See, They DO Lie to You!

I'm writing this post because secret documents have been released showing the level to which our governments were prepared to lie to us during world war 2 (links at the end), and the lengths they'd go to in order to cover up the dreadful massacre that OUR allies had carried out, and use it as propaganda to achieve their objectives.

It still boggles my mind that people believe today what our politicians tell us - whether it's 911, Libya, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc - it's always the same:

Those guys are the bad guys, look at what they've done - we HAVE to destroy them because we're the good guys - and that means you know that we wouldn't lie to you! ........

During World War 2 the Germans announced the discovery of 20,000 Polish Officers, lawyers, officials, and others who had been executed and buried in mass graves. At the time they were executed the area was under Soviet control, and both Roosevelt & Churchill knew the truth - that the Soviets were responsible.

But what happened next was one of the most appalling lapses of morality that our leaders have ever been responsible for. The blame was laid at the Germans, even though they knew it was untrue, so as to not upset our Soviet allies.

Sikorski, the leader of the free Polish government was outraged and demanded an investigation by the International red cross rather than the Soviets (once they'd recaptured the area).

This incensed the Russians and threatened to upset the Western-Soviet alliance. Sikorski conveniently died in a very unusual plane crash shortly after, allowing the Soviets and our leaders to use the massacre as anti-German propaganda.

The Russians even tried to bring charges at Nuremberg against the Germans for these war crimes - can you believe the cheek! Stalin ordered it, then tried to have other people hanged for it.

The Russians admitted they did it back in 1990, the question has always been how complicit we were in covering it up - well now we know - released US documents show we knew and actively blamed the Germans.

Now, you'd have thought that the murder of 22,000 innocent people would be a big deal, and would raise questions about who you're allied with.

But the main objective was to beat Germany at all costs, and so the massacre was blamed on them.

It really raises questions about how our leaders view us, whether people actually have any value in their eyes, and to what lengths are they prepared to go to today to achieve their objectives.

I'd argue that today the Soviets are replaced by the corporations who want to get their hands on the oil, the banks, and any other natural resources that all of the "rogue states" seem to own.

You might disagree, but it's interesting that every time we are told we're going to invade somewhere it's because that country "supports terrorism," "is responsible for terrorism," "is responsible for massacring people," "is oppressive to it's people," "has weapons of mass destruction," "is developing weapons of mass destruction," etc.

Do you think that our leaders would cause or allow something like 911 to happen if it opened the door to achieving bigger political, military, or economic objectives?

I know a lot of people wouldn't, couldn't believe it, but 911 has provided the background and some form of justification for EVERY country we've invaded since, and is bound to be used to justify Iran too - hey, they're terrorists - terrorists were responsible for 911 - therefore it's justified.

And we keep on falling for it. Just like we did back in WW2.

Previous thread from 2010

BBC article on new US documents

Wikipedia

Of course they lie.

History is written by the victors

I'm pretty sure that being an adept liar is actually part of the job description for pretty much every political position, that being said however I'm not sure there is anything wrong pinning the massacre on the Germans if it meant the Soviets would continue to support us while the Nazis were crushed inbetween, after all they were systematically exterminating millions of people; tactically speaking it was the smart move.

be ready to get nightmares beyond what you could start to imagine if you knew just how much you've been lied to by the corrupt bastards who people call "leaders" ... or end up going totally insane...

Originally posted by Helig
I'm pretty sure that being an adept liar is actually part of the job description for pretty much every political position, that being said however I'm not sure there is anything wrong pinning the massacre on the Germans if it meant the Soviets would continue to support us while the Nazis were crushed inbetween, after all they were systematically exterminating millions of people; tactically speaking it was the smart move.

Ah, but there you have it - we blamed the Germans for this massacre even though it wasn't true.

So do you then still just accept that the rest of their alleged crimes were also true. I mean if they'll lie about 1 massacre, why not add in a few more.

And the truth is that Stalin was responsible for killing many, many times more people than everyone else put together.

So how can we say we fought the Germans because of the terrible things they did to people when:

1) We knew our own allies were actually responsible for some of those terrible things;
2) The Soviets went on to do far worse than anyone in history had ever done before and we did nothing;

reply to post by Power_Semi

Ah, but there you have it - we blamed the Germans for this massacre even though it wasn't true.
So do you then still just accept that the rest of their alleged crimes were also true. I mean if they'll lie about 1 massacre, why not add in a few more.

Germans were blaimed due to political reasons. Continuing sending aid to Soviets and even continuing basic cooperation that was surely to impact fate of post war Europe after announcing the fact that they are no less barbaric then the Nazis would be problematic so they just lied to prevent possible complications during world war.
And after the war when those complications were no longer important the truth surfaced.
To remind you,even Animal Farm was not published during the war for fear of impacting the relationship between Allies and Soviets.
Poland was betrayed by Allies in WW2 and not once,there is no arguing about that. However if you were responible for sending people to death,making sure that fewer of your people would die and that after defeating one enemy another one would not appear instead - are understandable.

And the truth is that Stalin was responsible for killing many, many times more people than everyone else put together.

No. Soviets and especially Stalin (not only him though, those who came before him were almost just as bad) are responsible for murder and suffering of many people, but Chinese comrades are responsible for many more deaths since they had bigger population to play with. Nazis and Japanese empire were also in the same league. Maybe grim score was a little lower,but not by much.

So how can we say we fought the Germans because of the terrible things they did to people when:

No ,war against Germany was for geopolitical reasons,just as most of other wars. British empire and US could not allow Nazi German empire spanning over most of Europe and even beyond and Japanses empire spanning in the East Asia and Pacific.
It was justified internationally by attack on Poland (British) and German/Japanese alliance (US after pearl harbor) and to the population and politically by showing what horrible things Germans do( and Nazis sure made it pretty easy). But those were excuses and not the reason for confrontation.
Even during WW1 Allies propaganda stated what crimes Axis did and vice versa. Those were not the reason for WW1 though. And after WW1 truth surfaced just as quickly as after WW2. What crimes were real and what crimes were just a smearing campaign.

Originally posted by Power_Semi

Originally posted by Helig
I'm pretty sure that being an adept liar is actually part of the job description for pretty much every political position, that being said however I'm not sure there is anything wrong pinning the massacre on the Germans if it meant the Soviets would continue to support us while the Nazis were crushed inbetween, after all they were systematically exterminating millions of people; tactically speaking it was the smart move.

Ah, but there you have it - we blamed the Germans for this massacre even though it wasn't true.

So do you then still just accept that the rest of their alleged crimes were also true. I mean if they'll lie about 1 massacre, why not add in a few more.

And the truth is that Stalin was responsible for killing many, many times more people than everyone else put together.

So how can we say we fought the Germans because of the terrible things they did to people when:

1) We knew our own allies were actually responsible for some of those terrible things;
2) The Soviets went on to do far worse than anyone in history had ever done before and we did nothing;

You are grasping the wrong straws.... he's not saying that Germany was innocent, he's emphasizing what EVERYONE with a brain should know by now, that you CANNOT trust your own government at any time. They lie lie lie lie, no matter what they say.

He's saying that it's time we woke up and started working on our own countries morals. We cannot justify any action against anyone for whatever they did, when moral is not something we actually have ourselves.
Stop thinking you need to clean up the world, that's not your job.

If it was and I felt like I had a right to undo bad things and things I don't like, I'd roll over the bible belt in the US with tanks and napalm.... but fortunately it's not my job to judge the insanity and ill actions of those people.

The only way to do this by now is completely destroy and rebuild the establishment. Redefine democracy, and enslave capitalism to work for people instead of the other way around.
We HAVE TO revolt, otherwise this world will turn to # faster than you can imagine.

reply to post by Power_Semi

Star and flag, good into, friend. I always knew there are something funny about this who thing, and never did think the Germans did all of killings. I think, personal opinion, that the House of Rothschild Banking Cartel was the mastermind, in an effort to jump start a State for Israel, at the expense of the Germans.

Originally posted by flice

Originally posted by Power_Semi

Originally posted by Helig
I'm pretty sure that being an adept liar is actually part of the job description for pretty much every political position, that being said however I'm not sure there is anything wrong pinning the massacre on the Germans if it meant the Soviets would continue to support us while the Nazis were crushed inbetween, after all they were systematically exterminating millions of people; tactically speaking it was the smart move.

Ah, but there you have it - we blamed the Germans for this massacre even though it wasn't true.

So do you then still just accept that the rest of their alleged crimes were also true. I mean if they'll lie about 1 massacre, why not add in a few more.

And the truth is that Stalin was responsible for killing many, many times more people than everyone else put together.

So how can we say we fought the Germans because of the terrible things they did to people when:

1) We knew our own allies were actually responsible for some of those terrible things;
2) The Soviets went on to do far worse than anyone in history had ever done before and we did nothing;

You are grasping the wrong straws.... he's not saying that Germany was innocent, he's emphasizing what EVERYONE with a brain should know by now, that you CANNOT trust your own government at any time. They lie lie lie lie, no matter what they say.

He's saying that it's time we woke up and started working on our own countries morals. We cannot justify any action against anyone for whatever they did, when moral is not something we actually have ourselves.
Stop thinking you need to clean up the world, that's not your job.

If it was and I felt like I had a right to undo bad things and things I don't like, I'd roll over the bible belt in the US with tanks and napalm.... but fortunately it's not my job to judge the insanity and ill actions of those people.

The only way to do this by now is completely destroy and rebuild the establishment. Redefine democracy, and enslave capitalism to work for people instead of the other way around.
We HAVE TO revolt, otherwise this world will turn to # faster than you can imagine.

edit on 11/9/12 by flice because: (no reason given)

Well put - that's the thing I'm trying to get across - our own governments are morally bankrupt, so you can't listen to them tell us we have to go sort out the bad guys, because every other word that comes out of their mouths is a lie.

And if we are also responsible for some of the bad stuff, who are we to point the finger at anyone else.

They have created the notion, largely via Hollywood I think with Good 'ol John Wayne, Audie Murphy, Bruce Willis, Arnie, et al, of the good guy and the bad guy, but life just isn't so simple.

But it makes it easier for people to digest and to initiate propaganda against others if you can make them the bad guy, since we already know we're the good guys.

If that makes more sense.

reply to post by Helig


The problem is that no one really cares to know the truth and most dislike someone that disagrees with them. The problem is the electoral system itself, one should not judge a politician or his party by their promises, looks/visibility.

One should looks to the party experience in government (if possible), self consistency and people in key positions. A politician should be evaluated only by his life experience and past actions. In some nations there is even a chance to get them off if they do not comply with the promises made.

One thing that I find a bit illogical in constitutional governments is that most of them are required a vow of protection and respect to the constitution but most of the mismanagement often arises when the elected officials soon realize that to further their goals changes to the constitution that they vowed to protect are required. This seems a extreme contradiction, one would believe that even disagreeing with the text after the vow they would act to protect the status quo.

They blamed the katyn massacre on the germans but it was really the soviets. And allied bombing of supply lines in december 1944 caused massive starvation in the prison camps, so when they liberated auschwitz a month later in january, surprise, surprise, the prisoners were diseased and starved to death, yet they blamed this also on the germans and called it a holocaust! The holocaust pictures show corpses that died of starvation, not gassings, nor do they show cremated bodies although cremations did happen. About 100% of what we think we know about nazi germany is a total lie.

Originally posted by filosophia
They blamed the katyn massacre on the germans but it was really the soviets. And allied bombing of supply lines in december 1944 caused massive starvation in the prison camps, so when they liberated auschwitz a month later in january, surprise, surprise, the prisoners were diseased and starved to death, yet they blamed this also on the germans and called it a holocaust! The holocaust pictures show corpses that died of starvation, not gassings, nor do they show cremated bodies although cremations did happen. About 100% of what we think we know about nazi germany is a total lie.

I wondered how long it would be before the holocaust showed up

I have actually a great bit of interesting and quite possibly useless info on this. I apologise in advance for any offence caused.

Look at the first concentration camp victim, then the second. Do you notice any difference?





Both have shaved heads, both show CC victims with emaciated bodies, prominent knee joints, etc.

It might surprise you to know that the first is actually from the Boer War, the 2nd from Auschwitz.

Yes, we the British invented the concentration camp when we locked up thousands of women and children in a confined space without proper food, medicine, sewage system, clean water, etc.

The result was that typhoid and other diseases ripped through the camps, leaving the poor inmates dead, dying, or seriously ill.

The shaved head is due to lice being rampant, the withered body from malnutrition and disease.

Now, why do I mention this?

Bearing in mind the aforementioned lie that the Germans were responsible for the massacre above, is it not inconceivable that any opportunity to show them responsible for other massacres were taken too?

Now clearly they are responsible for the deaths and suffering of those people in those camps, since they already knew, from the British experience of interring thousands of people in small places, what the outcome would be.

But if the photos of the victims of Auschwitz etc truly are indicative of genocide, then it should also be true that this was also the aim of the British in the Boer war.

I do not for one second believe that the British set out to slaughter those people in those camps, but rather that the conditions dictated the outcome.

I suspect this COULD have been the case with the Germans too, but of course it's always also possible that they planned to kill them all.

Anyway, it's a really interesting read about the first real use of photography in a war zone, and how one woman, Emily Hobhouse, caused such public outrage at what was being done in the Boer war when the British public saw the photos, that she practically brought an end to the conflict.

Maybe that's why they don't show us the horror pictures from Iraq, Libya, etc, eh?

It really is gruesome to see dead children killed by our bombs that we dropped to "bring them freedom".

You want to see an example of this today?

23 years ago in England 96 football fans were crushed to death at a match - one of them was a friend of mine.

Today it's been revealed, finally, that the Police, Government, and Press conspired to LIE about the true reason the tragedy occured.

It was caused by poor policing, but they covered that up blaming it instead on "drunken ticketless fans" (who didn't actually exist) who arrived late and forced their way in.

They took blood tests from the bodies of the dead (including children) to try and prove they were drunk.

They even LIED that the fans were stealing from the bodies of the dead to try and smear them.

Thats how bad it is:

BBC

Most people are stupid and will believe anything they hear on the news or that their government tells them so we will have more things like that happen and the morons will cheer it on. Its sad that those tactics are used but they work and unless people get smarter as a whole this stuff will easily continue.

They just lied and said organic was not much better than non-org lol !