Facebook Twitter Gplus RSS

The HoloCo$t as religion, fairy tale and abuse


 Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Reddit Share on LinkedIn
7 Comments  comments 

7 Responses

  1. Nemeth

    Neal Bascomb’s recent book, Hunting Eichmann contains the claim that corpses the victims of gassings at Auschwitz were burned in large pits. “A channel running through the middle of the pit drained the fat exuding from the bodies. That fat was used to stoke the crematorium fires”.

    The claim is derived from the testament of Ze’ev Sapir who gave evidence at Eichmann’s trial.

  2. http://www.amazon.com/Hunting-Eichmann-Survivors-Agency-Notorious/dp/B004H8GMH6
    … corpses of the victims of gassings at Auschwitz were burned in large pits. “A channel running through the middle of the pit drained the fat exuding from the bodies.”

    Yep, there are hundreds of books out there repeating the Big Lies. Hard to keep up with it all. As Carlos Porter was the first to point out, the holoCo$t “facts” determined at Nuremberg were nothing but Communist propaganda.

  3. Les

    David Cole now has his own website – http://www.countercontempt.com

  4. As Carlos Porter was the first to point out …

    Actually Paul Rassinier, I am sure long before Porter, says in one of his books that witnesses at Nuremberg claimed gassings at Buchenwald because it was the Communist line that there had been gassings at Buchenwald.

    Professor Faurisson however would tell you adamantly that it is not a Communist lie or a British lie but a Jewish lie.

  5. That’s not exactly the same thing as saying the whole thing was made up of Communist Propaganda. That’s Porter’s claim: The Holoca$t – Made in Russia.

  6. katana

    Regarding Mark Weber’s performance on the Montel show I think you are being overly critical of him there. I watched the video before listening to you and thought he did well. Sure, as you point out, he could have expressed things better or not gone off on tangents, like the stuff about death totals of other nationalities, etc., (although he did get some audience applause for that).

    Your critical pecking away at Weber’s responses doesn’t really help the case against Weber’s current position. Weber, in that show, is the staid historian giving the Revisionist viewpoint to a wide audience, resulting in sounding like a bureaucrat counting bodies, to some. Cole on the other hand, homes in on the emotional side of the argument. Together, given the audience reactions, they made a good pair.

    The black host, Montel, also did a good job overall. So much so that he would be fired on the spot today, no doubt.

    All that said, the current Weber is useless to our cause and revisionism.

  7. Katana – thanks for your comment. I disagree with you except for your last two sentences. I stand by what I said about Weber’s performance on that show. He got no good response from the audience, unless it was in some later part after the survivors came on which I did not watch again (too sickening)– but more than that, he was not a good match to Cole. Cole would have been far more effective on his own. He was natural and likeable, yet sharp-minded, although his high-pitched voice comes as a shock and he needed to have braces as a youth. Wonder how that passed him by? What about Weber’s strange appearance with his Hitler moustache and lanky hair combed down the side? Does he not recognize what he sees in a mirror? Did the studio make-up people do that, hahaha? What do you think?

    P.S. And you don’t mind it when revisionists put out all that sympathy for the Jews? It drives me batty. Jews, like the survivors on this show, have plenty enough sympathy for themselves; we don’t need to add to it.

© the White network