Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old June 5th, 2011 #1
Alex Linder
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,338
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default Jews Lie about Lying - and Everything Else

[from Majority Rights]

In case people don’t know what Jimmy is talking about, this is from a Lyle Burkhead page which can be found here:

I have been quoting Hitler and Goebbels, as if they meant what they said. I need to pause here and consider their sincerity.

Just about all students are taught that Hitler and his associates were openly dishonest, and that they used the “Big Lie” as one of their main techniques, both before and after they came to power. For example, if you look up the Wikipedia article about George Orwell’s book, 1984, you find two alleged quotations, one from Hitler and one from Goebbels.

“The broad mass of the nation ... will more easily fall victim to a big lie than to a small one.” — Adolf Hitler, in his 1925 book Mein Kampf
This alleged quotation is repeated over and over. One of the things “everybody knows” about Hitler is that he cynically advocated lying as a basic principle. Well, let’s look at the whole thing in its original context. This is what he actually wrote (Mein Kampf, page 231):

This most of all shows the assertion that the lost War was the cause of the German collapse to be a lie. No, this military collapse was itself only the consequence of a large number of symptoms of disease and their causes, which even in peacetime were with the German nation. This was the first consequence, catastrophic and visible to all, of an ethical and moral poisoning, of a diminution in the instinct of self-preservation and its preconditions, which for many years had begun to undermine the foundations of the people and the Reich.

It required the whole bottomless falsehood of the Jews and their Marxist fighting organization to lay the blame for the collapse on that very man who alone, with superhuman energy and will power, tried to prevent the catastrophe he foresaw and save the nation from its time of deepest humiliation and disgrace. By branding Ludendorff as guilty for the loss of the World War they took the weapon of moral right from the one dangerous accuser who could have risen against the traitors to the fatherland.

In this they proceeded on the sound principle that the magnitude of a lie always contains a certain factor of credibility, since the great masses of the people in the very bottom of their hearts tend to be corrupted rather than consciously and purposely evil, and that, therefore, in view of the primitive simplicity of their minds they more easily fall a victim to a big lie than to a little one, since they themselves lie in little things, but would be ashamed of lies that were too big. Such a falsehood will never enter their heads and they will not be able to believe in the possibility of such monstrous effrontery and infamous misrepresentation in others; yes, even when enlightened on the subject, they will long doubt and waver, and continue to accept at least one of these causes as true. Therefore, something of even the most insolent lie will always remain and stick - a fact which all the great lie-virtuosi and lying-clubs in this world know only too well and also make the most treacherous use of.

The foremost connoisseurs of this truth regarding the possibilities in the use of falsehood and slander have always been the Jews; for after all, their whole existence is based on one single great lie, to wit, that they are a religious community while actually they are a race - and what a race! One of the greatest minds of humanity [Schopenhauer] has nailed them forever as such in an eternally correct phrase of fundamental truth: he called them ‘the great masters of the lie.’ And anyone who does not recognize this or does not want to believe it will never in this world be able to help the truth to victory.

Hitler was not advocating the Big Lie, he was complaining about it.

Wikipedia also gives us this alleged quotation by Goebbels:

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.” — Nazi Propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels

Please note that Wikipedia does not give a citation for this. Nobody ever does, because there is no source for it. Nevertheless everybody keeps repeating it over and over.

What Goebbels actually said can be found, in great detail, on the Nazi and East German Propaganda Guide Page of the Calvin College website. If you do a Google search for “tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it” you get more than 20,000 results. But if you do this search:

“tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it”

you get zero results. In other words, that expression is not found in any of the documents collected in their Propaganda Guide Page. Of course it is possible that the statement occurs in some document that is not included in the Propaganda Guide Page. I cannot be absolutely certain that he never said any such thing. However, judging by what I know about Goebbels, the statement is totally out of character, and I would bet 100-to-1 that he never said it.

[Note added years later: Now the expression “tell a lie big enough” can be found on the Calvin site. It is on a page of false quotations. Randall Bytwerk, the author of the Calvin site, is honest enough to have such a page. I am impressed.]

The alleged Goebbels quotation is itself an example of a lie that has been repeated so many times that everybody believes it.

In other words, to spell this out as clearly as possible, when people accuse Hitler and Goebbels of advocating the Big Lie, they are lying. They are turning the situation upside down. The alleged Hitler quotation is taken out of context so it appears to mean the opposite of what Hitler intended. They are accusing Hitler and Goebbels of doing what they themselves are doing. This is the kind of lie Hitler was complaining about. It is exactly the kind of falsification of history and destruction of language that Orwell was complaining about. And they put these lies in an article about 1984, of all things.

This is perfectly Orwellian. It just doesn’t get any better than this.
Old June 5th, 2011 #2
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 8,048

Bronstein-Trotsky and the others are on the record of wanting their Communist 'revolution' in a highly industrialized country, namely Germany. Russia didn't quite do it for them.
This is what they were working towards , and this is what A.H. succeeded in delaying until 1945.
Communism sought to destroy the middle class - so what is happening in neocon-controlled America as they strive towards globalism? Still clinging to 'worldwide revolution' notions.

Last edited by littlefieldjohn; June 5th, 2011 at 01:58 PM.
Old June 6th, 2011 #3
Dmitri Petrenko
Junior Member
Dmitri Petrenko's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Born in France, at moment in Brazil
Posts: 29
Dmitri Petrenko

Jews are a plague, they are bloody vampires!
Old March 8th, 2012 #4
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 8,048

Good examples of real yid attitudes are on this website.

Old May 12th, 2012 #5
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 8,048
Default Holocaust Faker Explains Himself!
Old May 12th, 2012 #6
C. Grady Tucker
Senior Member
C. Grady Tucker's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Caught in the Interwebs
Posts: 1,175
C. Grady Tucker

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.”
I can't tell you how many times I see this quote on facebook, along with a pic of Hitler in full speech pose, or the white house with huge Swastika banners and parade troops marching in front. I just pull the quote from Mein Kampf along with the source, and then dare anyone to source the bogus Goebbels quote. Boy, the jews start frothing at the mouth, big time.

Last edited by C. Grady Tucker; May 12th, 2012 at 04:22 PM.
Old May 12th, 2012 #7
C. Grady Tucker
Senior Member
C. Grady Tucker's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Caught in the Interwebs
Posts: 1,175
C. Grady Tucker

"Leon Haller" and "Rollory" just irritate the living hell out of me.

Two people saying “yeah, me too!” doesn’t invalidate the piles of bodies that were found, or the large numbers of Jews who lived in Germany prior to the war being nowhere to be found afterward.

2) <strawman bullshit>

3) If it wasn’t true, why the hell didn’t the captured Nazis make an issue of that at the time? What benefit was there in letting themselves be accused of something they knew was untrue?
That right there validates what Hitler said. No matter how many times this has been answered and debunked, the jews just keep on repeating it. Over and over and over.

Reminds me of another quote by Hitler in Mein Kampf, Vol 1, Chapter 2.

The more I argued with them, the better I came to know their dialectic. First they counted on the stupidity of their adversary, and then, when there was no other way out, they themselves simply played stupid. If all this didn't help, they pretended not to understand, or, if challenged, they changed the subject in a hurry, quoted platitudes which, if you accepted them, they immediately related to entirely different matters, and then, if again attacked, gave ground and pretended not to know exactly what you were talking about. Whenever you tried to attack one of these apostles, your hand closed on a jelly-like slime which divided up and poured through your fingers, but in the next moment collected again. But if you really struck one of these fellows so telling a blow that, observed by the audience, he couldn't help but agree, and if you believed that this had taken you at least one step forward, your amazement was great the next day. The Jew had not the slightest recollection of the day before, he rattled off his same old nonsense as though nothing at all had happened, and, if indignantly challenged, affected amazement; he couldn't remember a thing, except that he had proved the correctness of his assertions the previous day.

Last edited by C. Grady Tucker; May 12th, 2012 at 04:22 PM.
Old May 14th, 2012 #8
John sholtes
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 655

Originally Posted by littlefieldjohn View Post

This video is unavailable.
Old May 14th, 2012 #9
America First
Senior Member
America First's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Earth
Posts: 3,699
America First

Have viewed jooish TV documentary's where the Narrator explicitly stated that Hitler/Germany wanted to annihilate England, which was a 1000 % lie.

Even though some may already know all this information already, hearing this lecture by David Irving is powerfully spoken.

Isn't it strange that we talk least about the things we think about most?

We cannot allow the natural passions and prejudices of other peoples
to lead our country to destruction.

-Charles A. Lindbergh
Old June 10th, 2012 #11
Phil Tourney
Junior Member
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 15
Phil Tourney
Default Inbred Mongrels

It is in the kike's DNA and cultural lifeblood to lie, cheat and steal. It's called Kike and Jew 101. Just open any yellow pages and look for kike names in the legal field. Here's an example I just found under Lawyers:

Michael G. Levin
Westbury, NY

Just redact the zionist holohoax propaganda verbiage added to this footage and listen to how Himmler said it best:

Jews are a bacillus.
Old June 11th, 2012 #12
Bruce Rideout
Flight Instructor
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Above You, Look up, Behind You, , Too Late
Posts: 231
Bruce Rideout

Not one Mark. Not one Cigarette...
Words to live by when in the heat of engagement. Learn it, Earn, it or Burn it.
Old June 12th, 2012 #13
Phil Tourney
Junior Member
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 15
Phil Tourney
Default Core Identity

No matter what act they may put on otherwise, a kike is a kike.
Old January 24th, 2014 #14
John Evans
Christian Anti-Semite
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Kikesville, Hymietown
Posts: 243
John Evans

My philosophy is, whatever a kike says is a lie. Lying comes as natural to them as breathing. The only time a kike isn't lying is when he's sleeping, and even then he's dreaming about how he's going to screw non-jews.
No jews, no problems.

Never trust a jew.
Old August 10th, 2014 #15
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 8,048
jewsign Richard Marowitz, 88, WWII veteran found Hitler’s top hat

ALBANY, N.Y. — Richard Marowitz was just a day removed from witnessing the horrors of Dachau when he found a top hat on a shelf in a closet in Adolf Hitler’s Munich apartment.

Still furious over the gruesome sights he had seen at the nearby Nazi concentration camp, the 19-year-old self-described “skinny Jewish kid” from New York threw the black silk hat on the floor, jumped off the chair he had used to reach the item and stomped Hitler’s formal headwear until it was flat.

“I swear to this day I could see his face in it,” Mr. Marowitz told the Associated Press in a 2001 interview, recalling how he “smashed the hell out of it.”

Mr. Marowitz, who brought the souvenir back to New York after World War II ended, died this week at the Veterans Affairs hospital in Albany at age 88. His son, Larry Marowitz, told The Associated Press on Friday that his father died Wednesday after battling cancer and dementia. His death was first reported by The Times Union of Albany.

Mr. Marowitz, born in Middletown, New York, and raised in Brooklyn, was playing trumpet in a swing band when he was drafted into the Army. He served as a reconnaissance scout in the 42nd Infantry Division as it fought its way across Europe in 1945. On April 29, his unit was ordered to push ahead to a place called Dachau to beat other American divisions headed there.

In a 2003 interview he gave to an upstate New York high school’s WWII oral history project, Mr. Marowitz told how he and his comrades sped their Jeeps through German convoys and enemy positions, firing their guns all the way.

“As we got closer to Dachau, we got this awful smell,” Mr. Marowitz recalled. They were among the first American soldiers to enter the concentration camp, where the GIs found bodies stacked inside rail cars and emaciated inmates who were barely alive.

“The prisoners were just walking skeletons, and they just dropped where they were and died,” Mr. Marowitz said.

The next day, the 19-year-old scout was among a group sent to search Hitler’s Munich apartment. While looking in a closet, Mr. Marowitz found a top hat with the initials “A.H.” on the lining. He jumped up and down on the hat a few times in anger. It was April 30, the day Hitler committed suicide in his bunker in Berlin.

“When he heard some skinny Jewish kid stomped all over his favorite hat, he committed suicide,” Mr. Marowitz joked to the AP in 2001.

Mr. Marowitz kept the hat and brought it home. Decades later, he started bringing it along when he gave talks about the war and the Holocaust at Albany-area schools. Despite the horrors of combat and genocide he witnessed, the showman-turned-clothing manufacturer always sprinkled some humor into his stories, his son said.

“He loved people, he loved to joke around,” Larry Marowitz said.

Mr. Marowitz’s story was told in a 2003 documentary film, “Hitler’s Hat.” At the veteran’s request, the family will donate the hat to a museum, the son said.
Old May 31st, 2015 #16
Robbie Key
Senior Member
Robbie Key's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 3,902
Robbie Key

OCTOBER 21, 2014

A Moral Fabulist
Truth and Fiction in Elie Wiesel’s “Night”

Old August 22nd, 2015 #17
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 8,048
jewsign Ugly Holohoaxing Jewess Suing Person For Saying Mean Things to Her on The Facebook

An ugly Holohoaxing Jewess named Esther Bejarano is literally suing a person because they said mean things to her on the Facebooks.

Her Holohoax story is a good one. She apparently was able to join a girls orchestra at Auschwitz so she didn’t have to lift heavy stones.

Wow, a girls orchestra at Auschwitz? But I thought all the Germans did was gas people in shower rooms? Why waste time allowing Jews to form their own orchestras if it was their intent to gas them?

Her own personal Holohoax story raises even more questions about the dumbest hoax of the 20th century.

Esther Bejarano, one of the last survivors of the Auschwitz concentration camp, is suing a Facebook user for making disparaging remarks. She says he mocked her by putting her in a class with Nazi officials.

Bejarano, a Jewish artist from Hamburg who has been campaigning tirelessly to keep the memory of the horrors of the Nazi regime alive, is suing the Facebook user for libel and slander, according to a report by German public broadcaster NDR.

The man, who has not been identified, had commented on a post pertaining to a concert she attended in the central German town of Fulda on Bejarano’s Facebook page.

He mocked Bejarano’s efforts to combat far-right extremism, calling it “the great Esther Bejarano show,” according to the report.

He went on to say that “strangely, people everywhere are being sued for and convicted of being an accessory to mass murder because they collaborated with the Nazi regime. But that’s exactly what this woman did, who ‘sang for her life.'”

During her time in the Auschwitz Nazi concentration camp, Bejarano joined the camp’s so-called “girls orchestra” to get away from the grueling work of lifting heavy stones for the Nazis.
She pretended to be able to play the accordion, which may well have saved her from death in the camp. The members of the orchestra were forced at gunpoint to play when new inmates arrived at the camp.
Old July 4th, 2016 #18
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 8,048
Default Elie Wiesel: Hoaxer and Zio-Racist

The death of Elie Wiesel has been celebrated by the controlled media as almost the passing of a saint—but in reality, Wiesel was a proven holocaust hoaxer, and an extreme Zio-racist who celebrated the murder and expulsion of Palestinians.

His book Night—supposed to be a “memoir” of his experiences in Auschwitz and Buchenwald, has been shown even by Jewish sources to be fiction.

An October 2014 article by the editor of the famous political newsletter CounterPunch, Alexander Cockburn, titled “Truth and Fiction in Elie Wiesel’s ‘Night,’” was introduced by co-editor Jeffrey St. Clair as follows:

Though Wiesel offers himself as a paragon of moral virtue, the truth is somewhat seamier. As detailed in this myth-shattering piece by Alexander Cockburn from the February 2006 print edition of CounterPunch, Wiesel assiduously campaigned for the Nobel Prize and has for decades tried to pass off his short book Night as a true account—a “testimony” in his words—of his experiences at Auschwitz, even though key scenes in the book have been exposed as fiction.

The article also pointed out that in 2014, Wiesel, a “self-appointed moral conscience for Holocaust survivors,” praised the expulsion of Palestinians from their homes to make way for yet more illegal Jewish settlements in Jerusalem.

Cockburn went on to point out that “The trouble here is that in its central, most crucial scene, Night isn’t historically true, and at least two other important episodes are almost certainly fiction.”

As Cockburn pointed out, many Jewish publications warned at the time of Night’s first appearance in English that it was fiction rather than factual.

“There were articles in the Jewish Forward and in the New York Times, also a piece on NPR, saying that Night should not be taken as unvarnished documentary,” Cockburn writes.

In the Forward article, published January 20, challengingly titled “Six Million Little Pieces?”, Joshua Cohen reminded Forward readers that in 1996, Naomi Seidman, a Jewish Studies professor at the Graduate Theological Union in Berkeley, California, had compared the original 1956 Yiddish version of the book with the subsequent, drastically edited translation.

“According to Seidman’s account, published in the scholarly journal Jewish Social Studies,” Cohen wrote, “Wiesel substantially rewrote the work between editions”—suggesting that the strident and vengeful tone of the Yiddish original was converted into a continental, angst-ridden existentialism more fitting to Wiesel’s emerging role as an ambassador of culture and conscience.

Most important, Seidman wrote that Wiesel altered several facts in the later edition, in some cases offering accounts of pivotal moments that conflicted with the earlier version.

(For example, in the French, the young Wiesel, having been liberated from Buchenwald, is recuperating in a hospital; he looks into a mirror and writes that he saw a corpse staring back at him. In the earlier Yiddish, Wiesel holds that upon seeing his reflection he smashed the mirror and then passed out, after which “my health began to improve.”)

The CounterPunch article then goes on to quote concentration camp survivor, Eli Pfefferkorn, who worked with Wiesel for many years, and Raul Hilberg, who is claimed to be the “world’s leading authority on the Nazi Holocaust” and author of the three-volume book The Destruction of the European Jews.

Wiesel, Cockburn says, personally enlisted Hilberg to be the historical expert on the United States Holocaust Commission.

“If absolute truth to history is the standard, Pfefferkorn says, then Night doesn’t make the grade. Wiesel made things up, in a way that his many subsequent detractors could identify as not untypical of his modus operandi: grasping with deft assurance what people important to his future would want to hear and, by the same token, would not want to hear.”

Pfefferkorn spent some time working with Wiesel on the conceptual design of the Holocaust museum in Washington DC. Pfefferkorn’s “uncritical admiration” for Wiesel changed after being in close contact with him, Cockburn writes, quoting him as follows:

In Night, Pfefferkorn isolates a number of episodes in which he makes a convincing case that Wiesel dumped truth in favor of fiction.

Two instances cited by Pfefferkorn in particular involve a boy playing a violin amidst a “death march,”—supposedly when Jews were “forced” to flee the advancing Russians—and the second is one of Night’s most famous scenes, the hanging of three inmates.

Of the first episode, Pfefferkorn writes:

“The story of the ‘violin episode’ takes place during the death march from Auschwitz to Buchenwald with a short gap at Gleiwitz in January of 1945. Mercilessly driven by the SS guards, stragglers were shot at and shoved to the side road. The columns of inmates arrived in Gleiwitz, after having dragged themselves through the snow-swept roads in freezing temperatures for about fifty kilometers. Immediately upon arrival, they were herded into barns. Drained, they dropped to the floor — the dead, the dying and the partially living piled one on the other.

“Under this heap of crushed humanity laid Juliek, cradling a violin, which he has carried all the way from Auschwitz to Gleiwitz. Eliezer, somehow, stumbles on Juliek, “…the boy from Warsaw who played in the band at Buna… ‘How do you feel, Juliek?’ I asked, less to know the answer than to hear that he could speak, that he was alive. ‘All right, Eliezer … I’m getting on all right … hardly any air … worn out. My feet are swollen. It’s good to rest, but my violin…’

“Eliezer — the inmate — wonders, ‘What use was the violin here?’ Wiesel — the memoirist — does not find it necessary to give an answer to the question. Such an answer, I assume, should be of interest to the reader for if Wiesel were to provide an answer, the veracity of the story would dissolve like the morning mist in the Sinai desert. Maintaining hold on a violin as one marched the March of Death is highly improbable. However, a violin in the midst of human debris strains the imagination and questions memory.

How did Juliek hold on to the violin on the death journey? Deprived of food and drink, when each step stubbornly refused to follow the next one, how did Juliek manage to clutch the violin in his numb fingers, let alone play Beethoven on it? Would the SS escorts have let him keep it?

(Also, as an Irish reader of a draft of this article remarked to me: “as a professional musician, who has played a wide variety of string instruments for 40 years, including fiddle, guitar, banjo, and mandolin, I immediately thought, How did the violin strings survive the severely cold temperatures and the long march? It’s a minor point perhaps, but very improbable, especially since it was 1945 and they were not modern strings.”)

Pfefferkorn continues:

“Obviously, Wiesel’s putative memoir, written while on a boat to Brazil, is but a recollection of experiences seen through the eye of his creative imagination. And yet, the melancholy melodies that came out of Juliek’s violin were the first strains of a myth orchestrated by Wiesel and his disciples, over a period of thirty years.”

Another major scene in Night, one that contributed hugely to the book’s success in the West, and its impact on many Christians, starting with Francois Mauriac, was the execution of three inmates in the Buna work camp, Cockburn continues.

As Pfefferkorn writes, “The fascination of Christian theologians with the Wiesel phenomenon must be traced back to a hanging that the 16-year-old Eliezer witnessed in Auschwitz.”

In the incident, two adults and a little boy are being led to the gallows. The little boy refused to betray fellow inmates who have been involved in an act of sabotage; to protect his fellow inmates, the boy is willing to pay with his life. Each one climbs to his chair and his neck is slipped into the rope’s noose.

Someone asks “Where is God?” and the answer is “hanging here on this gallows.”

Cockburn writes that this “graphically described hanging scene has been etched into the imagination of the Christian theologians because of the numerous parallels to the Crucifixion of Jesus.”

However, Cockburn then goes on to interview Hilberg about Wiesel’s truthfulness in describing the scene—and Hilberg’s answer is illuminating:

“I have a version of the hanging from an old survivor with the names of all three adults.” That survivor had said that there was no boy among the three.

Hilberg mentioned this in a review of Night, in which, he told me, “I made no secret of our differences. But whereas it [the age of the central figure in the hanging] may seem somewhat small, it makes a very big difference to Christians, particularly Catholics, because it’s very clear that mystics are intensely interested in the scene because it seems to replicate the crucifixion. It made a considerable impact. So the fact that this figure may not have been a boy at all is disturbing.”

“It would appear,” Hilberg went on, “from the record I have, that some witnesses have questioned whether this scene took place at all. I have a long statement by an older man, a man whom I judge to be quite trustworthy, though one must always remember that things are sometimes observed or heard about later. I talked recently to a survivor of that section of the camp who said it [the hanging of the three] didn’t take place, but maybe it took place earlier. I don’t know.”

In an article in The Nation magazine, Christopher Hitchens revealed more of Wiesel’s background:

Is there a more contemptible poseur and windbag than Elie Wiesel? I suppose there may be. But not, surely, a poseur and windbag who receives (and takes as his due) such grotesque deference on moral questions.

Wiesel was, Hitchens revealed, a “member of Menachem Begin’s Irgun in the 1940s, when that force employed extreme violence against Arab civilians and was more than ready to use it against Jews.”

As other evidence of Wiesel’s hypocrisy on “moral matters,” Hitchens goes on to write:

In 1982, after Gen. Ariel Sharon had treated the inhabitants of the Sabra and Shatila camps as target practice for his paid proxies, Wiesel favored us with another of his exercises in neutrality. Asked by the New York Times to comment on the pogrom, he was one of the few American Jews approached on the matter to express zero remorse. “I don’t think we should even comment,” he said, proceeding to comment bleatingly that he felt “sadness—with Israel, and not against Israel.” For the victims, not even a perfunctory word.

Finally, it is well known that Wiesel may not have been in any of the camps at all. He claimed repeatedly that he had been tattooed at Auschwitz with number A7713 on his left forearm.

However, numerous photographs of Wiesel with his sleeve rolled up have shown that he had no tattoos at all, and certainly no “Auschwitz” number—casting a question mark over his entire “holocaust memoir” claims.

All these facts are, however, likely to be ignored by the controlled media and their lackeys over the next few days, as they all rush to pay tribute to someone whose “holocaust memoirs” are rejected as false even by those on his own side.
Old July 4th, 2016 #19
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 8,048
Default Joseph Hirt’s letter of apology tells more lies to “explain” his previous ones, Part 2

Joseph Hirt’s letter of apology tells more lies to “explain” his previous ones, Part 2

By Carolyn Yeager
Part 1
Preface to Part 2 –
Andrew Reid is only a middle-school history teacher, yet he recognized that some things Joseph Hirt was saying in his multi-media lecture didn’t tally historically, and also logically. During Hirt’s long tenure of speaking in schools (in many cases the same school, same teacher, to new students each year), no other teacher or administrator, or parent or member of the audience, ever questioned what Hirt said. That is surprising, and reveals an unhealthy unwillingness to think critically about the “received truth” of the Holocaust. It has come to be treated as a religion, but is defined as a historical event. This will be discussed further in Part 2.

Joseph Hirt’s letter of apology goes on to recount how the writings of Primo Levi changed his idea of the kind of book he wanted to write – no longer only his own experience as a survivor (which he could hardly do now anyway), but something “in a more explanatory mode, exploring Nazi doctrines and their origins, how they were affected by Social Darwinism …”
In this regard, it’s important to know that Primo Levi spent 9 months in the Soviet Union after he left Auschwitz. He was in a Soviet camp for former concentration camp inmates … wonder what was taking place there? Without a doubt he was being trained for the work he was expected to do, he was willing to do, and he did do: writing and speaking about his Auschwitz experience as one of living in a dehumanizing murder factory. When he returned to Turin, Italy in October 1945, he immediately began writing. What he wrote was a perversion of the actual conditions he experienced, and of the attitudes of guards and co-workers. Yes, Levi functioned as an agent of the Soviet Union, an agent for spreading communism and destroying nationalism.

And Joseph Hirt takes his beliefs about Auschwitz directly from Primo Levi.
Hirt’s injunction to everyone to “keep the truth and the memory of the Holocaust always in your heart and mind” is similar to a statement by Primo Levi: “It is the duty of everyone to meditate on what happened. Everybody must know, or remember …”
Levi’s first book may be the first holocost surliever story to be published after the war (1947), and became a model for others to follow.

Certainly Elie Wiesel would have read it and got many ideas from it. But Levi never spoke of “gas chambers” except as rumors that he was questioning. And then only one was imagined. That had to be because the atmosphere they were living in didn’t suggest Germans would do such a thing–that foul lie took awhile to gain momentum, to get people to believe it. In 1976, 29 years later, an appendix appeared in If This Be a Man describing the “gas chambers” (plural) that he did not mention previously.
“The gas chambers were in effect camouflaged as shower rooms with plumbing, faucets, dressing rooms, clothes hooks, benches, etc.” (page 198)

Sounds ridiculous now, when we know they were shower rooms. As an advanced graduate in chemistry, Levi had to know it then, but it was more important that he update his best-selling book to make sure it included the latest official position on “gas chambers.”

We can also read in The New Republic Levi’s diabolical comparison of “German” to “Soviet” camps.
“The German camps had the monstrous goal of erasing entire peoples and cultures from the world.”
“Gas chambers and crematories were deliberately planned to destroy lives and human bodies on a scale of millions. The appalling record belongs to Auschwitz, with 24,000 dead in a single day, in August 1944.”
They were fighting a brutal war, fighting for their life, so really didn’t have the luxury to devote the resources required to exterminate 24,000 people in a day. Pray tell, how was it done? We’ve yet to learn that. Stalin, on the other hand, was in a different class.

“The Soviet camps were not and are not, certainly, pleasant places, but in them the death of the prisoners was not—even in the darkest years of Stalinism—expressly sought. It was a very frequent occurrence, and it was tolerated with brutal indifference, but basically it was not expressly intended. It was a by-product, rather, of hunger, cold, infections, hard labor.”

Get it? This is Soviet-Stalin-Communist apologetics. And this is who Joseph Hirt admires and relates to most of all. He doesn’t mention Elie Wiesel or any other well-known surlievors, just Primo Levi. His attitude toward the Germans is just as fiercely hostile as is Levi’s.
We suffered fear …

The apology letter then moves to the ‘dangers’ his family was exposed to during the war years, seeking safe places to settle. He says their “first plan for departure” was from Belgrade, completely ignoring the town he was born and lived in — Horodenka, Poland — now Ukraine. His family didn’t leave there until 1939, just before the Germans invaded. This lapse seems to be part of Hirt’s general tendency to want to prevent knowledge of his past, since he is playing a role.

One thing he has not yet “come clean” on is his age. His family members reported he was born in 1930 in Horodenka, and this is reinforced in the Congressional Record of the refugees interned at Fort Ontario. The book Haven by Ruth Gruber lists all the refugees and their birth dates in an appendix. The father, Artur Hirt, was a judge in Poland and is mentioned in 6 places in the book. He would have given the correct vital statistics about his family, which means Joseph Hirt, born in 1930, is 86 years old today. However, he’s still reporting himself to be 91. In a June 29th update, Hirt’s wife, Dot, spoke to the reporter on his
behalf and addressed this issue:

Dot said her husband was born in 1925, although his “replacement wartime” papers said 1930. Asked if she thought it was a clerical error, Dot said she wasn’t sure, but that Joseph was not responsible.

“The information from the nephew who knows nothing about this was assumed to be correct. Some of it was not,” Dot said.
Clearly, Dot is an enabler for her husband. Joseph Hirt being born in 1930, makes him only 9 years old when the family left Poland, and only 14 when they arrived in the United States. That is too young for his tale of being taken to Auschwitz in 1942 and made a forced laborer.

That’s why he changed his birth date to 1925, making himself age 17 (instead of 12) in 1942.
Dot did not accept what Andrew Reid found out about her husbands tattoo, either. The Philadelphia Inquirer’s 2006 story about Hirt gave his number as 194517, while Primo Levi’s was 174517, as published on the Bryn Mawr College website.
Dot and her husband, meanwhile, claim they don’t know where the 194517 sequence found in the Inquirer article and Reid’s research came from.

“The number was a sincere effort to show his respects [to Levi],” Dot said of her husband’s decision to get the tattoo.
If you magnify this image the way I described on this page, you can make out the last four numbers – 4517 – on Hirt’s arm, but the first two numbers are still too small. However, a 19 cannot be ruled out, from the look of it. To act confused about the number seems to be simple dissembling. Hirt either made a mistake in copying it, or he purposely changed one number so that he could have it both ways.

He emphasizes the difficulty his family had during the war years but the biggest trauma he could come up with was that they suffered from fear. Well, they and many millions of others, no? But they were actually very luck, and even fortunate. When Belgrade was bombed in 1941, they crossed over to Italy and spent time in a detention camp until the American victory in Sicily changed things for the better. When Italy changed sides, they were no longer illegal. He writes that he and his father couldn’t wait for the Allies to take Mount Cassino, so they crossed the front lines in the snow and fell into the hands of an enemy snow patrol.

His father was thrown to the ground and his fingers broken by being “trampled by uniform boots.” Sorry, but I think this is another case of Joseph Hirt’s need to embellish. Either it’s complete fantasy or the father’s fingers did get stepped on inadvertently, maybe only one or two damaged, since shortly afterward his father was still making the decisions for the family.
By the way, Hirt came from a well-to-do Jewish family. That’s why they could leave before Sept. 1939 and seek a safer place to live. And they did eventually find safety … in America. With their family intact. Once the Americans had complete control of Italy, his family was assigned to a convoy headed to New York from Naples in July 1944.

Anti-German libel
Hirt tells a little about their new life there, then goes heavily into more of the suffering—his difficulty adjusting because of post-traumatic stress and his guilt for having survived. This brings him to the biggest lie of all. Naturally it’s in the form of a personal account with no traceable features whatsoever. But it is meant to exonerate him from the dishonesty he’s been charged with – by indulging in more dishonesty! Judge for yourself:

A serious adjustment problem for me had to do with social behavior. I was on the street in Belgrade, returning with food for the family when an SS officer stopped me and asked my name. I stood at attention, looked straight into his face, and made eye contact. At this point he hauled off and struck me in the nose and chin with his clenched fist. I ended up on the ground, bleeding from my nose and mouth as he screamed at me “How dare you, you Untermensch, look at me, a member of the master race. You look at the ground. Show humility. Be humble.” As I lay on the ground bleeding, he kicked me in the ribs as he walked away.
Personal accounts like this, sans witnesses or definite time and place, are much-used by surlievors because they cannot be checked out. “On the street;” in “Belgrade” (a very large city); “bringing food to his family” (such a good boy); an “SS officer” (no rank, no description); “stopped him” (for no reason); “asked his name” (he would have been asked where he was going, not his name). This fictional SS man was not functioning as a guard who was checking people because after “he kicked [Hirt] in the ribs” he walked away! This fictional SS man must have been an off-duty loner, walking the streets looking for untermensch to bully.

A story like this is meant to show the SS as out-of-control thugs who would beat and even kill innocent Jews for no reason, for sport. And what’s more, during the time he was in Belgrade (1939-41), he would have been anywhere from 9 to 12 years old. Don’t tell me any trained SS officer would punch a kid in the face or say those words. It’s a disgusting lie. There are many stories like this told in survivor “memoirs” and that’s why I call them surlievors. They deserve the name.

The word Untermensch was not commonly used by Germans, nor did Germans ever refer to themselves as “the master race.” That term was dreamed up by enemy propagandists, and especially by Jews (projection) who want to create hatred and scorn against National-Socialist Germany and, by extension, reinforce a crude, untrue stereotype of the German character. And please take note of the similarity with Primo Levi’s famous book cover that is illustrated in Part 1 and shown at right – do you think he got the idea from that image of a man sprawled on the ground with a bloody face? I do. It might have also inspired the story of his father’s broken fingers.

Auschwitz-Birkenau Museum trip
He says he traveled to the Auschwitz-Birkenau Museum and Memorial (no date given as to when) “to confront [his] devils.” But I believe he went there so he could become familiar with the layout, see it in real life, and learn what he could to prevent mistakes in his story about spending 8 months there as a prisoner. But he was not impressed at all by the place and this distressed him. It was merely another “clean and polished tourist destination.” Plus, “Visitors commented quite openly that stories circulating about Nazi cruelty, persecution and death having occurred there were ‘propaganda’,” he said. And they laughed about it.
“I determined at that moment to do everything in my power to prevent the loss of the truth about wartime life (and death) at Auschwitz.”

The above image is the result. Posing as a survivor and volunteering his time and talents to the indoctrination of schoolchildren, he was welcomed with open arms by teachers and administrators, even parents. No one questioned if what he was saying was the truth about “wartime life (and death) at Auschwitz.” It’s curious why that is. But it’s considered impolite to do so.

The problem here is who says what is the truth? Like any religious fanatic, Hirt is sure he has the truth. But he himself has told many lies publicly, claiming they were true. He went to great lengths to push these lies on gullible young people, and to oldsters sitting around tables in a coffeehouse. He even told them to TV reporters.

So how can such a one claim to know the truth? He defends himself by saying he was only trying to help the truth, to get people (Christians mainly) to believe what he says is truth. So how does one, and why would one, listen to someone who has already proven himself to be dishonest? And, by the way, he was also passing himself off as Christian (thinking he would be more convincing that way, I assume); I don’t know if he retracted that yet.

He uses phrases like “I swerved off in a wrong direction” and “used poor judgment and faulty reasoning.” But never, “I lied and I abused your trust by lying to you. I don’t deserve your trust anymore.” No, he would like to continue, and maybe write a book.
At the end, he says,
“Unanswered questions in my mind sent me looking for answers by reading widely in Holocaust literature.”

I would suggest he do some reading in Holocaust Revisionist literature, where, I am sure, some of his unanswered questions would be answered.

“But the more I learned, the more real the images became, and the more intense my feeling of responsibility for keeping the memories alive. How could I assure that the message of the Holocaust would be heard and understood?”
Such intense feeling is associated with religious conviction, when the subject of your interest involves the deepest meaning of your life. Hirt got caught up in an obsession about the victimization of Jews – the mind-boggling number of 6,000,000 Jewish individuals that the myth insists on, the supernatural events happening everywhere – and he couldn’t look away from it. For millions of Jews “The Holocaust” substitutes for their religion.

Judaism as a religion is demanding and rather contradictory – and is also not so very relevant in modern times. “The Holocaust,” on the other hand, is responsible for the successful founding of Israel, for completely funded it through the early years – and still does in large part today! It also gives Jews privilege and protection. The importance of the holocost for Jews cannot be over-stated. So Joseph Hirt’s obsession with it is more practical than spiritual. If the world stopped believing in the holocost what would be the effect on Jewish life? It’s something they don’t want to even imagine.

Now, if it really happened as they say, as Primo Levi and Joseph Hirt (copying him) say, then yes, by all means, it should be remembered forever and memorialized. But the evidence shows it did not. There is no evidence for the number six million (or five or eleven), for homicidal gas chambers, or for an intention to exterminate an entire people. So what is the purpose of remembering and memorializing something that didn’t occur? That is manipulation.
Old September 10th, 2016 #20
Ray Allan
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 8,202
Ray Allan

I got one of those "Send a poor Jewish Widow in Israel Food" solicitations in today's mail, put out by some christard/jew organization. Didn't even open it, just ripped it up and tossed it in the garbage.

There are no poor jew widows in Israel. Their relatives in New York and Florida send them money, never mind what US taxpayers are extorted to send.
"Military men are dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns for foreign policy."

--Henry A. Kissinger, jewish politician and advisor


Display Modes

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:40 AM.
Page generated in 0.17742 seconds.