• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

9/11-investigator explains the Holocaust

Status
Not open for further replies.
Care to explain why Churchill wanted the train line between Budapest and Birkenau bombed then?
 
Uzzy said:
Care to explain why Churchill wanted the train line between Budapest and Birkenau bombed then?
Click to expand...

Huh, he never did although he could have. That was the complaint of the Jews towards the Allies that they did not do exactly that.

Reason: the Allies had no reason to believe that something was going on. The reality was that the British had excellent eavesdropping and decoding facilities (tens of thousands worked in that branch of intelligence). The Brits knew of every role of toilet paper that was needed in Auschwitz, yet they never ever found any sign that something special was going on.

http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/docs/PoliceDecodes.html

Every other conceivable detail is however reflected in the signals, including a signal to Auschwitz commandant S.S. Sturmbannführer Rudolf Höss in September 1942 regretting that rubber truncheons are 'unobtainable in Breslau.'

This is what the worlds most renowned historian on WW2 (until he started the doubt the official views on the holocaust), David Irving has to say in addition:

http://www.vho.org/GB/Journals/JHR/10/4/Irving491-508.html

The German texts of these decoded telegrams are in the British secret service archives now. I'll tell you what they say in sum; I don't exactly know what they say verbatim because the British government, for reasons we in this room could only surmise, is refusing to release the exact text of the telegrams. But they’ve been good enough, in an appendix to Volume II of the British official history, the government history of the British secret service, to tell us what we can learn from these telegrams.

Each day the daily telegrams reported back to Berlin: the number of prisoners who had arrived that morning at each camp; the number of prisoners who left that day from each camp; the number of prisoners left in each camp at the end of the day. In addition, under a fourth heading was a category described, oddly enough, as Other losses" - Abgänge alter Art. And the British secret service deduced that "other losses" were mostly losses caused by deaths. According to the British official history, "in the case of Auschwitz, most of these other losses turned out to have been due to illness. The remainder were partly accounted for by executions, which are described as having been executions by hanging and executions by shooting. There are no references to any gassings in Auschwitz."

But on the other hand, the great big battleship Auschwitz, this lie that's been cruising around for the last 45 years, has told us that that's what Auschwitz was about! That Auschwitz was there purely as a kind of Endstation, or terminus. That the trains arrived in Auschwitz, and disgorged their masses of helpless, pitiful humanity, all of whom were Jews, of course, in the present perception. And they were then kind of channeled through the extermination procedure, where they were gassed. Not a single word of this is in the messages that the British government was decoding throughout the years 1942 and 1943. And have you seen any reference to this British government finding anywhere in the newspapers? No.

That's why the Allies never bombed the railway lines to Auschwitz. There was no reason to.
 
Well you're wrong, but as you're a Nazi, it's hardly necessary for me to say that.

Churchill himself asked that the lines be bombed, immediately. He did not wait for the cabinet to debate it, but rather, he asked the Air Force to do it right away. The request went to the American Air Force Commander, General R. Eaker, who gave it his full support, but had to pass it up the ladder, where the matter was debated in Washington for quite some time.

Sadly, Churchill's request came in on the 7th July 1944. The tracks between Budapest and Birkenau stopped being used on the 9th. After that, the requests from Jewish groups stopped being about bombing the tracks, and started being about protective documents for as many Jews as possible.

You can read further about it here. Either way, it shows that Churchill had certainly seen lots of proof that the Holocaust was going on, and wanted to do something about it, DURING the war itself.
 
9/11-investigator said:
Does anybody here care to explain why the best informed players of WW2:

- Churchill
- De Gaulle
- Eisenhower

in their extensive many-volume memoirs never lost a word about 'gas chambers' and the like?
Click to expand...

And if they did, they'd be lying because they're just working for the Jews along with every serious historian.
 
I really think we should leave the racial stereo-typing to the Nazis, guys
 
9/11-investigator said:
Never said anything like that, just that not much attention was paid to it (to the myth that is) before the propagando hell broke lose in the seventies.
Click to expand...

This is a lie -- that you are ignorant of the 1950's and 60's is not relevant.

How can you write this? Do you wish to claim that no one paid attention to the IMT or Eichman's trial?

Does anybody here care to explain why the best informed players of WW2:

- Churchill
- De Gaulle
- Eisenhower

in their extensive many-volume memoirs never lost a word about 'gas chambers' and the like?
Click to expand...

Churchill wrote to the systematic murder of Hungarian Jews by 'scientific machinery' - that he did not use the magic words you require is irrelevant He also did not mention Kamikazes or the siege of Leningrad, does that mean these are lies as well?

Eisenhower wrote extensively about the camps in his private and unprivate papers and correspondence -visit the Eisenhower library

here's a link, go educate yourself

http://www.eisenhower.archives.gov/

That De Gaulle mentioned anyone but himself is a small miracle.


Maybe you will find a minute or two between the self-gratulating and chest thumping and 'Nazi'-shouting to answer that question?
Click to expand...


Its been answered - when are you going to use an original argument -- or are you going to run back to CODOH for a new shot?
 
Last edited:
9/11-investigator said:
Not a single word of this is in the messages that the British government was decoding throughout the years 1942 and 1943. And have you seen any reference to this British government finding anywhere in the newspapers? No[/I].

That's why the Allies never bombed the railway lines to Auschwitz. There was no reason to.
Click to expand...

So your claim is that because the Germans did not mention their secret gassing operations in coded communications that were intercepted and deciphered, they never took place.

By the same token, we can claim that the rescue of Mussolini never occurred since the allies did not intercept a secret communication about this operation.

:eye-poppi
 
9/11-investigator said:
I do not say that I know for a fact that no gassings etc. did occur. But the proof for what allegedly happened is so poor that for the moment I stay with my preliminary judgment of 250,000 people died in the camps (as a consequence of the war conditions), as administered by the Germans themselves and several hundred thousand people killed in cold blood by the Einsatztruppen in the East.
Click to expand...

How do you come by either figure? Its it just wild eye fantasy land, or did Hannover give you the numbers?
 
9/11-investigator said:
I admit that it sounds rather harsh to put it mildly. But you have to admit that he does not announce any unconditional extermination of the Jews, but only in retaliation if the Jews would succeed to plunge Germany in a war for the second time. You might argue that this was exactly what the Jews did, via their English proxy and American serfs...
Click to expand...

...and by brainwashing Hitler into invading Poland and the USSR and declaring war on America. Apparently Hitler was a tool of the Jews.

Anyway, we reach here the usual denier attitude: the holocaust didn't happen and the Jews deserved it.

Oh, by the way: if there were no Jews there would be no Bible and no Jesus, so I suppose that European civilization itself, having been based to a great degree on these things, is a monstrous tool by the Jews to rule the world.
 
Last edited:
dudalb said:
I got to post that comment on some WW2 websites I visit. A good laugh is always welcome.
Click to expand...

One of David Irvings history doco's got a run on the history channel here in Australia before it got pulled because of the number of complaints

I was watching it (before I realised it was David Irving) stunned, trying to work what exactly I was looking at. I mean, some of the stuff on the history channel is crap, but this was just plan wrong. The episode I saw was about the last months of the war and there was one section that just blew my mind, (paraphrasing now) ..."the brave boys of the SS, with the military genius of Adolf Hitler, held back the communists for two days..."

Military genius...if he was such a fantastic general why is he just around the corner from losing the war?
 
SimonD said:
One of David Irvings history doco's got a run on the history channel here in Australia before it got pulled because of the number of complaints

I was watching it (before I realised it was David Irving) stunned, trying to work what exactly I was looking at. I mean, some of the stuff on the history channel is crap, but this was just plan wrong. The episode I saw was about the last months of the war and there was one section that just blew my mind, (paraphrasing now) ..."the brave boys of the SS, with the military genius of Adolf Hitler, held back the communists for two days..."

Military genius...if he was such a fantastic general why is he just around the corner from losing the war?
Click to expand...


Especially at that time.
The stress and worries from the coming defeat had robbed of whatever competence he might have had (which I don't believe were very high to begin with).
 
Some posts moved to AAH.

Remember to attack the argument, not the arguer.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Gaspode
 
9/11-investigator said:
My position on the bunnycaust is that I will believe that it happened if somebody can demonstrate it to me that it happened.

In Europe we hold the view that somebody is innocent until proven guilty very unlike jungles like the US (jungle, because the dudalbs, the dtuggs, the parkys and the finewines are in charge) where the rule is: 'listen pall, we're going to throw you in jail for 4 years. However, if you confess being guilty we'll reduce your sentence to 2 years' ('fleabargain').

So here is my request to the local Israel-Lobby here on this forum (dudalb, dtugg, parky, finewine and a few hundred more): demonstrate to me that 6 million people were gassed in WW2 under the Nazis.


Wait, I'll make it easy for you: prove that only one person was gassed.

Success (you may use a calculator for this exercise).
Click to expand...
I'm going to say this and then I'm going to bow out. I am not jewish and I was born a few years after WW2. My father was a military policeman who was with the screaming eagles. They liberated a small jewish concentration camp in Germany. I forget the name of it and I ought to be ashamed of myself. He saw jews in skeletal states. He saw dead and decaying jews. They weren't gassed they were shot to death. He wanted to kill the guards but he didn't. No one did at this death camp but they should have.

I have a choice to either believe the jewish people or to believe some stinking worthless nazi sympathizer. I believe the jews.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom