LADIES AND GENTLEMEN WE HAVE BEEN LIED TO BY THE GERMANS ABOUT THE DRESDEN BOMBINGS
(**note** this article is not my original work, if you wish to see the original it is
> February 13, 1999
> Good Morning from the Zundelsite:
> Today is "Dresden Day."
Apparently Mr. Zundel is unaware that recent research conducted by the courageous and politically incorrect truth-seekers of THE MAD REVISIONIST has
revealed startling evidence that the bombing of Dresden and other German cities during the conflict known as World War II is in fact an elaborate
German propaganda hoax.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that a few buildings might not have burned down, and that maybe a few people weren't singed or even killed as a
result. But revisionists are scorned, and even laughed at, when we ask difficult questions about what really caused the tragedy, and how many people
were really killed. Meanwhile, so many establishment lies about this alleged event have been exposed by revisionist research that its hard to take
the normatively accepted version seriously.
Take the fact that there are numerous memorial sites in Germany that supposedly mark "mass graves" of civilians alleged to have been killed in these
so-called "bombings". Yet not one of these sites have ever been excavated and subjected to impartial forensic examination to confirm that they
contain what they are alleged to contain. Appalling, is it not? These Dresden hoaxers obviously have something to hide.
> Fifty-four years ago today, the city of Dresden, which had no strategic
> military significance at all and which had become a huge refugee city for
> civilians fleeing the Red Terror, became a huge fireball in the fiercest
> Allied terror bombing ever.
Indeed, the city of Dresden had no military or strategic significance. Is it therefore not the least bit fishy that the Dresden hoaxers expect you to
believe the ridiculous notion that the Allies, while fighting a war that they intended to win, would waste valuable military resources on it?
> David Irving has written about the Dresden Holocaust, and it is a book well
> worth reading - and one you will never forget.
> It is estimated by some that as many as 350,000 - 600,000 victims were
> incinerated beyond being identifiable or even recognizable as human remains
> in that Holocaust. Only 35,000 could be identified.
Ah, so only 35,000 victims could be identified, and yet Zundel expects us to believe that another 350,000-600,000 people (why does the number vary so
widely, hmmm?) were killed as well, simply because they are unaccounted for. How gullible does he think we are? Does he offer any proof to support
this absurd number?
> Many of the pictures that people were served up as "pyres of gassed Jews"
> from Auschwitz and elsewhere in early Allied "atrocity flicks" are, in
> fact, photographs the Wehrmacht took of German victims of the Allied war
> crime of Dresden.
But every revisionist knows that it is physically impossible to burn bodies in open pits. That's why the photos and eyewitness testimonies of Jews
being burned outside the kremas at Auschwitz must be fakes, right? So it serves as proof, as well, that the Dresden bombing is a hoax.
> The War Department, describing another city, Hamburg, described how people
> died in such a firestorm:
> "Literally hundreds of people were seen leaving shelters after the heat
> became intense. They ran across the street and were seen to collapse very
> slowly like people who were utterly exhausted. They could not get up."
> A reporter, Melitta Maschman, wrote of what happened in the City of Darmstadt:
Well, I suppose it is accurate to refer to Melita Maschmann (correct spelling) as a reporter at the time of the bombing. Though it would, perhaps, be
more accurate to say that she was a reporter for the Bund Deutscher Madel. In fact, it would be more accurate still to say that she was the head of
the BDM Press and Propaganda division in Berlin from 1943 until the end of the war. Interesting how Mr. Zundel is willing to, er, prune information
that might cast doubt on the reliability and objectivity of his sources. Particulary when the source in question, in her memoir (Account Rendered: a
Dossier on my Former Self) written after the war, was quite open in describing how the Nazis used to brainwash German youth.
> "There was not a house anywhere in the street which had not turned into a
> blazing firebrand. Above the sea of flames, a glowing cyclone raged over
> the town, and whenever it caught the bodies of people in flight, it
> shriveled them in a second to the size of a child, and the next day they
> lay all over the streets, hardly burnt, but like mummified children."
HBO should have saved this lie for its "Tales from the Crypt" program. Preposterous nonsense! So called "eyewitness" testimonies of these alleged
bombings of German cities contain so many impossibilities and discrepancies as to make the whole story unbelievable. Sure, all of the survivors
pretty much agree on the point that the city was bombed by the Allies, but how reliable are survivors who also testify to "puddles of melted human
flesh" and people "glowing blue (or orange) and disintegrating" - and this, in sealed bunkers which were protected from the fire. There have been
so many lies told by so-called "Dresden survivors" that all of these testimonies are wide open to reasonable doubt. After all, how much can you
trust people testifying against their hated enemies?
And is there a single witness who actually saw a bomb dropped from an American plane land on the city and explode? No. Not one such witness. Who
could have survived to have described such a thing? All we have are rumors. I don't want to hear what people thought they heard from inside the
bomb shelter, or what they figured might be going on above. I want to know what they saw.
No, the Dresden myth relies almost entirely on hostile eyewitness testimony and questionable "confessions" by those alleged to have done the dirty
deed. There is not a single survivor account of the Dresden bombing that has ever stood up to hostile cross-examination, and I challenge you to find