Depraved Jews love the hype of voyeurism they've introduced into their Holocaust tales
No doubt like many others, I often have a bit of a chuckle about the distress the Holocaust deniers cause the Jews by ignorantly downplaying what was really the mass destruction and attempted genocide of the Jews in Europe under Hitler’s regime, especially posters like “Hoff “on the realzionistnews.com site, and “the Skunk” over at judicial-inc.org. But the point in this post is that while Jews have had a propensity for lying outright and resorting to false flag ops to deceive their non-Jewish enemies, they will hype up and exaggerate what is even an authentic historical event, like the Holocaust, to advance their evil agenda of an antichristian global takeover, which is just exactly what they’ve done in terms of HOW the Jews suffered and died under the Nazis, especially in places like the Auschwitz concentration camp.
The Jews have used many and various devices to gain sympathy for and hype up and propagandize what was the authentic destruction of several million Jews in World War 2 Europe; but they’ve shown a peculiar penchant for voyeurism as a device of that sort, as is indicated by the Holocaust literature and films they’ve foisted on the Gentiles since the 1940s.
Voyeurism is effectively a somewhat sophisticated form of raw and unbridled lust, but has been more specifically defined as:
“a psychosexual disorder in which a person derives sexual pleasure and gratification from looking at the naked bodies and genital organs or observing the sexual acts of others. The voyeur is usually hidden from view of others. Voyeurism is a form of paraphilia.
A variant form of voyeurism involves listening to erotic conversations. This is commonly referred to as telephone sex, although it is usually considered voyeurism primarily in the instance of listening to unsuspecting persons …
The object of voyeurism is to observe unsuspecting individuals who are naked, in the process of undressing or engaging in sexual acts. The person being observed is usually a stranger to the observer. The act of looking or peeping is undertaken for the purpose of achieving sexual excitement. The observer generally does not seek to have sexual contact or activity with the person being observed.
If orgasm is sought, it is usually achieved through masturbation. This may occur during the act of observation or later, relying on the memory of the act that was observed.
Frequently, a voyeur may have a fantasy of engaging in sexual activity with the person being observed. In reality, this fantasy is rarely consummated.
A number of states have statutes that render voyeurism a crime. Such statutes vary widely regarding definitions of voyeurism. Most states specifically prohibit anyone from photographing or videotaping another person, without consent, while observing that person in the privacy of his home or some other private place.”
Weird and particularly depraved sexual practices have been characterisitc of Middle Eastern persons since ancient times, as exposed in the article featured on a page on this site, titled: “Eastern Sexual Practices – censored volumes“; and hence it’s no marvel that voyeurism has been a psychosexual characteristic of the ordinary Jew since at least as early as the first century. Proof of this has been provided in various sources, and one is the Jewish Encyclopedia, which says the Pharisees at the time of Christ had revised the then legitimate Old Testament priestly rite of trying a woman for adultery, so that a jealous husband had to bring his wife to the Sanhedrin; and if she admitted being unfaithful to him, she was immediately divorced and lost her conjugal property rights. However if she denied the charge …
“she was taken to the East Gate of the Temple, in front of the Nicanor Gate, and placed in charge of a priest who rent her garment so that her breast was exposed and loosened her hair: she was draped in black; all ornaments were removed from her person, and a rope was tied around her chest. Thus publicly exposed (only her servants being prevented from seeing her), the jealousy offering was placed in her hands.’
Obviously the foregoing rabbincal stricture has deviated significantly from the righteous biblical ordinance practised by God’s Levitical priest who uncovered the head but not the breast of the woman (Nu. 5. 11-31); and it also has patent sadistic overtones, and indicates that the Pharisees derived considerable pleasure from voyeurism and sexual bondage.
Even Jesus Christ denounced the Jews of his day by placing an emphasis on their sexual depravity, by citing them as “an evil and adulterous generation”; and he specially alluded to the voyeurism of the Pharisees who evidently indulged in the pornography of viewing couples copulating and even copulated with women so that they could use that to control them in a hypocritical religious way. For in the eighth chapter of John’s gospel we read of a woman who was brought to Jesus by the Pharisees, after being taken “in the very act” of adultery; which would tend to indicate that the Pharisees had either ‘accidently’ walked in on, were watching, or had participated in the event, to use it against her at a later date.
In the years 200-500 AD, the oral law of the Pharisees was put in writing as the Mishnah of what became known as the Talmud; and by the end of the Middle Ages comprehensive rabbinical commentaries had been added to that oral law, which are known as Gemara. Many of the leading commentators on the Mishnah have been Ashkenazic Jews of Khazar ethnic extraction; and hence it’s no marvel that the sexual depravity the Khazars had notoreity for as phallic worshippers has been carried over into much of the Gemara or rabbinical commentaries on Pharisaical oral law in the Talmud.
One notable example is the Jewish rite of male circumcision (brit milah), which was originally a singular (one cut) ordinance instituted by God via the Hebrew patriarch Abraham; but has since degenerated into a horribly depraved Talmudic rite with three stages, consummated by the awful act of mezizah, which involves calling on a Jewish mohel or surgeon to orally suck the blood from the wounded penis, and mingle it with wine in his mouth, and then spit the blood, wine and any bits of skin into a receptacle provided!
For the Jewish Encyclopedia says, in the third stage of Jewish ritual circumcision, which is mezizah, the mohel …
Rabbi sucks blood from wounded penis while Jewish 'voyeurs' look on
“takes some wine in his mouth and applies his lips to the part [i.e., penis] involved in the operation, and exerts suction, after which he expels the mixture of wine and blood into a receptacle provided for the purpose. This procedure is repeated several times, and completes the operation.”
Jewry’s repugnant rite of mezizah is mandatory according to the Talmud, and rabbis have traditionally insisted that any mohel who fails to perform it must forfeit his office. Some rabbis, especially in Reform and Conservative Judaism, have admittedly dispensed with or at least modified mezizah in recent times; but not because of its depraved nature and because it doubtless fosters voyeurism among the Jewish watchers, but because of the risk of the infant contracting diseases like syphilis from the mouth of the mohel.
For to quote a practising mohelet (female surgeon) Lonnie Morris (2002) …
“Little old men used to come to your home and suck the blood out of the penis with their mouths. Then they started using a glass tube. They thought if they took the blood out it would bleed less and feel better. Because of AIDS, they stopped doing things like that!”
Critics have plausibly attributed sadistic and homosexual connotations to the repugnant Jewish rite of repetitively orally sucking blood from a wounded penis, and it could well be argued that it’s a form oral sex; and there’s little doubt that it fosters voyeurism among the Jews watching it, and would help to explain why rabbis have gained notoreity for sexual depravity, which is substantiated by this page on this Weblog, titled: “Register of Sexually Depraved Rabbis”, and endorsed by the fact that Jews in general are disproportionately involved in the sex and pornography industries.
One other significant Jewish religious rite that has very definite voyeurism overtones is the Jewish ritual bath, which is mandatory for initiation into Judaism, and also used to ostensibly cleanse a Jew – especially a Jewess – from some sort of “defilement”, like seminal and menstrual emmissions.
Naked Jewess in mikvah recites ritual prayer in earshot of Beth Din
For instead of instituting something dignified and proper like immersion in water clothed, as is done in Christian baptism, the Talmudic rabbis who concocted the ordinance of the Jewish ritual bath decreed that a woman should strip naked in the presence of a woman watcher, and then descend naked into the mikvah or sacred pool. Indeed not being content with that, they also insisted that while she was standing naked in the mikvah she should recite a ritual prayer within earshot of a Bet Din or council of male Jews (voyeurs) in an adjacent room, ostensibly “so they’ll know she’s a true convert”.
The popularity the mikvah now has among ‘liberated’ Jewesses has also caused some commentators to conclude that the rite of a woman stripping naked in the presence of another woman in the mikvah chamber has lesbian overtones; and just what the male Jews of the Bet Din are thinking about while listening to a naked Jewess reciting a ritual prayer in a room next to them God knows; but it seems hard to believe that their thoughts are altogether pure.
Jewess disrobes in a mikvah as a sort of dupe of voyeurism and lesbianism
Admittedly the male Jews of the Bet Din may not be masturbating or spontaneously ejaculating seminal fluid like a lot of voyeurs do while engaged in telephone sex; but it does seems reasonable to conclude that many of them would be getting at least aroused sexually, and possibly in a manner similar to the way Roman Catholic priests have gained notoriety down through the centuries for getting off sexually by listening to women from behind a partition in a Confessional.
But getting back to this business of the way Jews have used voyeurism in their hype about what the Nazis did to Jews in the ghettos, concentration camps, and as a “final solution” during World War II, we find that not a few movies have been put out with those sorts of connotations since the 1940s, beginning with the Love Camp Seven film (1969), which was the first in a series of “exploitation films” about women in prison and the first of the so-called Nazi exploitation genre of concentration camp movies, and it has been reviewed at this site in these glowing terms …
“During the second world war, a German scientist had developed a new style of jet airplane. As the Nazis began to take over Europe and bombard England continually, the allies made contact with the scientist’s assistant, Martha Grossman, who was sympathetic to the allied cause. Martha was sending information to allied spies when the old scientist died. As Martha was a Jew, her protection was removed and she was thrown into a concentration camp.
The allies now knew that Martha was trapped in a particular camp called Love Camp Seven, basically a brothel for high ranking Nazi officials. Ms. Grossman had essential information about the amazing new jet airplane that may win the war for the Nazis. The plan was to send two American Women’s Army Corps officers in as undercover spies, make contact with Martha, memorise as much information about the jet as possible and hopefully bust them all out. The two beautiful WACs, Linda Harmon and Grace Freeman, appear and accept the insane task. Later, they meet up with resistance forces (one of whom is played by John Alderman of Erotic Adventures of Zorro fame) strip naked, dress in their peasant outfits and receive their fake Jewish identities. They’re dropped into the enemy’s area and soon captured as Jews.
Scene from Love Camp Seven
Suddenly the guards bring in a disobedient prisoner and hang her by her hands over a sharp board as an example to the others. The Commandant bellows that if anyone helps, there will be a severe punishment for them. Linda gives her water but the Commandant has seen it through a window and brings the guards back in. They force all the women to strip nude, holding their buckets in the air in a mock Nazi salute. The Commandant whips Linda with his ever-present riding crop. The suspended women begs to be freed but the sadist won’t let her off her trap. Later, the pudgy Bruce Kimball guard takes a shine to Linda while a more honourable-looking guard looks on disapprovingly at his animalistic advances. Later he makes love to Grace gently and humanely while Linda is brutishly raped by the Kimball-guard. All the sex scenes in this film are done with the men with their pants on, the women resolutely nude.
The “nice” guard requests a transfer, stating he wants to return to the real war and that the operations of the Camp are inhumane and unnecessary. The arrogant Commandant refuses, forcing him to work with the female scientist who is killing scores of women with unethical experiments, which we never see. The hung woman is cut down and made to lick the evil tyrant’s boots. Grace finds out that Martha has been removed to a detention chamber elsewhere in the camp for disobedience. Women there are tortured and eventually sent back or to the gas chambers. Still, Linda has a plan to make contact with Martha.
When some high-ranking officals are sent in to use the girl’s services, Linda rejects and slaps one of the slobbering old men, who are are all equally portrayed as animalistic, snarling brutes in the group sex scene. Of course she’s given a nude, anaemic-looking flogging by the Kimball guard and thrown in with Martha Grossman. As both tied-up women try to help each other out, Linda eventually wins Martha’s trust and explains who she really is. They form a plan to escape as well as exchange information. At the same time, a new area commander, General Erich Von Heinemann, (played by David F. Friedman himself) enters the camp and forces Cresse to pick up the camp’s game. The women will wear lingerie and makeup. The rooms will be improved and an orgy will be held. The girls are made to stage a nude lesbian love-fest for the general. Martha and Linda are returned to the main group, and Linda is raped again by the Kimball guard as the nice guard and Grace look on. The nice guard attempts to defend Linda and attacks Kimball but is ineffective. Grace later tells him he should help them, but he claims he is firstly a soldier and must follow orders.
As Cresse and the General stage a drunken orgy, the signal comes in from resistance that the escape is about to be sprung. Grace confronts the soldier she’s been trying to turn to the side of good. The General is shot through the head, Kimball stabbed through the neck and the Cresse-Commandant has a superb death-scene as he’s blinded by a broken glass, staggering and sobbing over his shattered kingdom. As Cresse fires blindly, who will survive the hail of random bullets and escape to freedom, and who will meet their demise in Love Camp Seven?
First off, is the film an enjoyable example of cult cinema from a bygone era, or a detestable piece of offensive trash? Perhaps a bit of both. If you’ve seen Ilsa, for sheer violence and gore this one’s a walk in the park in comparison. Still, it’s nasty and surprisingly serious, except for Cresse’s over-the-top performance. The beatings and whippings are fairly brief but we do get the point. The sex scenes are mainly rapes but as mentioned before, made almost demure by the clothed men. Again, we get the point though as the characters are obviously suffering. Technically the film’s quite crude, with no real location shooting, just a few indoor sets and the odd outside wall or gate. Nonetheless, the tanks and uniforms do look real. The women are all quite beautiful, with poor Linda – no cast list folks, so I have no idea about actor/actress names – suffering the most of any of the prisoners. Grace certainly gets off easier, but you’ll have see the end to see exactly what happens. Despire the fact that they spend most of the film naked, the actresses playing Grace and Linda and even the extras, put all they can into it, and are dead serious all through.
For sheer sleaze, nastiness and depravity, you don’t need to go much further than Love Camp Seven. While not a hugely-populated genre, the Nazi sexploitation pantheon has this as one of its grandfathers, a true roughie in the Lee Frost/David Friedman tradition. Certainly not for the easily offended, though.“
After that there’s the notorious Ilsa She-Wolf of the SS movie (1974), produced by the Jew David Friedman, which has been given the following review at this site …
“I have to admit, I was a bit scared to watch this film. I’ve read it described in various ways, somewhere expressed as unbearably intense and graphic, a veritable maelstrom of sickness, violence and perversion. Nonetheless, in the spirit of testing oneself, I bought this film from Polyster Books in Melbourne, Australia, and plonked myself on the sofa for some fine family viewing. What was the outcome?
Well, let’s look at the plot outline, what there is of a plot, anyway. It’s World War II, and in a concentration camp, Commandant Ilsa and her evil, blonde female cohorts are experimenting sadistically on various Jewish women and men. Mainly naked women, by the way. The men are tested sexually by the large-breasted Ilsa (Dianne Thorne) and as they all fail to please her, are then castrated and sent back to the camp. The women are tested viciously by Ilsa, who is trying to prove her theory that women can withstand more punishment and pain than men. And boy, does she put these poor unfortunates through their paces. Fortunately, none of these scenes are particularly well-filmed or convincing, otherwise they’d be unwatchable. The first castration scene borders on this, as the actor involved conveys real pain as he’s mutilated without anasthetic.
Okay, so this is primarily a film about torturing naked women, so what happens to them? Ilsa and her cronies whip women (and men) to death, insert electified dildoes into them, explode them in decompression chambers, boil them alive, have them gang-raped, hung as they stand on blocks of ice, give them disfiguring diseases and have live maggots breed on open wounds. One particularly strong woman who stands up to Ilsa is tortured over the course of the film until she becomes a bloody, mangled, but still living, mess. We never find out exactly what’s being done to her, but she gets worse every scene.
In the end, an American prisoner who finally, sexually pleases Ilsa leaves her vulnerable, and starts a chain reaction which leads to revolt and the tables are finally turned. Her own countrymen finally do her in though – she has become a risk even to the Third Reich. I won’t give away every detail of this, as you need to see exactly what happens and who survives.
Filmed using the sets from “Hogan’s Heroes” – yes, really – there’s virtually no narrative to this unbelievable film. It’s just torture and sex, through and through. Some of it’s laughable, given the right perspective, and even feels like a bad Hogan’s heroes episode. Some of it is cringe-worthy in the nastiest way, like the castration scene. Maybe it’s because I’m a male. All of the acting is pretty much camped up, the male Colonel or General or whatever he is, who turns up towards the end, urging Ilsa to one unusual sexual act, is completely over the top. Music, cinematography, direction is all nondescript. It’s really a film that travels on reputation alone. Some of the reputation is partially deserved, but most of it is done through makeup and static camerawork. I certainly didn’t have nightmares that night.“
Notable among more recent movies of a similar genre have been the Jew Steven Spielberg’s Schindler’s list (1993); and to some extent Valkyrie (2008), starring Tom Cruise, because the latter was reconceived with Lee frost, director of the Love Camp Seven film, replacing Bryan Singer as director, and Wes Bishop, a co-writer of Love Camp Seven, present to re-write it. The ‘new Valkyrie’ movie’s title was: The Man With Jew Heads, as a play on the words: “the Jew with two heads”, and it’s illustrated by the adjacent rare reshoot photo.
The reconceived version of Valkyrie has been described as:
“a tender comedy about the Nazi and the Jew Movie Producer he has sown to his body in order to keep him alive, and stars Tom Cruise as the Nazi and Tom Cruise as “Jewface”, and a hillarious side character, Ben Schiller as Dr. Hank Mengele, the slippery fingered, 1/16th Jewish surgeon who is mistaken for his more famous, more talented brother.”
The Jew Yehiel Dinur’s Pulitzer Prize winning novel: The House of Dolls has been floating around in the literary firmament in recent times; and in it he elaborates on “Joy Divisions” that were ostensibly groups of Jewish women kept as sex slaves for the Nazis at labour camps like Auschwitz. Dinur’s novel has been quite rightly classified as unsubstantiated fiction; and yet it’s retained in the curriculum of Israeli High Schools and promoted by Jews as based on reality.
In The House of Dolls, Dinur relates what he says were actual experiences his sister suffered during the Holocaust; and in his other book: Pepiel, he tells tall tales about Nazi sexual abuse of Jewish boys in death camps, ostensibly describing his brother’s experience. There’s little doubt that Dinur’s works are indeed fiction, because the Nazis generally despised Jews as racially inferior and joked about them as rats or vermin, and they were forbidden by Reich Law to have sexual relations with them; and if Dinur suffered from psychosexual afflictions like voyeurism it would help to explain why he became deranged later in life, and subjected himself to psychedelic therapy, including the use of LSD.
Indeed while it seems certain that the vast majority of Nazis would have found it very difficult to even get aroused sexually by seeing ‘Jewish vermin’ disrobing and being led to their deaths naked, it’s equally sure that many Jews have, since the war, developed a penchant for voyeurism when viewing pictures and movies of naked Jewish women getting executed by the Nazis.
Here are some other works in the genre of Dinur’s The House of Dolls advertised on posters …
For video clips of the Jews’ leading Holocaust voyeurism movie Ilsa She-wolf of the SS see this link.
Even the following Schindler’s List trailer could be construed as an example of the Jewish Holocaust voyeurism on sale in films and literature today, especially where it depicts naked Jewish women being hustled into what they expected to be gas chambers …
Jewish Holocaust voyeurism may be just simply largely the figment of a wild and depraved imagination, but it seems likely that it has also been inspired by what actually happened in the 1940s, as for example what’s portrayed in this video …
There’s also this slideshow of Holocaust pictures along similar lines.
To sum up then, it should be reiterated that while Jews have obviously hyped up and even lied outright about certain events that ostensibly took place in World War 2 under the Nazis, especially because of their penchant for voyeurism, that doesn’t at all mean that the Holocaust is a Holohoax as so many non-Jews are now being led to believe – see the post on this Weblog titled: “Did Six Million Really Die”. It does, however, mean that some Jews are very wicked, because they’ve descended into using the porn of voyeurism to hype the tragedy of the Holocaust, and not simply to gain undeserved sympathy and benefits for their nation, but even to make money for personal aggrandisement, which is clearly behaviour that’s just simply indefensible and inexuseable on the part of any person, Jew or Gentile.
20 Comments
“In fact I would say that this whole business of Holocaust denial is just simply an irrational, knee-jerk response by either blinkered or superficial researchers to what is the plain evidence if the matter is thoroughly reviewed.”
And what evidence is that? I’ve been researching the holocaust for a number of years now, and I haven’t seen *any* substantive evidence that the Germans had a plan to exterminate Europe’s Jewish population, let alone try to carry that plan out. Apart from dubious “survivor” testimony and a few ambiguous statements and documents here and there, there simply isn’t any evidence that the events known collectively as “the holoocaust” actually took place. That’s rather amazing for something that you suggest claimed at least 2.5 million lives. With that many deaths, you’d think there would be *some* forensic evidence to support the idea, but there isn’t.
As for holocaust revisionism being a “knee-jerk” reaction, have you ever sat down and actually read a book like Arthur Butz’s “Hoax of the 20th Century”? It may be a stiff read, but the word knee-jerk hardly applies. Have you gone through, for example, the 15 volumes of the English language Nuremberg Military Tribunal transcripts as Butz has before forming your opinion?
Even if, for the sake of argument, we were to assume that the holocaust really did happen, the revisionsists, if nothing else, serve the purpose of calling the Jews on their more outrageous lies. If you think Jews are telling some whoppers now, imagine how bad it would be if there was no one around to challenge their claims.
I don’t get this recent trend of people within the movement attacking holocaust revisionists. While revisionists sit in jail for having challanged the holocaust story, the movement responds by trying to disown them? Something smells fishy.
* challenged
Your insinuation that a Jewish Holocaust didn’t occur in WW2 Europe is not a challenge I or anyone else should have to take seriously.
How many dead Jews do you need to have a Holocaust anyway – 250,000, 1 million, 3 million, 6 million, etc? Even if only 1 million Jews perished that’s still about one in every 16 Jews alive on the planet at the time and must be considered a Holocaust.
Are you saying only 250,000 perished? If so, what about the ordinary mortality rate of Jews for the years 1939-45, which would have been about three times that? If you’re saying the Nazis didn’t do anything to exacerbate the ordinary mortality rate by starving Jews in the 400 ghettoes, abusing and watching them die from typhus in the dozens of concentration camps, and by mass murdering them in the occupied East – quite apart from any offical and systematic extermination of Jews as a “final solution of the Jewish problem”, you’ve certainly shoved a lot of things under the carpet.
I made a few comments on and provided some evidence to support the contention that the Nazis had an official extermination programme in place to resolve the “Jewish problem” at least as early as 1942 in another post on this Weblog, on this page: http://jewsribsinbearjaw.wordpress.com/2009/02/21/did-six-million-really-die-2/, and under the title of “Did Six Million Really Die”, so I’m not going to bother to rehearse all of that here.
If you doubt the Holocaust because the bodies of the several million Jews that perished haven’t all been found, you should try and find the graves and/or remains of the 60 million others who perished in the war, and I’ll bet you won’t come back with authentic evidence of even a tenth of them.
I mentioned in my other post on the “Six Million” that there was understandably some difficulty in determining the actual figure simply because the deaths occurred during the chaos of a major war, which is quite consistent with the difficulty researchers have had in trying to work out the totals of those who perished in the Second World war itself – totals that vary even by tens of millions among the many who have tried to compile the data.
I’ve heard the argument that some of the older Jewish demographical records don’t support the thesis that there was a drastic reduction in the Jewish population worldwide during World war II, but when I checked it out I found that the Jews that compiled them had, at the time, been understandably unable to get reliable data for that period, and had in fact said so when compiling the tables.
As for Arthur Butz’s book, I would only say that if he was sincere and really wanted an unbiased source for his research, the Nuremberg Military Tribunal transcripts were hardly the best place to go looking for it. Jews testifying at Nuremberg were seething with hatred for the Nazis on trial and would have literally torn them to pieces if they had been given the chance, and the Nazis that testified knew they were going to be swinging from the end of a rope on Hoshanah Rabba if they didn’t do something pretty drastic to avert that calamity.
I understand even David Irving has conceded that “the Nazis did murder millions of Jews” – at least 2.5 million. Why are you effectively challenging and flying in the face of even his obviously capable research, even if he has been now officially and quite rightly discredited as an historian?
Maybe your hero Arthur Butz’s “knee-jerk” reaction was delayed a bit more than it has been with other revisionists, because he did more research and was a bit slower up top, but I’m still quite sure that for one reason or another it did actually take place.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090103020025AAetWyt
Red Cross says it’s not even half a million… small potatoes to what happened to the Germans at Eisenhowers’ death camps and Ehrenburgs rape order.
Here’s notable Holocaust denier David Cole’s recent retraction that succinctly sums up the Holocaust denial delusion:
“This statement is given in an attempt to set the record straight about my current views regarding the Holocaust and Holocaust denial. As anyone who follows the subject of the Holocaust denial knows, from 1991 until 1994 I was well known in the movement as a Jewish Holocaust denier (a self-described “revisionist”).
For the last three years I have no longer been associated with this movement, having realized that I was wrong and that the path I was taking with my life was self-destructive and hurtful to others. I have spent the last few years in silence on the subject of my time with the denial movement, a silence caused mainly by my shame at what I had done with my life and my desire to distance myself from that life.
However, in that shame-induced silence it has been brought to my attention that I have not gone as far as I should have to make a clear and complete public statement in order to set the record straight as to where I stand.
It is my great hope that this statement accomplishes that task.
I would like to state for the record that there is no question in my mind that during the Holocaust of Europe’s Jews during World War II, the Nazis employed gas chambers in an attempt to commit genocide against the Jews. At camps in both Eastern and Western Europe, Jews were murdered in gas chambers which employed such poison gases as Zyklon B and carbon monoxide (in the Auschwitz camp, for example, the gas chambers used Zyklon B). The evidence for this is overwhelming and unmistakable.
The Nazis intended to kill all of the Jews of Europe, and the final death toll of this attempted genocide was six million. This atrocity, unique in its scope and breadth, must never be forgotten.
During my four years as a denier, I was wracked with self-hate and loathing, a fact that many of my critics were quick to point out. Indeed, this self hatred was obvious to most, but I was too blind to see it. The hate I had for myself I took out on my people.
I was seduced by pseudo historical nonsense and clever-sounding but empty ideas and catch-phrases. When my eyes were finally opened, thanks to several good, kind friends who refused to give up on me even at my worst, I was horrified by what I had done. My instinct was to flee and never look back, but I now understand that I owe it to the people I wronged to make a forceful repudication of my earlier views.
I also owe a very large apology, not only to the many people I enraged, and to the family and friends I hurt, but especially to the survivors of the Holocaust, who deserve only our respect and compassion, not re-victimization.
Therefore, to all of the above people, let me offer my most humble and very, very sincere apology. I am sorry for what (I) did, and I am sorry for the hurt I caused.
And just as I must set the record straight concerning my views, it is also incumbent on me to set the record straight regarding the video “documentaries” and media appearances I did from 1991 to 1994. These “documentaries” are merely videotaped garbage filled with self-hatred and pseudo-intellectual nonsense. My “media appearances” were nothing but an embarrassment. My glazed look, specious reasoning, and talking-in-circles during my talk show appearances would have hopefully alerted any astute viewers that this was a man not in touch with reality.
It has been brought to my attention that Bradley Smith is still using one of my videos in advertisements he is running on college campuses. Therefore, I would like to make these additional points: This video is being advertised without my consent, and I denounce this video as being without worth.
Bradley Smith is no historian, and denial is no “historical field”. Students on college campuses should look elsewhere to find out about the Holocaust. To these students, I would say, look to books like Hilberg’s “Destruction of the European Jews”, Yahil’s “The Holocaust”, and Dawidowicz’s “War against the Jews” for correct information. If your school library doesn’t stock these books, have them order copies. Do not pay any attention to any “David Cole” videos, except to rightly denounce them as frauds.
I am thankful for being given the opportunity to make this statement. This statement is made freely and under no duress, and is quite willingly, even happily given to Mr. Irv Rubin of the Jewish Defence League for the widest possible distribution. This statement is the most current and accurate compilation of my views, and it supersedes an(y) previous writings, videos, or statements. It is my hope that there will be no more confusion as to where I stand. I thank you for letting me set the record straight.
(signed)
David Cole
(notarized)
In reply Ernst Zundel has said Cole (a Jew) was reduced to a form of insanity under pressure from his co-religionists before he retracted; but it looks more like the dimwitted Holocaust deniers behind bars in Europe are the fools, and that Cole deprogrammed himself from the Holohoax (Hollow-hoax and real Holocaust hoax) before it turned him permanently into the embarassment the other deniers have been become.
There’s a lot to be said for revising official history, but If you check out dyed-in-the-wool Holocaust deniers they’re almost invariably of the dimwitted sort – a bit like the Jehovah Witnesses and Moron cult members that knock on your door and have an irrational mental block to taking on board certain information somewhere.
The Web site of denier Eric Hufschmid makes it pretty obvious that the guy is at least paranoid and probably not mentally stable …
http://www.erichufschmid.net/HoloHoax/DavidCole_Auschwitz.html
The whole silly nonsense of Holocaust denial is already falling apart at the seams, and I would venture to say that soon enough it will be discredited to the point of being permanently denied the status of being credible by rational persons.
What did the lie of Holocaust denial achieve? Well it just got more undeserved sympathy for the Jewish criminals, and made it easier for the Jews to introduce their “hate and thought crime” legislation and lock up their Christian and Gentile enemies.
Cole was threatened with death by the JDL:
http://www.codoh.com/cole/traitor_amer.html
The statement you quoted sounds like a POW’s scripted ‘confession’.
Do you believe in the shrunken heads, human skin lamps, human soap, and electro-conveyor?
Surely the holocaust narrative is full of holes.
Why should we believe the six million, when they have lied to us about other aspects of the ‘holocaust’?
Interesting new insights on the Holocaust revealed in this video that claims 1.3 million Jews were mass murdered by the Nazis in the Ukraine alone from 1941 to 1944 …
http://vodpod.com/watch/1539636-ukraine-holocaust?pod=croctears4jews
Don’t miss this recently recovered and obviously authentic audio that proves categorically that Himmler and the SS had a “final solution to the Jewish problem” in mind at least as early as October 4, 1943 …
http://vodpod.com/watch/1539580-heinrich-himmler-speaks-of-the-extermination-of-the-jews?pod=croctears4jews
1.3 million? All they had is a few pictures… 1.3 million they get out of that? And vague claims of mass graves they don’t produce…
J-ws are the masters of the lie, of fraud, of forgery. You think they would be above fabricating this, with everything we know?
No Holocaust happened, until we see a forensic assessment of these supposed mass graves
I think we need to bear in mind that the lack of forensic evidence for mass killings of Jews in the Holocaust is widely known to be a hoax that was perpetrated by the Nazis for obviously very necessary uses.
Here’s a relevant article found at http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/article.php?lang=en&ModuleId=10007273
…
“Nazi policy did a great deal to facilitate denial of the Holocaust even as the killing operation unfolded across German-occupied Europe during World War II.
The Holocaust was a state secret in Nazi Germany. The Germans wrote down as little as possible. Most of the killing orders were verbal, particularly at the highest levels. Hitler’s order to kill Jews was issued only on a need-to-know basis. The Nazi leaders generally avoided detailed planning of killing operations, preferring to proceed in a systematic but often improvised manner.
The Germans destroyed most documentation that did exist before the end of the war. The documents that survived and related directly to the killing program were virtually all classified and stamped “Geheime Reichssache” (Top Secret), requiring special handling and destruction to prevent capture by the enemy. Heinrich Himmler, Reich Leader of the SS and Chief of the German Police, said in a secret speech to SS generals in Posen in 1943 that the mass murder of the European Jews was a secret, never to be recorded.
In order to hide the killing operation as much as possible from the uninitiated, Hitler ordered that the killings not be spoken of directly in German documentation or in public statements. Instead, the Germans used codenames and neutral-sounding terms for the killing process. In Nazi parlance, for example, “action” (Aktion) referred to a violent operation against Jewish (or other) civilians by German security forces; “resettlement to the East” (Umsiedlung nach dem Osten) referred to the forced deportation of Jewish civilians to killing centers in German-occupied Poland; and “special treatment” (Sonderbehandlung) meant killing.
Both at the time and later, such euphemisms impeded a clear understanding of what the Nazis were doing. This was partly to facilitate the killing process by keeping the victims in the dark about their fate as long as possible. Widespread Jewish resistance was only possible once Jews understood that Nazi policy was to kill all of them.
Furthermore, Hitler could not just assume that almost no one would protest the killing of Jews. Even within his own party there were those who agreed with the campaign of persecution against Jews but who occasionally balked at systematic murder. For example, Wilhelm Kube, the German civilian administrator of occupied Belarus, fully supported the murder of the Belarusian Jews, but protested when the SS deported German Jews to Minsk and shot them there.
Hitler had reason to fear possible unfavorable reaction should all the details of the Holocaust become public. Euphemistic language aided secrecy since only those who knew the “real” meaning of the words would understand the deeper meaning of public statements or accurately interpret the documentary record.
In addition to the use of coded language, Heinrich Himmler sought to destroy the physical remains of the victims of killing operations to hide the killing process from advancing Allied armies. He assigned SS officer Paul Blobel to command Operation (Aktion) 1005, the code name for German plans to destroy the forensic evidence at mass murder sites.
The SS forced prisoners to reopen mass graves at both the killing centers in German-occupied Poland and at the open air killing sites in the former Soviet territory and to cremate the bodies, thereby removing evidence of mass murder. For example, at Babi Yar in Kiev in the summer of 1943, at Belzec in late 1942, and at Sobibor and Treblinka in the fall of 1943, the mass graves were reopened and the bodies burned to ashes. In this way, the Germans and their collaborators destroyed much — but by no means all — of the forensic evidence of mass murder before advancing Soviet armies overran the scenes of these crimes.
Late in the war, after word of the Holocaust had reached Britain and the United States, the Nazi leadership sought to counter Allied condemnation of Nazi policies toward Jews with a coordinated campaign of disinformation. On June 23, 1944, the Nazis permitted an International Red Cross commission visit to the Theresienstadt ghetto in occupied Bohemia in what is today the Czech Republic. They hoped to mask Nazi killing operations in the occupied eastern territories by showcasing good conditions for Jews in Theresienstadt.
The Red Cross commission consisted of two Danish officials and one Swiss representative and the visit lasted only six hours. It was an elaborate hoax. The SS authorities intensified deportations of Jews from the ghetto to alleviate overcrowding and spruced up the ghetto by planting gardens, painting houses, opening cafes and theaters and the like in preparation for the visit. They even instructed the prisoners how to behave during the inspection and to give positive reports about conditions in the ghetto.
Once the visit ended, however, the SS authorities resumed deportations of Jews, overwhelmingly to the Auschwitz killing center in German-occupied Poland. The visit had served its purpose: to confuse international public opinion about the true nature of Nazi policies towards Jews.
Despite Nazi efforts to keep secret the unfolding Holocaust, information did leak out. The perpetrators themselves talked about what they were doing. Occasionally, survivors of mass killing operations bore witness to the killing program. Both Jewish and Polish underground organizations made great efforts to let the outside world know what the Germans were doing in eastern Europe. The information was sometimes incomplete, contradictory, and inaccurate in some of the specific details, but the general policy and pattern of events were clear by the second half of 1942.
Yet the psychological barriers to accepting the existence of the Nazi killing program were considerable. The Holocaust was unprecedented and irrational. It was inconceivable that an advanced industrial nation would mobilize its resources to kill millions of peaceful civilians, including women and children, the elderly, and the very young. In doing so, the Nazis often acted contrary to German economic and military interests. For example, they intensified the killing operation, killing skilled Jewish laborers even while labor shortages threatened to undermine the German war effort.
All too many people responded to reports about German killings of Jewish civilians by comparing these reports to news stories about German atrocities in occupied Belgium and northern France during World War I. The British media in World War I charged that the German occupation was monstrous, that German soldiers committed many outrages against defenseless civilians in German-occupied Belgium. They charged that German soldiers bayoneted babies, disfigured women, and killed civilians with military-issued poison gas. It turned out after the war that the Allies had invented many of those stories in order to maximize popular support for the war effort. As a result of that experience, many people were skeptical of reports of mass murder operations during World War II. In this case, however, the reports turned out to be generally accurate.
While some people today are misled as a result of the Nazi policies described above into doubting the reality of the Holocaust, others deny the Holocaust for more overtly racist, political, or strategic reasons. These deniers begin with the premise that the Holocaust did not happen. This premise suits their broader purposes. They deny the Holocaust as an article of faith and no amount of rational argumentation can dissuade them. This denial is irrational, largely unrelated either to the facts of the history or to the enormity of the event …”
I noticed that your previous Web site was taken down for “terms of use violation” anarchore. Was it because you were being unjustly persecuted or was it because you were hardened in your irrationality on a number of issues?
Yeah, wordpress has a no-irrationality policy. Canada has a no-rationality policy. Lies don’t get censored, truth does- cf Canada’s courts declaring “the truth is no defence”.
The Nazis were long gone before the mention of a ‘Holocaust’… unless you count the article in WWI bemoaning the six million dying J-ws. Are you an Underground Reich theory proponent?
Have you seen this site, about the so-called death camp Auscwitz?
It was censored by the govt of Australia:
http://web.archive.org/web/20080215072010/http://www.adelaideinstitute.org/Auschwitz/truth.htm
You’re starting to sound irrational again. The documentation in my last commment shows how the Nazis’ hoax of a lack of forensic evidence for the Holocaust was perpetrated DURING World War 2 not before or after it.
The real Holocaust hoax is first the denier’s line that it didn’t happen or that there were at least no gas chambers in the camps. After that, the real Holocaust hoax is what the Nazis did to conceal the evidence of their mass destruction of the Jews in Europe.
David Emory’s Underground Reich theory is pretty broad at the base, and hence has proponents of at least some aspects of it all over the Web.
Any thesis – Emory’s or otherwise – that fails to identify the Jews as the world’s leading sinister conspirators for world control, and as one unit in opposition to God, Jesus Christ, and Christians, and as dedicated to undoing, dominating, and genociding Gentiles so the Jews can enjoy an ideal Jewish world under Israel’s antichrist, has missed the whole point of what this Web site is all about.
One man’s proof of the Holcoaust is another man’s proof that Pharisees and their lackeys can generate reams of BS text. There is no ‘documentation’ in that roBSt(reams of BS text), just words. No cites whatsoever, just propaganda. They even included a paragraph that says if you don’t believe their roBSt, it is because of antisemitism, irrational hatred of J-ws(you disprove that theory though Jewribs, you have an irrational hatred of J-ws, and you believe the Pharisee/Zionist holohoax).
Stop blaming all J-ws, J-ws lived in peace in many countries with Arabs and Christians, before the Pharisee Zionists took over J-daism.
That is like blaming all Americans for Bush, and while it may be true that without Americans there would have been no Bush, is it fair to blame all Americans, even tough many of them were brainwashed to support Bush?
Are Americans the “world’s leading sinister conspirators for world control”? Yes, and no. Same with the J-ws.
When Americans rally against the war, do you call them liars because they are still Americans and America wants a world empire under their control? Is it rational to call anti-Zionist J-ws liars because they are calling down Zionists, putting their safety on the line, going against the JDF and other Zionist scum?
Collective blame and collective punishment is an Isr-eli thing, we should rise above.
Maybe the holocaust happened, but I won’t believe in it until they do the forensics.. and I mean real forensics, not roBSt.
Real forensics:
Check out these audios of phone conversations between Holocaust denier Eric Hufschmid (a Jew related by marriage to the notorious Zionist Rupert Murdoch) and Daryl Bradford Smith (host of the French Connection/ I am the witness Web site) that took place just prior to their parting company …
http://www.erichufschmid.net/Smith-phone-call-8Sep2007.html
Woah cool! The youtube vid shows up in the comments! How did I do that?
Yeah I listened to that (phone call) a while ago, and have thought Hufschmid is full of it for a long time.
Who the hell records phone calls with their ‘friends’ to use against them later?
DBS is great, but he isn’t talking about the Holocaust whatsoever because of French law forbidding it.
It would be interresting to know where the rightwing folks think the people they claim WASNT murdered in the concentration camps is hiding?
(its not like they popped up alive and well after the war!)
A complete revision of history is called for.
By the way, does not the word ‘holocaust’ mean death by fire?
I don’t think we need to revise history as it’s provided in the Bible.
The discipline of an historian is a fairly complex issue.
Here’s a wikipedia article on it …
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History
Here’s one on pseudo-history …
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudohistory
Here’s one on historical conventions …
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_method
I don’t believe Holocaust denial falls within the parameters of reasonable historical methodology – it is a pseudo-historical assumption, and hence denies any advocate of it any legitimate claim they may think they have in that context to being “an historian”.
The word holocaust is more or less equivalent to the concept of a burnt offering or sacrifice (especially to God) – many Jews look at the death of several million Jews in the Holocaust as a sacrifice of suffering that brought them into favour with God, and got them back into Palestine and enabled them to set up the Talmudic state of Israel.
Hitlers Bible
1. Adolf Eichmanns Bible
2. Nazi-Bible
3. Military Bible
4. Soldiers Bible
5. Nablus- (Palestinians&Israels Bible)
6. Nablus Bible against Palestine
7. George W. Bushs Bible
8. Barack Obamas Bible
9. Martin Luther Kings Bible
10. AIPAC-Bible
11. NATO-Bible
12. NeoCon-Bible
13. MOSSAD=Bible
14. CIA-Bible
15. Desmond Tutus Bible
16. Joseph Ratzingers Bible
17. Vietnams Bible
18. Iraqwar-Bible
19. Afghanistanwar-Bible
20. SOCOM-Bible
21. Jesus.Christ.Soldiers Bible
22. Soldiers of Jesus Christ Bible
23. Jesus Special Force in Iraqwar
24. Evangelicam Cionist-Soldiers in Iraq
25. Evangelical Hitlers Soldiers
26. Childrens Bible
27. Familiy Bible
28. Michele Obamas Bible
Holy Bible???
1. Racism
2. Genocide
3. Pedophily
4. War
5. Cannibalism
6. Militarismstrategy
7. Monotheism
8. Fashism
9. Theokratism
10. Archaism
11. Creacionism
12. Superstition
13. Intoleranc
14. Antisemitism
15. Phallophilism
Atheist!!!
Looks like you’ve got a lot of questions about something you don’t want to know anything about. Also we prefer comments in English rather than the scrambled emo/Goth stuff you freaks concoct while on weed or speed.