Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
Taboos are very useful for putting sensitive subjects beyond debate. The one thing the Jews fear above all else is an even-handed and totally open investigation into their long and checkered history, for the ugliness thereby revealed would be simply beyond the belief of all bar the most heavily initiated of persons. Not surprisingly, therefore, the Jews have developed a series of techniques for stifling debate on such issues and avoiding having to address these sensitive matters AT ALL. This article is about one such technique and its most eloquent exponent, the 'British Jew' Alan Coren, who died last year.
Those of us who espouse views which are generally taken to be outside the current spectrum of "acceptable opinion" by the popular media will - if we are lucky enough to get a platform in the first place - often find ourselves taken to task in the presence of a Jew by a hostile interviewer who falsely purports to be impartial. Many, many years ago, such encounters were the norm and indeed unfettered, free and open debate was quite properly regarded as the only viable route to establishing the real, underlying truth. But that was some decades ago when the Jewish stranglehold over 'permissible utterances' was very much weaker. I refer of course to those increasingly distant days prior to the advent of political-correctness.
Now, if one has something dreadful to hide for which one can offer no valid excuse, it doesn't benefit one to debate one's beliefs in the media spotlight, for fear of being caught short of an appropriate response to an unwelcome or unexpected question or accusation. The Jew, uniquely, has developed the perfect technique in such awkward situations: 'the ed walk-out.'
This 'storm of self-righteous indignation" method offers a number of benefits for any Jewish interviewee who's been caught off-guard on a sensitive issue. Namely:
1. It lends him elevated 'moral authority' - he appears to occupy the high moral ground by virtue of storming off in feigned with his nose in the air, rather than 'lowering himself' to bandy words with those of seemingly fixed opinions hostile to Judaism.
2. It avoids him having to answer any awkward questions concerning his people and their 'interesting history' (such as the Holocaust period or the genocide in Palestine) that his interlocutor might confront him about from out of the blue with hard, indisputable evidence.
3. It creates in the audience a sense of sympathy and respect for the Jew, who though clearly so grievously insulted, exercised immense dignity and self-control by simply walking out, rather than punching his opponent on the nose.
4. Most importantly of course, it enables the Jew to yet again escape scott-free without ever having to address a single question or allegation made against him, his race, and/or their complex and deeply troubling history.
The Jewish Grand Master of the self-righteous storm-out was a 'British' radio and TV personality by the name of Alan Coren who enjoyed a long and active career in 'journalism' and broadcasting in the US and Britain before finally settling down at the BBC in London (at the license payers' expense, of course). Coren's parents came to Britain between the two World Wars and (like so many other Jewish immigrant families) changed their original name, COHEN, to something less obviously Jewish; in this case, "Coren" - not very imaginative but it nevertheless did the trick. Anyway, Coren's specialty was storming out in self-righteous indignation the moment anyone raised any uncomfortable facts concerning the Tribe.
Coren/Cohen had it down to a very fine art and really should have been a character actor. The moment anyone ventured into any area that was REMOTELY critical of the Jews or Israel, Coren would assume a deathly grave expression, solemnly gather his papers together, tear-off his microphone and earpiece with well-practiced theatricality, and simply walk out without a word, shaking his head in . Seemingly no one ever worked out that the move was simply a ruse to avoid having to address the issue raised. Cohen would subsequently enjoy sympathy heaped upon him by empathetic viewers for his noble refusal to get down and dirty with 'racists and anti-Semites.'
So, gentile reader, please remember those that walk out of interviews aren't really offended at all. They have no answers that the rest of us would deem acceptable. And they KNOW it!
Sorry, it was a library book which I have since returned.
Here is the entry from my libraries catalogue:-
Author Willenberg, Samuel
Title Surviving Treblinka edited by Wladyslaw T. Bartoszewski; <translated> by Naftali Greenwood
Notes 256pp. Memoirs of a survivor of the extermination camp in Poland.
Do you believe Jews were gassed to death at Treblinka in homicidal gas chambers using the exhaust fumes of a diesel engine?
I have not decided yet. I believe it would be technically possible to kill people by this method,
but would probably involve death by suffocation, rather than poisoning.
I know that the answer is obvious to *you*, and, it seems, everybody else who visits this forum,
but I can't be railroaded into making a decision, even if you find that frustrating. What would be the point?
Catleugh, carbon monoxide is a chemical asphyxiant. The Holocaust storyline has it that the
Nazis wanted to cheaply develop large amounts of CO to murder the Jews, replacing the cumbersome
and traumatic shootings alleged to have been going on in the Soviet Union in the second semester of 41.
Allegedly the Nazis had used bottled CO in their euthanasia program - BS too - and that's how they got
the idea, except they had to use a cheaper and simpler way to generate CO, that's how we arrive at the
mythological gas vans. The idea is that the engine exhaust was piped into the cargo compartment thus
killing the victims. From the gas vans allegedly used by the Einsatzgruppen and at Chelmno the next
step would have been the fixed installations at the Aktion Reinhardt camps, where only salvaged
foreign engines from trucks/tractors/tanks or even submarines are said to have been used.
That is the case of Treblinka.
You seem to think that to commit mass murder using exhaust fumes from Diesel engines is possible.
IT IS NOT. Particularly with the engine running at idle, as the lie-witnesses described it.
Diesel engines are almost CO free and since their exhaust is rich in oxygen, such idiotic setup
would probably have prolongued the lives of the victims, because they would use up the oxygen pretty quickly
in the closed chambers and there would be more oxygen in the Diesel exhaust than in the chamber.
As several revisionist researchers have pointed out, the hoaxters may have chosen Diesel engines to be
the murder weapons because it is a German developed technology and Diesels stink and smoke so the hoaxters
thought it must be poisonous.
Beign techno-idiots the hoaxters didn't think through the technical details very well.
The holocaust is full of such nonsense.
- Valuable asset
- Posts: 981
- Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 8:00 am
- Location: Somewhere in Europe
I am looking for a certain webpage which I saw several months ago, perhaps even last year. I desperately need it for a paper.
The page in question paraphrases (or perhaps quotes) a letter sent by former Treblinka SS man Kurt Franz to Michael Tregenza (or perhaps Robin O'Neil or H. Mazal, my memory is a bit unclear on this point) sometime in the late 1980s. The story was that Tregenza had sent a letter to Franz asking about the model of the gassing engine at Treblinka. Franz' reported answer was, if I recall correctly, that it was a Soviet T-34 tank engine.
David Irving speaks about the same letter here:
Mike Treganza wrote to Kurt Franz (deputy Kdt, owner of the Saint-Bernard dog called Barry, originally Stangl's; arrested 1959 and sentenced to life index, he died 1998) and Franz said to Mike from prison in a letter ca. 1980s he thought it was diesel, but never operated it himself)
I am sure that it was not this page on Irving's site that I remember. The paraphrase of the letter went on for several lines.
Anyway, I have spent many hours now googling for this page but without any results. I have a vague memory that it was located on the Holocaust History site (www.holocaust-history.org) but I've looked through it without finding anything.
The page was in English (I'm about 90% sure of that) and located on an anti-revisionist kind of site.
Any help in locating this page would be much appreciated.
You know what these "people" are like, masters of obfuscation, they are going to come back with this argument :
I have also seen claims that T-34 tank's engine was used. I have seen this claim ascribed to Kurt Franz, though I can't tell if the reference is true. I've seen deniers argue that since T-34 tanks had diesel engines, the Treblinka engine had to be diesel too. For the sake of the argument, let us assume that Treblinka engine was indeed from T-34 tank. Now, it is simply not true that all T-34s were diesels. Because of shortage of V-2 diesels in the autumn of 1941 it was ordered to implement the ways to install old carburetor engines M17-T in T-34 tanks (I. Shmelyov, "Tank T-34", Tekhnika i vooruzhenije, no. 11-12, 1998). Another author confirms that some T-34s had M-17, a powerful aviation motor, installed (E. Zubov, Dvigateli tankov (iz istorii tankostrojenija), 1991).
Of course despite their sources, there are problems with this statement.
The Author whether by design or mistake gives the reader the impression that all T-34's produced in the 3 factories in the Autumn of 1941 were fitted with Gasoline Engines, nor does the Author even attempt to put an exact figure on how many were so fitted, the fact is that of the 3 factories producing T-34 up to that time it was only at Krasnoye Sormovo Factory No. 112 in Gorky which modified their Tanks to incorporate the M17 Aircraft Gasoline Engine, owing to the fact that the factory had only just tooled up for production in July & had not received any Diesel Engines from the Kharkov Diesel Factory No. 75.
The KhPZ Tank factory (developer of the T-34) in Kharkiv was relocated to the Ural mountains in September & any Diesel Engines earmarked for dispatch to this plant would have been diverted to either the Stalingrad Tractor Factory (STZ) or No. 112 in Gorky.
The Authors of "the Unknown T-34" state that only the "initial production run" were equipped with the M17 Gasoline Engine, which because of the recent tooling up (July) & personnel training would have been fewer than 50.
Zheltov, I., M. Pavlov, I. Pavlov (2001). Neizvestnyy T-34 (The Unknown T-34). Moscow: Eksprint. ISBN 5-94038-013-1
- Valuable asset
- Posts: 981
- Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 8:00 am
- Location: Somewhere in Europe
Many thanks for the information on the T-34 engine.
I don't think it was at Nizkor, but I will check it out again. IIRC the design of the site was rather heavy on dark colors.
I need the quote/paraphrase for comparison. I have an interview with Franz were he "recalls" it to have been a "Saurer engine" from a "French truck", i.e. I need the quote to establish that Franz contradicted himself on this issue.
MrNobody wrote:I'm sure I saw this on the Nizkor website, aside from that I think you're flogging a dead horse.
"No one is claiming that "virtually no fuel was needed because the Germans had discovered a magical way to stack the bodies just right".
and adds this a short time later:
"To be sure, the wood-felling done by Treblinka inmates probably yielded only a fraction of the wood required for burning, most of that would having to be brought in from outside. 26,475 tons over a period of at least 150 days would be 177 tons per day on average. That’s 35 trips with one five-ton truck, just 4 trips with 9 five-ton trucks, no big deal. The wood could also have been brought in by rail."
I have to get me a pair of those magic glasses!
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests