Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
It was in 1976 (according to Norman Finklestein, The Holocaust Industry 2003) that the capital ‘H’ -word Holocaust got going, becoming ‘a fixture in American Jewish life.’ Then, the definition which Mr Marques helpfully gives us, got going. So it is a relatively recent thing, for a word that has been around for centuries. Mr Marques wants to put the figure of six million into the very definition of this word. Well, I’m not sure if he can do that!
They wanted that word and its meaning because it sounds so good. It has a mystique. It helps Elie Wiesel to give his lectures on the subject, for 25,000 dollars plus chauffered limousine. He intones how the Holocaust 'leads into darkness', 'negates all answers', and lies 'outside, if not beyond, history'. It is a 'mutation on a cosmic scale' and is itself 'non-communicable.' (p.45) This is the language of religious mystique and one doubts whether mere rational logic can refute it.
Is this correct, Mr. Marques?
Henry wrote:I don't know if Astro is understanding Mr. Marques. I don't think Mr. Marques is trying to say that the 'six million' as part of the Holocaust definition is a matter of choice. It has been dictated to us by the Traditional Enemies, rather, and as such, our choice on defining 'Holocaust' has been taken away from us right out of the gate.
Is this correct, Mr. Marques?
Correct, Mr. Henry. What I mean is when one is saying "yup, I sure deny THE 'Holocaust'", what one is meaning is "yup, I sure deny the big propaganda lie universally known nowadays as the 'Holocaust'", and not "yup, I deny anything that Mr. Astro3 -- or anyone else for that matter -- may feel like calling THE "Holocaust", such as ancient sacrificial practices, ordinary massacres of civilians by gunfire or bombing near the front or in the rear hinterlands during large wars and so on..."
The utility of Newspeak for the maintenance of an indoctrinated mindset is glimpsed in the intriguingly stubborn affinity many journalists have for the "Holocaust" Newspeak agenda. With comical monotony, reporters refuse to describe revisionists in terms of the specific question they have about a specific event. Instead, both the event and the questioner are located within the artificial agenda of "Holocaust" Newspeak. By continually referring to a researcher who doubts the technology described for the Nazi gas chambers, for example, as one who "says the 'Holocaust' didn't happen," the doubter is cleverly saddled with the enormous connotations which are summoned in the public mind by the invocation of a Newspeak buzz word.
Was World War Two itself a holocaust over-all, or does the term have a proprietary relationship with Jews alone? How is it that the atomic and thermite incineration of approximately one million helpless German and Japanese civilians, mostly women and children, in deliberate mass murder firebombings by the Allied air forces, does not rate as a holocaust?
The overwhelming holocaust of the modern era, for which there is all of the forensic proof the Jewish "Holocaust" is supposed to contain and from which it is also intended to distract, is the merciless Allied fire-bombing holocaust against Hamburg, Berlin, Dresden, Tokyo, Hiroshima, Nagasaki and dozens of other major civilian centers.
The racism of the ethnocentric "Holocaust" cult is confronted full force in the special criterion established for the phrase "Holocaust survivor." Such people are always the victims of the National Socialists and are mostly Jews. Human perception has been so impaired by this cult category that Germans and Japanese who escaped death in the unprecedented firestorms which transformed their cities into pits of mass human incineration, are not referred to as holocaust survivors.
Let the TV cameramen and the professors focus their attention on the mass burning of hundreds of thousands of women and children in deliberate Allied slaughters, and they too will come to realize the degree to which Zionist racism and hatred of gentiles has suppressed this holocaust to such a degree that it is totally dismissed from discussion of the history of the Second World War.
It is from a desperate need to take world attention away from the authentic "burnt offerings" of that horrid war that the traumatizing monomania of Jewish "Holocaust" preoccupation has warped the conscience of the West.
Mt. Zion decrees, "The 'Holocaust' cannot be debated ..."
Georges Theil has been sentenced to jail for his short book, Heresy in twenty-first Century France, A Case of insubmission to the Holocaust Dogma (2002 France, 2006 Historical Review Press UK). This is a book which might be widely appreciated, if it were put up on the CODOH website, in both English and French. One's only regret concerning this moving work is that it is rather brief, a mere 80 pages - but, such brevity is an advantage for web-material. See Theil's interview with Richard Widmann www.codoh.com/viewpoints/vprwtheil.html
Theil meditates upon two things: the fictional nature of the Jewish holocaust versus the real and far worse one suffered by Germany.
... The ex-Allies and Israel's permanent charges against Germany for unprecedented crimes; the latter seemed to me to have become the indispensable consideration needed to veil both the apocalypse of the massive bombing raids on the German population by the allies and the abominable deportation of some 15 to 20 million Germans from their ancestral homes in Prussia, Silesia, the Sudetanland and Hungary ... How can it be explained that the greatest deportation of all history, desired and planned by Churchill, Roosevelt and Stalin, was that of 18 million Germans chased from their homelands in the period 1945 to 1948, a deportation carried out in conditions so horrible as to cause the death of probably two million amongst them, if not more? (p.29).
I can't think of any opus since Yockey's Imperium which has woven together these deep themes. I surmise that Theil may not realise quite how significant his work is, in this respect. His historical insight is combined with respect and admiration for Germany, and the book is written with passion and conviction. He ponders on why the world wars were started and the role of Jews in this process. There is a real sense of justice in this work.
We are startled by Theil's figures for The Holocaust suffered by Germany, whereby the number of Third Reich nationals (Germans, Austrians, Volksdeutche) who died in WWII exceeds fourteen million. To get this he adds up these five groups:
* 650 k victims of Allied terror bombing (an absolute minimum figure),
* military victims, killed in combat, 'missing' who never returned 4,800 k;
* victims of the expulsion program 1945-48 2,800 k;
* postwar deaths from organised famine, Western Allies' prison camps 5,777 k - alluding to James Bacque, Other Losses
* others, deaths in Russian & other concentration camps - 1,430 k
These figures come from several German studies he mentions. We could do with a bit more detail on how these totals were derived.
Theil contrasts these German mortality figures with the officially-documented figures from the Arolsen International Tracing Service, in northern Germany, which numbers every documented labour-camp death; they are concerned to keep this total a secret - its databases are not open to the public! The total of named 'victims' of German labour-camps in their records, seems to be fairly stable at around 396,081. Opening up the Soviet-held records did not materially affect this total, Theil explains. Within this total he finds an upper limit of two hundred thousand authenticated Jewish deaths, in the camps, for the whole National Socialist era (There is a case for saying that total mortality is more or less double these 'authenticated' totals: see eg, Dissecting the Holocaust).
This book by no means answers the question it asks, 'to learn the reasons for the concealment of the historical truth about the first half of the 20th century in regard to everything touching on Germany, and thus on our own destiny as Europeans...' and let's hope we hear some more from him on this matter.
D-Day, for example, simply means the date of the invasion. But if you ask anyone when D-Day was on Iwo Jima they will insist that it didn't take place there. But it doesn't usually de-rail a World War II discussion.
Or more contemporarily, in American politics the word "choice" doesn't refer to gun ownership school choice. The word has been co-opted.
Holocaust now has a new specific meaning. Very few people even know it can start with a lower case "h" or has anything to do with fire.
We hear it, we use it, we know what it now means. Big deal.
It was Churchill who imposed ... the first terror bombings on civilian objectives (like the city of Duisberg, the attack on which in June 1940 incited Hitler to bomb English cities, including London); furthermore Churchill recommended to his air force to attack, especially with incendiary bombs, the heavily populated centres of old German towns, for the old houses burned better, better represented the culture to be destroyed and were inhabited very largely by the common people and workers in general. He later organised personally the onslaughts of terror and annihilation on German cities packed with civilians, like Hamburg and Dresden, the latter being [in February 1945] but a hospital town (1).
It was not 'our finest hour.' Indeed, one may be grateful to Vera Brittain, who perhaps alone in wartime Britain managed to find and print adequate words, to characterise Churchill's city-eradication policy: it would, she said, 'appear to future civilisation as an extreme form of criminal lunacy' (2).
1. Dietrich Schuler, L'AntiGermanisme, son Histoire et ses Causes Paris 1999, quoting Claude Soas; no copy of this work seems to exist in any London library. Theil, Heresy, p.82.
2. V.Brittain, Seed of Chaos, what Mass Bombing Really Means, 1944, 116.
Georges Theil has agreed to have the first part of his book Heresy posted on the CODOH website. Let's hope it can be in three languages, French, English and German. Its 2002 publication in French got him prosecuted - and, get this, as well as a pending 6-month jail sentence he also has to pay up civilian "damages" to nine Jewish organisations of about 55,000 US dollars. Uh? Whatever happened to those glorious, atheistic slogans, Liberte Fraternite Egalite? Theil has been found guilty of explaining to two journalists why the alleged "gas chambers" never existed.
Let's hear his view about the 'guilt' of Germans:
Guilty of being what they are, the Germans are decreed to be "too German" and, by that token, their leaders find themselves in the position of the accused before a sort of permanent international tribunal ... [concerning] the ex-Allies' and Israel's permanent charges against Germany for unprecedented crimes, the latter seemed to me to have become the indispensable consideration needed to veil both the apocalypse of the massive bombing raids on the German population by the Allies and the abominable deportation of some 15 to 20 million Germans from their ancestral homes in Prussia, Silesia, the Sudetanland and Hungary. ... a deportation so horrible as to cause the death of probably two million amongst them, if not more? (Heresy, 2006, pp.26, 29)
While it is my opinion it's best to completely drop the word "holocaust" once and for all rather than use it in any form whatsoever, I do understand where he's coming from.
I already tried to point out in --> another post <-- (which has received no reply so far) that we should also focus our attention on the allied attrocities that took place during and after WW2, which were often much more extreme and violent in nature than anything ever done by the Germans. If we had done our research on this topic as well as our research on the accusations towards Germany in the same era, the contrast between benevolent national-socialism and malevolent "democracy" would become even more obvious.
For a fine account of Germar Rudolf's researches and his heroic achievements, I'd recommend the Mannheim District Court Judgement against him, made on May 2nd 2007: www.adelaideinstitute.org/Dissenters1/R ... ay2007.htm. Its obvious from reading it that the judges were impressed - and perhaps transformed - by the Power of Truth emanating from this young man. The Judgement mainly consists of long excepts from debates and writings by him. Thus, we are startled to learn:
Since the end of World War II, Germany has paid well over 100,000,000,000 (one hundred billion) marks in reparations to Jewish individuals and institutions. In the course of these reparations, over five and a half million applications by Holocaust survivors have been processed. Obviously, the number of survivors is very large. Since the German obligation has no statute of limitations, demands for reparation have been uninterrupted and have even escalated in recent years. However, we are not addressing the question of whether those who are demanding still more money are entitled to it, after fifty-five years. Much more important is the question of why the present day German taxpayer should pay these sums. 99.9% of all German taxpayers today are sixty-five or younger and thus were at most small children when World War II ended ...
In passing, wouldn't it be interesting to know when the millions of Germans who were exploited as slaves by Frenchmen, Dutchmen, Englishmen, Belgians, Jugoslavs, Poles, Danes, Russians, Czechs, for years and even decades after the end of WWII, will finally be allowed to claim reparations? When will the 12 million eastern German victims of ethnic cleansing and the survivors of the three million who were murdered in the process, the six hundred thousand victims of Allied terror bombings, the five million who died of starvation under Allied blockage and de-industrialization and Eisenhower's withholding of food to them, be given proper memorialization? (Please refer to the work by J. Bacque.)
The judges found him guilty of ‘Incitement of the Masses’ and ‘Insulting and Disparaging the Memory of the Dead’ - but did so in a way that carried little conviction. My guess is that a lot of Germans will enjoy reading this Judgement, as containing vital info, clearly presented, that is otherwise hard to come by. Clearly, no 'masses' have been 'incited' by Germar Rudolf and this is ostensibly a very absurd judgement. But I suggest there could be some irony here, and that this could be a way of getting massive publicity for GR's very lucid arguments and discourses.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Lamprecht and 3 guests