Scrapbookpages Blog

February 25, 2016

Irving Roth still out speaking to school children but can’t keep his story straight

Filed under: Dachau, Germany, Holocaust, World War II — Tags: , , , — furtherglory @ 7:46 am

Today I am commenting on a news article about Holocaust survivor Irving Roth, who is still out speaking to school children about his ordeal in the Nazi concentration camps.

I previously blogged about Irving Roth at https://furtherglory.wordpress.com/2015/12/01/irving-roth-still-educating-american-children-about-the-holocaust/

The following quote is from the news article:

Roth experienced first-hand the horrors that most of us have only read about in textbooks. He recounted being separated from his family, only to watch his grandparents, aunt and cousin be led to the gas chambers. Through the holes in the ceilings, Roth watched as Zyklon B, a cyanide-based pesticide infamous for its use in camps like Auschwitz and Dachau, kill his family and hundreds of others. Meanwhile, he was ushered away to Auschwitz with his brother, where he had to perform manual labor while being starved.

In the above quote, it sounds as if Irving Roth were allowed to watch as gas pellets were thrown through the holes in the ceiling of the gas chamber [in the Auschwitz-Birkenau camp] when what the writer obviously meant was that Irving Roth was allowed to watch while the Zyklon-B gas was poured into the gas chamber in the main Auschwitz camp through holes in the ceiling.

My 1998 photo of the holes in the roof of the Auschwitz gas chamber

My 1998 photo of the holes in the roof of the gas chamber in the Auschwitz main camp

Irving Roth was a prisoner at the Auschwitz-Birkenau camp, not at the main Auschwitz camp. Was he taken to the main camp so that he could watch the gassing procedure?  Did the Nazis allow him to live so that he could come to America after the war and educate children about the Holohoax?

This quote is also from the news article:

At the age of ten, Irving Roth was in a war with the world that he was not capable of fighting, and at the age of fourteen, he was taken from his family, packed inside a cattle-car with hundreds of people and forced to fight for his life in Auschwitz Death Camp.

So little Irving was 14 years old when he was taken to the “Auschwitz Death Camp.”  As we all know, children under the age of 15 were sent immediately to the gas chamber. But not Irving Ross; he was saved so that he could tell his story to little children 70 years later.

What effect does this have on these children?  Are they being taught to hate the German people?  Yes, I think that Irving Ross is teaching hatred.

This quote is also from the news article:

Most people that entered Auschwitz died there. Each night while entering the showers, the prisoners were inspected by a doctor, who decided whether or not each of the prisoners were allowed to continue on living.

“If you walked bent over, obviously you shouldn’t live,” Roth said. “If you’re dragging your foot, obviously you shouldn’t live. My brother and I survived that.”

Did you catch that?  The prisoners at Auschwitz were given a shower “each night” during a time when most people in America did not have a shower in their bathroom; most people, in the 1940ies, took a Saturday night bath. The water was not changed after each person’s bath — the whole family bathed in the same water which had been heated on a wood-burning stove.

My personal opinion is that Irving Roth was never in a concentration camp.  I think that he has made up his stupid stories in order to educate young children in the Holohoax.

dachau01

The young boy on the far left has been identified as Stephan Ross, who was liberated from the Dachau camp. Were there two young boys named Ross who were involved in the Holohoax?

 

 

38 Comments »

  1. The damned Shoah Business – Tale Telling Division – is going on exploiting aged survivors induced to tell stories arranged in way to catch effect. But I repeat that without a sound knowledge of European history of century XX in order to understand the Shoah events. Force school children to attend such lectures or speeches may harm their psicological growth – fear of devil. In High School not individual stories but General European and Shoah History ought to be tought. Personally, my doctors advised strongly to avoid to deliver speeches about the story of my family. I am allowed only to write essays and comments. And it is often painfull to recall certain events.

    Comment by Wolf Murmelstein — February 26, 2016 @ 12:26 pm

    • Wolf….please explain who you could recall painful events you were just a little kid???
      So you were indoctrinated with the propaganda that your folks taught you.
      In court that would be considered second hand information which is not acceptable.
      Makes for good reading but not truthful accurate info.

      JR

      Comment by jrizoli — February 26, 2016 @ 1:00 pm

      • jrizzoli. When wearing the Yellow Star in 1942 – i was 6 – I had been insulted and even beaten when walking on streets. I too had to stay five times in front of the SS, awfull for a little boy. Furthermore I am the son of the last Elder who had to go to the KOMANDATUR – SS Headquarter – every morning. Not easy for a kid to grow up with very nervous parents. And after war end my Father had to face heavy accusations; I have still to rebuke idiotic tales. Even the last Comander commented before the investigating magistrate “No it had not been so … We certainly did not receive orders from Murmelstein”.
        I had not been indoctrinated about Shoah history. I asked and studied the historical background of events and how poets abd thinkers turned in Germany in a state of judges and hankers. Clear at last?

        Comment by Wolf Murmelstein — February 27, 2016 @ 2:24 am

  2. Um, really? Sure, the wording used wasn’t terribly clear or eloquent, but in no way does it sound like he was in the gas chamber with them watching them die, and only that he saw the pellets thrown in through the holes in the ceiling, killing them, as even you have acknowledged was meant. .With all of your obvious intellect and research capabilities, do you really have nothing better to occupy your time with than being so ridiculously nitpicky, argumentative, and hateful?

    And really? A forced shower (with no indication that this was hot water, incidentally, which you seem to have assumed, by noting that many in America had to heat water on a stove) after endlessly ruthless hard labor and starvation is to you such a luxury that for this, the prisoners should have been grateful? Unbelievable.

    Comment by Halli — February 25, 2016 @ 8:31 am

    • Unbelievable

      You hit the nail on the head here, Halli — a lot of what these “survivors” say is simply not believable, and that is not something that you address, ever.

      So maybe you wouldn’t mind answering a few specific questions re what this man Roth claims here (as reported) — and please note: just a simple ‘yes, I believe it’, or ‘no, I don’t believe it’, is all that is needed — 1) that he ‘watched his grandparents, aunt and cousin led to the gas chambers’; 2) that he ‘watched as Zyklon B, a cyanide-based pesticide infamous for its use in camps like Auschwitz and Dachau, kill (sic) his family and hundreds of others’; 3) that ‘each night while entering the showers, the prisoners were inspected by a doctor, who decided whether or not each of the prisoners were allowed to continue on living’.

      So re what this man Roth specifically claims, here you have a chance to go on record about what you believe and do not believe.

      hateful

      That’s your opinion; and I can see why someone might see it that way. But as I pointed out before, perhaps the tone of some of fg’s writing is the product of reading, year after year, the obvious falsehoods and lies told by so many “survivors” — with no critical examination whatsoever.

      Comment by eah — February 25, 2016 @ 9:21 am

      • I have no reason from anything here to disbelieve that he “1) that he ‘watched his grandparents, aunt and cousin led to the gas chambers’; 2) that he ‘watched as Zyklon B, a cyanide-based pesticide infamous for its use in camps like Auschwitz and Dachau, kill (sic) his family and hundreds of others’; 3) that ‘each night while entering the showers, the prisoners were inspected by a doctor, who decided whether or not each of the prisoners were allowed to continue on living’.” Nothing you or furtherglory have said provides evidence that supports an alternate story. While any eyewitness accounts from decades earlier should be held at arms’ length, “trust but verify” is a more apt theory of practice than your and further glory’s apparent insistence to “distrust even without verification.” Further glory’s main problem here even seems to be that he feels that the article misleads readers to think that he actually watched them die, which it does not, despite the poorly phrased line. If either of you have any form of verification that Roth did not watch his family members led to the gas chambers; that he did not see something he has reason to believe was Zyklon B inserted into the holes in the ceiling; or that they were not inspected each night in the showers, you have certainly not provided it here.

        And yes, further glory’s manner of speaking and writing is EXTREMELY hateful. Full of hate, and aiming to express this hate. This is not a matter of opinion.

        Comment by Halli — February 25, 2016 @ 3:43 pm

        • Anti Semitism old definition: someone who hates Jews
          Anti Semitism new definition:
          Anyone who Jews hate

          Comment by Schlageter — February 25, 2016 @ 4:01 pm

        • I have no reason from anything here to disbelieve

          OK, but that was not the answer I asked for, right? And what did you expect to read/find here to make you doubt or not believe the claims in the article? Their standalone absurdity ought to be enough.

          If either of you have any form of verification that Roth did not watch his family members led to the gas chambers

          You must be kidding — how can anyone possibly provide any such “form of verification”? Really Halli.

          Anyway, the questions are rather moot — because reading the linked article closely, it is far from clear that Mr Roth said those things, at least at this event — it seems more likely this is just the reporter blathering away, embellishing for emotional effect.

          However, searching for Mr Roth, you can find quite a bit of info about him, including a couple of videos here — I will say he seems quite well-spoken (if somewhat melodramatic) and healthy, and seems to have made quite a name for himself in what some would call the ‘Shoah Business’ — in the video from 2007, if you allow it load a bit and then skip ahead to the 8:00 mark, you can hear him claim he saw, off in the distance, chimneys belching flames when he arrived at Auschwitz — one of the standard “survivor” tales.

          Comment by eah — February 26, 2016 @ 11:51 am

          • So while you know full well that we can’t “prove” every detail he says, you also know we can’t “disprove it” either – so why do you and further glory have such venom and disbelief for his telling of what he saw?

            Comment by Halli — February 26, 2016 @ 9:28 pm

            • such venom

              What did I write that you see as ‘venomous’?

              know full well

              Yes I do — but apparently you don’t, because you’re the one who (more or less) asked for such proof — right?

              disbelief

              As I said, the questions I asked are moot — because it is not clear he said those things — as to why I ‘have disbelief’, I phrased it this way: “standalone absurdity” — the claims are simply not believable.

              But here you can answer another question — reminder: see above for the kind of answer I want (just yes or no) — did you watch the video? — do you believe he saw flames shooting from chimneys? — if so, please explain how that could happen –,how cremating a corpse in a standard, purpose-built cremation oven could produce such a phenomenon — remember: they weren’t flaming gas from a (hydrocarbon) well — below is a foto — note how tall a chimney is.

              Comment by eah — February 26, 2016 @ 11:04 pm

    • I think, reading the article and what is posted, that the newspaper article took a lot of things out of context.
      I also believe that after all of these that the old gentleman’s memory is starting to fade and he is starting to add things that didn’t necessarily happen to him.
      Frankly, anything that someone didn’t record in the years directly after the war I find suspect. It’s common for witness and victim memories to fade over time.
      What I do find funny is that deniers make such a big deal about it, however, I question the wisdom of allowing this man to talk to children.
      Jeff

      Comment by Jeff K. — February 25, 2016 @ 10:19 am

      • You wrote: “deniers make such a big deal about it [the Holocaust]” Do you find it funny that Holohoaxers make a big deal about the Holohoax? Deniers are responding to the Holohoaxers.

        Comment by furtherglory — February 25, 2016 @ 10:29 am

        • “deniers make such a big deal about it [the Holocaust]”

          No, what I think is funny is that deniers continue to make a big deal about survivors in their 80’s and 90’s say.
          I think that many of these old survivors are mixing up what they have heard with what they experienced.
          I would no longer want these survivors to speak to children, only to historians, who can sift through the stories and figure out what is real and what is mixed up.
          Jeff

          Comment by Jeff K. — February 25, 2016 @ 10:41 am

          • I have blogged about the survivors telling lies several times including this blog post: https://furtherglory.wordpress.com/tag/telling-lies-about-the-holocaust/

            No one seems to care about the survivors telling lies. Newspaper accounts never tell the other side of the story.

            Comment by furtherglory — February 25, 2016 @ 11:12 am

          • “No, what I think is funny is that deniers continue to make a big deal about survivors in their 80’s and 90’s say.
            I think that many of these old survivors are mixing up what they have heard with what they experienced.
            I would no longer want these survivors to speak to children, only to historians, who can sift through the stories and figure out what is real and what is mixed up.
            Jeff” Maybe its a big deal because men are being thrown in jail and having their lives ruined and companies and countries are shelling out billions of dollars based on what these old coots say. Hence the need for some forensic and substantive proof that their allegations are accurate. I’m sure if you or your grandfather, or the business you run were accused by these senile old fucks you’d want them to get specific.

            Comment by Schlageter — February 25, 2016 @ 11:53 am

            • “Jeff” Maybe its a big deal because men are being thrown in jail and having their lives ruined and companies and countries are shelling out billions of dollars based on what these old coots say. Hence the need for some forensic and substantive proof that their allegations are accurate. I’m sure if you or your grandfather, or the business you run were accused by these senile old fucks you’d want them to get specific.”

              I’ve said, repeatedly, over and over again, on record, that I completely DISAGREE with these ridiculous trials that Germany feels the need to put on to assuage its conscience, or make up for lost time, or for whatever fucking reason. Putting geriatric old men and women on trial is a complete waste of time for multiple reasons, among which how do you prove some 95 year old man actually committed a CRIME, or why are you wasting taxpayer money or the judiciary’s time on a person who will never spend a single day in prison because of their age.
              I’ve voiced my complete opposition to laws making Holocaust denial a crime, primarily because all it does it give an unneeded and unwarranted spotlight on the lunatic fringe. I also disagree with it because it infringes on free speech. My own belief is that a person should be allowed to have an opinion and voice that opinion as long as that person does not advocate violence or encourage others to commit violence.
              So, I actually agree with Holocaust deniers on a few things. Now, I’m curious, because I wonder if you, or any denier, if they had power, would allow actual free speech to occur.
              Jeff

              Comment by Jeff K. — February 25, 2016 @ 12:12 pm

              • So, I actually agree with Holocaust deniers on a few things. Now, I’m curious, because I wonder if you, or any denier, if they had power, would allow actual free speech to occur.
                Jeff

                Jeff it’s all about free speech for me anyway..we just want to be able to make a case known but they won’t let us so that shows you that something is wrong. If they have the right facts then why do they stop us from presenting our case. There is only one reason to stop people from presenting a case its because they don’t want to be exposed that’s the whole point of it all. I got into this moment because of free speech I couldn’t stand the fact that Holohuxsters were stopping people who have a different view point of World War 2 history and they’re trying to stop them from presenting it that makes no sense. I have never ever seen a Holocaust revisionistl stop the free speech of anyone else I’m sure there’s some person that might have done it on a personal level but I haven’t seen it as a practice.
                I have asked people in my town to debate me on the topic and they refuse. Then they through all this Holocaust b******* at us making it look like were nuts. That’s all we have ever wanted is open debate and what has it gotten us…. fired, jail time, being ostracized, hated, attacked, you name it this is what they do to you if they don’t like what you have to say, and they smile while they do it.

                JR

                Comment by jrizoli — February 25, 2016 @ 12:37 pm

                • Well, let’s see. Zundel and Berg both protested the airing of the miniseries “Holocaust” and wanted it pulled off the air.
                  David Irving threatened libel suits to prevent publication of works critical of him….including Lipstadt’s book. He didn’t protest it’s initial publication but waited until it was published in the UK to file under the UK’s notorious libel laws that favor the plaintiff.
                  Oh, and Zundel wants a worldwide ban on the movie “Schindler’s List” (which, by the way, I’ve never seen).
                  I’m sure there are other examples but those are what I can come up with now.

                  Any thoughts?
                  Jeff

                  Comment by Jeff K. — February 25, 2016 @ 12:58 pm

                • You wrote: “David Irving threatened libel suits to prevent publication of works critical of him….including Lipstadt’s book. He didn’t protest it’s initial publication but waited until it was published in the UK to file under the UK’s notorious libel laws that favor the plaintiff.”

                  I wrote about David Irving and Debra Lipstadt on this blog post: https://furtherglory.wordpress.com/2014/08/30/deborah-lipstadt-who-defeated-hard-core-holocaust-denial-now-worries-about-soft-core-denial/

                  Comment by furtherglory — February 25, 2016 @ 1:35 pm

                • I wouldn’t have taken the position that they took let them present there Holohuxster views and we will present our views.
                  I might have complained about it saying that the movie was a farce but I wouldn’t stop anybody from seeing that’s the point. Now let’s take a look at the other side of this David Irving is banned everywhere he goes so I think he gets a little gun shy when hes dealing with the topic.
                  Again Ingrids husband Ernest can’t even come to the United States for 25 years so I think she’s a little upset about that. The point is you can see that it’s not balanced on how it holocaust revisionis are treated compared to the Holohuxsters. But as a whole the revisionist don’t stop people from seeing things they might express the viewpoints that it shouldn’t be showed because it’s a lie but they’re not going to stand out in front preventing people from going in which happens to the revisionist all the time when they have meetings and talks excetera.

                  JR

                  Comment by jrizoli — February 25, 2016 @ 1:37 pm

                • You wrote that you have never seen the movie “Schindler’s List”. This is an important movie that you MUST see. I wrote a review of it on this blog post: https://furtherglory.wordpress.com/2013/09/22/how-the-film-schlindlers-list-introduced-americans-to-the-holocaust/

                  Comment by furtherglory — February 25, 2016 @ 1:42 pm

                • Here is the best review you’ll get out of the movie.

                  JR

                  Comment by jrizoli — February 25, 2016 @ 1:50 pm

                • I’ve decided I don’t need to see Schindler’s List, the typical over dramatization annoys me.
                  I’d rather just read history and watch movies for pure enjoyment.
                  The last “historical” movie I saw was “Valkyrie,” the Tom Cruise movie about the July 1944 attempted coup against Hitler.
                  Decent movie, from what I remember, just over dramatized and at times horribly inaccurate.
                  Jeff

                  Comment by Jeff K. — February 25, 2016 @ 2:07 pm

                • I did a review of the movie Valkyrie in this blog post: https://furtherglory.wordpress.com/2015/12/19/a-blast-from-the-past-the-movie-valkrie/

                  Comment by furtherglory — February 25, 2016 @ 4:33 pm

                • “fired, jail time, being ostracized, hated, attacked,you name it this is what they do to you if they don’t like what you have to say, and they smile while they do it”

                  Jim – this is what the Nazi’s did to the Jew’s in the 30’s – based on your recent posts I suggest you start reading history books written by real historians instead of the revisionist tracts you read- there’s nothing wrong with looking at the other side of the argument – try it, Jeff and I have. You might have some credibility then.

                  “making it look like were nuts” – well you said it, maybe they have a point 🙂

                  Comment by srebrenica — February 25, 2016 @ 3:21 pm

                • I think Jim is nuts….but in a nice way.
                  😆

                  Comment by Jeff K. — February 25, 2016 @ 3:24 pm

                • I don’t think I have to worry about credibility or any Revisionist in that way either we have plenty of credibility the info that you present is beyond incredible it’s actually laughable in many cases.
                  Of course now we can add pickled jews to the mix of atrocity stories.
                  I read both sides of the stories I get to see what you folks believe and it is incredibly interesting to see that you can actually believe this stuff.
                  But I have to hold my tongue because there are lot of things people believe that is crazy and they believe them good luck to them.

                  JR

                  Comment by jrizoli — February 25, 2016 @ 3:33 pm

                • “I don’t think I have to worry about credibility or any Revisionist in that way either we have plenty of credibility the info that you present is beyond incredible it’s actually laughable in many cases”

                  How do you know? – you don’t even bother to read most of the stuff we post because you assume it’s one sided

                  Comment by srebrenica — February 25, 2016 @ 3:43 pm

              • Jeff wrote: “Now, I’m curious, because I wonder if you, or any denier, if they had power, would allow actual free speech to occur.”

                Doesn’t furtherglory allow you to post on his blog as many comments as a full-time Hasbara Cyber Warrior would do? I think that answers your question pretty well…

                Comment by hermie — February 25, 2016 @ 9:03 pm

                • Jeff wrote: “He is a she. You didn’t know that?”

                  No, I didn’t.

                  Jeff wrote: “You let me know if you would like me to make up something particularly juicy for you to spaz over.”

                  Most Holo-tales are juicy enough. Holohoaxsters have already provided us with laughing matter for centuries. No need to make up anything else, IMO.

                  Jeff wrote: “In FG’s case it does. Not for Ernst Zundel…or you, for that matter.”

                  On my side, the answer is: Probably yes. But only because the idiotic claims of Holocaust believers & propagandists are often good food for anti-Holohoax education, not for the sake of any kind of American-style illusory freedom of speech (which I don’t care about) or other similar BS.

                  Comment by hermie — February 26, 2016 @ 8:14 am

            • “companies and countries are shelling out billions of dollars based on what these old coots say”

              Like who? – IG Farben haven’t paid a dime. Siemens. Bayer and other similar companies have acknowledged their role in using slave labor and compensated the victims. Germany too – what’s the problem with that?

              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IG_Farben

              “Hence the need for some forensic and substantive proof that their allegations are accurate. I’m sure if you or your grandfather, or the business you run were accused by these senile old fucks you’d want them to get specific.”
              ” I would no longer want these survivors to speak to children, only to historians, who can sift through the stories and figure out what is real and what is mixed up.”

              Read a couple of history books – you might learn something. I doubt it, but there’s always hope.

              Comment by srebrenica — February 25, 2016 @ 3:39 pm

          • Jeff wrote: “No, what I think is funny is that deniers continue to make a big deal about survivors in their 80’s and 90’s say.”

            On my side, what I think is funny is that believers make a big deal about what survivors of any age said/say at all, like gullible kids believing that lying doesn’t exist. (No surprise, but lots of laughs. Isn’t blind faith what characterizes believers of all types after all?) But humor is just a matter of perspective, I suppose…

            Comment by hermie — February 25, 2016 @ 8:55 pm

        • We’re not the ones posting blogs about it, much less practically daily. You are.

          Comment by Halli — February 26, 2016 @ 9:29 pm

      • Whats the difference with Octogenarian HoloHuxsters teaching in the schools….It would be the same as JK Rowling talking about Harry Potter as being real to the kids.

        JR

        .

        Comment by jrizoli — February 25, 2016 @ 11:36 am

  3. Irving Roth just another typical Holohuckster out there making a fine living giving speeches about what didn’t happen in the camps.
    He should be ashamed of himself for telling these kids lies but being a good Jew I guess he really doesn’t think of the 9th commandment which says not to bear false witness as most Jews today don’t adhere to any bible belief anyway.
    Lying is just part of the game. On the positive side I’m sure in his mind he really believes what happened to him just like the Rosenblatt’s believed what happened to them and they went on Oprah Winfrey a couple times and were going to even have a big movie made about it but then he admitted what he experienced in the camp meeting his wife and all that was not true.
    Was he ashamed for lying to everyone no, because he felt that he experienced it in his own mind and that was good enough of a story to tell to encourage people. So if you have a good story to tell a good lie to tell somebody you can tell it as long as you feel good about it who cares who it hurts. And believe me there are a lot of good stories out there floating around some of them so impossible and so bizarre that you can make a great fiction movie. Yes there is one out there actually many but the big one is called SHOAH.
    We call it show us the facts. They call it we’ll show you nothing.

    JR

    Comment by jrizoli — February 25, 2016 @ 8:07 am

    • You wrote: “I’m sure in his mind he really believes what happened to him just like the Rosenblatt’s believed what happened to them and they went on Oprah Winfrey a couple times and were going to even have a big movie made about it but then he admitted what he experienced in the camp meeting his wife and all that was not true.”

      I was watching that Oprah show on which the Rosenblatts told their lie. I e-mailed Oprah immediately after the show, but got no answer. It was not until later, when other people told Oprah about the Rosenblatt lie, that she paid attention.

      Comment by furtherglory — February 25, 2016 @ 8:17 am


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: