One Third Of The Holocaust:More Compelling Evidence It Never Happened

Edit to remove own post since Mods addressed the issue.

[edit on 26-6-2009 by maybereal11]

reply to post by KilgoreTrout


Hi,

I was on vacation and without internet access and only now came upon this post.

Those videos are very old and made by a boy who has since grown up.

Not a good start.


o2

Originally posted by o2bwise
reply to post by KilgoreTrout

 

Hi,

I was on vacation and without internet access and only now came upon this post.

Those videos are very old and made by a boy who has since grown up.

Not a good start.


o2

David Cole retracted his statements because he got the crap kicked out of him and his life and that of his family was threathened by the JDL. I cannot be bothered to post the evidence links, look for yourselves.

To anyone else who THINKS he is informed about the "Holocaust" (hi nefermore) I strongly suggest _reading_ transcripts and real historic evidence by accepted historians.

Before you argue, you cannot dismiss a court transcript can you?

Read "Did Six Million Really Die?" which is a transcript of the Ernst Zuendel trial in Canada from 1988. This was the last trial where evidence was allowed to be presented to challenge the Holocaust claims.

All trials after that it was "duly noted" the Holocaust happened, and no evidence (forensic or other) in defense of anyone questioning the Holocaust was ever allowed again. For a good reason as you will see!

Just read or shut up. I will not discuss anything with anyone before you inform yourselves. That is the least I can ask of anyone who wishes to debate the issue.

Barbara Kulaszka: Did Six Million Really Die? (Warning: 16Mb - 941 pages)

This just about covers all the burning questions.

More here

See also signature.

Follow the rabbit into the hole and then come back here and spout nonsense about the "Holocaust" like "the Germans did not care about lice".

I am sure you think that you can burn a human body TO ASHES in the open air by pouring gasoline over it and setting it on fire right? Well, good luck with that. You may want to Google Hindu Funeral and the fuel requirements for burning a single human body in the open air.

I hate to repeat myself.



[edit on 1-7-2009 by Truth4hire]

rofl... gosh this is the most foolish thread...

Just because most of the survivors are dead, it doesn't mean those of us who knew them are...

I have seen with my eyes and heard with my ears all I ever need to know the holocaust happened...

The fact is facts aren't always true. I don't know what to think because I don't know all the "facts".

I am sitting here at work, but the following are my summary thoughts about the comments made about David Cole.

Regardless of what anyone thinks, the following range anywhere from 99% likely to absolutely true.

1) Cole's research exceeds that of 99.9% of humans who have any position on whether or not the holocaust happened.

2) His effort included "bothering" to travel to Auschwitz himself and gain special treatment (1-1 tours, interviews).

3) What is the significance of the age of the Cole video? Sounds like a self-defeating statement.

4) To say he was a boy and needs to grow up, as being rock-solid truth, would require uncanny capabilities (telepathic, perhaps?). Any reasonable amount of research logically must allow for the plausibility that Cole feared for torture and his very life (holo-hoax is BIG BUSINESS not to mention politically crucial to the aims of the NWO).

Regarding #4, here is a parallel statement. The person who said Cole needs to grow up is a disinformation junkie who needs a new heart.

I can't prove that as well, but if we're gonna play the game of attacking someone's character, what's good for the goose is good for the gander.


Finally, as a generic statement: this is not ONLY about the number of Jewish persons who died. After all, typhus and starvation could have killed huge amounts.

It is also about whether or not a nation truly desired the extermination of an entire ethnic group. In other words, the numbers, as horrific and telling as that is, are one thing. But, WHY the numbers are whatever they are, is quite another.


o2

reply to post by Truth4hire


Hm, your evidence intrigues me. It has inspired me to research. However, I have one question that MUST be answered before anyone can continue:

If one third of the holocaust didn't happen, who didn't it happen to?

Originally posted by nine0099thousand
reply to post by Truth4hire

 

Hm, your evidence intrigues me. It has inspired me to research. However, I have one question that MUST be answered before anyone can continue:

If one third of the holocaust didn't happen, who didn't it happen to?

If you would have indeed studied the film you would have known that "One Third Of The Holocaust" pertains to the fact that only one third of the alleged death camps are discussed. Even though I do not agree with all that is said and the way it is presented, it does raise some serious questions and made me want to know more which led to the things you can read in this thread and others.

I hope you are "intrigued" enough to read more on the subject this time.

Originally posted by o2bwise
Regarding #4, here is a parallel statement. The person who said Cole needs to grow up is a disinformation junkie who needs a new heart.

I didn't say that Cole needed to grow up, I said that he had grown up.

Originally posted by o2bwise
I can't prove that as well, but if we're gonna play the game of attacking someone's character, what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

I did not attack his character, I was in fact commending him on having one. He was a teenager when he made those films and he became a man when he was able to admit that he was wrong. I have enormous respect for David Cole.

Originally posted by o2bwise
Finally, as a generic statement: this is not ONLY about the number of Jewish persons who died. After all, typhus and starvation could have killed huge amounts.

Starvation and typhus did kill millions, especially Russian POWs, but with minimal hygiene facilities, if any at all, typhus was rife in the larger Concentration Camps and in the Ghettos. Starvation became a significant factor after 1942 when the German supply lines ran dry.

Originally posted by o2bwise
It is also about whether or not a nation truly desired the extermination of an entire ethnic group. In other words, the numbers, as horrific and telling as that is, are one thing. But, WHY the numbers are whatever they are, is quite another.

The Nazis did not want to annihilate the Jews, they wanted them out of the Reich, they, in the end, when all other means had failed, chose to murder them, over the sixteen months or so of Aktion Reinhard because they felt it was 'kinder' than allowing them to starve to death. To the SS heirarchy, Himmler and Heydrich, it was beneath them to commit genocide, ungentlemanly or in their minds un-German. It is a very complicated set of events, but, in my opinion the Nazis did not set out to commit genocide, what they did was set in motion a series of events that led to genocide.

reply to post by KilgoreTrout


I really wish you would not start your un-informed half truths again in here.

Would you have studied you would have indeed found the pectoral typhus link and the real tragedy of the camps and stories behind the infamous pictures from e.g. Bergen-Belsen.

And no KilgoreTrout, not at any point in history did Hitler or anyone in his command order any complete ethnic group to be killed, nor did they "do things that made them commit genocide".

The Germans did the correct thing by doing what they could to keep the camps healthy. Once that was no longer possible (for whatever reason) outbreaks of typhus were a very common thing in the camps with hundreds dying a day, INCLUDING guards. And how does typhus spread? It is called the Rickettsiae bacteria which enters humans via the bite of fleas or lice.

All clothing had to be fumigated for any new entry into the camp without exceptions. To combat lice, ALL inmates were shaved. It was part of protocol, whereas putting people in gas chambers was not.

All the above information and much more is freely available to anyone.

Originally posted by mopusvindictus
rofl... gosh this is the most foolish thread...

Just because most of the survivors are dead, it doesn't mean those of us who knew them are...

Yeah, what he said. A doctor I knew (he recently passed) was one of the first doctors sent into Auschwitz after it was discovered. That man, whom I trust without reservation, still cried when he talked about what he had seen more than 60 years earlier.

Originally posted by mopusvindictus

I have seen with my eyes and heard with my ears all I ever need to know the holocaust happened...

Exactly.

[edit on 4-7-2009 by sweetpeanc]

Originally posted by Truth4hire
I really wish you would not start your un-informed half truths again in here.

Could you be specific? Where am I being untruthful? Which half is the truth?

Originally posted by Truth4hire
Would you have studied you would have indeed found the pectoral typhus link and the real tragedy of the camps and stories behind the infamous pictures from e.g. Bergen-Belsen.

I am really missing your point here, are you making one? I agreed that there were many deaths as a result of disease and starvation. I know that from reading books, watching documentaries etc, does your link provide any variation on the accepted opinion that millions of deaths were caused by disease and starvation? Or are you saying that millions didn't die as a result of disease and starvation? I apologise but you're not making a great deal of sense.

Originally posted by Truth4hire
And no KilgoreTrout, not at any point in history did Hitler or anyone in his command order any complete ethnic group to be killed, nor did they "do things that made them commit genocide".

Hitler made numerous speeches where he spoke of the removal of the Jewish and Slavic peoples from what would be the Greater Reich. The Nazi controlled press and media promoted the notion of the Jews as racially inferior and of the Slavic race as being untermensche. The Jews of Germany were stripped of all legal rights and then removed from their homes and transported several hundred miles to a region where the SS were already deeply desensitised to the suffering of others after the bloody and almost complete annihilation of the Slavic people of Eastern Europe.

Hitler did order the removal of the Jews, and he indicated to Himmler that how that was done was Himmler's problem. You've got to love the Fuhrer Prinzip. While it may not have been his intention to murder the Jews, that is what he set in motion. His direct orders, issued to his Generals preceding Operation Barbarrossa make clear that he expected the Jewish Bolsheviks to be treated with maximum ferocity, and they were. Do you question the authenticity of these events too? Can you provide sources that contradict the testimony of several Wehrmacht General?

Originally posted by Truth4hire
The Germans did the correct thing by doing what they could to keep the camps healthy. Once that was no longer possible (for whatever reason) outbreaks of typhus were a very common thing in the camps with hundreds dying a day, INCLUDING guards. And how does typhus spread? It is called the Rickettsiae bacteria which enters humans via the bite of fleas or lice.

According to the testimony given at the trial of IG Farben's German executives, the Nazis ordered sufficient Zyklon B to cause the deaths of several million people. IG claimed that the Nazis had a rolling order, at no time were they ever in any shortage of Zyklon B. At the trial the details of the tests that IG carried out on Soviet POWs for the SS were presented in court. The tests took place in August 1941, immediately following a series of memos from Himmler requesting that a more efficient means of death be investigated other than mass shootings which were having an unhealthy effect on his men, he said.

The majority of the camps that suffered the worst from disease, did so because they had limited washing facilities and little or no medical care. These camps were not death camps, the death camps, with the exception of Chelmo and Auschwitz, had no problem with Typhus. The Jews were murdered upon arrival, their lice dying alonside them no doubt, so that the Sonderkommando who then were forced to dispose of the corpses had little to fear from infestation. The SS would order them into the gas chambers soon enough anyway.

In a recent study, a group set out to map the camp network. They knew of 3500 camps and expected that their research would uncover somewhere in the region of 5000. They in fact found that there had been 15000. Obviously this number includes sub camps. Some of those camps would only have been housing a few hundred for a particular work detail, but still that is an awful lot of camps. The people interred in those camps would have been lucky to have access to clean drinking water and lived on very meager rations, in the early days due to corruption in the supply of food, later because there was no food. Little food, water limited to drinking only, of course disease was rife. Why do you think that Speer was constantly haranging Saukel to get him more labour squads, by any means? They were always dying. Hitler himself sent a memo to the Labour office requesting that the Ukrainians receive better treatment, that if they were working for the Reich they should be given food. Sadly, Hitler's grasp on the wider situation was very limited otherwise he would have realised the futility of such a request. Or at the very least would have instituted rationing on his own people so that the food that was available went a little further. But that wouldn't be good for morale or so he argued with Goebbels who proposed rationing as early as 1941, it would finally be implemented in 1944.

Originally posted by Truth4hire
All clothing had to be fumigated for any new entry into the camp without exceptions. To combat lice, ALL inmates were shaved. It was part of protocol, whereas putting people in gas chambers was not.

Only at the camps where typhus was rife were inmates routinely shaved. Only during Aktion Reinhard were civilians transported directly to the death camps. When the Aktion Reinhard camps were destroyed in early 1943 the mass killings were concentrated at Auschwitz. They would be selected on arrival, only those who had a needed skill or characteristic were saved. Not all of those selected for work details were shaved, it depended on the detail.

Originally posted by Truth4hire
All the above information and much more is freely available to anyone.

Ditto.

Of course the Holocaust (which means a ritual sacrifice by fire) happened. The details are obscured by time and the fact that victors write history, so I really don’t see the benefit of dickering over them. It seems clear to me though that it was purposely engineered as part of the globalist agenda. Zionism is a creation of the globalists, and certainly had a role in the holocaust. www.jewsagainstzionism.com...
www.jewsnotzionists.org...
Hitler was a tool of the globalists as well of course, his unlikely and meteoric rise to power, as well as his occult belief system make this plain.
www.illuminati-news.com...

So much of the globalists efforts are centered on Jerusalem. It’s where God chose to put His name, and so the god of this world, who loves to mimic, twist and pervert the ways of God, wants to put his temporal throne there. The coming one world gov will be headquartered in Jerusalem, so when you see a one world leader standing in Jerusalem, pronouncing himself supreme, (and I thing most of us will) know that your judgment draws nigh.

In the who's who department of the holocaust question we have this.

Martin Bormann was Rothschild Agent -- Damning Evidence
July 1, 2009
by Henry Makow Ph.D.
"The second most powerful man in Nazi Germany, Martin Bormann, was a "Soviet" (i.e. Illuminati British) agent who ensured the destruction of both Germany and European Jewry.

Thus, he advanced two of the Illuminati's main goals: integrate Germany into a world government by annihilating its national, cultural and racial pretensions, and establish Israel as the Masonic bankers' world capital by threatening European Jews with extinction."

Martin Bormann

This article for more understanding of Bormann

"Martin Bormann (1900-?) was the organizer, treasurer and paymaster of the Nazi Party and controlled its powerful machine. He was the contact with Illuminati bankers and industrialists who financed the Nazi Party and donated millions to Hitler. As Deputy Fuhrer and Hitler's Secretary, Bormann signed Hitler's paycheck and managed his accounts. He determined whom and what Hitler saw, and acted in his name.

Goering said "Bormann stayed with Hitler day and night and gradually brought him so much under his will that he ruled Hitler's whole existence." ("Martin Bormann" by James McGovern, p.160)

Hitler made Bormann the Executor of his will. Bormann, not Hitler, owned the Berghof. "The entire complex on the Obersalzberg, consisting of 87 buildings and worth over one and a half million marks, was legally registered in Bormann's name. (McGovern, p.128)"

In war the victor will dictate history,
I wasnt there at the time so i can only go on what was written after,
and from what i have read the holicaust happened to what extend i do not know
And if youve ever spoken to some one that went through it you will get the feeling that it was real.
If you speak to some one that was there at the end that is the rescue part of it some say it wasnt as bad as others make out it to be and thats war, others say it was hell on earth .
I dont know what it was like i wasnt there but i think it happened and i hope it never happens agian ,
but i always keep this in mind the term [ in war the victor will dictate history]
as a true statement .

i hope you get my meaning writting isnt my biggest strenght

Originally posted by OhZone
Goering said "Bormann stayed with Hitler day and night and gradually brought him so much under his will that he ruled Hitler's whole existence." ("Martin Bormann" by James McGovern, p.160)

I haven't read James McGovern's book on Martin Bormann, but I presume that it is the same James McGovern, to whom Reinhard Gehlen handed a report to in 1953 stating (quoted from Gehlen: Spy of the Century by E H Cookridge, 1971) '...that whilst the ultimate fate of Bormann could not be fully ascertained, it must be presumed that the Nazi leader had been killed in cross-fire during the fighting in Berlin on 1st May 1945.' (p35)

At that time James McGovern worked for the CIA.

Allen Dulles was very keen to locate Bormann and in 1965 initiated an investigation into the claims that Bormann had been sighted in South America. Gehlen assisted with the inquiry. According to Cookridge, the only time that Gehlen mentioned that Bormann might have survived the war was when he was attempting to get his own book published.

E H Cookridge though was a British SIS agent during the war, he could be trying to cover MI6s backs as much as McGovern might be trying to cover the CIAs. Can't trust either side to be providing the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Maklow doesn't clarify matters. Who are these Illuminati that he speaks of? I have two biographies on Victor Rothschild and he was certainly very active in intelligence matters during WW2 but he was not in anyway connected to banking at that time and was not involved in the 'family business' at all. He was a Chemist and headed Counter Sabotage for SOE.

Also it was Himmler and not Bormann who headed up the 'Circle of Friends', the financiers and industrialists who provided the financial backing of Hitler's campaign for power. Himmler and Bormann though did become closer towards the end of the war and it may be possible that they were in cahoots and that Himmler may have given Bormann all the account details for the SS and the minutes of the Maison Rouge meetings which would have enabled him to take over in Himmler's absence. Himmler's other alternatives, of whom to trust, were somewhat limited. The main purpose of those meetings was to attempt to prevent investors money from being tied up in Germany and therefore subject to be paid as reparations. Or for assets to be claimed as booty. While the Soviet Red Army ploughed through Europe seeking retribution the British and the US had special task forces set up to seize 'booty'. If Bormann assisted Himmler, he assisted in the successful masking of assets that were later refunnelled into the West German economy. That had been Himmler's major activity in the closing days of the war. That and concealing the evidence of the crimes that he and his subordinate had ordered be committed. The murder of the German Jews was a lesser concern here.

At that time, in law, it was not a criminal act or a crime against humanity for a country to murder it's own people. Slavery was though. As was the transportation of the citizens of occupied countries for work purposes related to the war effort. It was also a crime not to give due care to POW and those citizens that come under your occupation. The crimes that they committed against their own people were not therefore criminal acts, only those committed against other peoples.

It is odd therefore that the eastern block, when it was established, removed all those who had had a crime committed against them from any legal process. Could it have been because while their testimony would have damned Germany, it would also have implicated numerous companies and individuals in the USA, UK, and Europe in profiteering from slavery, then, a greater crime than genocide?

Originally posted by KilgoreTrout
It is odd therefore that the eastern block, when it was established, removed all those who had had a crime committed against them from any legal process. Could it have been because while their testimony would have damned Germany, it would also have implicated numerous companies and individuals in the USA, UK, and Europe in profiteering from slavery, then, a greater crime than genocide?

The slavery you speak of is endemic to the beast system. There was much more to be hidden, but no doubt the cover up was on. Even so it’s well known that the Bush family were ‘trading with the enemy’.

www.tarpley.net...

And they weren’t the only ones on wall street.

www.reformed-theology.org...

Then there’s the Vatican connection to consider.

www.geocities.com...

WWII was a globalist operation, just as WWI was, and just as WWIII is soon to be.

Originally posted by resistor
The slavery you speak of is endemic to the beast system. There was much more to be hidden, but no doubt the cover up was on. Even so it’s well known that the Bush family were ‘trading with the enemy’.

www.tarpley.net...

And they weren’t the only ones on wall street.

www.reformed-theology.org...

Those are both great sources, the latter especially which I have in hard copy as it is so invaluable. Sadly it is very US-German specific so provides a limited picture of overseas investment in Nazi Germany, but you can't have everything.

Originally posted by resistor
Then there’s the Vatican connection to consider.

www.geocities.com...

This source is not so good, but luckily there are countless books on the subject of the Vatican and religion in general in the Reich. The Jesuit angle is a false flag and falls apart when any close scrutiny is paid, although the Slovakians I believe had a Jesuit father as their 'puppet' leader, but that says more about the social situation in the Balkans than in the Reich itself. Similarly the Ustasha in Serbia was heabily influenced by Franciscan monks. The German Nazi administrators in control of those regions actually lodged complaints to Berlin about the brutality with which both those countries acted to Jews and Slavs alike.

The Vatican itself was cheifly guilty of assisting war criminals to escape prosecution and in laundering the profits of slavery and murder.

Originally posted by resistor
WWII was a globalist operation, just as WWI was, and just as WWIII is soon to be.

Personally, I don't believe World War two is quite finished yet and won't be for a good while yet.

[edit on 6-7-2009 by KilgoreTrout]

reply to post by KilgoreTrout


Many think that the way WWI was ended made WWII inevitable. Perhaps all three great wars were conceived as one long drawn out whole? The first two were preceded by economic collapses. Not a good sign.

As to the Jesuits I’m agnostic on the issue. That whole thing could very well be a straw man to cover the Vatican’s real involvements.

reply to post by Truth4hire


Hi truth4hire!
One thing that I've found; even if others don't agree with you, they will still get on the wagon and express the same drivel that has been expressed on this subject, time-immemorial. Its like a large sector of Humanity seems to enjoy hearing the same quotes and prose over and over, slowly hypnotised, and slowly growing deaf.
Deaf to any other point of view.
I have to say that I agree with you.
It was unfortunate what happened to anyone that wasn't a Nazi in WWII; it was equally unfortunate what happened to the Russians.
The Russians beat the Nazi forces all the way back to Berlin, and then took the Reichstag.
It was only at the eleventh-hour that America and co-allition forces 'Liberated' the 'Occupied' territiories.
How noble of the west.
To step in when the Nazi's had been all but crushed!
To step in and plunder the spoils of the Nazi loot!
To demonize the Soviet republics after the war; they would not have won if the soviets hadn't done most of the fighting.
How about all the Nazi's that found 'Absolution' within America???
Cia, and Nasa, just to name a few fraternities.