule in Irving’s favor because if he had done that, the judge would now be reviled by the whole world, just as Irving was.

David Irving has now redeemed himself, to the point where he can now go on making a living because he now says that he believes that Treblinka was a death camp. I wrote about this on this blog post:

I wrote about Irving’s visit to Treblinka on this blog post:

Lipstadt’s side of the story is official history and Irving’s side of the story is a crime, punishable by prison time in 19 countries today. So which side is the judge going to believe? The judge could have been thrown into prison in any one of 19 counrties if he had ruled in Irving’s favor.

As I mentioned before, I followed the libel trial very closely. I put this quote from the trial testimony on my website. I have quoted from my scrapbookpages website below:

The following quote, regarding the purpose of the Treblinka camp is from the trial transcript of David Irving’s libel case against Deborah Lipstadt which is on this web site:

(Richard Rampton, the lawyer for the defense, shows David Irving a map of the railroad lines to the Treblinka, Sobibor, and Belzec camps, as he questions him about the purpose of these camps.)

[Mr Rampton] Then there is that another marking, which we do not have to bother about, which is the actual, I think, German railway as opposed to the Russian one or the Polish one. A different gauge, I think. The line runs north/east or east/north/east out of Warsaw to a place called Malkinia; do you see that?
[Mr Irving] Yes.
[Mr Rampton] Just on the border with White Russia?
[Mr Irving] Yes.
[Mr Rampton] And there is a sharp right turn and the first dot down that single line is Treblinka.
[Mr Irving] Yes.
[Mr Rampton] Then if you go to Lublin and you go east/south/east towards the Russian border you come to a place Kelm or Khelm.
[Mr Irving] First of all Treblinka and then Kelm, yes.
[Mr Rampton] And you go sharp left northwards to Sobibor?
[Mr Irving] Yes.
[Mr Rampton] Which is just again next to the border. If on the other hand you turn right before you get to Kelm or Khelm and go to Savadar, again, travelling right down to the border on single line you get to Belsec?
[Mr Irving] Yes.
[Mr Rampton] Those, Mr Irving, were little villages in the middle of nowhere, and from the 22nd July 1942, if these figures you have given in your book are right, which they are not quite, but the volume, if you multiply, must be hundreds of thousands of Jews transported from Lublin and Warsaw and as I shall show you after the adjournment also from the East; what were those Jews going to do in these three villages on the Russian border?
[Mr Irving] The documents before me did not tell me.
[Mr Rampton] No, but try and construct in your own mind, as an historian, a convincing explanation.
[Mr Irving] There would be any number of convincing explanations, from the most sinister to the most innocent. What is the object of that exercise? It is irrelevant to the issues pleaded here, I shall strongly argue that, it would have been –
MR JUSTICE GRAY: If you want to take that point, can you
[Mr Irving] — it would have been irresponsible of me to have speculated in this book (Hitler’s War), which is already overweight, and start adding in my own totally amateurish speculation.
MR RAMPTON: No, you mistake me, Mr Irving, it is probably not your fault I, as his Lordship spotted what I have done, I have taken what you have wrote (sic) in the book as a stepping stone to my next exercise, which is to show the scale of the operation, and in due course, and I give you fair warning, to demonstrate that anybody who supposes that those hundreds of thousands of Jews were sent to these tiny little villages, what shall we say, in order to restore their health, is either mad or a liar.


MR RAMPTON: No. I suggest, Mr Irving, that anybody — any sane, sensible person would deduce from all the evidence, including, if you like, the shootings in the East which you have accepted, would conclude that these hundreds of thousands of Jews were not being shipped to these tiny little places on the Russian border in Eastern Poland for a benign purpose?
End of quote

Neither Rampton nor Irving seemed to know the reason why “hundreds of thousands of Jews” were shipped to “these tiny little places.”

I explained the reason that the Jews were shipped to “these tiny little places” in this blog post:

and also in this blog post:

August 27, 2014

The Nazis were “Green” when being Green wasn’t cool

Update: August 31, 2014:  I have checked my blog stats again and I have discovered that many of my readers have been directed to my blog by this website:

I can’t read Chinese, so I don’t know what is written on the website, which I have cited above. However, the photos show me that the Chinese are now being educated in all the Holocaust lies. For example, the soap made from Jewish fat, which is pictured on the Chinese website. I have many of the same photos on my scrapbookpages website and on my blog, which is apparently what is attracting Chinese visitors.

The Chinese website has a link to this post on my blog:

In that particular blog post, I told about one of the more outrageous lies told by Holocaustians. Are the Chinese now interested in the Holocaust because they believe that these outrageous lies are true?

Continue reading my original blog post:

I always check my blog stats every morning, to see what posts on my blog are being read and by whom.  For the last couple of days, there have been hundreds of people in China reading my blog.  What could I possibly have written that could be of interest to the Chinese.

I go to a Traditional Chinese Medicine doctor and I have written several blog posts about Chinese medicine, including two blog posts which you can read here:

But why would people in China want to read what I have written about TCM? Finally, I checked the news and found that the Chinese are getting interested in saving the environment.

The Nazis are noted for trying to save the environment in the early 30ies when this was virtually unknown.

I blogged about Heinrich Himmler growing medicinal herbs at Dachau on this blog post:

I also blogged about Heinrich Himmler doing organic gardening at Dachua on this blog post:

I am very happy that people in China are reading my blog posts, but Good Luck with understanding my writing. A lot of what I write is sarcastic and might be hard for people to understand unless they are native English speakers.

August 25, 2014

93-year-old survivor of Mauthausen visits the Memorial site

93-year-old survivor of Mauthausen visits the Memorial site

93-year-old survivor of Mauthausen visits the Memorial site

The photo above shows Pal Ferenczi, a 93-year-old survivor of the Mauthausen concentration camp in Austria; he recently returned to visit the Memorial Site at the former camp. You can read about it here; the article includes this quote: “Mauthausen was the only category III concentration camp – which means it had the most brutal conditions, according to the memorial’s website. Nearly 200,000 people were taken to the camp, and half of them died there.”

This quote is from the news article about Ferenczi’s visit to Mauthausen:

Passing an empty room, he recalled how corpses would be stacked on top of each other there, waiting to be burned in the furnace. At the gas chamber, he told his family how 50 men would be shoved into the tiny room to die. Terrified victims left scratch marks on the door.

Pal Ferenczi enters the Mausthausen gas chamber

Pal Ferenczi enters the Mausthausen gas chamber

The photo above shows the inside of one of the two doors into the Mauthausen gas chamber, as Pal Ferenczi enters the room. The object on the right hand side, just above the peephole, is what is left of the door handle, which has had the actual handle removed. When prisoners took a shower in this room, it was possible for them to turn a handle and open the door to get out of the room.

When I visited Mauthausen a few years ago, I didn’t notice the scratch marks on the door of the gas chamber.  I took the photo below, which shows the same door into the gas chamber.  There is a peephole in the center of the door which has some white marks around it, but I don’t think that these are scratch marks.

One of the two doors into the Mauthausen gas chamber

One of the two doors into the Mauthausen gas chamber

Door latch on the inside of the Mauthausen gas chamber has no handle

Door latch on the inside of the Mauthausen gas chamber has no handle

Close-up of the peephole in the Mauthausen gas chamber door is called a Judas opening

Close-up of the peephole in the Mauthausen gas chamber — this peephole is called a “Judas opening”

Mauthausen was the only Class III camp in the Nazi concentration camp system. It was a punishment camp where prisoners were rarely ever released.  I have an extensive section about Mauthausen on my website, which you can read here.  You can read about the Jewish prisoners at Mauthausen on my website here — this page is a MUST read.

Mauthausen was the first Nazi concentration camp to receive foreign prisoners; it was not a camp that was particularly for Austrians, nor was it a camp that was specifically designed for killing the Jews. It was mainly a camp for resistance fighters from Nazi occupied countries, such as France, Hungary and the Netherlands, and for German “career criminals.”

Pal Ferenczi was undoubtedly sent to Mauthausen because he was fighting as an illegal combatant in the Hungarian Resistance. On his trip back to visit the camp, he was photographed as he stood near the Monument to the Hungarian Resistance fighters.

Pal Ferenczi visited the Memorial to the Hungarian Resistance fighters at Mauthausen

Pal Ferenczi visited the Memorial to the Hungarian Resistance fighters at Mauthausen

My photo of the monument to the Hungarian Resistance fighters a Mauthausen

My photo of the monument to the Hungarian Resistance fighters at Mauthausen

On his visit to Mauthausen, Ferenczi visited the former morgue, which has been converted into a room where the names of the victims who died at Mauthausen are engraved.  The photo below shows Ferenczi on his visit to this room.

Former morgue room at Mauthausen has names of the victims

Former morgue room at Mauthausen has names of the victims

When I visited the Mauthausen camp, I took the photo below, which shows the former morgue before it was converted into a Memorial room. Note the two posts which are the same in both photos.

My photo of the Mauthausen morgue before it was turned into a Museum room

My photo of the Mauthausen morgue before it was turned into a room of names

I took the morgue photo below, because it shows a water pipe which goes into the gas chamber room.

Water pipe in the Mauthausen morgue goes through the wall into the gas chamber

Water pipe in the Mauthausen morgue goes through the wall into the gas chamber

Why would a gas chamber need water pipes?  The Mauthausen gas chamber was a multi-purpose room where prisoners could take a shower with water coming through real shower heads, or they could be gassed with Zyklon-B which came through a special device that has since been removed.

The article about the visit of Pal Ferenczi to Mauthausen includes a photo which shows the first crematory oven.  When I visited Mauthausen, I was told that the first crematory oven was the oven that is shown in my photo below.

My photo of the first crematory oven at Mauthausen

My photo of the first crematory oven at Mauthausen

An American Tragedy: “Unarmed teenager gunned down by white policeman”

Photo of Michael Brown which was shown many times on TV

Photo of Michael Brown which has been shown many times on TV

The title of my blog post today is in quotes because these words were spoken a million times today as “unarmed teenager” Michael Brown was laid to rest, after being “gunned down” by a white policeman.  The date of his death was August 9th.  Michael Brown could not be laid to rest before now because three (or maybe four) autopsies had to be performed, and the rioting caused by his death had to be allowed to continue unabated.

This photo of Michael Brown was displayed in the church at his funeral

This photo of Michael Brown was displayed in the church at his funeral

The funeral of Michael Brown took place today in the “Friendly Temple” Baptist church in Ferguson, MO as 4,500 people attended, including many famous people, such as Snoop Dog and Spike Lee. President Obama skipped this important event, but sent THREE White House aids to represent him.

The eulogy was given by Al Sharpton, who wore a white suit.  Many people in the church were wearing red, including the mother of Michael Brown.  A man sitting beside her, chewing gum, was wearing a red shirt. 485 members of Michael Brown’s family were at the funeral.

I saw one photo taken at the funeral, which showed a man wearing a T-Shirt that said “No Justice, no Peace.”

All of this could have been avoided if Michael Brown had been trained, as a child, in how to avoid being gunned down by a white policeman.  The first thing that he should have been taught, by his parents, is that after you rob a store, you should not attract the attention of a police officer by walking down the double yellow line in the middle of a major street.  If a police officer orders you to get out of the middle of the street, you should not approach his police car and try to take his gun.

Of course, this advice applies to all criminals, regardless of age or color.  In fact, the best advice that I can give to potential criminals is to pay for small items in a store.  Then the police won’t be called and you won’t be gunned down by a white policeman.

August 24, 2014

Hedy Epstein (the Jewish woman who was arrested in St. Louis) confronted Herman Goering at Nuremberg

Filed under: Germany, Holocaust, True Crime — Tags: , , , — furtherglory @ 10:43 am

Ninety-year-old Holocaust survivor Hedy Epstein has been in the news recently because she was arrested in St. Louis, MO as she protested against Gov. Jay Nixon’s actions in the aftermath of the shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, MO.

A news story, which you can read here, mentioned that Hedy Epstein had “aided Allied forces” in the trials of the Nazi war criminals at Nuremberg in 1945.

This quote is from the news article:

“Epstein, who aided Allied forces in the Nuremberg trials, was placed under arrest in downtown St. Louis, Missouri, “for failing to disperse” during a protest of Gov. Jay Nixon’s decision to call the National Guard into Ferguson. Eight others were also arrested.”

I was dubious about Epstein’s involvement in the Nuremberg trials, so I did a search and found the video below. In the video, she explains about how she taunted Herman Goering, who was on trial at Nuremberg.


« Newer PostsOlder Posts »

The Silver is the New Black Theme. Blog at


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 249 other followers