Concerned Citizens and Friends of illegal Immigration Law Enforcement 508-875-0835 firstname.lastname@example.org
A Challenge to DEBATE Any and All self-described “Holocaust Survivors!”
On any screening of YouTube, one can SEARCH for “holocaust survivors.” One will quickly get many video accounts from living “holocaust survivors.” I have begun challenging them in the YouTube comments sections to debate me personally with the text below. The question I put to them as loudly as I possibly can is: “If the Nazis had really been trying to kill them, how did they possibly survive?”
There are still today hundreds of thousands of so-called “holocaust survivors” including many thousands who spent time in Auschwitz. ALL of them are, in fact, living p-r-o-o-f (not merely “evidence”) for the simple fact that there was absolutely no attempt by the Germans to exterminate the Jews of Europe. All were kept alive by the Germans with food, water, shelter, medical care, clean clothing (free of lice), security and more. If the intended victims had simply been denied any of those essential ingredients, they would have died without any need for gas chambers or mass shootings. The "survivors" had in fact been treated rather well by the Nazis under the horrific circumstances that the Allies had imposed on everyone in German-occupied Europe.The Nazis and Germans had fed the “survivors” and provided them with shelter, medical care and clean lice-free clothes, security, and so much more as best they could in spite of a terrible war in which their own country was being turned into a crematory oven by the criminally insane Allies.
So, to all “holocaust survivors”—stop lying and whining!
Let's have a debate about it—with me and not just with brainwashed, innocent school children. Surely, the Phoenix New Times can help arrange such a public debate with sufficient police security and wide public interest in this enormously important subject. There are limits to how many challenges I can post myself. Perhaps others will post similar challenges--publicly as well. If people simply copy and paste the above challenge (with or without my name), that is fine with me. Friedrich Paul Berg
10 Trick Questions for “Holocaust Survivors”
Holocaust survivors are like zombies. After all, that's how they survived—right? If they look like zombies even sixty years after the war, like Elie Wiesel, all the better. It makes their horror tales all the more compelling. They are still human, at least partially—but they have been programmed to lie with great skill omitting inconvenient facts in order to boost the holocaust mythology. And of course, avoid serious questioning by people who are not totally sympathetic and programmed themselves. How dare anyone ever doubt their stories. It all brings them endless rewards. It also excuses the crimes and real atrocities of their fellow Jews, especially in the Middle East.
1. When did you enter a concentration camp or labor camp and when did you leave?
2. How old were you when you entered?
3. What job skills did you have if any?
4. What did you actually do throughout your incarceration in such camps?
5. Were you fed and how often?
6. Were you given shelter?
7. Were you given clean clothing and how often?
8. Were you ever too ill to work and were you given medical care?
9. For how long were you ever unable to work?
10, Why do you believe the Germans had ever wanted to kill you?
The trick questions are not really tricky at all. They are simply the kinds of normal and reasonable questions that defense attorneys should always ask prosecution witnesses. However, we have all been so thoroughly programmed with holocaust propaganda that hardly anyone ever dares to ask the right questions. The zombies are like saints. The real “trick” is to simply ask the questions!
No doubt, there are many other
“excellent” or even “better" questions to put to self-described
“holocaust survivors” than the ten I have chosen.
The trick is to actually put the questions to the “survivors.”
Take their magic halo away from them.
If the holocaust “historians” were reasonable or fair, they would have to admit that their claim that ALL Jews were targeted for extermination is totally false and that huge numbers were definitely targeted for “survival.”
Holocaust survivors are like Coca-Cola. They are everywhere! When I was much younger, I believed as most people believed that only a tiny handful of Jews “survived.” To actually meet a “survivor” was like seeing that rare person who had actually come back from the dead. After the Schindler's List movie became successful, Steven Spielberg began making video recordings of “survivors.” The numbers of such recordings quickly grew into the tens of thousands—and then one began seeing statistical studies from Jews showing that the numbers of “survivors,” alive even into the twenty-first century, were well into the hundreds of thousands. Such numbers mean that the numbers of “survivors” at the end of WW2 must have been in the millions. Can one continue to believe that only those capable of hard work as slaves were allowed to survive? Of course, not!
Will Jews ever admit that there is something grossly wrong with the tale they have promoted so successfully and for so long? Will Jews ever tell the truth?
As John F. Kennedy said, “The great enemy of the truth is
very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived, and dishonest – but the myth –
persistent, persuasive and realistic.
Here are the liars again click here....
There is no physical evidence of the holocaust. No bodies (killed by gassing), no murder weapons ('gas chambers'), no documents, no
photographs, no intercepted communications (although the Allies broke
the German encryption codes). There is only 'testimony'. This was
recently admitted by one of the most respected holohoax scholars, Robert
Jan Van Pelt, arguing that Birkenau should not be preserved, Pelt
"Ninety-nine per cent of what we know we do not actually have the physical evidence to prove . . . it has become part of our inherited knowledge. I don't think that the Holocaust is an exceptional case in that sense. We in the future – remembering the Holocaust – will operate in the same way that we remember most things from the past. We will know about it from literature and eyewitness testimony. . ."
Van Pelt is right in that there is no physical evidence of the holocaust, but as for other historical events, like WW II for example, he may have overlooked a few things !
Schindlers list lie....
The true story of Schindler and of his list of 1300 Jews to be “saved” came from his wife, who called Steven Spielberg an all out lair and that his film was “packed with lies.” at a presentation of her autobiographical book, and indicated that her husband Oscar was a selfish, greedy man…
“Spielberg’s film … portrays Oscar as a hero of this century. That is not true. Neither he nor I were heroes. We were just what we were able to be. In war we are all souls without a destiny,”—Emilie Schindler Memoirs
“They say in that book (Keneally’s Schindler’s List) that I gave the Jews the food in their mouths. I never had time to find out who was sick and who had to be fed (by hand). I am no good as a nurse, I tell you frankly. I have no talent for nursing . . . I bought the food for everyone.” —Emilie Schindler
“Schindler was a drunkard. Schindler was a womanizer. His relations
with his wife were bad. He often had not one but several girlfriends. Everything
he did put him in jeopardy. If Schindler had been a normal man, he would not
have done what he did.” —Mosche Bejski, on of the Jews in
Schindler’s factory, which he “saved” to be a cheap laborer, and for no other
“THERE WAS NEVER A SCHINDLER’S LIST. It was drawn up by a man called
Goldman. This man took money to put a name on that list – no money, no place on
the list. I was told this by a Dr Schwartz, in Vienna; he had paid in diamonds
to save his wife…” —Emilie Schindler
“Emily Schindler – Memoirs” portrays her husband Osker as a greedy man whose interest in saving Polish Jews from Adolph Hitler’s death camps was to have cheap labor for his factory. She also admits purports that without his factory running, Oskar Schindler would have been drafted to the SS and sent to the front lines. For remember, Schindler was a Nazi, who entertained Nazi’s on a constant basis in his wealthy home. How else do you keep a good thing going but by wining and dining your superiors?
“What matters now is being able to take our people somewhere else, so that we can continue to work,” —Emilie Schindler
Again, the point must be made that no person and no race is above corruption. Only a brave few individuals, of which the Schindler family were not.
“What does he know about my life? Absolutely nothing.” —Emilie Schindler, referring to Spielberg.
“Steven Spielberg only gave me $50,000 for making a film about the Holocaust and my husband, and he never asked me permission, he just did it.” —Emilie Schindler, Drudge, June 1, 1999.
No Order, No Plan
No Budget, No Weapon
No expert report stating:
This was a homicidal gas chamber
No Bodies examined by forensics saying
This is or was the body of a person killed by poison gas.
This makes NO Sense! Yet people believe it!
HoloHoax CASH Industry
It's called take the money and run.......
In his book, Auschwitz: Technique
and Operation of the Gas Chambers, published by the [Beate] Klarsfeld
Foundation and meant to refute revisivonists, Jean-Claude Pressac admits that
over 95% of the Zyklon B used by the Germans was used to disinfect. He assigns
only 5% to homicidal purposes.
How could so little usage "kill" so many people?
As Barton Biggs reports in his book, Wealth, War, and Wisdom:‘By the end of 1935, 100,000 Jews had left Germany, but 450,000 still [remained]. Wealthy Jewish families… kept thinking and hoping that the worst was over…
Lampshade controversy my a$$
I am still dumbfounded at how many people fall for many of the myths of the alleged “Holocaust” of WWII. The lampshade controversy (lampshades made of human skin) mentioned in Lampshade a WWII mystery was proven fraudulent years ago, yet American citizens still believe in it and will continue to do so even after learning there is no evidence of their existence.
It’s no fault of their own, however. After being subjected to half a
century of Holocaust propaganda, that Jewish professor Norman Finkelstein
labels, “The Holocaust Industry”, what could one expect? After a while,
when a lie is repeated thousands of times, everyone starts believing.
There are numerous other Holocaust myths that have been proven fraudulent by scientists and academics, but are continuously peddled by those in Hollywood as fact, such as the Jewish soap myth and the gas chambers. To this day, there has not been one bar of soap produced or any forensic evidence that prove the gas chamber story.
However, there have been scientists and engineers who have taken forensic samples of the alleged gas chambers, which disprove their existence. Fred Leuchter, a gas chamber expert, performed a study on a variety of concentration camp sites (including Auschwitz) and reported, “Chemical analysis supports the fact that these facilities were never utilized as gas execution facilities.”
Dr. William Lindsey, a chemist at DuPont, declared after an onsite investigation of the alleged gas chamber sites, "I have come to the conclusion that no one was willfully or purposefully killed with Zyklon B [hydrocyanic acid gas] in this manner. I consider it absolutely impossible."
So tell me, why is it that so many media outlets continue to promote known falsehoods? The answer is simple: “Show me the money!”
Presently, the state of Israel has received $84 billion from Germany, $134 billion from the United States, and $1.25 billion from Switzerland, and there seems to be no end in sight.
I guess Professor Finkelstein was right in his book, The Holocaust Industry, when he stated this shakedown may turn out to be the “…greatest robbery in the history of mankind.”
Here are the best entries for our Annual David McCalden Most Macabre Halloween Holocaust Tale Challenge.
In The 'False News' Trial of Ernst Zündel -- 1988 Joseph G. Burg was the twelfth witness called by the defense. He testified on Tuesday, March 29 and Wednesday, March 30, 1988. For an eight or nine year period prior to 1981, Zündel had been in communication by letter and in visits with Joseph G. Burg, a Jewish author who had written several books on the Second World War. These books included Guilt and Fate, Scapegoats, Zionist Nazi Censorship in the Federal Republic of Germany, National Socialist Crimes of Bad Conscience by Germans Against Germans under Zionist Direction and Major Attacks of Zionists against Pope Pius XII and the German Governments. Burg had discussed these books with Zündel and believed the latter had received them.
In his books, Burg dealt with the subject of the alleged Nazi extermination camps. Burg had spoken to hundreds of people who had been in Auschwitz and had visited the camp in the fall of 1945. Burg had wanted to see the crematoria, the hospitals, and in particular, a large new bakery. He also wanted to find the gas chambers although at that time gassings were not yet in fashion. He did not find any gas chambers. Burg formed the opinion that there were no "extermination" camps at all, that gas chambers had never existed and that there had been no plan to exterminate the Jews of Europe.
After the war, Burg heard a lot about the allegations that people were gassed at Auschwitz and Majdanek. He proved that it was either out of stupidity or propaganda. Up to now, he pointed out, no document had been found showing who gave the order for gassings, who built them and where they were built. The German authorities especially had been called the "super-bureaucrats." It therefore couldn't be that after all these years not a document could be found. Burg testified that he spoke to hundreds of people who serviced and operated the crematoria but the people who operated gas chambers were impossible to find.(The reason being they didn't exist) Nobody had published anything in which it was claimed that he worked in a gassing institution for human beings. There was literature about gassing that was completely contradictory. Why? Because it was all made up. These opinions were published in his books.
The only gassing that were done were on clothes and areas with lice problems.
AUSCHWITZ: AN EYE-WITNESS ACCOUNT
Some new facts about Auschwitz are at last beginning to make a tentative appearance. They are contained in a recent work called Die Auschwitz-Lüge: Ein Erlebnisbericht von Theis Christopherson (The Auschwitz Legends: An Account of his Experiences by Thies Christopherson, Kritik Verlag/Mohrkirch, 1973). Published by the German lawyer Dr. Manfred Roeder in the periodical Deutsche Bürger-Iniative, it is an eye-witness account of Auschwitz by Thies Christopherson, who was sent to the Bunawerk plant laboratories at Auschwitz to research into the production of synthetic rubber for the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute. In May 1973, not long after the appearance of this account, the veteran Jewish "Nazi-hunter" Simon Wiesenthal wrote to the Frankfurt Chamber of Lawyers, demanding that the publisher and author of the Forward, Dr. Roeder, a member of the Chamber, should be brought before its disciplinary commission. Sure enough, proceedings began in July, but not without harsh criticism even from the Press, who asked "Is Simon Wiesenthal the new Gauleiter of Germany?" (Deutsche Wochenzeitung, July 27th, 1973). Christopherson's account is certainly one of the most important documents for a re-appraisal of Auschwitz. He spent the whole of 1944 there, during which time he visited all of the separate camps comprising the large Auschwitz complex, including Auschwitz-Birkenau where it is alleged that wholesale massacres of Jews took place. Christopherson, however, is in no doubt that this is totally untrue. He writes: "I was in Auschwitz from January 1944 until December 1944. After the war I heard about the mass murders which were supposedly perpetrated by the S.S. against the Jewish prisoners, and I was perfectly astonished. Despite all the evidence of witnesses, all the newspaper reports and radio broadcasts I still do not believe today in these horrible deeds. I have said this many times and in many places, but to no purpose. One is never believed" (p. 16). Space forbids a detailed summary here of the author's experiences at Auschwitz, which include facts about camp routine and the daily life of prisoners totally at variance with the allegations of propaganda (pp. 22-7). More important are his revelations about the supposed existence of an extermination camp. "During the whole of my time at Auschwitz, l never observed the slightest evidence of mass gassings. Moreover, the odour of burning flesh that is often said to have hung over the camp is a downright falsehood. In the vicinity of the main camp (Auschwitz I) was a large farrier's works, from which the smell of molten iron was naturally not pleasant" (p. 33-4). Reitlinger confirms that there were five blast furnaces and five collieries at Auschwitz, which together with the Bunawerk factories comprised Auschwitz III (ibid. p. 452). The author agrees that a crematorium would certainly have existed at Auschwitz, "since 200,000 people lived there, and in every city with 200,000 inhabitants there would be a crematorium. Naturally people died there -- but not only prisoners. In fact the wife of Obersturmbannführer A. (Christopherson's superior) also died there" (p. 33). The author explains: "There were no secrets at Auschwitz. In September 1944 a commission of the International Red Cross came to the camp for an inspection. They were particularly interested in the camp at Birkenau, though we also had many inspections at Raisko" (Bunawerk section, p. 35). Christopherson points out that the constant visits to Auschwitz by outsiders cannot be reconciled with allegations of mass extermination. When describing the visit of his wife to the camp in May, he observes: "The fact that it was possible to receive visits from our relatives at any time demonstrates the openness of the camp administration. Had Auschwitz been a great extermination camp, we would certainly not have been able to receive such visits" (p. 27). After the war, Christopherson came to hear of the alleged existence of a building with gigantic chimneys in the vicinity of the main camp. "This was supposed to be the crematorium. However, I must record the fact that when I left the camp at Auschwitz in December 1944, I had not seen this building there" (p. 37). Does this mysterious building exist today? Apparently not; Reitlinger claims it was demolished and "completely burnt out in full view of the camp" in October, though Christopherson never saw this public demolition. Although it is said to have taken place "in full view of the camp", it was allegedly seen by only one Jewish witness, a certain Dr. Bendel, and his is the only testimony to the occurrence (Reitlinger, ibid, p. 457). This situation is generally typical. When it comes down to hard evidence, it is strangely elusive; the building was "demolished", the document is "lost", the order was "verbal". At Auschwitz today, visitors are shown a small furnace and here they are told that millions of people were exterminated. The Soviet State Commission which "investigated" the camp announced on May 12th, 1945, that "Using rectified coefficients . . . the technical expert commission has ascertained that during the time that the Auschwitz camp existed, the German butchers exterminated in this camp not less than four million citizens ..." Reitlinger's surprisingly frank comment on this is perfectly adequate: "The world has grown mistrustful of 'rectified coefficients' and the figure of four millions has become ridiculous" (ibid, p. 460). Finally, the account of Mr. Christopherson draws attention to a very curious circumstance. The only defendant who did not appear at the Frankfurt Auschwitz Trial in 1963 was Richard Baer, the successor of Rudolf Höss as commandant of Auschwitz. Though in perfect health, he died suddenly in prison before the trial had begun, "in a highly mysterious way" according to the newspaper; Deutsche Wochenzeitung (July 27th, 1973). Baer's sudden demise before giving evidence is especially strange, since the Paris newspaper Rivarol recorded his insistence that "during the whole time in which he governed Auschwitz, he never saw any gas chambers nor believed that such things existed," and from this statement nothing would dissuade him. In short, the Christopherson account adds to a mounting collection of evidence demonstrating that the giant industrial complex of Auschwitz (comprising thirty separate installations and divided by the main Vienna-Cracow railway line) was nothing but a vast war production centre, which, while admittedly employing the compulsory labour of detainees, was certainly not a place of "mass extermination".