Scrapbookpages Blog

April 10, 2011

New book: The Man Who Broke into Auschwitz by Denis Avey — is it an insult to the millions who died there?

Filed under: Holocaust — Tags: , , — furtherglory @ 11:49 am

According to a news article in the Daily Mail which you can read here, there is some doubt about the truth of the story told by Denis Avey in his new book, The Man Who Broke into Auschwitz, which was recently published in ten countries and is already a best seller. Some people are calling his story an insult to the millions who died in the gas chambers at Auschwitz.

Back on March 4, 2010, I wrote about Avey’s story; you can read my blog post here.

This quote from the Daily Mail news article caught my attention:

What is also troubling is that the story of Mr Avey’s swap is almost identical to that told by another former POW at camp E715 called Charles Coward.

In a post-war trial, Coward gave testimony — now widely discredited by Holocaust scholars — in which he claimed to have smuggled himself into Auschwitz by swapping places with a Jewish inmate. This tall tale is included in a book about Coward’s exploits which is called The Password Is Courage and billed on the jacket as The Man Who Broke Into Auschwitz — the very same title as Avey’s book.

The chance that two British POWs both independently thought up the life-endangering idea to swap places with an inmate of Auschwitz for the night stretches credibility to breaking point.

I have not read Avey’s book and when I first heard about his story, I was confused because I thought that he was claiming that he had sneaked into Auschwitz I, the main camp, which was about six miles from the Auschwitz III camp, aka Monowitz, where Avery was working when he was a POW.

Now it is clear that his claim is that he sneaked into the barracks at Monowitz, the Auschwitz III camp, where he learned all about the gas chambers from the Jewish prisoners.  What threw me off at first was that Avery described the camp as having the “Arbeit Macht Frei” sign, which was on the gate at the Auschwitz I camp, but not on the Monowitz gate.

Sgt. Charles Coward had been captured by the Germans in May 1940 but he was not sent to the E715 POW camp near Monowitz until December 1943. While he was a prisoner at E715, Coward smuggled out news about what was happening at Monowitz in letters to the British War Office and informed Swiss representatives of the Red Cross, who paid two visits to E715 in the summer 1944.

Coward testified at the Nuremberg International Military Tribunal regarding his observations about Monowitz.  This quote is from his testimony:

DR. DRISCHEL (counsel for Defendant Ambros): Witness, it is remarkable that you state in your affidavit that for a few cigarettes you saw the gas chambers in Auschwitz and the crematoria. Can you tell its where that was in the city of Auschwitz?

COWARD: To my best belief the gas chamber and crematorium, as it was known, was about 50 yards from a railway station at the far end of, I think the name was Monowitz.

DR. DRISCHEL: Did I understand you to say that you saw the gas chambers in Monowitz?

COWARD: No, not actually in Monowitz, no. Where the station was at Auschwitz, you see – I very likely misunderstood your question. At Auschwitz there was a railway station, you see, and about 50 to 100 yards from Auschwitz there was a siding where they used to bring the civilians, you see; and about 20 yards on the other side of this siding was where this particular guard took me and showed me the place.

The “siding” that Coward mentioned was called the Judenrampe or Jewish ramp in English.  The Judenrampe was an actual ramp, that is, a platform made out of wood, on which the Jews disembarked from the trains.

Railroad tracks at Auschwitz where the Judenrampe was formerly located

The Judenrampe, where the Jews got off the transport trains was “some distance from the railroad station” in the words of Sgt. Coward. The wooden ramp has since been torn down, but the tracks are still there. In May 1944, the railroad tracks were extended into the Birkenau camp when the transports of Jews from Hungary began to arrive, and the Judenrampe was no longer used.

When I visited Auschwitz in 2005, I saw some old abandoned buildings, to the left of the tracks, which might be the location that Sgt. Charles Coward was talking about when he testified about the gas chamber that was “20 yards from the siding.” The photo below, taken in October 2005, shows one of these old buildings.

Abandoned building near the former Judenrampe

Today, there is no claim by the Auschwitz Museum that these buildings once housed a gas chamber. However, an SS judge named Dr. Georg Konrad Morgen testified in defense of the SS at the Nuremberg IMT.  He claimed that there was a gas chamber at Monowitz but the SS was not involved.  You can read about his testimony here on my web site.

Here is another quote from the Daily Mail news article:

The trouble is that increasing numbers of people don’t believe him. They include former Auschwitz prisoners, historians and Jewish organisations — and they all doubt very much that he broke into Auschwitz.

This week Dr Piotr Setkiewicz, the head historian at Auschwitz, said that he did not believe Mr Avey’s story of the swap. He said that his fear was the story could provide ammunition for Holocaust deniers who are keen to exploit implausible memoirs in order to ‘prove’ that the Holocaust did not take place.

Don’t worry about Avey’s book.  It will soon be classified as a novel and made into a movie.  Just because a book is in the Holocaust fiction genre is no reason to throw it out.    The basic premise of the book is that a British POW  traded places with a Jewish prisoner in order to learn about the gas chambers.  What’s wrong with that?


  1. The more I read Avey,s book, the more I became convinced that it does not ring true. How could a person remember in such detail all the conversations they had with the people in the book, unless they had kept a diary of all these events, and no mention was made of a diary being kept in the book. One thing that niggles me in the book is his bragging and self praise, one other thing, many of his supposed experiences, as was commented on by other posters, could have been taken from other sources.

    A Doubting Thomas

    Comment by David Field — September 13, 2011 @ 2:00 am

  2. Avey has responded to doubters in an interview with Welt Online dated 8th May 2011 at . I translate, with my notes in square brackets.

    Welt am Sonntag. How do you respond to those who say your story is too fantastic to be true?
    Avey Why should an old man like me think up such a hellish experience? To boast and for desire for fame? Anyone who maintains that has a bad [or evil] heart and should look at themselves in the mirror. Also you should consider that at the request of my English publisher the manuscript was closely scrutinised by Holocaust Historians. [Who are they?] Over my desk hangs a letter from Avner Shalev, the head of the Holocaust memorial Yad Vashem in Jerusalem in which he tanks and acknowledges me [for what?]

    Welt am Sonntag: Was entgegnen Sie jenen, die sagen, Ihre Geschichte sei zu fantastisch, um wahr zu sein?
    Denis Avey: Warum sollte sich ein alter Mann wie ich solche Höllenerfahrung ausdenken? Aus Prahlerei und Ruhmsucht? Wer so etwas behauptet, hat ein böses Herz und sollte in den Spiegel schauen. Außerdem können Sie sich denken, dass das Manuskript auf Wunsch meines englischen Verlages von Holocaust-Historikern genau geprüft wurde. Über meinem Schreibtisch hängt ein Brief von Avner Shalev, dem Leiter der Holocaust-Gedenkstätte Yad Vashem in Jerusalem. Er spricht mir Dank und Anerkennung aus.

    Comment by Ethelred — May 12, 2011 @ 4:46 am

  3. I just got to listen again. Yes, he could be saying “I had no heavy soles to put on my boots … so for 2 packs of English cigarettes … so, ummph, came again to save my life on the death march that took place in 1945.”

    If this IS what he’s saying, when has anyone used the expression “I had no heavy soles to put on my boots?” I can’t imagine saying it that way. Lobethal is now living in the U.S. for 50 years and speaks normal English. He doesn’t say he had his boots resoled; that is inferred. He doesn’t say what he did with those 2 packs of cigarettes; he stops himself with “Ummph” and then says “came again to save my life …” Why again? Is there something earlier on the video where he tells of other things that “saved his life.”

    These survivors always want to point to what “saved their lives” and why they weren’t killed with all the others. They have to explain why they survived a “death camp.” This is all so obvious, and the media people try to extract the meaning they want.

    As in everything, we need to see the entire video testimony of this man, not just 3 minutes of it.

    Comment by Skeptic — April 29, 2011 @ 8:45 am

    • Sceptic, I heard perfectly clearly “I had new heavy soles put on my boots for two packets of english Players cigarettes.” I’ve never heard anything else. This would be normal English in the U.K.

      Comment by Ethelred — April 29, 2011 @ 10:33 pm

      • Okay, since you have pointed it out, I agree that is probably what he’s saying. He pronounces the words oddly for Americans … saying no for new, and soles still sounds more like socks, but okay.

        So that brings up: Where did he get his boots resoled? That doesn’t fit with the kind of story Avey is telling of conditions there. Also, the version now being put out is that Lobethal got “new boots”. That’s not what he’s saying. How confused can the whole thing get?

        Comment by Skeptic — April 30, 2011 @ 8:38 am

        • Lobethall appears to be very charming in the video. If they had a shoe repair shop at Auschwitz III, which I doubt, he could have charmed the cobbler to get his boots re-soled. Or he could have waited until it was time for the march out of the camp and good boots from the warehouses at Auschwitz II were handed out. He would have had no trouble getting a good pair of boots — with his good looks and charm.

          Comment by furtherglory — April 30, 2011 @ 10:14 am

          • Further Glory – your comment presupposes that Lobethal knew in advance there was ging to be a march and that the prisoners would be issued with shoes. These are both plausible but not demonstrated.

            There is a reference to Lobethal at
            which may be relevant.

            PS in reply to Sceptic above where is the ‘new version’? So far as I am concerned the only versions which have the authority of Avey are the book and anything put out by the BBC or his publisher. I don’t see that Avey can be held responsible for anything else in the media.

            Comment by Ethelred — April 30, 2011 @ 2:01 pm

        • Sceptic – Lobethal lived in America and not Britain so I’d expect Brits rather than Americans to misunderstand him, but maybe there’s something about his way of speaking which makes him less misundertood in Britain.

          I hadn’t really thought about how he got his boots re-soled – I thought that there were skilled prisoners who could improvise from limited materials, but maybe there were some prisoners who had better conditions than others.

          Just because some testimonies are dodgy it doesn’t mean they all are. But the question about the cobblers shop seems a reasonable one.

          Comment by Ethelred — April 30, 2011 @ 1:56 pm

  4. Re: this link

    The video won’t play for me, but the text was very interesting. It says:

    “Mr Avey always thought that inmate, Ernst Lobethall, had died – but in fact he had survived until 2001. Here, he meets Mr Lobethall’s sister Susana Timms for the first time – and together they watch video testimony recorded by Mr Lobethall before he died.”

    The ‘official’ story is that Avey and Timms met at the end of the war, but then ‘lost touch.’ Here it says ‘for the first time.’ This is typical of the mix-up always going on in these holocaust fables.

    As far as the socks/soles goes, I have only ever heard ‘socks’ from the time I first listened to it a year ago. Right now I can’t get the video to play in either location so I can ‘try’ to hear soles.

    I agree with furtherglory’s general assessment. Also, Lobethal was too emotional on that video to be believed. All that sniffling doesn’t appear authentic to me. Many of those Shoah Foundation testifiers lied quite a bit.

    Comment by Skeptic — April 29, 2011 @ 8:12 am

    • I think certain distortions are introduced by innacurate secondary reporting, reporters either being careless or seeking to sensationalise. If a caption or commentator says that Avey and Susanna Lobethal met for the first time in 2009 it doesn’t automatically follow that that is what Avey claimed.

      Comment by Ethelred — April 29, 2011 @ 10:24 pm

      • I played the video again and it’s quite clear here that Avey and Susanna have met before – it’s just an error in the caption. A close comparison of the video itself and the corresponding passage of the book might be interest though I’m not spurred to do this at present.

        Comment by Ethelred — April 30, 2011 @ 2:53 am

  5. On the link you gave me at 1.26 Ernst says ‘I had new heavy soles put on my boots…’. What precisely does it say to you?

    Comment by Ethelred — April 28, 2011 @ 5:09 pm

    • At 1.26 Ernst says “I had no heavy socks for my boots.” I have watched this video at least ten times and all I hear is “heavy socks.”

      P.S. I listened to it one more time and I finally heard “I had new heavy soles put on my boots.” However, the words “new” and “soles” were very hard to understand. I did hear him say “put on my boots.”

      What are “heavy soles?” I’ve never heard that expression before.

      Comment by furtherglory — April 28, 2011 @ 9:32 pm

      • I imagine ‘heavy’ is the equivalent of ‘thick’. (More to follow)

        Comment by Ethelred — April 29, 2011 @ 12:24 am

  6. There is a new article by Carolyn Yeager about Denis Avey which says more about the politics of the BBC and Labour Party which I’d certainly agree with. I haven’t really thought about whether or the cigarette story is true or not.

    Comment by Ethelred — April 28, 2011 @ 4:39 am

    • Thanks a million for this link. I read the article by Carolyn Yeager and it is excellent, as her articles always are. She is very meticulous in her research. I was impressed with her knowledge of British politics. She is the best of the current revisionists.

      This quote from her article is very interesting:

      “Lobethal’s actual Shoah testimony is that a British PoW he knew as Ginger gave him 10 packs of cigarettes, and he used two packs to trade for heavy socks to wear with his boots. Avey’s story is that Ernst got his shoes resoled. Broomby wrote in the Ariel promo linked to above that Lobethal said he traded cigarettes for “favours” which “enabled him to get his shoes resoled,” and that “saved his life” But when I watched the video testimony, that’s not what he said. In any case, this brings up the question that if conditions were as bad inside the Monowitz camp as Avey says, who is doing skilled labor like resoling shoes for prisoners whom Avey says were only waiting to die?”

      In the above quote, Ms. Yeager brings up an important point about socks and the resoling of shoes. According to many survivor stories that I have read, the Auschwitz prisoners did not wear socks. There must have been socks available because the prisoners brought socks with them in their luggage when they were transported to Auschwitz. So it makes sense that Lobethal bribed someone to get him a pair of heavy socks from the Canada warehouses at the Birkenau camp. However, I have also read several survivor accounts which said that the Germans gave everyone a good pair of shoes for the march out of the camp. There were lots of shoes available in the warehouses at Birkenau, so why not hand them out to all the prisoners before the 35 mile march through two feet of snow. What does not make sense is that a prisoner would have had his shoes resoled before the march.

      When I was a child, resoling shoes was common. One could get his shoes “half-soled” or get a full sole which could be done by taking the heel off and putting a new sole on the entire shoe. Wearing “half-soled” shoes was the mark of a really poor person who could not afford a full sole and a new heel. (Is this where the term “well-heeled” comes from? Rich people in my day could afford a new heel and a full sole, instead of the dreaded “half-sole.) In any case, I don’t think there were any cobblers at Auschwitz since this was not needed.

      P.S. There was a shoe repair shop at Majdanek where the shoes of the German soldiers were repaired. I don’t know of any shoe repair that was done at Auschwitz. I can’t imagine Lobethal asking someone at Auschwitz to re-sole his shoes for a couple of packs of cigarettes. The sock story is more believable. Other survivors have written about the ski boots which was available at the Auschwitz warehouses because many of the Jews had brought their ski boots after they were told that they were being “transported to the East.” Many of these people were rich and they wanted to be well equipped for their new life in the East.

      Comment by furtherglory — April 28, 2011 @ 8:04 am

      • I think Ms Yeager has a British contact, or two.
        I did manage to access Lobethal’s Shoah testimony on the BBC the BBC The first time I played the clip did freeze just before the part about the soles so I can see why the author thought the video diabled, but the next times I tried I was able to play the whole thing and Lobethal was talking about soles not socks. I’m not persuaded that the cigarettes for soles part of Avey’s is untrue and suspect many others are of like mind – I hope that doesn’t obscure Yeager’s political analysis because at present she is the only person saying this, and I’m sure a great swathe of the British public would agree with it if it were in the Daily Mail.

        Comment by Ethelred — April 28, 2011 @ 8:28 am

        • I listened to Lobethal’s Shoah testimony twice, but I did not hear anything about shoe soles. How come no one else ever wrote about the shoe repair shop at Auschwitz III? What was the name of the cobbler? I don’t believe that he had his shoes re-soled. By the way, cigarettes were so common in the 1940s, when everyone smoked, that English cigarettes would not have been that valuable. Everyone would have wanted American cigarettes. Were English cigarettes made with American tobacco? If not, the non-existent cobbler at Auschwitz III would have thrown the two packs of Player cigarettes in Lobethal’s face and said, “Get the hell out of here.”

          I noticed in the video that Avey is in remarkably good health, considering that he was 91 at that time and is now 92. One would think that, after his ordeal in a POW camp and being forced to work in the factories at Auschwitz III, he would have died an early death.

          Comment by furtherglory — April 28, 2011 @ 8:54 am

          • Well you and Ms Yeager agree but the clip on the link doesn’t. Would it be possible for you to play it and comment? Thanks.

            You could also argue that only the strong survived and they would be likely to live long so I’m not sure about longevity arguments, which could apply to a lot of living survivors. Also you may provoke me to patriotism over English ciggies – not that I smoke!

            Comment by Ethelred — April 28, 2011 @ 9:05 am

            • I have watched the video on the link that you gave several times, and also at this link:

              I do not hear anything in the video about him having his shoes resoled. If there was a cobbler at Auschwitz, which I doubt, he would have been at the main camp, not at Auschwitz III which had nothing but factories, no workshops. Lobethall had 10 packs of cigarettes. He used two packs as a bribe to get better footware, either thick socks or new soles for his shoes. Why didn’t he use all ten packs to get a different pair of boots? In any case, he would have obtained the socks from the Birkenau warehouses, so why not get a different pair of boots?

              The way that I heard the story of the march out of Auschwitz, from several survivor books and speeches, all the people who were marched out of Auschwitz were given warm clothing and good shoes. German soldiers led the march and tramped down the two feet of snow so that the prisoners could walk more easily. There was also a “sag wagon” for those who got tired of walking. The women and children were marched out first, to give them a head start. The purpose of the march was to save these prisoners so that they could continue to work for the Germans. If the purpose had been to kill them, they would have been shot and the bodies left in the snow.

              A pair of socks would have been more valuable than re-soled shoes. I can’t imagine not wearing socks. I wear socks even with sandals.

              Comment by furtherglory — April 28, 2011 @ 11:12 am

  7. Avey is now on BBC local TV saying he is looking for information about the man with whom he swopped places.

    Comment by Ethelred — April 27, 2011 @ 3:18 am

  8. Thanks Sceptic. Let’s hope the article gets lots of hits so that when folk google ‘Denis Avey’ they find it quickly.

    Comment by Ethelred — April 18, 2011 @ 5:05 pm

  9. This is how the Denis Avey expose should be given to the pubic. This article has everything Ethelred said was needed. It just appeared on Inconvenient History revisionionst blog.

    Comment by Skeptic — April 18, 2011 @ 2:12 pm

  10. Just found this

    “A hugely popular real life story and historical account, The Man Who Broke into Auschwitz is the heroic memoir of Denis Avey, a man who willingly traded places with a Jewish inmate and smuggled himself into Auschwitz III during the Second World War.
    £4.99RRP £20.00Save £15.01”

    If it’s ‘hugely popular’ why such a discount less than three weeks after publication?

    Comment by Ethelred — April 17, 2011 @ 7:35 am

  11. Brown is yesterday’s man, but we should try to turn the spotlight on the BBC and the (U.K.) Holocaust Education Trust who promoted Avey’s story. I’m sure they would like it to be forgotten, but hopefully they won’t be allowed to.

    Comment by Ethelred — April 17, 2011 @ 7:25 am

  12. We should consider the hypothesis that Avey is a decent man fallen among politicians. His story emerged, with the help of the ‘public-service’ BBC, at a time when the last Prime Minister Gordon Brown was setting up his ‘British Hero of the Holocaust’ award, just before the last election. He is now tied into a book deal. I don’t think he particularly needed the money and he may now be wondering whether it was all worth it.

    Comment by Ethelred — April 17, 2011 @ 12:53 am

    • Decent men don’t lie through their teeth as this man has been doing for a long time. He may be a compulsive liar and braggert who has now gotten in deeper than he might have wished. Who in their 90’s with a good pension needs millions of pounds? I don’t think it was the money, but the glory and attention.

      The truth is they’re now all stuck with each other … Avey, Brown, and the BBC.

      Comment by Skeptic — April 17, 2011 @ 6:20 am

      • I just read more about Avey and find that he has been complaining about what a measly war pension the British govt. has given him and others for years. He’s known for it in Britain. He doesn’t seem to have come out of nowhere, after all.

        So yes, he would want the money because he feels he deserves it. He has been embittered since the end of the war and is now getting his revenge and reward. He’s more of a conniving old sob than I realized. But I should have known. Even I take these people as better than they are at first because of the media presentation, and because that’s the way we European people are. We don’t expect such deceit and are of a trusting nature overall.

        Comment by Skeptic — April 29, 2011 @ 8:57 am

  13. Correction: I should have written “to refuse to get into the fray and openly resist” in the second to the last paragraph.

    Open resistance is what is really needed by many more than are doing so. That, I suppose, is my basic message.

    Comment by Sceptic — April 13, 2011 @ 7:49 am

  14. ” Just because a book is in the Holocaust fiction genre is no reason to throw it out. The basic premise of the book is that a British POW traded places with a Jewish prisoner in order to learn about the gas chambers. What’s wrong with that?”

    It was ghost written and dishonestly promoted and sold as non-fiction. That’s what’s what’s wrong with this book and it’s sorry author. It should be thrown out because there’s nothing redeeming about this fraud. When Willomirsky was exposed Deborah Lipstadt announced that it didn’t make any difference that his memoir, which had been heaped with literary laurels, was a hoax. In her racial hubris she believes prevarications in the service of the Holocaust are somehow moral because they benefit her craven tribe, I guess. It’s the ubiquity of this Judaic ends justify the means mentality
    that’s corrupted our society to the point where drug dealers, white collar criminals and smarmy politicians have become glorified role models. Kevin Spacey nails Jack “sniper school” Abramoff in “Casino Jack” and we’re supposed to care.

    Comment by who+dares+wings — April 11, 2011 @ 11:13 pm

    • I purchased Wilkomirski’s book “fragments” when it came out, and I spotted it as a fake before it was announced that it was a hoax. He made some mistakes in his description of the Majdanek camp. However, his book is still used to teach children in American schools. Avey’s book has already sold enough copies to be on the best seller list, so it can’t be withdrawn.

      Comment by furtherglory — April 12, 2011 @ 7:39 am

      • What are you talking about? “It can’t be withdrawn”?? If it’s proven to be fake, and there is enough public outcry or bad publicity, it certainly can.

        You express yourself as a defeatist, and that is what I find so disappointing. You are intelligent and talented — you certainly know that what is obvious to you is not obvious to others, especially school children.

        Let’s get real, shall we? We have become Judaized in our white, European lands. Anything that encourages multiculturalism, or acceptance of the dominance of ANYTHING/ANY OTHERS over ourselves is a sign of that. It is called “getting along with everyone” and “not making a fuss.”

        How about this:
        Rabbi Martin Siegel, reflecting a Messianic zeal, was quoted in the 18 January 1972 edition of New York Magazine as declaring: “I am devoting my lecture in this seminar to a discussion of the possibility that we are now entering a Jewish century, a time when the spirit of the community, the non-ideological blend of the emotional and rational and the resistance to categories and forms will emerge through the forces of anti-nationalism to provide us with a new kind of society. I call this process the Judaization of Christianity because Christianity will be the vehicle through which this society becomes Jewish.”

        Anti-nationalism is the sign that this process is moving forward to the objective of the Judaization of previously non-Jewish societies. People like Denis Avey cooperate in the process for money and attention to their pathetic selves.

        To refuse to get into the fray, to openly resist, is the response of the vast majority of non-Jews. For many, they actually like the Judaization — nothing is expected of them except to be entertained and become soft.

        When an opportunity like Avey and his fictional story comes up, it should be exposed in the strongest possible terms. That means “destroy it utterly.” No one should think they are too unimportant, or “small fry” in the larger scheme of things, to make a difference.

        Comment by Sceptic — April 13, 2011 @ 7:42 am

        • Skeptic,

          You first. Let’s see you under your real name with a photo calling for Jihad against Jews. Then maybe we’ll talk about open resistance.

          Comment by Lucius — April 13, 2011 @ 12:20 pm

  15. Gasan,

    I agree. I downloaded and re-uploaded all those FBI PDFs your linked to. I appreciate that. That is important information. In the meantime here’s a video for you:

    That’s Fritz Berg on Spingola’s show talking about the Pseudocaust. A great talk.

    Comment by Lucien — April 11, 2011 @ 9:40 pm

  16. I would rather be a peacemaker.
    There is no reason to be offensive to each other. I can understand reader Sceptic’s feelings about that idiotic book written by an old stupid liar, who wanted to make some money. That is disgusting, but there is also freedom of speech and freedom of artistic expression. You could try to sue old fool, but for what? He is in a frail stage of his life and could easily claim that he has Alzheimer or Parkinson or just memory loss.
    This book and “the fifth diamond” (which was apparently discovered in the writer’s own derriere) should be derided altogether.
    Sceptic, why would you object the publishing the book and making the movie based on it? We NEED more movies like that based on the MORE books based and those testimonies. The movies and books like that would have an adverse effect on general public and even more would really want to know the real history.
    I have spent sixty bucks on the “Black Book of Russian Jewry” (English version) and it worth every penny. Much more entertaining than “Comedy Central”.
    So, why not let that old idiot to make a movie with a title, lemme see: “Swinging in Auschw…eh, I mean “Swapping in Auschwitz”. That’s right. That is what I meant.
    I just came to another brilliant idea. The books of Dennis Avey and Irene Zisblatt could be combined in the same movie, where they would meet in Auschwitz and Dennis helps her to retrieve those diamonds from her cr… eh… her stuff.
    We should not be taking these people seriously, even though, their lies are bringing serious consequences and literally cost lives today. The stories of Zisblatt and Avey are justifying today’s treatment of the Middle East and other parts of the World. Their stories are not better or worse than those which were told right after the war, or the government war time propaganda itself. But both of them as many others could be easily discarded by holocaust apologists at any time, after their purpose was served.
    But they cannot deny hard evidence. They cannot deny FBI reports and the speeches of the Zionists leaders, which were top secret for a long while. They cannot deny the documents, pictures, historic videos, we are finding and sharing with each other.
    This it the way to share the information and educate the others. People aren’t stupid. They can judge for themselves, if you present them information, supported with the documents and visual materials.
    Would you like to hammer last nail in the coffin of that idiot? I don’t believe anyone in attendance would object it. All posts to this article were from like-minded people. The disagreements on minor details should not even matter.
    Everyone, have a good evening!

    Comment by Gasan — April 11, 2011 @ 7:21 pm

  17. Spare me, “Miss Lucien.” I was not addressing you, and FG has no trouble speaking for himself.

    I have been posting comments on this blog since it first went online; I’m plenty familiar with all the issues, and the personalities. You have just shown up, but immediately consider yourself the “expert.” I am not interested in your Anglo-Saxon opinions.

    Comment by Skeptic — April 11, 2011 @ 5:07 pm

    • Miss? Uh, I’m done talking to you now. Good luck with your pollyanna pursuits, Miss Skeptic. I’m glad you know it all, cuz I never claimed to. I’m not that arrogant. But thanks for the Anglo-Saxon jab even though I’m not one. The Anglo-Saxons deserve it.

      Comment by Lucien — April 11, 2011 @ 9:34 pm

  18. What’s wrong with classifying Avey’s book as a novel and turning it into a movie, you ask?

    This is what’s wrong: To write fiction about a subject such as being in a historicaly real concentration camp (which is even deemed to be a “death or extermination camp”), when you were not there, and making up atrocities that you did not see and know nothing about first hand. This is not material for fiction writers or for movies.

    Further, the capacity of the human imagination to indulge in visions of blood, gore, sadism, beastiality, cruelty, not to mention revenge and old ethnic and national hatreds is encouraged … since it is fiction, anything goes.

    Also, the lying media will facilitate the public’s belief in the fiction as fact.

    Only further hatred and lies can come out of writing fictional accounts of places like Auschwitz, Birkenau, Monowitz. What other reason is there for doing it? Besides profit, that is. Entertainment?! In your addiction to watching television (talmudvision), FG, you have become judaized. It is an addiction to being entertained. We have all become judaized to an extent, meaning that our values have been corrupted. We accept things that were once not accepted because we’ve become more ‘sophisticated.’

    Your orginal blog on Avey, a year ago, was excellent. This one not so much so. Instead of hammering the nail in the coffin of Mr. Avey, you gave him a pass to continue on into celebrityhood.

    Comment by Skeptic — April 11, 2011 @ 7:27 am

    • On the other hand, Avey could have written a book about his time as a POW in the E175 camp and told about how the British POWs were treated well. He could have written about how he observed the Jewish prisoners working at Monowitz and how they were also treated well. He could have mentioned the Red Cross visits which were allowed by the Germans. He could have mentioned the soccer games and other recreation in the POW camp. He would have had trouble finding a publisher for such a book and he would have gotten no publicity. He could have published his book privately and maybe a few of his fellow prisoners would have purchased it. Such a book would never have become a best seller and would not have been published in ten countries. Avey would die pennyless and unknown. Most of his fellow prisoners would have criticized him if he had written the truth.

      No one wants to read or hear the truth about World War II and no one cares if Holocaust survivors and veterans lie. 99.9% of the people in the world believe Holocaust fiction books, so the Holocaust liars are not concerned that a few people don’t believe their stories. They are laughing all the way to the bank.

      How many people have ever heard of Bad Nenndorf, the British POW camp where German prisoners were starved, tortured and beaten? Nobody cares about the atrocities done by the Allies. I don’t know of any book about Bad Nenndorf. Maybe Gasan knows if there is a book about Bad Nenndorf; you can read about it at

      Comment by furtherglory — April 11, 2011 @ 9:09 am

      • FurtherG,

        I regret to admit that you are 100% correct. The masses do not want truth or honesty in history, but self-justifying “lies, sweet little lies.” And make no mistake about it, these lies sell!

        Anyway, I have heard of Bad Nenndorf and other Allied horrors, but the only book I can think of that details the true history of the horrors committed against “Nazis” and Germans alike is Thomas Goodrich’s “Hellstorm: The Death of Nazi Germany”. Needless to say it was not a best-seller and Goodrich’s usual publisher would not touch it. The only publisher that would touch his manuscript was Aberdeen in Colorado, but this fact kept the book virtually unknown to the masses and made it far more expensive than anything a Heeb publishing house could crank out. I highly recommend “Hellstorm” nevertheless; it’s one of the best books I have ever read.

        I find it pathetic, but also fascinating in the psychological sense, that one can show the masses pictures of, say, Negro soldiers in the Wehrmacht and the masses will flat out reject the photos and call them “fakes.” They are so intensively brainwashed from grade school on that when you show them a photo (i.e. reality) they deny the reality and accept the fiction as fact. Oddly this does NOT happen when you show them the doctored and fake photos of the Pseudocaust. Hollywood and TV play a HUGE, and I mean HUGE, role in this strange reality/fraud dichotomy. In fact, I would venture to guess that 99.9% of all viewers of the movie “Saving Private Ryan” think that it was non-fiction. Same thing with the fiction tale “Life is Beautiful,” which won numerous Academy Awards. Make no mistake though, this is how the Pseudocaust was born in the collective mass mind. It’s difficult, very difficult, to undo the mass psychology of a culture and people, but that is what we are up against; it is what must be done.

        I would recommend undermining the credibility of America and Britain as well as exposing their deep-rooted hypocrisy and treachery as a starting point. Once you upturn that and destroy the myths the Anglo-Saxon nations are founded upon, then and only then can you begin to start imprinting the masses with the truth about the Germans and Heebs. Until then you’re at a loss.

        Comment by Lucien — April 11, 2011 @ 11:22 am

      • Avey doesn’t *have* to write a truthful book–he is not a writer, haven’t you noticed–he didn’t *have* to write any book at all. He did it to cash in–after everyone else had died off–and to get a little bit of glory. He should be humiliated to the umpteenth degree, along with his despicable country and the Yad Vashem museum, instead of being able to ride it out.

        All your protests that “nobody cares” is just the same old cop-out that we hear everywhere. Do you write your blog just for your own amusement, for something to do? I think you really want to bring out the truth, but you are afraid of the Jews and therefore choose to do it in the most indirect way possible. At the same time, you believe it’s all over and we are lost, and have lost.

        Sorry I’m so harsh, but I just can’t tolerate the ending of this post. You might think it’s clever, and of course your famous tongue-in-cheek, but it’s too much realism and not enough idealism.

        Comment by Skeptic — April 11, 2011 @ 12:15 pm

        • Pessimism and realism are two necessary factors in the fight against the Judeo-Saxonist/Anglo-Zionist Power Configuration. Too much idealism is a fault as is too much pessimism. This world is not ‘Pollyanna Perfect’ and it never will be. This blog is plenty balanced. If you want answers to the Jewish-Saxonist Problem then you need look no further than NS Germany my friend. The Anglo-Saxons are the ones with the Nazi-bashing hang-up, not any other white peoples. FurtherG is doing a fine job and it’s only natural that occasionally he and others like him will feel hopeless and negative. This is normal when one has not gotten beyond the “hump” yet. It takes time, but at the same time the percent of the masses any of us will ever reach in our natural lifetimes is very limited. However, as Jeff rense would say, those are the only human beings worth saving anyway.

          Comment by Lucien — April 11, 2011 @ 12:30 pm

        • “Afraid of the Jews” — I don’t think so. If anything, he is scared of spending the rest of his life in a German prison, and that is a real danger. In a German court, truth is irrelevant, and your lawyer might actually get sentenced to prison for presenting evidence to defend you.

          FurtherGlory’s indirect approach is amazingly effective when it comes to picking up people where they are, and teaching leftists — those with the knee-jerk reaction of getting scared and all emotional when you mention Hitler — how to think.

          I had been reading this blog for about a year and was still considering it possible that people were killed in gas chambers (which only shows how brainwashed I was), and I had to be hit over the head with the fact that there were no homicidal gas chambers (just saying this is illegal where I live). I simply wasn’t ready for that before, but I was not so grossed out I stopped reading and learning. Most websites about WWII are preaching to the converted, you have either the exterminationists or the revisionists talking amongst themselves only. Here, both sides are treated with respect, and it is incredibly enlightening to see how easily the believers get ugly and aggressive. I would still be a believer if I had not been so shocked by their behaviour.

          Anyway, my point is that attacking Jews would only turn off those people who are most in need of the truth while risking prison for nothing.

          Also, do not expect idealism from old people.

          Comment by Rachel — April 15, 2011 @ 5:18 pm

      • Further Glory,
        Thank you for asking for my opinion on the matter of Bad Nenndorf atrocities. I believe that reader Lucien has provided the reliable source of information (Thomas Goodrich’s “Hellstorm: The Death of Nazi Germany”.)
        I have not read the book yet and cannot make my own judgement. However, you have provided the link to that article in “Guardian” which explains more than any book.
        This is written by the “Guardian” columnist Ian Cobain.
        Just a few excepts:
        “The pictures show suspected communists who were tortured in an attempt to gather information about Soviet military intentions and intelligence methods at a time when some British officials were convinced that a third world war was only months away.”
        “Harrowing photographs of young men who had survived being systematically starved, as well as beaten, deprived of sleep and exposed to extreme cold, were considered too shocking to be seen.”
        That’s enough.
        Just ONLY being “suspected communists” were literally starved and tortured to death. And what happened to those who were “suspected nazis”. Didn’t the Brits just won the war because “the communists” of USSR helped them out?
        And then, they have found several young Germans to charge them with “communism”,”national socialism” or whatever and deliberately starve them, while plenty of food was available.
        The Brits are responsible for more war crimes than the Germans. This article is only a tip of the iceberg of their crimes,

        Comment by Gasan — April 12, 2011 @ 9:05 pm

    • Why do you think Mr Avey’s book is fiction ?
      Have you actually read his book ? No, well what do you know then, you are just feeding off the writing of others who also have not bothered to read his book.
      I have met Mr Avey, and talked to him at length about his experiences. I don’t doubt his story at all. Before you start writing drivel, why don’t you actually buy the book and read it.!!

      Comment by Johnny E — June 6, 2012 @ 11:40 am

  19. There is some more from the same FBI declassified documents:
    Apparently, the FBI surveillance lasted for many years since the Zionist Organization of America was considered as a “foreign agency” under “Neutrality Pact”. The Milwaukee office of FBI was constantly investigating the arms and ammunitions shipments to Palestine in early 1948, prior to declaration of the state of Israel in may of the same year.
    Sometimes, even Hollywood movies could provide you with the bits and pieces of information. I would recommend everyone to watch the 1991 movie “Homicide” with Joe Mantegna. The victim, an old jewish small store owner, was an ardent zionist and was shipping Thompson submachine guns to Palestine, when she was young.
    The small firearms supplied from USA, Czechoslovakia and few other countries helped the jews to commit Deir Yassin massacre, as well as other atrocities. The Arab population of Palestine did not have any firearms to defend themselves.

    Comment by Gasan — April 10, 2011 @ 9:29 pm

  20. This is from FBI declassified documents. “The Zionists Organization of America”, ZOA was under surveillance for a long time. This is the report sent to FBI, regarding ZOA event held in San Francisco on 11/18/1943. The speaker was Rabbi James G. Heller.
    “Dr Heller estimated the numbers of Jews in occupied Europe to be 2,000,000. He feared, that this number would be reduced to “a mere handful” if the Nazis remained in control for another year”.

    The number of Jews in occupied Europe was “estimated to be” 2,000,000, according to Rabbi Heller. Out of this number 6,000,000 died in ‘holocaust” and about 3,000,000 survived, which left us with negative -7,000,000 jews in Europe after the WWII. Did I miss something in my arithmetic class at my grade school?
    The revisionists have always insisted there were no more than 2.5-3.5 millions of jews residing in the areas occupied by Germany. Rabbi Heller provided even lower number, and there is why.
    Same page of the document:

    “On the question of number of Jewish immigrants Palestine could absorb Dr. Heller expressed the belief that further land utilization resulting from new irrigation projects would permit an increase of perhaps 4,000,000 in the Jewish population. Progress in industrialization would in all probability add to this estimate. Thus, said Dr. Heller, Palestine might easily absorb 1,300,000 Jews who had fled from Poland to Soviet Russia, and who in his opinion were not anxious either return to Poland or to remain in USSR”.
    This sly Rabbi knew exactly that about half of the polish jews had fled the country and were in safe place.
    He was also lying about ” new irrigation projects”. There could not be any “irrigation projects” at the time of war, to accommodate four millions of new immigrants in such a small territory as Palestine. What does it mean” irrigation projects’? Stealing water from the neighbor’s well?
    And here is a gem:
    ” Dr. Heller restated the Zionist program is favoring immigration into Palestine and democratic regime (SIC!) in that country once the Jews had won the majority. He pointed out that the setting up the democratic machinery (MACHINERY, HUH) now (as desired by American Council of Judaism) would, in his view, play into hands of the Arabs in other anti-jewish elements”.
    And this was dated November 18, 1943.
    That was probably a great speech of one of the zionist leaders. Hitler is still alive and his faithful soldiers are fighting, but completely unarmed Arabs are already the main enemy. The democracy will be established as soon as “the jews won the majority”.
    This rabbi was very sly, but he was an idiot. Too arrogant, to stupid to hide their hidden goals and dreams, which are against the whole mankind.

    Comment by Gasan — April 10, 2011 @ 8:42 pm

  21. He’s as credible as the Jewish pseudosurvivors.

    Comment by Lucien — April 10, 2011 @ 4:54 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

%d bloggers like this: