The official blog of the site “Der Stürmer” – http://der-stuermer.org
Saturday, October 30, 2021
Wednesday, October 27, 2021
The „Russian“ Revolution - Part III
„The Daily Telegraph reported on April 9, 1937: ‘Since M. Litvinoff ousted Chicherin, no Russian has ever held a high post in the Commissariat for Foreign Affairs.’ It seems that the Daily Telegraph was unaware that Chicherin’s mother was a Jewess. The Russian Molotov, who became Foreign Minister later, has a Jewish wife, and one of his two assistants is the Jew, Lozovsky. It was the last-named who renewed the treaty with Japan in 1942, by which the Kamchatka fisheries provided the Japanese with an essential part of their food supplies.“ (The Jewish War of Survival, Arnold Leese, p. 84; The Rulers of Russia, Denis Fahey, p. 24)
I am quite ready to admit that the Jewish leaders are only a proportionately infinitesimal fraction, even as the British rulers of India are an infinitesimal fraction. But it is none the less true that those few Jewish leaders are the masters of Russia, even as the fifteen hundred Anglo-Indian Civil Servants are the masters of India. For any traveller in Russia to deny such a truth would be to deny any traveller in Russia to deny such a truth would be to deny the evidence of our own senses. When you find that out of a large number of important Foreign Office officials whom you have met, all but two are Jews, you are entitled to say that the Jews are running the Russian Foreign Office.“ (The Mystical Body of Christ in the Modern World, a passage quoted from Impressions of Soviet Russia, by Charles Sarolea, Belgian Consul in Edinburgh and Professor of French Literature in the University of Edinburgh, pp. 93-94; The Rulers of Russia, Denis Fahey, pp. 31-32)
The Bolsheviks had promised to give the workers the industries, mines, etc., and to make them ‘masters of the country.’ In reality, never has the working class suffered such privations as those brought about by the so-called epoch of ‘socialization.’ In place of the former capitalists a new ‘bourgeoisie’ has been formed, composed of 100 percent Jews. Only an insignificant number of former Jewish capitalists left Russia after the storm of the Revolution. All the other Jews residing in Russia enjoy the special protection of Stalin’s most intimate adviser, the Jew Lazare Kaganovitch. All the big industries and factories, war products, railways, big and small trading, are virtually and effectively in the hands of Jews, while the working class figures only in the abstract as the ‘patroness of economy.’
The wives and families of Jews possess luxurious cars and country houses, spend the summer in the best climatic or bathing resorts in the Crimea and Caucasus, are dressed in costly Astrakhan coats; they wear jewels, gold bracelets and rings, send to Paris for their clothes and articles of luxury. Meanwhile the labourer, deluded by the revolution, drags on a famished existence...
The Bolsheviks had promised the peoples of old Russia full liberty and autonomy...I confine myself to the example of the Ukraine. The entire administration, the important posts controlling works in the region, are in the hands of Jews or of men faithfully devoted to Stalin, commissioned expressly from Moscow. The inhabitants of this land once fertile and flourishing suffer from almost permanent famine.“ (Giornale d’Italia, February 17, 1938, M. Butenko, former Soviet Charge d’Affairs at Bucharest; Free Press (London) March, 1938; The Rulers of Russia, Denis Fahey, pp. 44-45)
„On my arrival in U.S.S.R. in 1934, I remember that I was struck by the enormous proportion of Jewish functionaries everywhere. In the Press, and diplomatic circles, it was difficult to find non-Jews...In France many believe, even amongst the Communists, that, thanks to the present anti-Jewish purge...Russia is no longer Israel’s chosen land...Those who think that are making a mistake.“ (Contre-Revolution of December, 1937, by J. Fontenoy, on Anti-Semitism in Russia; The Rulers of Russia, Denis Fahey, pp. 43-44)
CARDINAL MINDSZENTY, of Hungary quoted in B’nai B’rith Messenger, January 28, 1949: „The troublemakers in Hungary are the Jews... they demoralize our country and they are the leaders of the revolutionary gang that is torturing Hungary.“
CAPTAIN MONTGOMERY SCHYLER, American Expeditionary Forces, Siberia, in a military intelligence report dated March 1, 1919, to Lt. Col. Barrows in Vladivostok: „It is probably unwise to say this loudly in the United States but the Bolshevik movement is and has been since its beginning guided and controlled by Russian Jews of the greasiest type, who have been in the United States and there absorbed every one of the worst phases of our civilization without having the least understanding of what we really mean by liberty.“
M. OUDENDYK, the Netherlands’ Minister to Petrograd on September 6, 1918, to the British Government, published in the unexpurgated edition of A Collection of Reports on Bolshevism in Russia, April, 1919: „...I consider that the immediate suppression of Bolshevism is the greatest issue before the World, not even excluding the war which is till raging, and unless, as above stated, Bolshevism is nipped in the bud immediately, it is bound to spread in one form or another over Europe and the whole World, as it is organized and worked by Jews who have no nationality, and whose one object is to destroy for their own ends the existing order of things.“
H.H. BEAMISH, N.Y. speech, 1937: „Communism is Judaism. The Jewish Revolution in Russia was in 1918.“
REV. KENNETH GOFF, in STILL ‘TIS OUR ANCIENT FOE, page 99: „The Frankenstein of Communism is the product of the Jewish mind, and was turned loose upon the world by the son of a Rabbi, Karl Marx, in the hopes of destroying Christian civilization - as well as others. The testimony given before the Senate of the United States which is take from the many pages of the Overman Report, reveals beyond a shadow of a doubt that Jewish bankers financed the Russian Revolution.“
Sunday, October 24, 2021
Dr. David Duke - What Jews Really Think About YOU
If this video is not available in your country use TOR Browser to watch it – fight the jewish censorship!
Friday, October 22, 2021
Wednesday, October 20, 2021
The Health of the Nation
by Dr. William Pierce
A physician who wants to ascertain the health of a person checks his weight and blood pressure, listens to his heartbeat and breathing, examines his skin, and so on. The physician knows what signs to look for, what measurements to make in order to decide whether his patient is healthy or ill. He knows what signs are important and which have no fundamental significance.
If we want to determine the health of a nation, we likewise look for signs and make measurements. And of course, it’s necessary to understand which signs are the important ones. Most Americans today seem to believe that the only important signs are economic signs. They believe that if the stock market is going up, unemployment is low, and people are spending lots of money, everything is rosy. Which is to say, if they are economically comfortable, if they can buy the things they want, they are inclined to believe that the nation is healthy.
Of course, they do worry a little about the schools: about the continual lowering of standards, about the substitution of more and more Mickey Mouse courses in the place of history and mathematics and grammar. They have an occasional flash of worry that we may be raising a less competent generation than the one before. But, hey, the economy is okay, so don’t worry. They believe that we can spend more money on the schools, and that will make up for the lower standards and the watered down curriculum.
They may become a little depressed when they look at the array of candidates running for public office. The polls show that approximately half the electorate is willing to vote for a loyal member of the gang that gave us the Bill and Monica show and, last year, willfully slaughtered White women and children in Belgrade for no good reason. And the other candidate really is not much better. He also would have unleashed the cruise missiles on the women and children of Belgrade in order to teach that guy Slobodan a lesson in dee-mo-cra-cee, rather than risk the wrath of Madeleine and her tribesmen, who had demanded the war against Serbia. Well, contemplating the candidates is depressing, but the malls are still full of shiny stuff waiting to be bought, and the limit hasn’t been reached on the credit card yet, so the country must still be healthy.
The average citizen certainly has misgivings when he reflects on the increasing darkening of America’s racial complexion: when he notes, as Atlanta Braves pitcher John Rocker did, that fewer and fewer of the people he sees and hears on the sidewalks of our cities speak English or look like the sort of people he grew up with. But all of the media bosses and the politicians and even his priest or minister assure him that more diversity is good for America, that it strengthens our economy. So the country must be healthier than ever. Right?
No, not right. Judging the health of a nation by how much shiny junk is for sale in the shopping malls and how much the average citizen can charge on his credit card is like judging the health of a man on the basis of whether or not his shoes are shined and his fingernails are clean.
There are several things that are important to the health of a nation, and these things have relatively little to do with shopping malls and credit cards. Natural resources are important, of course. A country rich in minerals and land and timber and fresh water is better off than one with fewer natural resources – other things being equal. Of course, it is seldom that other things are equal. The countries of Black Africa have enormously rich natural resources, but health-wise they are all basket cases. Without the boost given to them by Europeans during the colonial period, their people still would be eating each other. Some of them still are, in fact. And since the Europeans gave up on their colonies, the Africans have been sliding back down into the jungle.
They are unable to take care of themselves. Whenever a natural disaster occurs, as with the flooding in Mozambique recently, they are dependent on help from Whites.
Japan, on the other hand, is very poor in natural resources but nevertheless is infinitely healthier than any Black country. The Japanese never ask for outside help from anyone. They take care of themselves. And despite their lack of minerals they are enormously wealthy. So what’s the secret? Why is Japan so much healthier, so much more fit, than Mozambique, despite having so much less land and resources? Well, of course, you already know the answer. It’s the difference in the quality of the people.
For every nation, the one essential determinant of national health is the quality of the people who make up that nation: their genetic quality – which is to say, their racial quality – and their moral quality. Everything else, including the state of the economy, ultimately depends on these two elements. A nation whose population is intelligent, creative, resourceful, energetic, and able to solve problems and plan ahead, ultimately will be a healthier nation than one whose people are dull, lazy, and able to think only about the present, regardless of mineral wealth or other advantages. Genes are the determining element.
And a nation whose people are disciplined, racially conscious, and imbued with a strong sense of responsibility will be healthier than a nation whose people have the same genes but who are accustomed to permissiveness and self-indulgence and to thinking only about themselves, who do not feel any sense of belonging to their race or any sense of responsibility to it. When genes are equal, morality is the determining element.
Now, with that introduction, let’s talk about the immigration situation in this country. Let’s talk about it in a specific and personal way. Roger Barnett is a rancher in Arizona. He has a cattle ranch in Cochise County, in southeastern Arizona, near the town of Douglas, which is right on the Mexican border. Last month, on the afternoon of February 19, driving in his pickup truck along U.S. Highway 80 east of Douglas, he pulled alongside a van carrying 10 Mexicans. With horn honking and lights flashing, Barnett forced the van to stop. Determining that all 10 occupants of the van were illegal aliens, Barnett and his brother performed citizen’s arrests of the Mexicans and escorted the van to the Border Patrol station in Douglas, where they turned the Mexicans over to the Border Patrol for deportation.
Now, Roger Barnett is not a policeman, and he’s not a Border Patrol agent. He’s just a rancher, a private citizen. He’d much rather be tending to his cattle than rounding up illegal aliens. Yet in the last two years he estimates that he’s arrested more than 1,000 – more than 1,000 – illegal aliens on or near his ranch. That’s getting close to two a day, and it doesn’t leave him much time for ranching. He’s not paid to apprehend illegal aliens, but he does it because the Border Patrol is, in effect, paid not to do it. And he does it because the Mexicans are ruining his ranch. Heading north across his land, they leave a trail of trash and filth and destroyed vegetation behind them. Where they camp the ground is littered with debris and human feces. They cut down Barnett’s trees for firewood to build campfires. Empty plastic bottles, discarded diapers, and other trash are everywhere, posing a hazard to his cows. The cows will eat plastic trash, and it jams up their digestive tract and kills them.
It’s not just a few Mexicans sneaking across the border. It’s a non-stop flood, an invasion by a huge army. And the Border Patrol, under orders from the Clinton administration, deliberately lets the invaders come across the border, only pretending to try to stop them by arresting a few each day. Those few who are apprehended never are punished or imprisoned; they are simply sent back across the border to try again. When Barnett arrested the 10 illegals in the van on February 19, the Mexican consul in Douglas, Miguel Escobar Valdez, tried to have him prosecuted for assault and unlawful imprisonment. A lot of other people also were wringing their hands and moaning about Barnett: „taking the law into his own hands.“
Local liberals and church spokesmen were complaining that he had „intimidated“ the illegal aliens and „violated their civil rights.“ The local prosecuting attorney, Chris Roll, said:
„This is conduct we all wish wasn’t happening and do not condone, yet we cannot go forward unless there is sufficient evidence of a crime for a jury to convict.“
What that means in plain language is that the prosecutor would love to lock Barnett up for trying to keep the illegals away from his ranch, but he knows that he couldn’t get a local jury to convict him for anything because all of the other ranchers and businessmen and homeowners in the area sympathize with Barnett, even if they don’t have enough courage to do the same thing themselves. The liberals are hoping that one of Barnett’s arrests of illegals will end up in a shooting. Then they will yell for Janet Reno, and Barnett will be prosecuted for a „hate crime.“
You know, this goes far beyond the usual liberal bias in favor of the criminal and against anyone who gets tough with a criminal. The law is clear. The illegal aliens are breaking U.S. law simply by entering our country, completely aside from the laws they break after they are in the country, by trespassing on Barnett’s ranch and destroying his property. The U.S. Border Patrol is charged with keeping them out and with arresting them if they get in. But the U.S. Border Patrol is under the jurisdiction of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, and the Immigration and Naturalization Service is headed by a woman named Doris Meissner, who, even if she weren’t a Jewess, would be carrying out the policy of the Clinton administration, which is to let anyone into the country who will strengthen the feminist, Jewish, homosexual, racial minority, welfare coalition against the normal, healthy, self-supporting, heterosexual White men and women who used to be America.
You might think the Republicans would raise hell about this policy, but they’re afraid to. In the first place, they’re afraid of being called „racists“ by the media – and they’re afraid that the Mexicans who’re legally in the country will vote against them if they’re seen as anti-immigrant. Of course, nearly all of those votes go to the Democrats anyway, but the Republicans believe that the Mexicans will continue swarming into the country because they think that Americans just aren’t tough-minded enough to support the firm policies required to halt the flood, and so instead of trying to keep them out the Republicans are trying to out-Democrat the Democrats in being nice to them.
The fact is that the government could halt all illegal immigration immediately, and I mean today, if it wanted to, simply by announcing that anyone attempting to cross the border illegally would be shot on sight and then demonstrating that we meant it. That would do it. We could spend the next three months building an adequate set of fences, installing intrusion sensors, and so on. But just shooting a few hundred illegals the first day would be enough to stop the flood. It wouldn’t require any more resources than the Border Patrol is using now. All of the excuses we hear about the government not being able to afford enough Border Patrol agents to patrol the border, and that it’s impossible to keep the Mexicans from climbing the fences we build or cutting through them or burrowing under them, are simply lies. We could stop them all in a day with almost no effort.
Of course, the liberals and the Jews in the media and the Christian churches would wail long and loud if the government actually got serious about protecting our borders. The government would have to be prepared to deal with them. But of course, the government isn’t about to begin protecting our borders.
Our real problem is that we don’t have enough Roger Barnetts. And we don’t have enough people who really understand how bad the problem is. The ranchers along the border understand. They see the size of the flood, and they also see the appalling lack of human quality among those who make up the flood. In the rest of the country, the perception is not as clear – but it is becoming clearer as the mestizos continue pouring in. Communities that ten years ago had only a relatively small Mexican problem – and that 20 years ago had no Mexicans at all – are finding themselves overwhelmed by the Mexican invasion today, and these communities being overrun by mestizos are not just along the border: they are all over the country. The big agribusiness tycoons are importing them by the hundreds of thousands for farm labor, for work in poultry plants, and for other low-wage work, and the Clinton government is pretending not to notice. One of the worst offenders is Bill Clinton’s bosom buddy and financial supporter, Arkansas chicken-processing billionaire Donald Tyson, of Tyson Foods.
As I said, the mestizo problem is spreading all over the country. Last month my organization, the National Alliance, organized a public demonstration in Siler City, North Carolina, to protest the government’s refusal to arrest and deport illegal aliens. Ten years ago Siler City, a little town of about 6,000 residents, was almost entirely White. Today it is 40 per cent Mexican, because two poultry processing plants in the town have been bringing mestizo workers in, and the Immigration and Naturalization Service has done nothing to stop them. The government ignores its own laws, and because of this the mestizo population of the state of North Carolina has doubled in the past decade.
And let me tell you, the people do not like this. In communities such as Siler City, which have been especially badly impacted by the mestizo invasion, the people are angry. They don’t like it that the schools, which were built with their taxes, and used to be clean and safe and White, now are overrun with Mexicans. They don’t like it that the drug problem and the gang problem and the crime problem and a dozen other big problems which came along with the Mexicans have made their town a far less pleasant place to live. Like John Rocker, they prefer their neighbors to be White and to speak English. Of course, the agribusiness tycoons – the Donald Tysons – don’t really care what they prefer. And clearly, the government doesn’t either.
When the National Alliance was demonstrating in Siler City last month, the White citizens were on our side, and the media, the politicians, and the preachers were on the Mexican side. The media are on the Mexican side because multiculturalizing the country – destroying the White majority – is a deliberate policy with the media bosses. The politicians are on the Mexican side because the agribusiness tycoons and the media bosses are. The agribusiness people slip them money, the way Donald Tyson used to slip money to Bill Clinton in Arkansas, and they know that if the media bosses turn against them they’ll never be allowed to win another election.
Furthermore, they don’t think the White citizens have the will to stop the invasion. The preachers are on the Mexican side because to them a Brown soul is as good as a White one. The churches had a few counter-demonstrators in Siler City carrying signs with slogans such as, „God sees no borders“ and „The only race is the human race.“
Now, to return to the subject of national health: the mestizo invasion of the United States clearly is making a profound impact on the genetic constitution of our population. Our inability to stop this invasion is a clear indicator that our moral health already has suffered a profound impact.
We need a million Roger Barnetts, and we have only a handful. The rest of the people who agree with him are too intimidated by the media to speak out. No, it’s worse than that: they are too cowardly to speak out.
Silicon Valley may be keeping the economy zooming along for now, but that is only a superficial sign of health, a misleading sign. America is like a man whose body is riddled with cancer, but who still manages to keep his shoes shined and his fingernails clean. Genetically, our health is declining fast. The government’s Census Bureau estimates that somewhere between 30 and 50 years from now the mestizos and the Blacks together will outnumber the Whites. That doesn’t bother the preachers, of course. And it doesn’t bother the agribusiness tycoons, who figure that the cost of labor should be lower than ever. And it doesn’t bother the politicians, so long as they still can count on their place at the public trough. And it pleases mightily the Jewish media bosses and their liberal camp followers, who have been striving for that goal all along.
But having their grandchildren growing up in a country where Blacks and mestizos will outnumber them, a country with the sort of society that Blacks and mestizos will transform our society into – a society of barrios and drugs and brutality and all-pervading corruption – that should concern decent, intelligent White people. And it does concern them, when they’re not too busy using their credit cards at the shopping mall or watching the ball game on TV. I mean they know that is what is in store for America. They know that we will have a society which is a cross between that in Zambia and that in Nicaragua, the sort of society that Blacks and mestizos always create. The Census Bureau has announced it. The Jews and liberals are gloating in anticipation.
The fact that they know what is being done to America, they know what is ahead for their grandchildren, and they haven’t risen up in righteous fury and hanged every politician and every media boss and every agribusiness tycoon is medical proof that morally the country already is dead and beginning to stink.
Can a nation which is morally dead save itself from dying genetically as well? Are there still enough Roger Barnetts among us to turn the tide? Well, if I believed that it couldn’t be done, I wouldn’t be talking with you today. But I would appreciate some help. So would Mr. Barnett.
Sunday, October 17, 2021
Jewish Emigration from the Third Reich
2nd revised and expanded edition
Source: http://holocausthandbooks.com/index.php?page_id=12
by Ingrid Weckert
DOWNLOAD THE BOOK IN PDF, KINDLE, EPUB FORMAT.
Historical writings to date dealing with matters related to the Third Reich paint a grim picture. This applies especially to writings that deal with the Jewish ethnic group. To this day there are still accounts of the Jewish emigration that depict it as some kind of clandestine operation – as if the Jews who wished to leave Germany had to sneak over the borders in defiance of the German authorities, and leave all their possessions and wealth behind.
The truth is that the emigration was welcomed by the German authorities, and benefitted from encouragement and assistance that increased over time. Emigration was not some kind of wild flight, but rather a lawfully conducted and regulated matter. Weckert‘s booklet elucidates the emigration process in law and policy, thereby correcting the traditionally received picture of Jewish emigration from Germany significantly.
German authorities and Jewish-Zionist agencies worked closely together on this emigration. Jews interested in emigrating received detailed advice and offers of help from both sides. The accounts of Jews fleeing Germany in secret by night across some border or straits are fabulous. On the contrary, the German government wished German Jews only to live elsewhere. The myths to the contrary were contrived only to accord with the greater myth of genocidal intent and were capitalized upon by erstwhile “smugglers” seeking sainthood.
Thursday, October 14, 2021
Tuesday, October 12, 2021
Jasenovac Unmasked
by Thomas Dalton
Published: 2021-10-10
Source: https://codoh.com/library/document/jasenovac-unmasked/en/
In the year 1700, German scholar Johann Eisenmenger published a shocking exposé entitled Entdecktes Judentum – Judaism Unmasked. His objective was to reveal the thread of Jewish ideology hidden within Christianity, and to lay out the pernicious effect of Jews in contemporary German society. The book was highly influential for more than two centuries, in large part because it laid bare the deeper nature of European Jewry. In the present day, we have many such exposés, some tackling large and complex issues (such as the broader Holocaust) and others, like the present essay, that seek to simply ‘unmask’ one small piece of a larger story. Sometimes we can draw the largest of lessons from the humblest of examples.
The case in point here is an obscure WW2 concentration camp in present-day Croatia, by the name of Jasenovac. The camp – which operated for around three and a half years, from mid-1941 until war’s end – is, by any reasonable accounting, all but irrelevant to the Holocaust story. Even according to the US Holocaust Memorial Museum, only some “12,000 to 20,000 Jews” died there, which means that the camp accounts for, at best, 0.33% of the presumed Jewish death toll of 6 million. Were it not for a recent blunder by the Jerusalem Post, I would likely never have spent a moment on the topic. In the grand Holocaust narrative, there are much larger fish to fry. But the latest gaff gives us a chance to shine a light on the on-going fraud that is the Holocaust. When the Jews themselves put a foot in their collective mouths, we should make the most of it.
The subject at hand is an article that briefly appeared on the Post website, titled “This disgraceful mocking of the Holocaust needs to stop now” (now available here; the original URL has been deleted). Written by an Australian journalist named David Goldman, the short essay obsesses over a three-year-old Croatian television interview in which historian and Croatian Jew Ivo Goldstein expounds on the “increasingly problematic” camp at Jasenovac. The interview, from 2018, included this question of Goldstein: “Many have commented on the lack of forensic evidence from this particular camp. Can you explain why this is the case?” (meaning, why there is an absence of evidence). Goldstein then dropped his “bombshell” reply: “Because in April 1945, Hitler flew in special machines to Jasenovac. These machines were used to dissolve the bones that were left.”
Several points here: One, in all of Holocaust historiography, there is no actual or even rumored documentation of any such “bone dissolving machines.” There were alleged bone crushers, driven by diesel engines; here is one alleged photo. But these have been shown to be fraudulent.[1] The Nazis also allegedly used chlorinated lime (quicklime) to try to decompose corpses at Treblinka and Belzec, but this chemical, when used, only reduces the odor; it does nothing to hasten decomposition. “Dissolving,” especially for bones, implies the use of acid or some other strong chemical process, but again, such claims are completely unknown in the literature. Hence Goldman rightly refers to these as “hitherto unheard-of machines.” Perhaps there was some confusion on Goldstein’s part, and he actually meant ‘crushing,’ not ‘dissolving.’ But again, we have no reliable evidence that such crushing machines were ever used by the Germans.
Two, this idea seems to be a pure invention by Goldstein to explain away a troublesome fact, namely, lack of forensic evidence at Jasenovac – meaning any corpses, ash, or other human remains. And by “pure invention,” I mean an outright lie. By all accounts, Goldstein lied to cover up a critical and damning fact. Anyone who has studied the Holocaust story knows that such lies are legion.[2]
Three, the whole premise that the Germans, in the final throes of defeat, would take the trouble to send anything like “bone dissolving machines” to an obscure camp in Croatia is patently absurd, as Goldman points out. The whole idea is nonsense.
Perhaps most significantly, this little episode brings to mind similar claims about the more important camps like Auschwitz, Treblinka, and Belzec. Lacking physical evidence, how can we justify claims of thousands, or hundreds of thousands, or a million Holocaust victims at these camps? For the journalist Goldman, however, the lies about Jasenovac only “contaminate” the larger Holocaust story, which he accepts unquestioningly. As he says, “Why allow the contamination of Holocaust history with a place [Jasenovac] that cannot provide any independent forensic evidence past a few thousand victims, and that has an ever-increasing – including in 2021 – victim list that has been repeatedly proven to have been doctored?” Indeed; and we can ask the same question about virtually all of the conventional Holocaust sites. The implications are dire for Jews everywhere.
A Short Course on Jasenovac
It is worthwhile taking a moment to review the conventional history of this camp, given the many lessons it offers here. It is undisputed that Jasenovac was established under the auspices of the Nazi-aligned government of occupied Croatia known as the Ustasa (or Ustase, or Ustashi). The camp was constructed in August 1941, not long after Hitler began his invasion of the Soviet Union. It consisted of five separate facilities, two of which were short-lived, but the other three – Ciglana, Kozara, and Stara Gradiska – operated right until the virtual end of the war in April 1945. The purpose of the camp is disputed; some claim it was strictly a detention and work camp, whereas others declare it to be an extermination center on par with the worst camps of Poland. By all accounts, several thousand people died there – mostly Serbs, but also Jews, Roma, and scattered numbers of Muslims and Croatian political enemies.
The numbers of victims, and especially the numbers of Jews, are the main points of contention. Like most Holocaust camps and death sites, the range of estimates is vast. Individuals sympathetic to the Ustasa regime, like former president Franjo Tudjman, regularly gave figures of just 3,000 to 4,000 total. Such numbers date back to the first forensic examinations of the camp in 1947. But by the 1970s and 1980s, the numbers were rising; the 1990 Encyclopedia of the Holocaust (p. 189) claimed, without evidence, that around 300,000 bodies were discovered and exhumed there.
Yet even this number was insufficient for our Holocaust propagandists. One recent article notes that, over past decades, “historians have estimated that between 700,000 and 1,000,000 people were killed at Jasenovac.” Serbian publications of the 1990s cited figures as high as 1.2 million.[3] Of these, around 15% are claimed to have been Jews – meaning, potentially 100,000 to 150,000. At that upper estimate, this would put Jasenovac well ahead of Majdanek camp in terms of Jewish death toll, and approaching the status of Sobibor. If, on the other hand, Jews were 15% of, say, 3,000 fatalities, it would mean an utterly inconsequential 400 or 500 deaths. Much is at stake.
Today, though, the more commonly accepted estimates are much closer to the low end than the high. The current Croatian government seems to accept a figure of 83,000 total deaths. The US Holocaust Memorial Museum claims that “the Ustasa regime murdered between 77,000 and 99,000 people in Jasenovac between 1941 and 1945.” Of these, some 12,000 to 20,000 are claimed to have been Jews. Still, the USHMM is not very sanguine about their own estimates:
Determining the number of victims for…Jasenovac is highly problematic, due to the destruction of many relevant documents, the long-term inaccessibility to independent scholars of those documents that survived, and the ideological agendas of postwar partisan scholarship and journalism, which has been and remains influenced by ethnic tension, religious prejudice, and ideological conflict. The estimates offered here are based on the work of several historians who have used census records as well as whatever documentation was available in German, Croat, and other archives in the former Yugoslavia and elsewhere.
As I noted above, even 20,000 Jewish deaths are largely irrelevant to the broader Holocaust narrative.
A Rebuttal
Goldman’s short essay drew a quick and furious response from Dejan Ristic, the acting director of the Serbian Museum of Genocide Victims. It was published in the Jerusalem Post just two days after Goldman’s original piece. Serbia, of course, has an incentive to promote high numbers of victims, and especially high numbers of Serbs, because it enhances their victimhood status and promotes their nationalist agenda. But more important than high numbers is the overall integrity of the camp as a legitimate Holocaust site and not as a whimsical political ragdoll that has victim numbers ranging over nearly three orders of magnitude, and that is entirely lacking in relevant evidence.
Ristic’s rebuttal – “Shame on those who seek to revise history of the Holocaust” – is as poorly argued as it is poorly written. (Though, oddly, the Post website still displays this rebuttal, whereas the original essay is long gone.) Ristic expresses “astonishment” at the “pseudo-scientific and revisionist text” by Goldman, which contains, he says, little more than “a series of inaccurate statements and semi-information.” Ristic is incensed that Goldman dares to cite the ragged history of victim numbers; the Museum clearly accepts a figure in the mainstream range (80,000 to 90,000), though with the opportunity for higher figures in the future. Ristic writes, “As the research of the experts of the Museum...continues, it is to be expected that the number of Jasenovac victims will be corrected... The estimated total number of victims is, unfortunately, far higher than the one that historical science will ever be able to identify with the precise data.” He is anxious to quell all thoughts of a mere few thousand deaths, and he equally seeks to avoid any suggestion that the figure approaches a million or more; as he well knows, both extremes threaten to undermine all credibility about the camp.
Most amusingly, in his entire lengthy rebuttal, Ristic never once mentions the “bombshell” about the bone-dissolving machines – not once. This is a tacit admission that the point holds, that no evidence was sought or found, and that the whole basis for Jasenovac as a top-tier death camp rests on little more than rumor and innuendo, if not outright falsehood.
The central problem for both Ristic and Goldman, however, is that their back-and-forth arguments promise to expose the far more consequential problems of the main Holocaust camps. In fact, Ristic does the nasty work for us. He writes, “we could ask a question as to whether it is possible to deny, in the same way, the number of 1,200,000 to 1,500,000 killed in Auschwitz since there is no forensic evidence for that claim either?” Touché, Mr. Ristic! The irony is that he is entirely correct, of course. No evidence (or scarcely any) for Auschwitz; none for Treblinka; none for Belzec – the same old story.
Grave Implications
Goldman’s main beef is with the ad hoc lie of the bone-dissolving machines, but this echoes the many, far more grievous lies about Auschwitz, Belzec, Treblinka, and indeed all six of the so-called death camps.[4] Of these, Goldman of course is silent. But he does decry the ongoing process of myth-formation surrounding a camp like Jasenovac, “where myths of Serbian and Jewish suffering were interwoven, providing a new series of national myths” (to cite the author David McDonald). Goldman, though, naturally avoids the similar but far greater myth-formation process about Auschwitz, the other camps, and the broader Holocaust. It is this very myth-formation process that has led to numbers like 1 million Jews gassed at Auschwitz, when, on the far more plausible revisionist thesis, perhaps 150,000 people died there, of whom maybe half were Jews – but none in gas chambers.
Likewise, Goldman ridicules the notion of human remains “yet to be discovered” at Jasenovac, and he rightly jabs a finger at the Yugoslav government, who, “during its 47-year rule of the site, never bothered once to try and locate these mysterious ‘missing’ remains.” The same, of course, can be said for the current Croatian government and its on-going 30-year rule. (One strongly suspects that there are simply no remains to be found there.) But this again raises the same question for the other camps: Where are the remains of anything approaching 1 million Jewish bodies at Auschwitz? Or 900,000 Jewish bodies at Treblinka? Or 600,000 Jewish bodies at Belzec? Do we have anything? Bodies, bones, ash – anything? Do we even have the holes in the ground where the Germans were said to bury the hundreds of thousands of victims, only to later dig them up and burn them “to ash” on open-air fires over wooden logs? Based on my years of research, the answer to all these questions is ‘no.’
What about the alleged 1 million Jews killed in the various ghettos? Where are their remains? What about the alleged 1.6 million Jews killed by shootings, mostly along the Eastern front; where are their remains? (Such figures are stated or implied by all of our experts, and are absolutely required to get us to the mandatory “6 million” total.) Not all of their remains, mind you, or even most of them. We would be satisfied with, say, half, or even a quarter, as long as we had a good explanation for the remainder. But instead we get stories of “600 bodies found here” and “250 bodies found there” and ashes consistent with perhaps “a few thousand bodies” at most. These are so far short of the “6 million” that they constitute an effective refutation of that very figure. Just as the “700,000 to 1 million” at Jasenovac is a farce, so too is the “6 million Jews” for the broader Holocaust.[5]
And yet, our intrepid reporter David Goldman has the gall to write, “Those who have conflated the only [!] wartime concentration camp without any verifiable data, with scientifically proven [!] Holocaust facts, have done immeasurable harm to Jewish history.” He is either ignorant of the truth or deliberately covering up the reality. The true “immeasurable harm” has been done by his fellow Jews and their intellectual lackeys who, for decades, have promoted an unsustainable myth of Jewish suffering.
The days of the “6 million” are numbered, and I suspect that Goldman, Goldstein, and friends know it. When that crumbles, so too collapses what little remains of Jewish credibility. When the orthodox Holocaust story goes down, the dominoes may well begin to fall. And when that happens, all bets are off.
Notes
|
1 |
All alleged use of Nazi ’bone crushers’ to eliminate bodily evidence has been refuted in recent years. The machines in the few extant photos are likely conventional gravel ball mills used in road construction in the early 20th century. See the discussion in The Einsatzgruppen in the Occupied Eastern Territories (2018, C. Mattogno, Castle Hill Publishers), pp. 481-484. See also the online article “The bone mill of Lemberg” (2013). |
|
2 |
My all-time favorite Holocaust liar is Herman Rosenblat, who fabricated the whole “angel at the fence” story in the 1990s. His television interview in 2009, in which he openly confesses to the lie, is so audacious, so brazen, and so deluded that it stands as a monument to Jewish mendacity. The video can’t be circulated enough, so instructive is it. |
|
3 |
Benčić, A. (2018). “Koncentracijski logor Jasenovac: konfliktno ratno nasljeđe i osporavani muzejski postav.” Polemos XXI (41): 37–63. |
|
4 |
Such lies are vast, both in content and type. They cover all aspects of the Holocaust, and include overt lies, lies of omission, half-truths, dissembling, gross exaggeration, hyperbole, and many more. They were promoted by survivors, “eyewitnesses,” coerced and captive Germans, and present-day “experts.” I can’t begin to elaborate these here; they are the subject of several dedicated books. For starters, one might refer to Auschwitz Lies (G. Rudolf and C. Mattogno, 2017, Castle Hill), Treblinka (C. Mattogno and J. Graf, 2020, Castle Hill), or Belzec (C. Mattogno, 2016, Castle Hill). Or for a good overview of these issues, see my own work Debating the Holocaust (2020, Castle Hill). |
|
5 |
This is not to deny that many thousands of Jews did die during the National Socialist era. By most revisionist accounts, perhaps 500,000 in total died, from all causes. But this is more than a 90% reduction from the claimed 6 million. And it reduces Jewish deaths to a mere footnote in the larger catastrophe that was World War Two. |
Saturday, October 9, 2021
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)