Tony Blair new role includes making HOLOCAUST denial a criminal offense.

a reply to: crazyewok

In Ukraine and Russia I wonder how many attrocitys were commited by the USSR got pinned on the NAZIs ?

I'm not too sure about any switcheroos but I watched Brad Meltzer's Decoded recently about U.S General Patton...

& some of the WW2 vets spoke of Russian atrocities against the Nazis while they did their rounds in the East...

They didn't go into a lot of detail but they weren't especially vague either.


From what I recall it was pretty horrific from all sides.

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

Not just the Nazi's - it was regarded amongst the Red Army that all German women were fair game. Rapes and murders were common place as the Red Army advanced.

originally posted by: woodwardjnr
Maybe Tony Blair isn't the best man for the job.

understatement of the year.

The Lehi, who are recognized by Israel for their "activity establishing Israel" had offered their services to the Nazi's to fight the British.

Lehi split from the Irgun militant group in 1940 in order to continue fighting the British during World War II. Lehi initially sought an alliance with Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany, offering to fight alongside them against the British in return for the transfer of all Jews from Nazi-occupied Europe to Palestine.[2]Believing that Nazi Germany was a lesser enemy of the Jews than Britain, Lehi twice attempted to form an alliance with the Nazis.[2] During World War II it declared that it would establish a Jewish state based upon "nationalist and totalitarian principles".[2][17]After Stern's death in 1942, the new leadership of Lehi began to move it towards support for Joseph Stalin's Soviet Union.[1] In 1944 Lehi officially declared its support forNational Bolshevism.[6] It said that its National Bolshevism involved an amalgamation of left-wing and right-wing political elements – Stern said Lehi incorporated elements of both the left and the right[2] – however this change was unpopular and Lehi began to lose support as a result.[18]

Lehi and the Irgun were jointly responsible for the massacre in Deir Yassin. Lehi assassinated Lord Moyne, British Minister Resident in the Middle East, and made many other attacks on the British in Palestine.[19] On 29 May 1948, the government of Israel, having inducted its activist members into the Tzahal, formally disbanded Lehi, though some of its members carried out one more terrorist act, the assassination of Folke Bernadotte some months later,[20] an act condemned by Bernadotte's replacement as mediator, Ralph Bunche.[21] Israel granted a general amnesty to Lehi members on 14 February 1949. In 1980, Israel instituted a military decoration in "award for activity in the struggle for the establishment of Israel," the Lehi ribbon.[22]Former Lehi leader Yitzhak Shamir becamePrime Minister of Israel in 1983.

WIKI

Personally, and this is only my opinion, I think that ones belief in state-sponsored history is a good index to gauge ones tollerance for lies and deception.

The founders of Israel assasinated the British and offered their services to the Nazi's. I must have slept through that chapter in history class.

Why do we NOT have the right to deny the Holocaust?

Good question.

The body campaigns for European countries to make Holocaust denial a criminal offence, clearly define racism and anti-Semitism, and to pay for security at synagogues and Jewish schools.

If someone were to deny the Earth is a sphere: Would there be a need to get all up in arms about it...?



So, why the campaign to make it a criminal offence for those who do happen to question history if it is the truth?

I personally do NOT deny the holocaust -- It happened, no doubt. However, I believe that making out WW2 to be perceived as if the Jewish population were the primary agenda of the Nazis and the only victims of war, paints a great distortion and diminishes the value of life lost of those who were not Jewish and killed in death camps. It was not only Jews who were persecuted...who suffered...and who died during WW2.

Over 60 million people were killed, which was over 3% of the 1939 world population (est. 2 billion). The tables below give a detailed country-by-country count of human losses. World War II fatality statistics vary, with estimates of total dead ranging from 50 million to more than 80 million.

en.wikipedia.org...

However, why are they making this denial a criminal offense? Does anybody have a specific answer outside of the usual conspiracy stuff, like money, banking or whatever.
Any good thoughts on this matter?

Good question...considering truth is like a lion.

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: stumason

I think the numbers will always be getting reajusting.

Not because of any conspiracy but just because the holocaust was not asorganised as people think or at least not all paper work (were there was any) survived, and thats not even counting off the book executions and massacres.

There just no way to make a exact count.

Nothing sinister about the reajustments, just a sad realitiy on a crime that scale.

You'd be in Jail according to this law.

I'm quoting the definition of holocaust denial:

“Holocaust denial” describes attempts to negate the established facts of the Nazi genocide of European Jewry. Common denial assertions are: that the murder of six million Jews during World War II never occurred; that the Nazis had no official policy or intention to exterminate the Jews; and that the poison gas chambers in Auschwitz-Birkenau death camp never existed.

A newer trend is the distortion of the facts of the Holocaust. Common distortions include, for example, assertions that: the figure of six million Jewish deaths is an exaggeration; deaths in the concentration camps were the results of disease or starvation but not policy.

Sourcewww.ushmm.org

As many have stated earlier, denial is a figure for questioning any aspect of the OS. Here's proof of it.
This is downright censorship and an attack to science and free speech.

obviously there is something amiss in the holocaust story that the main stream media doesn't want us to know about! If you haven't looked up the word holocaust I suggest you take a look at the origins of what the word actually means and where it came from. Holocaust isn't a Hebrew word its Greek if I'm not mistaken and was used in some bibles excluding the king james and another well know bible. Holocaust means burnt offerings to a god. Which god you ask? holocaust is used in direct relation to moloch and that's the only time its used.

If you haven't heard the story of moloch i suggest you read up about it.

Moloch had associations with a particular kind of propitiatory child sacrifice by parents.[citation needed] Moloch figures in the Book of Deuteronomy and in the Book of Leviticus as a form of idolatry (Leviticus 18:21: "And thou shalt not let any of thy seed pass through the fire to Moloch"). In the Old Testament, Gehenna was a valley by Jerusalem, where apostate Israelites and followers of various Baalim and Canaanite gods, including Moloch, sacrificed their children by fire (2 Chr. 28:3, 33:6; Jer. 7:31, 19:2–6).

the word holocaust isn't in the king james bible but if you search correctly you will find it in another bible

Hauing offred vp their sacrifices, victimats and holocaustes to their false Gods. (The earliest recorded employment of "holocaust(es)" by a secular English author within the Oxford English Dictionary -- Philip Stubbes, The Anatomie of Abuses, 1583 [from the OED's (1989) entry "victimate"])

... they haue forsaken me ... they haue filled this place with the bloud of innocents. And they haue built the excelses [high places] of Baalim, to burne their children with fire for holocaust [in the Hebrew OLOT] to Baalim: which I commanded not, nor haue spoken of, neither haue they ascended into my hart. (Rheims Douai Bible, 1582-1610, Ieremie [Jeremiah] 19:4,5 -- the only employment of "holocaust" to refer to the killing/ sacrifice of human beings (plural) in the Catholic Bible, a translation of the only OLAH/ OLOT in the Hebrew Bible referring to the killing/ sacrifice of human beings (plural).

Baalim refers to a false god such as moloch without addressing moloch by name but by act "to burne their children with fire for holocaust"

here is the question why would you use a word like holocaust to describe what happened? genocide works just fine!
Also you should take into account that after the holocaust happened Israel happened! "The jews got back their homeland".

In relation to WW2 history you should note Hitler was part Jewish im sure he saw the rise of Bolsheviks and communism.

The label "Judeo-Bolshevism" was used in Nazi Germany to equate Jews with communists, implying that the communist movement served Jewish interests and/or that all Jews were communists


The Jewish community has tried to downplay its part in the mass killing of Christians "20 million" low figure "66 million high figure" in Russia however simply looking at the ranks of Bolsheviks it is very clear they played a vital roll in it.

What roll do you think that would have played on hitler? He watched as Bolshevism spread and witnessed its gruesome results. yet in America we dont here the name Genrikh Yagoda," the greatest Jewish murderer of the 20th Century we hear hitler

I will sum up what evidence I'm trying to project to better define what it is I'm saying.

#1 The word holocaust= burnt offerings to a god which is in direct relation to moloch a semite god that jewish people used to sacrifice their own children too by throwing their children into fire as an offering.

#2 Jews as a result of the holocaust "their own wording not mine" receives the holy lands and creates the country of Israel.
#3 Russian Bolsheviks leadership was mainly jewish.
#4 Bolshevism "communism" was most likely the reason hitler picked the jews for genocide which killed 20 million Christians and divided a country by religious beliefs or blood lines giving the jewish population "religious or not" the control of said country.

What does this essay have to do with holocaust deniers receiving jail time for expressing their views?

This essay I posted is in direct violation of the official story.

#1 the holocaust was a planned event and allowed to happen in order to receive their homeland. as they offer up their own children to receive it, which is based off their own wording of the event. "why did the jewish get Israel specifically and not some other piece of land"
#2 communism and Bolshevik control was most likely the real reason for the holocaust not just eugenics and hatred which would make the Jewish German population not a victim but a real political, economical and social threat to the non jewish German population at the time.
#3 Bolshevik leadership was mainly Jewish.
#4 topics like these will be banned and put into the Conspiracy section of crazy people beliefs and while i don't specifically believe in all these some do make a good point and should be addressed.

originally posted by: Danbones
when one can't prove the OS is true
one makes questioning it illegal
instead of proving the debate to a close

That's right we don't have a time machine. All of the witnesses will eventually be dead. All we have are records and forensics. Perhaps those things were faked by time travellers or aliens?

We have something tantamount to proof. It should be enough.

I think it's kind of dumb though to go after deniers. It's like going after someone who denies the sky is blue. Unless they're supporting terrorists or actually convincing large segments of the population to harm others then it's kind of a waste everybody's time. Is like prosecuting insane people. Insane people don't belong in jails they belong in institutions.

I think the important thing is to remember the Nazi's will happen again and to not allow them to attain the same self-destructive power as they did before. It was essentially anti-human. The face of the Nazi's was Hitler but there were many behind him and further enabled and fueled the hatred. I think an importan piece to this puzzle is the below link:
www.psychologicalscience.o rg - Why Do People Defend Unjust, Inept, and Corrupt Systems?...

Why do we stick up for a system or institution we live in—a government, company, or marriage—even when anyone else can see it is failing miserably? Why do we resist change even when the system is corrupt or unjust? A new article in Current Directions in Psychological Science, a journal published by the Association for Psychological Science, illuminates the conditions under which we’re motivated to defend the status quo—a process called “system justification.”

System justification isn’t the same as acquiescence, explains Aaron C. Kay, a psychologist at Duke University’s Fuqua School of Business and the Department of Psychology & Neuroscience, who co-authored the paper with University of Waterloo graduate student Justin Friesen. “It’s pro-active. When someone comes to justify the status quo, they also come to see it as what should be.”

Reviewing laboratory and cross-national studies, the paper illuminates four situations that foster system justification: system threat, system dependence, system inescapability, and low personal control.

The above link gives would-be Nazi's a blueprint to world domination. But it also gives people the information they need better understand themselves and possibly prevent themselves from being used this way.

The keys to look for then are:
1) A threat to the system/yourself
2) Dependence on the system
3) Inability to escape the system
4) Low personal control

Any one of those will make you more likely to actively support a potentially corrupt and/or abusive system.

Other research suggests we innately will tend to defer to experts or people of status even if we're ordered to do something immoral. This was research performed in the 60's and possibly 70's. They discovered participants were more likely to be coerced to do bad on others IF they were ordered to do so by someone they perceived to be a scientist/expert/person of status.

Would-be Nazi's will exploit this psychology by issuing forth experts and persons of status to eschew opposition or resistance. By knowing this psychological tendency exists, we can potentially be extra cautious of our actions when such a situation presents itself.

originally posted by: jonnywhite

originally posted by: Danbones
when one can't prove the OS is true
one makes questioning it illegal
instead of proving the debate to a close

That's right we don't have a time machine. All of the witnesses will eventually be dead. All we have are records and forensics. Perhaps those things were faked by time travellers or aliens?

We have something tantamount to proof. It should be enough.

I think it's kind of dumb though to go after deniers. It's like going after someone who denies the sky is blue. Unless they're supporting terrorists or actually convincing large segments of the population to harm others then it's kind of a waste everybody's time. Is like prosecuting insane people. Insane people don't belong in jails they belong in institutions.

I think the important thing is to remember the Nazi's will happen again and to not allow them to attain the same self-destructive power as they did before. It was essentially anti-human. The face of the Nazi's was Hitler but there were many behind him and further enabled and fueled the hatred. I think an importan piece to this puzzle is the below link:
www.psychologicalscience.o rg - Why Do People Defend Unjust, Inept, and Corrupt Systems?...

Why do we stick up for a system or institution we live in—a government, company, or marriage—even when anyone else can see it is failing miserably? Why do we resist change even when the system is corrupt or unjust? A new article in Current Directions in Psychological Science, a journal published by the Association for Psychological Science, illuminates the conditions under which we’re motivated to defend the status quo—a process called “system justification.”

System justification isn’t the same as acquiescence, explains Aaron C. Kay, a psychologist at Duke University’s Fuqua School of Business and the Department of Psychology & Neuroscience, who co-authored the paper with University of Waterloo graduate student Justin Friesen. “It’s pro-active. When someone comes to justify the status quo, they also come to see it as what should be.”

Reviewing laboratory and cross-national studies, the paper illuminates four situations that foster system justification: system threat, system dependence, system inescapability, and low personal control.

The above link gives would-be Nazi's a blueprint to world domination. But it also gives people the information they need better understand themselves and possibly prevent themselves from being used this way.

The keys to look for then are:
1) A threat to the system/yourself
2) Dependence on the system
3) Inability to escape the system
4) Low personal control

Any one of those will make you more likely to actively support a potentially corrupt and/or abusive system.

Other research suggests we innately will tend to defer to experts or people of status even if we're ordered to do something immoral. This was research performed in the 60's and possibly 70's. They discovered participants were more likely to be coerced to do bad on others IF they were ordered to do so by someone they perceived to be a scientist/expert/person of status.

Would-be Nazi's will exploit this psychology by issuing forth experts and persons of status to eschew opposition or resistance. By knowing this psychological tendency exists, we can potentially be extra cautious of our actions when such a situation presents itself.

If everything you say is true why make it a crime? #1 its obviously not going to change the official story #2 if history is always correct why do they make new history books? Because obviously Columbus was the first person to find america and mass eye witness accounts are always reliable even with UFOs and Miracles right? Media manipulation "propaganda" doesn't and can't control the population to believe a false truth.

Many people keep mentioning the six million figure, this has already been debunked. Even official documentation details only 4.5 million Jews were under Nazi control at the height of the war. Even Raul Hilberg in 1988 (I believe) released an article where by he states after 30 years of research, 2.8 million Jews were meant to have died. In March 1991 the NY Times run an article on the official German records for Auschwitz from 1935-1945, now remember the original figure for Auschwitz was 9 million, this went down to 4 million which was the general recognised figure....The German records themselves APPARENTLY showed a total between 1935-1945 of 403,713 prison population....403,713! Of them 73,175 were Jewish...

Now with so much inconsistency, I guess it's no wonder that as people have become so much more suspicious of TPTB and are able to research quite freely on any given topic, it's now becoming a crime to question any aspect of the Holocaust. In my mind, it's the wrong thing to do, because even for me, it raises my suspicions hundred fold! The truth is the truth, it speaks for itself...Why be worried if a load of people wish to question an aspect of it, especially when the inconsistencies are already overwhelming. Yes it did happen, but what exactly happened? People have a right to know and therefore to question, especially when none of us will ever be allowed to forget it.

a reply to: freefall2020

Media manipulation "propaganda" doesn't and can't control the population to believe a false truth.

Unfortunately it controls the minds of almost everyone. Great post back there btw.

a reply to: and14263

thank you

There is no plausible justification for making questioning the events of the Holocaust a criminal offence. Unless, of course, you wish to deter historians and truth seekers from researching the validity of many of the claims as outlined in the official story of events.

originally posted by: freefall2020
obviously there is something amiss in the holocaust story that the main stream media doesn't want us to know about! If you haven't looked up the word holocaust I suggest you take a look at the origins of what the word actually means and where it came from. Holocaust isn't a Hebrew word its Greek if I'm not mistaken and was used in some bibles excluding the king james and another well know bible. Holocaust means burnt offerings to a god. Which god you ask? holocaust is used in direct relation to moloch and that's the only time its used.

If you haven't heard the story of moloch i suggest you read up about it.

Moloch had associations with a particular kind of propitiatory child sacrifice by parents.[citation needed] Moloch figures in the Book of Deuteronomy and in the Book of Leviticus as a form of idolatry (Leviticus 18:21: "And thou shalt not let any of thy seed pass through the fire to Moloch"). In the Old Testament, Gehenna was a valley by Jerusalem, where apostate Israelites and followers of various Baalim and Canaanite gods, including Moloch, sacrificed their children by fire (2 Chr. 28:3, 33:6; Jer. 7:31, 19:2–6).

the word holocaust isn't in the king james bible but if you search correctly you will find it in another bible

Hauing offred vp their sacrifices, victimats and holocaustes to their false Gods. (The earliest recorded employment of "holocaust(es)" by a secular English author within the Oxford English Dictionary -- Philip Stubbes, The Anatomie of Abuses, 1583 [from the OED's (1989) entry "victimate"])

... they haue forsaken me ... they haue filled this place with the bloud of innocents. And they haue built the excelses [high places] of Baalim, to burne their children with fire for holocaust [in the Hebrew OLOT] to Baalim: which I commanded not, nor haue spoken of, neither haue they ascended into my hart. (Rheims Douai Bible, 1582-1610, Ieremie [Jeremiah] 19:4,5 -- the only employment of "holocaust" to refer to the killing/ sacrifice of human beings (plural) in the Catholic Bible, a translation of the only OLAH/ OLOT in the Hebrew Bible referring to the killing/ sacrifice of human beings (plural).

Baalim refers to a false god such as moloch without addressing moloch by name but by act "to burne their children with fire for holocaust"

here is the question why would you use a word like holocaust to describe what happened? genocide works just fine!
Also you should take into account that after the holocaust happened Israel happened! "The jews got back their homeland".

In relation to WW2 history you should note Hitler was part Jewish im sure he saw the rise of Bolsheviks and communism.

The label "Judeo-Bolshevism" was used in Nazi Germany to equate Jews with communists, implying that the communist movement served Jewish interests and/or that all Jews were communists

The Jewish community has tried to downplay its part in the mass killing of Christians "20 million" low figure "66 million high figure" in Russia however simply looking at the ranks of Bolsheviks it is very clear they played a vital roll in it.

What roll do you think that would have played on hitler? He watched as Bolshevism spread and witnessed its gruesome results. yet in America we dont here the name Genrikh Yagoda," the greatest Jewish murderer of the 20th Century we hear hitler

I will sum up what evidence I'm trying to project to better define what it is I'm saying.

#1 The word holocaust= burnt offerings to a god which is in direct relation to moloch a semite god that jewish people used to sacrifice their own children too by throwing their children into fire as an offering.

#2 Jews as a result of the holocaust "their own wording not mine" receives the holy lands and creates the country of Israel.
#3 Russian Bolsheviks leadership was mainly jewish.
#4 Bolshevism "communism" was most likely the reason hitler picked the jews for genocide which killed 20 million Christians and divided a country by religious beliefs or blood lines giving the jewish population "religious or not" the control of said country.

What does this essay have to do with holocaust deniers receiving jail time for expressing their views?

This essay I posted is in direct violation of the official story.

#1 the holocaust was a planned event and allowed to happen in order to receive their homeland. as they offer up their own children to receive it, which is based off their own wording of the event. "why did the jewish get Israel specifically and not some other piece of land"
#2 communism and Bolshevik control was most likely the real reason for the holocaust not just eugenics and hatred which would make the Jewish German population not a victim but a real political, economical and social threat to the non jewish German population at the time.
#3 Bolshevik leadership was mainly Jewish.
#4 topics like these will be banned and put into the Conspiracy section of crazy people beliefs and while i don't specifically believe in all these some do make a good point and should be addressed.

I am utterly appalled that this post got four stars. This kind of garbage and rationalization has no place in any civilized discussion. Get help, sir.

originally posted by: projectbane

originally posted by: Gothmog
Why would anyone want to deny it , it is history. It is against the law in Germany , some states in the US , and a few other countries as well.

I understand what you are saying but why is it a criminal offense? There have been worse things in history. Why do they get such special privilege?

Want to list some

originally posted by: Involutionist


So, why the campaign to make it a criminal offence for those who do happen to question history if it is the truth?

A quick look at some of the groups that promote it as never having happened will show you why.

originally posted by: Dark Ghost
There is no plausible justification for making questioning the events of the Holocaust a criminal offence. Unless, of course, you wish to deter historians and truth seekers from researching the validity of many of the claims as outlined in the official story of events.

This is well said. and maybe should be looked at closer!!

originally posted by: payta

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: payta

what they are going after are the people who claim the holocaust never occurred. Those who state the governments never conspired to kill 6 million jews and that the murder of 6 million jews never occurred.

Anyone who questions the OS is thrown into that group of "people who claim the holocaust never happened".
So you either go along with the OS, or you are labeled as a "denier" and banished from society.

And on that note i agree, yuo either agree with the OS or you are labelled. I wonder why its not the same with 9/11. everyone says "we can't believe the MSN, and never believe the OS"

fair enough, then why must we believe the OS for the holocaust...people seem to pick and choose what the OS is truthful about based on their beliefs

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: Danbones
when one can't prove the OS is true
one makes questioning it illegal
instead of proving the debate to a close

Except in this case it revolves around people who think the holocaust never occurred and that Nazi officials never murdered anyone. That's the denial in question even when there is a truck load of facts proving it occurred.

People can debate numbers all they want but it doesn't change the facts.

"facts"
people believe the nazis never murdered anyone?
LOL!
No one thinks that

ITS ILLEGAL TO QUESTION FACTS???
LOL thats too funny
if it wasn't so facsist

let me quote some JEWS on Jewish history
specifically some senior rabbis of the day

TEN QUESTIONS TO THE ZIONISTS
BY RABBI MICHAEL DOV WEISSMANDL ZT"L
DEAN OF NITRA YESHIVA AND AUTHOR OF MIN HAMETZAR...

...IS IT TRUE that in 1941 and again in 1942, the German Gestapo offered all European Jews transit to Spain...
...IS IT TRUE that the answer of the Zionist leaders was negative, with the following comments:
a) ONLY Palestine would be considered as a destination for the deportees.
b) The European Jews must accede to suffering and death greater in measure than the other nations, in order that the victorious allies agree to a "Jewish State" at the end of the war.
c) No ransom will be paid

...IS IT TRUE that this response to the Gestapo's offer was made with the full knowledge that the alternative to this offer was the gas chamber

www.nkusa.org...

Why Jewish-born Karl Marx was an anti-Semite and
wrote A World Without Jews.

www.barrychamish.com...
banker supported enemy of banker installed hitler
also read about the deal Hitler offered so the jews could go free, and how the ALLIES effed that up to force the creation and expansion of Israel
crashrecovery.org...
books one and two
from senior Jewish rabbis on jewish journalists websites and the main nnews paper of israel


in these Issues I really only have to quote islaelis and jewish thinkers/writers/historians
I simply support their unveiling of the FACTS

51 Documents: Zionist Collaboration with the Nazis

www.amazon.com...

The ex-Israeli soldier who led a Kiev fighting unit
Svoboda, an ultra-nationalist party that has been frequently accused of anti-Semitism and whose members have been said to have had key positions in organizing the opposition protests.

“I don’t belong [to Svoboda], but I take orders from their team. They know I’m Israeli, Jewish and an ex-IDF soldier. They call me ‘brother,’” he said

www.haaretz.com...
jews and nazis:
"band of BROTHERS"
the modern day version

facts
as reported by jews

originally posted by: Danbones

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: Danbones
when one can't prove the OS is true
one makes questioning it illegal
instead of proving the debate to a close

Except in this case it revolves around people who think the holocaust never occurred and that Nazi officials never murdered anyone. That's the denial in question even when there is a truck load of facts proving it occurred.

People can debate numbers all they want but it doesn't change the facts.

"facts"
people believe the nazis never murdered anyone?
LOL!
No one thinks that

ITS ILLEGAL TO QUESTION FACTS???
LOL thats too funny
if it wasn't so facsist

let me quote some JEWS on Jewish history
specifically some senior rabbis of the day

TEN QUESTIONS TO THE ZIONISTS
BY RABBI MICHAEL DOV WEISSMANDL ZT"L
DEAN OF NITRA YESHIVA AND AUTHOR OF MIN HAMETZAR...

...IS IT TRUE that in 1941 and again in 1942, the German Gestapo offered all European Jews transit to Spain...
...IS IT TRUE that the answer of the Zionist leaders was negative, with the following comments:
a) ONLY Palestine would be considered as a destination for the deportees.
b) The European Jews must accede to suffering and death greater in measure than the other nations, in order that the victorious allies agree to a "Jewish State" at the end of the war.
c) No ransom will be paid

...IS IT TRUE that this response to the Gestapo's offer was made with the full knowledge that the alternative to this offer was the gas chamber

www.nkusa.org...

Why Jewish-born Karl Marx was an anti-Semite and
wrote A World Without Jews.

www.barrychamish.com...
banker supported enemy of banker installed hitler
also read about the deal Hitler offered so the jews could go free, and how the ALLIES effed that up to force the creation and expansion of Israel
crashrecovery.org...
books one and two
from senior Jewish rabbis on jewish journalists websites and the main nnews paper of israel


in these Issues I really only have to quote islaelis and jewish thinkers/writers/historians
I simply support their unveiling of the FACTS

51 Documents: Zionist Collaboration with the Nazis

www.amazon.com...

The ex-Israeli soldier who led a Kiev fighting unit
Svoboda, an ultra-nationalist party that has been frequently accused of anti-Semitism and whose members have been said to have had key positions in organizing the opposition protests.

“I don’t belong [to Svoboda], but I take orders from their team. They know I’m Israeli, Jewish and an ex-IDF soldier. They call me ‘brother,’” he said

www.haaretz.com...
jews and nazis:
"band of BROTHERS"
the modern day version

facts
as reported by jews

Well there you have it. The Jewish people refused a nice train ride out of the Country to go and live as refugees in Spain, so. . . CONSPIRACY AND FAULT!!!