Scrapbookpages Blog

September 12, 2015

Holocaust denial is explained by Deborah Lipstadt

Filed under: Germany, Holocaust — Tags: , , — furtherglory @ 11:18 am
Cremation ovens at Majdanek death camp

Cremation ovens at Majdanek death camp (click on photo)

A black and white photo, similar to the photo above, is at the top of an article written by Deborah Lipstadt: http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/genocide/deniers_01.shtml

This quote is from the article written by Deborah Lipstadt:

Holocaust deniers are people who contend that the Holocaust – the attempt by Nazi Germany to annihilate European Jewry during World War Two – never happened. According to the deniers, the Nazis did not murder six million Jews, the notion of homicidal gas chambers is a myth, and any deaths of Jews that did occur under the Nazis were the result of wartime privations, not of systematic persecution and state-organised mass murder.

Some even claim that Hitler was the best friend the Jews had in Germany, and that he actively worked to protect them.

Deniers dismiss all assertions that the Holocaust took place as conscious fabrications, or as psychotic delusions. Some even claim that Hitler was the best friend the Jews had in Germany, and that he actively worked to protect them. According to deniers, Jews have perpetrated this hoax about the Holocaust on the world in order to gain political and financial advantage, and it was in fact Germany that was the true victim in World War Two.

The cremation ovens at Majdanek as seen by the Soviet liberators

The cremation ovens at Majdanek as allegedly seen by the Soviet liberators when they arrived

The black and white photo above shows the ruined Majdanek crematorium as it looked when Russian soldiers arrived to liberate the camp on July 23, 1944. Or maybe it was the Russians who set the building on fire.  Who knows? It might have been the Russians who killed the prisoners before the building was burned.

The wooden crematorium building had allegedly been set on fire by the Nazis in order to burn the bodies of Polish political prisoners who had been brought from the Gestapo prison at the Castle in Lublin and executed the day before liberation. Their charred remains are shown in the foreground in the photo above.

In the background of the photo are the brick ovens with iron doors which were not damaged in the fire. The main gas chamber building, which is located down the slope at the other end of the camp, was not burned, leaving behind so-called evidence of alleged Nazi crimes.

So what am I complaining about now, you ask. O.K. I am nitpicking the article by Deborah Lipstadt, because I don’t think that she should have used a photo of the Majdanek ovens in her article.  She should have used a photo of the Majdanek gas chambers which are now a joke.

The latest official statistics on the Majdanek camp is that 59,000 Jews died there — of all causes.

I blogged about the updated information on the Majdanek gas chamber at https://furtherglory.wordpress.com/2013/03/30/changes-in-the-gas-chamber-story-told-in-1997-at-the-majdanek-death-camp/

The moral of this story is that Holocaust True Believers must keep up with the story of the Holocaust, as known today, so they won’t be criticized  by deniers.

68 Comments »

  1. I wish Lipstadt would leave denial to us denialists. Listening to her tell you what we are saying is a sucker game. But for the censors and persecutors, you could hear US say what it is WE say.

    Lipstadt HAS expressed the view that we denialists should not be censored. I give her that much. All she has to do now is shut up and (let you) listen.

    Comment by Jett Rucker — September 14, 2015 @ 10:16 am

    • I wrote about Ms. Lipstadt and her book entitled “Denying the Holocaust – The Growing Assault on Truth and Memory” in this blog post: https://furtherglory.wordpress.com/2011/01/04/denying-the-holocaust/

      In the APPENDIX in the back of the book, Deborah made several serious mistakes about the facts. Her mistakes reveal that she knows virtually nothing about the Holocaust. She has apparently never studied the facts of the Holocaust at all. She has apparently never visited the former concentration camps at all.

      Comment by furtherglory — September 14, 2015 @ 2:25 pm

      • Furtherglory! After Deborah and David had been married they pay a visit at the grave of Hanna Arendt, another paper waster who made a lot of money and a great career showing her ignorance of events and conditions in those times of darkness.

        Comment by Wolf MURNELSTEIN — September 14, 2015 @ 11:46 pm

  2. We revisionists don’t claim that ‘any’ deaths of jews in the German war regime were as a result of privations etc. Not at all. We understand there were executions and shootings and some war crimes. Those happen in any conflict. We state that the claim of six million is just nonsense and has never been proved and neither have the claims that millions were gasses, or indeed and substantial number. In fact we assert that Auschwitz etc were work camps which were under siege from typhus, as the records show.

    Revisionism is perfectly respectable and with the passage of time comes understanding of what really happened. Same in any conflcit or major event. After all it was suggested after 9-11 that up to 20,000 people were murdered that day, because the towers had a work force of similar. Now we know less than 300 died.

    Comment by Clent — September 12, 2015 @ 11:32 pm

    • CLIENT: I have relatives and friends who had passed and survived Auschwitz. I have seen many friends leave for “Birkenau Ghetto” who never returned. I have relatives who disappeared and we never knew whether they had been murdered in a Gas Chamber or a Mass Execution. And what meant the word “Special Treatment” – SONDERBEHANDLUNG – discussed at the Wannsee Conference when not Mass Gasings? Herr Leutner is a specialist in “Lawfull Executions” in USA prisons but he could not even understand how the Nazis could arrange mass gasings employing Zyklon B; no designs left.

      Comment by Wolf MURNELSTEIN — September 14, 2015 @ 11:42 pm

      • Furtherglory, Client, eah, hermie, tim, & C. At end of September the Swiss politician Jean Marue Mussy approched Himmler mentioning the possibility to reach a personal deal with the Allied Governments. At October 6 Himmler ordered that Auschwitz Gas Chambers should stop at October 31; why not suddenly? Just tha same day at Theresienstadt – the last Ghetto still existing – order for new transports had been given. The last transport left at October 28, just three days before the stop of the Gas Chambers. An interesting coincidence!
        Furthermore, just at October 6 1944 at the daily morning report the Elder Murmelstein had been told by Comander Rahm that after the September transports not others are in sight and the new organization map of offices should be submitted. Two hours later the Elder Murmelstein had been called again to the Head Quarter Komandatur – and had been told that other transports had to leave Theresienstadt. Three hellish weeks followed.
        Himmler ordered the stop of gasings but gave Eichmann time for a new transport wave to the Gas Chambers. Nazi kindness … aimed only murder.
        I will certainly enjoy all Your critics. Best.

        Comment by Wolf MURNELSTEIN — September 15, 2015 @ 1:35 am

        • I wasn’t even in that conversation wolfman. Last thing we were talking about,was you juxtaposing Eichmann and Pilate. I was getting ready to start in on how Israel gonna lose everything on the West Bank. That’s going to Palestine. The Jews can live there.but they gonna be under Palestinian rule. Jews are gonna start back up with animal sacrifices again . Just something else to piss off the big guy upstairs. Then all the Jews that ain’t recognized Christ,are gonna be kissing his ass begging for forgiveness. The tribulation is gonna be the time of ,”the gentile”. The Jews are all gonna be thinking,” we should’ve told Pilate to cut Christ loose and crucify Barabbas. We f**ked up big time on that one”. It all stated over the egos of the priests . Christ was more popular than they were. All this discussion on the holocaust ain’t gonna amount to shit, when the tribulation kicks in. I’d put the animal sacrafices on hold to be on the safe side. Don’t forget this important fact. Nazis still got a chance at redemption. The ol man gonna give em one last chance. What bothers me about that,is I might have to spend eternity with that asshole Stalin . I’m counting on Stalins ” I’m master of the universe and there’s no way in hell I’ll bow down to you”. That’ll be enough to piss off the ol man. He’ll send Stalin packing.

          Comment by Tim — September 15, 2015 @ 3:12 am

          • Tim! My English is too bad to undestand what You mean.

            Comment by Wolf MURNELSTEIN — September 15, 2015 @ 9:11 am

            • You left one comment here that was directed at more than one person here. My name was in with the names of those other people. I wasn’t even involved in that conversation. The last conversation me and you had involved Pilate and the crucifixion of Christ.. You were comparing Pilate to Eichmann.

              Comment by Tim — September 15, 2015 @ 10:09 am

            • Go to Google translate: https://translate.google.com/

              Comment by furtherglory — September 15, 2015 @ 10:19 am

              • FG. I’m watching “WW2 in HD” in history channel. They said 14,000,000 people were killed by nazis. They said over half were Jews. Then they showed some film footage of the Jews being liberated. They are talking about how they were starving to death. The Jews are munching away on food. I thought if a person is starving to death,they’re not supposed to eat . What’s up there. Like I said,the Jews are munching away. Didn’t look like it was having any bad reactions. They also said about a million Jews refused to return home. They were afraid of another holoocaustt. What’s that mean?

                Comment by Tim — September 15, 2015 @ 2:52 pm

                • TIM: 1. Do You know how one who is liberated also from starving could behave when seeing food? 2. That chanell increases the number of Holocaust victim from 6.000.000 to 7.000.000 = half of 14.000.000; the negationist will heavily claim about this.
                  I am affraid that history chanell is no way accurate. Best.

                  Comment by Wolf MURNELSTEIN — September 17, 2015 @ 3:50 am

                • I’ll have to agree with you. Heard a saying a long time ago. “History is written by the people who write it”. I listen to what they say and draw my own conclusions. Like I said,there’s 2 sides to this topic. I listen to both sides. From what I’ve gathered you were there . My ol man is 92. I can get first hand accounts of WW2 from him. Pacific theater. Nothing to do with the European Theater. Like 12% of the WW2 vets are still alive. You’ve said you’re no youngster either. So once my pop and camp inmates like you are gone. I’ve only gotten what the historians have written. I got a couple questions.,I heard after the war,a shitload of Hebs didn’t want to return home. Reasoning was,they were afraid of another holocaust. With the occupying forces after the war,how could they think that? It don’t make sense. I subscribe to the holocaust museum newsletter ( told you,I listen to both sides here). At any rate,there is a man in the latest newsletter I got. Fritz Gluckstein. The letter had a brief biography on the man. Father WW1 vet. His mother Christian,father Jew. His father was a judge,but got kicked off the bench when the jew laws kicked in. So how reliable is Fritz? By that I mean,is everything he says about his experience with the holocaust accurate.

                  Comment by Tim — September 17, 2015 @ 5:55 am

                • TIM! After WWI it had been hardly possible make any return to Poland – where in 1947 there had been a pogrom – and other east countries where survivors had to face questions like “how did you return?” or so. In those countries before WWII there had been anti-Semite riots. Clearly for many survivors, Israel had been the only choice. The Fritz Gluckstein had been a “mixed race first grade” so I think that he came to Theresienstadt only; without reading his story I cannot answer the question about his accuracy.

                  Comment by Wolf MURNELSTEIN — September 17, 2015 @ 10:08 am

        • Okay. Someone here said they don’t follow Jewish holidays. Jewish new year. Is that the same thing as the gentile new year. You know. Is this a seperate calendar for Jews? I ask because way years back I had a close friend Fran Lifshotz. Now she and her husband Randy,would go by both religions when it came to the holidays. I don’t know why,the whole family was Jewish . In addition to how the Jews celebrate the holidays,they also did December 25th. She said that wasn’t spiritual for them. They did that for the kids. They exchanged gifts and had the traditional Christmas dinner. Minus the Christ aspect

          Comment by Tim — September 15, 2015 @ 3:24 am

        • You are completely wrong about prisoners being sent from Theresienstadt to Auschwitz to be gassed. I wrote about what happened on this blog post: https://furtherglory.wordpress.com/2013/02/25/nazis-set-up-a-family-camp-at-auschwitz-birkenau-to-fool-the-red-cross/

          After re-reading my blog post, I realize that some readers might have trouble understanding it. I was writing facetiously, telling my readers what the Jews think happened, but this did not happen. The Jews sent from Theresienstadt to Auschwitz were not gassed — because there were no gas chambers at Auschwitz, except for killing lice in the clothing.

          Comment by furtherglory — September 15, 2015 @ 7:28 am

          • Furtherglory You are wrong at all. With the October 1944 transports about 17.500 inmates had been sent to Auschwitz – only few returned – while the Gas Chambers stopped operating only at October 31, 1944. At September 1943 about 5000 inmates had been sent to the Familienlager – had been comanded to sent post cards – and had been all gased in March 1944 at Purim Holiday which remembers that at that time in Persia Jews could take arms and defend themselves. At December 1943 other 5000 inmates had been sent to the Familienlager where they had been hold for six months and then followed the fate of other prisoniers; very few returned. This had been made certain so in Court as by serious historical research. About Theresienstadt and transports that left I certainly am better informed than You can be.
            As about the task of the Gas Chambers Nazis had not been interested in killing the lice plighing Jews. More likely they desinfected the belongings of murdered Jews.
            You are still not avare that Nazism is a murder doctrine resulting from development of Middle Age theories about a perfect society ruled by a chief holding absolute power.

            Comment by Wolf MURNELSTEIN — September 15, 2015 @ 9:06 am

      • wolfie: “And what meant the word “Special Treatment” – SONDERBEHANDLUNG – discussed at the Wannsee Conference when not Mass Gasings?”

        According to the great decoder of alleged ‘Nazi euphemisms’, Jacob Robinson (the Zionist jurist who advised U.S. Chief Prosecutor Robert H. Jackson in Nuremberg and codrafted the “Jewish case” presented to the International Military Tribunal), in his report to the World Jewish Congress of December 6, 1945, “Sonderbehandlung” (special treatment) only meant “special discriminatory treatment”.

        http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/study_collections/nuremberg/documents/index.php?documentdate=1945-12-06&documentid=C14-16-1&pagenumber=1 (p. 9)

        Comment by hermie — September 15, 2015 @ 3:29 pm

        • I think that Sonderbehandlung meant different treatment, or not the usual treatment. It did not mean gassing.

          Comment by furtherglory — September 15, 2015 @ 5:17 pm

          • Furtherglory, Hermie: The exact meaning of SPECIAL TREATMENT – Sonderbehandlung – came out some months later when the Death Camps with the Gas Chambers had been established in the Lublin area in adition to the already existing Auschwitz and Chenmo murder plants.

            Comment by Wolf MURNELSTEIN — September 16, 2015 @ 1:50 am

            • Wolfie: “The exact meaning of SPECIAL TREATMENT – Sonderbehandlung – came out some months later when the Death Camps with the Gas Chambers had been established in the Lublin area in adition to the already existing Auschwitz and Chenmo murder plants.”

              The exact meaning of “special treatment” is a post-war genocidal interpretation of a vague term for atrocity propaganda purposes. And you know it, Wolfie…

              Comment by hermie — September 16, 2015 @ 3:44 am

              • I could be wrong, but I think that the German word sonder is related to the German word sondern which I think means “but rather.”

                This quote is from an online dictionary:

                “aber” und “sondern” – German Language Stack Exchange
                german.stackexchange.com/…/is-there-any-difference-be…
                Stack Exchange
                Dec 12, 2014 – While aber is pretty close to the English but, the word sondern has a special meaning and cannot be replaced by aber (and vice versa). You are supposed to use sondern after a negated phrase to express, that you are now talking about something true. Ich mag keine Süßigkeiten, sondern Salziges.
                End quote

                This is why I don’t think that Sonderbehandlung could have meant “being sent to the Gas Chambers”. Sonderbehandlung meant some kind of DIFFERENT treatment, but not gassing.

                When I lived in Germany, the German people were using the word sondern very often, so I got a good idea of what it meant.

                Comment by furtherglory — September 16, 2015 @ 7:41 am

                • Furtherglory: SONDERBEHANDLUNG means exactly “special treatment” and has nothing to do with ABSONDERN meaning “to separate from”.

                  Comment by Wolf MURNELSTEIN — September 16, 2015 @ 10:07 am

  3. Usual trick of liars and crooks like Deborah Lipstadt: sticking a belittling defamatory label such as “deniers” on their opponents and misrepresenting their arguments in order to make them look as lunatics not to be listened to. (No need to add that people with the truth on their side and “mountains of evidence” to prove it, as often claimed, don’t need to resort to such tricks and just don’t do that.)

    Too bad Mrs. Lipstadt ‘forgot’ to say what ‘deniers’ “even claim that Hitler was the best friend the Jews had in Germany, and that he actively worked to protect them” and what ‘deniers’ said that “any deaths of Jews that did occur under the Nazis were the result of wartime privations, not of systematic persecution.”

    Comment by hermie — September 12, 2015 @ 9:16 pm

  4. 4 million or 6 million. Which is it gonna be? I’ll check and see if they have a math version of ” hooked on phonics” for the poor soul

    Comment by Tim — September 12, 2015 @ 1:39 pm

  5. Would like to see Debora Lipstadt ans David Irwing married. Both ought to study the historical background of events and stop useless debates,

    Comment by Wolf MURNELSTEIN — September 12, 2015 @ 12:25 pm

    • David Irving is very vain and conceited; he thinks he knows everything. Lipstadt is exactly the same way. These two would try to kill each other if they were married.

      Comment by furtherglory — September 12, 2015 @ 12:41 pm

      • And so a lot of useless debates would have their end.

        Comment by Wolf MURNELSTEIN — September 12, 2015 @ 10:28 pm

    • You must truly hate Mr Irving to wish him to be wedded to such a hideous beast as Lipstadt

      Comment by Schlageter — September 12, 2015 @ 9:27 pm

      • And would like to be their best man at the wedding.

        Comment by Wolf MURNELSTEIN — September 13, 2015 @ 11:40 am

      • Absolut! Hasn’t the poor man suffered enough?

        Comment by eah — September 13, 2015 @ 11:59 am

    • study the historical background of events

      I doubt anyone writing about WWII in Europe has spent more time in the archives studying documents and records of the time than Irving.

      Comment by eah — September 13, 2015 @ 4:30 am

      • EAH: I ask for a thorough study of historical economical and social background of event leading to WWII and the Holocaust.

        Comment by Wolf MURNELSTEIN — September 15, 2015 @ 9:09 am

  6. At the link, Lipstadt writes:

    Holocaust denial is a form of anti-Semitism,…

    She is really disgusting.

    Comment by eah — September 12, 2015 @ 11:42 am

    • Comment by hermie — September 12, 2015 @ 9:19 pm

    • EAH. Holocaust denial is led by a hidden anti-Semitism. Deniers too often repeat anti-Semite slogans.

      Comment by Wolf MURNELSTEIN — September 13, 2015 @ 11:41 am

      • Wolf: ‘Holocaust denial’, in and of itself, is not anti-Semitic. Some anti-Semites — however you may define that — may ‘deny the Holocaust’. But that does not mean that ‘Holocaust denial’ should be seen as anti-Semitic.

        In fact, as I suggested to you before, the practice of Jews labeling anyone who questions the conventional ‘Holocaust’ story, or some aspects of it, as anti-Semitic can itself generate dislike of Jews — because it is unfair and unjust to say someone is an anti-Semite just for questioning the conventional ‘Holocaust’ story — it is just an ad hominem smear designed to get people to be quiet.

        So please — no more nonsense about this — ‘Holocaust denial’ is not anti-Semitism.

        Comment by eah — September 13, 2015 @ 12:05 pm

        • EAH. An accurate study of historical background of WWI, Versailles Treaty, European history and WWII would be usefull for all of us and enable serious debates.

          Comment by Wolf MURNELSTEIN — September 13, 2015 @ 1:16 pm

          • would be usefull

            Well, that’s true enough. But in my comment I suggested that you stop saying or implying that questioning (aspects of) the ‘Holocaust’ story is the same as anti-Semitism. Because it isn’t.

            Comment by eah — September 14, 2015 @ 2:49 am

            • I think that the word anti-Semitic now means non-Jewish. To the Jews, everyone is anti-Semitic. IOW, one can never bow low enough to a Jew.

              Comment by furtherglory — September 14, 2015 @ 8:53 am

              • Furtherglory! The above statement is not correct at all. The foolish boy You have met at College belonged to a very crazy family. For centuries Jews hoped to be accepted as normal fellow citizens talking and dealing normally. To often in history and even nowadays Jews, even when already baptized or not affiliated any more, had to face refusal by many citizens, universities, circles, etc. as You too once mentioned. What You call bowing low is a mean of politicians or intellectuals for their purposes and not in our interest.

                Comment by Wolf MURNELSTEIN — September 14, 2015 @ 10:02 am

        • eah: “Wolf: ‘Holocaust denial’, in and of itself, is not anti-Semitic. Some anti-Semites — however you may define that — may ‘deny the Holocaust’. But that does not mean that ‘Holocaust denial’ should be seen as anti-Semitic.”

          You didn’t understand wolfie’s previous comment, eah. So I’ll rephrase it for him:

          ‘Holocaust denial’ must first be called ‘denial’ because it can’t be defeated in the field of debate. And ‘Holocaust denial’ must also be labelled as a form of crypto-antisemitism for the very same reason. Holocaust revisionism MUST be regarded by most people both as non-research, non-history (‘denial’) and as hatred (antisemitism) because the Holohoax is the core of Zionist propaganda and the rogue nation of Israel wouldn’t survive the public demolition of that hoax. Mere Bernaysian* marketing…

          * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Bernays

          Comment by hermie — September 14, 2015 @ 9:03 pm

          • Hermie – eah! The Holocaust is not the core of Zionist propaganda. Until the sixties survivors in Israel had been bothered with the question “why did you not oppose resistance?” Even that idiot of Hausner asked some survivor withness the same question. I myself some years ago had to answer in a rude manner the question “Why there had not been a revolt at Theresienstadt?”
            The Shoah business has to branches: 1. Meeting where an aged survivor has to answer suggestive question in order to entertain the attenders. 2. The negationism. The two branches could go along one without the other. Those involved in this profitable business must prevent any attempt of serious studies of historical background of event occured. Best to both of You.

            Comment by Wolf MURNELSTEIN — September 15, 2015 @ 11:09 am

            • Hermie, eah: You will certainly agree that the Negationst branch of the above mentioned Shoah business is much better managed than the other one and has a quite better customer satisfaction rate. Indeed the Arab propaganda is very interested in negationism in order to destruct the State of Israel, the only thrustworthy ally USA has in Middle East.

              Comment by Wolf MURNELSTEIN — September 16, 2015 @ 1:58 am

              • I may not agree with everything that deals with the holocaust,but I’ll go along with Israel being the only people over there that we can ” somewhat trust” ( for the record. I don’t totally trust any of our allies). We got a president who’s kissing Irans ass right now. I sure as hell don’t trust them or their neighbors who are all terrorist loving bitches.

                Comment by Tim — September 16, 2015 @ 2:37 am

              • Hermie, eah: Poland too entered the Shoah business turning the places of sorrow – mainly Auschwitz – in a tourist atraction. I have seen many friends leave for …. from where they never returned and now can watch how all that turned to be a profittable business for clever indivduals and groups. Individual who often are the heirs of those who profitted from the Nazi requisitions of Jewish assets.
                Even when You do not believe it, there had been many really needy survivors coping with illnesses due to imprisonment in Camps. Only few very clever persons had been able to make profit; I had never been clever enough. Best.

                Comment by Wolf MURNELSTEIN — September 16, 2015 @ 4:14 am

          • EAH! You certainly cannot deny that negationism has a great audience in antisemite circles. And antisemite propaganda takes on negationist thesises.

            Comment by Wolf MURNELSTEIN — September 15, 2015 @ 11:30 am

            • Wolfie: “You certainly cannot deny that negationism has a great audience in antisemite circles.”

              As well as you cannot deny that very numerous historians writing and spreading the orthodox version of WW2 and the ‘Holocaust’ are Jews and even often Zionist Jews. Should all their works be discarded from the outset only because of their patent racial and political biases?

              Comment by hermie — September 16, 2015 @ 4:08 am

              • Herrmie: Here and for any other subject You ought to make distinction among accurate historical research and simple paper wasting. The best books written by Jewish authors are THE WAR AGAINST THE JEWS by Lucy Davidowicz, THE DESTRUCTION OF EUROPEAN JEWS and PERPETRATORS, VICTIMS, BYSTANDERS by Raul Hilberg. Unfortunately I had no opportunity to read the researches of TOM SEGEV of the younger generation of historians. Interesting the works of the German – non Jewish – scholar Goetz Ally. About many Jewish authors I simple could not care less, while I find very interesting many German-Austrian historians who wrote about historical background of events, Are You now satisfied? Best.

                Comment by Wolf MURNELSTEIN — September 16, 2015 @ 11:20 pm

                • Hilberg, Davidowicz, no bias(es) on sight for sure…😉

                  You didn’t answer my question about the validity of their works with respect to their anti-nazi & pro-zionist bias. If an alleged antisemitic bias is supposed to nullify revisionist works, why should patent anti-nazi/pro-zionist biases not nullify Jewish works about WW2 and the ‘Holocaust’ as well?

                  Comment by hermie — September 18, 2015 @ 3:08 pm

                • Hermie! I quoted two authors who had made serious efforts to inform about the true history of the Holocaust; i can add also Martin Gilbert. There are a lot of authors – Jewish or not – I cannot stand, mainly because they quote too many personal stories.
                  From the age of 9 years I wanted to know the real causes of events I have passed through. Unfortunately I could not make my doctor thesis about the economic and social causes of WWII as the professor for economic history had been a well known antisemite who in 1943-45 changed side from the fascist to the catholic party in Italy. Now I think that also the causes of WWI ought to be considered. I am very critical about the main century idiots Woodrow Wilson and Kerenski. Please avoid to question me in a police questioning style; not every question can be answered in a “yes, yes, no, no,” way. Best.

                  Comment by Wolf MURNELSTEIN — September 19, 2015 @ 11:15 am

                • wolf: “From the age of 9 years I wanted to know the real causes of events I have passed through.”

                  So perhaps you should wonder why Chaim Weizmann declared war on Germany on your behalf (and on the behalf of all Jews) in late August 1939, before the German troops had even crossed the borders of Poland. You should also wonder why U.S. Zionist leaders Samuel Untermyer and Stephen Wise started a worldwide economic war (boycott) against Nazi Germany in March 1933 (I mean their real reasons and goals, not their alleged concerns for Germany’s Jewry) in spite of the appeals from Jewish organizations in Germany requesting them not to do that. And why not also thinking about the real purpose of Theodore Kaufman when he wrote and published a book advocating the extermination of the entire German people after Allied victory? The Nazi response to Kaufman’s 1941 “Germany Must perish!” was the compulsory wearing of a yellow Judenstern badge for all the Jews living in Nazi Europe.

                  In other words, who besides the Nazis had an interest in making the life of the Jews in Central and Eastern Europe as hard as possible before and during WW2 in order to make them pack their bags and start a new life elsewhere preferably in Palestine? And who had an interest in closing every non-Palestinian door in the face of the Jewish migrants wanting to leave Europe? By the end of the 19th century, some Americans tried to close the doors of the United States in the face of the Jews fleeing Czarist Russia, but Jacob Schiff easily kept them wide open nevertheless. Who can believe that American Jewry, which was even more powerful than the one of the Schiff era, wouldn’t have able to open the doors of America if a significant number of influent U.S. Jews had really wanted to achieve that? But between the Schiff era and the 1930’s-1940’s, a large number of the most influent American Jews had fallen for Zionism and they wanted the Jews of Central and Eastern Europe nowhere but in Palestine.

                  “Hitlerism enables us to convert all Jews to Zionism.” – Zionist leader Nahum Sokolow (President of the World Zionist Organization from 1931 to 1935), prior to September 1933 (words reported by the Jewish Telegraphic Agency on September 3, 1933).

                  Just food for thought…

                  Comment by hermie — September 20, 2015 @ 9:23 am

          • wolfie: “The Holocaust is not the core of Zionist propaganda.”

            Yeah, wolfie. The State of Israel was not established after WW2 as a reparation/compensation for the alleged ‘Holocaust’. Only a person at a dirty mind could believe that…😉

            Comment by hermie — September 15, 2015 @ 3:08 pm

            • In 1947 British diplomatic circles blaimed USA for limiting even after WWII immigration of Jewish refugees. As Hilberg shows on hand of statistics the had been accepted more Germans as Jewish refugees. According to those Britsh circles the USA voted for the State of Israel only for the purpose to divert the Jewish refugees from imigration in USA. I feel too many persons – politicians included – regret that there had been survivors of the Holocaust. Besides, USA used our tragedy also for ousting Great Britain from the Middle East. Other answer will follow. Best.

              Comment by Wolf MURNELSTEIN — September 16, 2015 @ 4:01 am

              • wolfie: “In 1947 British diplomatic circles blaimed USA for limiting even after WWII immigration of Jewish refugees. According to those Britsh circles the USA voted for the State of Israel only for the purpose to divert the Jewish refugees from imigration in USA.”

                For understandable reasons. As many American leaders, as well as the American public in general, brainwashed by years of very intensive Zionist propagnda, were pressuring Britain for large immigration into Palestine, what Britain couldn’t allow without destroying her own empire (too many Muslims opposed to a Jewish Palestine within the British Empire), it is no surprise that some irritated British leaders finally answered: “Why don’t you rather take them in your own country?”.

                wolfie: “Besides, USA used our tragedy also for ousting Great Britain from the Middle East.”

                Bullshit. Britain had announced her final departure from her “unworkable mandate” of Palestine in 1939, just after establishing an Arab-dominated state there (see the MacDonald White Paper of May 1939). The deadline for the British departure and for the definitive end of the Zionist dream was March 31, 1949. But, as we know, the Zionist propagandists were finally able to change the planned course of events with their propaganda hoax called the ‘Holocaust, and the state of Israel was established less than one year before the British dreaded fatal deadline. That was the exact purpose of the Zionist Holohoax intoxication campaign…

                Comment by hermie — September 16, 2015 @ 4:33 am

                • Me: ” just after establishing an Arab-dominated state there”

                  Unclear. I meant that an Arab-dominated State of Palestine was to be established by Britain prior to March 31, 1949, the moment when Britain was to leave Palestine once and for all. That was a titanic catastrophe, a titanic shoah, for the Zionist clique of that time. The date of Zionism’s death was henceforth known: March 31, 1949 at the latest. That was a genuine declaration of war against Zionism, and the Zionists of that time fought that war with their classic weapon of mass persuasion, i.e. cunning words and an overpowering propaganda machinery (and also “behind the scenes” diplomacy). Moderate elements like Weizmann had to send their most fanatical troops – the Wise-Goldmann and the Jabotinsky-Bergson armies – in the battle to prevail in the end…

                  Comment by hermie — September 16, 2015 @ 9:06 pm

                • Hermie: Your precious information about the statement of Ernest Bevin results usefull for my SUMMARY OF JEWISH HISTORY i am working on; indeed I already included this in the chapter dealing with the AFTER SHOAH. Any further information could be helpfull for my work, which is in no way politically correct. Best.
                  P.S. My name is WOLF and not wolfie. Clear?

                  Comment by Wolf MURNELSTEIN — September 17, 2015 @ 3:56 am

                • What kind of info exactly?

                  Comment by hermie — September 18, 2015 @ 3:10 pm

                • Hermie! Informations about statements similar to that of Bevin of other “democrats” or so will be highly apreciated and usefull for mt work on a summary of Jewish history. Best. Wolf.

                  Comment by Wolf MURNELSTEIN — September 19, 2015 @ 9:40 am

                • wolf: “Informations about statements similar to that of Bevin of other “democrats” or so will be highly apreciated and usefull for mt work on a summary of Jewish history.”

                  If you’re talking about additional words on America supporting the establisment of the state of Israel because she didn’t want more Jews within her own borders, I don’t know any. I don’t think that Bevin even thought what he said. IMO, Bevin’s words were just words of irritation, anger and nervousness caused by the very intensive Zionist campaign of vilifying propaganda led against himself in America. He probably regretted his unthinking statement the next day.

                  Comment by hermie — September 20, 2015 @ 9:37 am

              • wolfie: “According to those Britsh circles the USA voted for the State of Israel only for the purpose to divert the Jewish refugees from imigration in USA.”

                Not British circles. Only British Foreign Secretary Ernest Bevin in mid-1946. And he said that* in one instance because he was fed up with being harassed and insulted by U.S. Zionists only because he was still opposing the large immigration into Palestine requested by the Zionists.

                * Jewish Telegraphic Agency, June 14, 1946: [quote] British Foreign Secretary Ernest Bevin […] said that people in America insist on the admission of 100,000 Jews to Palestine “because they do not want too many of them in New York,”[end quote] (http://www.jta.org/1946/06/14/archive/n-y-press-unfavorable-to-bevin-statement-on-palestine-bluft-remarks-edited)

                Comment by hermie — September 16, 2015 @ 4:51 am

                • HERMIE: Thanks for this quotation I will record in my historical studies. Best. WOLF,

                  Comment by Wolf MURNELSTEIN — September 16, 2015 @ 10:11 am

              • I got a question for ya wolfman. You’re Jewish,you’re the only one who can answer the question,because it deals with the belief of Jewish people on this subject. You mentioned the reason for the U S wanting Israel to come about. What percentage of Jews would you say,believe what the Christian bible says about the birth of Israel . Where did the name “Israel ” come from? What are its orgins?

                Comment by Tim — September 16, 2015 @ 5:02 am

                • Dear Tim! i am a believing Jew but not a Jewish scholar. The name ISRAEL had been that of Jacob after he had to fight wiith an Angel; so the Bible mentions also the ISRAEL’S CHILDREN. Jewish, Catholic and Protestant views of the Jewish state are quite different. Until Pope John Paul II – who had watched things going on in Cracaw – Catholic Church opposed any idea of a Jewish State. Church Fathers stated that Jews are damned to continous errand in the World. Some Protestant Churches saw in the Jewish State of Israel the realization of prophecies. For believing Jews the Jewish State is an ideal. For ultraortodox ones it is too early and one ought to wait for the Messia. Best.

                  Comment by Wolf MURNELSTEIN — September 16, 2015 @ 10:59 am

                • For info, the other names considered and rejected for the State of Israel (Medinat Yisrael) were Zion, Judea, New Judea and Eretz Israel (the Land of Israel).

                  Comment by hermie — September 16, 2015 @ 9:29 pm

              • You wrote: “According to those Britsh circles the USA voted for the State of Israel only for the purpose to divert the Jewish refugees from imigration in USA.”

                Why do you think that the USA didn’t want Jewish immigrants? Why are so many people anti-Semitic, in your opinion?

                Why did the USA not allow all the Jews in Europe come to America before the Holocaust started? Hitler offered to send the Jews to America on “luxury liners.” Jews did come to America on a luxury liner, called the St. Louis, but they were turned away. Why are the Jews so disliked?

                Comment by furtherglory — September 16, 2015 @ 7:31 am

                • Furtherglory, Hermie: In both You above comments it is clear that so in USA as in UK Jewish organizations – not an only one – had not hold that position of power the propaganda claimes they hold. Nor they are holding such a position of power nowadays although when running for nomination or office many politicians came bowing very low to the various Jewish circles, as You certainly know.
                  Furhterglory: As to Your sensitive question I ought to write a long and bitter essay to answer. At any rate in these days European countries are arguing hard on the refugee question; an example. Best.

                  Comment by Wolf MURNELSTEIN — September 16, 2015 @ 10:33 am

                • FG: “they were turned away. Why are the Jews so disliked?”

                  They were not disliked. They were just wanted elsewhere. The Zionists of that time would never have let a large number of Eastern Jews immigrate anywhere else but into Palestine. Stephen Wise, the king of U.S. Zionists, once wrote in a letter to Keren Hayesod emissary Ida Silverman, “I personally believe, that Steinberg needs to be lynched or hanged and quartered, if that would make his lamented demise more certain.” (Wise was referring to Isaac Nachman Steinberg, the co-founder and leader of the Freeland League, a territorialist organization at that time leading negotiations with the Surinamese government to create a large Jewish community there.) The Zionists of the early 20th century never forgave Zionist vet Israel Zangwill for founding the “ITO” (the Jewish Territorialist Organization) even if he returned to Zionism after the Balfour declaration. After Herzl’s death, the response to Zionism’s atrocity propaganda, the final solution to the Jewish problem as the Zionists used to put it, was to be Palestine and only Palestine…

                  Comment by hermie — September 16, 2015 @ 8:38 pm


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: