THE 'FACTUALITY' OF JEWISH INNOCENCE
Again and again, revisionists and Holocaust Deniers attempt the pusillanimous technique of pretending that the gas chamber hoax was just a big misunderstanding. The Jews did not deliberately lie; there was no organized conspiracy to swindle the world. The Jews just: (10 believed their own propaganda or (2) were honestly confused by wartime anxiety. The appeal of this public relations ploy is obvious. It acquits the Chosen Ones of criminal and civil responsibility for their hoax and allows the 'Denier' to escape the charge that he is out to 'get the Jews' . This innovative nonsense was pioneered by Bradley Smith but has since been picked up by the pseudonymous Mr. Dalton, author of 'Debating The Holocaust' . At least one Holocaust Denier, Arthur Butz, has remained consistent from day one. He has always maintained that the hoax was deliberate, a position which follows inevitably from the facts.
The best proof of pre-meditated intent behind the hoax is what transpired at Nuremberg. It was Nuremberg which provided the pseudo-factual and pseudo-juridical foundation for the hoax. There was nothing accidental or coincidental at Nuremberg. It was all deliberately planned from the beginning. Just as the Jews descended on the Paris Peace Conference of 1919 to promote their agenda, so too the Jews descended upon Nuremberg. In fact, it was the Jews who originated the whole concept of the trial. The British simply wanted to shoot the leaders of the defeated Germans outright. It was the Robinson brothers of the Institute of Jewish Affairs of the World Jewish Congress who first proposed the idea of the trials to the Americans. It was the Jewish organizations, such as the Yivo (the Jewish Scientific Institute in New York) which processed, altered and forged captured German documents for the trial. The man in charge of picking all the personnel for the trials was Colonel David 'Mickey' Marcus, an extreme Zionist. (It was also Marcus who originated the idea of 'criminal organizations' to dispense with questions of individual guilt or innocence at Nuremberg.) According to Hungarian author Louis Marschalko in his book 'The World Conquerors' out of 3000 total personnel involved in the trials behind the scenes, 2400 were Jewish. American judges present at Nuremberg, such as Judge Wennersturm, testified that over 90% of the personnel at Nuremberg were Jewish. The late Senator Thomas Dodd of Connecticut testified in his private letters from Nuremberg where he served as an assistant prosecutor over the dominant Jewish involvement at Nuremberg. Just a few of the names at Nuremberg were Robert Kempner, Benjamin Ferencz and Sidney alderman. The New York Jew actor, Tony Randall, (Rosenberg) and the head of Vox, the third largest classical recording company in America behind RCA and Columbia, Bartholdy-Mendohlso
Would messrs. Smith, Dalton and Santomauro, among others, have us believe that all these facts about Jewish intrigue at Nuremberg have no significance? Do they suggest that there was no sinister intent operating behind the scenes? Perhaps these gentlemen would argue that although the Jews behind the scenes were manipulating things, that the little Jews in the camps were simply misled. That will not wash either. Surely the Jew in the camps had to notice that his fellows were still with him, day after day, laboring in the factories and the fields, long after they were supposed to have been 'gassed' . Surely he had to notice that when his fellow Jews fell ill, they were taken to the camp hospital and rehabilitated back to health. Surely he was present in the camp theatre and playhouse when his fellow Jews were attending concerts in between the 'gassing' operations. Surely, he swam in the camp swimming pool with other Jews who had not been 'gassed' . Surely, he was not being 'gassed' while mounting the camp prostitute. How could a Jew, acquainted with all these facts of daily camp life, have for one moment honestly believed the propaganda about 'gas chambers' and the exterminations that were not taking place around him?
Perhaps messrs. Smith, Dalton and Santomauro would tell us that the Jews were not confused at the time they were in the camps, but only became confused afterwards. The Nuremberg Trial propaganda was so overwhelming that it overrode what they personally knew not to be the case. The fact that the German defendants were hung in the middle of the high Jewish holidays, between the Day of Atonement and the Day of Final Judgement, had no significance. There was no message given or intended to brother Jews around the world. The fact that the court official who read out the sentences, Wolf Frank, was a Jew, had no significance. The fact that the executioner who dropped the gallows was a Jew, John Woods Short, had no significance. Truly, the gullibility of messrs. Smith, Dalton and Santomauro exceeds the gullibility of those they try to educate. They insist on the 'innocence' of the Jews the same way that the Jews insist on the factuality of the' gas chambers' .
Feb. 27, 2009
Sample Chapters and Contents for New Book:
DEBATING THE HOLOCAUST: A New Look At Both Sides by Thomas Dalton, PhD
Publisher's Note: This is a non-Revisionist title for Theses & Dissertations Press. It will be the first book on the Holocaust, in publishing history, that will not take a Traditionalist or a Revisionist point of view. When you purchase this book, one-third of the proceeds will go to imprisoned scholar Germar Rudolf and his family.
Founded in 2000 the publishing company Theses & Dissertations Press is at the center of a worldwide network of scholars and activists who are working -- often at great personal sacrifice -- to separate historical fact from propaganda fiction. The founder of Theses & Dissertations Press is Germar Rudolf. Who is currently serving prison time for his published works and will be released on July 4, 2009.
As the new director of TADP.org, I wish to express my outrage that the Holocaust, unlike any other historical event, is not subject to critical examination. Furthermore I deplore the fact that many so-called democratic states have laws that criminalize an examination and understanding of the Holocaust. It is my position that the veracity of Holocaust assertions should be determined in the marketplace of scholarly discourse and not in our legislatures bodies and courthouses.