Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old September 21st, 2019 #41
alex revision
Senior Member
 
alex revision's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 18,635
alex revision
Default Holohoax Tales - Handprints on solid walls

Holohoax Tales - Handprints on solid walls

https://www.bitchute.com/video/nYOOJM1TNwMi/

Crude WW2 holocaust atrocity propaganda aimed at demonizing the Germans including handprints on the solid concrete walls of so-called torture chambers. It appears that the US Holocaust Memorial Museum rehashed the British Pathe footage to use in conjunction with gas chamber stories.

British Pathé

Gestapo Torture Chamber in Paris: World War II (1944) | British Pathé




.
 
Old November 14th, 2019 #42
alex revision
Senior Member
 
alex revision's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 18,635
alex revision
Default

Buchenwald a Dumb Dumb Portrayal of EviL (2:21:00)

By DenierBud

Published: 2019-11-13

Buchenwald has been portrait by the orthodox historians as the portrait of evil as many more of German work camps. See this video to know the other side of the story. This video was made and narrated by DenierBud.

https://codoh.com/library/document/6957/?lang=en

Last edited by alex revision; November 14th, 2019 at 04:09 AM.
 
Old November 14th, 2019 #43
alex revision
Senior Member
 
alex revision's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 18,635
alex revision
Default

Europa: The Last Battle, Part 8 -- The "Holocaust"

“The Holocaust” is the term used to spread the belief that six million Jews were murdered by the Germans during World War 2 - primarily by gassing in makeshift gas chambers deceptively disguised as shower rooms. This narrative is often repeated in Hollywood, by the media and in the public school systems.

However, a growing movement of brave scientists, historians, engineers, journalists and other free-speech activists have investigated the official politically correct holocaust-story to be exaggerated and even false. These brave people are today called “Revisionists” but are often denounced as “holocaust deniers”. This labelling technique is used to discourage discourse and discussion about this controversial subject.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/hALqra0Re6dm/

Last edited by alex revision; November 14th, 2019 at 04:02 AM.
 
Old November 14th, 2019 #44
alex revision
Senior Member
 
alex revision's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 18,635
alex revision
Default

One Third of the Holocaust

By DenierBud

This documentary explains how the German wartime camps at Treblinka, Sobibor, and Belzec (all in Poland) were not death camps, as is usually claimed. It thereby debunks one third of the Holocaust. The movie asks questions like, "Would the Germans have really put a fence made out of tree branches around a deathcamp?" Answer: "Uh, no, that's silly." And would they have then conducted a huge burning operation inside this flammable fence?

https://www.bitchute.com/video/0cXNvf80LMiJ/
 
Old November 27th, 2019 #47
alex revision
Senior Member
 
alex revision's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 18,635
alex revision
Default

The Holohaux Exposed in 30 Minutes [Vincent REYNOUARD]

https://www.bitchute.com/video/ZZVMnsV5gEgz/
 
Old December 23rd, 2019 #48
alex revision
Senior Member
 
alex revision's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 18,635
alex revision
Default

As ‘Death Camp’ Scenario Collapses, Jews Find 2 Million New Holocaust Victims In Soviet Russia

Dec 21, 2019

In the immediate aftermath of World War II, based on ‘evidence’ presented at the kangaroo Nuremberg Trials, where jewish ‘eyewitnesses’ were not allowed to be cross examined, we were told that 6 million Jews were ‘gassed’ and ‘burned’ mostly at German-controlled ‘death camps’, but as that scenario has failed to hold up under intense scrutiny of even mainstream historians, jewish propagandists have been forced to look elsewhere for millions of deaths so that they can continue to maintain the magical talisman, the sacred non-negotiable 6 million:

https://christiansfortruth.com/as-de...soviet-russia/
 
Old February 14th, 2020 #49
alex revision
Senior Member
 
alex revision's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 18,635
alex revision
Default

Holohoax Tales - 4 Million killed in Auschwitz

https://www.bitchute.com/video/xRXiSFBxgNJp/

Clip from the documentary:
The Search For Mengele. 1985
Director: Brian Moser

Full documentary here:
https://archive.org/details/1985SearchForMengeleThe
 
Old March 4th, 2020 #51
alex revision
Senior Member
 
alex revision's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 18,635
alex revision
Default

To begin with, why would they bother with such a labor intensive project, a ten cent bullet or herding them to a remote open field in the middle of no where, not using a bug spray, but a fast kill with a lethal gas using a crop duster plane, would have been far cheaper and faster. Zyklon B was a relatively weak pesticide the USA used as well used in the cargo hold of all imported goods, until it came up with a better pesticide. It's a rhetorical question. They would NOT and did not use any gas let alone a relatively weak and inefficient pesticide, and they did NOT operate homicidal gassum chambers, they had delousing chambers for fleas to disinfect clothing. People need to to SNAP OUT of the JEW BRAINWASHING. REMEMBER...if what the Jews say is true, they would not have to have LAWS to ENFORCE it and silence those who point out the utter absurdity of the so-called "holocaust" of the Jews.

 
Old March 8th, 2020 #52
alex revision
Senior Member
 
alex revision's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 18,635
alex revision
Default

Auschwitz: The First Gassing – Rumor and Reality

By Carlo Mattogno

The orthodox history of Auschwitz is known to be based on an order to exterminate the jews of Europe – allegedly sent by Hitler to Himmler in the spring of 1941 and from there to the Auschwitz camp commander Rudolf Höss. This order is said to have materialized in the construction of the alleged extermination camp of Birkenau. This order, according to the interpretation that has become canonical, was implemented progressively in four stages:
  1. In September 1941 the first experimental homicidal gassing was allegedly carried out at Auschwitz using Zyklon B, which is said to represent the “discovery” of the chemical weapon for the subsequent mass extermination.
  2. At the beginning of 1942 the activity of homicidal gassing is said to have been transferred to the morgue of the crematorium at the Auschwitz Main Camp.
  3. In the following months, two houses located outside the Birkenau camp were purportedly converted into homicidal gas chambers (the so-called “Bunkers”) and began the mass extermination of Jews and sick prisoners.
  4. In March 1943, finally, the extermination activities are claimed to have been moved into the four crematoria of Birkenau, all allegedly equipped with gas chambers.

The first homicidal gassing in the Auschwitz concentration camp was allegedly carried out between September 3 and 5, 1941, in the basement of Building (Block) 13. This building was later named Block 11 because of an administrative change in the numbering of the buildings. This first gassing is said to have been the starting point of the alleged mass extermination process at Auschwitz. After having gone through the intermediate stages of the mortuary in Crematorium I of the Stammlager (Auschwitz Main Camp) and the so-called “Bunkers” at Birkenau, this claimed extermination process later led to the alleged homicidal gas chambers of the Birkenau Crematoria II through V. As such, the first homicidal gassing would therefore constitute the birth of the homicidal gas chambers and mark the “official” introduction of Zyklon B into the Auschwitz holocaust history. Moreover, it would also constitute the archetype of the alleged “selections” of registered detainees in the camp hospitals for the “gas chambers.”

The conclusion that emerges from the analyses of the available sources we have examined in this study is unambiguous: The first homicidal gassing at Auschwitz in the official reconstruction by Danuta Czech is based solely on contradictory statements of self-styled eyewitnesses and is discounted by the documents. It therefore has no historical foundation.

The story was invented in October of 1941 by one of the centers for black propaganda within the secret resistance movement at Auschwitz, from the initial idea of an experimentation with undefined combat gases on human beings in an equally undefined “Bunker” or “shelter” or “concrete building” at Auschwitz. Only later, cued by the disinfestations with Zyklon B that became more and more widespread with the enlargement of the camp, did the propagandists introduce Zyklon B into their tales and place the first gassing in the basement of Block 11. The normal removal of corpses of registered detainees who had died in the camp from the Leichenhalle of Block 28 to the crematorium was used to progressively enrich the story.

In 1946, Judge Jan Sehn, facing the task of historicizing the utterly contradictory accounts of the witnesses to enable judicial proceedings to be launched, invented the nucleus of the story, which included the canonical literary elements of the number of victims, the various phases of the gassing, but not its date. In 1959, Danuta Czech, in an even more daring manipulation of the sources, resurrected and augmented Jan Sehn’s story and drew from a mélange of diverging testimonies a purely fictitious “convergence of proof” and attributed to it a precise but completely invented date.: The first gassing had now become “history.”

This “history” reveals the deceitful tricks used by the inventors of the legend of the first gassing at Auschwitz. It also speaks volumes about the intellectual laziness of the orthodox Holocaust historians who uncritically accepted this legend and transmogrified it into an “untouchable historical truth.”

Pages 7, 8, 133


http://www.renegadetribune.com/ausch...r-and-reality/

https://holocausthandbooks.com/index.php?page_id=20

http://vho.org/GB/Journals/JHR/9/2/Mattogno193-222.html

Last edited by alex revision; March 8th, 2020 at 11:08 PM.
 
Old March 17th, 2020 #53
alex revision
Senior Member
 
alex revision's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 18,635
alex revision
Default

Special Treatment in Aushwitz: Origin and Meaning of a Term

By Carlo Mattogno

In the anthology Nazi Mass Murder, Adalbert Rückerl writes of the meaning of the term “special treatment”:

In all areas involving the physical extermination of people, the code word was ‘special treatment’ – Sonderbehandlung, sometimes shortened on the initials SB.”

It cannot be disputed that in numerous documents of the Third Reich, the term “special treatment” is, in fact, synonymous with execution or liquidation, but this does not mean that the meaning of this term always and exclusively had this significance. We have available to us other documents, in which “special treatment” was by no means equivalent to killing, as well as those, in which the word described privileged treatment.

Moreover, we have at our disposal a great number of important documents, in which the expression “special treatment” (as well as other alleged “code words” like “special measures,” “special operation,” or “special unit”) exhibit an entire palette of varied meanings, which nonetheless refer to perfectly normal aspects of camp life in Auschwitz and which in no single instance indicate the murder of human beings. These documents are for the most part unknown to researchers, and those already well known have been and are given distorted interpretations by the representatives of the official historiography.

In the present study these documents are made accessible to the reader and analyzed in their historical context, and cross-references are made. In doing so, we show what the documents actually say and not what the “decipherment” and mechanistic interpretation of supposed “code words” allegedly reveal. In reality, “special treatment” was by no means a “code word,” behind which the unspeakable was concealed, but rather a bureaucratic concept, which – depending on the context of its use – designated entirely different things, all the way from liquidation to preferred treatment. This fact refutes the interpretation advocated by the official historiography, according to which “special treatment” is supposed to have always been synonymous with murder, with no ifs, ands, or buts.

The results of the present study of the origin and meaning of “special treatment” in Auschwitz, it should be well understood, pertain solely to the theme dealt with here. They do not extend to the existing uncontested documents – clearly not originating from Auschwitz – in which the term “special treatment” actually did refer to executions. Yet even those documents cannot alter in any way the validity of the conclusions presented here.

During the investigations leading to the two Polish Auschwitz trials conducted directly after the war, the term “special treatment” (Sonderbehandlung) as well as expressions related to it, such as “special operation” (Sonderaktion), “special measure” (Sondermaßnahme) etc., were systematically interpreted as “code words” for the gassing of human beings. By the end of 1946, the Główna Komisja badania zbrodni niemieckich w Polsce (Chief Commission for the Investigation of German Crimes in Poland) had developed the orthodox interpretation of this term that was gradually to become an unshakeable cornerstone of the orthodox narrative of Auschwitz.

Therefore, in order to deduce a criminal meaning from expressions beginning with “special” (Sonder-), the Polish commission began its “decoding” with the assumption that homicidal gas chambers were located in the crematoria of Birkenau. Later, the official historiography switched to the converse argument: Starting from the premise that a criminal meaning was inherent in these terms, it derived from this the existence of homicidal gas chambers in Auschwitz. In this way, a pseudo-logical circular reasoning came into being which leads from expressions beginning with “special” to homicidal gas chambers, and returns back from these gas chambers to the pertinent “special” terms. In this vicious circle orthodox historiography has been trapped for decades. The term “special unit” (Sonderkommando) also belongs into that same “logical” framework. Orthodox historians always used this term to refer exclusively to the staff of the crematoria in order to create the illusion that criminal activities took place in these facilities.

The opening of the Moscow Archives, despite the enormous mass of documents made accessible to researchers thereby, resulted only in insignificant corrections to the arguments developed by the Poles right after the war. Jean Claude Pressac, who was the first to study the documents of the Central Construction Office of Auschwitz, emphatically maintained:

The extraordinary abundance of materials that the Soviet Army brought back permits an almost seamless reconstruction of the criminals’ inventiveness.”

and he adds that the documentation now available makes possible

“an historical reconstruction that does without oral or written eyewitness reports, which are ultimately fallible and become ever less accurate with time
.”

But in Pressac’s “historical reconstruction,” his interpretation of the special treatment in Auschwitz proves to be without documentary basis. In this respect, Pressac’s method manifests enormous deficiencies.

The same applies even more to Robert Jan van Pelt, author of a 438-page expert report dedicated to a large extent to the Auschwitz camp (The Pelt Report). It was submitted during the libel suit of British historian David Irving against Deborah Lipstadt and her publisher Penguin Books (which ended on April 11, 2000, with Irving’s defeat). This expert report was published as a book in 2002 in a revised and expanded form. In it, van Pelt presented a sketchy reprise of Pressac’s theses, and with regard to the topic at hand, as well as with regard to many other issues, he remained well below the quality level of the French scholar’s exposition.

According to orthodox historiography, the beginning of special treatment in Auschwitz coincided with the first “selection,” which took place on July 4, 1942. Under this date the Auschwitz Chronicle notes:

For the first time, the camp administration carries out a selection among the jews sent to the camp; these are in an RSHA transport from Slovakia. During the selection, 264 men from the transport are chosen as able-bodied and admitted to the camp as registered prisoners. They receive Nos. 44727–44990. In addition, 108 women are selected and given Nos. 8389–8496. The rest of the people are taken to the bunker and killed with gas.”

This interpretation leads to another circular reasoning, since unregistered prisoners can be regarded as “gassed” only if one assumes a priori the existence of extermination facilities in the Bunkers of Birkenau, based upon mere eyewitness statements.

The new documentation mentioned by Pressac allows a complete picture to be drawn of the facilities in Auschwitz which were finished in the first half of 1942, and it permits us to verify how well-founded claims about the homicidal function of these bunkers really are. However, instead of undertaking this verification, Pressac uncritically parroted the interpretation promoted by orthodox historiography and even attempted to round it out by referring to a document in which the expression “special treatment” appears, but which has nothing to do with the so-called bunkers. I shall examine this question more closely in Chapter 4 of Part One.

This is most certainly not the only weak point of Pressac’s method. In his “historical reconstruction,” he never even attempted to study the great abundance of recently accessible documents in which expressions beginning with “special” occur. Despite these serious weaknesses, Pressac was the most renowned representative of orthodox historiography concerning Auschwitz. For this reason it seemed appropriate to take his conclusions as a starting point for my investigation.

In 2014, the Auschwitz Museum published an important book containing 74 documents, many of which are pertinent to the present study and have previously been unknown or ignored. I have dealt with this collection in detail in my book Curated Lies: The Auschwitz Museum’s Misrepresentations, Distortions and Deceptions, so where necessary, I will limit myself here to pointing out these new documents and referring to Curated Lies for further study.

The purpose of the present study is the documentary examination of the hypothesis proposed by the Polish postwar commission, which was later generally appropriated by orthodox historiography, as well as the emendations made to it by Pressac. The problem of mass gassing of jews in Auschwitz is not the immediate subject of this study, since answering the question of whether there were homicidal gas chambers in Auschwitz is not the aim here, but rather whether or not expressions beginning with “special” refer to possibly existing homicidal gas chambers or to mass gassings.

Since the analysis I proposed is of a documentary nature, the problem of the prisoners deported to Auschwitz, but not registered there, will merely be treated in passing, as I have discussed this topic in yet another dedicated study which in a way complements the present study. After all, the documents cited in Chapters 1 and 7 of Part Two incontestably prove that in August and September of 1942 the jews deported to Auschwitz were shipped farther to the east and that one of their destinations was a camp in Russia.

The historical and documentary analysis presented in the present study enables a definitive answer to the question raised at the beginning: The prefix “special,” which occurs in the documents examined, referred to various aspects of life in the Auschwitz camp:

– the disinfestation and storage of personal effects taken from the prisoners;

– the delousing facility of Birkenau (the Central Sauna);

– the Zyklon B deliveries, which were shipped for the purpose of disinfestation;

– the prisoners’ hospital planned for Sector BIII of the Birkenau camp;

– the reception of deportees;

– the classification of those suitable for labor.

But in not a single instance did this prefix have a criminal meaning. For this reason the “deciphering” performed by orthodox Holocaust historiography is historically and documentarily untenable. Thus the vicious circle of the orthodox historians has been broken, and the claim that expressions in documents pertaining to the Auschwitz camp which contain the prefix “special” belonged to a “code language” concealing unspeakable atrocities is exposed for what it really is: a crude ploy meant to conjure up with mere words the kind of evidence that these historians should long since have provided, yet have been quite unable to provide and in fact continue to be unable to provide.

The documentary collection The Beginnings of the Extermination of jews in KL Auschwitz in the Light of the Source Materials, published in 2014 by the Auschwitz Museum, contains the result of years of research by the historians at that museum, who carefully perused all the documents stored in their archive. In a certain way, this work is an official confirmation for the fact that no document exists which in any way refers to the alleged gassing “bunkers” at Birkenau, to the alleged homicidal gas chambers of the crematoria, or in general to any form of killings of registered or unregistered inmates at Auschwitz.

http://www.renegadetribune.com/speci...ing-of-a-term/
 
Old 3 Weeks Ago #54
alex revision
Senior Member
 
alex revision's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 18,635
alex revision
Default

Holocaust Quiz

https://www.bitchute.com/video/w7dn8O9zb0SD/

One of the many video's JewTube has censored, because the truth is no defence,especially where the chosen people are concerned. Anne Frank, Holohoax, Holocaustianity, Gas Chambers
 
Old 1 Week Ago #55
alex revision
Senior Member
 
alex revision's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 18,635
alex revision
Default

Christian Gerlach and the “Extermination Camp” at Mogilev

By Carlo Mattogno

Christian Gerlach’s article, “Failure of Plans for an SS Extermination Camp in Mogilev, Byelorussia” is a typical example of the historically baseless conclusions reached by Holocaust historians due to their technical ignorance, particularly in the field of crematory ovens and cremation.

The article attempts to deduce an intention, on the part of the SS, to create an extermination camp for “Western European” jews at Mogilev (Byelorussia), in late 1941, according to a nonsensical technical conjecture, upon which – in order to justify his hypothesis – the author then constructs a series of inconsistent historical conjectures spiced with misleading interpretations.

http://www.renegadetribune.com/chris...mp-at-mogilev/
 
Reply

Tags
#1, fake conspiracy theory, fake history, holocaust, holohoax

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:16 AM.
Page generated in 0.15834 seconds.