If anyone else has any concerns, questions, or in need of clarification don't hessitate to ask.

We are friendly and open-minded people here.

Personally, if somebody, anybody can provide any concrete reliable evidence supporting the claim that the 6 million 'Jews' were systematically 'murdered' in the Holo'cost' please do....

.... we are very welcoming of facts.

It is just that ALL present claims and supporting "evidence" falls flat.

Even more so, is that the best and most widespread evidence tells us a contradictory story or raises more questions at best.

>>>>>>>>>>>>> For example:

Many know that IBM the company, provided electronic and equipment for the Nazi for record keeping. The Nazis were famous for being meticulous record-keepers. They keeped accurate and detailed records of their citizens, of their enemies, and of potential 'trouble makers'.

And the statistical population shows the population of Jews in each country and worldwide.

........ this is used as evidence.

BUT

BUT

BUT here's the real contradition.

The Nazi German records shows who died, in what year, at what age, and when possible by what cause ------ but this does not add up to the mythical 6 million figure.

Not even close.

Not even close to 1 million.

Not by a long short.

And the Nazi Germans were praised for their recording keeping.

And then there is the "official figures" in Poland that was repeated DOWN-GRADED.

The famous Aushwitz camp.....

.....from

quote:

The Post’s numbers may have been derived in part from the inflated estimate—originally of Soviet origin and endorsed by Polish authorities after the war—of about 4 million dead.

end quote:

.
.
.
From 4 Million in Poland

To 3 Million

To 1.5 Million

To 1.1 Million

To 1 Million

To a few hundred thousand

To a few hundred QUESTIONABLE thousand

To no number that can be supported by facts

.
.
.
.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

But yet the "official 6 million" figure remains IN TACT.

Just like the "official account of 9/11".

.
.
.

Something smells fishy -- and I'm sure I didn't have any fish or lunch.

.
.
.

And then there's the record of Jewish population in each European country (and the USA) and total world population.

BUT

BUT

BUT

BUT the population BEFORE Nazi took power (pre-1933) , DURING Nazi power (1933-1945), and AFTER (post 1945 to present day) ------------ does NOT show any "millions" missing.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

Like I said before, somethings smells fishy, and I didn't have any fish for lunch.

Auschwitz: The Final Count
http://www.barnesreview.org/auschwitz.htm

By Michael Collins Piper

A thought-provoking new anthology edited by English historian Vivian Bird casts stark new light on what really happened at Auschwitz during World War II. As the evidence shows, the official "facts" just don’t add up.

In the summer of 1997 I was invited to speak at a California college seminar about my book, Final Judgment, which contends that Israel’s intelligence agency, the Mossad, played a front-line role in the JFK assassination conspiracy alongside the CIA. Almost instantaneously I was hit by a media barrage orchestrated by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) of B’nai B’rith, a lobby for Israel.

The ADL told the press I was "a Holocaust denier" and, for that reason alone, I should not be allowed to discuss my book (which, incidentally, never once mentions the Holocaust). Evidently the ADL was determined to shift the focus away from what my book really does address, so they determined the best way to discredit me was to smear me as "a Holocaust denier" (which I am not).

The ADL’s tactic succeeded, setting off a firestorm of opposition—a "holocaust," so to speak—and the seminar was canceled, illustrating one point most clearly: The Holocaust has become a powerful propaganda tool for the state of Israel.

And what is important to remember is this: What did—or did not—happen at the Auschwitz concentration camp in Poland is, in fact, integral to the foundation of the basic story of the Holocaust.

Auschwitz is central to the Holocaust legend. If it can be proved that the official stories we have been told about Auschwitz are not true, the entire fabric of the Holocaust ultimately has to unravel. What, then, did happen at Auschwitz?

On April 18, 1945, in the immediate aftermath of World War II, The New York Times reported that 4 million people died at Auschwitz. This "fact" was reported over and over again during the next half-century, without being questioned.

However, on January 26, 1995, commemorating the 50th anniversary of the Auschwitz liberation, both The Washington Post and The New York Times itself reported that the Polish authorities had determined that, at most, 1.5 million people (of all races and religions)—not "4 million"—died at Auschwitz of all causes, including natural causes.

Yet this was not the first time this drastically reduced figure appeared in the major media. Almost five years previously, on July 17, 1990, The Washington Times reprinted a brief article from The London Daily Telegraph. That article stated:

Poland has cut its estimate of the number of people killed by the Nazis in the Auschwitz death camp from 4 million to just over 1 million . . . The new study could rekindle the controversy over the scale of Hitler’s "final solution" . . .

Franciszek Piper, director of the historical committee of the Auschwitz-Birkenau Museum, said yesterday that, according to recent research, at least 1.3 million people were deported to the camp, of whom about 223,000 survived.

The 1.1 million victims included 960,000 Jews, between 70,000 and 75,000 Poles, nearly all of the 23,000 Gypsies sent to the camp and 15,000 Soviet prisoners of war.

Shmuel Krakowsky, head of research at Israel’s Yad Vashem memorial for Jewish victims of the Holocaust, said the new Polish figures were correct: "The 4 million figure was let slip by Capt. Rudolf Hoess, the death camp’s Nazi commander. Some have bought it, but it was exaggerated." . . . [P]laques commemorating the deaths of 4 million victims were removed from the Auschwitz museum earlier this month.

This detail of history was intriguing, since, after all, history books had said for a generation that of the 6 million Jews who died during the Holocaust, 4 million died at Auschwitz alone. Thus, if the new facts were correct, the actual overall number of Jewish Holocaust victims had to be considerably less than the much-talked-about figure of 6 million. Put simply: subtract the former 4 million Jews dead at Auschwitz from the popular 6 million, and that leaves 2 million Jews dead. Simple math—and a controversial conclusion indeed.

More recently, Walter Reich, former director of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, jumped into the debate over Auschwitz. On September 8, 1998, The Washington Post published an article by Reich in which he addressed Jewish outrage over a group of elderly Polish nuns who wanted to place crosses in memory of Christians who died at Auschwitz. Reich was responding to what he described as a "well-meaning" August 31, 1998 editorial in The Post about the affair.

Reich commented that the editorial "illustrates how old fictions about Auschwitz have been accepted as facts—fictions that have been used repeatedly to distort the camp’s history." Evidently, the Post had forgotten its own report on the Auschwitz numbers that it had published three years previously and chose, instead, to repeat "old fictions . . . accepted as facts." What, then, were those "old fictions . . . accepted as facts"? Here’s what Reich had to say:

The Post identified Auschwitz-Birkenau as the death camp "where 3 million Jews and millions of others were murdered by the Nazis." Recent scholarship by a Polish historian has put the number of deaths there conservatively at about 1.1 million, with other estimates ranging to about 1.5 million. Approximately 90 percent of the dead were Jews.

The Post’s numbers may have been derived in part from the inflated estimate—originally of Soviet origin and endorsed by Polish authorities after the war—of about 4 million dead. This number, and other numbers of similar magnitude, were repeated so often that they came to be accepted by many as true, even though historians in Poland and elsewhere have revised this number down considerably.

Honest people find no problem with Reich’s call (in the essay) for "only words of accurate history" in reportage about Auschwitz. Today, a major first step toward "only words of accurate history" is the release of a new anthology on Auschwitz, assembled by English writer Vivian Bird.

Auschwitz: The Final Count examines the "new" reports in the mainstream media (outlined above) and provides essential additional facts that must be considered in order for the full story of Auschwitz to finally be told. Bird’s 109-page book is a compendium (supplemented with commentary by Bird) of four complete, previously published works relating to Auschwitz and the Holocaust.

The book features a fascinating introduction by Bird exploring the little-known but thoroughly documented phenomenon in which the numbers of the official Auschwitz "death toll" have plummeted from a "high" of 9,000,000 dead to a rock bottom of 73,137 (of whom 38,031 were Jews). And readers will note that of the 26 widely varying figures cited by Bird, all come from a variety of "responsible" and mainstream sources. No figure Bird cites comes from any source accused of "denying the Holocaust," whatever that means.

Clearly, the number of people who died at Auschwitz is central to understanding what did happen there. But the figures keep changing. If Bird’s book proves anything, it proves that.

However, there’s much more to Auschwitz than the changing numbers. The essays in Bird’s volume each provide a uniquely different facet to the overall problem:

• The Auschwitz Lie by Thies Christophersen is an insider’s view of Auschwitz. The German author, an agrarian, was sent to Auschwitz, not as an inmate, but as a scientist researching the development of synthetic rubber. Working side by side with inmate staff, Christophersen saw, firsthand, day-to-day life at Auschwitz and, in postwar years, was astounded to hear the stories of "gassings" and all the tall tales that we today associate with Auschwitz.

His essay, The Auschwitz Lie, first published in German in 1973, caused great consternation. However, Christophersen would not back down, and, as a consequence, he was variously fined or imprisoned for daring to tell his eyewitness account. Those accustomed to "docu-drama" renditions of Auschwitz will find a new perspective in Christophersen’s report.

• Zyklon B, Auschwitz, and the Trial of Dr. Bruno Tesch is the second feature in Bird’s anthology. Written by a veteran chemist, the late Dr. William Lindsey, this is a carefully documented demolition of the war crimes trial of Dr. Tesch, who was ultimately convicted and hanged. The unfortunate Tesch was co-owner of a company which bought in bulk (from the manufacturers) and then supplied (as the middleman) to the German concentration camp authorities the now-infamous Zyklon B pesticide.

Although we have been told Zyklon B was used to gas millions of Jews to death, Lindsey shows that the compound was used as an insecticide and disinfectant to delouse not only the Auschwitz inmates but also SS members running the camp and to fumigate their clothes, bunkhouses etc. Zyklon B, in short, was used to maintain and sustain human life—not to end it. Lindsey’s essay examines the fraudulent evidence and testimony in the Tesch trial and eviscerates another critical element of not only the Auschwitz legend, but of the Holocaust story as a whole.

• Inside the Auschwitz "Gas Chambers" is by Fred A. Leuchter, a spunky American engineer once known as perhaps the foremost U.S. authority on the mechanics of judicial execution. Leuchter describes how he conducted scientific experiments on the structures at Auschwitz that court historians say were used to exterminate vast numbers of people—the infamous gas chambers. Leuchter concluded no such gassings could have ever taken place as the official story describes. For daring to present his findings—the only known such study carried out at the gas chambers—Leuchter was relentlessly harassed. But his point was made. His findings cut right to the core of the matter of Auschwitz.

• The final essay is Why Is "The Holocaust" Important? written by TBR publisher Willis A. Carto, who points out that the Holocaust has become a lucrative industry unto itself, used as a highly effective political tool to not only extort billions of German and American taxpayer dollars to Israel but also to force the United States to conduct its foreign policy in a fashion beneficial to Tel Aviv (and contrary to U.S. national interests). Carto’s essay puts the Holocaust in perspective.

Thus, there’s clearly much more to the story of Auschwitz and the Holocaust than meets the eye. The facts assembled paint a perhaps much more interesting story about what really did happen.

Bird’s book will, in many ways, very much serve as the final judgment on Auschwitz. Auschwitz: The Final Count will outrage many—but as Bird puts it: "For those who care to investigate the facts—not the myths—about the events of World War II, this volume should put at least some of the major legends of the Holocaust to rest." V

Michael Collins Piper is the author of Final Judgment: The Missing Link in the JFK Assassination Conspiracy and Best Witness. He is a keen student of historical intrigue and hidden political motivations.

Auschwitz: The Final Count, paperback, 109 pages, is available from the TBR Book Club for $12.95 plus $3 S&H; $6 S&H outside the U.S. TBR subscribers get 10% off. Send payment to TBR, 130 Third Street SE, Washington, D.C. 20003.

You said,

"...Not all people from Khazaria are Ahskenazi Khazars --- Khazaria is now present day Southwestern Russia, and includes Armenia, and other small former 'Soviet' states --- these people are innocent.

It is just unfornate that the MAJORITY of the atrocities and crimes against humanity of the last 400 years were COMMITED by those who originated there.

The term "Ashkenazi" or "Khazar" or "Zionists" DOES NOT refer to a race -- it just so happens they are all 'WHITE' -- but it refers to those who support, carry out, and benefit from these evil deeds..."

I am puzzled by this argument. You want to blame the "Ashkenazi Khazars" or "Zionists" for major crimes. But, it is not clear to me whether you think it's a particular bloodline of people originating in a part of Russia, or is it only those people who "support, carry-out, and benefit from..." certain evil deeds? I don't think the two mean the same.

So, if you meant the first, then isn't this unfair to any person who is part of this bloodline who has never participated in these evil deeds.

And, if you meant the second, then couldn't just anyone, say for instance, christian zionists who could be from any part of the world, be guilty of these evil deeds and have nothing to do with any particular bloodline?

It is also not clear to me why you want to be so general and go after zionism, as though there were no virtues in this movement at all. Is there some particular policy or commitment that you find evil?

I am troubled by how loose the accusation you've made has been.

About Hitler, what difference does it really make whether he had jewish parents to whether or not he committed crimes, or why?

Do you think it's even relevant who his parents were in understanding why he did this, that, or the other thing?

[It is also not clear to me why you want to be so general and go after zionism, as though there were no virtues in this movement at all. Is there some particular policy or commitment that you find evil? ]

Why don't you give us the virtues of zionism. Please, we all want to you to list us as many good things about zionism as you can. We can hardly wait.

quote:

"About Hitler, what difference does it really make whether he had jewish parents to whether or not he committed crimes, or why?

Do you think it's even relevant who his parents were in understanding why he did this, that, or the other thing?"

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Thank you for your comments. I will answer both questions of yours, since they are both intertwined.

ANSWER:

ANYONE WHO HAS COMMITTED THESE HORRENDOUS CRIMES SHOULD BE STOPPED.

In other words, "Christian Zionists" who pushed for the slaughter of the Iraqi people --- here I'm referring to the 1st War, in the 1990s.

If some of you may have recalled, there was the "kicker" in which a "supposed nurse" who worked in one of the Baghdad hospital TESTIFIED WITH TEARS FLOWING FROM HER EYES THAT SHE PERSONALLY WITNESSED IRAQI DOCTORS THROWING BABIES OUT OF THE INCUBATOR ONTO THE FLOW TO DIE.

Now we all know that THIS WAS A LIE.

There was no such incident.

NOT only that, but the girl was the DAUGHTER OF SOME KUWAITI EMBASSADER WHO FAKED THAT TESTIMONY.

NOW, HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF IRAQIS WHERE BOMBED AND MURDERED IN THEIR SLEEP.

THEIR INFRASTRUCTURE WAS UTTERLY DESTROYED.

TO DATE almost 1 MILLION people were killed.

.
.
.

All started from a simple lie...

.
.
.

A simple lie STAGED by Khazars...

.
.
.

A simple LIE told by the daughter of the Kuwaiti Embassadar (if I recall)

.
.
.

A simple LIE totally FABRICATED, with NO BASIS.

.
.
.

A simple LIE KNOWN BY THOSE WHO TOLD IT....

.
.
.

A simple LIE THAT WAS PROPAGATED BY "JEWISH"-CONTROLLED MEDIA, ALL WITH THEIR BLESSING -- IN FACT THEY MADE IT HAPPEND....

.
.
.

A simple LIE that has cost so many people their lives, their way-of-life, their future....

.
.
.

Now, that daughter of the Kuwaiti who told the AWEFUL LIE --- she is guilty of great sins.

BUT, THAT FAILS IN COMPARISON TO THOSE WHO ORCHESTRATED AND CARRIED IT OUT.

So, "Useful goyims" and "Zionist Christians", OR WHOEVER THEY ARE --- It doesn't matter from what nationality you are from, A DEADLY SIN IS A DEADLY SIN.

.
.
.

Why it is important to note and keep track of WHO IS THE MASTERMIND is because THE ONLY WAY YOU CAN STYMIE A CANCER OF SUCH MAGNITUDE IS BY EXTINIGUISHING IT'S SOURCE.

In other words, the daughter of the Kuwaiti Embassader -- however guilty she is -- fails in comparison with those who told her to do it, who wrote the script/act, who planned 9/11, who did other things.

If we focus our attention on the 'daughter' we miss the 'Khazars' ....

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Secondly, by noting Hitler and many of his top Generals and Leutenants were a 'Jewish' brings up some VERY INTERESTING QUESTIONS.

Firstly, it becomes hard to believe SO MANY OF THE TOP COMANDERS (especially Hitler and Schroedder, etc) would have such "passionate hatred" for their own kind.

If Hitler hated jews, why did he have SO MANY AROUND HIM, GIVING HIM ADVINCE, GIVING HIM ORDERS....

.... the more likely answer was that he was a PUPPET, an ACTOR, part of the BIG GAME.

And that is why it is import. I hope that answers your 'obvious' question as to why it matters what background they come from.

This is to show that this is NOT an isolated event.

History is a very important lesson. If you know what happened in the past, what is happening now, you have a very good idea of what is to come.

First, a Merry Christmas to you as well. We are all ignorant to a degree and I think that some of your statements demonstrate yours. Correct me if I am wrong. I do not believe that either of Hitler's parents were Jewish. One source I checked suggested a "remote possibility" that one grandparent was. Obviously, Hitler had no love for the Jews. Second, my reading suggests that some modern Jews may be related to Khazars who converted to Judaism (and are recognized as Jews.) So what? Why are they a "demonic clan"? So rather than being anti-Semitic you are anti-Khazarian? Yes, some Jews believe in Biblical fairy-tales. Some do not. A good friend of mine, who is Jewish, is an atheist. Some Christians believe in Biblical fairy-tales as well.

I guess the thing is I don't believe that your facts are facts. I suppose if you see a demonic Jewish-Khazarian conspiracy behind all events then the "Jews" are to blame for everything. I do not subscribe to your particular conspiracy theory.

I myself am neither Jewish or Zionist. Although I dislike labels, I believe in the values of liberal democracy and generally vote Democratic. I see a two-state solution as the best basis for peace in the Middle East.

"I myself am neither Jewish or Zionist. Although I dislike labels, I believe in the values of liberal democracy and generally vote Democratic. I see a two-state solution as the best basis for peace in the Middle East."

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I dislike labels also. But to be totally IGNORANT of history is a major fallacy.

quote "anti-Khazarian" is funny.... I said already that most modern day 'khazars' aren't referred to as "Ashkenazi Khazars" but as Armenians, Russians, etc.

The great "conspiracy" that you say we see, is quite the sleezy move you made.

You tried (but failed) to make it look like we are all "conspiracy theorists".... and yes, Hitler was "jewish", and so was Joseph Schroedder -- the "Butcher" -- and so is Henry Kissinger -- and so were many, MANY US Presidents.

You can vote "Democratic" all you like, but it doesn't matter since BOTH POLITCAL PARTIES are two faces on the same beast.

BOTH PARTIES IN THE USA ARE CONTROLLED BY THE KHAZARS.

Let's continue this discussion shall we?!

And please, PLEASE respond the the previous concerns you had answered.... we ALL HERE are very interested in what you 'think'...

... though you have given cause for us to suspect you (as in 'plural', more thna one person) are really a 'Jewish'-mouthpiece.

I'll await until your superiors tell you how to respond.

Until then ;)

Gary Buell quote:

"I myself am neither Jewish or Zionist."

>>>>>>>>>

You have demonstrated that you are INDEED A ZIONIST.

.
.
.

"If it acts like a Zionist, thinks like a Zionist, supports Zionism --- it's a Zionist."

First, I believe that the statement that Hitler had Jewish parents is simply incorrect. Can you back that up with facts?

Likewise I think you're statements about Khazars (or at least the Jewish Khazars) is simply pseudo-science. If SOME Jews are descended from Khazar converts to Judaism I ask again so what?

I am not here to defend Jewish or Israli-Zionist interests. I believe that the Israeli occupation of the lands that they acquired through war is an atrocity, and not in the genuine interest of Israel for that matter, and that both sides but be pressured to move toward peace.

Your statement about asking my superiors for direction is simply laughable.I am not part of any plot, and I am afraid that I am not pliable enough to be a useful idiot for anyone.

QUOTE:

"If SOME Jews are descended from Khazar converts to Judaism I ask again so what?"

Gary, here's the SO WHAT:

Firstly, we have a group of WHITE EUROPEANS CLAIMING PALESTINE AS THEIRS.

Secondly, it doesn't really matter. Let's ASSUME THE MYTH that the 'jews' left in hoards out of Palestine 2000 years ago, but the MAJORITY OF THEM STAYED (i.e. ancestors of present day Palestinians) -- do they have the right to KILL the original inhabitants.

In other words, British settlers became "American". But now some Rabbi tells them "England" is the holy land, and that they are to return to take their place as the master race...

... so they slaughter the Britons.

Does that make sense to you Gary?

It sure doesn't make any logical sense to a sane person!

Gary Buell is a useful goy who loves his Zionist athiest master more than his master loves himself. No doubt his master has about the same regard for Gary Buell as someone would have for a dog he owns.

Gary tells his master "you don't worry...I'm going on the internet and 'we' will debate those people...I'm gonna keep them in line for YOU". That's what you're doing Gary...trying to keep us in line for your Zionist masters.

(Read the famous 1963 Malcolm X TV interview where he talked about the "Two Types")

My Zionist atheist master? Are you referring to the friend I mentioned? We went to school together but I haven't seen her in several years.

You didn't reply to my request to back up your statement that Hitler had Jewish parents.

I am not here to defend the establishment of the state of Israel although I do think Israel is an established fact at this point (as is America, stolen from the native americans.) I favor a two-state solution although I respect those who favor a one-state solution.

I do not have a problem with criticism of either Israel or Zionism. I have a problem with pseudo-scientific and irrational nonsense such as you two have been expounding. I do not see much point in continuing the discussion.

Hitler wasn't Jewish. This Khazar stuff is rank nonsense. You seem to have a problem with Jews.

"Hitler wasn't Jewish. This Khazar stuff is rank nonsense. You seem to have a problem with Jews."

..... Right...Gary.... And 99% of Jews are White.

That's the problem I have Gary.

Why are African-Arab bloodline suddently WHITE?!

Behold the power of Yahweh!!!

The "Chosen Ones" (TM) have spoken!!!

Gary Buell,

QUESTION: That "Atheist" Zionist master of yours, is she white?!!!

I think I would start by saying that we should maintain civility and not overstate our case!
I don't think all evils in the world can be laid at the door of the Zionists or that all corrupt regimes stem from their machinations.

Furthermore I don't think we can say for certain either way about Hitler's family as he kept things very secret but a discussion by Jim Condit Jr on this can be downloaded here:

Jim Condit

codoh

13th Tribe

Freedman - what everyone should listen to

David Cole 1

David Cole 2

getting the treatment

books

official version blog

Its only a big deal if you buy into the whole 'official' story.

It has no effect if all the bull regarding it is ignored as if it it imaginary (which is what it is, a myth which needs defending, a taboo that cannot be broken or questioned). Rather than engaging with the myth, it is better to ignore it and to not be 'afraid' of it. The fear is only created by the powerful who have the power to smear someone with their mass media systems.....why is this to be feared. Freedom is a state of mind, it means ignoring the false propaganda and their power to label someone as a 'unbeliver'.