Theresienstadt (Terezin) and Family camp "propaganda ploy"

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
Butterfangers
Posts: 9
Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2020 1:45 am

Theresienstadt (Terezin) and Family camp "propaganda ploy"

Postby Butterfangers » 6 days 2 hours ago (Wed Oct 13, 2021 9:06 pm)

I have seen numerous instances of establishment narratives which claim that both Theresienstadt and the corresponding family camp at Auschwitz served the main purpose of essentially being a "window dressing" to deceive international onlookers and public opinion into believing Jews were not being horrifically abused, tortured, deliberately starved, etc. This is the argument for the additional amenities and features apparent in either location (e.g. families kept together, apparently living well) compared to the conditions [alleged or actual] of Auschwitz-Birkenau, generally.

From Wikipedia, regarding international visitors to Theresienstadt:

The visitors spent eight hours inside Theresienstadt, led on a predetermined path[136] and only allowed to speak with Danish Jews and selected representatives, including Paul Eppstein.[46] Driven in a limousine by an SS officer posing as his driver,[127][137] Eppstein was forced to deliver an SS-written speech[138] describing Theresienstadt as "a normal country town" of which he was "mayor",[16][46] and give the visitors fabricated statistical data on the ghetto. He still had a black eye from a beating administered by Rahm, and attempted to warn Rossel that there was "no way out" for Theresienstadt prisoners.[46][139] A soccer game and performance of the children's opera Brundibár were also staged for the guests.[138] Rossel reported that conditions in the ghetto were favorable—even superior than for civilians in the Protectorate—and that no one was deported from Theresienstadt.[140]

While the preparations for the Red Cross visit were underway, the SS had meanwhile ordered a prisoner, probably Jindřich Weil, to write a script for a propaganda film.[141] It was directed by the German Jewish prisoner Kurt Gerron and the Czech filmmaker Karel Pečený under close SS supervision, and edited by Pečený's company, Aktualita. One scene was filmed on 20 January 1944, but most of the filming took place during eleven days between 16 August and 11 September 1944.[141] The film, officially Theresienstadt. Ein Dokumentarfilm aus dem jüdischen Siedlungsgebiet ("Theresienstadt: A Documentary Film from the Jewish Settlement Area"), was dubbed Der Führer schenkt den Juden eine Stadt ("The Führer Gives a City to the Jews") by Jewish prisoners.[142] Completed on 28 March 1945, the film was intended to discredit reports of the genocide of Jews reaching the Western Allies and neutral countries, but it was only screened four times and did not achieve its objective.[143]

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


And on the family camp at Auschwitz (housing Jewish inmates from Theresienstadt):

The SS deported around 18,000 Jews to Auschwitz from the Theresienstadt ghetto in Terezin, Czechoslovakia,[182] beginning on 8 September 1943 with a transport of 2,293 male and 2,713 female prisoners.[183] Placed in sector BIIb as a "family camp", they were allowed to keep their belongings, wear their own clothes, and write letters to family; they did not have their hair shaved and were not subjected to selection.[182] Correspondence between Adolf Eichmann's office and the International Red Cross suggests that the Germans set up the camp to cast doubt on reports, in time for a planned Red Cross visit to Auschwitz, that mass murder was taking place there.[184] The women and girls were placed in odd-numbered barracks and the men and boys in even-numbered. An infirmary was set up in barracks 30 and 32, and barracks 31 became a school and kindergarten.[182]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auschwitz ... amily_camp


What is the Revisionist consensus on this question, if any? I would imagine it is possible to concede that a propaganda effort was underway that was at least somewhat deceptive (considering Allied nations were using their propaganda in the exact same way)—not to conceal mass murder nor 'gassing' but perhaps to at least avoid media exposure of the effects of the typhus epidemic, other disease and malnourishment which are generally acknowledged by all to have been present. Still, I am also inclined to believe there may be a better explanation, perhaps a refutation of the notion that these were 'propaganda ploys' at all, given Allied propaganda distorting the true operations of the NSDAP is a far more common than evidence of actual deception on the latter's part.

Rosie
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2021 9:18 am

Re: Theresienstadt (Terezin) and Family camp "propaganda ploy"

Postby Rosie » 5 days 7 hours ago (Thu Oct 14, 2021 4:55 pm)

Hello, as far as I know there is no consensus, you have to understand that my views do not represent anyone else or any group of people, only me, therefore what I can say is that the word revisionism is not adequate to describe our work, history is in constant evolution, adapting to any new discovery or explanation so in reality, what we do corresponds much more to the way history behaves than any other treatment of our past, true history avoids bias and it is solely based on research, documents and proven facts rather than beliefs, allegations or witnesses testimonies that can and often do distort reality towards one's interests, especially when one's financial gain is concerned SO here are links that I find correspond pretty much exactly to what I consider as a revisionist way to assertain reality.

First you need to understand that Wikipedia may be a great tool to find information about your favorite singer or football team, when it comes to sensitive topics you can not count on it to give you fair and unbiased information and here's why:

A 2008 exposé in the Electronic Intifada revealed: “A pro-Israel pressure group is orchestrating a secret, long-term campaign to infiltrate the popular online encyclopedia Wikipedia.”
While it is common and appropriate for individuals to edit Wikipedia entries to add factual information and remove inaccurate statements, this project was the antithesis of such editing. As EI, reported, its purpose was “to rewrite Palestinian history, pass off crude propaganda as fact, and take over Wikipedia administrative structures to ensure these changes go either undetected or unchallenged.”
Author Ali Abunimah reported that a source had provided EI with a series of emails from members and associates of the pro-Israel group CAMERA (Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America) that showed the group “was engaged in what one activist termed a ‘war’ on Wikipedia.”
CAMERA called for volunteers to secretly work on editing Wikipedia entries. It emphasized the importance of keeping the project secret. Volunteers were schooled in ways to elude detection. After they signed up as editors, they were to “avoid editing Israel-related articles for a short period of time.”
When this all came to light, Wikipedia took measures against such manipulation of its system and the CAMERA program may have ended.
If it did, others stepped into the breach. In 2010 two Israeli groups began offering a course in “Zionist editing” of Wikipedia entries. The aim was “to make sure that information in the online encyclopedia reflects the worldview of Zionist groups.” A course organizer explained that the use of the word “occupied” in Wikipedia entries “was just the kind of problem she hoped a new team of editors could help fix.”

https://israelpalestinenews.org/israel- ... -internet/

In this Video Maurice Rossel from the Red Cross Explains
How He Visited Auschwitz Unannonced and That Although
He Knew Theresienstadt Had Been Beautified For His First
Visit, He Had Gone Twice Later and Nothing Had Changed.
https://collections.ushmm.org/search/catalog/irn1004374

There's No Business like Shoah Business, Life in the Camps
https://www.bitchute.com/video/uPTu6Y1hMDnP/

Artistic Expression in Prisoner of War Camps
https://blogs.icrc.org/cross-files/arti ... -camps-1/#

Now, About the Germans: The Horrors They Went Through
Have Been Kept Out of Sight so Efficiently and for so Long,
One Can Only Wonder Who Controls the Flow of Information
in Today's World...

Hellstorm - The Systematic Destruction of Germany
https://youtu.be/HY3PxsWFi8A

German Expulsions from Eastern Europe
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FXLy9ws9ewU&t=2s

Hellstorm - The Terror Bombing
https://www.bitchute.com/video/1eOrmkHpeBtU/

Hellstorm - The Rape of German Women
https://youtu.be/ORnnVXiVAVM

The Rhine Meadows Camps
https://youtu.be/0_vIUPIV2j4

The Planned Elimination of German Identity
https://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Morgenthau_Plan

Did the Germans Hate the Jews Because They Were Jews?
https://www.bitchute.com/video/seVuIlqcCNgY/

Hitler's Peace Plans
http://hitlerspeaceplans.com/

How Churchill Avoided Any Possibility of Peace
https://military.wikia.org/wiki/May_194 ... net_Crisis


"Atrocity propaganda is how we won the war and we're only really beginning with it now, we will continue and we will escalate it until nobody believes even a good word from the Germans. Re-education needs careful tending, like an English lawn, even one moment of negligence, and the weeds crop up again,
those indestructible weeds of historical truth."

--Sefton Delmer, Former British Chief of Propaganda.

I hope it helps, Rosie.

Merlin300
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 180
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2017 2:21 pm

Re: Theresienstadt (Terezin) and Family camp "propaganda ploy"

Postby Merlin300 » 3 days 13 hours ago (Sat Oct 16, 2021 10:55 am)

Butterfangers wrote:I have seen numerous instances of establishment narratives which claim that both Theresienstadt and the corresponding family camp at Auschwitz served the main purpose of essentially being a "window dressing" to deceive international onlookers and public opinion into believing Jews were not being horrifically abused, tortured, deliberately starved, etc. This is the argument for the additional amenities and features apparent in either location (e.g. families kept together, apparently living well) compared to the conditions [alleged or actual] of Auschwitz-Birkenau, generally.
.


The Believers have a problem with masses of inconvenient evidence. Remember there were large hospitals set up for Jewish detainees at Auschwitz.
And schools for Roma children. And dozens of babies born in Auschwitz to detainee mothers as examples. These operated constantly and were not
stage props.

Also remember that the baseline of Holocaust Belief is that there was a top secret conspiracy of a small handful of some top National Socialist leaders to exterminate various groups of people. Any evidence of decent treatment flies in the face of the claim of a plot to murder all Jewish people.
So the claim of various secret conspiracies is a common theme of Holocaust Belief.

To address your particular question:
The Germans did allow Red Cross inspectors into several of the camps and did film and photograph all the camps so the claim
the Germans could stop a program of mass murder, savage brutality, and starvation, to dress the victims up, fatten them up and have them chat with Red Cross Inspectors for several days without giving away anything seems absurd on its face.


Secrecy at camps like Auschwitz was impossible. Large groups of German and Polish civilians worked inside the camp including on the construction of the four crematoria at Birkenau! Hundreds of thousands of inmates were transferred out of the camps and from camp to camp.
As Pressac notes Documents and plans were shared with civilians outside the camp without any special secrecy.

The Believer claims that events in the camps were held secret for 3 or 4 years is ridiculous.




Another interesting fact that the Believers overlook: That the last two transports out of Westerbork on SDept. 3, 1944 went to Theresienstadt and to Auschwitz. Anne Frank was on the transport sent to Birkenau but probably would have been set to Theresienstadt except that her father Otto Frank had been implicated and arrested in blackmarket cheating. Of course, Anne and her sister survived Auschwitz and were transported to Bergen-Belsen. Another German conspiracy to trick people, no doubt.

Archie
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 296
Joined: Fri Jun 12, 2020 12:44 am

Re: Theresienstadt (Terezin) and Family camp "propaganda ploy"

Postby Archie » 3 days 12 hours ago (Sat Oct 16, 2021 11:57 am)

You can spin things any number of different ways. The facts are that it was a privileged ghetto of sorts where older Jews (65+) or those with some special status like war veterans were sent instead of being evacuated to the East. Later it also functioned as a transit camp. The Red Cross visited in June 1944 and the ICRC rep Maurice Rossel wrote a favorable report about it which provoked protest from the WJC. I'm sure the Germans did try to present it in the best possible light to the ICRC but that's to be expected.

From the hoaxer perspective, you have to wonder why the Germans set this up such a ghetto within the context of an extermination program. Their a priori commitment to the extermination story forces them to conclude it was entirely for propaganda, it was to fool the Jews, etc. I think the most likely explanation for why it was set up is simply that there were certain categories of Jews who they decided to exempt from evacuation. "Special treatment" if you will.

Rosie
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2021 9:18 am

Re: Theresienstadt (Terezin) and Family camp "propaganda ploy"

Postby Rosie » 3 days 5 hours ago (Sat Oct 16, 2021 6:56 pm)

Every witness testimony should be subjected to one basic truth test: does the witness receive any financial aid from any organization related to holocaust survival? If so fraud and/or deception accusations in a court of law could be ascertained, the testimony should be removed from public access or at least there should be a visible disclaimer warning of impossible objectivity and clear bias due to financial interests, then the claimant should go through the available documentation to avoid looking like an idiot and only then subject their claims to revisionist scrutiny, only in such cases should we consider taking the time to research and evaluate the validity of the proposition.

In the meantime the links I provided in my first intervention should provide enough meat for any carnivorous mind no matter the position. Cheers, Rosie.


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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests