The official blog of the site “Der Stürmer” – http://der-stuermer.org
DOWNLOAD THE BOOK IN PDF FORMAT.
Inconvenient History seeks to revive the true spirit of the historical revisionist movement; a movement that was established primarily to foster peace through an objective understanding of the causes of modern warfare.
By Denis Wise
The origins of the New World Order and the infiltration of the free world.
Source: https://codoh.com/library/document/the-allied-leaders-on-the-holocaust/
By Panagiotis Heliotis
November 23, 2017
One of the many anomalies concerning the Holocaust is that the three leaders of the Western Allies – Eisenhower, De Gaulle and Churchill – did not seem to be aware of it. Despite Nuremberg and despite that they, of all people, were highly informed in every aspect of the war, their memoirs are unexpectedly laconic about the Holocaust. So, let’s see what exactly they had to say.
Dwight Eisenhower
In his memoir Crusade in Europe, we find only this:
“Of all these DPs the Jews were in the most deplorable condition. For years they had been beaten, starved and tortured. Even food, clothes, and decent treatment could not immediately enable them to shake off their hopelessness and apathy. […] They were, in many instances, no longer capable of helping themselves; everything had to be done for them.” (p. 439)
Nothing new here. Beaten, starved, tortured, but not exterminated.
Charles de Gaulle
In The Complete War Memoirs of Charles de Gaulle the Final Solution is mentioned three times. But De Gaulle had even fewer to say. First, we read this:
“During the summer the persecution of the Jews grew worse, conducted by a special ’commissariat’ in collaboration with the invader.” (p. 346)
Then this:
“During the course of the winter the persecution of the Jews redoubled, despite public indignation, the protests of bishops – such as Monsignor Saliege in Toulouse and Cardinal Gerlier in Lyon – and the condemnation of Pastor Boegner, president of the French Protestant Federation.” (p. 403)
And finally, this:
“During the same period the shameful horrors of the persecution of Jews were unleashed.” (p. 496)
So, De Gaulle was aware of a persecution but not of any extermination program.
Winston Churchill
Well, if the above fail to meet our expectations, then perhaps it’s time for the British Bulldog to show its teeth with the 6-volume The Second World War. Alas, we are quickly disappointed. Two passages are relevant, the first from Volume 1, which is as follows:
“The progress of Hitler and his doctrines is thus registered with precision. In 1928 he had but twelve seats in the Reichstag. In 1930 this became 107; in 1932, 230; By that time the whole structure of Germany had been permeated by the agencies and discipline of the National Socialist Party, and intimidation of all kinds and insults and brutalities towards the Jews were rampant.” (p. 52)
This of course is about the first anti-Semitic measures. For the Holocaust we find only this in Volume 6:
“There is no doubt that this [persecution of Jews in Hungary and their expulsion from enemy territory] is probably the greatest and most horrible crime ever committed in the whole history of the world, and it has been done by scientific machinery by nominally civilized men in the name of a great State and one of the leading races of Europe.” (p. 597)
This does not confirm the official account at all. It’s actually quite damning. For if the Hungarian Operation by itself was bad enough for Churchill to be considered the greatest crime in the history of the world, then what would we expect him to say about the entire Holocaust? As it turns out, nothing.
So, in the above works we read about Jews being beaten, starved, persecuted but shockingly nothing about death camps, gas chambers, crematories and the genocide of 6 million victims. How do we explain this? Can we really believe that all of these were deemed to be simple details? Or that they had no idea about them? Of course not. The only plausible explanation, no matter how undesirable, is that they had not confirmed any of this and therefore passed over them in silence.
Source: https://www.renegadetribune.com/jewish-invention-myths-compulsory-education/
by Karl Radl
Another odd ‘jewish invention’ myth that has been claimed is the idea that jews ‘invented compulsory education’ with Debbie Lechtman writing that:
‘COMPULSORY EDUCATION
Jews were the first to come up with the concept of public and compulsory education. In 64 CE, Rabbi Yehoshua Ben Gamla decreed that all Jewish children, age six and up, should attend school, whether their parents could afford to pay for their studies or not. The Jewish community was receptive to the idea and began establishing subsidized or public schools for their children.
According to educational philanthropist George Hanus: “[This] is the first instance in recorded history of a people instituting compulsory universal education funded by the larger community…Many scholars believe Gamla’s model was the inspiration for free public education systems in the contemporary West, including the United States.”
A little over a hundred years earlier, in 75 BCE, Simeon ben Shetah argued that education should be compulsory. The Torah itself emphasizes the importance of parents educating their children.
The Talmud states that children should begin their formal education at age six and that their education should override all other tasks and responsibilities.
Literacy among the ancient Israelites was shockingly high, around 15-20 percent. Though that sounds low by today’s standards, in the ancient world, such a percentage was astronomical.’ (1)
This is as fine as far as it goes as Ben Gamla did indeed rule that all jewish boys – not girls though mind you – should receive a compulsory education so they could read and understand the Written Torah in circa 64 A.D.; (2) he was – and thus the jews were – not the first to have such a system with the Spartan system of compulsory education – which we know the jews knew of – (3) of the Agoge being created at the earliest between 700 B.C. to 1000 B.C. by the Laws of Lycurgus. (4)
Further there is some indication that the Laws of Solon (between 500 B.C. to 600 B.C.) also involved compulsory education specifically in the form mentioned by Plato of reading and swimming, which differed from Sparta’s compulsory education but never-the-less would be a similar compulsory education system to that advocated by Ben Gamla in 64 A.D.
It is also worth pointing out that the Spartan system of the Agoge was probably far closer to what we’d think of as a compulsory education today and was not only in theory compulsory – which is Ben Gamla’s system and which clearly was only universal in theory since (as even Lechtman admits) only 15-20% of jews were literate in the years after it was enforced – (5) but rather known to be compulsory and this was directly enforced by the Spartan state. (6)
So, no jews most certainly did not invent the first system of compulsory education.
Thanks for reading Semitic Controversies! This post is public so feel free to share it.
References
(1) https://www.rootsmetals.com/blogs/news/israelite-jewish-inventions-during-ancient-times
(2) https://voices.sefaria.org/sheets/246260?lang=bi
(3) On Spartan-jewish relations see my article: https://karlradl14.substack.com/p/classical-sparta-and-the-jews
(4) https://www.britannica.com/topic/Lycurgus-Spartan-lawgiver
(5) https://www.rootsmetals.com/blogs/news/israelite-jewish-inventions-during-ancient-times
(6) On this see Douglas MacDowell, 1986, ‘Spartan Law’, 1st Edition, Scottish Academic Press: Edinburgh, pp. 42-46
Source: https://www.renegadetribune.com/jewish-invention-myths-the-presumption-of-innocence/
by Karl Radl
Our next ‘jewish invention’ myth is the claim that jews first created the legal concept of the presumption of innocence.
Debbie Lechtman claims as follows:
‘PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE
The presumption of innocence is a principle in law that every person accused of a crime is innocent until proven guilty.
It was the Talmud — the central text of Rabbinic Judaism and the main source of Halacha [Jewish Law] — that repeatedly emphasized that the burden of evidence rests on the accuser, not the accused, such as in Bava Kamma 46b.
The Jerusalem Talmud was completed in the fifth century and the Babylonian Talmud was completed in the sixth century.
Equality before the law was also an ancient Israelite idea. The Israelites were the first not to assign their kings divine rights; in other words, Israelites did not believe that their kings ruled in the name of God. As such, kings, too, had to obey the Ten Commandments and the other laws outlined in the Torah. In other words: the kings were not above the law.
In the Torah, Leviticus argues that all should be treated equally before the law: “You shall not commit a perversion of justice; you shall not favor the poor and you shall not honor the great; with righteousness shall you judge your fellow.”’ (1)
The problem is that this is complete cobblers and the first formally codified presumption of innocence in law was introduced into Roman law by Emperor Antonius Pius sometime between 138 to 161 A.D.
As John Bagnell Bury explains:
‘In criminal law, Antoninus introduced the important principle, which, though now universally recognised in theory, is not always respected in practice, that accused persons are not to be treated as guilty before trial.’ (2)
And even before Antonius Pius; the famous Babylonian ‘Code of Hammurabi’ (c. 1775 B.C.) contained an early rendition of the presumption of innocence which states:
‘If anyone bring an accusation of any crime before the elders, and does not prove what he has charged, he shall, if it be a capital offense charged, be put to death.’ (3)
It is from these sources that Leviticus and the rabbis of the Talmud almost certainly took their ideas that now Lechtman is trying to claim were ‘jewish inventions’ all along.
So no, the presumption of innocence was not first created/innovated by jews.
Thanks for reading Semitic Controversies! This post is public so feel free to share it.
References
(1) https://www.rootsmetals.com/blogs/news/israelite-jewish-inventions-during-ancient-times
(2) John Bagnall Bury, 1893, ‘A History of the Roman Empire from its Foundation to the Death of Marcus Aurelius (27 B.C.-180 A.D.)’, 1st Edition, Harper: New York, p. 527
(3) https://avalon.law.yale.edu/ancient/hamframe.asp; this interpretation is supported by https://www.pumphreylawfirm.com/blog/innocent-until-proven-guilty-the-history-and-current-application-of-the-presumption-of-innocence/
Germany Awakens – A Document of the Rebirth of Germany (1933)
