Tell the Truth & Shame the Devil Read online

  One of the later mystics, Rabbi Natan Nata Shapiro of Krakow (Megaleh Amukot, 1585-1633) wrote that this number corresponds to the 600,000 Jewish souls that exist. Sure there are more people than that, but each soul can mystically animate more than one person.Moreover, the Hebrew name for Israel – Yisrael – is an acronym for Yesh Shishim Ribbuy Otiyot Latorah, there are 600,000 letters in the Torah. (Jerusalem Post, June 1, 2012) (author’s italics)

  So could the number 666 “be considered a symbolic number.”

  The Bible declares: “Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred three score and six.” (Revelation 13:18) Useful superstitions about “The Beast” or Antichrist can thus be traced to this hokum around the number “6.”

  All material evidence to the contrary is stubbornly declared insignificant, as was the exonerating evidence at the Nuremberg show trials. The only relevant fact is:

  The holocaust dogma of Judaism is an article of faith and a doctrine of belief of Jewish religious history adjudicated by their rabbis according to Talmudic law and Kabalistic tradition. (Ben Weintraub, The Holocaust Dogma of Judaism: Keystone of the New World Order)

  So we have “faith,” “doctrine” and “belief.” What we don’t have is hard physical proof. “Faith means you don’t know,” as someone has said. If you don’t know that a crime has occurred, how can you punish someone for perpetrating it?

  “The Holocaust is a complete forgery, initiated by Americans and Zionists.” (Gilad Atzmon, Ruhr-Nachrichten 2005)

  More astounding because it appeared in a major mainstream French newspaper, as summary to a long pseudo-historical article under the general title “Menace negationniste” (“Menace of holocaust denial”), was the assertion:

  Everyone is free to refer to this or that kind of explanation, everyone is ultimately free to imagine or to fantasize that these monstrous events did not take place. Unfortunately they did take place and nobody can deny their existence without abusing the truth. One must not ask oneself how such mass murder was technically possible. It was technically possible because it took place. (Le Monde, February 21, 1979)

  “Don’t think about it. It took place because I say so.”

  This pledge of allegiance to the faith was signed by 18 French historians, all presumably keen to keep their jobs. One assumes that they were also familiar with the French fantasist Rabelais, who composed five satirical books entitled The Horrible and Terrifying Deeds and Words of the Very Renowned Pantagruel King of the Dipsodes, Son of the Great Giant Gargantua.

  As “six million” merely represents some token in Jewish dogma, some cabalistic hocus-pocus, there is no reason to attach any especial importance to its numerical value. It is only rational to recall that there were never six million Jews under German control during the war.

  The claim that 5.7million Jews were murdered is not true. The number of Jewish victims can only range between 1 and 1.5million, because there were not more Jews within Hitler’s reach. (Ferdinand Otto Miksche, colonel in the French army and a close aide to Charles de Gaulle, The End of the Present, Herbig, Munich 1990, p.107)

  Statistics for 1919 show 615.021 Jews in the whole of Germany. (Flächeninhalt und Bevölkerung, 8. Oktober 1919)

  Official statistics and censuses before and after the war show hardly any changes in the numbers of Jews. This was demonstrated by Swedish author Einar Aberg in 1959, who, citing official organs of Jewry such as the American Jewish Committee and mainstream American publications such as The World Almanac, showed that they did not document a substantially sharp decline during the years of the war. It stated that in 1936 there were 15,753,633 Jews worldwide; while in 1949 there were 15,713,638.

  These Holocaust deniers are very slick people. They justify everything they say with facts and figures. Chairman, New Jersey Commission on Holocaust Education (Newark Star-Ledger, 23 Oct. 1996, p. 15)

  An estimate based on documents held by the International Tracing Service of the Red Cross arrives at a figure of 74,000 deaths at Auschwitz, based on the “Auschwitz death books.” The death books themselves are wartime German camp records, which were captured by the Soviets towards the end of the war and hidden in Soviet archives, until released to the Red Cross in 1989 by Mikhail Gorbachov.

  The International Red Cross made frequent visits to Auschwitz.

  We had not been able to discover any trace of installations for exterminating civilian prisoners. This corroborates a report which we had already received from other sources... (USA-Today, Friday, May 2, 1997, page 14A)

  ***

  Furthermore, there exists since 1979 a document from the Bureau of Vital Statistics in Arolsen, which lists the certified deaths in each concentration camp of the Third Reich (total 271,304 cases of which 52,389 in Auschwitz). (Bureau of Vital Statistics Arolsen, case officer Herr, Az. I/V-050-Schw. 11th May 1979)

  Many died simply of old age.

  According to International Red Cross statistics from 1979, an estimated 271,304 inmates died in the top 13 German-run WWII work camps—including some of the most “notorious”—Auschwitz, Dachau, Bergen-Belsen, Majdanek, Buchenwald etc. This includes inmates of all nationalities and from all causes, including old age and disease. This is a far cry from the alleged “6 million” Jews who are claimed to have been “gassed to death” under orders from Adolf Hitler and his top “henchmen.”

  Auschwitz was a labour camp. Workers received “Lagergeld” or “camp money,” which they could spend on cigarettes, in the canteen, or even in the bordello (Paper Money of the World Part I: Modern Issues of Europe by Arnold Keller, Ph.D., 1956, pp. 23-25/ Das Lagergeld der Konzentrations- und D.P.-Lager: 1933-1945). Among other amenities, Auschwitz had a hospital, a pool, and sporting grounds (for a round-up of the benign aspects of the camps generally, check out www.mfsfaraz.com). In early 1945, when the war was nearly over, inmates were given the choice either to wait for the Russians, or to leave with the camp attendants. Most chose the latter.

  That seems to be proof enough that “liberation” by the Russians was less desirable than the continued company of those who, according to the myth, had spent the last three years exterminating them.

  “Auschwitz was a terrible place, but it was not an extermination camp.” (Gitta Sereny, Jewish biographer, historian, London Times, August 29, 2001)

  In conclusive proof, both of the nature of Auschwitz concentration camp and of the implausibility of the charge that Jews were gassed there –or anywhere at all—the records of the Auschwitz Kommandantur (commander’s headquarters) appeared in 2000 (Institut für Zeitgeschichte, Munich, 604pp.). Here are a few extracts:

  Commandant’s headquarters order Nr. 9/40. Auschwitz 28 November 1940. Communication with prisoners in protective custody. It must be yet again be affirmed that some SS-men still call the prisoners to the fence to give them shoes or items of clothing to be repaired. I must point out that such behaviour is not only forbidden, but that it is also life-threatening... The Commandant of Auschwitz concentration camp, signed Höss, SS-Major.

  ***

  Commandant special order 1/42. Subject: work on Sundays. If a prisoner is to produce a full amount of work, it is necessary that he should also have enough strength, rest and readiness to approach each week’s stint. For this, he needs Sunday to rest. In this regard, it is vital to ensure that prisoners in future bathe once a week, and that the calm of Sunday be used to maintain clothes and all other items of daily use, which the prisoner needs for his personal care. Signed, Höss, Major and Commandant.

  ***

  Commandant’s headquarters order Nr. 19/43. Auschwitz, May 27 1943. Sunday work for prisoners. I forbid the assembly of work details on Sundays for work that is not absolutely necessary or essential. Prisoners should report for disinfection, bathing etc. and with this to undertake the necessary change of clothes, bed linen and mending of clothes. (author‘s italics)

  “Gas chambers.” Birkena
u, Poland, 1942. Prisoners working with disinfection apparatus

  Standortbefehl Nr. 51/43. Auschwitz, November 16 1943. Häftlingseigentum. “Prisoners’ property.” I have occasion to point out, for the last time, that prisoners’ property, no matter what it consists of, or where it is or is seen, must remain untouched...I expect from every orderly, decent SS-member – and that will be the majority – that he keeps his eyes open and helps to remove swiftly any evident rascal and thus that our ranks stay clean. The state cares for every German citizen today, so that he may lead a decent life. It is therefore not necessary to stray from the straight and narrow. The Senior Officer, signed Liebehenschel, SS-Lieutenant-Colonel.

  ***

  Kommendanturbefehl Nr. 4/44. Monowitz, Februar 22 1944. Mistreatment of prisoners. I take this opportunity to call attention to the existing order which forbids any SS-Man from harming a prisoner. The Camp Commandant, signed Schwarz, SS-Major.

  ***

  Standortbefehl Nr. 29/44. Auschwitz, November 25 1944. Tips at the hairdresser. Prisoners at the hairdressers are still being offered tips, although this has been forbidden by repeated orders and notices on the premises.

  In further extracts from the above-mentioned documents, the SS Business Administration is concerned, in a message of 1943 to 19 concentration camps, to state not only the “unparalleled” quality of the armaments industry they have created, but also the necessity of ensuring that not more than 10% of prisoners may be incapacitated due to illness at any time, and that they receive “correct and appropriate nutrition.”

  In a communication of 5.4.1944, SS-General Pohl summarizes for Himmler the number of prisoners in Auschwitz’s three camps: 67,000. How this relatively minor total could ever have been inflated, even over a period of five years, to the 4,000,000 originally claimed (now reduced to 1,000,000), is of course incomprehensible.

  On August 30, 1943, US Secretary of State Cordell Hull wrote to William Standley, US Ambassador in Moscow: “. . . there is insufficient evidence to justify the statement regarding execution in gas chambers” (Foreign Relations of the United States: Diplomatic Papers 1943. US Government Printing Office, 1963, vol. 1, p. 416).

  No wonder the unfortunate Höss had trouble conjuring up 2 ½ million gassed Jews to satisfy his torturers! Höss’s confession (March 15, 1946) created a useful base for further allegations of this type, and within a few months of the end of the war, probably no German of rank remained alive or willing to relate the truth about National Socialist policy towards the Jews.

  Höss, Kommandant at Auschwitz between 1940 and 1943, stated after his confession that he would have confessed to having gassed any figure that was wanted: “Certainly, I signed a statement that I killed two and a half million Jews. But I could just as well have said that it was five million Jews. There are certain methods by which any confession can be obtained, whether it is true or not.” (Höss, to Moritz von Schirmeister, before his hearing as witness for the defence, at the Nuremberg tribunal). The unreliability of Höss’s millions figures is so grave that Martin Broszat simply left them out of the publication of the Höss documents publication of The Number of Victims of Auschwitz. (Fritjof Meyer: Die Zahl der Opfer von Auschwitz. Osteuropa. 52. Jg., 5/2002)

  In this connection, a further misunderstanding derives from the post-war falsification of the so-called “Aktion-Reinhardt,” conveniently claimed to have been revenge for the assassination of Reinhard Heydrich(May 27, 1942) and “was the code name given to the Nazi plan to murder Polish Jews in the General Government. The operation marked the most deadly phase of the Holocaust with the introduction of extermination camps“ (Wikipedia). In actual fact:

  The “Aktion Reinhardt” was a tax subsidy on prematurely recovered scrap, a scrappage premium and part of the whole Reinhardt programme to animate the economy during the time of National Socialism. The “Aktion Reinhardt” was regulated by the scrappage decree of December 13, 1933. The decree was suspended again on August 31, 1934. The name of the campaign was originally based on that of the state secretary in the finance ministry, Fritz Reinhardt. (Called the First Law to Reduce Unemployment, of June 1m 1933 (Reichsgesetzblatt 1 S 323) and Paragraph I of the Second Law to Reduce Unemployment, of September 21, 1933 (Reichsgesetzblatt 1 S. 651)

  Repeal of the scrap metal regulation. Tax concession also without scrapping within the framework of the Reinhardt-Program

  Süddeutsche Zeitung, Mai 17, 2010: Then an idea that is surprisingly current came to Fritz Reinhardt, state secretary at the finance ministry: next to the marriage loan of 1,000 Reichsmark, which above all served to keep women from the labour market and in confinement instead, the ministry wanted to foster the lagging consumption by means of a scrappage decree, enacted on December 13, 1933.

  Proclamation about resettlement in the east, signed by the Jewish Council

  In July 1942, Himmler is supposed to have charged Chief of Police Globocnik with an “Aktion Reinhard(t),” which consisted of the systemic registration and transfer of all Jews who lived in the five districts of the Generalgouvernment (Poland). For what this designation was actually used is disputed. Karl Wolff, Himmler’s personal adjutant, declared on June 3, 1947, during the Wilhelmstrasse trial:

  That there was an “Aktion Reinhard,” and even under the name Reinhard, I learnt for the first time in Nürnberg. (HistorischeTatsachen, Lügen um Heinrich Himmler, Teil 1, S. 40)

  In keeping with its genesis in the Ministry of Finance, the following description, by its then chief executive, bears out the commercial nature of “Aktion Reinhardt”:

  The entire Action Reinhardt is divided into four spheres: A. The expulsion itself. B. The employment of labour. C. The exploitation of property. D. Seizure of hidden goods and landed property. (Gruppenführer/Lieutenant-General Globocnik letter to Himmler, January 5, 1943)

  In anticipation of the occupation of Ukraine, Jews from the Generalgouvernment were being transferred east to Belzec, Sobibor and Treblinka camps, waiting to be settled in Ukraine, the future border of German settlement.

  Russia and Western Europe had different rail gauges. Many concentration camps were therefore at the points between different track widths. These were therefore transit camps.

  This is confirmed by an exchange of messages between Himmler and General Pohl:

  1. Transit camp Sobibor in Lublin District is to be transformed into a concentration camp. A facility for deactivation of captured munitions is to be set up in the concentration camp. 2. All senior SS and police ranks are constrained to deliver all captured munitions there, in so far as they are not needed in the use of captured weapons. 3. Metals and above all gunpowder must be carefully handled. 4. At the same time a manufacturing facility for our rocket launchers or other munitions will be built in this concentration camp. (July 5, 1943)

  ***

  Reichsführer! According to your above instruction Sobibor transit camp in Lublin District should be transformed into a concentration camp. I have spoken to General Glücks about this. We both suggest to you to renounce the conversion to a concentration camp because your goal to install a deactivating facility for captured weapons at Sobibor could take place without these changes. (July 15, 1943)

  ***

  It would be expedient to divide the transports of Jews arriving in the Lublin district at the station of origin into employable and unemployable Jews. […] All unemployable Jews are to come to Bezec [sic], the outermost border station in the Zamosz district. Hauptsturmführer Höfle is thinking of building a large camp in which the employable Jews can be registered in a file system according to their occupations and requisitioned from there. […] In conclusion he [Höfle] stated that he could accept 4-5 transports of 1.000 Jews to the terminal station Bezec daily. These Jews would cross the border and never return to the General Gouvernement.” (Fritz Reuter, employee in the Department of Population and Welfare in the Office of the Governor General for the District of Lublin, note referring to exchange with SS Hauptsturmführer H. Höfle, March 17, 1
942, quoted by Jozef Kermisz, “Dokumenty i materialy do dziejow okupacji niemieckiej w Polsce, vol. II: Akce i Wysiedlenia,” Warsaw-Lodz-Krakow 1946, p. 32 f)

  War Refugee Board Releases Report on Extermination of Millions of Jews in Nazi Camps. November 26, 1944. The Executive Office of the President through the War Refugee Board today made public two eye-witness reports of the horrible and barbarous events which occurred in the two notorious extermination camps — Auschwitz (Oswiecim) and Brikenau (sic) — in Upper Silesia.

  The sixty-page horror story, containing details and statistics of the murders in these camps, is released by the War Refugee Board “in the firm conviction that the reports should be read and understood by all Americans.”

  This official, Presidential confirmation of the worst horrors charged to the Germans is prefaced by a statement that it is now “beyond denial that the Germans have deliberately and systematically murdered millions of innocent civilians — Jew and Christians alike — all over Europe,” as part of the campaign of terror and brutality, unparalleled in history which was “part of the German plan to subjugate the free peoples of the world.”

  The atrocities reported in detail are characterized by the report as “so revolting and diabolical” that “the minds of civilized people find it difficult to believe that they have actually taken place. But the governments of the United States and of other countries have evidence which clearly substantiates the facts.”

  The report is based on eye-witness accounts given by two young Slovakian Jews (Rudolf Vrba and Alfred Wetzler) who escaped in April 1944, after spending two years in the Nazi concentration camps at Auschwitz and Birkenau and on a report of a non-Jewish Polish army major who is the sole survivor of one group imprisoned at Auschwitz....The facts in this report, according to the War Refugee Board, “tally with the trustworthy yet fragmentary reports hitherto received, and dates given with regard to transports to various camps agree with the official records. These statements can, therefore, be considered as entirely credible.” (author’s italics)