These words are easily typed. In post #4110 I gave you a simple scientific criterium to establish the truth or falsehood regarding the H-word once and for all. I cannot believe that it is possible to kill millions in gas chambers without a single photograph made of a heap of gassed people in a gaschamber. Many Germans had camera's at the time.
Why would a German soldier photograph a gas chamber filled with bodies? It's not like the German public was aware of what was going on. It's not like finding out would help the war effort anyway whatsoever. It's not like the camps were run principally by the goddamn SS, who wouldn't exactly be to stringent on security on such matters. Hell there may even have been photographs at one point, the Nazi's made extreme efforts to destroy as much as possible once they knew things were going the wrong way.
(Also, you merely asked for the testimony I was told, I don't see what attacking that accomplishes.)
You are misinformed. It was victor USSR who in 1939 together with Germany swallowed Poland (a country created in during WW1) restoring the pre-1914 situation.
Germany invaded on the 1st, USSR on the 17th. I dislike Stalin-ism as much as Nazism, but Hitler struck first. Technically, you could call re-militarising the Rhineland as an act of war as well. (That said pulling this thread further back in time would go off topic, but if we stick to Hitler's Germany, it struck first.)
It was in this situation that Britain declared war on Germany but tellingly NOT on the USSR.
Ask any military historian whether the commonwealth could have taken the Soviet Union in pre WW2 Europe. They'll laugh. The USSR suffered the highest casualties and still managed to win, not to say they were unstoppable, but a unified Europe would do far better than one dissolving into war.
Let's not also forget that the strategy in Europe was originally to stop Communism, some calling for principally using Hitler and the Nazi's. It was obvious that something like Operation Barbarossa would have come about, declaring war on both ran the risk of uniting them. It's not like western Europe was well enough armed to even fight Germany alone at this point.
Germany never wanted war with Britain (race and stuff), it was Britain who really escalated the conflict as Patrick Buchanan points out in his latest book " Churchill, Hitler, and The Unnecessary War: How Britain Lost Its Empire and the West Lost the World". Britain aimed for nothing less than the destruction of Germany and succeeded in it (destroying itself in the process) and handed Europe over to Americans and. Or more precisely it was Chamberlain who made the terrible mistake of handing out a blanc cheque to the Poles that Britain would come to their aid regardless what the Poles would do in the Danzig situation. But it was Churchill (bought and paid for by Jewish financials circles in London and probably Jewish himself) who really aimed for the destruction of Germany, totally against the interest of Britain itself. No wonder that a lot of the British establishment including the Royals hated Churchill. Britain was basically hijacked and destroyed by this half-American hooligan.
Of course Britain escalated it, it was trying to stop the spread of Hitler and the Nazi's, also the British Empire was in a severe downfall ever since WW1, WW2 merely sped things up. Also Churchill didn't hate Germany, he just saw them as the enemy, thus he was the one to come up with Operation Unthinkable, the plan to reactivate the German Army to strike the USSR whilst it was nursing its wounds. Churchill was hated by many, yeah, mainly because he really wasn't that good a politician, what he was was a symbol, a source of moral which we badly needed at some points. He lost the election just weeks after the war ended.
Also I laughed at the highlighted bit.
America (by means of it's Jewish ruling class) is openly aiming for world domination. On it's own. But by opposing China, Russia and Iran it is taking too much hay on it's fork (not mentioning it's desastrous immigration policy). We in Europe only have to wait for the moment America is committing suicide somewhere in this decade and to abandon our former colony turned into our destroyer, first in Versailles, later in Berlin. Maybe if the America is lucky we are going to recolonise it again. But we are not making promisses here.
Er, okay, this may even happen, well, not the recolonise part, but the rest maybe.
To this day still some million 'holocaust survivors' are at large. I am not going to repreat what ma Finkelstein has to say about this fact.
Curiously enough, he thinks the holocaust happened, he merely has the same Isreal-NWO theory that you (I think) have.
I am completely uninterested in moral judgments, just in reconstructing what happened. The fact that the Kristallnacht was triggered by the killing of a German diplomat by a Jew is NEVER EVER mentioned.
Except in textbooks. They give it as the reason it kicked off. Yeah he was a Jew, but that makes for no real reason to defend Kristallnacht.
Euro-Siberia is a total new concept.
You were the one who said 'return'.
Every home has a television with incessant American (Jewish) propaganda.
Every home has a television with incessant Islamic, Christian, Nationalistic propagandas, its called a t.v channel. If one's owned by Jews then it's owned by Jews, I take it you are assuming that they are sticking hidden pro-Zionist messages everywhere? You could easily prove that certain programmes have a pro-jewish message, just as you could prove that certain programmes have an anti-jewish message. If anyone is in control of television, it's the people, they don't like it, they'll change the channel.
Not going to happen. The industrial age is coming to an end soon. The world is running out of oil and other resources. The world is going to be very big again. Globalization will land on the scrapheap of history.
Assuming that we do not prepare in any way for this eventuality, which we are already doing. With the exception of some catastrophic nuclear war, I don't see how Globalization can possibly collapse.
The idea of gaschambers is ridiculous. The idea is to put hundreds of people in a room, throw pellets of Zyklon-B through a hole in the roof and after 20 minutes everybody is dead. Next a bunch of kapo's merily enter the room and start the difficult task of dragging these bodies away to the crematorium. For some mysterious reason these kapo's were immune for the Zyklon-B!
Okay. Look at executions by gas chamber in the U.S. Look at chemical agents, the sort of technology needed has been in existence since before WW1. H-C(triple bond)N, the infamous Zyklon-B, is a very reactive substance (hence why it is so lethal), a simple water shower would dissolve and carry away any remaining gas in a few short minutes. You'd still have cyanide residue on the walls and floor (curiously enough, this is found in the ruins of gas chambers), but as long as the soldiers didn't lick the walls or floor they wouldn't suffer anything. One could also merely pump the gas out, so that it could be used again, the Nazi's were sticklers for efficiency.
I am inclined to believe that there was no extermination program. I am here in this thread to investigate the H-word and from what I hear from my opponents after 4000+ posts this belief is hardened. You are unable to convince me. I do not care about Nazism, but I do care about Germans, Europeans and European civilization. The H-word is used to destroy European civilization (either in Europe and in North-America). We are supposed to hand over this magnificent continent to third world invaders otherwise we are accused of being 'racists' and inevitable references to Auschwitz follow. The H-word constitute the crown jewels of the left and their neo-marxist ideology as formulated by the
Frankfurter Schule (all Jews).
Waiiit, are we talking about the Islamification Problem? Because that's the closest we can come to talking about "third world invaders". Also you seem to think Europe needs to feel guilty about it. Yes it was a terrible thing, but nearly everyone who ever perpetrated it is now dead. I hear nothing (in Europe) about trying to exterminate populations any more (except, curiously, all the "Death to those who insult Islam" business).
It is not just Germans, it is the Euro-Americans as well who are targeted on a daily basis by the Jewish controlled media and Hollywood.
Boom, you got it in one at the end there. Hollywood. Hollywood is there to make America look good, hence why they are always the ones in WW2 films to be the victors, saving camps and the like. It's called artistic license. Would you try and stop everybody from trying to bend the truth for the sake of entertainment? You'd have a long job ahead of you.
This is not a very innocent question.
I know, but there we go, it's just you were talking about overthrowing the Jewish controlled order and I wanted to see your reaction to a question like this.
First of all Jews always get stronger after pogroms. The smart ones see the tide rising in advance and flee, leaving the duller, poorer and more harmless ones ('Anne Frank') at the mercy of the persecutors. In end effect the Jewish community gets smaller but the average IQ rises making them in end effect more influential in (and thus dangerous for) their 'host populations'.
The same can be said of any group who has a similar situation, but yeah I kind of see your point, the intelligent and/or rich will generally survive.
(That's kind of obvious)
Any society is made/run by a few thousand people in government, media, think tanks, banks, labour unions, etc.. The rest constitutes merely the tax base. So it does not really matter how large the Jewish community is, 5 or 9 million in the US. The top stratum is innundated with Jews (listen to the recorded conversations between Nixon and Graham to get the picture). Reason: high IQ and collectivistic mind set.
Eugenics is very shady on details at its best, but you probably know full well that any sort of intelligence or mental patterns are around 95% due to background growing up, not your birthright.
The highly individualistic 'Aryans' will always be outmanouvered by them, until the 'Aryans' remember that the maybe they have less average IQ-points but still have more fists. It is a little bit embarrassing to have to admit that but this is basically the pattern of Jewish/Gentile interaction through the ages. Ah well, I will read it all in the newspaper when the next chapter of this sad story will unfold, this time in the US.
I'll ignore the fact that there only seem to be 2 races in your mind. You do talk in a very prophetic way, it gives the impression that the evidence for all your arguments lies in the future and we will have to wait till then to see if you are right. It's not an easy way to have a debate.
So to answer your question: no I am not glad that maybe 200-500,000 Jews got killed during WW2. It were not they who were dangerous, it is the International Jew who is dangerous: the media moguls, the journalists, the think tanks, the philosophers, the banksters. The Jews know best how to murder a nation: they showed it in Katyn Forest were Beria ordered the killing of the entire Polish elite. They did the same in Russia and the Ukraine leaving Eastern-Europa as the depressed place it is today. Only dull small people left, no elite let alone an aristocracy.
So you are anti-elite, rather than anti-jewish then? You hate a large group of people in power with similarities more than any specific group itself. That's actually kind of comforting. Also, why the hell are you implying that the NKVD is Jewish? You might as well call Stalin Jewish.
