Spread the love

THE SOVIET AND AMERICAN DOCUMENTARY FORGERY FACTORIES

On the Soviet side:

Aside from extensively rewriting their own history, Russian forgery experts spent most of their time in producing material designed to delude, confound and mislead their perceived enemies, both domestic and foreign. Much of this began after the Second World War with extensive rewriting, editing and deliberate forgeries of German military and political documents designed to embarrass the United States and its client, the West German government, as well as to elevate the image of their own regime.

Faked reports dealing with the purported death of Hitler began the deluge and these were followed by endless papers concerning the fate of Martin Bormann who the Soviets claimed was living somewhere in the West, probably protected by the insidious Americans. The same creative writers also heavily edited and enhanced the records of German Army Group Center, captured by their military units, when that entity was overrun during the war.

One of the most ambitious Soviet productions concerned the writings of Dr. Josef Goebbels. Because handwritten documents on the original, special paper Goebbels used would have been nearly impossible to successfully fake, the new Soviet line was that the documents had actually been typed and then put onto glass negatives. These were hidden by the Germans in cases where the Soviets were able to “discover” them after the war. Having altered the Goebbels’ diaries from “several stacked folders” of handwritten material to a box of more easily forged photographs of typed manuscript, the Russians began to offer their rare, politically-incorrect material to sources in Germany for sale and publication. German experts universally rejected these productions as completely fake.

On the American side:

Among the many fraudulent historical documents that have been cited over the years by “conformist” historians of the Third Reich era, Irving said, have been the fake wartime diaries of Gerhard Engel, Hitler’s army adjutant, and of Felix Kersten, masseur and confidant of Himmler. Similarly unreliable is the diary of Mussolini’s foreign minister Galeazzo Ciano, which American officials doctored after the war. Completely fake are Hitler’s supposed “table talk” remarks from February and April 1945. Irving related that the Swiss lawyer Francois Genoud, now dead, admitted privately that he had fabricated them.

Note: The Office of Strategic Services (OSS) was the CIA’s “black propaganda” branch during WW2. At its peak in late 1944, the OSS employed almost 13,000 men and women.
https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=8107

TRENT PARK EAVESDROPPING “ MORE FABRICATED ATROCITY PROPAGANDA

Trent Park is an English country house in north London. Between 1942 and 1945, it served as a prisoner-of war camp for high ranking German generals and officers of the Wehrmacht. Eighty-four generals and a number of lower ranking staff officers were brought to Trent Park. It is alleged that British Intelligence hid microphones in the ground floor rooms and secretly recorded the conversations of the German generals and officers who feeling unobserved spoke freely with each other. It is alleged that the secret listeners eavesdropped on admission of war crimes and terrible atrocities against Russians, Poles and Jews. However, consider the following:

1. The audio recordings do not exist! It is claimed that “when the fighting ended, the recordings were destroyed and the transcripts locked away for half a century”. It is simply absurd to believe that they would destroy the audio recordings.

2. The alleged transcripts contain claims of gassings and other known lies. All allegations of gassings have been thoroughly refuted.

Examples: “Let me tell you,” General Count Edwin von Rothkirch und Trach told General Bernhard Ramcke on March 13, 1945, “the gassings are by no means the worst.”

Kittel told Schaefer about Auschwitz: “In Upper Silesia, they simply slaughtered the people systematically. They were gassed in a big hall. There’s the greatest secrecy about all those things.”

Colonel Dr Friedrich Von der Heydte told Colonel Eberhard Wildermuth about the Theresienstadt concentration camp in Czechoslovakia: “Half a million people have been put to death there for certain. I know that all the Jews from Bavaria were taken there. Yet the camp never became over-crowded. They gassed mental defectives, too.”

In the above quote it is alleged that Friedrich Von der Heydte said that half a million people were killed at Theresienstadt concentration camp. However even mainstream historians now admit that Theresienstadt was not a death camp and do not claim half a million people were killed there.

It is alleged that the transcripts contain conversations about Babi Yar. Babi Yar is a debunked Soviet lie.

3. It is claimed that they didn’t use the recordings as evidence at Nuremberg or another trial because the information was not obtained in accordance with the Geneva Convention.

“The secret nature of the operation meant that the information was not obtained in accordance with the Geneva Convention and could not be used in trials. The generals themselves were released after 1945.”

The Nuremberg Tribunal where they specially included a clause that the court was not to be bound by the normal rules of evidence. Where fake shrunken heads, soap made from Jewish fat and lampshades made from Jewish skin (now admitted to be untrue) were presented as evidence and where torture was used to extract “confessions” yet they would not use evidence from recorded conversations? This claim is simply laughable.

4. It is claimed that “The largest proportion of the ˜listeners’ were German-speaking Jewish exiles who had fled Nazi Germany and Austria and recruited to carry out this job.” The fact that the alleged listeners and transcribers were Jewish exiles from Germany brings into question the reliability of the transcriptions. The German-speaking Jewish refugees would have been extremely prejudiced and could be expected to invent fabrications about what they heard.

Holocaust evidence through eavesdropping?
https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=7540

Comment on this article NOW! / recorded conversations claims
https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2693

Allied recordings show German POWs laughing about atrocities
https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=7240

Channel Four claims it has proved the holocaust
https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=7942

The bogus Bruns document
https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=15

Bruns admits confession was fake
https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=1311

recorded conversations not “ ˜pumpkins/music directors’
https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=366

yet another bogus conversation, this one about ˜gassings’
https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=352

Bogus alleged ˜conversation’ about Babi Yar
https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=345

HOLOCAUST PROPAGANDA LIES ABOUT DR. JOSEF MENGELE

No one personifies the “evils of the Nazis” more than Dr. Josef Mengele. I have collected a number of materials about Mengele over the years including one of his published essays and his SS personnel records which show that he himself contracted typhus while at Auschwitz. He was a thoroughly decent and admirable man in every respect whose principal shortcoming was his choice of a name. I never came across even the vaguest shred of documentation that he ever conducted any atrocious procedures or experiments anywhere, ever. The case against him is all blah-blah from the likes of Ada Bimko and Eva Kor and Irene Zisblatt! It is incredible how Mengele has been vilified entirely on the basis of such blah-blah. Shame on the press and “scholars” for being so vile and stupid.

If anyone has ever seen a shred of documentation of any atrocious procedures or experiments by Mengele, please post it here.

“ Friedrich Paul Berg

Carlo Mattogno debunks the gruesome nonsense about Dr. Mengele
(Dr. Mengele’s alleged “Medical Experiments” on Twins in the Birkenau Gypsy Camp)
http://inconvenienthistory.com/archive/2013/volume_5/number_4/dr_mengeles_medical_experiments_on_twins.php

The Making of a Monster: How Jews created the Mengele Legend
Other than Adolf Hitler, Josef Mengele may be the only figure from National-Socialist Germany targeted for demonization with an entire major motion-picture while he was still alive and at large. The Boys from Brazil in 1978, based on Ira Levin’s 1976 novel, portrays a “Josef Mengele” that is pure, crude caricature.

The worst of the accusations against Mengele is not that he carried out absurd pseudo-medical experiments, but that he was responsible for indicating who at Auschwitz would be gassed. The number typically attributed to him is 300-400 thousand.

But this is precisely the claim about Auschwitz that, since 1985, has been most conclusively disproven, thanks to Fred Leuchter, who has demonstrated that the supposed gas-chambers at Auschwitz are structurally unsuited for that purpose, thanks to Walter Lüftl the former chairman of the Austrian Chamber of Engineers, whose Lüftl Report points out that the properties of Zyklon-B as a fumigant make it unsuitable for use as described in the so-called eyewitness accounts, and to Germar Rudolf, who has checked the quantities of cyanide-residue in the putative gas-chambers. Above all, thanks to Professor Robert Faurisson, who had the idea of commissioning experts to examine the gas-chambers, and to Ernst Zündel, who recognized the merit of Faurisson’s idea and put it into action.

Dr. Mengele denied performing ghastly experiments on anybody
http://winstonsmithministryoftruth.blogspot.co.uk/2011/07/dr-mengele-denied-auschwitz-was-death.html

Josef Mengele: A New Look By Michael Murphy
http://barnesreview.org/pdf/TBR2004-no3.pdf

Mengele: The Complete Story A Review By Thomas Kues
http://codoh.com/library/document/484/

Lessons of the Mengele Affair
http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v06/v06p377_Weber.html

Fake Mengele photo on H.E.A.R.T.’s website
http://winstonsmithministryoftruth.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/fake-mengele-photo-on-hearts-website.html

AUSCHWITZ TATTOO HOAX

Of all the multifarious “symbols of the Holocaust”, probably no symbol is more powerful than the “Holocaust tattoos” of the “Holocaust survivors”. Wherever you find Jews, you find “survivors”; wherever you find “survivors”, you find “Holocaust tattoos”. One “survivor” at a public meeting of some sort has the same sort of effect on the audience as a shot of curare or displaying a crucifix in front of a vampire: the “tattoos” (and the sob-stories with which they are inevitably accompanied), have a paralyzing effect on almost everyone who sees them; yet, astonishingly enough, apart from the tattoos themselves, there is not the slightest proof that the National Socialists tattooed anyone, ever, at Auschwitz or anywhere else. Let us examine this matter dispassionately, in a bit more detail.
http://www.cwporter.com/tattoo1.htm

World’s Record for Continuous Tattooing: 178 Simple Tattoos in 35 1/2 hours!
I don’t know how long it takes to do a wisdom fish (perhaps this is the simple symbol for Christianity with which we are all familiar), but this is pretty much the way I imagine it must have been done at Auschwitz, if it was done at all, which I do not believe. The wisdom fish cannot be very complicated for 20 dollars; they would probably charge almost the same to do a 6-digit set of numbers. Note the number of tattoos and teamwork involved: 178 simple tattoos in 35 1/2 hours, using modern equipment and a team of two people. So one Jew at Auschwitz tattooes 200,000 people with two needles and a pot of ink?

Tattooing poses the risk of infection. Are we to believe this procedure was carried out despite the serious threat of typhus and even during or after the typhus outbreak in July of 1942? Tattooing leaves tiny open wounds on the skin. With typhus a person only need to scratch a bite to rub the contaminated lice faeces into the tiny wound on the skin to become infected. Were inmates allowed to wonder off around the camp and mix with other inmates after receiving the tattoo before the skin had healed?

Despite Jews only comprising less than 40% of prisoners at Auschwitz we never saw any non-Jewish prisoners displaying their tattoos for the world to see.

SOAP AND LAMPSHADES

Soap and Lampshades: The Lies Persist
http://codoh.com/library/document/628

Holy Soap
At the Nuremberg Trial, it was proven, that the Nazis made soap out of Jews. Its since been proven they didn’t make soap out of Jews.
http://winstonsmithministryoftruth.blogspot.co.uk/2010/11/soap.html

1941 article about fake WW1 soap lie
Brilliant article from September 1941, about the World War One propaganda lie, that Germans made people into soap.
“There wasn’t a word of truth in it”
http://winstonsmithministryoftruth.blogspot.co.uk/2011/06/1941-article-about-fake-ww1-soap-lie.html

HUMAN SOAP
“the classic lie of war propaganda”
Radha Binod Pal (1886 “ 1967) was a judge at the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, the Japanese version of the Nuremberg Witch Trials. He wrote a 700 page Dissenting Judgement of the trial which was banned in Britain and occupied-Japan. Pal made reference to the the World War I British propaganda lie that the Germans boiled down their dead to make pig food, which later morphed into them making soap. In 1925 the British Foreign Secretary admitted in Parliament, the story was untrue, in 1941 the Germans issued “propaganda” mickey-taking the British for it, even Americans were stating in 1941 “there wasn’t a word of truth in it”, but Jews still re-hashed it in World War II.
David Ben Gurion on the “soap factory”
Israeli Prime Minister David Ben Gurion interviewed in the New York Times 1960 on the forthcoming Eichmann trial.
“I believe that through this trial all thinking people will come to realize that in our
day the gas chamber and the soap factory are what anti-Semitism may lead to.”
http://winstonsmithministryoftruth.blogspot.co.uk/2011/10/david-ben-gurion-on-soap-factory.html

MOST OUTRAGEOUS TALES OF THE HOLOHOAX

Please remember when you skim through this long list and read individual stories, that although most of this may appear completely outrageous, impossible and laughable, these stories and allegations were presented dead serious as nothing but the truth.
http://balder.org/judea/The-Most-Fantastic-Holocaust-Survivor-Stories-Jewish-Soap-Lampshades-Fertilizer-Mengele-Miracles.php

“EYEWITNESSES”

The judge asked the prosecutor if he would call any “survivors” to the witness stand. The prosecutor answered no. The experience of 1985 had been too embarrassing. The cross examination had been devastating. It is regrettable that at the trial of Klaus Barbie in France in 1987 and at the trial of John Demjanjuk in Israel in 1987-1988, no defense lawyer has followed Douglas Christie’s example in the first Zündel trial (1985): Christie had shown that by carefully questioning witnesses about the gassing process itself, one could destroy the very foundation of the “extermination camp” myth. ” The Zündel Trials (1985 and 1988) by ROBERT FAURISSON

” ¦most of the memoirs and reports [of ˜Holocaust survivors’] are full of preposterous verbosity, graphomanic exaggeration, dramatic effects, overestimated self-inflation, dilettante philosophizing, would-be lyricism, unchecked rumors, bias, partisan attacks ¦” ” Samuel Gringauz, “Jewish Social Studies” (New York), January 1950, Vol. 12, p. 65.

Bruno Baum, a former communist inmate in Auschwitz, was allowed to brag in summer 1945 in a Soviet newspaper: “The whole propaganda which started about Auschwitz abroad was initiated by us [German communist inmates] with the help of our Polish comrades.” (Deutsche Volkszeitung, Soviet paper in occupied East Germany, 31 July 1945). Thus, it is not surprising to learn that during several trials in Germany, it emerged that the testimony of witnesses from eastern Europe had been orchestrated by communist authorities. ” THE HOLOCAUST CONTROVERSY The Case For Open Debate An Introduction by Germar Rudolf

Witnesses to the Gas Chambers of Auschwitz
By Robert Faurisson
Eyewitness testimony must always be verified. There are two essential means of verifying such testimony in criminal cases: confronting the account with the material elements (in particular, with expertise as to the crime weapon), and the detailed cross-examination of the witness on what he/she purports to have seen. Thus, in the proceedings where it had been a question of the homicidal gas chambers of Auschwitz, no judge nor any attorney was able to claim any kind of expertise regarding the weapon of the crime; moreover, no lawyer ever cross-examined the witnesses by asking them to describe with precision even one of these chemical slaughter-houses. That is, up until 1985. When witnesses that year were finally cross-examined on these subjects during the first Zündel trial in Toronto, their rout was total. Because of this resounding set-back and by reason of other calamities previous to or following 1985, the defenders of the thesis of Jewish extermination have begun to abandon a history of Auschwitz primarily founded on testimonies and are obliging themselves, at the present time, to replace it with a scientific basis, or, at least, one which appears scientific, founded on factual research and proofs. The ˜testimonial history’ of Auschwitz in the manner of Elie Wiesel and Claude Lanzmann is discredited. Its time has passed. It remains for the exterminationists to attempt to work like the Revisionists on the facts and the evidence.
http://codoh.com/library/document/935/

Eyewitnesses
http://www.whale.to/b/eye_witnesses.html

Holocaust Survivor Stories
http://semiticcontroversies.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/holocaust-survivor-stories.html

The unforgettable Moshe ˜gassed six times’ Peer
“Moshe Peer” is fairly notorious because of an article about him that appeared in the Montreal Gazette in 1993, which claimed that as a boy of 12, he’d survived six separate gassings at Bergen-Belsen, a camp in which homicidal gassing are not claimed by historians to have occured.
http://winstonsmithministryoftruth.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/the-unforgettable-moshi-gassed-six.html

Gena Turgel’s Holofraud tale: “I walked out of an Auschwitz gas chamber alive, camped with Anne Frank, and was experimented on by Mengele”
http://exposing-the-holocaust-hoax-archive.blogspot.co.uk/2015/01/gena-turgels-holofraud-tale-i-walked.html

Holyhoax survivor extraordinaire Thomas Blatt “ At Sobibor “250,000 people roasted on huge pyres made from iron rails, and fueled with diesel oil”
http://exposing-the-holocaust-hoax-archive.blogspot.co.uk/2010/01/thomas-blatts-tale-at-sobibor-250000.html

Anti-Zionist Jew Josef Ginsburg, whose father was a rabbi, testified as a defence witness in the second trial of Ernst Zündel in 1988. In his testimony Ginsburg stated that the false, sick statements made by “Holocaust survivors” would go down by 95.5% if they were made to swear a special Jewish oath, as the superficial oath made in a secular court of law was not morally binding for Jews.
http://winstonsmithministryoftruth.blogspot.co.uk/2011/08/how-to-make-jew-tell-truth.html

Kol Nidre Prayer “ Judaism’s License To Lie
http://www.rense.com/general92/nidre.htm
A Jewish Prayer to Absolve All Vows
http://www.fpp.co.uk/BoD/origins/Kol_Nidre_debate.html
Kol Nidre Prayer
http://www.whale.to/c/kol_nidre_prayer.html

ELIE WIESEL: A PROMINENT FALSE WITNESS

Elie Wiesel Cons The World: A website dedicated to exposing the false testimony of the world’s most famous Holocaust survivor.
http://www.eliewieseltattoo.com/

Warren B. Routledge: Holocaust High Priest ”Elie Wiesel, “Night,” the Memory Cult, and the Rise of Revisionism
http://holocausthandbooks.com/index.php?page_id=30

Documents on Elie Wiesel
http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/Wiesel/index.html

Elie Wiesel
http://www.whale.to/b/wiesel_h.html

“Things are not that simple, Rebbe. Some events do take place but are not true; others are ” although they never occurred.” “ Elie Wiesel, The Legends of Our Time, p. 8

In All Rivers Run to the Sea: Memoirs (Schocken Books, 1996, p. 74), Elie Wiesel proclaims that his bizarre gas chamber cult is off-limits to investigators looking to verify the false claims that he, and his co-religionists, make, stating: “Let the gas chambers remain closed to prying eyes, and to imagination.”

Some anti-German hate speech from the “dignified humanitarian” Elie Wiesel:

“Every Jew, somewhere in his being, should set apart a zone of hate ” healthy, virile hate ” for what the German personifies and for what persists in the German. To do otherwise would be a betrayal of the dead.” ” Elie Wiesel, The Legends of Our Time

Elie Wiesel on raping German girls
http://winstonsmithministryoftruth.blogspot.co.uk/2011/03/elie-wiesel-on-raping-german-girls.html

The origin of Elie Wiesel’s German hatred
http://winstonsmithministryoftruth.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/the-origin-of-elie-wiesels-german-hatred.html

1985, Wiesel’s fire pits still doing the rounds
http://winstonsmithministryoftruth.blogspot.co.uk/2011/06/1985-wiesels-fire-pits-still-doing.html

THE BBC’S OSKAR GROENING “I SAW THE GAS CHAMBERS” LIE

The BBC’s breathless coverage of Groening’s court date, as contained in their article of February 2, 2015, titled “Trialdate set for ˜Auschwitz bookkeeper’ Groening” is clearly designed to be an attempt to beat back the growing Holocaust revisionist tide.

The BBC article, in a sub-heading called “I saw the gas chambers,” tells its readers that:

“Groening, who began work at Auschwitz aged 21, does not deny witnessing the mass killing at Auschwitz. In 2005 he told the BBC: “I saw the gas chambers. I saw the crematoria. I saw the open fires. I was on the ramp when the selections [for the gas chambers] took place.”I would like you to believe these atrocities happened ”because I was there.”

The documentary to which this article refers is the six-episode “Auschwitz: The Nazis and ˜The Final Solution'” produced by the BBC and distributed all over the world. As usual with these sorts of Holocaust stories, the truth is very far from reality. Groening was a lower-ranking SS man at Auschwitz ”but in the BBC documentary, he actually never used the words “gas chambers.” This is a complete fiction, a made-up insertion.

Oskar Gröning and his testimony “ David Irving

Once again, we have a classic case of outright lies, combined with a “don’t-deny-it-happened-but-I-was-not-involved” type confession, the sort of which I detailed in Chapter 8: The Psychology of Confessions in The Six Million: Fact or Fiction. Critically, Groening talked about his time at the camp, but denies ever having committed any murders or atrocities himself. Equally critically, he would of course have seen crematoria, and cremations ”these were installations at every single German concentration camp. The existence of crematoria does not, however, “prove” a mass extermination program, and it is clear that Groening was talked into making his remarks in some type of belief that he would not be prosecuted if he admitted being at the camp. Now, however, he will soon regret having been willing to comment at all, because his appearance on the BBC documentary, and his resultant “fame” has landed him in court facing no less than 300,000 murder charges. The only logical ”and best ”defense against this incredible charge, is of course to show that there were no mass exterminations. However, unfortunately for Groening ”and he has played along with the game, never thinking it would land him in court ”this obvious, and only, real defense is illegal in Germany.

Oskar Groening and the Erect Penises of Auschwitz
http://peterwinterwriting.blogspot.co.uk/2015/02/the-bbcs-oskar-groening-i-saw-gas.html

THE ANNE FRANK DIARY FRAUD

In 1980, because of a lawsuit in a German court, the German state forensic bureau, the Bundes Kriminal Amt [BKA], forensically examined the original “diary” manuscript. Their analysis determined that “significant” portions of the work were written with a ballpoint pen. Since ballpoint pens were not available before 1951, portions of the work were added well after the war (Anne Frank died in March 1945).

The BKA also determined that none of the “diary” handwriting matched known examples of Anne’s handwriting. Earlier handwriting experts had determined that all of the writing in the “diary” was by the same hand. Therefore, the entire “diary” was a postwar fake.

The true author of the diary was Jewish novelist Meyer Levin, who demanded and was awarded $50,000 in payment for his work in a court action against Anne’s father, Otto Frank.
http://exposing-the-holocaust-hoax-archive.blogspot.co.uk/2011/12/diary-of-anne-frank-is-fraud.html

Anne Frank Diary Co-Authored by Father
The Basel, Switzerland, Anne Frank Fonds (Anne Frank Fund) ”which controls the copyright to the Diary of Anne Frank ”has admitted that the book was in fact at least co-authored by Otto Frank, Anne’s father, after the war. The admission proves that the book, which is still heavily promoted as a “holocaust memoir,” is in fact largely a postwar fabrication which contained parts of the young Anne’s diary with extensive additions added by her father.
http://peterwinterwriting.blogspot.co.uk/2015/11/anne-frank-diary-co-authored-by-father.html

The Diary of Anne Frank: Is it Genuine?
By Robert Faurisson
http://codoh.com/library/document/2938

Anne Frank’s Diary “
Some Honest Questions
http://www.rense.com/general65/aan.htm

˜Anna Frank’s Novel: The Diary is a Fraud’
http://www.heretical.com/sgs-1998/afn.html

Anne Frank FAQ
http://www.heretical.com/sgs-1999/frank6.html

ATROCITY PROPAGANDA: ALLIED PHOTO FORGERIES OF “GERMAN ATROCITIES”

Photo manipulations in the USSR
http://englishrussia.com/2012/09/06/photo-manipulations-in-the-ussr/
Holocaust Propaganda Photographs
http://www.whale.to/b/holocaust_prop_p.html
Letters to David Irving: Photo Forgeries
http://www.fpp.co.uk/Letters/hate_08/Splitcane_010108.html
http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/docs/fake/SWCsmokeFake.html
http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/docs/fake/USHMMDachauFake.html

Udo Walendy: Forged War Crimes Malign The German Nation
Udo Walendy examines the alleged visual documents ”photographs ”that are claimed to prove the atrocities perpetrated by the National Socialists against the Jews. The question at issue is what exactly the pictures show, whether they were retouched or whether they may even be completely fabricated, i.e., montages or drawings. A pile of dead bodies or an open mass grave, for example, can be presented as evidence for the gas chamber murders, but what is there to prove that the pictures do not in fact show the German victims of Allied air-raids, or the victims of starvation or epidemics in German or Allied camps, soldiers killed in action, victims of pogroms, or even persons killed by the Soviet secret service? Udo Walendy shows with numerous examples that the falsification of photographs for purposes of incriminating the Third Reich is rather more the rule than the exception. It is astonishing to note that there are usually many different versions of a forged photograph, which makes it easy to spot cases of alteration. Walendy shows that the photo documents analyzed by him cannot be incontestable evidence for the claims usually associated with them.
PDF: http://archive.org/details/ForgedWarCrimesMalignTheGermanNation
http://www.scribd.com/doc/151615857/Forged-War-Crimes-Malign-the-German-Nation

Fake Film Documentaries “ ˜Nazi’ Concentration Camps on Staten Island
“As senior director for the popular movie house newsreel, he often created world events with actors and movie sets. One such news feature film, Inside Nazi Germany, made in 1938, included footage of a “concentration camp” that was filmed on Staten Island with scores of New York City actors. Much of the film’s footage was shot within the borders of the Third Reich by a free-lance cameraman, but [Louis] Rochement [Glenn’s producer] felt that the film had been censored by the German authorities and ordered Glenn to re-enact widely reported Nazi camp atrocities.”
http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/docs/fake/GlennObit.html

In November 1941, the British government decided that there were not enough dramatic photographs of Nazi atrocities. The BSC arranged for a studio in Canada to create such photographs using actors, stage-sets, costumes, and dummies for the manufacture of war scenes in which actors dressed up as Nazi soldiers were shown mass-murdering innocent people. These photos were widely circulated in the United States. “ Desperate Deception: British Covert Operations in the United States, 1939-44

WWII UK and US PSYOPS Exposed
The following book details how the BRIZIS and YANKIZ set up a fake German Concentration Camp on Staten Island to create “news reel” footage depicting “Nazi atrocities” with which to get the American public to support the war against Germany. This was done in Canada too where fake photos and were created, all to demonize the Germans! But of course, it didn’t stop there when the war ended. Do you recall seeing all this “Nazi atrocity” stuff that they taught you in history class?
http://justice4germans.com/2012/10/31/wwii-uk-and-us-psyops-exposed-still-think-goebbels-and-hitler-were-the-big-fat-liars/

Dino A Brugioni: Photo Fakery: The History and Techniques of Photographic Deception and Manipulation
Dino A. Brugioni was one of the founders of the CIA’s National Photographic Interpretation Center. He also co-authored the CIA’s “Retrospective Analysis of the Auschwitz-Birkenau Extermination Complex.” In the “About the Author” section of this book it notes that he “became the CIA expert in photo fakery and photo manipulation.” Of course this topic is of interest to revisionists. It is doubly interesting in that the self-admitted CIA expert in photo fakery is also the one who wrote the CIA’s report based on aerial photos to prove the Holocaust.
http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/docs/fake/Brugioni1.html

German bodies from the Rhine meadow camps presented as Jewish bodies
http://www.hist-chron.com/eu/D/1945-rheinwiesenlager/ENGL/003-giant-Lie-german-bodies-presented-as-Jewish-bodies.html

Stalin’s “Torch-men-Order” #0428 confirmed by Russia
The so-called “torch-men order” (Fackelmännerbefehl) is the command No. 0428, issued November 17th, 1941 by Stalin. It declares that Russian partisans in German uniforms, particularly those of the Waffen-SS, were to destroy all settlements within a swathe of about 40 “ 60 km depth from the main battle lines and to ruthlessly kill the civilian population. With these tactics it was important to leave a few survivors, which would report the supposed German terror attacks. This method of warfare was also confirmed by German soldiers who captured many Russian partisans wearing German uniforms.

The Stawka headquarters of the highest commands orders:

All settlements, in which German troops are found, up to a depth of 40 “ 60km from the main lines of battle, are to be destroyed and set on fire, also 20-30km from the roads. For the destruction of the settled areas in the required radius, the air force will be made available, also artillery and rocket-launchers will be used extensively, as well as intelligence units, skiers and Partisan divisions, who are equipped with bottles with flammable liquid. These hunting expeditions in their activities of destruction are to be dressed to the greatest extent in German soldier’s uniforms and uniforms of the Waffen-SS looted from the German army.

This will ignite hatred toward all fascist occupiers and make the conscription of partisans from the outlaying areas of fascist territories easier. It is important to have survivors who will tell about “German atrocities”. For this purpose every regiment is to form hunter-units of about 20- 30 men strong with the task to detonate and incinerate the villages. We have to select brave fighters for this action of destruction of settled areas. These men will be especially recommended to receive bravery awards when working in German uniforms behind enemy lines and destroying those settlement outposts. Among the population we have to spread the rumor that the Germans are burning the villages in order to punish the Partisans.
(Archive Series 429, Rolle 461, General’s Headquarters of the Army, Division, foreign Units East II H 3/70 Fr 6439568. Filed: National Archive Washington) [1] [in progress] “Fackelmänner Befehl” (torch men-order) confirmed. Russian Security Service FSB published Stalin’s order No. 0428.

HOLOCAUST DENIAL LAWS: THE TRUTH IS NO DEFENSE “ EVIDENCE INADMISSABLE, DEFENSE FORBIDDEN

German courts are forbidden by orders from higher up to accept such motions to introduce evidence, as is stated in Article 97 of the German Basic Law: “Judges are independent and subject only to the Law.”

Germany’s Basic Law, which was negotiated between German politicians and primarily the U.S. occupational forces right after WWII, is considered to be its constitution, although formally seen it has never been approved by a referendum of the German people, hence lacks formal legitimacy.

One hideous feature of German legal standards is that, when it comes to “the Holocaust,” it pits human dignity against the right to search for the truth. According to this “logic,” the human dignity of all Jews “ those who suffered back then and those who live today “ depends on everyone accepting the orthodox Holocaust narrative. And since the protection of human dignity is the first and most important article in the German constitution, this has priority over everything else.

What I pointed out first in court was the fact that denying us the search for the truth is an even more serious violation of human dignity than denying the Jews a certain narrative of a detail of their history. After all: what sets us humans apart from bacteria and insects? Isn’t it the capacity to doubt our senses and to systematically search for the reality behind the mere semblance.
Resistance Is Obligatory “ Germar Rudolf

In Germany, if a person is taken to court on the charge of Holocaust Denial a truly Orwellian law exists that it is illegal to submit evidence to the court that refutes the alleged gas chambers or any other aspect of the Holocaust narrative. It is illegal for the defendant to defend their position. If the defendant attempts to defend their position in court the defendant will be found guilty of Holocaust Denial and further fines or years of imprisonment will be added to the defendant’s punishment for attempting to defend his or her position. If the defendant’s lawyer attempts to defend their client’s position the lawyer will also be charged and convicted of Holocaust Denial as happened to German lawyer Sylvia Stolz.

The truth is no defense. In Germany you can go to jail for telling an audience what the curator of the Auschwitz Museum said about Auschwitz. Can you call the curator as a witness? No. The truth is no defense. One can go to prison for reporting scientific findings regarding the alleged homicdal gas chambers. Is science a defense? No. They criminalize the honest practice of science. It is a crime to speak the truth.

German Laws for the Suppression of Free Speech

The precedence of individual rights and the distinction between the expression of opinion and claims of fact underlie the prohibition of the so-called Auschwitz-Lüge (Auschwitz Lie). The expression was first coined by right-wing extremists and anti-Semites both in Germany and elsewhere to deny the systematic mass murder of European Jewry in Auschwitz and other concentration camps under the Nazis. The “lie,” they maintain, was invented by Jews to defame Germans and to exploit them financially. In the meantime, the expression has acquired a broader meaning and now serves as a shorthand description of assertions denying that the Holocaust occurred.

The Criminal Code, in its Sections 185, 189 and 194, prohibits the defamation and denigration of the character of deceased persons and make such denigration punishable by law. The statement that Jews were not persecuted during National Socialism is clearly false. The mass murder of Jews in the gas chambers of the Third Reich is a historical fact that has been proven by countless witness statements and documents, numerous court rulings and extensive historical research.

In dealing with denial of the Holocaust, criminal law clearly finds itself in conflict with the right to express one’s opinion. While recognizing that prohibiting the “Lüge” represents a limitation of the right to free expression, German jurisprudence holds that the injury to the personal honor of those defamed (Jewish citizens) weighs so heavily that it takes precedence over freedom of expression.

In a ruling issued in April 1994, the Federal Constitutional Court confirmed that Holocaust revisionism is not protected under the Basic Law’s guarantee of freedom of opinion. “In weighing the importance of free speech against that of individual rights, courts must consider on the one hand the severity of the offense caused by Holocaust denial to the Jewish population in light of the suffering inflicted upon it by Germany. On the other hand, the opinion expressed is not particularly deserving of protection,” the constitutional court judges wrote, “stemming as it does from a claim of fact that has been proven untrue. This court has consistently protected the personal honor of those defamed above the right of others to make patently false statements.”

The Auschwitz-Lüge may also be prosecuted under Section 130 of the Criminal Code, which makes incitement (Volksverhetzung) a punishable offense. The current German legal interpretation of incitement protects public peace and human dignity. The constitutional foundation of the Federal Republic of Germany recognizes no interest that could justify injuring the personal honor and dignity of some of its citizens and promoting enmity and hatred toward them. Germany is not, incidentally, the only nation that considers denial of the Holocaust to be beyond the limits of free speech. France passed a law in 1990 that makes it a criminal offense to dispute the facts of the Holocaust as recognized by French courts or the 1945 international war crimes tribunal held in Nuremberg. A similar law exists in Italy.

Sylvia Stolz “The Reality of Freedom of Expression”

In this video, Sylvia Stolz, who has been called the German Joan of Arc, discusses her experiences as a trial lawyer defending Ernst Zündel and others who have been charged with holocaust denial. A question that people have been asking for a long time is that if the holocaust is based upon such solid evidence, and can withstand historical scrutiny, then why is it against the law to question it, as indeed is the case in France, Germany, and certain other countries?

But the picture of just how repressive things can get in countries where laws like this are on the books is darker and more Kafkaesque than most of us realize. Stolz describes the arbitrary and coercive parameters set by the German legal system when defense attorneys attempt to submit evidence or mount a rational, reasoned defense of their clients. In cases where defendants are charged with holocaust denial, normal judicial procedures and rules of evidence are in essence tossed out the window, making a legal defense practically impossible. What comes through loud and clear from Stolz’s talk is the complete, utter insanity of holocaust denial laws. Here is a bit from the video description:

In the speech, Stolz discusses her experiences as a defence lawyer for so-called Holocaust deniers in Germany, and describes the Orwellian system of state-enforced repression there which denies defendants (and their lawyers!) the right to explain themselves under threat of additional charges for the “repeat offence” of expressing a forbidden idea, even in their own defence in a court of law. Stolz further relates how the subject of the Holocaust itself has never been clearly or adequately defined by the German courts through the normal channel of judicial findings-of-fact in precedent decisions. Instead, the courts have relied on the arbitrary doctrine that the facts of the Holocaust are “self-evident” and thus in no need of proof, despite the obvious objection that the arguments of the “deniers” themselves clearly demonstrate that those facts are indeed contestable and thus cannot be “self-evident” by definition.

In the face of such abuses and absurdities, other lawyers might throw up their hands and simply walk away: Sylvia Stolz has the courage to call injustice what it is, and take a stand. Her speech is an extraordinary document of our times, a deeply moving call “to think what is true, to feel what is beautiful, and to want what is good.” Wherever you may fall along the ideological spectrum, if you believe in freedom of expression, this speech is a must.

Stolz has been arrested, jailed and stripped of her license to practice law. And on February 25, 2015 she was sentenced to 20 months in prison for “racial incitation” ¦ on the basis of statements she made in this speech. The talk was given on November 24, 2012.

Holocaust skeptic Vincent Reynouard sentenced to two years prison in France
In light of all the ˜Je Suis Charlie’ free speech hoopla, the French regime just confirmed their fraudulent stance on the issue by sentencing a man, Vincent Reynouard, to two years in jail for his non-violent historical opinions concerning the ˜Holocaust.’ The ˜free speech’ sham continues in the Talmudic Republic of France.

In France, Holocaust revisionists are now treated as dangerous criminals

Vincent Reynouard, condemned for having the wrong view of history as it pertains to WWII and “Holocaust,” has now been refused a bank account. Is not the right to have a bank account a basic right of citizenship, necessary for carrying on one’s business in modern society ¦ and not a privilege to be taken away for political reasons? This signals that questioning the “Holocaust” is intended to be utterly stamped out, not just discouraged. Also that the private sector is being forced to carry out the policies of the political governmental sector. And it also signals that Vincent Reynouard’s work in this field is effective, ie. successful, and as he is a younger man than Robert Faurisson and not likely to pass from the scene soon on his own ” he must be stopped. Reynouard rightly speaks of a religous taboo, saying that “in our modern secularized societies, the Hitlerian “gas chamber” has become a religious taboo. He cites a columnist writing for L’Express: “Holocaust denial is not a hypothesis [to be debated]; Holocaust drew a line beyond which doubt is a crime.” Imagine that this is accepted in a supposedly Democratic society!

Why ˜Holocaust Denial’ Laws are Dangerous
Justice applied selectively is not justice. It is a form of injustice. Because “denial” laws prohibit dissident views about only one chapter of history, they are inherently unfair. They inhibit historical inquiry and restrict free speech.

“Holocaust denial” laws are the result of a well-organized, long-term Jewish campaign. In 1982, the Institute for Jewish Affairs in London, a London-based agency of the World Jewish Congress, announced that it was launching a worldwide campaign to persuade and pressure governments to outlaw “Holocaust denial.” The anti-revisionist laws that were subsequently enacted in several European countries reflect the success of this initiative. Germany enacted its “Holocaust denial” statute in 1985 (amended in 1994), France in 1990, Austria in 1992, Belgium in 1995, and Slovakia in 2001. Underscoring the organized nature of this campaign, the International Association of Jewish Lawyers and Jurists in June 1998 called for new and more severe laws against “Holocaust denial.”

The ˜Holocaust’ storyline is one of the most easily debunked narratives ever contrived. That is why those who question it are arrested and persecuted. Truth needs no protection from scrutiny.

GENERAL REVISIONIST ARTICLES

The Great Holocaust Mystery: Reconsidering the Evidence by Thomas Dalton

The Holocaust is the greatest murder-mystery of the 20th century. Six million Jews, we are told, perished at the hands of the Nazis ”in gas chambers, ghettos, and concentration camps. They were starved, suffocated, and shot. Their bodies were buried in mass graves, or burned in the ovens of Auschwitz, or on open flames. And all simply because they were Jews. It was the embodiment of evil, the greatest crime ever perpetrated.

Traditional historians claim to know about this crime in great detail. They have documents, photographs, and hard evidence. They have incriminating testimony from key Nazis. Some of the gas chambers have survived. And they have innumerable Jewish eyewitnesses. According to some, it is the “most well-documented event in history.”1

And yet, when we ask detailed and pointed questions, our historians fall short. They don’t really know when, where, or how the Jews died. They have no technical explanation of how it was possible, for example, to gas thousands of people per day in a single room, and then to dispose of their bodies ”such that not a trace remains. They cannot find the mass graves that allegedly held thousands of bodies. They cannot explain wartime aerial photographs that show a disturbingly calm Auschwitz camp. And they refuse to even consider a raft of contradictory evidence. In fact, many aspects of the traditional story simply don’t add up. The deeper we look, the more puzzling the picture becomes ”and hence, the great mystery.

As with any murder, we, as investigators, would like to examine several aspects of the crime; these would include the motive, the means by which it was conducted, and the bodies of the victims. We would furthermore like to consider all ancillary and related evidence that might support, or refute, the traditional story. As we will see, all these areas are problematic, from the conventional standpoint.

Why I Call Myself a Holocaust Denier by Paul Eisen

My family were ordinary folk “ ˜twice-a-year Jews’ we used to call them. But like most of us second and third generation, upwardly mobile, North London Jews, our Jewishness filled our lives. And, at that time, that meant Zionism and the Holocaust. For me, my family and our friends, a post-Holocaust Israel meant quite simply ˜never again’.

But, while seemingly ordinary, my family was also rather extraordinary. My father was unusually tolerant and free-thinking, and my mother too was unusually lively in her thinking. A born rebel, there was nothing she loved more than to burst a balloon. As for me, I started off, first as the family tsaddik “ awfully concerned with God and my Jewishness (though always strangely at odds with other Jews) “ then the family dissident-intellectual. By young adulthood, you would have found me somewhere on the Zionist left “ unquestioning in my support for the Jewish state but wishing it would not behave quite so badly and stop embarrassing me in front of my friends. However, when it came to the Holocaust, my faith was unwavering ¦.
http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/?p=64860

But how could the Holocaust not be true? by Paul Eisen

How could the Holocaust not be true? How could such a delusion and deception have taken place? How could all those survivors be so wrong in their testimonies? How could all those perpetrators be so wrong in their confessions? How could all those documents, unspecific as they are, have been falsified? Arthur Butz called his groundbreaking revisionist study “The Hoax of the Twentieth Century”, but a hoax of this size and nature just defies belief. Conspiracy theories rarely convince, nor do those who propagate them, so surely the sheer absurdity of the revisionists’ claim tells us all we need to know. So, if revisionism is to have any credibility at all, it must demonstrate how, if false, the Holocaust narrative, as we know it, came to be.
http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/?p=80479

A Brief History of how the Masters of Make-Believe made the world believe in Death Camps
Auschwitz as we know it is a Hollywood creation

Today’s Hollywood Jews are the heirs of the original crop of wartime Hollywood producers and directors who were called into service by the U.S. Army to “document” the concentration camps. Although they were not allowed into Auschwitz-Birkenau or Majdanek which were under the tight control of the Soviet Union, they actually had better film-making opportunities at the camps located in Germany proper which had suffered from intense American bombardment. With supply lines and infrastructure smashed to pieces, horrific scenes in these camps caused by hunger, poor hygiene and disease were not hard to find in 1945.

To tell the story, let’s go back to the beginning when George C. Marshall, U.S. Army Chief of Staff, called upon award-winning Hollywood director Frank Capra to head a special section on morale to explain to soldiers “why the hell they’re in uniform.” Marshall explained to Capra that these were not to be “propaganda films like those created by the Nazis and Japan, but sensitive and objective troop information films.” That, however, they were not.
http://jan27.org/news-views-70th-anniversary-commemoration/

The Revisionists’ Total Victory on the Historical and Scientific Level
By Robert Faurisson

“The rising flood, particularly on the Internet, that is bringing to the world’s knowledge the spectacular achievements of historical revisionism is not suddenly going to halt its advance or return towards its source.” “ Robert Faurisson

In France and in the rest of the world historians and specialists of “the Holocaust” no longer know what to answer to the revisionists’ arguments. And to speak only of my own case, which has been going on since 1978 (that is, for some thirty-seven years), never has my country’s justice system, despite the tireless requests by self-righteous associations to rule against me on the substance of my writings or statements, been able to note therein the least trace of any rashness, negligence, deliberate ignorance, falsehood, falsification or lying. My adversaries, rich and powerful though they may be, have never succeeded in getting our judges to convict me on the merits of the conclusions reached through my research work which, for over half a century, has focused on what is commonly called “the genocide of the Jews”, “the Nazi gas chambers” and “the six million (or nearly)” Jewish victims of the Third Reich. At most, at the end countless cases I have lost suits (whether as plaintiff or defendant) or been found guilty mainly 1) for a malevolence, supposed but not demonstrated, towards the Jews, 2) for breaking the gayssotine (the Fabius-Gayssot or Faurisson Act, legislation of convenience specifically targeting the findings of my research) or 3) by virtue of the “good faith” (sic) of individuals like Léon Poliakov or Robert Badinter, even though found to be at fault by the judges themselves ¦
http://robertfaurisson.blogspot.co.uk/2015/12/the-revisionists-total-victory-on.html