Why would US "soldiers" & propaganda personnel lie about what they supposedly saw?

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
User avatar
Hektor
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2736
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 7:59 am

Re: Why would US "soldiers" & propaganda personnel lie about what they supposedly saw?

Postby Hektor » 1 year 4 months ago (Tue Apr 12, 2016 4:42 pm)

Werd wrote:
http://www.openculture.com/2015/06/dr-seuss-world-war-ii-propaganda-films.html

It is a propaganda film in the sense that American military men made it to brainwash their soldiers, but that is not the issue. The issue is, and always has been:
It falsely accuses Germany of starting the first two world wars, and tells Americans not to trust civilians since civilians have a fascist desire to rule the world because of the people they elected. It also tells them to not engage on friendly terms with them and to respect their laws and not engage in misbehaviour. Propaganda, nor atrocity propaganda nor reducation are explicitly said in the video.

The issue is not only the actual title, but what actual words/phrases show up in the movie.

Let's not shift the goal posts. Claim victory all you want for revisionist history given what denier bud has exposed. But there is nothing to hoot and holler about with this little 10 minute move in particular.

The issue is a little bit different. The movie is far more suggestive than instructive. Movies like those helped to create a climate in which susceptible soldiers where more likely to reinterpret their war experience and the information they were fed in line with what later became institutionalized as the Holocaust.



avatar
Carto's Cutlass Supreme
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2237
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 1:42 am
Location: Northern California

Re: Why would US "soldiers" & propaganda personnel lie about what they supposedly saw?

Postby Carto's Cutlass Supreme » 1 year 4 months ago (Tue Apr 12, 2016 9:23 pm)

What comes to my mind, is the double whammy of a film like this combined with faking evidence directed at Americans at Ohrdruff, Buchenwald, and Dachau. You're an American soldier and you see a short film like this, and then you learn about Ilse Koch and take a tour of Ohrdruf, and then you believe "yes, there is some evil dark underbelly."

avatar
Werd
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 974
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 2:23 am

Re: Why would US "soldiers" & propaganda personnel lie about what they supposedly saw?

Postby Werd » 1 year 4 months ago (Wed Apr 13, 2016 2:25 am)

This video wasn't atrocity propaganda per say. Rather it was preparing Americans to accept atrocity propaganda as truth.

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9091
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: Why would US "soldiers" & propaganda personnel lie about what they supposedly saw?

Postby Hannover » 1 year 4 months ago (Wed Apr 13, 2016 10:15 am)

Werd seems to think that such a film would just blatantly say, 'OK GIs, just go out and make stuff up about what you see'.
But that is not how it works. The propaganda films used base psychology in demonizing the Germans, conditioning soldiers before they are taken to the labor camps where they are to encounter former inmates & Psych Warfare personnel who have been prepared / trained to make false statements. See these Psych Warfare "prisoners, soldiers" at work in the cited Buchenwald video by Denierbud.

The results:
baseless, ridiculous claims for which there is no proof whatsoever and Werd cannot produce any.
The results:
laughable & bizarre claims of human skin lampshades, shrunken heads, and 'gas chambers' which were accepted at the time, but now even the sleazy Zionist 'historians' reject.

at Nuremberg, perjurer "inmate"/ operative Blaha said about Dachau in a sworn statement:
There were numerous executions by gas, executions by firearms, and by injections, in the camp. The gas chamber was finished in 1944, and I called Dr. Rascher to examine the first victim. Of the eight or nine persons in the chamber, three were still alive; the others seemed to be dead. Their eyes were red and their faces bloated. Numerous detainees were subsquently killed in the same manner." IMT, vol. V, p. 198 (PS-3249).
Without a shred of proof.

and again:
Your Job in Germany
Has been described as the most hate filled film ever made
Dr Seuss's script shows a far uglier side to his persona than the cat in the hat. The film is essentially a crass (though I fear successful) attempt to entrench racist ideas about Germany in the American soldiers sent after Germany's WWII defeat. Germans are portrayed as inherently evil human beings. American Soldiers are warned to be on their guard that those wily Germans are likely to slap their lederhosen and drink beer and be merry in the hope that their essential evil and cruelty might go unnoticed. The audience is left in no doubt that to fraternise with a German is to succumb to the trickery of the most irredeemable despicable evil that human nature could offer. Nazism is not political but an inevitability of the German race.

- Hannover

The 'holocaust' storyline is one of the most easily debunked narratives ever contrived. That is why those who question it are arrested and persecuted. That is why violent, racist, & privileged Jewish supremacists demand censorship. What sort of truth is it that crushes the freedom to seek the truth? Truth needs no protection from scrutiny.

The tide is turning.
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9091
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: Why would US "soldiers" & propaganda personnel lie about what they supposedly saw?

Postby Hannover » 1 year 4 months ago (Wed Apr 13, 2016 11:46 am)

The claim that SS guards would abuse inmates flies in the face of SS Reichsführer Heinrich Himmler's very real order that inmates must be afforded good care AND the fact that there was the no nonsense SS judge Konrad Morgen who vigorously punished any staff who were abusing inmates.

- Hannover

The 'holocaust' storyline is one of the most easily debunked narratives ever contrived. That is why those who question it are arrested and persecuted. That is why violent, racist, & privileged Jewish supremacists demand censorship. What sort of truth is it that crushes the freedom to seek the truth? Truth needs no protection from scrutiny.

The tide is turning.
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

User avatar
hermod
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2076
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 10:52 am

Re: Why would US "soldiers" & propaganda personnel lie about what they supposedly saw?

Postby hermod » 1 year 4 months ago (Wed Apr 13, 2016 7:56 pm)

During the interwar era,, thanks to the victories of the first revisionists (i.e. the first researchers called by this name), it was quite widely admitted that WW1 had been the result of a Pan-Slavist Serbian-Russian plot enabled by the 'Anglo-Russian Entente' and 'Franco-Russian Alliance,' but WW2 and its anti-German propaganda wiped it all out and only the victors' lie about an alleged German quest for world domination remained to this day.

Hannover wrote:a must see here:
'Propaganda: Your Job in Germany'



Directed by It's A Wonderful Life's Frank Capra [Zionist] and written by Theodor "Dr. Seuss" Geisel [Zionist], produced by the United States Information & Education Division of the Army Services Forces in 1946 [read: US propaganda agency], this authentic film proposes, "War with Germany ends in victory, victory leads to peace ... Sometimes ... Sometimes not.



Capra didn't hesitate to lie and deceive in order to prove his point. In his wartime series of propaganda movies 'Why We Fight,' he made up and used fake Nazi quotes to better dupe American audiences.

http://national-socialist-worldview.blo ... ganda.html
"But, however the world pretends to divide itself, there are ony two divisions in the world to-day - human beings and Germans. – Rudyard Kipling, The Morning Post (London), June 22, 1915

User avatar
Hektor
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2736
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 7:59 am

Re: Why would US "soldiers" & propaganda personnel lie about what they supposedly saw?

Postby Hektor » 11 months 3 weeks ago (Tue Aug 30, 2016 5:05 pm)

Werd wrote:
http://www.openculture.com/2015/06/dr-seuss-world-war-ii-propaganda-films.html

It is a propaganda film in the sense that American military men made it to brainwash their soldiers, but that is not the issue. The issue is, and always has been:
It falsely accuses Germany of starting the first two world wars, and tells Americans not to trust civilians since civilians have a fascist desire to rule the world because of the people they elected. It also tells them to not engage on friendly terms with them and to respect their laws and not engage in misbehaviour. Propaganda, nor atrocity propaganda nor reducation are explicitly said in the video.

The issue is not only the actual title, but what actual words/phrases show up in the movie.

Let's not shift the goal posts. Claim victory all you want for revisionist history given what denier bud has exposed. But there is nothing to hoot and holler about with this little 10 minute move in particular.

Well, it's not exactly that the propaganda is limited to one little ten minute movie shown to American soldiers once.
Fact is that anti-German agitation, packaged into the Nazi-caricature was already starting before the war. Of course the negative stereotyping increased after Britain declared war on Germany and further intensified after Pearl Harbor, when this was a bit diversified with Japs. The main medium have been newspaper, which may have reached people of medium to higher education and more fully blown over the radio. Consider that radio and papers, perhaps cinema were the main media used then and people weren't that over-saturated with information, like it is the case today. Hence they were more hungry then today.

The real medium of influence is however "word of mouth" meaning what people talk about among each other. Now add to that the increased polarization, aggression and hostility during work time. That makes people more receptive towards negative information for the enemy. And that adds also to the confirmation bias meaning they would be more inclined to interpret anything they see or hear in a highly horrific way.

So no surprise there on what they're telling. PWD did of course know what I just said and they'd have that in mind when taking American soldiers for a ride through Dachau or Buchenwald.

On top reports of this sort came around from this:
https://www.eisenhower.archives.gov/res ... caust.html

avatar
Hieldner
Member
Member
Posts: 127
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2016 5:21 am

Re: Why would US "soldiers" & propaganda personnel lie about what they supposedly saw?

Postby Hieldner » 2 weeks 3 days ago (Sat Aug 05, 2017 4:26 pm)

It’s worth pointing out that C. D. Jackson’s original name apparently was Jacobson and he was Jewish.
See P. S. Birmingham, Life at the Dakota, p. 59. https://books.google.fr/books?id=OGEDiK ... on&f=false
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Douglas_Jackson
[Holocaust soap] odor, if captured and retained…would preserve the core of an individual soul…The undesirable smell of the extract spoke of the spectral Derridian trace, of the illusive core that continued to remind its consumers of their own bio-ontology

User avatar
Sannhet
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 274
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 6:12 pm
Location: USA

Re: Why would US "soldiers" & propaganda personnel lie about what they supposedly saw?

Postby Sannhet » 2 weeks 3 days ago (Sun Aug 06, 2017 7:06 am)

Hieldner wrote:It’s worth pointing out that C. D. Jackson’s original name apparently was Jacobson and he was Jewish.

Is that source credible? C.D. Jackson (1902-1964)'s New York Times obituary does not mention any Jewish connection. It notes that his funeral service was going to be held at "Madison Avenue Presbyterian Church" in Manhattan.

User avatar
Hektor
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2736
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 7:59 am

Re: Why would US "soldiers" & propaganda personnel lie about what they supposedly saw?

Postby Hektor » 2 weeks 3 days ago (Sun Aug 06, 2017 7:25 am)

Sannhet wrote:
Hieldner wrote:It’s worth pointing out that C. D. Jackson’s original name apparently was Jacobson and he was Jewish.

Is that source credible? C.D. Jackson (1902-1964)'s New York Times obituary does not mention any Jewish connection. It notes that his funeral service was going to be held at "Madison Avenue Presbyterian Church" in Manhattan.

It doesn't seem to be a "Revisionist" or "Right-wing" source.

Life at the Dakota is a deliciously entertaining social history which describes the lives of the rich and trendy who have lived at the Dakota, a New York apartment house daringly erected in 1884, “too far up” and on the wrong side of town.
In Stephen Birmingham’s witty chronicle, the atmosphere of this elegant edifice is so powerful that the building itself becomes an unforgettable major character. From its start the Dakota has attracted a lively mix of people, from celebrities Leonard Bernstein, Roberta Flack, and John Lennon, to a ground-floor tenant who kept a stuffed horse in full armor in the living room, and yet another older tenant who was spotted wandering naked through the cellar by some workmen, mistaken for a ghost of the building.
While detailing the active and often contentious life within the building from the nineteenth century to the present, Mr. Birmingham also brings to life the New York social scene and that of other fashionable American cities. Just as the sixty-foot rooms, the elaborate moldings and rococo ceilings are lushly described, so is the changing atmosphere in Central Park, the smell and sound of the street below, the judgments about what was fashionable and what was not throughout the years. Here is a window into the marvelous world of The Dakota and through it, the changing view of New York.
https://www.amazon.com/Life-Dakota-York ... 1493024736


I do however agree that we need more information on the PWD and the biographies of its members.

User avatar
Sannhet
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 274
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 6:12 pm
Location: USA

Re: Why would US "soldiers" & propaganda personnel lie about what they supposedly saw?

Postby Sannhet » 2 weeks 3 days ago (Sun Aug 06, 2017 9:27 am)

Hektor wrote:It doesn't seem to be a "Revisionist" or "Right-wing" source.

True, but it also seems to be the only source making this claim. I could not find another.

More circumstantial evidence against a Jewish background: C.D. Jackson attended Princeton from 1920 to 1924. The incoming Princeton class in September 1918 was only 4% Jewish, the lowest of the Ivy League universities.

(1918, share of students of Jewish ethnicity [source] -- Princeton: 4%; Yale: 9%; Harvard: 20% and rising. Harvard in the early or mid 1920s peaked at 27.6% Jewish. The still-confident and strong U.S. Protestant Establishment (C.D. Jackson's likely family background from evidence I see) instituted "Jewish quotas" in the 1920s (for fear of a small ethnic minority taking over elite academia), and reduced the Jewish presence at Harvard in half by circa 1930; Columbia University, same story. [See Wiki].) (I note that this was a softer and less total version of what the NS regime itself did around the same era; I understand the NS regime banned Jews entirely from teaching, for instance; not sure on their "quotas" at German universities in the years after 1933..).

we need more information on the PWD and the biographies of its members.

Does anyone have a list of names associated with it? The scant few I find at the Wiki for Psychological Warfare Division has no Jews I can see immediately.


Return to “'Holocaust' Debate / Comments / News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests