FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist  Chat Chat  UsergroupsUsergroups  CalendarCalendar RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

7/7 'truther' author Nick Kollerstrom is a Nazi Apologist
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    9/11, 7/7 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> 9/11 & 7/7 Truth Controversies
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Rachel
On Gardening Leave
On Gardening Leave


Joined: 17 Feb 2006
Posts: 211

PostPosted: Thu Apr 17, 2008 8:34 am    Post subject: 7/7 'truther' author Nick Kollerstrom is a Nazi Apologist Reply with quote

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=15930

http://codoh.com/newrevoices/nrnktrip.html

http://www.codoh.com/newrevoices/nrcitybomb.html
Code:

The Auschwitz 'Gas Chamber' Illusion
by Nicholas Kollerstrom, PhD

As surprising as it may sound, the only intentional mass extermination program in the concentration camps of WW2 was targeted at Germans. From April, 1945 five million Germans were rounded up after surrendering, and deliberately starved until well over one million had died, in French and American-run concentration camps[1] - an event soon erased from the history books. There was, in contrast, never a centrally-coordinated Nazi program of exterminating Jews in Germany. Lethal gas chambers did not function in German labour-camps, that's just an illusion. The traditional Holocaust story has developed out of rumours, misunderstandings, and wartime propaganda. From stories pre-dating the Second World War to the Nuremberg Trials which gave official sanction to the notion, to subsequent trials, books and films, we have had it imprinted on our collective psyche. In most of Europe now, it is a thoughtcrime to believe what you have just read, punishable by imprisonment, so think carefully before deciding to read on.

The real experts on this subject are - in jail, so maybe you will put up with hearing my view instead? Europe needs, more than anything else, a truth and reconciliation forum to get to the bottom of these matters, and to try and exorcise the demonic hate-images. Ever more nations are passing laws that prohibit citizens from expressing doubt - Germany, France, Austria, Poland, Romania, Belgium, Switzerland, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Collectively, we need to work trough our despair, rage, and ideas of blame, to try and access the real historical record.

Cyanide at Auschwitz

Zyklon-B was used at Auschwitz, as an insecticide. It was vital in attempting to maintain hygiene that mattresses be deloused. Cyanide gas was adsorbed onto clay-type granules, designed to make the deadly gas as ‘safe’ as it could be. If you go to Auschwitz today, you can’t see any authentic gas chambers. You see stone huts, and experts have testified that they could not have been used to gas people, owing to problems in sealing them up (Zyklon-B released its cyanide gas rather slowly[2]).

In 1988 the scientific team of Fred Leuchter (a US execution-expert ‘Mr Death’ in gas-chamber technology) visited Poland, and concluded that the Auschwitz ‘gas chambers’ could not possibly have functioned in the alleged manner - i.e., they were not gas chambers[3]. In the following years, others would confirm the accuracy of his seminal, ‘Leuchter Report’. The German chemist Germar Rudolf, who worked at the Max Plank institute for Solid State Physics, is now in jail, because he likewise measured the high levels of the cyanide in the walls of the de-lousing chambers. It happens that this gas bonds permanently with iron, and iron is present in all the cement etc of stone walls. Whereas, he found none in the walls of what were supposed to be the ‘gas chambers’ which were mainly shower units. He thereby confirmed the work of Leuchter who likewise only found remains of the cyanide gas-insecticide in the delousing chambers.[4]

After Rudolf’s report was published in 1993, he lost his job and was prevented from completing his doctorate, then a few years later he was given a jail sentence. He is now in a high-security prison near Stuttgart, for the crime of not finding cyanide in the ‘gas chambers[5],’ echoing Leuchter’s cyanide residue investigations. [6] When a chemist is put in jail, for replicating the result of another - in Germany of all places, the nation which invented chemical procedure – then the farce cannot continue for much longer[7] (The gas chambers were conveniently located east of Germany behind the Iron Curtain to make them inaccessible to westerners, which helped the myth to flourish).

The Leuchter results were almost too good to be true, with a three orders of magnitude difference between the cyanide levels in the delousing chamber walls (about one part per thousand) and those in the washing chambers (aka ‘gas chambers’), around one part per million. They are not published in any peer-reviewed chemistry journal, for obvious reasons. The only way to hold a debate on this subject appears to be in a courtroom, while being prosecuted! It is hard to reach the calm condition necessary for replication of chemical measurements. Nonetheless people have replicated the fundamental result[8], and even folk with no interest in chemistry can appreciate the pretty blue colour on the outside of the de-lousing chamber (where the Ferro cyanide has seeped right through the wall) and its complete absence around the so-called ‘gas chambers.’ Let’s face it, the case is established: the cyanide poison was used where the German records state that it was used – for delousing mattresses, clothing etc - whereas it was not used where the US and UK (at Nuremberg) alleged.

Tourists, thirty million of them, have filed through ‘Krema 1’ at Auschwitz, with its piteous piles of shoes, etc of the dead. This was reconstructed after the war in 1946[9], a fact revealed 1992 by Dr. Franciszek Piper, the Senior Curator and Director of Archives of the Auschwitz State Museum. The historic remains from the camp are such things as shower-unit huts, a swimming pool and a morgue. There was a camp orchestra, and quite a collection of pictures from the camp art-classes,[10] although these cannot be shown in Germany or Poland, on account of laws prohibiting the doubting of the Holocaust. Anne Frank of ‘Diary’ fame came to the camp in 1944 with her father who was ill. He was put into the hospital there, and recovered, suggesting that he was decently looked after.[11]

The ‘gas chambers’ at Auschwitz had water pipes in their ceilings, indicating that they were designed as shower units. They generally lacked tight-seal doors, which would have been essential, even though these were easy to install – the Leuchter report cited the absence of such seals as one reason why the alleged ‘gas chambers’ would never have functioned.

The Arithmetic of Annihilation

The primary argument put forward by Professor Arthur Butz in his classic text, The Hoax of the 20th Century was demographic: the Jews of Europe were still there after the war and therefore had not been exterminated. They had generally moved eastwards, and once the Iron curtain came down in 1948 it became difficult to count them. Some two million emigrated from Europe, both to Palestine and America. Between 3 ½ and 4 million Jews had lived in all the lands controlled by Adolf Hitler[12], of which an upper limit of one million died in WW2: the figure of a million dead, ‘while possible, seems rather high to me’, concluded Butz[13],[14] - a figure to be contrasted with ten million Germans who died during and just after that war[15]. If somewhere around fifty million people died during WW2, that Jewish mortality comprised some 2% of this total: which is about the average for Europe, i.e. no great excess of Jews died in WW2. Almost half a million Jews dwelt in Germany around 1930 (around 1% of the population), and by 1939 many had emigrated, some 270,000 remaining[16].

The figure of six million dead is given in the ‘Holocaust’ section in Wikipedia, with three million having died in Poland. Its high ‘extermination’ figures are given in counties well to the East of Germany. East Europe was then the epicentre of world Jewry, and in the years around WWII a vast diaspora of Jews took place, mainly into what became the Soviet Union, but also Palestine and America. Poland had 10% of its total population Jewish in the 1930s and the Polish premier had ‘stated repeatedly that there were a million too many Jews in Poland’[17] –so the pressure on them to emigrate was not solely due to German policies. British rule in Palestine disintegrated in 1938, which meant that its strict immigration quotas ceased to apply. A very careful estimate of East Europe’s Jewish population ascertained that there were 2.6 million in Poland at the outbreak of the war - less than the total Polish ‘deaths’ given by Wikipedia. It put total worldwide mortality of Jews through WWII at 1 ¼ million, of which most was due to ‘Soviet barbarism’ rather than German labour-camps[18]. That seems quite comparable to the figure given above. Within the Nazi labour-camps, around four hundred and fifty thousand Jews died.[19]

Around 500,000 prisoners were registered in the labour-camps of Auschwitz in Poland, of which some 130,000 died[20]. Bodies were there disposed of by individual cremation, and the records for coke fuel consumption over the period February 1942 – October 1943 for the cremation ovens indicate that around five thousand bodies were then burnt. That accords with the number of registered, deceased inmates, viz those who had died from natural causes[21], who had to be cremated rather than buried because of the great typhoid epidemics. This demonstrates that no mass-incineration of bodies took place. Josef Kramer, a supervisor at the Auschwitz camp, gave a statement after the war which is recommended by Professor Butz as probably genuine: it had 350-500 deaths per week happening over May-November 1944, all from natural causes, a very high figure because sick prisoners were sent there, and the dead were all cremated. He believed the camp held up to 100,000 prisoners, mainly Poles and Prussians.[22]

The Final Solution – An Export Program

The ‘Final Solution’ of Adolf Hitler retained a single meaning right through WW2, central to the program of ‘National socialism,’ and signified the deportation of Jews, generally eastwards to Poland and Russia[23]. This program did not change at any point, e.g. the Wannsee conference of 1942,[24] to signify deliberate extermination. If that practice ever happened, it was not a centrally-directed policy and did not involve gas chambers: many tons of documentation of ‘third Reich’ policies remains, and no-one has been able to find therein any hint of such a meaning – of intentional genocide. The historical record fails to show any central decision to exterminate Jews by Nazi Germany.

The Gestapo and Zionists were collaborating in the late 30s because they had in this respect similar aims.[25] But, a German Foreign Office circular bulletin of June 22, 1937 stated that: ‘In view of the anti-German agitation of international Jewry, Germany cannot agree that the formation of a Palestine Jewish state would help the peaceful development of the nations of the world’.[26] International Jewish organisations twice declared war on Germany, in 1933 then again in 1939[27]. As the ‘final solution’ policy[28] was thwarted by the Allies, the camps became places of hard labour; then under the impact of Allied terror-bombing ravages of disease and famine took place.

No Documents!

At the Auschwitz trial held at Frankfurt in the mid-sixties, the court had to conclude that it lacked ‘almost all the means or evidence available in a normal murder trial’ including ‘the bodies of the victim, autopsy reports, expert reports on the cause of death, evidence as to the criminals, murder weapons, etc[29].’ Far from leading to doubt, this gave to the mythic gas chambers a metaphysical status, doubt of which was forbidden. 'No documents have survived, perhaps none ever existed,' concluded the Holocaust historian Léon Poliakov.[30]

‘In the case of the rush to impute to the Nazis a programme for the extermination of millions of people which has implausibly left no material traces, all the normal rules of historiography seem not only to have been suspended, but to have been violated over and over again. Historians routinely cite documents from secondary works like Raul Hilberg's The Destruction of the European Jews (1961) or from printed collections of documents, such as Robert Wolfe's Holocaust: The Documentary Evidence - but they never cite original documents.[31]

The nearest we have to primary-source documents concerning what went on within the camps, comes from the bulky, three-volume International Red Cross Report published in 1948. This and especially Volume III describes the couple of thousand regular, routine inspection-visits that its doctors made through the war years to the Polish labour-camps. Their report never hints at any gas-chamber, nor any mass-cremations. While maintaining a politically neutral position[32], it confirms that mortality in the camps was to a large extent caused by the allied terror-bombing.[33] Likewise Winston Churchill’s bulky, six-volume account of the War gives no allusion to the subject, especially volume Six, Triumph and Tragedy where one would expect to have some allusion if he believed it had happened.[34]

The head of the SS camp administration office sent a directive dated Dec. 28, 1942, to Auschwitz and the other concentration camps. It sharply criticised the high death rate of inmates due to disease, and ordered that "camp physicians must use all means at their disposal to significantly reduce the death rate in the various camps." Furthermore, it ordered: “The camp doctors must supervise more often than in the past the nutrition of the prisoners and, in cooperation with the administration, submit improvement recommendations to the camp commandants ... The camp doctors are to see to it that the working conditions at the various labor places are improved as much as possible.” The directive stressed that "the Reichsfuhrer SS [Heinrich Himmler] has ordered that the death rate absolutely must be reduced."[35] A further letter to all concentration camp commanders dated 20th January, 1943, reaffirmed that ‘every means must be used to lower the death rate.’ By September 1943 Auschwitz still had mortality peaking at 80/day, viewed as ‘catastrophic’ by the SS administration. Thus, from authentic documents concerning the need to reduce fatalities at the Auschwitz camp, the world has moved to a belief in genocide, with not a single authentic, supporting document[36]. The Auschwitz camp was set up as an industrial plant using the giant coalfields of Poland, and located at the confluence of rivers; it was essential to the war-effort - it would have made no sense to start exterminating its inmates.

The Hamburg judge Wilhelm Staeglich had been positioned near Auschwitz during the war and had on various occasions dropped into the camps around there. The conditions seemed fairly tolerable, he recalled, and certainly nothing resembling an extermination program existed. In particular, he had discerned no fear of mistreatment amongst the inmates. He published a testimony to this effect in 1973, and in return for his shocking news a German inquisition forced him to resign his job, stripped him of his doctoral degree, and banned his book. He was then subjected to police raids. His book, translated into English, is an essential text.[37]

German military radio messages were successfully decrypted at Bletchley Park using the ‘enigma’ codebreaker. Concerning the labour camps, over the period Spring 1942-February ’43, the following information was obtained: ‘The return from Auschwitz, the largest of the camps with 20,000 prisoners, mentioned illness as the main cause of death, but included references to shootings and hangings. There were no references in the decrypts to gassings.’[38] That seems clear enough - though no-one took any notice of it at Nuremberg.

No Photos!

Not only is there no trace of ‘Third Reich’ documentation[39] for what is alleged, but no photographs exist showing anything resembling such a group-gassing procedure. Do you believe that Jews both male and female stripped then marched into the gas chambers, then were hauled out in piles? If so, are you willing to believe that neither the very-thorough Germans nor the clever Jews wanted or were able to get a single picture of this ultimate horror? Go to Google and search – you’ll find rows of emaciated bodies, dead of typhus, will that do? I don’t think so.

US air-photographs taken in 1944 (released in 1978) when the ‘program’ was supposed to be in full swing do not show any huge crematoria burning corpses nor queues entering the ‘gas chambers: ‘The few air photos of Auschwitz-Birkenau known to date from the period of December 1943 to February 1945 show no signs of fuel depots, smoke from chimneys or open fires, burning pits or pyres. The photos were altered: Zyklon B input hatches, groups of inmates, and walls around crematoria were retouched onto the photo negatives … To this day there is no air photo evidence to support the alleged mass murder of the Jews at any location in Europe occupied by the Germans during World War Two….That the photos in western hands were altered in order to incriminate Germany, and were first published by the CIA, is also very significant indeed.’[40]

The Fabrication of Untruth

Let’s hear a couple of testimonies concerning the dreaded gas-chambers. An Austrian woman, Maria Van Herwaarden, testified about her camp experiences in a Toronto District Court in March 1988, as she had been interned in Auschwitz-Birkenau in 1942 for having sexual relations with a Polish forced laborer. On the train trip to the camp, a Gypsy woman told her and the others that they would all be gassed at Auschwitz. Upon arrival, Maria and the other women were ordered to undress and go into a large concrete room without windows to take a shower. The terrified women were sure that they were about to die. But then, instead of gas, water came out of the shower heads. Auschwitz was no vacation center, Maria confirmed, and she witnessed the death of many fellow inmates by disease, particularly typhus, and quite a few committed suicide. But she saw no evidence at all of mass killings, gassings, or of any extermination program.[41] A Jewish woman named Marika Frank arrived at Auschwitz-Birkenau from Hungary in July 1944, when 25,000 Jews were supposedly gassed and cremated daily. She likewise testified after the war that she heard and saw nothing of "gas chambers" during the time she was interned there. She heard the gassing stories only later.[42]

The Allied carpet-bombing destroyed the supply lines for the Camps, and so the death-toll mounted from famine and disease. Leaflets were dropped from the air, alleging that at Auschwitz a ‘final solution’/extermination of Jews policy was being conducted, using gas. [43] That was the genesis of the story, as those Allied-propaganda leaflets were believed. Greeted by the sight, of rows of famished Jews who had died of e.g. typhoid, it was not hard to see its confirmation. ‘Far from it being common knowledge in Germany that people were being gassed … the vast majority of Germans were horrified by the United Nations accusations and they protested that they had never heard of such acts until after the cessation of hostilities when they had begun listening to United Nations broadcasts …. Since the British Broadcasting Corporation had been broadcasting these accusations regularly for many months before the end of the war, those Germans who had "common knowledge" of the gassing before the war's end most likely got this "knowledge" from the BBC!’[44] The gas-chamber legend was born in December 1941, when the German author Thomas Mann declared on the BBC that, in German hospitals, the severely wounded, the old and the feeble were culled with poison gas. This was the ‘first appearance of gas chambers in propaganda.’[45]

As to how the stories got going, here is a remark by Faurisson: ‘The Foreign Office saw the new rumors of the Second World War only as Jewish inventions, and many in American circles shared that conviction[46]. Edward Beneš, President of Czechoslovakia (in exile in London), announced in November 1942, after inquiry by his staff, that the Germans, contrary to what had been reported to him, were not exterminating the Jews. The American Jew, Felix Frankfurter, a Supreme Court judge, stated to Jan Karski on the subject: "I can't believe you." In August of 1943, Cordell Hull, Secretary of State, warned the U.S. ambassador in Moscow by telegram that in planning a joint Allied statement on "the German crimes in Poland", it would be advisable to eliminate any mention of the gas chambers, since, as the British pointed out, there was "insufficient evidence" in the matter[47]

The Hoax of Nuremberg

A modern inquiry needs to start from the data-fabrication at Nuremberg by the US/UK, using systematic assassination and torture of witnesses. The Nuremberg trials started in 1946 with the image of six million dead as firmly established.[48] This did not emerge as a conclusion from the trials, but in its immensity it was presented to the tortured and/or beaten[49] Nazis as a fact, and would they confess their part in it? All the main defendants at Nuremberg insisted that prior to the trial they had not known of any mass murder of Jews: except that Rudolf Höss, the former Commandant of Auschwitz, signed on March 15, 1946, a document averring that he had overseen the slaughter of two and a half million Jews, and this was read out on 15th April at Nurnberg. That day signified the birth of Auschwitz’s horror-myth. Two weeks earlier, Höss had remarked:

Certainly, I signed a statement that I killed two and half million Jews. I could just as well have said it was five million Jews. There are certain methods by which any confession can be obtained, whether it is true or not.”[50]

Decades later, an account was published of how Höss had been tortured for three days and nights without sleep by a British army team in order to extract that statement.[51] In a letter to his wife, Höss apologised for his ‘confessions’ and explains that they had been extracted from him under torture[52]. The victorious Allies could not have their ‘truth’ come out at Nuremberg, without the assistance of torture. In 2001, Patricia Meehan discussed the network of secret "Direct Interrogation Centres" the British had set up in their occupational zone of Germany[53] - torture chambers, to prepare ‘evidence’ for the upcoming trials. A Zionist influence was noted at the Nuremberg trials,[54] not least concerning the figure of six million.[55]

Weighty books are in print as memorials to ‘the Holocaust’, but, let’s hear a sceptical view from Down Under:

“…Yet in the case of the Holocaust, the dearth of material evidence for the existence of large-scale extermination programme is not perceived as significant. It is assumed that the Nazis destroyed their vast death machinery so thoroughly as to preclude all possibility of post-war detection. It is not permissible to express doubts as to whether the Nazis could really have eliminated all material evidence so completely, including making the ashes of six million people vanish from the locations at which they must have been interred. To think such doubts is to engage in thought crime….

‘The reality, therefore, is that the bulk of the 'evidence' for the Holocaust derives from a corpus of documents that was expressly manufactured by the OSS and OCC in 1945-46 for the purpose of incriminating the leaders of the former German government at Nuremberg. The procedure went roughly along these lines: the Documentation Division in Paris created 'copies' (in English only), certified them as true, and sent them to the prosecution in Nuremberg, while the original documents (if they ever existed) were never seen or heard of again. German translations of the original English texts were then prepared and sent to the defense in Nuremberg, where they arrived as late as possible so that the defense had insufficient time to worry about such matters as their authenticity….

‘Starting in May 1945 with the alleged suicides of SS-General Hans-Adolf Prützmann, SS head Heinrich Himmler and SS-General Odilo Globocnik while in British captivity, there followed a bizarre string of murders of individuals associated with the Auschwitz concentration camp. (These were perpetrated by a Jewish hit squad known as the DIN.) As Joseph Bellinger, author of a new book on Himmler's murder, points out, within six months or so of the war's end practically any one who could have shed light on the Jewish policy of the Third Reich was murdered!’ This, it must be said, was extremely convenient for the prosecution at Nuremberg.[56]

At Nuremberg, the German war-generals as well as being tortured had their wives arrested, to dissuade them from making inappropriate remarks in court. They were kept in solitary confinement to prevent their comparing notes, as each was presented with the Great Untruth and asked to believe it. Finally, most of them were hanged, by a court which felt free to invent new laws, and to act as prosecutor, judge, lawyer and executioner: American justice!

Coming of the Truthseekers

In the post-war years, anyone claiming to have a personal memory of the German gas-chambers would be liable to have Paul Rassinier turn up on their doorstep. Having himself experience the hell of the Buchenwald camp he was far from being a fan of the Nazis; but, neither was he prepared to endure fabricated stories on the subject. He spent years travelling about Europe with his tape-recorder and questions, but always he found that the witnesses came out with ‘evasions or palpable lies,’ and his published report concluded:

With regard to the gas chambers, the almost endless procession of false witnesses and of falsified documents to which I have drawn the reader’s attention during this long study, proves, nevertheless, one thing: never at any moment did the responsible authorities of the Third Reich intend to order - or in fact order – the extermination of the Jews in this or any other manner.[57]

That bold conclusion (for which he was, naturally, jailed) kick-started the ‘revisionist’ movement! We may here note that the money which the FRG keeps paying out to ‘holocaust survivors’ does enormous damage here, in stimulating ‘memories’ and generating such averred cases.


Revisionist Pioneers: David Irving, Ernst Zündel, and Germar Rudolf

Robert Faurisson investigated the configuration of the alleged Auschwitz ‘gas chambers,’ then Zundel[58] got to hear of this. At a historic 1985 trial in Toronto, witnesses were grilled for the first time ever over the existence of the alleged ‘gas chambers,’ and it was found that no such testimony would stand up. Faurisson was an advisor to Zundel in this trial, and a subsequent one, and this duo just kept on winning the arguments. The prosecution could come up with no credible witnesses for a gas-chamber’s existence:

“… in 1988, during the second trial against Ernst Zündel, the public prosecutor deemed it prudent to abandon any recourse to witnesses. Canadian justice had apparently understood the lesson of the first trial: there were no credible witnesses to the existence and operation of the 'Nazi gas chambers'. Little by little, every other country in the world has learned this same lesson. At the trial of Klaus Barbie in France, in 1987, there was talk about the gas chambers of Auschwitz but no one produced any witnesses who could properly speak about them. All the while in France, during several revisionist trials, Jewish witnesses sometimes came to evoke the gas chambers but none of them testified before the court as to having seen one or having participated in a homicidal gassing by hauling bodies out of the 'gas chambers'.

“Today, gas chamber witnesses are making themselves extremely scarce and the Demjanjuk trial in Israel, which once again has revealed how much false testimony is involved in the matter, has contributed to the suppression. Several years ago, it happened that I was aggressively questioned at the rear of a law court by elderly Jews who presented themselves as "living witnesses to the gas chambers of Auschwitz", showing me their tattoos. It was necessary for me only to ask them to look me in the eyes and to describe for me a gas chamber that inevitably they retorted: "How could I do this? If I had seen a gas chamber with my own eyes I would not be here today to speak with you; I myself would have been gassed also."”[59] (Faurisson)

The study of history cannot exist without dissenting views, and who would want to read a history journal that did not allow this? One fails to understand why ‘revisionism’ should be reprehensible, and Jews especially should be relieved to discover that their ancestors were never subject to such a horror. Bestselling author David Irving, who has written over a dozen books on WWII, was recently jailed[60]. His definitive, 700- page blockbuster Hitler’s War gave no hint that the Fuhrer ever got to hear of a gas chamber, or gave any extermination command! Irving is known for the care with which he checks out his primary-source material. In 1991 his publisher, Macmillan, destroyed all their copies of his books. Irving has paid quite a price for the truth he discovered.

In November 1991 Fred Leuchter was about to speak at Chelsea Town Hall (invited by David Irving), when he was arrested onstage by the police at the request of the Board of Deputies of British Jews, and deported back to the United States. So much for freedom of speech. When his trailblazing ‘Leuchter Report’ was first published in 1989, the House of Commons denounced it as ‘Nazi propaganda’ and a ‘fascist publication’ (on July 20th, with 100 MPs voting). Even the House of Commons, however, cannot alter the laws of chemistry: the durability of the ferrocyanide ion is now pivotal to the Holocaust debate!

We are not likely to get important insights unless the ‘thoughtcrime’ penalty is lifted from the German people, and they are allowed to review their own past. The definitive modern textbook, Dissecting the Holocaust has chapters by some twenty different authors over six hundred pages.[61] In 1995 the German Government demanded that all copies be confiscated and burnt![62] Edited by Germar Rudolf, it draws its inspiration from the pioneer labours of Ernst Zundel. While in Tennessee and publishing ‘revisionist’ material, he was seized by the police and thrown into solitary confinement in a Canadian jail[63]. After two years he was transferred to Germany, where his trial now progresses. He recently (October 2006) read to the court an open letter from the Iranian president to Germany’s chancellor - to the judge’s fury. The letter said, in effect, that Germany had been on its knees before Zion for fifty years and it was time to get up[64].

Here are conclusions which Professor Robert Faurisson (University of Lyon) has drawn:: [65]

that there was neither an order, nor a plan, nor a budget for the alleged genocide of the Jews;

that 'Wannsee' was at best only a "silly story";

that there existed no specialist's report on the weapon of the crime concluding that 'the building (whether intact, "reconstructed", or in ruins) served as a homicidal gas chamber';

that there is no autopsy that would allow us to conclude: 'This is the corpse of a deportee killed by poison gas'[66]

that the confession of Rudolf Höß was no longer of any value ("Höß was always a very weak and confused witness");

that their alleged witnesses had probably never seen gas chambers or gassings inasmuch as the best of them, the famous Rudolf Vrba, in 1985, had been obliged to admit before a Canadian judge and jury that in his famous book on the subject he had made use of "poetic licence" or "licentia poetarum";

that the "Jewish soap" had never existed;

that the figure of four million victims at Auschwitz was only a fiction;

and that from 1942 to 1945, certainly at Auschwitz, but probably overall, more Jews were killed by so-called 'natural' causes [starvation, disease, sickness and overwork] than by 'unnatural' ones.

At the recent Tehran conference, Faurisson summed up his case more succinctly –

• They cannot invoke a single document proving the crime.
• They are unable to provide the least representation of the crime weapon.
• They do not possess any proof nor even any evidence.
• They cannot name a single truthful witness[67]

Forbidden Doubt and Fictional Horror

Doubt anything in our modern world, scoff at sacred texts, no-one will care - except that one kind of doubt is forbidden to you, which will land you in jail – in ten different nations! You can read the Hammer-horror account in, e.g., Auschwitz by Lawrence Rees (2005): every hour or so, a thousand naked Jews were marched (somehow) into a room with space for maybe one or two hundred, the doors are locked, then the Zyklon-B is poured down special chutes or holes in the ceiling (which did not exist in the war, they were added later), then after the screaming stops ‘powerful fans’ remove the poison gas. In your dreams, Mr Rees. There were no such powerful fans. But, then what? The mass of bodies will be mixed up with the Zyklon-B, and that is specifically designed to keep emitting the cyanide gas slowly. How is anyone supposed to shovel out this tortured mass of corpses mixed up with poison powder? Remember there are only ordinary-sized doors, mostly opening inwards. Its an unthinkable nightmare that could not possibly have worked, and would certainly have gassed any workers trying to operate it. It is the ‘safe’ design of this insecticide material, which would have prevented it from functioning in this deliriously-imagined manner.

No German government existed after the war, that was the ‘unconditional surrender’ which the Allies demanded. By losing both its senior military staff and government, Germany was in effect decapitated - necessary for the illusory version of events to be perpetrated. The verdicts of Nuremberg were made final and binding for the post-war FRG. Germany has since paid a hundred billion Deutschmarks to Israel by way of Holocaust-compensation – clearly, that needs to be refunded. Germany should take the advice of Iranian leader Ahmadinajad and stop paying it, because that funding provides undue motivation for holocaust ‘memories.’ Germany is helping to maintain the holocaust legend,[68] by thus aiding the state of Israel.[69]

The United Nations has now established its annual Holocaust Remembrance Day on 27 January, as of 2006. On this anniversary, we all need to mull over the faking of history and the Greatest Lie Ever Told. As Perseus gazed at the Medusa only via a mirror, to avoid being petrified, to too we need calm reflection and the power of Truth to avoid our collective destruction.

END NOTES

[1] ‘Starting in April 1945, the United States Army and the French Army casually annihilated about one million men, most of them in the American camps,’ a part of the US-UK-Russia plan ‘to destroy Germany as a world power once and for all…’ James Bacque Other Losses London 1989 p.xix.

[2] www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=55888

[3] Fred Leuchter, Auschwitz: the First Forensic Examination of Auschwitz: London, 1989; 1988, Toronto. www.zundelsite.org/english/basic_articles/inside.html For debate, see: www.codoh.com/gcgv/gc426v12.html

[4] http://vho.org/GB/Books/trr//

[5] www.takeourworldback.com/short/rudolfarrested.htm

[6] http://vho.org/GB/Books/trr/ www.dailynorthwestern.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2006/02/14/43f1778c0f7e0

[7] www.vho.org/GB/Books/dth/fndgcger.html

[8] www.zundelsite.org/english/debate/014_jam.html In 1990 the Krakow Forensic Institute obtained somewhat lower values: their brick samples from Auschwitz ‘gas chambers’ gave a maximum of 0.6 parts per million of cyanide ––ie, hardly a trace: www.nizkor.org/hweb/orgs/polish/institute-for-forensic-research/table- three.html

[9] www.rense.com/general53/aauz.htm, www.ihr.org/jhr/v15/v15n1p23_Weber.html

[10] http://judicial-inc.biz/Auschwitz.htm

[11] Dittlieb Felderer, Anne Frank’s diary a Hoax, IHR CA 1979, p.1; www.radioislam.org/annefrank/.

[12]Did Six Million Really die? (Richard Harwood, Historical Review Press, 1975: a 30-page monograph) pp.6, 28. An official German source of June 1940 put the figure at 3 ¼ million Jews ‘in all the territories now under German control’ (i.e. it excludes Russia). W. Staeglich, Auschwitz – a Judge Looks at the Evidence’ IHR 1986, p.29.

[13] A.R.Butz, The Hoax of the 200th Century (Historical Review Press, 1977, Brighton, 2003), p.239.

Paul Rassinier ((Debunking the Genocide Myth

[15] Ibid p.240..

[16] Walter Sanning, The Dissolution of European Jewry, IHR 1983, p.27.

[17] J&D. Kimche, The Secret Roads, the “Illegal Migration of a Peoplee 1954, p.215.

[18] Ref. 16, pp.32,198.

[19] Dissecting the Holocaust: The Growing Critique of "Truth" and "Memory" ed. germar rudolf, 2003, p. 216: www.vho.org/GB/Books/dth/found.html, Ch. “Holocaust victims – A Statistical analysis.”

[20] Dissecting (www.vho.org/GB/Books/dth/fndGraf.html) section 4.1

[21] Dissecting (ref 19), p.406.

[22] There were a network of labour camps around the small town of Auchwitz and this figure would be their total population. The gas-chamber allegations centred on the Birkenau (Auchwitz II) camp. British-intelligence estimate of 20,000 population (ref. 37) must have been for just one camp. Kramer’s statement alluded to the gassing stories: ‘All I can say is that it is untrue from beginning to end.’ Butz (ref 12), p.265.

[23] In the German endlosung, ‘end’ signifies ‘goal’ and ‘aim’, at least as much as ‘final.’

[24] The minutes of the Wannsee Conference (Berlin, 20th January 1942) provide ‘unambiguous documentary evidence that no extermination program existed:’ Butz, p.212;. For its text, see Staeglich (ref 12), Appendix I.

[25] Butz p.233.

[26] Quoted by Zundel, www.zundelsite.org/english/debate/022_jam.html

[27] 24 March 1933: www.sweetliberty.org/issues/israel/freedman.htm, http://k0nsl.com/k0nsl/detox/Judea1.html Daily Express headline, ‘Judea declares war on Germany;’ then again, on 5th Sept 1939 (8th Sept, Jewish Chronicle) “The Israeli people around the world declare economic and financial war against Germany … holy war against Hitler’s people” declared by Chain Weizmann, Zionist leader: Six Million (ref 12) p.4; , For Those Who Cannot Speak M. McLaughlin, Historical Review Press 1979 p.17. Staeglich, p.57.

[28] On June 17th 1942, Hitler remarked: ‘One could found a state of Israel in Madagascar,’ (Six Million, p.5) suggesting that the National-Socialist ‘final solution’ was then still viewed as feasible. Many ‘Zionists’ for whom Palestine was unfeasible looked at Madagascar.

[29] Dissecting (ref. 19), p.38. n.119.

[30] Léon Poliakov, Harvest of Hate, 1979.

[31] Social Democracy Now website http://www.blogigo.co.uk/socialdemocracynow/accuse-indictment-academic -historians-for-their-unprofessional/45/ (February, 2006).

[32] See Butz’ discussion of this Report (ref 13), p. 142ff.

[33] Report of the International Committee of the Red Cross WW2, 1948, Vol.3. www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=2735

[34] General Eisenhower may have alluded to the subject, in one paragraph: after the war he visited a ‘horror camp’ near Gotha, where he saw evidence of ‘Nazi brutality’. D. Eisenhower, Crusade in Europe, 1948, p.408.

[35] Dissecting, p.289.

[36] Irving, Nuremberg, p.188 n.16, for absence of German ‘holocaust’ documents.

[37] Steiglich, ref. 12.

[38] British Intelligence in World War Two, HMSO, 1981 F.Hinsey Ed., Vol. II, p.673.

[39] For discussion of an alleged statement by Himmler concerning extermination, see Butz (ref.13) p.193.

[40] J. C. Ball, Air Photo Evidence, www.vho.org/GB/Books/dth/fndaerial.html

[41] www.ihr.org/leaflets/auschwitz.shtml www.ihr.org/books/kulaszka/21herwaarden.html

[42] Abrams, Voices from the Holocaust p.196

[43] In the Anne Frank ‘Diary’, she gets to hear in October 1942 about Jews going to gas-chambers, solely via the ‘English radio: The Diary of Anne Frank, Pan 1989, pp.43, 130; Felderer (ref. 11), p.13.

[44] www.ihr.org/jhr/v04/v04p261_Lindsey.html. The story appears in a 1944 War Refugee Board report German Extermination Camps: Auschwitz and Birkenau, Washington, Executive office of the President, the WRB being ‘an instrument of the World Jewish congress:’ Butz p.66-7; Staglich p.93-8.

[45] Butz, p.174.

[46] “The whole propaganda which started about Auschwitz abroad was initiated by us with the help of our Polish comrades… It is no exaggeration when I say that the majority of all Auschwitz propaganda, which was spread at that time all over the world, was written by ourselves in the camp…." Bruno Baum, communist’ (Dissecting, p.115).

[47] www.vho.org/GB/Books/dth/fndfaurpref.html

[48] David Irving, Nuremberg the Last battle (1996): US judge Robert Jackson was initially advised of the ‘six million’ figure by influential Jews: ‘Chapter 4, The Origin of six Million.’

[49] ‘All but two of the Germans [on trial at Nuremberg], in the 139 cases that we investigated, had their testicles kicked in beyond repair. This was standard operating procedure with our American investigators:’ 23.1.49, The Sunday Pictorial (quoted in For Those Who Cannot Speak (ref. 27), p.21.

[50] Höss spoke these words to Moritz von Schirmeister in a car on his way to Nurnberg on 1st April, 1946: www.rense.com/general68/Höss.htm. Faurisson states that Bernard Clarke, Höss’s chief torturer, was Jewish, but this is not in Butler’s book. Irving (ref 47), p.241.

[51] Rupert Butler, Legions of Death 1983, pp.237-8; Dissecting, p.96; Staeglich (ref. 12), pp.193-216.

[52] The letter is preserved: Irving, Nuremberg, p.246.

[53] Patricia Meehan, A Strange Enemy People: Germans under the British 1945-50, 2001.

[54] According to The Jewish Chronicle, the World Jewish congress ‘had secured the holding of the Nuremberg trials at which it had provided expert advice and much valuable evidence’ (16.12.49): McLaughlin, Nuremberg and other war crime Trials, Historical Review Press, 1979, p.54.

[55] For Zionists occupying top positions at the Nuremberg trials, see Butz (ref 13) p.30.

[56] Ref. (31).

[57] Rassinier (ref. 14) p.270.

[58] www.zundelsite.org/

[59] www.vho.org/GB/Books/dth/fndwitness.html

[60] www.ihr.org/newsletters/ihr_update_december_2006.pdf; released, December 2006.

[61] Ref. 19.

[62] www.codoh.com/found/found.html. Academics protested against this search-and-destroy operation: www.iamthewitness.com/DarylBradfordSmith_Holocaust.html In 2005 G.R. Rudolf deported from America: www.rense.com/general68/scientistgermar.htm.

[63] Zundel was charged for the crime of having promoted the pamphlet Did Six Million Really die? (ref 11) This brilliant pamphlet, banned in many nations, has sold in hundreds of thousands in various languages, and let us hope it will come to be studied by every schoolchild.

[64] www.zundelsite.org/zundel_persecuted/sept11-06_letter.html

[65] Dissecting, preface: http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/dth/fndfaurpref.html.

[66] US forensic pathologist Dr Charles Larsen performed autopsies in 1945 at Dachau and other German labour-camps. He is quoted as saying to a newpaper in 1980: ‘There never was a case of poison gas uncovered:’ www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=55. But, his biography Crime Doctor (J.D.McCallum, Canada 1979) has him saying that at Dachau ‘a relatively few of the inmates I personally examined were murdered in this manner,’ viz. by cyanide pellets: these were, he reckoned, ‘mercy killings’ only for psychotic prisoners, p.61.

[67] He found Butz’ book to be still the best one on the topic, with which one may agree. A Paris court found Faurisson guilty (February 2005) of the crime of Holocaust denial, for affirming on Iranian TV, ‘There was never a single execution gas chamber under the Germans.’ He presided over the Holocaust-re-evaluation conference at Tehran, December 2006. See his excellent lecture there given: http://www.ziopedia.org/content/view/2676/58/

[68] The Six Million Reconsidered, Ed W. Grimsted, Hist. Rev. Press 1977.

[69] www.zundelsite.org/english/debate/022_jam.html

Taken from: CODOH.com
__________________
I did not come to the conclusion that the holocaust was a fraud because of what the revisionists said, I came to the conclusion because of what the holocaust historians said themselves!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TonyGosling
Editor
Editor


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 14221
Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England

PostPosted: Sat Apr 19, 2008 5:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hid this post the other day when Rachel posted it on an unrelated thread.

But she does raise a serious point about Nick's views on the Nazis and the Holocaust. So reintroducing it with a new headline.

This thread, along with the other one on the decision to stop Holocaust discussions, ae the only two exceptions to the no Holocaust discussion rule.

It may also serve as a reminder of why it's an extremely bad idea to have anonymous users in any position of authority as they may be 'outed' like this at any time.

See here as well
911 Cultist and UCL Research Fellow in Holocaust Denial Shame
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/04/396964.html

_________________
www.rethink911.org
www.actorsandartistsfor911truth.org
www.mediafor911truth.org
www.pilotsfor911truth.org
www.mp911truth.org
www.ae911truth.org
www.rl911truth.org
www.stj911.org
www.l911t.com
www.v911t.org
www.thisweek.org.uk
www.abolishwar.org.uk
www.elementary.org.uk
www.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149
http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
https://37.220.108.147/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
karlos
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 2516
Location: london

PostPosted: Sat Apr 19, 2008 5:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

But surely Rachel herself has been outed many times and nothing she says has a shred of credibilty anymore.
Like others she is playing the smear card to distract people from her own shortcomings. And like many others using the same smear to avoid answering the questions.

Rachel is like an old soak who keeps coming back for one last drink. always threatening to leave but never quite making it to the door.

As Rachel has now used the H word does that not mean she should be banned or at least labelled a critic?

ps: is it acceptable for Rachel to print someone elses name?
When everytime her maiden name and married name got printed the thread got deleted.

_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
TonyGosling
Editor
Editor


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 14221
Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England

PostPosted: Sat Apr 19, 2008 6:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

This thread isn't about Rachel Carlos, it's about Nick's extraordinary writings. Whatever you think about her I think she's done us a service flagging this up. I personally had never read this article of Nick's.

And let's remind ourselves of Nazi Nick Kollerstrom's flirtation with the London Theosophical Society - which he tells me he visits regularly and does talks - an organisation that many, including author of Unholy Alliance Peter Levenda, show acted as a sort of domestic 'infernal incubator' for the Nazi ideology through the Thule Society and its magazines, Nazi party and Adolf Hitler himself.

_________________
www.rethink911.org
www.actorsandartistsfor911truth.org
www.mediafor911truth.org
www.pilotsfor911truth.org
www.mp911truth.org
www.ae911truth.org
www.rl911truth.org
www.stj911.org
www.l911t.com
www.v911t.org
www.thisweek.org.uk
www.abolishwar.org.uk
www.elementary.org.uk
www.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149
http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
https://37.220.108.147/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/


Last edited by TonyGosling on Sat May 12, 2012 10:25 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
numeral
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 23 Dec 2005
Posts: 500
Location: South London

PostPosted: Sat Apr 19, 2008 6:11 pm    Post subject: astro3 on holocaustianity Reply with quote

Hi astro3

I note your brilliant reply to the slur on Blair watch and the blog of the Blessed Rachel North PBUH:
http://rachelnorthlondon.blogspot.com/2008_04_01_archive.html
Quote:
May I have a right of reply?
Most of your viewers may share your own knee-jerk response of ‘Holocaust denier =Nazi= anti-Semitism,’ with the accompanying hate and rage; and this is the one any only topic in our culture where everyone knows they are supposed to believe it but no-one ever gets to hear what the evidence is supposed to be, and one gathers it would be very ethically damnable to inquire about it. For the one or two who wish to look into the subject and dare I say question it, permit me to recommend perusing ‘Dissecting the Holocaust’ by twenty-odd different authors which is the modern work on the subject: www.vho.org/GB/Books/dth/

You are quite right to call me a ‘denier’ in that I deny that anyone ever put Jews into gas chambers. That didn’t happen, its not part of the historical record. There are no documents, no photographs, no physical traces or remains, no post-mortem diagnoses of deaths by cyanide poisoning: there are only stories. In all the Nazi documentation, the ‘Final solution’ always meant the export of Jews, Eastwards, it never had a lethal meaning. The Bad-Arolsen archives in North Germany are the definitive record of who died in the camps, how many died, and how they died.
Thank you for allowing me to reply, have a nice day.


I am not really up on all this but I do recall Sylvia Plath's poem Lady Lazarus:
Quote:
I have done it again.
One year in every ten
I manage it----

A sort of walking miracle, my skin
Bright as a Nazi lampshade,
My right foot

A paperweight,
My face a featureless, fine
Jew linen.

Peel off the napkin
0 my enemy.
Do I terrify?----

The nose, the eye pits, the full set of teeth?
The sour breath
Will vanish in a day.

Soon, soon the flesh
The grave cave ate will be
At home on me

And I a smiling woman.
I am only thirty.
And like the cat I have nine times to die.

This is Number Three.
What a trash
To annihilate each decade.

What a million filaments.
The peanut-crunching crowd
Shoves in to see

Them unwrap me hand and foot
The big strip tease.
Gentlemen, ladies

These are my hands
My knees.
I may be skin and bone,

Nevertheless, I am the same, identical woman.
The first time it happened I was ten.
It was an accident.

The second time I meant
To last it out and not come back at all.
I rocked shut

As a seashell.
They had to call and call
And pick the worms off me like sticky pearls.

Dying
Is an art, like everything else,
I do it exceptionally well.

I do it so it feels like hell.
I do it so it feels real.
I guess you could say I've a call.

It's easy enough to do it in a cell.
It's easy enough to do it and stay put.
It's the theatrical

Comeback in broad day
To the same place, the same face, the same brute
Amused shout:

'A miracle!'
That knocks me out.
There is a charge

For the eyeing of my scars, there is a charge
For the hearing of my heart----
It really goes.

And there is a charge, a very large charge
For a word or a touch
Or a bit of blood

Or a piece of my hair or my clothes.
So, so, Herr Doktor.
So, Herr Enemy.

I am your opus,
I am your valuable,
The pure gold baby

That melts to a shriek.
I turn and burn.
Do not think I underestimate your great concern.

Ash, ash ---
You poke and stir.
Flesh, bone, there is nothing there----

A cake of soap,
A wedding ring,
A gold filling.

Herr God, Herr Lucifer
Beware
Beware.

Out of the ash
I rise with my red hair
And I eat men like air.


I guess this fifties / early sixties stuff is a bit dodgy.

Nazi lampshades made out of human skin and mass production of soap from human fat are just stories?

_________________
Follow the numbers
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
ian neal
Site Founder
Site Founder


Joined: 26 Jul 2005
Posts: 3129
Location: UK

PostPosted: Sat Apr 19, 2008 6:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I would like to make a suggestion.

This thread is kept public but locked.

(I would even be happy for the previous holocaust discussion thread to be made public again provided in stays locked.)

Then offer Nick the opportunity to respond to this in his own time.

And then take it from there.

Just a suggestion. Your call Tony
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
TonyGosling
Editor
Editor


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 14221
Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England

PostPosted: Sat Apr 19, 2008 7:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

We need to be self-critical as a movement.
Or we will be no better than the bullies and fascists we have taken on.
This is an important issue IMO so let others comment if they wish.
It's important not to lock/stifle this one.
Nick can respond in his own time if he wants.

_________________
www.rethink911.org
www.actorsandartistsfor911truth.org
www.mediafor911truth.org
www.pilotsfor911truth.org
www.mp911truth.org
www.ae911truth.org
www.rl911truth.org
www.stj911.org
www.l911t.com
www.v911t.org
www.thisweek.org.uk
www.abolishwar.org.uk
www.elementary.org.uk
www.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149
http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
https://37.220.108.147/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
astro3
Suspended
Suspended


Joined: 28 Jul 2005
Posts: 274
Location: North West London

PostPosted: Sun Apr 20, 2008 2:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

A Personal comment
I’ve always endorsed the general view that any discussion about ‘The Holocaust’ should be kept off this site. However I have been posting on the CODOH site for about a year (Committee for Open Discussion of the Holocaust) and maybe this is a time to comment upon it. My two articles on the subject posted up there are: The Auschwitz Gas Chamber Illusion (1) and the shorter School trips to Auschwitz (2). In addition I especially looked into the chemistry of the ferrocyanide embedded in the remains of the German labour-camp walls from sixty years ago, and the question of whether this tells us exactly where the cyanide gas was used (yep it does). (3)

I would say that the very existence of the state of Israel depends upon sustaining the vast untruth and calumny against the German people, that they – as was alleged at Nuremberg in 1946 - put Jews into homicidal gas chambers. My opinion, which you don’t have to agree with, is that they didn’t. At Nuremberg in 1946 any discussion of the huge quantities of Zyklon-B (liquid cyanide absorbed onto clay) used in the German labour-camps was predicated on the assumption that it was for human murder: whereas we may now apprehend something different, viz that it was actually used for delousing mattresses & clothes, as part of the struggle against typhus. Those actual gas chambers endure today – but you don’t get shown round them on a visit!

Permit me also to express the view, that the hundreds of thousands of Jews who died in these labour-camps under terrible conditions are hardly to be compared with the millions of Germans who died under equally or maybe worse conditions. ‘The Holocaust’ if that word has any meaning should apply to the systematic city-incineration practiced by the allies in WW2, the most frightful war-crime ever conceived by man. The story dreamed up of human gassing meant that the Allies could walk away on the moral high ground without the city-bombing even having to be mentioned at Nuremberg. For a long time most decent people would never consider that the US/UK would ever create an untruth so frightful, however after the lies brewed up to get us into war with Iraq I think more people are open to this possibility.

Let’s notice our own feelings here, that ‘The Holocaust’ always appears as the one and only subject in the whole world which no-one is allowed to question – would not something terrible happen to you if you did that? Nobody can arrange a public meeting on the subject – a pub or whatever would not expect its windows or its finances to remain intact very long if it did that! Only in Iran could a conference be held, questioning what really happened, in 2006, and it stands under real, imminent danger of nuclear attack in consequence.

Israeli nuclear subs sold by Germany now stand ready to launch their nuclear missiles against Iran. How could Germany have done such a thing? A hundred billion Deutchmarks have been paid to Israel by Germany by way of recompense to ‘Holocaust survivors,’ isn't that enough? There are 11 different EU nations where doubt of the H. is a crime, where I’d be in jail for posting these articles, those edicts need to be withdrawn.

There is deep-level mind-control programming which kicks in if one tries to discuss this topic. I’ve never in my life had such filthy insults as I have of late from Rachel and to a lesser extent from 'Blairwatch'. Anyone who knows me knows I’ve never had the slightest interest in the Nazi cause, I couldn’t tell you the difference between Goering and Himmler. As for being a white supremacist, as Rachel is informing people, well for a start I’m about to marry a Native American; and secondly my forthcoming July 7 book ‘Terror on the Tube,’ which is going to knock Rachel’s off the shelf, will advocate Islamic innocence. Also if you look at my thread about the present Kingston July 7 trial you’ll see I condemn it as racist because of all the white men wearing wigs versus the three brown-skinned men in the dock. I think you’ll find I’m on record as likewise condemning the 21/7 trial at Woolwich for having about 15 white males in wigs and four dark-skinned men in the dock. I’m proud of living in London as a vibrantly multicultural city and believe that it should have a zero-tolerance policy towards such racism.

That’ll probably do for now but I’d be happy to engage in civil debate on this topic with any group. It is a Sacred Myth and has a slight degree of comparison with the Sacred Myth of 9/11. Both are hate-engendering, war-ratifying illusions brewed up primarily (IMO) by the US/UK. Both have an almost unbelievable depth of Untruth encoded into them, designed for the gaining of political control. We need to find Truth if our civilisation is to endure, banning doubt just won’t do. A huge number of books are being banned and burnt across Europe on this topic and we badly need a ‘truth forum’ open debate, where people are allowed to express their rage and confusion, and then slowly we will begin to get somewhere. The last attempt to arrange a UK public meeting on doubting the Holocaust was by David Irving when he invited Fred Leuchter onto a public platform in 1991, at Chelsea Town Hall. Leuchter was arrested on the stage while about to begin, and flown straight back to America.

Twenty years ago more or less now (spring 1988) Leuchter unlawfully took samples from the walls of Auschwitz, dodging the guards, and the analyses of these samples back in America began the whole modern ‘Revisionist’ debate. Later on the brilliant German chemist Germar Rudolf took some more samples, and though he is now in jail his results have clearly established the modern case: (4) at least for anyone who is open to rational argument.

1. www.codoh.com/newrevoices/nrillusion.html
2. www.codoh.com/newrevoices/nrnktrip.html
3. http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=4111
4. www.vho.org/GB/Books/dth/


Last edited by astro3 on Thu May 01, 2008 9:23 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Dogsmilk
Mighty Poster
Mighty Poster


Joined: 06 Oct 2006
Posts: 1616

PostPosted: Sun Apr 20, 2008 4:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
There is deep-level mind-control programming which kicks in if one tries to discuss this topic. I’ve never in my life had such filthy insults as I have of late from Rachel and to a lesser extent from 'Blairwatch'. (I’ve asked my solicitor if its actionable) Anyone who knows me knows I’ve never had the slightest interest in the Nazi cause, I couldn’t tell you the difference between Goering and Himmler. As for being a white supremacist, as Rachel is informing people, well for a start I’m about to marry a Native American; and secondly my forthcoming July 7 book ‘Terror on the Tube,’ which is going to knock Rachel’s off the shelf, will advocate Islamic innocence. Also if you look at my thread about the present Kingston July 7 trial you’ll see I condemn it as racist because of all the white men wearing wigs versus the three brown-skinned men in the dock. I think you’ll find I’m on record as likewise condemning the 21/7 trial at Woolwich for having about 15 white males in wigs and four dark-skinned men in the dock. I’m proud of living in London as a vibrantly multicultural city and believe that it should have a zero-tolerance policy towards such racism.


Though you will obviously be aware I think you're dead wrong I'd like to say I think it is unjust that people are automatically labelling you an anti-semite and a Nazi unless they can demonstrate that you have actually expressed such views. Anyone who reads this forum knows I have fairly strong views about Holocaust denial, but it seems to me this is being played to the hilt somewhat. It's slightly ironic that the one person who never posted about it here has caused far more fuss than any one of the people who've been posting about it here for ages.
It's also being assumed that this site has taken a knee-jerk reaction, yet I seem to recall Tony saying he was going to do something about denial posting here before all this happened - long enough for an entire page of the now hidden thread to be formed by people complaining about his decision before he actually hid it. Though I obviously can't check.
I kinda assumed people would know your views already. I did. But then I browse CODOH every now and then to see what they're saying. I am surprised you do not post at RODOH as they have actual debate.
That said, given so many of your references are to anti-semites and/or Nazis (Richard Harwood, Ernst 'Nazi flying saucers' Zundel, JudicialInc (even considered dubious among many Stormfront posters ferchrissakes) etc I'd be surprised if you're entirely surprised at people's assumptions.

_________________
It's a man's life in MOSSAD
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
johnnyvoid
Wrecker
Wrecker


Joined: 26 Apr 2006
Posts: 23

PostPosted: Sun Apr 20, 2008 5:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kollerstrum speaks
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ian neal
Site Founder
Site Founder


Joined: 26 Jul 2005
Posts: 3129
Location: UK

PostPosted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 1:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

No that is not

johnnyvoid wrote:
Kollerstrum speaks


that is some anonymous blogger offering us his/her opinions on Nick

And here is another

www.londonbroiges.blogspot.com



And for what it's worth, my experience of Nick has given me no reason to think of him as a racist, anti-semite or a nazi sympathiser. A flawed researcher? Yes and on the holocaust I think he is wrong but one who occasionally throws up gems such confirming the cancellation of the Luton train the July 7 'bombers' were alleged to have taken. A piss poor campaigning strategist? Guilty as charged. A strident critic of zionism? Hey join the club. But a racist, anti-semite and nazi-sympathiser? Not guilty atleast not in my experience or on the evidence I've seen (though I admit I have yet to find time to read what he has had to say on the holocaust beyond what is posted here. I will aim to do so and depending on what he has actually written, may revise my opinion, though I doubt it).

Would those who believe Nick is a racist, anti-semite and nazi sympathiser care to post specific quotes from Nick's writings or other evidence that led them to conclude this or would you say that everyone who 'denies the holocaust' is automatically a racist, anti-semite and nazi-sympathiser?

Thanks


Last edited by ian neal on Mon Apr 21, 2008 2:43 am; edited 5 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
ian neal
Site Founder
Site Founder


Joined: 26 Jul 2005
Posts: 3129
Location: UK

PostPosted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 2:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Good post dogsmilk

Dogsmilk wrote:
It's slightly ironic that the one person who never posted about it here has caused far more fuss than any one of the people who've been posting about it here for ages.


I suspect there is a reason for this which is that this attack is linked to the fact that Nick was recently interviewed for the upcoming conspiracy files programme on July 7 and that it may be in certain peoples' interests to link those who question the official July 7 narrative with anti-semitism as well as linking 9/11 truth with anti-semitism. Something that the BBC conspiracy files programme on 9/11 last year went out of its way to do.

I believe it was last Monday when the interview was recorded. A 'co-incidence' then that Blairwatch 'broke' this story on the same day when Nick posted on CODOH last year?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
ian neal
Site Founder
Site Founder


Joined: 26 Jul 2005
Posts: 3129
Location: UK

PostPosted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 2:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Given that the Blairwatch and rachel blogs link to the hidden holocaust thread, I urge Tony to make it public but to keep it locked. I certainly have nothing in that thread I'm not happy to have in the public domain and keeping in hidden is IMO counter-productive
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
conspiracy analyst
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter


Joined: 27 Sep 2005
Posts: 2273

PostPosted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 1:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think the attacks on Nick aim to divert away from the issues under current debate namely 7/7 and a way of destroying him politically before his book is out. But I do think he has helped them attack him by posting an issue wihout actually asking questions regarding it but being so fundamental in his approach.

Certain passages I would contest are aimed primarily at an Anglo-American audience...
Quote:
As surprising as it may sound, the only intentional mass extermination program in the concentration camps of WW2 was targeted at Germans. From April, 1945 five million Germans were rounded up after surrendering, and deliberately starved until well over one million had died, in French and American-run concentration camps[1] - an event soon erased from the history books.


The Germans occupied the Slav countries and exterminated millions, firebombing cities, carrying out reprisals of 200 to 1 for each dead German soldier, destroying 60 odd cities in Russia, 800 villages in Greece, over a million dead in old Yugoslavia etc.

The emphasis on the gas chambers is linked to assigning a special role to jewish extermination over and above all else. This is what Nick is trying to attack but maybe done in such a manner which opens up all to attack primarily because fascism is considered the biggest evil of all. Death whether from a gas attack or a nuclear bomb is still death, the issue at stake is whether WW2 was primarily an anti-Jewish war or something else.

Without analysing the nature of WW2 the epithet 'holocaust denier' works in the same emotional manner as the epithet 'racism'. Whole generations have been brought up by it forcing one to defend ones positions for only asking questions.

Denying the Holocaust and what that implies is obviously like denying the existence of God under the Spanish inquisition. All else that you say will be coloured by that fact alone. What was the Holocaust and what does it actually mean is obvious that it is open to interpretation by power superior to us. For instance if one says I dont think 6 million jews died but 3 million immediately you are branded a ...Holocaust denier not for not believing that jews didn't die but that jews did, you just disagree on the... numbers.

The Americans adopted Israel at some point, have nourished it with a massive marketing excuse to continue to exist and they go round the world asking for donations for its military airbase in the Middle East. What this all has to do with the Holocaust is once again open to interpretation primarily because jews who fled from Germany went to many countries, why is it that Israel though became associated with the Holocaust and not Munich? Why wasn't a jewish homeland created in Poland after the end of WW2 or Germany why did it have to be created in the Arab world?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
karlos
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 2516
Location: london

PostPosted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 3:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ian neal wrote:

I suspect there is a reason for this which is that this attack is linked to the fact that Nick was recently interviewed for the upcoming conspiracy files programme on July 7 and that it may be in certain peoples' interests to link those who question the official July 7 narrative with anti-semitism as well as linking 9/11 truth with anti-semitism. Something that the BBC conspiracy files programme on 9/11 last year went out of its way to do.

I believe it was last Monday when the interview was recorded. A 'co-incidence' then that Blairwatch 'broke' this story on the same day when Nick posted on CODOH last year?


I think this is a very true point which i had not thought of until you stated it. I would ask a question though. Why dont we use the term World War II HISTORIAN?
Surely that sounds so much more friendly than the H word.

_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
paul wright
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 26 Sep 2005
Posts: 2651
Location: Sunny Bradford, Northern Lights

PostPosted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 10:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

This is bad. Nick has done some very worthwhile research re 7/7
Why does he risk that through holocaust 'revisionism'
Whatever the reality or otherwise, why feed the enmity?
Why was I seduced into a few moments of footage, previously unannounced, from the Beeb
With all this background?
I'm right annoyed, and will let this forum go which way it's supposed to...

_________________
http://www.exopolitics-leeds.co.uk/introduction
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
johnnyvoid
Wrecker
Wrecker


Joined: 26 Apr 2006
Posts: 23

PostPosted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 11:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

“22 April 2008

UCL has been made aware of views expressed by Dr Nicholas Kollerstrom, an Honorary Research Fellow in UCL Science & Technology Studies.

The position of Honorary Research Fellow is a privilege bestowed by departments within UCL on researchers with whom it wishes to have an association. It is not an employed position.

The views expressed by Dr Kollerstrom are diametrically opposed to the aims, objectives and ethos of UCL, such that we wish to have absolutely no association with them or with their originator.

We therefore have no choice but to terminate Dr Kollerstrom’s Honorary Research Fellowship with immediate effect.”

http://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/news-articles/0804/08042202
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jfk
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 19 Aug 2007
Posts: 246

PostPosted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 11:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

why is this thread in 911 controversies?

it's completely off subject

it should be moved somewhere like other controversies asap
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
blackbear
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 08 Aug 2006
Posts: 656
Location: up north

PostPosted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 11:54 am    Post subject: Zionism + Holocaust Research Reply with quote

Nicholas Kollerstrom: 9/11 "Truther", Nazi

"University College, London has terminated Nicholas Kollerstrom's Honorary Research Fellowship.

Frankly, I'm not at all surprised."
comments (7) ...
http://hurryupharry.bloghouse.net/ (muslim hate site)

UCL has been made aware of views expressed by Dr Nicholas Kollerstrom, an Honorary Research Fellow in UCL Science & Technology Studies.

The position of Honorary Research Fellow is a privilege bestowed by departments within UCL on researchers with whom it wishes to have an association. It is not an employed position.

The views expressed by Dr Kollerstrom are diametrically opposed to the aims, objectives and ethos of UCL, such that we wish to have absolutely no association with them or with their originator.

We therefore have no choice but to terminate Dr Kollerstrom’s Honorary Research Fellowship with immediate effect.

http://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/news-articles/0804/08042202

Sieg Heil-De-Heil...by Unity

If there’s one recent piece of first rate investigative blogging that deserves a much higher profile at the moment then it has to be Blairwatch’s ‘outing’ of Nicholas Kollerstrom, a prominent ‘9/11 truther’ (i.e. conspiraloon) and UCL research fellow as a confirmed (and completely unabashed) Holocaust denier.

To give a quick bit of background on the ”truthers’ for those who’ve not come across them before, they subscribe wholeheartedly to a number of bizarre conspiracy theories relating to the attacks on the World Trade Centre and the July 7th London bombings; most of which contend that these terrorist attacks were not the work of Islamic extremists but were in [their version of] ‘reality’ false flag attacks carried out by the US/UK/Israel to justify the ‘war on terror’ as a means of establishing some form of ‘Pax Americana/New World Order’.

To visit ‘Trutherville’ is to immerse yourself in a rich vein of paranoid delusions ranging from the mundane - from blaming the CIA and/or Mossad for 9/11 to the claim that Al Qaeda was ‘made up’ by the FBI - to the usual major league nutball stuff about Illuminati, the Bilderberg Group and that favourite old chestnut, the International Zionist Conspiracy™, the latter of which appears, from his comments and writings, to be the particular brand of conspiracism that floats Kollerstrom’s delusional boat.

Ordinarily I might just write Kollerstrom off as just another run of the mill conspiraloon and move on, were it not for the fact that he holds down a ‘day job’ as a research fellow at University College London and actively trades on his academic credentials when writing articles for CODOH’s ‘New Revisionist Voices‘ website, where he has, to date, published three articles; Britain - Pioneer of City Bombing, School Trips to Auschwitz and The Auschwitz ‘Gas Chamber’ Illusion. CODOH, which styles itself as the ‘Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust’ - ‘open debate’ meaning open revisionism - also promotes the ‘work’ of the discredited revisionist ‘historian’, David Irving, and Ernst Zundel, both of whom Kollerstrom cites in his own articles.

Kollerstrom’s main line of academic work appears to be the history of astronomy, albeit that he has a notable sideline in publishing articles on astrology and crop circles, and an interest in pseudoscience is not at all an uncommon feature amongst ardent conspiracy theorists. Zundel started out publishing pamphlets on ‘Ufology’ before graduating to titles such as ‘The Hitler We Loved And Why‘, for which he provided the photographs, under the pseudonym Christof Freidrich, to accompany text written by Eric Thomson:

http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/2008/04/21/sieg-heil-de-heil/

What a sad day for freedom,
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TonyGosling
Editor
Editor


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 14221
Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England

PostPosted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 4:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nick is a prominent 9/11 Truther who has done several public talks on the subject.

I will be urging the acting chair of UK 9/11 Truth to make a public statement on this unforunate occurance.

Please do bear in mind that Nick may decide to take legal proceedings against UCL and/or Ms. North.

_________________
www.rethink911.org
www.actorsandartistsfor911truth.org
www.mediafor911truth.org
www.pilotsfor911truth.org
www.mp911truth.org
www.ae911truth.org
www.rl911truth.org
www.stj911.org
www.l911t.com
www.v911t.org
www.thisweek.org.uk
www.abolishwar.org.uk
www.elementary.org.uk
www.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149
http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
https://37.220.108.147/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
karlos
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 2516
Location: london

PostPosted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 4:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

johnnyvoid wrote:


We therefore have no choice but to terminate Dr Kollerstrom’s Honorary Research Fellowship with immediate effect.”

http://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/news-articles/0804/08042202


So are you saying that he has lost his job.
Surely you guys must realise that this is bad for everyone who expresses an opinion. How long before people who oppose the official accounts of 911 and 7/7 get removed from their posts?
Remind anyone of Nazi Germany?

I also dont understand why this post by Rachel was allowed to remain in place which named astro3 when previous posts which named her, listed her home address, named her solicitor husband and his place of work and her father the vicar who was interviewed extensively by the press, were all deleted.
The right to Privacy applies equally to everyone.

Her post was made AFTER the forum rules expressly prevented ANY content regarding WW2 history

Why is Rachel not branded a 'Truth Critic' and confined to critics corner?
Or even banned?

_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
ian neal
Site Founder
Site Founder


Joined: 26 Jul 2005
Posts: 3129
Location: UK

PostPosted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 5:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TonyGosling wrote:
Nick is a prominent 9/11 Truther who has done several public talks on the subject.

I will be urging the acting chair of UK 9/11 Truth to make a public statement on this unforunate occurance.

Please do bear in mind that Nick may decide to take legal proceedings against UCL and/or Ms. North.


A couple of things

Who is "the acting chair of UK 9/11 Truth"?

And second presuming UK 9/11 is the British 911 Truth Campaign, why exactly would it have anything to say on this except possibly to clarify that Nick has played (to the best of my knowledge) no role in the formal campaign and his actions are those of an independent campaigner.

So to see Nick described as either prominent or a mainstay of the 9/11 truth movement in this country isI suggest over-egging it.

The reason the campaign does not have members (or research fellows) is to minimise the extent to which the campaign is associated with any one individual. We all speak and campaign in a personal capacity. The only exception to this rule is when the campaign is asked to provide a spokesperson

Ian Neal

Co-chair of the British 911 Truth Campaign
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Justin
9/11 Truth Organiser
9/11 Truth Organiser


Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 500
Location: Cumbria / Yorkshire Dales

PostPosted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 9:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Having heard about all of this tonight from a phone call from Tony, may I remind everyone what Voltaire is attributed to have said:

'I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it'

We must stick by Nick - our freedoms are under attack and the actions of UCL are disgraceful and ill thought through. Spread the word - Rachel North is our equivalent to Richard Warman in Canada (See www.davidicke.com). She must be exposed for the very sick, spiteful and possibly controlled person she is.

Justin
Retiring 9/11 Co-Chair

_________________
Connect to Infinite Consciousness - enjoy the ride!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
paul wright
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 26 Sep 2005
Posts: 2651
Location: Sunny Bradford, Northern Lights

PostPosted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 9:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I must say, though what kind of society does Nick K think we're living in? Does he think that his material won't be picked up on while he's apparently investigating an ongoing situation validly.
I've marked him as a duffer already, and he's proved his point
He's unfortunately effed himself in the A which might be just wayward naivete
Let that be a warning - this is not fantasy land, keyboard tappers

_________________
http://www.exopolitics-leeds.co.uk/introduction
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
chrisc
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 31 Oct 2007
Posts: 154

PostPosted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 11:03 pm    Post subject: Guilty as charged Reply with quote

Justin wrote:
We must stick by Nick


I don't know who your "we" is supposed to cover but I don't consider myself to be part of it.

Justin wrote:
Rachel North... must be exposed for the very sick, spiteful and possibly controlled person she is.


I think that is a vile statment, people should be thanking her for prompting Blairwatch to look into Nick Kollerstrom's activities (it wasn't the BBC who tipped off Blairwatch).

There is clearly no basis whatsoever on which Nick Kollerstrom can be defended -- he is pleading guilty:

Nick Kollerstrom wrote:
"I note you seem to object to my having defended the proposition that: no German ever put a Jew into a gas chamber. You call that Holocaust Denial, well I’m proud to be associated with it. I’m happy to defend, it any time, any place. It happens to be true!"


The title of this thread, "Holocaust denial allegations against Nick Kollerstrom" is inaccurate -- he is happy to admit he is guilty as charged.

He would deserve to be listed on Jim Hoffman's Holocaust Denial Versus 9/11 Truth page if there was any truth in him being a "mainstay of the 'truth movement'" or a "prominent 911 'truth' activist", also consider what Mark Robinowitz has said:

Mark Robinowitz wrote:
The 9/11 truth movement has suffered from some infiltration by advocates of what is euphemistically called Holocaust revisionism, who have written in defense of various aspects of Holocaust Denial and have praised neo-Nazis who seek to downplay the Holocaust.

The 9/11 truth movement has attracted a lot of people who want to be instant experts. Some crave public recognition. Others, no doubt, have their unique psychological reasons, some good, some not so good. But those who make very bold conclusions while being ignorant of most of the available evidence run the risk of "foot in mouth" disease, and worse, their antics can rub off on the rest of us, especially if they seek to connect neo-Nazi pseudo historians and 9/11 truth activists in common cause.

Due to these (and other) efforts to link 9/11 skeptics with Holocaust denial, there are a fair number of citizens who think that 9/11 investigation is really all about blaming "the Jews" for the atrocity, both from those who want to blame the "jews" and those who think that 9/11 investigation is anti-semitism.

Not all "conspiracy theories" are true - some are blatant revisions of history to snare the gullible or those who let their anger get in the way of the facts.

The 9/11 truth movement should not be co-opted by those who want to pretend that one of the greatest crimes in history was oversold by Jews in order to justify a land grab in Palestine.

It would not be surprising if many of the voices most loudly advocating Holocaust Denial were "false flag" operatives of the Israeli government - since the fact that some crazy people promote these lies makes it more difficult to find political space to criticize Israeli human rights abuses (even though the two issues are quite separate). In other words, the spectre of Holocaust Denial is used to discredit legitimate criticism of Israeli crimes -- who benefits is always a useful question to ask.

It is possible that some well-meaning people have been lured into believing Holocaust Denial due to a lack of critical thinking abilities and the fact that much of the best historical material from murdered victims, survivors, bystanders and perpetrators is not on the internet (a failure of only doing research on the web!) and the neo-Nazi liars are aggresive in their advocacy. Fortunately, there is a large amount of material documenting the reality of the Holocaust and refuting the Deniers.

_________________
http://truthaction.org/
http://truthmove.org/
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/topics/terror/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ian neal
Site Founder
Site Founder


Joined: 26 Jul 2005
Posts: 3129
Location: UK

PostPosted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 11:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

There is a lot of truth in what Mark says and I have made similar points myself before. That said I wish Mark had taken a leaf out of his own book before stating he thought the pod footage in 'In plane site' had been photo shopped. Those with long memories will recall this (together with Mark and Mike Ruppert's desire to link 9/11 with the contested proposition of imminent peak oil) was a catalyst for many of the divisions amongst US campaigners back 2004 whose consequences still ripple.

Justin wrote:
Rachel North... must be exposed for the very sick, spiteful and possibly controlled person she is.

Sorry mate, but that's not a wise thing to have said. Leaving aside whether it is true (and you are of course free to think this and I will defend your right to say so ....) we should be seeking to make friends not enemies.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
chrisc
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 31 Oct 2007
Posts: 154

PostPosted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 12:02 am    Post subject: Pods and Peak Oil Reply with quote

ian neal wrote:
That said I wish Mark had taken a leaf out of his own book before stating he thought the pod footage in 'In plane site' had been photo shopped.


Ugg, I didn't know about that, the first example of TV fakery...? Rolling Eyes

But his site is now clear on this issue see the Pod People hijack the 9/11 truth movement page and the In Plane Site page.

ian neal wrote:
Those with long memories will recall this (together with Mark and Mike Ruppert's desire to link 9/11 with the contested proposition of imminent peak oil) was a catalyst for many of the divisions amongst US campaigners back 2004 whose consequences still ripple.


Well the pod stuff was clearly nonsense but I think peak oil is one the the reasons, the key reason in fact, for the seizure of the oil fields in Iraq and it's one of the key reasons behind the current food shortages. In fact peak oil is virtually mainstream these days, like climate change (in a conservative form) is.

_________________
http://truthaction.org/
http://truthmove.org/
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/topics/terror/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Justin
9/11 Truth Organiser
9/11 Truth Organiser


Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 500
Location: Cumbria / Yorkshire Dales

PostPosted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 8:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm afraid, Ian, that you can't build bridges with Rachel, she has taken her venom against 'Conspiraloons' too far to do a 'U' turn. I've tried the 'nice' approach with her. I've tried reasoning with her politely through emails. There is not one thing that she agrees with us apart from our mutual call for a Public Enquiry into 7/7. I had hoped that this would have been a basis for constructive dialogue between us and herself and her supporters. Unfortunately, she consistently throws anything positive back in our faces. I'm personally all for ignoring her altogether - I genuinely believe she is a 'sick' person (perhaps not surprisingly after her 7/7 and appalling rape experiences) and I do find her 'spiteful' in her attacks on people - I would never dream of behaving like her, believing instead that the magic formula to get through this reality is TREAT PEOPLE AS YOU WISH TO BE TREATED YOURSELF. As for being'Controlled', those of us who know and understand the 'Big Picture', know what organisations like the Tavistock Institute are capable of. I have no evidence, just suspicions.

As regards poor Nick himself, I think he was extremely unwise to write what he has done, but we all know that 'History' is written by the victors and that the spinning we see our politicians doing today to dress up and distort the truth has been going on for centuries. I, personally, have no doubts that the Nazi Holocaust happened and that millions of innocent Jews, Gypsies, Homosexuals and political dissidents met horrible deaths in the Concentration Camps. However, I also believe it is possible that the Zionists (not Jews) also use the Holocaust to mask, shield and uphold their sinister agendas. The most important thing is we must never stop questionning - if we do, we are lost..

David Icke has taken up Nick's cause - that is, his right to question:

http://www.davidicke.com/content/blogcategory/30/82/ (scroll down until you come to 'Headlines')

_________________
Connect to Infinite Consciousness - enjoy the ride!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
ian neal
Site Founder
Site Founder


Joined: 26 Jul 2005
Posts: 3129
Location: UK

PostPosted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 1:20 pm    Post subject: Re: Pods and Peak Oil Reply with quote

chrisc wrote:
ian neal wrote:
That said I wish Mark had taken a leaf out of his own book before stating he thought the pod footage in 'In plane site' had been photo shopped.


Ugg, I didn't know about that, the first example of TV fakery...? Rolling Eyes

But his site is now clear on this issue see the Pod People hijack the 9/11 truth movement page and the In Plane Site page.

ian neal wrote:
Those with long memories will recall this (together with Mark and Mike Ruppert's desire to link 9/11 with the contested proposition of imminent peak oil) was a catalyst for many of the divisions amongst US campaigners back 2004 whose consequences still ripple.


Well the pod stuff was clearly nonsense but I think peak oil is one the the reasons, the key reason in fact, for the seizure of the oil fields in Iraq and it's one of the key reasons behind the current food shortages. In fact peak oil is virtually mainstream these days, like climate change (in a conservative form) is.


Hi Chris

I'm not supporting the pod theory and have said in the past that the Spanish University study upon which the theory was based IMO is probably flawed and either way certainly not amongst the strongest pieces of evidence

Pro-pod analysis http://911review.org/Wiki/Wtc2PlanePod.shtml
Anti-pod analysis http://www.911review.com/errors/phantom/st_plane.html

My point was that Mark at the time accused DvK of photo-shopping (i.e. deliberate manipulation) as opposed to supporting weak or flawed analysis/research. Obviously people get more annoyed about accusations of deliberate deception as opposed to challenging their editorial judgement but I'm glad to see he re-wrote that part of his website and hopefully it is water under the bridge.

On peak oil, I've said before that for me the jury is out although on balance I say it is not imminent. But regardless of the truth on this, the issue for me is the need to avoid creating unncessary schisms between campaigners based on the views on secondary issues such as peak oil. But pods and peak oil is so far off topic (my fault) that it is probably for a different thread

Like I say I support 90% of what the truthmove declaration says and it needed saying. My only problem with it is I would not and do not declare the controversial theories as debunked, I just support the clear strategy to stand on the strongest evidence that would stand up in a court of law and so far the controversial theories (which I would even extend to Steven Jones' thermite work) do not make my definition of 'strongest evidence'.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
chrisc
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 31 Oct 2007
Posts: 154

PostPosted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 1:37 pm    Post subject: Truth Action Declaration Reply with quote

ian neal wrote:
I support 90% of what the truthmove declaration says and it needed saying.


Have you read the Truth Action one that was developed from it?

truthaction.org wrote:
Mission Statement

truthaction.org is dedicated to achieving justice for the crimes of 9/11. To this end our primary focus is promoting activism to raise awareness about the lies of the official 9/11 story and to push for an independent criminal investigation into those events.

It is our aim to grow the movement for truth on a global level through the promotion of International Days of Truth Action on the Eleventh Day of Every Month and to encourage and support everyday activism.

We aim to put an end to the global war on terror by exposing the truth about its foundational myth. 9/11 truth is the key to stopping the global war machine.

We aim to restore our rights and civil liberties and repeal all laws based on 9/11 propaganda.

The 9/11 Truth Movement is at the forefront of the global movements for justice and peace and we will continue to build bridges with our natural allies within these movements.

truthaction.org is a wholly peaceful organisation and we totally reject violence in activism.


Recommendations for 9/11 Truth Activism

Guiding Principles

We support the following:

1. A dedication to rational, dignified and nonviolent activism and debate motivated by compassion, justice and truth
2. Awareness of public perception and the need for a strategic and responsible promotion and presentation of our cause
3. A commitment to building credibility and encouraging constructive alliances with the peace movement and other natural allies
4. Adherence to the scientific method and journalistic standards with a focus on facts, substance, and sources
5. Continually reaching out to new people in new places and in new ways

Conversely, we will actively seek to counteract, minimize and withdraw from the following:

1. Motivations based on ego, hatred and personal agendas
2. Promotion of speculative and unsubstantiated claims
3. Disruptive, divisive, diversionary and irrational behavior
4. Damaging and marginalizing associations
5. Highly partisan representations of the movement and cults of personality
6. Ongoing debate on divisive issues (see section on divisive issues)

We will engage others in the movement to make them aware of our recommendations, developing constructive dialogue while raising awareness of them and the reasoning behind them, while being open to critique and revision. We will disengage from groups and persons that continue with destructive or divisive behavior.


Dealing with destructive and divisive behavior


1) Identify and critique behavior that is harmful to the movement (i.e. speculative theories without evidence and activists who engage in disruptive behavior, divisive incidents, etc). Challenge leaders who unreasonably continue to support and tolerate such damaging behavior.

2) Refuse to debate solidly debunked theories by simply referencing responsible websites, articles, and blogs which have already refuted such claims

3) Discourage unnecessary and unproductive antagonism (i.e. infighting, personal attacks, gossip, etc.) that wastes time and causes divisiveness.

4) Avoid the divisive labeling of individuals and groups.(i.e. shill, agent etc)

5) Be aware and vigilant concerning the presence of agent provocateurs within the movement. Do not engage in witch hunts or unsubstantiated accusations. Treat those who continually, and despite consultation, act in word and deed in the manner of agent provocateurs, as such. While these people can rarely be proven to be agents, they should be treated as counterproductive and untrustworthy. Such groups and individuals should not be engaged in unproductive ways, such as aggression, name-calling, personal attacks, etc. Instead, the substance of their destructive behavior should be detailed, after which they should be avoided when possible. If appropriate, exclusionary action (banning from forums or groups, removal of links from websites, cancellation of speaking engagements etc.) or in extreme cases legal action should be taken.

6) Do not allow the proliferation of irresponsible information or damaging behavior simply because the individuals or groups in question maintain a certain reputation or notoriety within the movement. The fact that someone may “have done good work in the past” is never a valid excuse to tolerate damaging participation in the present. The movement must be about truth and justice rather than character and popularity.

In Summary: It is in our experience that group unity is not achieved by ignoring divisiveness. It is achieved through civil critique and a constructive response to the disruptive behavior.


Divisive Issues

1. Debunked Theories

We recognize an important distinction between private speculation and public promotion. Speculation, hypothesis, and experimentation are the basis of the scientific method. However, the promotion of highly speculative claims is irresponsible and damaging to our credibility. Instead, verifiable fact-based research must be primary in our search for and promotion of the truth. For these reasons we do not support the promotion or debate of the following during activism or blogging:

1. No planes hit the WTC towers
2. Directed Energy Weapons were used to demolish the towers
3. Theories based on inconclusive video and photographic evidence


2. Off Topic Associations

Some associations that are damaging and marginalizing to the movement are listed below. It is a historical fact that the mere mention of these topics has been seen to cause us long term damage. Consequently it is considered by TruthAction.org that only a clear focus on 9/11 fact based evidence will achieve our goals.

1. UFO and alien theories
2. Holocaust revisionism
3. Religion based conspiracy theories
4. Moon landing hoax

Note: It is often a method of the media to bait us on various conspiracy theories in an attempt to discredit us. We suggest any questions on unrelated subjects should not be responded to; rather we should redirect the conversation back to the hard evidence regarding 9/11. This approach is also appropriate with the public.

3. What hit the Pentagon?

The question of "what hit the pentagon" has been the single most divisive issue within the movement, but we can all agree that absolutely nothing could have hit the Pentagon without those in charge allowing it to happen. While we support ongoing research into the event, we urge unity on our common ground; refocusing energy towards demanding accountability and away from endless debate. We urge framing our public presentation of the Pentagon issue around unanimously agreed upon issues such as the absent air defense, the missing 2.3 trillion dollars, the conflicting testimonies, the inconsistencies regarding the official flight path of AA77, the very low probability of an amateur pilot achieving the maneuver seen and the refusal by government agencies to release evidence.

4. Global Warming

It has become apparent during attempts to reach out to environmentalists in our communities that questioning the veracity of man made global warming has prevented many in this group from continuing dialog with us. We suggest these “off topic” assertions or debates should not be brought to the public domain during 9/11 truth outreach. truthaction.org as a group holds no particular view on this issue.

Conclusion

Many activists came together to make these recommendations possible. We have all had direct experience with behavior and information that has impeded our cause. Thus we hope this document will help the 9/11 truth movement to achieve greater unity and focus. We encourage activists to cite and link to these recommendations as a standard response to diversionary and disruptive behavior. Hopefully, this will allow us to move beyond some of our major obstacles to spreading truth and securing justice.



These recommendations were inspired by and contain large portions of the TruthMove Declaration 2008.
Thank you to TruthMove and the other activists who contributed to this document.

_________________
http://truthaction.org/
http://truthmove.org/
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/topics/terror/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    9/11, 7/7 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> 9/11 & 7/7 Truth Controversies All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 1 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group