Schindler’s List (1993) review

Rated: 2 / 5

Rather than telling a story with universal meaning, however, Spielberg has instead made what can only be called a “Jewish” film; that is, a film by Jews, about Jews, and for Jews to use against non-Jews.

Greg Raven

“It’s human nature.  ‘We’ll do this to avoid that.'”

“That’s what they have done since thousands of years.  It’s what they do, they weather the storm.”

“But this storm is different.  This is not the Romans.  This storm is the SS.”

 

This is one of those movies that packed a punch felt through the nation at the time of release.  Everyone talked about this film.  About how it was one of the most important movies ever released.  About how it should be shown to students in school which was almost the case for me when I was in middle school.  Well, those of us who didn’t get to see it in school, we usually found a way to see it outside of school.  Because it was an obligation.  We had to experience what it was like for the Jews in Nazi Germany amidst World War II.  We had to know about the gritty experience, so as to fully appreciate (if that’s the right word for it) that event in history when genocide was committed.  To know the full depravity of humanity.  To know what humans can be like at their lowest levels.  To know what the Nazis were like, and why it is important to know all this hindsight history so as not to repeat it, so as not to create a new generation of a race or religion that has been through a genocide event.  To pity those who survived it, and spit upon those who caused it.  And to thank those who did what they could to help those living through those times to survive.

And what better director to encapsulate all that than Steven Spielberg.  Arguably the movie director most famous for emotional manipulation, particularly ever since Close Encounters of the 3rd Kind (1977, where it was becoming obvious but still slightly restrained) and E.T. (1982, where any restraint he once had had completely diminished).  I do sometimes wonder how often people knew they were being emotionally manipulated, didn’t know, or knew but were willing to go along with it because it was entertainment.  Then again, don’t most films, especially dramas, tend to go for emotional manipulation anyway?  Is that not part of the movie-going experience?  In any case, emotional manipulation or not, it won Oscars, and has been put on virtually every list of “Movies to See Before You Die.”  Quite an achievement, especially since I doubt that’s the only movie of his that has been placed on such lists.

And I was one of those people back in the day, who saw this at a young age, who broke down at the end of it crying and all.  The film got to me, as it has gotten to many others.

So today, I decided to revisit it, on a different level of maturity, criticism, knowledge, and guard against such manipulation that got to me in the past.  And what did I think of it?  Well, that depends on how you look at it.

Judging it purely as a film in-of itself, it’s well-made in terms of camerawork.  Filmed mostly in black and white, and moving amongst people at ground zero to give it an aura of historical authenticity.  The violence that occurs is realistically explicit to maintain this aura, and it certainly had enough extras in it to give the film a semi-epic feel at times.  It’s some of the best camerawork done in film for capturing the elements it depicts in the manner it wished to depict it.  If anyone didn’t know any better, they would say it’s a borderline real-time documentary.

However, the more in-depth thematic elements get laughable in how blunt and obvious they’re implemented, even in the more horrifying moments.  I can give three examples where the film blasts you in the head with it so hard you’ll be seeing stars of David carried by blue birds circling  your head.

1.) When the SS evicted this upper class Jewish couple from their home, and continually cut between Schindler moving into their home, and them moving into the crummy ghetto.  To the point where these lines were uttered between two takes:

Schindler: “It couldn’t be better.”

********************************************

Jew wife: “It could be worse.”

2.) The second time got more eye-rolling than that.  With Schindler’s one-armed semi-senile worker coming to personally thank him for the work and saving his life, before he gets killed in literally the next scene.  Talk about an obvious emotional setup.

3.) The Jews who have been moved in the Krakow forced labor camp, and this line is uttered between a couple women:

“The worst is over.  We’re workers now!” 

In the same scene, this is followed by Amon Goeth shooting the more lazy workers.  Wawahhhhhhh.  Another obvious emotional setup that’s borderline comical when you think about the timing of it.

I mean, Jesus Christ, you’d think Spielberg would pad it out with at least 2 scenes before having the whole waawaaawaaaaahhhhhh moment hit.  Fucking Bridge to Terabithia was more subtle with the foreshadowing and emotional warning than this movie!  And that’s saying a lot!

But anyway, it’s a bit amusing to hear Ralph Fiennes’ character say the line, “Wakey wakey,” to his, uh, girlfriend, after the above segment.  And this seems to be referenced in a later film Ralph Fiennes starred in.  Spider, directed by David Cronenberg.

Other than all that, when one puts aside that the film primarily exists for sympathy points for one race/religion and shame points against another, there really isn’t much more to it than that.  Sure, Schindler goes through this character arc (with each moment of change signified by the girl in the red dress; subtle), and Goeth has his false-redemption angle.  But everyone else, including Ben Kingsley’s character, is about as one note as it gets.  There’s literally no dimension to anybody else in this movie.  They make a marginal effort of trying to add some depth to the jews who became ghetto police (they were known as Ordnungdienst), talking briefly about their position, but it’s never expanded upon other than they exist and they work for the nazis now.  The Nazis are as one-dimensional as you would expect (even to the point where one would play the piano amidst all the shooting in the ghetto), and the Jews are as one-dimensional as they are for entirely different reasons (pure pacifist).

I mean, putting aside the sympathy/shame points, there really isn’t all that much to this film.  Not enough time is spent with the interesting characters to make this all that investing (unless you’re invested in the events as depicted), and because of that the plot didn’t maintain my interest this time around (as opposed to the first time I watched this film many years ago).  Plus I found it questionable that Schindler would make this dramatic of a turn against Germany during the last third of the film when he goes so far as to discourage the workers from making artillery shells that work, and in-effect attempting to sabotage the German war effort (though that being said, from what I’ve researched, he did actually do this to an extent; it’s just that the film doesn’t make his character complex enough to allow for this to seem natural; more on that later).  It’s not one of those movies that ages well past the first viewing or two.  It’s about as surface-level of a movie as you can get.  There isn’t much to dig into.  It gets about as dull as the color scheme.

But in terms of cinematography (though those close-up shots of the faces get very tiring real fast) and camerawork and having actors move about here and there, there is plenty to admire.  So it’s worth a watch for those interested in trying to make a career out of directing.  If nothing else, Spielberg at least knows how to shoot a scene.  It’s just an issue of how much he tries to indulge in the emotional factor.  In this case, he clearly overindulged in the emotional factor more than Tarantino indulged the cult-hip-50s-to-70s factor in, well, anything made after Jackie Brown (Pulp Fiction cut it close).  And whenever a film overindulges in something like that, it doesn’t really hold up all that much.

So the main thing this film really has going for it is the historical significance of the events it covers.  It has entombed itself as the definitive Holocaust film.  For better or worse, that’s all this really has going for it.

Although there is an alternative opinion about that.  By alternative, I mean that it feels the film put more emphasis on Schindler’s character than on the Jew’s plight, and is shallow for that reason instead of vice versa:

Some feel the film, which won a best picture Oscar, serves to embed a narrative of Jewish weakness and passivity, in which Jews were nearly always portrayed as undeserving victims. By choosing to focus on Schindler (Neeson) and the commandant of the Płaszów concentration camp in Nazi-occupied Poland, Amon Goeth (Fiennes), Spielberg marginalised the Jews to supporting roles (with the exception of Schindler’s accountant Itzhak Stern, played by Kingsley).

Spielberg portrayed them as cardboard cut-outs, a monolithic mass of feebleness, lacking in psychological depth, to be saved or murdered at the whim of the non-Jews. From this point of view, then, Schindler’s List is not about the Holocaust or the Jews at all, but a biopic of Schindler and his conversion from ambivalent antihero to righteous gentile.

Source

Tips For Spring Cleaning | Her Campus

 





 

More needs to be done for Holocaust education, Spielberg said: “It’s not a pre-requisite to graduate high school, as it should be. It should be part of the social science, social studies curriculum in every public high school in this country.”

Source

So this portion of the review won’t be placed on Letterboxd, at least not entirely.  Why?  Because:

Firstly: dangerous fascist and white supremacist ideologies can go to hell. We remove such content from our service regularly. We want to catch it all. We’ve changed our community policy as of today to reflect this, adding in an explicit line rejecting content that “expressly praises, supports, promotes or represents white nationalist ideology”.

Letterboxd terms of service

Anything questioning the holocaust is deemed to be against their community policy, which is why the shadow-banned, then removed, my review of Europa.  Knowing that, I know this portion won’t last on that website.  So, to quote a line from the film being reviewed:

“Not essential?  I teach history and literature!  Since when not essential?”

Parallels between the community policy and depiction of the dangerous Nazi ideology in this film, anyone?  I mean, when you consider how the film portrays one side as pure and innocent while completely demonizing the other without giving them any sense of humanity whatsoever, it’s a lose-lose situation.  From the viewpoint of revisionists and non-revisionists.  Either the Holocaust did happen, and media then and now deem it ok to completely dehumanize Nazis and Germans, without any consideration that these were multidimensional people with flaws and good sides, thus encouraging hatred towards them; and that people are capable of committing that much evil against those of another religion/race regardless of any good they have in them.  Or the Holocaust didn’t happen, and many have been brainwashed into hating on people of a certain race/religion/nationality for something they didn’t do.  Either way you look at it, the worst of humanity has already been demonstrated.  The reason people get so emotional about the historical significance of the Holocaust, whether it happened or not, is because it evokes the worst in humanity, it showcases the worst case scenario of judging other human beings and viewing them as lower lifeforms not worthy of remorse.  The worst part is that many are fully accepting of this simplification, almost as much as many Americans are ok with the acceptance of the simplification of Confederates being one-dimensional black-hating assholes during the Civil War.

So on the note of historical significance…

Judging it as a film that is shown in schools and such as an educational tool to inform those of the Holocaust, it’s one big pile of shit.

 

First of all, the book this film is based on is stated as a work of fiction.  Yet the film tries to pass itself off as being based on a true story with its documentary-like look.  Considering how they offer free screenings of this film from time to time to students for educational purposes, I have to dock a point for that reason.

Second, the film opens (discounting the Jewish song opening) stating that Germany conquered Poland in 2 weeks.  WRONG!  While Germany (which invaded Poland on September 1, 1939) did conquer enough of Poland to ensure it would completely fall to its invasion in a little over two weeks (basically around September 18, 1939), it was closer to 5 weeks when they completely took over Poland and put down virtually all forms of military resistance (October 5, 1939).  And there’s some complex history regarding not just Poland’s relation to Germany and Russia, but also Poland’s relation to the Jews.

After the partition of Poland between Germany and the Soviet Union, the Polish government fled the country and established a government-in-exile in London. Polish refugees in eastern Poland faced the prospect of a long exile from home.

When the Soviets annexed eastern Poland, about 300,000 Jewish refugees from German-occupied Poland were trapped. The vast majority of these refugees remained in Soviet-occupied Poland. In 1940 and 1941, Soviet secret police officials arrested and deported—as “unreliable elements”—hundreds of thousands of residents of eastern Poland, including thousands of Jewish refugees from German-occupied Poland. Those arrested were deported to Siberia, central Asia, and other locations in the interior of the Soviet Union. About 40,000 Jewish refugees continued their flight from Poland, fearing arrest and persecution in either German- or Soviet-occupied territory. More than half of those who fled Poland went to Romania and Hungary. 15,000 went to Lithuania, most to Vilna, Kovno, and the surrounding regions.

[…]

Some refugees could not escape Poland before Soviet and German authorities established their control of the country. By the time some refugees reached the German-Soviet demarcation line as well as Poland’s borders with her neighbors they found both closed and heavily guarded. Some refugees attempted to sneak across, often at great danger. Those caught trying to cross between occupation zones or trying to flee without papers faced arrest and arbitrary violence at the hands of both Soviet and German border guards.

For others, the prospect of permanent exile away from home was overwhelming. Penniless, tired of aimless wandering, and despairing of seeing their families in the German-occupied zone of Poland again, some refugees headed home, back across the German-Soviet demarcation line into German-occupied Poland.

Source

 

However, in the early twentieth century anti-Semitic tensions began to rise. Poverty caused many Poles to oppose the disproportionate role of Jews in their country’s economic elites and intelligentsia. Until his death in 1935, Poland’s de facto ruler Marshal Jozef Pilsudski vigorously opposed anti-Semitic policies. Nonetheless, post-Pilsudski governments officially discriminated against Jews by, for example, excessively taxing them while many universities introduced quota systems to limit the number of Jewish students admitted and conservative organizations boycotted Jewish businesses, thus pauperizing Poland’s Jews.

Source

 

 

Third, Oskar Schindler himself.  Aside from the first third of the movie, his depiction in this film is about as fictional as it gets compared to the real life individual.  Starting with the inconvenient fact that Schindler was working for a powerful Hungarian Jew.

Keneally mentioned that Schindler worked for the powerful Hungarian Jew Rudolf Kastner. Nowhere will this information be found in Schindler’s List because in 1944 Kastner helped Eichmann deport hundreds of thousands of Jews to Auschwitz, in return for favorable treatment for Kastner’s Zionist cronies. The fact of high level cooperation between Nazis and Zionists was too embarrassing to be included in Spielberg’s pro-Zionist film.

Hoffman, Swindler’s Mist

And it doesn’t end there.  Schindler didn’t even have the lists written up in the way depicted in the film.  He was in jail at the time.

But several of the nine separate lists enshrined by history as Schindler’s list were actually compiled by Marcel Goldberg, a corrupt Jewish member of the security police, Prof Crowe reports.

Schindler was hardly in a position to oversee any of the details involved: he had been arrested on suspicion of bribery by SS officers investigating corruption charges against Amon Göth, the concentration camp commander played by Ralph Fiennes in the film.

Source

And there’s more:

Schindler is also accused in the book of having headed a German unit responsible for planning the Nazi invasion of Poland – a far graver allegation than the fact, already known, that he had spied for Germany in Czechoslovakia in the 1930s.

He was described by several of his former employees as an angel. But he was viewed so ambivalently by Yad Vashem, Israel’s Holocaust remembrance authority, that it failed to grant him the official status of “righteous gentile” until 1993, when Mr Spielberg’s film was already in production, Prof Crowe wrote. That appears to contradict the Oscar-winning film’s claim that he was granted the status in 1958.

[…]

Since his death in 1974, his legacy has already lost some of its lustre, not least at the hands of his wife, Emilie, who in the months before her death in 2001 gave interviews condemning him as an amoral womaniser who had denied her the credit she deserved for her role in helping to save almost 1,200 Jewish workers.

Source

 

Mr. Crowe said the legend of “the list” arose partly from Schindler himself, to embellish his heroism. He was trying to win reparations for his wartime losses, and Yad Vashem, the Jewish Holocaust memorial organization in Jerusalem, was considering naming him a “righteous gentile,” an honor given to someone who risked death to save Jews.

[…]

It has long been known that Schindler was a spy for German counterintelligence in the late 1930’s, but he played down those activities. Yet Mr. Crowe said that Czech secret police archives refer to Schindler as “a spy of big caliber and an especially dangerous type.” Mr. Crowe also said that Schindler compromised Czechoslovak security before the Nazi invasion and was imprisoned. Later, the Czechoslovak government tried to prosecute him for war crimes. Schindler was also the de facto head of a unit that planned the Nazi invasion of Poland.

[…]

There were also rumors, briefly mentioned in the book and film, that after Schindler moved to Krakow in 1939 as a carpetbagger following the Nazi invasion, he stole Jewish property and ordered Jews beaten. Although the charges were unproven, Mr. Crowe discovered that Yad Vashem was so concerned that it delayed designating Schindler a righteous gentile. The film’s epilogue says Schindler was named in 1958, 16 years before his death in 1974. But Mr. Crowe found that he was officially named in 1993, after Yad Vashem learned that Schindler’s widow, Emilie, who also behaved heroically, was coming to Jerusalem to participate in the film. Both received the honor, he posthumously.

[…]

After the war Schindler was a failure. He squandered money given to him by the American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee and moved to Argentina, where he attempted to breed nutria. He then returned to Germany and bought a concrete factory, where workers attacked him for saving Jews during the war. That factory went bankrupt. Schindler continued drinking, and begged Jews he had saved to help him financially. He died from alcoholism and heavy smoking, Mr. Crowe said.

Source

Schindler did rely on funds from Jewish organizations (such as that named above) after the war, and tried to start up some more businesses afterwards, all of which failed.  He squandered all the money he was given, he didn’t remain faithful to his wife, and he died of liver failure (likely from heavy drinking).  The only thing he kept the jews from were forced labor camps which were only somewhat worse than being at one of his factories (ie not as bad as depicted in the film, which is something Europa and my responses to Myles Power’s videos point out).  And even then, the jew ghetto police also utilized Schindler’s funds to have Jews moved to the more lenient (ie more luxurious by comparison) labor camps when there wasn’t room in Schindler’s factories.  Likely because, near the end of the war, Schindler could tell that Germany was going to lose, especially after the failure of taking Russia, and when the Americans got into the war (June 1944).  And on last note about Schindler, and this is a very very interesting little tidbit Spielberg decided to leave out, which completely goes against the pacifist depiction of the Jews:

Mr. Crowe said that the only part of the film that angered him was the ending, in which Schindler flees as the Russians advance. The Jews are shown as defeated, but in fact, Mr. Crowe said, Schindler had created “an armed guerilla group of Jews.”

“They were armed to the teeth, ready to fight till the death,” he said. Hours after Schindler left, they hung a Jew who worked for the Nazis.

Source

That all being said, this doesn’t mean Schindler was a bad man.  It makes him a complex one, with many layers.  A man who did good things and bad things.  If we were given this character in the film, the film would be a much more interesting one.  He may have been a man who was only helping the Jews and sabotaging the Germans for his own personal benefit knowing the end of the war was nigh, or he may have been doing it out of the good of his heart, or somewhere in-between.  The testimony of his wife seems to indicate the former, but we may never know.  Would be nice to have a film with a portrayal of that character which leaves those viewpoints open to interpretation by the viewer.  Of course, in order for me to fully appreciate that film even with a character like that in it, it can’t portray the Nazis unfairly either.  And as far as I can tell, no modern film (let alone older ones) seems to be capable of doing that, mainly because they all go with the assumption that 6+ million Jews were killed in the Holocaust due largely in-part to the Final Solution, which is something I’ve come to no longer believe.

 

That being said, I don’t buy that the forced labor camps were picnic parties either, even when some revisionist documentaries, including Europa (for all the great insights it provides, it does have some false or misleading info from its biased point of view, as most documentaries do), try to convince people otherwise.  There were labor camps run by reasonable SS leaders, and some were run by terrible SS leaders, such as Karl Otto Koch and Amon Goeth (the latter depicted by Ralph Fiennes in the film as the main antagonist).

The fact that the SS, under orders from Heinrich Himmler, attempted to operate the concentration camps (KZ) in a humane manner, in part by prosecuting, jailing and even executing brutal Nazi concentration camp personnel, has been nearly completely suppressed in much of the discussion of the history of World War Two.

One of the key officers who was instrumental in Himmler’s campaign to attempt to ensure the human rights of KZ inmates, was the heroic and incorruptible SS Judge Konrad Morgen. His testimony follows:

From Affidavit SS-65 by SS Judge Konrad Morgen, IMT Vol. 42, p. 556:

Individual criminal acts – in these cases having broad implications – included: the assumption of a license to kill by commandants and subordinates concealed through falsification of medical death certificates.

Arbitrary conduct, chicanery, unlawful corporal punishments, acts of brutality and sadism, liquidation of no-longer-convenient accomplices, theft and black-market profiteering.

ALL OF THESE OFFENSES WERE COMMITTED both alone by prisoners AS WELL AS BY PERSONNEL OF THE SS, most however in conspiracy between SS personnel with kapos (Jewish concentration camp guards).

The intervention of SS jurisdiction in the concentration camps commenced with the initiation of my investigations in July 1943 and lasted until the conclusion of the war. It could not have started sooner, because there were no suspicions in this regard.

Arrested were the commandants of Buchenwald, Lublin, Warschau, Herzogenbosch, KRAKAU-PLASZOW.

The commandants of Buchenwald and Lublin were shot.

More than a hundred cases were brought to a verdict. Maximum punishments were imposed on members of all ranks.

Source

 

Fourth, the depiction of Amon Goeth.  Well, I’m not going to lie.  From what I’ve gathered, he is about as big of an asshole as depicted in the film.  However, the film depicts both him and the Germans as if they were the rule rather than the exception.  This was not the case:

Although there were orders to administrators from the National Socialist government that concentration camp inmates were not to be brutalized, the camps themselves varied from well-run, fundamentally decent places of confinement, to pure hell-holes, depending to a large degree on the quality of the Nazi leadership in each concentration camp. Some commandants such as Amon Goeth and Karl Otto Koch were little more than criminals, while others like Hermann Pister were incorruptible and supervised the most humane facilities they could under the circumstances, given the scarcity of food and medicine in wartime Germany under conditions of saturation bombing by the Allied air forces.

There are many instances of attempts by the German military to secure humane conditions within the concentration camps. For example, in 1943 SS Judge Konrad Morgen of the Haupt Amt Gericht (SS-HAG) was assigned to investigate and prosecute brutality at Buchenwald. Morgen was so successful in correcting conditions there that Himmler gave him an expanded staff and unlimited investigative authority in the camps. Morgen’s next target of inquiry was Krakau-Plaszow and its commandant, Amon Goeth, the arch-fiend of Speilberg’s film.

In Schindler’s List Morgen’s entire investigation of Goeth was reduced to a scene in which fleeting reference is made to Goeth having his books “audited.” If you blinked, you missed it. The crucial truth that Steven Spielberg withheld from his audience is that in September of 1944, Goeth was arrested by the Central Office of the SS Judiciary and imprisoned on charges of theft and the murder of concentration camp inmates.

Hoffman, Swindler’s Mist

Hoffman never made it to a trial in Germany though, as he was arrested near the end of the war, Germany had other things to worry about, and they lost the war.  So Hoffman had to face justice at the hands of the Polish rather than at the hands of the Germans.

And on another note, he didn’t have the authority to execute those working at the camp.  And even more interesting, he wasn’t tried as a Nazi when he did go to trial in Poland post WWII, mainly because he wasn’t in a high command position.  They had to make up a new law for trying someone like him.

As the commandant of the Plaszow camp, Goeth had been ordered to carry out the executions that were ordered by others. These executions took place at the Plaszow camp. The people who were executed were not prisoners in  the Plaszow camp.

According to David Crowe’s book, entitled Oscar Schindler,  Wilek Chilowicz was a Jewish prisoner, who was the head of the OD, the Jewish police at Plaszow. Crowe wrote that “Göth sought permission to murder Chilowicz and several other prominent OD men in the camp on false charges.”

In all the Nazi concentration camps, the staff had to get permission from headquarters in Oranienburg to punish a prisoner, but punishment did not include murder.

Dr. Georg Konrad Morgen was a Waffen-SS officer and attorney, whom Reichsführer-SS Heinrich Himmler had put in charge of investigating murder, corruption and mistreatment of prisoners in all the Nazi concentration camps in 1943. Dr. Morgen’s first investigation had resulted in the arrest of Karl Otto Koch, the Commandant of Buchenwald, and his later execution by the Nazis.

According to David Crowe’s book, Goeth asked one of his SS officers, Josef Sowinski, to prepare a detailed, false report about a potential camp rebellion led by Chilowicz and other OD men. Based on this report, Koppe sent a secret letter to Goeth giving him the authority to carry out the execution of Chilowicz and several other OD men. The execution took place on August 13, 1944; Goeth was arrested exactly a month later and charged by Dr. Morgen with corruption and brutality, including the murder of Wilek Chilowicz and several others.

[…]

After World War II ended, the American military turned Amon Goeth over to the Polish government for prosecution as a war criminal. He was brought before the Supreme National Tribunal of Poland in Krakow. His trial took place between August 27, 1946 and September 5, 1946. Goeth was charged with being a member of the Nazi party and a member of the Waffen-SS, Hitler’s elite army, both of which had been designated as criminal organizations by the Allies after the war. His crimes included the charges that he had taken part in the activities of these two criminal organizations. The crime of being a Nazi applied only to Nazi officials, and Goeth had never held a job as a Nazi official. In fact, at the time of Goeth’s conviction by the Polish court, the judgment against the SS and the Nazi party as criminal organizations had not yet been made by the Nuremberg IMT.

At Goeth’s trial, the Nazi party was said to be “an organization which, under the leadership of Adolf Hitler, through aggressive wars, violence and other crimes, aimed at world domination and establishment of the National-Socialist regime.” Amon Goeth was accused of personally issuing orders to deprive people of freedom, to ill-treat and exterminate individuals and whole groups of people. His crimes, including the newly created crime of genocide, came under a new law of the Allies, called Crimes against Humanity.

Source

The point being, his acts and methods were cruel enough to where even the SS had to arrest him and see him punished.  That, and because he was stealing stuff on the side from the Jews, which is something I believe was supposed to go straight to the Nazi party to help fund the German war effort or something.

And on another more minor note, it wasn’t geographically possible for Goeth to snipe Jews from the second story of his house.

 

Fifth, the ghetto jew police (Ordnungdienst / Ordnungsdiest), and the pacifist nature of the jews in the film.  Regarding the German Jewish police, “they were supervised by Polish guards and armed German police to ensure that they performed their tasks correctly and with appropriate strictness,” (Source).  Despite that, there’s a chance they weren’t all that, eh, honorable, since it’s been reported they were “ruthless killers” at times (still need to verify this, so take that information with a grain of salt).

As for the Jews being completely pacifist and meek, that’s a load of bull:

According to Thomas Keneally’s novel, after the first liquidation in 1942, in which many of the Jews escaped, the Jewish Combat Organization (ZOB), a group of resistance fighters, bombed the Cyganeria Restaurant and killed 7 German SS soldiers. Next, the SS-only Bagatella Cinema was bombed in Krakow. In the next few months, the ZOB sank German patrol boats on the Vistula, fire-bombed German military garages in Krakow and derailed a German army train, besides forging papers and passports for Jews to pass as Aryans.

In the movie, the date of the scene where Mrs. Dresner hides has been changed to the day of the final liquidation of the ghetto on March 13, 1943.  The movie gives the impression that the Jews were killed for no reason and does not mention what the Jews did in the Resistance.

[…]

According to the novel, Schindler’s Ark, around 4,000 Jews were found hiding in the Podgorze ghetto during the final liquidation and they were executed on the spot. However, during the postwar trial of Amon Goeth, one of the charges against him was that 2,000 Jews were killed during the liquidation of the Podgorze ghetto.

According to the novel, the Jews, who managed to escape from the ghetto, joined the partisans of the Polish People’s Army, who were hiding in the forests of Niepolomice.

Unlike the novel, the movie Schindler’s List does not mention the Jewish resistance fighters, who fought as partisans throughout the war.  In the movie, the Jews are portrayed as totally harmless, so there was no reason for the Nazis to shoot them as they were trying to escape.

Thomas Keneally, who is a native of Australia, mentioned in his novel that in 1944, an Australian plane was shot down by the Germans over Oskar Schindler’s factory; the plane was dropping supplies to the Jewish and Polish partisans in the forest east of Krakow, according to Keneally.

Krakow had been populated by Jews for 600 years before the Nazis invaded Poland in 1939, and the Jews had been discriminated against for years, before the Nazis arrived.

In 1494, there was a  fire in Krakow which was blamed on the Jews; this was the start of pogroms against the Jews.  Because of this, the King of Poland ordered the Jews in the city of Krakow to be resettled in the district of Kazimierz. During World War II, the Nazis ordered the Jews to move out of Kazimierz, into a ghetto in the Podgorze district, which was  across the river Vistula.

Source

So yeah, history is not all that one-dimensional, not as this film depicts it.

 

On that note, some other tidbits concerning where the hatred of the jews came from (aside from the bankers who influenced the laws and the nations, which Europa covers):

You need to understand the true story of what happened to the German people living in these German lands From 1918 to 1939… Twenty years of systematic oppression, taxation, killing, murder, torture, terrorizing, persecution, impoverishment under jews.

This is another part of the true history of Europe which has been covered up and buried. The jews who flocked to Versailles and gained a special dispensation for an independent Polish nation to be recognized: did this because Poland had been jewified and was under total jewish control. It was the closest thing they could get to having their own land and their own jewish nation. Jews had been intermarrying into Polish high society for CENTURIES; for 100’s of years until they had become thoroughly accepted into Polish culture and society: Until Poland became known worldwide as “The Land of The Jews”… And from this jewified nation: their offspring spread like lice on a rat’s ass all over the diseased body of Europe: into Germany and especially into key appointments of power in the occupied territories which had been so ‘generously’ ‘given’ to various other nations by the scum who wrote the Versailles Treaty. The result of the Versailles Treaty: was a systematic racist program of discriminatory laws inflicted by the jews in power over their German victims for twenty years in every land stolen from Germany after WW2….

But to understand why this happened… You need to go even further back into European History and understand just why the jews hated the Germans so much… The reason for their racist hatred was because Germany was the last… I repeat, Germany was the LAST nation in Europe to grant emancipation to jews: the right to own property and the right to vote. Germany: the states and duchies of German speaking people kept their jews locked up in ghettos. Far longer than any other nation in Europe the Germans kept the jews apart from their society and did not allow them to infiltrate or intermarry into their society. For this: the jews invented a special vile racist hatred against all Germany and all German people. This was why when they were granted emancipation, when they did gain power over Germans: they became the most brutal, subhuman overseers of any oppressed people in Europe…

So now! jump back to the lands Hitler freed the once-German lands from Jewish control and oppression between 1935-1939. Most of the jews in these lands were of Polish origin. They were Polish jews wreaking ‘revenge’ on a hapless German people who had their rights taken away from them and their land taken away from them. In nearly all cases, they were jews of Polish extraction. Even the jews living in Vienna and Austria had nearly all originally come from Poland. Then suddenly the Anschluss happened. The German victims of jewish oppression were given back their rights, their land and their power!… and in every case: each land that was freed from Jewish rule: DEPORTED their jews by force: they stripped them of their titles, property and wealth and put them on trains.

Source

 

 

One more thing.  The whole propaganda regarding the mass execution of the Jews.

We will therefore find that examination of stories
concerning alleged Jewish extermination that appeared in the New York Times,
spring 1942 through 1943, together with a summary of 1944 propaganda,
which will be presented in Chapter 5, is all that is required to get a satisfactory
conception of the propaganda.

[…]

February 14, 1943, p. 37: “EXECUTION ‘SPEED – UP ’ SEEN
Mass executions of Jews in Poland on an accelerated tempo was re-
ported by European representatives of the World Jewish Congress in a
communication made public by Rabbi Stephen S. Wise, president of the
American Jewish Congress.
In one place in Poland 6,000 Jews are killed daily, according to the re-
port, dated Jan. 19. Jews left in Poland are now confined in fifty-five ghet-
tos, some in the large towns and some in the smaller towns that have been
transformed into ghettos.”
This was the propaganda story involved in the conflict between State and
Treasury. As noted in connection with the remarks on the Times editorial of
December 18, if this story had managed to emerge from the State Department,
greater credibility would, apparently, have been attached to it. Unfortunately
for the propaganda inventors at the time, they had to settle for Rabbi Wise as
ostensible source.

[…]

April 12, 1943, p. 5: “NAZIS ERASE GHETTOS IN TWO POLISH CITIES
London, April 11 (AP) – The Polish Telegraph Agency said tonight that the Germans had erased the ghetto at Krakow in a three-day massacre that started March 13, and also had eliminated the ghetto in Lodz.

The fate of the Jews in the latter city was unknown, but the agency said it was believed they also were killed.”

Because almost all Jews outside the Continent, particularly those in the
U.S., believed the extermination claims, they brought political pressures which
resulted in the Bermuda Conference. It was believed, 161 correctly, that the Na-
zis wished the emigration of the Jews from Europe (under appropriate condi-
tions), and this put the British and American governments, on account of the
propaganda basis for their war, into an awkward position, around which they
were obliged to continually double-talk. 162 We have described the conflict be-
tween State and Treasury in this regard. The British had, at that point, no in-
tention of opening Palestine, and both the British and Americans had no inten-
tion of providing the resources, in the middle of the war, for massive opera-
tions undertaken for reasons that were valid only to the degree that their prop-
aganda was taken seriously. No sane modern statesmen believe their own
propaganda. This is the dilemma, which J. Breckenridge Long and other State
Department officials felt themselves facing.

[…]

The allegations of exterminations of Jews do not appear to have had great importance to the public during the war, if one judges from the lack of any prominence given to such stories. Another way to express it is to say that if one spends some time examining the newspapers of the time, a high degree of hostility to the Nazis is obvious, but the specific basis of the hostility is virtually impossible to distinguish. Thus, there is something of an emotional nature missing from our survey, but this is unavoidable.  Two principal observations should be made in regard to the extermination propaganda. First, the legend has its origin among Zionists and, second, Auschwitz was not claimed as an extermination camp until very late in the war.

We have seen that the first extermination claims were not based on one
scrap of intelligence data. Zionists, principally the World Jewish Congress,
merely presented their nonsense to the Allied governments, in particular to the
U.S. government, demanding endorsement of their nonsense. The first reac-
tions in Washington were to scoff at the claims but, on account of various po-
litical pressures, and only on account of those pressures and not because cor-
roborating information had been procured from military intelligence, official
Washington eventually cooperated with the extermination propaganda to the
extent of having high officials make vague public declarations in support of it,
and of having propaganda agencies make more specific declarations of an ob-
scure nature. The early propaganda had features which are retained in the leg-
end to this day, such as the six million figure, and also features which were
quickly forgotten, such as the soap factories, although both features were au-
thored by the same Zionist circles.

— Arthur R. Butz, The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, 4th ed.  Castle Hills Publishers.  February 2015 p.112, 114, 123-124

Anyway, for more information about how Spielberg’s depiction of the Holocaust is rubbish, when going outside the film itself, you can see a debunking of a documentary Spielberg made titled The Last Days where 5 Holocaust survivors were interviewed and given their point of view of events.  The documentary that debunks this documentary (by showcasing the faulty testimony of the people in the documentary) is titled Spieleberg’s Hoax: The Last Days of the Big Lie.

And an Ernst Zundel interview where he bashes on the film for various reasons (I did find his taking offense at the “boobs and butts” to be rather funny).  But it’s insightful for him to mention that the burning of the bodies (an event with an insane orchestral score in the film, to give the impression that you should feel shocked and sad at what you are seeing; Chujowa Gorka, April 1944) was to prevent disease spreading from the dead bodies, thus a health measure.  And that bodies had to be dug up and burned because they were poisoning the groundwater.  That, and crematoriums weren’t supposed to emote much smoke or smell, despite what the film depicts.  And even German SS bodies (and the wives of German soldiers) who died of disease or typhus had to be burned along with any dead Jews at these crematoriums.  And it questions the “number” of people that would have to be burned day by day in order to match up with the official numbers given to the holocaust amidst all this.

Lastly, a video of Jews giving their testimony on the holocaust that tends to contradict officially accepted mainstream views.

 

PS: One more little tidbit I found interesting from the film:

“Ah, an educated Jew.  Like Karl Marx himself.”

Huh, cool to see the film admits that fun fact.

 

 

Sources

Amon Goeth liquidates the last Jews in Krakow ghetto

https://www.grunge.com/142302/the-true-story-about-oskar-schindler-from-schindlers-list/

https://www.big-lies.org/jews/jews-poland-revisionism.html

https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/german-invasion-of-poland-jewish-refugees-1939

Re-examining Spielberg’s Portrayal of Polish-Jewish Relations

https://sites.google.com/a/csumb.edu/hcom352-schindlers-list-1993/historical-accuracy-of-the-film

https://www.thejc.com/culture/features/is-schindler-s-list-fatally-flawed-1.43304

https://www.revisionisthistory.org/shindler.html

https://www.revisionisthistory.org/revisionist6.html

http://www.nizkor.org/features/techniques-of-denial/schindler-01.html

http://www.nizkor.org/features/techniques-of-denial/appendix-1-01.html

Hoffman, Michael A., and Alan R. Critchley.  “Swindler’s Mist: Spielberg’s Fraud in Schindler’s List”.  January 1, 2001.  https://codoh.com/library/document/488/

swindlers mist

ScrapbookPages Blog.  https://furtherglory.wordpress.com/2015/03/03/did-amon-goeth-have-the-authority-to-order-executions/

Burkeman, Oliver, and Ben Aris.  “Biographer takes shine off Spielberg’s Schindler”.  The Guardian.  November 25, 2004.  https://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/nov/25/germany.film

Smith, Diitia.  “Book Adds Layers of Complexity to the Schindler Legend”.  The New York Times.  November 24, 2004.  http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/Schindler/OOF1104.html

Arthur R. Butz, The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, 4th ed.  Castle Hills Publishers.  February 2015

Comments on Debunking Holocaust Denial

Got into a small debate on YouTube, which ended up taking an unexpected constructive turn.  First, some responses from a more polite fellow:

Funny, I don’t see Stephen (coming out of) Leftfield responding to this comment. Considering how fanatical he seems to be about defending this stuff. Anyway, I’m going to use your comment on my blog site for a response to this vid.
@Anomalous Host Yeah I think Stephen actually replied to this comment but then deleted it. He’s a funny guy. If you’re going to use this info on your blog site, just realize that you can actually expound the points here even further if you want to do more thinking and research. Here is a link which has in-depth data on Prussian Blue staining caused by Hydrogen Cyanide, it explains how humidity speeds up the staining process and other things:http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/trr/6.html The page also includes pictures of blue staining on the outside walls of German dis-infestation/fumigation chambers, which I of course mentioned in my above comment.

 

And now, for the more interesting response.  First it was typical trolling, but then the troll decided to try being intelligent, which got more than either of us bargained for.

 





 

 

 

Stephen LeftfieldStephen Leftfield

Tadpolak “At the time, Leuchter was THE US expert on gas chamber construction & had designed & constructed most, if not all, of the US gas chambers.” – ‘sfunny. Wikipedia says he was a fraud and a conman . . . . . . =======================================================================

 

@Stephen Leftfield Alright, come on, seriously? You’re going to cite Wikipedia as a source? Any respectable history teacher wouldn’t wipe their ass with an assignment that used Wikipedia as a source. At best, you can cite the source that Wikipedia uses, not Wikipedia itself.

 

Stephen Leftfield
Anomalous Host
“At best you can cite the source that Wikipedia uses.”
– Yeah. You said it yourself.
Now get back to the substance, munchkin.

 

Anomalous Host
@Stephen Leftfield Get back to it? I’ve already covered it:
Though part 3 gets more in-depth and scientific about the coverage than parts 1 and 2. Currently working on part 4, which aims at Myles’ latest video: The Fred Leuchter Report – #1.
Stephen Leftfield
Anomalous Host
You’ve “covered” nothing, munchkin. I glanced at your blog, but it was clear from paragraph 1 line 1 that you’re peddling the usual, worn-out denier drivel. My advice: forget it. Do something useful with your life.

 

Anomalous Host
@Stephen Leftfield Decided to leave a comment and not delete it huh? Well anyway, paragraph 1 line 1 is a direct quote from Myles. Guess that says everything about his videos then.

 

Stephen Leftfield
Anomalous Host
– Too clever by half, aren’t you, little smart arse Holocaust denier?
You know what my comment means. You’re just another Jew-hating, racist nazi-hugger, who seriously thinks he’s going to “disprove” the Holocaust with an avalanche of amateurish bullshit.
Funny how you people deny the Holocaust. No nazi ever did.

 

Anomalous Host
@Stephen Leftfield “You know what my comment means.”
Yeah, it means you’re a troll who never had any intention of taking the arguments seriously. Myles put considerably more effort into it than you ever will, which is why I took his arguments more seriously.
“Funny how you people deny the Holocaust. No nazi ever did.”
Not true:
But just to save us both some time, here’s how I imagine your response going:
“Yeah, well he’s a nazi, and nazi’s can’t be trusted, just like how Myles bitched about Toben stating documents were forged and thus couldn’t be trusted.”
Or…
“Alright smart-ass, but that doesn’t apply towards nazis back in the day now does it?”
In which case I’ll just post a link to evidence showing that nazis back in the day didn’t mention anything about exterminating jews on a genocidal scope.
Or you’ll just say something about it all being hogwash (along with more racist/nazi/anti-semite/deplorable/etc name-calling), to which I’ll just simply reply, “Well that’s your opinion, and your opinion is wrong.”
Personally, I’d rather you stop trying to be one of those guys who can’t stand not having the last word and just let things be. But if you’re going to make it this easy to show your statements to be inaccurate, I’ll happily oblige. Because I find it fun. At least I provide links to evidence backing up my position, all you do is name-calling and calling my arguments weak/fruitless/non-arguments without demonstrating specifically how.

 

Stephen Leftfield
“Yeah, it means you’re a troll who never had any intention of taking the arguments seriously. Myles put considerably more effort into it than you ever will, which is why I took his arguments more seriously.”
– You’re right. I never had – and never will – take any of your “arguments” seriously. Well done. We agree on something.
“Not true:
– Lol. So this Karl Munter was a junior SS squaddie in 1944. I’m not interested in the ravings of small fry! I’m talking Hoess, Eichmann et al – you know, the ones who actually planned and directed the mass murders.
Not forgetting Himmler, of course, who committed suicide. Now – why was that?
“In which case I’ll just post a link to evidence showing that nazis back in the day didn’t mention anything about exterminating jews on a genocidal scope.”
– Yeah, surprising that, eh? You’d have thought Heini would have been calling press conferences every week to announce proudly to the world how many innocent people had been murdered in the previous seven days.
And talking of Himmler: the Posen speeches.
Personally, I’d rather you stop trying to be one of those guys who can’t stand not having the last word and just let things be. But if you’re going to make it this easy to show your statements to be inaccurate, I’ll happily oblige.
Because I find it fun.
..

 

Anomalous Host

“I’m not interested in the ravings of small fry!”

Ah crap, that’s the one retort I forgot to include in the possibilities of your responses. Moving the goal posts. Then again, since you admitted to never taking me seriously, I doubt they were ever firmly planted in the first place. But that’s ok, I’m loose enough to adjust my kicks/runs/throws.
“Not forgetting Himmler, of course, who committed suicide. Now – why was that?”
Oh, I could think of a number of reasons. Such as him acting independent of Hitler’s orders, planning to surrender to the West in order to fight the Soviets, thus causing Hitler to strip him of his ranking and order his arrest, which caused him to flee without anyone to really turn to, only to be arrested by the British who I’m sure had some unpleasantries in store for him as they would other SS officers they would get a hold of post-War for the trials, only for Himmler to take the easy way out to avoid torture and forced confessions. Of course, I’m sure you’d rather believe a specific alternative explanation. Either way, we’d be speculating about as much as Michael Moore did in Fahrenheit 9/11.
“You’d have thought Heini would have been calling press conferences every week to announce proudly to the world how many innocent people had been murdered in the previous seven days.”
Trying to have your cake and eat it too? “Funny how you people deny the Holocaust. No nazi ever did.” First you’re proclaiming no Nazi ever denied the Holocaust. Then it’s no “ones who actually planned and directed the mass murders” ever denied the Holocaust. And now it’s a sarcastic remark admitting how ludicrous it would be for Nazis to freely admit to the Holocaust (assuming they were even carrying out one). Keep the seriousness out of this conversation; it will make it that much easier for me to throw your words back at you.
“And talking of Himmler: the Posen speeches.”
Ah! Finally! Something for me to actually chew on! A portion of this speech:
“I mean the clearing out of the Jews, the extermination of the Jewish race. It’s one
of those things it is easy to talk about – “The Jewish race is being exterminated”
says every party member, “that’s quite clear, it’s in our program – elimination
of the Jews, and we’re doing it, exterminating them.” And then they come, 80
million worthy Germans, and each one has his decent Jew. Of course the others
are vermin, but this one is an A-1 Jew. Not one of all those who talk this way has
witnessed it, not one of them has been through it. Most of you know what it
means when 100 corpses are lying side by side, or 500 or 1000.”
Yeah, this is the main section referred to in those Posen speeches (of which there is only a written record of that has been subjected to errors. Originally written by Himmler in shorthand, and via phonographic devices which weren’t of the best quality (ie there are gaps in various segments of varying lengths). SS-Untersturmführer Werner Alfred Venn was responsible for the making and keeping of these writings/speeches, but also made “corrections” to the text here and there. So there’s the high probability of error when it comes to how close to the original speeches these actually are. But even if we put that aside, it becomes highly suspect that he said all the stuff recorded in the speech as is. Especially when you said it yourself, “You’d have thought Heini would have been calling press conferences every week to announce proudly to the world how many innocent people had been murdered in the previous seven days.” Yeah, it is on the unbelievable side (thanks for the fodder).
And even if we were to put all that aside, even if we are to assume that those corpse numbers were referring to Jews and not German soldiers (though for the record, there were German Jews who voluntarily signed up for and fought in the German army), there’s the numbers issue. We’re to believe the Holocaust murdered millions of Jews, and that Himmler is one of the main guys responsible for the murder of millions, and yet he’s only talking about numbers that only add up to 1,000? Where the hell is that ambitious hundreds of thousands number at?
There are many more holes that can be poked at with these Posen speeches, of which can be found in the book Auschwitz: A Judge Looks at the Evidence By Wilhelm Stäglich.
This is finally getting constructive. What else have you got? And for the record, don’t even bother trying to delete these posts. I’ve got them archived. Whether you take the response seriously or not is irrelevant. I’m already of the assumption you’re a lost cause. I’m playing for the audience.

 

This blog post may be a work in progress.  Might get updated.

RE: Debunking Holocaust Denial (part 4)

I ended those videos by saying, “I thought it was a waste of my time, covering this subject again.  Because I thought I was beating a dead horse at this point.  And I realized that the people who I was talking to were never going to change their mind.  They were only looking for an excuse to excuse their bigotry and denying that the holocaust ever happened is the perfect excuse.  So here I am a year later, and looking at the comment section, looking at the like-to-dislike ratio of those videos, I can see that holocaust denialism, especially online, is still a big issue.  So for that reason, I’ve decided to come here to Poland, to Auschwitz, to tackle the subject one more time.

All right, let’s get this over with.

Before going further, it’s worth pointing out some of the sites Myles links to which back up his position.  He has 3 links in this video, they all go to the same site, just 3 different pages of the site.  HDOT.org.  Holocaust Denial On Trial.  It uses this one book as a major source for much (but not all) of its information.  Robert Jan van Pelt’s The Case for Auschwitz: Evidence from the Irving Trial.  And guess what?  There’s a book that debunks the stuff in that book, called The Real Case for Auschwitz—Robert van Pelt’s Evidence from the Irving Trial Critically Reviewed by Carlo Mattogno.  And guess what else?  That book is banned from Amazon, just like the Leuchter Reports.  Well, I just so happen to have a pdf copy of that book on my computer (it doesn’t take too long of a search to find downloadable copies of it, especially since they have been released to the public domain for educational purposes).  So we’ll see if I’ll need to reference it.

I would also like to correct a few mistakes I made in my previous videos, because mistakes are blood to these leeches.

He goes over a few things mentioned in the previous videos, and, well, it’s more accurate to say he clarifies points he made rather than correct any mistakes. That being said, it is worth addressing a point that he clarifies, which was brought up in his previous video, that I didn’t address.  The chimney connected to Crematorium I which isn’t actually connected to it at all.

 

 

Point #5: Chimney Connected Underground

1.) This chimney was rebuilt post-war, by the Soviets.  The reason it’s not connected to the building, at least on a visual level, is because it was connected underground.  There are plans/blueprints that show this to be the case, when it was a crematorium, a morgue, a gas chamber, and then an air raid shelter.

This is from Crematorium II, but the chimney connection to the structure is similar to that of Crematorium I from what I understand.

From what I’ve gathered, yes, this is true.  The chimney did exist at the time where it is pictured, and did connect underground.  But this raises some questions.

Gas and smoke float upwards.  And the gas chambers certainly weren’t underground.  So how the hell did the smoke make it from the crematorium room to the chimney if the pipes go underground (I’m going to assume this chimney in question was for the crematorium, since it has been determined the building initially had 2 cremation ovens before later being allegedly converted to gas chambers)?  Apparently, there were suction devices to blow the smoke (and other fumes) through the underground pipes and up through the chimney.  So assuming this is true for Crematorium I (and thus must be true for the other 4 crematorium buildings), this causes a problem to come up.  The amount of power required for these (and other) devices at the camp.

What is important here is that the “existing machines” which consumed so much
energy were the three Saugzug-Anlagen (forced draft suction equipment) in the three ducts of the chimney and the five blowers (DruckluftAnlagen) of the crematorium ovens. As we have already seen, Crematorium II went into operation on February 20, but at a reduced rate  – for the very reason that the power line allowed only “a reduced operation of the existing machines.” Because of this, the Gasprüfer were needed in order to check whether the reduced operation of the forced draft equipment and of the blowers still allowed an efficient combustion.
What remains to be elucidated is a question Pressac avoided and which further confirms the explanation given above: why did the ZBL request concern precisely 10 Gasprüfer? The answer is simple: they were to go into the 10 flue ducts (Rauchkanäle) of Crematoria II and III.

Summarizing, if the Gasprüfer were normal instruments for the control of the combustion gases, it is easy to see

a) why the order came from ZBL and not from the SS garrison surgeon;

b) why the order went to Topf and not to Tesch & Stabenow;

c) why they were ordered under the name of Gasprüfer and not as Gasrestnachweisgeräte für Zyklon;

d) what their function was;

e) why exactly 10 were ordered;

f) why, aside from the Gasprüfer, there was no order for either Zyklon B, gas masks, gas mask filters, or opening tools for Zyklon B cans.

— Footnote 174: The flue ducts (Rauchkanäle) were accessible through appropriate manholes (Fuchseinsteigeschächte). The chimneys of Crematoria II-V had a total of 10 flue ducts (Schornsteinröhren), but only the chimneys of Crematoria II and III were equipped with cleaning traps (Reinigungstüren). Therefore, the “Gasprüfer” were certainly intended for the flue ducts.

— The Real Case for Auschwitz (2nd ed.) p.110-111

So even if we are to assume that this crematoriums burned through between 1.1 million to 4 million Jews (depending on which source you go off of), and allegedly went through thousands of people a day, that would require a lot of power, daily.  More than your average crematorium burning through an average amount of bodies that would die due to disease or starvation or something else besides genocidal levels of killings.  Power problems made this unviable.  And that’s not even taking into account the lack of tools needed to utilize Zyklon-B, especially if that was the most commonly used method for offing people in these gas chambers.

You think anyone would notice all that smoke?

Plus you have to take into account that there were “corpse slides” outside of these crematoriums, where you could slide bodies into these chambers where they would be burned.  So from what I’ve gathered, according to Robert Jan van Pelt (see above), the SS wanted to remove the corpse slides to conceal the fact that the prisoners were being led to gas chambers as opposed to the showers.

No one has yet pointed out that on the ground floor blueprint, in the area where the slide and the staircase should have been found, there is a new room labeled “Abstellraum” (store room) linked, by means of a door, to a previously non-existent “Waschraum” (wash room [for corpses]). This means that this blueprint provided for an additional room closing off the opening which led from the outside to the half-
basement, clearly visible on blueprint 1173 (Pressac 1989, p. 274).

The reasoning behind this project is not explained in any document.  Strictly speaking, it is not correct to say that the new entrance constituted “the only access to the morgues,” because there was also a second route via the freight elevator. Actually, the ground floor blueprint shows that from the entrance to the crematorium, passing through an air-lock (Windfang) and a hall, one arrived in the “Waschraum” with the doors to the freight elevator on one side; the doors opposite led into the furnace hall.

This type of route is, admittedly, not very convincing, but doing away with the corpse-slide in two crematoria planned as normal sanitary installations is even less so, because the crematoria continued to receive corpses of registered inmates on a regular basis who had died in the camp (see chapter 12.7.).

If the SS had planned two crematoria with a total of 10 ovens of 3 muffles each for a daily capacity of 2,880 corpses per day, arising from the “natural” mortality of the camp, how could they possibly throw out the corpse slide?

— The Real Case For Auschwitz, p.130

All this supposed effort despite there being a big fucking chimney just outside the building to give this all away.

Yet even if we accept – again without conceding the point – that the slide was shortened so as to keep it from interfering with the victims’ path, why would it have to be “concealed”? To keep the victims from realizing that they were in a crematorium? In that case it would have been better to “conceal” the enormous chimney!

— The Real Case For Auschwitz, p.133

Aerial view of Auschwitz-Birkenau. By Ryszard Domasik (Photo by Ryszard Domasik.) [GFDL (http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html) or CC-BY-SA-3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/)], via Wikimedia Commons.

A few more points, then I’ll drop the chimney subject.

[7]: Van Pelt affirms that the SS “immediately began to work the ovens at full capacity,” but this is historically wrong, because the damage to the chimney and the flues was caused by “heating of single ovens only” (see chapter 8.8.3.).

[8]: Van Pelt claims that “the electrical system caught fire”; this is wrong, because the cause of the damage was not electrical but thermal, as I will explain next.

[9]: Van Pelt asserts that “both the forced-draft system that fanned the incinerator flames and the ventilation system to extract the Zyklon B from the gas chamber were damaged,” which is utter nonsense.  Kirschneck’s Aktenvermerk of March 25, 1943, states clearly that the only units that suffered damage were the three forced-draft units and that the damage had been caused by overly high temperatures. ZBL intended to retain “the three electric motors (15 HP each),” provided “that they were not damaged by the high temperatures,” 290 which confirms that the damage was not electrical. The “ventilation system to extract the Zyklon B from the gas chamber” i.e. the Belüftung / Entlüftung had, of course, not been damaged. The “forced-draft system,” on the other hand, served to remove the smoke during the cremations by increasing the draft of the chimney, but this increased the air-feed to the hearths only indirectly. Van Pelt, for his part, believes that the forced-draft units “fanned the incinerator flames” like a pair of bellows. This serious lack of understanding demolishes van Pelt’s conjectures once and for all.

— The Real Case for Auschwitz, p.193

So in a nutshell, yes, this chimney did exist at the time, and it was connected via underground chambers/tunnels/whatever.  This does go against the assertion that construction of the chimney while not being visibly connected to the building proves revisionists right.  However, these arguments should not be considered the only ones, let alone the primary ones, any decent revisionist would have today.  Because stating that these crematoriums were used for anything other than the burning/disposal of bodies that died through “natural” means in the camp (by natural, I mean due to starvation, old age, weakness, injury, infection, beatings, etc.) introduces a large number of statistical and scientific problems.  And these problems are not limited to just the examples I pulled from here.

Myles then goes on to address Leuchter’s questionable methods of acquiring evidence on whether people were gassed in the chambers at Auschwitz or not, which is something I already covered in the previous article.  But he does bring up one other thing worth addressing:

In February 1999, the director of the Institute for Forensic Research in Krakow conducted a fair experiment where they extracted ion cyanide based compounds from the walls gas chambers.  […]  They tested them and, ‘lo and behold, they found hydrogen cyanide residue.  […]  The Institute for Forensic Research demonstrated that cyanide was present in all [5 of] the facilities where it’s claimed gassing took place.

Point #6: The Institute for Forensic Research in Krakow proved that the facilities in Auschwitz had gassing chambers used to kill thousands of prisoners.

Once again, Mattogno has this covered (though he basically references a book for chemists who are interested in the nitty gritty details to look up for themselves if they really want to go that far in their research):

I will close this chapter with another quotation of the same vein directed against Leuchter by van Pelt (p. 387):

“Then he took no account of the fact that the gas chambers of Crematoria 2 and 3 had been purposefully demolished in 1944, that their remains had been exposed to the elements for forty-five years, and that the walls had been washed with acid rain – a fact of some importance because, contrary to Leuchter’s belief, ferro-ferri cyanide is not stable under all conditions but tends to slowly dissolve in an acidic environment.”

These assertions show up van Pelt’s crass technical and even archeological ignorance. As any visitor to Birkenau can see, the outer walls of the gas  disinfestation chambers of BW 5a still exhibit vast areas stained blue with ferric ferrocyanide or Prussian Blue (less so at BW 5 b), even though they, too, have been “washed with acid rain” for decades. As Germar Rudolf has shown, Prussian Blue has its highest stability in a slightly acidic environment as produced by acid rain (Rudolf 2003b, p.170).

In this context van Pelt refers to the chemical expert report commissioned by the Auschwitz Museum in 1994 to the Jahn Sehn Instytut Ekspertyz Sądowych (Institute for Forensic Research) based in Krakow (Markiewicz et al.) and states that its results “positively demonstrate that the alleged gas chambers were used to kill people” (van Pelt 2002, p. 355). I will not go into chemical matters here and would merely like to point out that the chemist Germar Rudolf has shown this expert report in question to be methodically and scientifically flawed and thus unfounded (Rudolf/Mattogno 2005, pp. 45-67; Rudolf 2003b, pp. 270-273).

— The Real Case For Auschwitz, p.494-495

Emphasis added in bold.  And I’ll end this with some comments from the YouTube page; comments that Myles is likely to ignore or have deleted, just like in the last few videos, where he cherrypicked some comments to use at the beginning of this video:

Time to debunk Myle’s video here. His whole “argument” boils down to a few assertions.
1. He claims only 300ppm of Hydrogen Cyanide gas after only 2 minutes is lethal for humans. This is false.
The average (estimated) lethal amount for humans is around 600ppm at an exposure time of 10 minutes.
2. He uses this claim as an excuse for why there isn’t any blue staining in the supposed “gas chambers” that can otherwise be found on Zyklon B fumigation/delousing chambers (used to kill lice.) The obvious flaw in this argument is that, even at smaller concentrations, the alleged gas chamber operations were happening every 10 minutes or so. The ultimate amount of Hydrogen Cyanide that would have passed through the supposed homicidal gas chambers would have been similar if not greater than the amount used in the delousing chambers. Myles gives an estimate for 16,000 ppm used to kill insects (over 24 hours)…
The homicidal gas chambers would need at least around 600ppm every instance, which could end up being around 1500-3000ppm every hour. That’s around 18,000-30,000ppm every day (12 hours.)
3. The last part of his “argument” is that the homicidal “gas chambers” were supposedly washed down with water and “chemicals” after each instance. The main problem with this claim is that the Prussian blue staining doesn’t simply wash off.
In fact water/humidity actually speeds up the Prussian blue staining reaction.
The idea that they washed the gas chamber out after each instance also doesn’t explain why we don’t see Prussian blue staining on different parts of the building like the outside walls, (which is what we see all over the delousing/fumigation buildings found in German camps.)
Hydrogen Cyanide is a liquid (or gas) which penetrates deep into walls, it doesn’t just sit on the surface layer like some kind of solid paint.
Washing it down with water would only send the Hydrogen Cyanide deeper into the bricks/walls.
As for the alleged ‘mystery chemical’ referred to by Myles, the quote he gave actually says that it was supposedly used to remove the “odor of the gas,” not to clean the walls from Prussian blue staining. Oops.

 

tadpolak69
12:13 “self-proclaimed specialist on execution chambers”? WRONG! At the time, Leuchter was THE US expert on gas chamber construction & had designed & constructed most, if not all, of the US gas chambers.< bit.ly/_Leuchter-Expert > N.B. Yes Leuchter got some items wrong & was later corrected by leading German chemist Germar Rudolf. bit.ly/_Leuchter-Reports-4 (Leuchter was a Holocaust believer until he visited the “crime scene” himself) Of course jews destroyed his career with LieKlone B gas! bit.ly/_Leuchter-persecution How “LAZY” of you Pyles Mower! (Your intellectual hemorrhoids are hemorrhaging!)
bz-5cf1119656e0d

RE: Debunking the Holocaust Denial (part 3)

“There is a principal which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance — that principal is contempt prior to investigation.”
Herbert Spencer

Ok, video 2 out of 2.  Not as long as the first one, so hopefully this will be the last post I make on this.  Let’s do it.

 

Point #4: Auschwitz was not a Tropical Resort (at least not for the Jews)

So getting past some of the frivolous bullshit, Myles mentions how German Commandant Arthur Liebehenschel replaced Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer as commander of Auschwitz on December 1, 1943 (ok, it was Rudolph Hoess, but now I want a fucking Santa Clause crossover with Nazis).  He was commander for 5 months, and during that time he expanded a water reservoir into a pool for people to swim in.  This is to attack the notion brought up by the documentary that the Jews were treated so well in these camps that they had a pool to swim in during their stay.  2 problems with this according to Myles:

1.) The pool not being built until Arthur’s arrival implies the Jews were treated like shit because they didn’t have a pool to swim in at a concentration camp, and thus goes against the message of the documentary that they were treated borderline luxuriously.

2.) The pool could only be used by SS men and privileged Aryan prisoners.

I’m not going to get into point 1 for now, other than to say he’s right about Arthur being responsible for improving the reservoir into a pool (and at the very least constructing some diving boards).  But regarding point 2, that is also a deceptive statement.

When I visited Auschwitz in 1998, I asked to see the swimming pool, but I was told that it was not on the tour. My tour guide told me that there were two swimming pools, one for the prisoners and one for the SS men, but she would not show me either pool. When I returned in 2005, the swimming pool for the prisoners was still not included on the tour, but I found it myself as I wandered around on my own in the early morning.

The swimming pool is now called a water reservoir on a sign board that was erected some time after my visit to Auschwitz in October 2005. The words on the sign board are in Polish, English and Hebrew; the sign reads as follows: “Fire brigade reservoir built in the form of a swimming pool, probably in early 1944.”

Source

So the (Jew) prisoners eventually got their own pool.  Seems a little strange they would even bother making the effort if they were in the middle of the genocidal version of the Final Solution (which was proposed in 1942, so I would imagine the slaughter would be underway by that time).

That stuff aside, now we get to the good stuff.  Crematorium I in Auschwitz.  And this is finally the point where Myles makes some very strong (counter) arguments.  After Toben points out how the Crematorium wasn’t built to be a gas chamber and is incapable of being used as a gas chamber for various reasons:

Likewise, Crematorium I did not always contain a gas chamber. Originally it was equipped with two (later three) cremation ovens with a morgue room behind them. It was not until late in 1941 that this morgue room was sealed up and five holes were cut into the roof, allowing Zyklon-B to be dropped in so it could be briefly used as a gas chamber.

Ok, so it needs to be determined if Crematorium I was ever used as a gas chamber to kill people (and not to disinfect clothing and bed sheets, to also eliminate lice and typhus and whatnot).

It helps to get a visual image of this place:

Auschwitz_gas_chamber
The alleged gas chamber.
Zyklon-B

Vent through which Zyklon-B was dumped.

So this is the chamber the prisoners were put in (supposedly they were convinced it was a shower room when going in here), where they would be locked in, and have Zyklon-B (made up of HCN, hydrocyanic acid; prussic acid) pellets dropped in.  And where were they dropped in from?  From the chimneys/vents on the roof.

And how does Zyklon-B work?  Well, apparently, there seem to be differing opinions on this.

Zyklon-B is a powerful insecticide which serves as a carrier for the gas Hydrocyanic acid, or HCN. It usually comes in the shape of small pellets or disks. (See Breitman, 203, for more detail about the early use of the gas at Auschwitz) HCN is the cause of death following the application of Zyklon-B. While interacting with iron and concrete, it creates Hydrocyanic compounds, which Leuchter admitted were found in the ruins of the gas chamber in Krematoria II. His finding was confirmed by findings of the Polish government.

HCN is extremely poisonous to humans. It is used in execution gas chambers in the US; the first was built in Arizona in 1920.

  • Holocaust denial often includes the claim that Germany in the 1940’s could not handle the “technical difficulties” inherent in using HCN for execution.

As noted above, these “difficulties” were easily solved in 1920. Moreover, the Germans had a lot of experience with HCN, as it was extensively used for delousing.

There were two types of gas chambers in Auschwitz: those used for delousing clothes (“delousing gas chambers”) and those used for killing people on a massive scale (“extermination gas chambers”). The delousing gas chambers were a standard feature, and were left intact by the SS (the extermination gas chambers were dynamited in an effort to conceal criminal traces).

  • Holocaust denial asserts that because more Hydrocyanic compounds were found in the delousing chambers in Auschwitz than in the ruins of the extermination gas chambers, mass murder using the gas could not have taken took place within, because the reverse would be true.

HCN is much more effective on warm-blooded animals, including humans, than it is on insects. The exposure period (to HCN) is much greater in delousing operations than in homicidal gassings. This means that a much lower concentration is necessary to kill people than to get rid of lice, etc. In delousing, concentrations of up to 16,000 ppm (parts per million) are sometimes used, and exposure time can be up to 72 hours; while 300 ppm will kill people in fifteen minutes or so.

[…]

For HCN, a concentration of 300 ppm (parts per million) kills humans within a few minutes.

Source

 

‘Zyklon B is known as prussic acid. Only one in two people can smell the cyanide – but it has the smell of bitter almonds and marzipan.

‘It is lighter than air and penetrates by inhalation into the smallest branches of the lungs. There it blocks cellular respiration.’

He went on: ‘The brain and the heart are first attacked. It begins with a stinging feeling in the chest, then it can cause spasmodic pain – similar to epileptic seizures. Death by cardiac-circulatory arrest occurs usually within seconds. Cyanide is one of the fastest-acting poisons.’

[…]

Dr Anders said it was unlikely that the poison worked at the same speed in all areas given the size of the gas chamber and the unfortunate people who were breathing lower concentrations would suffer much more.

He added: ‘A lower intoxication leads to a blockage of blood in the lungs and thereby causes shortness of breath.’

‘Commonly one speaks of water in the lungs, breathing will then always deeper and stronger, because the body craves after oxygen. The agony could last more than half an hour.’

[…]

‘The gas is lighter than air… It ascends in space, width first under the ceiling. In closed rooms, you must specify height as a risk factor.’

This meant that taller individuals died in agony first while smaller people, and children, could see the suffering taking place over their heads.

Source

So, because a lower concentration would be enough to kill humans compared to the higher concentration needed to sanitize clothing and sheets, less was used in the gas chambers that allegedly killed thousands (or hundreds of thousands), which accounts for their being little to no trace of Zyklon-B in these chambers.  Their traces are usually marked by a blue hue stained into the walls, indicating the Zyklon-B reaction to the iron in the walls.  Plus much of their traces would dissipate after the 40+ years before the first revisionists came to inspect and test these chambers for traces of Zyklon-B. The earliest of these tests is known as the Leuchter Reports, named after Fred A. Leuchter.  And it apparently didn’t help that the chamber they inspected wasn’t used that often:

In 1944, the building was converted into an air raid shelter.  […]  Its ovens were dismantled, the holes that were once used to drop Zyklon-B into were filled in, toilets were installed, and the gas chamber was subdivided with strong walls to support the ceiling. This is probably one of the reasons why it remained after the war when attempts were made by the Nazis to destroy all evidence of these gas chambers.

After the war, the camp was turned into a museum and, using blueprints dated September 25, 1941 and eyewitness testimonies, the gas chamber in Chamber 1 was restored. This is why it looks like the holes in the roof of the gas chamber have been smashed – because they have been, just like the originals were.

[…]

The [Leuchter] report analyzed multiple pieces of brick and the remains of the crematoria and gas chambers at Auschwitz (without the camps permission). The report stated that it was unable to find evidence of any cyanide-based compounds in the homicidal gas chambers and, therefore, they could not have been used to kill people. It goes on to say that it was able to find evidence of these compounds in Auschwitz’s delousing chambers.

This is a huge cornerstone of the revisionist conspiracy theory. They believe that Zyklon-B was only used for delousing infested clothing, and that it was not used to murder people. In the documentary, this section is even called “real gas chambers made for saving lives”.

There are multiple crippling errors with the Leuchter report, starting with the fact that the synthesis of these iron-based cyanide compounds is by no means a categorical sign of cyanide exposure. It requires a very high concentration of cyanide over a large period of time, and a source of iron.

There was also a problem with sampling in the Leuchter report. Rather than just testing the surface of the gas chambers, entire chunks of brick and mortar were smashed and ground up, then analyzed. This diluted these cyanaide-based compounds to below the detectable amount for the lab they hired.

The reason why they were able to decide the compounds using the same method in the walls of the delousing chambers was for two reasons. The first is that they survived the war, and were not exposed to the elements.  The second is that Zyklon-B was used in these rooms in a much higher concentration, and for a far longer time, in order to kill the parasites. Because of crackpots like Töben and the unnamed Australian narrator, competent scientist have tested the walls and found, under double-blind conditions, evidence of cyanide-based compounds.

In my opinion the “fake gas chamber” and the lack of cyanide-based compounds detected in the rubble of the gas chambers is the best evidence these “revisionists” have that the holocaust was faked. None of it stands up against even the slightest bit of scrutiny and, most of the time, it takes a massive leap of faith to believe in.

And to my surprise, Myles actually makes a visual reference to one of the more popular (though banned from Amazon) Holocaust revisionist book series, the Holocaust Books (yeah, I know, original title for a series), volume 16, the Leuchter Reports.

Anyway, that’s a lot to take in, and it doesn’t seem like these points can be refuted.  At least not easily.  So I’ll start with a small one that’s borderline tangent.  So earlier I quoted a source stating the first gas chambers (used for executions) were built in Arizona, USA in 1920.  And the first executions in those chambers were carried out in 1924.

The gas generator consisted of a crockery pot filled with a dilute solution (18%) of sulfuric acid with a mechanical release lever. The chamber had to be scrubbed with ammonia after the execution, as did the executee. Some 25 — 13-gram sodium cyanide pellets were used and generated a concentration of 3200 ppm in a 600 cubic foot chamber.

[…]

All systems employed the gas generator technique because it was the most effective and simplest procedure available up until the late 1960’s. No system ever was designed to use, or ever used, Zyklon B. The reason for this is quite simple. Zyklon B takes too long to evaporate (or boil off) the HCN from the inert carrier and requires heated air and a temperature controlled system. Not only is the gas not instant, but a danger of explosion always exists.

The overall gas mixture is generally below the lower explosion limit (LEL) of the gas air mixture of 0.32% (since the mixture should not normally exceed 3200 ppm), but the concentration of the gas at the generator (or as in the case of Zyklon B, at the inert carrier) is much greater and may well be 90% to 99% by volume. This is almost pure HCN and this condition may exist at points of time in pockets in the chamber. The ambient air temperature or the heated air temperature must be considerably higher and artificially controlled for Zyklon B (since evaporation is strictly a physical process), where, with the gas generator, the temperature can be lower and uncontrolled since the chemical reaction in the generator is self-catalytic after starting. Electrical contacts and switches must be kept at a minimum, explosion-proof and outside the chamber. Technology available only since the late 1960’s has enabled the Missouri system, which will be the most advanced system ever built, to utilize a gas vaporizer and delivery system for liquid HCN, eliminating the dangerous of handling and disposal of the prussic acid residual after the execution.

Zyklon B, which would seem on the surface to have been a more efficient means of supplying gas and eliminating the prussic acid residue problem, was not the solution to the problem. In fact, the use of Zyklon B would have increased the execution time and therefore lengthened the time for handling the dangerous gas and, also, because of the heater requirements, caused a risk of explosion. An alternate solution would have been to heat the gas externally and circulate the gas/air mixture through plumbing outside the chamber and back into the chamber as the DEGESCH delousing equipment did, but this would only have caused a greater risk of leakage and hazard to the users. It is poor design and extremely dangerous to allow the gas outside the pressurized chamber. The DEGESCH equipment was intended to be utilized in the open, or in a well-ventilated area, and only in the presence of trained personnel and not with untrained people present.

Source

So there’s a potential problem.  So if we are to believe that Zyklon-B was very potent towards killing humans (so potent that it’s said to work better against humans than it does against insects and clothing, which I find to be strange), even to the point that not too much needed to be used to get the job done (thus leaving less of a trace of it in the death chambers over these years), then what exactly did they do to air out these rooms once everyone was dead?  How did they air it out well enough and safely enough to where Germans (it would have to be German guards who went in there, otherwise Jewish prisoners would blow the whistle on the whole think shouting, “Jesus titty fucking Christ!  These are gas chambers, not showers!  Everyone rise up and revolt before they kill another few hundred of us!”) could go in and drag out the bodies and cremate them in another chamber in another building across the way, without any prisoners noticing (lest these fit labor workers start a prison riot; because they were used for labor work while in these camps, thus they were fit enough)?

Myles explains:

According to the book, ‘Anatomy of the Auschwitz Death Camp‘, a large fan was installed to remove the gas after it was used to murder people. However, the proximity of nearby buildings was still a problem. For this reason and more, the gas chamber in Crematorium I was only used for a small amount of time – from February 15, 1942, until sometime in the fall of 1942.

[So] only about 100,000 people were killed in this gas chamber.

So why isn’t that large fan at the Auschwitz camp today?  Because it was reconstructed using blueprints from 1941, before the fan was installed.  Regardless, this doesn’t address the other issue of needing warm temperatures to evaporate the HCN from the carriers (ie the pellets), especially considering it was almost always cold in those places.  Then again, perhaps the room warmed up enough with all those bodies huddled together.  Maybe they also had a heater to keep it warm?  Maybe warm shower water was used in combination?  At a temperature that reached over 78.3 degrees (the required temperature to vaporize HNC out of the pellets).  Doubtful.  Besides, it’s very dangerous to have anything electric and heat-generating near this stuff unless it’s in a controlled environment (gas chambers filled with living people do not count).

The reason for this is quite simple. Zyklon B takes too long to evaporate (or boil off) the HCN from the inert carrier and requires heated air and a temperature controlled system. Not only is the gas not instant, but a danger of explosion always exists.

Source

But I know what you might be thinking.  “Couldn’t they just ventilate the area after 30 minutes (to ensure everyone was dead) and wait an entire day or two before going in there to drag the bodies out and cart them to the next building to incinerate them (or just put them in a pit that got dug and burn the bodies there, which I guess no one would notice either)?”  Well apparently, during the 1942 time period, they would air the room out for just a few hours before emptying it out.  Later on, they would get more efficient after installing ventilation units, only needing to air it out for just 1 hour.

After this time had elapsed, the prisoners of the crematorium squad proceeded to burn the corpses. All of this took place in the deepest secrecy, with participation limited to the minimum number of SS men from the camp command and the Political Department.

Source

That, or…

Sonderkommando prisoners dragged the corpses out of the gas chambers.

Source

Who the hell are Sonderkommando prisoners?  Basically Jewish prisoners.

Now, you see, I’m having a hard time believing they could pull this off without others in the camp knowing about it.

And even that aside, there’s the issue of the technology required to properly ventilate this stuff in such an environment (as stated earlier with such technology only really existing once the 1960s came about).  And even worse, there are studies that indicate it would take longer than 1 hour, even if there was proper ventilation and proper temperatures to get rid of traces HNC.

Fumigation takes a minimum of 24 to 48 hours.

After the fumigation, the ventilation of the area must take a minimum of ten
hours, depending on the location (and volume), and longer if the building has
no windows or exhaust fans. 58 The fumigated area must then be chemically
tested for the presence of gas before entering. 59 Gas masks are sometimes
used, but are not safe and should not be used for more than ten (10) minutes. 60
A complete chemical suit must be worn to prevent skin poisoning. 61 The
warmer the temperature and the drier the location, the faster and safer the
handling will be.

[…]

This value is recommended by DEGESCH for fumigations in rooms without special heating and ventilation devices. Minimum ventilation time is set to be 10 hrs. or even 20 hrs

— Source: Fred A. Leuchter, Robert Faurisson, Germar Rudolph, The Leuchter Reports: Critical Edition.  5th Edition.  Holocaust Handbooks Vol.16.  Castle Hill Publishers. Uckfield, TN22 9AW, UK.  March 2017.  page 29

— That’s right, I’ve got the Leuchter Reports.  Let’s see how effective Myles’ attacks on them really are.

So basically the official witness testimony stories would try to have us believe that they would use Zyklon-B on up to about 300 people in gas chambers, initially in non-ventilated chambers before upgrading to chambers that could be ventilated, spend less than 10 hours (sometimes as little as 1 hour) ventilating those chambers, hoping the temperatures would reach and stay above 78.3 degrees (and hoping the ventilated gas doesn’t make anyone nearby sick, especially if the ventilated air isn’t being dispersed 40 feet above the building, in an area that isn’t sheltered from the wind by other structures), and then have either some Nazis dressed up in special suits with gas masks to go in and take out these bodies, or have Sonderkommando prisoners come in (I don’t recall them ever saying they would be wearing protection), take these bodies to a pit or another crematorium where they would be burned, and all the while keep up the pretense that all the other prisoners in the camp wouldn’t figure out that these weren’t shower rooms?  In a place where they bothered to keep them alive long enough to enjoy swimming in a pool, have sports, and some live music played every now and then?  And Myles Power says the revisionist story is more far-fetched than the official one?

And the decontamination procedures get worse from there (not to mention people puking and shitting themselves):

The temperature of the walls and the air within the facility, and the intake
air, must be kept at least 10 degrees above the boiling point of the hydrocyanic
acid (78.3 degrees F) to prevent condensation of HCN on the walls, floor and
ceiling of the facility, as well as in the exhaust system. If the temperature is
below 79 degrees F and condensation occurs, 63 the facility must be decontaminated with chlorine bleach or ammonia, the former being the more effective.
This is accomplished by spraying the walls either automatically or manually.
If done manually, protective suits (generally neoprene) must be worn and the technicians must utilize air breathing cylinders, as gas masks are unsafe and
dangerous. 64 The interior of the building must be evacuated longer to allow
the chlorine bleach vapors to neutralize the liquid HCN in the exhaust system.
The interior of the building must be washed with water and thoroughly
mopped and dried before the next use.

Additionally, a check of the air inside the building must be done to determine whether all of the HCN has been removed. The test may be either by gas
detector or by the copper acetate/benzidene test. In the former, an electronic
readout is provided with detection to 10 ppm. In the other, a benzidene solu-
tion is mixed with a copper acetate solution and is used to moisten a piece of
test paper which turns blue in varying degrees if HCN is present.

— The Leuchter Reports: Critical Edition

Not to mention virtually everyone, revisionists and non-revisionists, tends to agree that these gas chambers did not start out as gas chambers.  They were remodeled to act as such.  Which means they would need to acquire and put in place air-tight doors/vents to make this all work and not risk gas leakages.  You’d think that would also be a giveaway for the prisoners.

“Why does the shower room have an air-tight doorway?”

“Because you touch yourself at night.”

And even all that aside, when Myles talks about the inefficient method by which one Leuchter Report tested for Zyklon-B traces, the most current edition addresses this very thing:

Leuchter’s sampling procedure has been criticized. For some details of his methods see Errol Morris’s documentary Mr. Death: The Rise and Fall of Fred A. Leuchter, Jr., Fourth Floor Productions, May 12, 1999; premiered January 1, 1999 during the Sundance Film Festival in Park City (Utah); vgl. William Halvorsen, “Morris Shines a Light on Fred Leuchter,” The Revisionist, Nr. 3, 2000 (www.codoh.com/library/document/411). For example, in one case Leuchter picked up a brick fragment out of a water puddle in the collapsed Morgue 1 of Krema II. Such bricks are neither likely to form long-term stable iron cyanide compounds, nor can anyone safely determine the exact origin and history of the brick fragments that Leuchter fished out of the puddle.

— Footnote 122, page 44

It admits this potential bit of evidence is likely weak, but that’s cherrypicking compared to all the other stuff these reports contain (I suspected Myles would be cherrypicking from these reports).  For instance, one other instance of how they detected traces:

The detection level of 1 mg/kg for this method was determined for liquid samples. Because building material samples are solid and usually contain large amounts of carbonates (mortar, cement, concrete), which can disturb the method, the detection level is probably considerably higher than 1 mg/kg. Repeated analyses of mortar and concrete samples showing results of lower than 10 mg/kg have shown this to be true, since the results could not be reproduced reliably. It is therefore most appropriate to state that test results below 10 mg/kg of solid samples rich in carbonates cannot be interpreted properly and ought to be considered zero. See my expert report, ibid., pp. 253, 258.

— Footnote 129, page 45

There’s more, and the measurements and methods get more numerous and just as, if not more, complicated from there, but I’ll end it with another inconvenient fact.  The doors that were installed to try and keep people in, air-tight, and fit for gas chambers, were incapable of doing any of the above.

However, all that was ever installed, and later found, in Auschwitz were doors such as shown in Figure 26. The simple latch to close this door and the two simple hinges which held it in place would have had no chance to withstand the pressure of a crowd of hundreds of panicking people.

door

— page 99

There’s more I could put out to address Myles’ rebukes of the documentary (though, to be fair, Myles was right to criticize various aspects of the documentary, as it doesn’t have many of its facts straight), but this post is long enough.  And I’m tired of working on this.  And, fuck it, because Myles didn’t feel the urge to put in some extra effort to address the other points.  Besides, he said it himself, this is arguably the biggest cornerstone of revisionist conspiracy theory, that Zylon-B was used for disinfecting clothing/sheets, not for killing people.  At the very least, I’ve done enough to put some cracks into the foundation of his arguments.  Plus, I’d rather have people look up this stuff for themselves.  And hopefully overturn the ban on holocaust denial in their countries while they’re at it.

 

PS: And it turns out, after whining about how depressing it was doing this video series, and how pointless it was to do it because holocaust deniers/revisionists won’t change their minds no matter what, he goes and makes a fucking sequel video that goes after the Leuchter Reports.  Goddamnit!  I don’t want to do a long dragged out series!  It’s already a pain in the ass having unfinished work because of that with my 90s Nostalgia series, and the War on Film Culture series!  And yet, I can’t completely trust myself to finish the latter without tackling these holocaust conspiracies (and their rebuttals) in a manner I deem adequate, because that relates very very heavily to film culture.  Even to this day.

PPS: By the way, it’s not a good idea to even hint at scoffing at people who got sent to prison just for questioning whether or not an event happened, even if it is the holocaust (at this point, especially if it’s the holocaust).  Seriously, Myles has an attitude that borderline, “Good, fuck’em,” when mentioning holocaust revisionists that got sent to prison for publishing works on the subject or speaking out about it.

RE: Debunking Holocaust Denial (part 2)

Point #3: Reasons for the International Jewish Boycott of German Goods, and The Final Solution

Ok, can we get to the Holocaust part now?

This time he says that their hand was forced when it comes to putting Jewish people into concentration camps. That they had no choice, they had to do it, and Jewish people are to blame for that.

Eh, close enough.

Guess I spoke too soon on my previous analysis. Myles does cover “the Final Solution.” The points he makes about why this didn’t mean deporting the Jews out of Germany to Madagascar:

Point 1: Tobin (person who stars in the documentary) states international Zionists organized a boycott in response to Germany’s plan to deport 4 million Jews to Madagascar, making it too financially difficult for Germany to pull that off (that does sound far-fetched). However, the Madagascar plan was proposed in June 1940, seven years after the international Jewish boycott, and 10 months into the war. This makes the timing off with Tobin’s statement, and more likely that the international boycott was in response to German laws made that targeted Jewish people directly.

Point 2: Madagascar was a French colony which Germany had no jurisdiction over, thus Germany couldn’t even hope to deport Jews there until well into the war after they had taken over France.

Point 3: Because the British naval blockade made this deportation plan non-viable even after Germany took France, this deportation plan was shelved in 1942, when the actual “accepted by official historians” version of the Final Solution began.

Ok, so the first thing we should establish is when the first German laws were made that directly targeted Jews.

The first major law to curtail the rights of Jewish citizens was the “Law for the Restoration of the Professional Civil Service” of April 7, 1933, according to which Jewish and “politically unreliable” civil servants and employees were to be excluded from state service.

Source

Next, establish when Judea declared war on Germany. As shown in the previous post, this was done as early as March 24, 1933, at least 2 weeks before any German laws were enacted. Plus there was this message given by Bernard Lecache, President of the World Jewish League, in 1932:

Germany is our public enemy number one. It is our object to declare war without mercy against her.

Bernard Lecache

So if nothing else, we can at least rule out that these boycotts were done as a direct response to German laws targeting Jewish people, since they were started before those German laws were even enacted. Not to mention some Zionist groups in Germany opposed these boycotts. In any case, things escalated when Germany decided to boycott Jewish goods in response. As you could imagine, things would only get worse from there.

german jewry appeals that demonstrations not be held

Now to establish when this Final Solution was actually proposed, almost. The Europa documentary gets into this a little over 18 minutes into episode 4 (Judea Declares War On Germany chapter). There was this other deportation attempt Germans tried to make prior to that, which they did soon after the international boycott, known as the Haavara Agreement (aka the Transfer Agreement). German officials compromised and attempted to make a deal in secret negotiation with Palestine center of the World Zionist Organization, a deal to deport German Jews to Palestine (similar to the deal Britain made with the elite Zionists in exchange for the Zionists getting America into the war). This deal was made in August 25, 1933. The deal was controversial, as not all Zionists thought it was a good idea. And there was a violent response in Palestine.

On June 16, 1933, the Revisionist newspaper Hazit Haam published what many considered a death threat: “There will be no forgiveness for those who for greed have sold out the honor of their people to madmen and anti-Semites…. The Jewish people have always known how to size up betrayers…and it will know how to react to this crime.” That evening, Chaim Arlosoroff [one of the negotiators of the Haavara Agreement] and his wife Sima took a Shabbat walk along the beach in north Tel Aviv at a point now occupied by the Tel Aviv Hilton. Two men dressed as Arabs approached the couple and asked for the time. Sima was worried, but Arlosoroff assured her, “Don’t worry, they are Jews.” A few moments later, the men returned, one with a Browning automatic. A bullet flashed into Arlosoroff’s chest, mortally wounding him. Two Revisionists were charged with the murder and sentenced to death, but they were released later on technical grounds.

“The Holocaust: Could We Have Stopped Hitler?” by Edwin Black

As for the Madagascar plan itself, this was proposed in August 1940 (after France fell to Germany in June 1940), and was scrapped when the British invaded the island in 1942.

January 20th, 1942, is when the Final Solution was actually proposed, at the Wannsee Conference in Germany. According to the document from this conference that is available online, this primarily composed of plans for deporting millions of Jews to various countries around the world, and trying to factor in costs for doing so. Closest line I could find in regards to exterminating Jews is this one:

Under appropriate direction the Jews are to be utilized for work in the East in an expedient manner in the course of the final solution. In large (labor) columns, with the sexes separated, Jews capable of work will be moved into these areas as they build roads, during which a large proportion will no doubt drop out through natural reduction.

The remnant that eventually remains will require suitable treatment; because it will without doubt represent the most [physically] resistant part, it consists of a natural selection that could, on its release, become the germcell of a new Jewish revival. (Witness the experience of history.)

I don’t know about you, but this doesn’t exactly sound like a plan for genocide to me. Then again, they do argue that references to “resettlement” were code for “kill.” But under the circumstances, we have to go with the sentiment that revisionists argue that this is code for nothing, that they did intend to just deport Jews out of Germany, and that was that.

So, to wrap up this section, yes, Myles is correct in pointing out the error in the JDWoG documentary regarding the timing issue of this plan. In fact, Toben incorrectly associates the Final Solution with the Madagascar plan, and even worse incorrectly associates Germany’s reason for doing to be in response to the bankers, prior to the boycott. There were at least 3 plans regarding the deportation of Jews: the Haavara Agreement in 1933 (which was proposed after the international Jewish boycott), the Madagascar proposal in 1940 and scrapped in 1942, and then the Final Solution plan proposed in January 1942. However, his statement that the Final Solution was to eradicate the Jews is wrong (though we’re not done covering this aspect of the arguments yet), and so is his statement that the boycott was in response to anti-semitic laws (since the first of those laws came after the international boycott started).

 





 

Myles then questions the German concentration camps, why gays/retards/etc. were initially imprisoned there, and then why the Jewish people were imprisoned there afterwards if they were supposedly the enemy of the German people. You know, it’s kinda funny that he even asks that question, since that seems to hurt his own rebuttal, regarding how much the Nazis hated the Jews. But in any case, it’s worth noting that the majority portion of Jews who did wind up in concentration camps were in fact Communists or Communist sympathizers, which is basically what the corrupt Jewish bankers were that put Germany into their post-WWI in the first place, which also caused the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia prior to WWI. The Germans had a reason to be wary, especially with the cries for bloodshed made by international Zionist groups even prior to WWII.

 





 

Then Myles addresses the 6 million number, when Toben mentions how this number was brought up well before the alleged holocaust, in 1919, by Martin Glynn. He shrugs this off as a coincidence, and talks of how other historians came up with other numbers for the holocaust. Nothing is mentioned of the many other times this 6 million number came up, associating it with a holocaust, even prior to this 1919 number, even going as far back as being mentioned in the Talmud (basically the Jewish equivalent of the Bible). That makes it more than just a coincidence.

What are we meant to see apart from an interesting coincidence?

Repeat a lie enough times, people will start to believe it. Or more correctly, have those in power repeat this story enough to the masses via papers and articles and media, and people who don’t fact-check it heavily will believe it. You know, like how Myles believes the mainstream story we’ve all been spoon-fed about Hitler, the Nazis, and the holocaust.

And no Myles, you fucking smart-ass, this number wasn’t brought up in 1919 to attempt to “fake” a holocaust during that time period, or in any of the time periods previous. It’s a reference to a prophecy regarding that number that is found in the Talmud, much as the book of Revelations, and Gilgamesh, have prophecies about the end of days. A prophecy elitest Zionist Jews decided to try and make real to suit their needs (not to be associated with the general Jewish population, which is what Myles is implying). Well, so far, they’ve succeeded.

 





 

And now Myles is jumping the gun a bit here, discussing the numbers of those who died in these concentration camps before allowing the documentary to at least get to the concentration camp part.

 





 

An interesting and surprising fact about the Holocaust is that we don’t actually have a signed order from Hitler actually telling people to kill X amount of Jews. Now there are many reasons for this. The first reason is that the Nazi regime was fairly secretive about what they were doing. They didn’t want to enrage the people they were fighting, and they didn’t want to enrage their fellow Germans, so they kept this on the down-low.

The second reason is when the Germans were retreating, they actually went to great effort to destroy evidence that showed what they were doing.

The third reason is that there isn’t one Final Solution. These things evolved over time. And even although there were different methods, different things going on, they had one goal in mind, and that was to exterminate the Jewish population under Germany’s control.

Theories, of which Myles doesn’t cite any evidence to back up. I mean, if he’s going to counter Toben’s points in that manner, I mine as well as do the same and not take his rebuttals all that seriously. They have just as much ground, likely less, than the points Toben makes regarding the Final Solution. Granted, Toben made some errors regarding the timing and destinations with the Final Solution, but Myles has been shown to not have his facts entirely straight either. Next!

 




 

The Wannsee Protocols. Documents in German used at the Nuremberg Trials as evidence that the Final Solution was for the purpose of exterminating the Jews (and likely one of the earliest points in history where the Nazis were accused of doing this outside of Zionist papers. Toben points out how they were faked (mainly because of German grammar usage). And what does Myles do? He says:

If you say can’t trust the authenticity of the Wannsee Protocols because after the war the Allies had access to stamps, typewriters, and letterheads, then what documents can you trust? The answer should be, you can’t trust any of them. At least that’s the answer this holocaust denier should be giving. But he doesn’t do that. Instead this skepticism is only put towards things that don’t back up his warped views of the holocaust. Anything that he thinks can be used to back him up, that’s fine, that’s naturally authentic! But this, this one document that doesn’t back him up, it’s a fake.

That is not a good argument to be making. Myles accuses him of cherrypicking (which, to be fair, is plausible). Yet Myles is doing the same, with which arguments of Tobens he addresses. Granted, he has shown that Toben has made errors on at least one of his points. And also granted, he shouldn’t be expected to address every single point that’s in the documentary. Regardless, he can also be accused of cherrypicking some of Toben’s points. Plus there’s the bandwagon fallacy much of Myles’ remarks lean on, and the composition fallacy.

Regardless, Myles does get around to directly addressing the grammar issue, stating the writer of the document was an Austrian German named Adolph Eichmann. His Austrian descent accounts for the awkward grammar used in those Wannsee Protocol documents, or so Myles argues. And he argues by saying that this “might” have something to do with the grammatical errors.

Adolf Eichmann

The thing is, these are the same Wannsee protocols of which I got a hold of an English translation from the link above (regarding the January 20, 1942 document). If that’s the same document used to condemn the Germans of genociding Jews, then they had a poor translator or a liar. If it’s not the same document, then fakes were used. Either that, or there are other authentic documents I haven’t seen yet.

It is worth looking at how revisionists deal with the testimony of Adolf Eichmann, who was more or less the only participant to deny neither Wannsee nor its purpose. Of course, during his Jerusalem trial and the pre-trial interrogations, Eichmann embedded his testimony on Wannsee in his general defense strategy, and historians should use it very cautiously. Nevertheless, Eichmann contributed valuable information on the development of the Conference as well as details. For example, he admitted his participation, that he was responsible for taking notes and writing the Protocol. He also admitted he contributed to the preparation and follow-up tasks, and confirmed that the topic was the genocide of European Jewry. Revisionists either keep silent about Eichmann’s testimony, simply deny it or claim that Eichmann had been tortured and/or brainwashed. It is telling that none of the revisionists mentions that during his stay in Argentina in the 1950s, as a free man and without any constraints, Eichmann told the same things to his former SS comrade Willem Sassen during the course of an interview.

Source

Adolf Eichmann had escaped Germany post-war, and fled to Argentina, thought he was free, but was then captured and extradited to Israel on May 11, 1960, and put on a highly publicized trial there alongside John Demjanjuk. He would later be hung in Tel Aviv, Israel on May 31, 1962. I’d hardly call living in hiding under a false identity, and dodging in and out of the Middle East for years before settling in Argentina in 1958, being a free man without any constraints.

In any case, while he is part-Austrian, he wasn’t born there. He moved from Germany to Austria in 1913 (when he was 7 years old), and later moved back to Germany after losing his job in Austria due to the Great Depression, and would join the Nazi party in April 1932. While this could account for his grammar issues, since he was most likely taught to write while in Austria (Upper Austria and Linz, Austria to be more precise), there’s still that possibility that, during those 2 years in Israeli captivity before the trial, that he was tortured and brainwashed into giving the confession he did. Keep in mind Israel came into independence May 14, 1948, well before Eichmann was captured. Considering Israel was ground zero for Jews and Zionists at the time, who no matter how you look at holocaust events, would definitely hold a grudge against someone like Eichmann, it’s not exactly far-fetched to believe he was tortured to an extent.

So yes,  this is all suspect.

It’s also suspect that Myles didn’t point any of that out. And so ends part 1 of his 2 part series in tackling the JDWoG documentary.    To be continued…

ezgif-4-fb7e60acbdd8

RE: Debunking Holocaust Denial (part 1)

Some people believe in conspiracy theories because it gives them a sense of comfort and security.  You see, they much prefer to live in a world where everything is orchestrated by shadowy figures than the chaotic world we live in, because then at least there’s some form of control.  Other people like the sense of power it gives them.  After all, they’re the ones that have this privileged knowledge, and this sense of power they might not be getting in their real life.  However there are certain conspiracy theories that come form a much darker place, where people bend reality to back up and justify their dislike and even hatred toward a certain group of people.  And there is no better example than those who distort or flat out deny the facts of the holocaust.

Myles Power

I could’ve named this, “RE: Debunking Holocaust Denial Documentary ‘Judea Declares War on Germany,'” but I thought that would be too long of a title.  You know, like the title “The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford,” (still haven’t seen that movie by the way).

Anyway, I’ve been casually keeping an eye out for something that would attack the position given by that film Europa: The Last Battle, and have finally stumbled onto one.  Made by that guy who did those debunking 9/11 truther’s series on youtube (which he has now condensed into one big video).  While this video doesn’t address Europa directly, it does address an aspect of it, attacking a documentary that was used as a source in the Europa documentary.  It attacks this little documentary made around 1997 (4 years after Schindler’s List was released) titled Judea Declares War on Germany.

Well, I’m interested in seeing if his criticism and “debunking the debunkers” points stand up to scrutiny.  So, I have downloaded his 2-part videos, and the JDWoG video, just to ensure I have copies just in case youtube decides to take them down just as they took down Spielberg’s Hoax: The Last Days of the Big Lie (that’s right, I’m coming for Spielberg and Schindler’s List after this one).  I’ll do so by going through his videos, and addressing each point as they come up.

 

Point #1: Denying the Holocaust is Done for the Purpose of Justifying Hatred Towards A (Jewish) Group of People

This is an assumption, the main assumption being that holocaust deniers are wrong and delusional and driven by hate.  Which might be true for those neo-nazi assholes who suffer from delusions that go beyond the holocaust.  But it’s a dangerous assumption to make if you’re trying to equate all holocaust deniers with those types of people.

Besides, accepting the validity of the Holocaust does something similar.  It justifies the hatred towards Germans, and adopts a guilt complex towards a good portion of the civilized world, in a manner suggesting, “You let this happen, you didn’t stop the Nazis sooner.”  Plus that bombardment of Holocaust victim support commercials (why the fuck would they still need money now this many years later!?  Did the fucking Nazi’s give them cancer and retardation and make them cripples too?  I’d rather give those funds to veterans of more recent wars!).  The holocaust has become a multi-million dollar industry, with many organizations profiting from it.  It would be nice to know whether they are profiting from a lie or truth.

So we’re left with a situation where either the Nazi-Germans were irredeemable assholes who deserved to be offed as they were in Inglorious Basterds (among other films) and deserved the treatment they got post-WWII, and to have those ancestors disrespected.  Or that the (elitist) Jews deserve the hate they get today for falsifying evidence to support the Holocaust to justify hatred towards Nazi-Germans.  Or perhaps somewhere in-between.  Helps to listen to both sides and consider the facts (or determine which are actual facts) to get a better idea.

Anyway, one of the reasons why holocaust deniers are around is because they believe criminalization of holocaust denial, and promotion of holocaust belief, is to subliminally attack Nazis to the point that no one will want to even attempt their method of government and economy ever again, a nationalist socialist nation, where they had their own independent form of banking and currency, and a belief in helping/supporting their fellow man/citizen/culture.  As opposed to being reliant on the alternatives, where banking is not run by the nation itself (among other factors).

Of course, these reasonings and assumptions don’t mean much without evidence to back them up.  So…

 

Point #2: The Timing of the International Jewish Boycott Against German Products, and Bloody Sunday

So it is stated that the 1933 headline, “Judea Declares War on Germany” came in response to the mistreatment of Jews in Germany.  According to the Europa documentary, the actual reason they did this was in response to Germany rising up, led by Hitler, to overthrow the Jewish rule, which was more or less set in place after WWI.  The (Communist) Jews controlled the German economy and the banks, and Germany was suffering under it.  Even official historical scholars will admit Germany wasn’t doing very well financially, under a crushing debt put upon them as a consequence of WWI. Just to give an example, Hitler had Louis De Rothschild (yes, THAT Rothschild, that banking family) arrested in Austria and held until a release was negotiated, where the Nazis were paid $21 million for his release, arguably the largest ransom payment in history; Rothschild would later immigrate to the United States.  This happened in 1938, a year before WWII officially began (via Germany usurping Poland).

Once Germany began to thrive under their new rule and policy and independence, the elitist Communist Jews became enraged that a country was managing to be successful outside of their financial control, so they called for the boycott, and eventually utilized their influence across nations (partly from communist infiltration, which is backed by the novel Blacklisted by History, written by M. Stanton Evans) to have an actual war against Germany, leading to WWII.

Anyway, the alleged hostilities the Jews claimed to be facing in Nazi Germany during this time.  This likely relates, at least in-part, to Hitler outlawing the debt-based system Germany was suffering under, punishing anyone attempting to re-implement it by death.  You know, so he could guarantee a complete replacement, and removing/eliminating the previous bankers in the process.  Other than that, Germany supposedly hadn’t enacted any anti-Jewish laws, just laws against the previous banking system, which may have ended up targeting the Jews because a good portion of the Jews were the bankers.

Myles Power states that the documentary gets the timing wrong on this, not by attacking any of the above points, but rather by going to the topic of Germany attacking Poland.  September 3-4, 1939 (over 6 years after the headline “Judea Declares War on Germany”); Bromberg, Poland (the city is actually spelled Bydgoszcz, but that’s just as fucking hard to read as it is to pronounce, so I’m going with Bromberg); Bloody Sunday, where ethnic Germans were killed by the Polish.  The number killed is disputed among historians, but the Germans would initially claim it was nearly 5,800 that were killed, and then later raise that number to 58,000 (and it is very tempting to point out the irony of this, when considering the holocaust numbers and how much Poland reduced the official death count at Auschwitz from 4 million to 1.5 million).

So the first thing Myles seems to dispute is that the documentary utilizes the 58k number because it was the Nazi propaganda number (there-bye implying the number should be much closer to 5.8k).  The second thing he disputes is the reason for Germany invading Poland.  He implies it was a power grab, as opposed to Germany either retaking land that they believe they unjustly lost due to the Treaty of Versailles made post-WWI, or in response to the massacre of German civilians done in the lands in Poland lost from Germany because of the aforementioned treaty.  The third thing brought up is that Germany signed a non-aggression pact with the Soviet Union (August 23, 1939) in the hopes this would prevent them from acting against Germany invading Poland.  Fourth, that Germany intended to invade Poland August 26th, but delayed after Britain signed a treaty with Poland, declaring they would provide military support should they be attacked.  Fifth, Germany staged false attacks against themselves in order to create propaganda supporting an invasion of Poland.  These false flag attacks would be known as Operation Himmler (aka Operation Canned Goods), named after Heinerich Himmler, the man responsible for coming up with these false flag attacks.

See Europa chapter An Unholy Alliance (44:40). (also worth seeing the chapter preceding it, The Polish Corridor)

As early as October 1930, Die Liga der Grossmacht (an influential Polish newspaper) expressed interest in preparing for a conflict with Germany, and a defeat of Germany.  This would not be the last Polish paper to stir up violence against Germany, let alone the German civilians living in Poland.

August 15, 1939, the Polish ambassador in Paris stated, “It will be the Polish army that will invade Germany on the first day of war.”

Hitler declared to the British ambassador in August 25, 1939, “Poland’s provocations have become intolerable.”  And in September 1939, Hitler declared that Poland committed at least 30 border violations in the month of August 1939.  During that time period, it is stated that the Polish were committing atrocities to those of German descent (it’s a bit complicated, but a lot of Germans wound up in Poland due to some treaties signed post-WWI that divided Germany up, and split off a section from it that became part of Poland (ex: the city of Danzig, cutting off East Prussia), more-or-less, which accounts for those who were initially German citizens pre-WWI to be caught in this awkward situation of being in a country that stated to be no longer their own, despite living off the same land as before).

Now to be fair, Europa seems to have a bit of an error here (an error Myles states that the JDWoG documentary also makes, except more obviously).  Europa seemed to imply that Hitler responded to the Bloody Sunday massacre by invading Poland on September 1, 1939.  And yet that was 2 days before Bloody Sunday happened.  So in actuality, Hitler had Germany invade Poland before Bloody Sunday occurred.  That being said, Bloody Sunday indicates the worst incident (that took place over the course of 2 days) of the massacre of Germans in Poland prior to the war.  Such crimes were committed on a smaller scale during August 1939.  The invasion occurred in response to those previous massacres, with the Bloody Sunday one seeming to take place practically as a response to Germany invading Poland, by seriously escalating the intensity of the massacres.  And the slaughter of German civilians would continue until about September 18, 1939, when Germany had retaken enough territory of what was lost via the Treaty of Versailles.

In any case, Europa seems to go with this 58k number as well, though now it’s not entirely clear if the 58k refers strictly to Bloody Sunday (of which at least 5.5k German civilians were slaughtered), or refers to the slaughter of German civilians throughout Poland before Germany managed to invade and push in far enough to stop the slaughter.  Either way, the Germans were a persecuted minority in Poland (persecuted due to Jewish control of the news, who published such propaganda promoting violence; sound familiar to stuff going on today?).  And there were 12,857 identified dead bodies (separate from the “unidentified” numbers) in Bromberg, something The Wehrmacht War Crimes Bureau (among some other historians, though not all) agree with.  Myles states that more recent historians put that number at much lower than what the Wehrmacht War Crimes Bureau indicate, but he doesn’t bother citing any of them.

There was also the whole “unholy alliance” theory, that Britain, France, Poland, and the Soviet Union (with them joining last) were planning to unite against Germany to wage a war on them from all fronts, and have the U.S. intervene if necessary (France would do something similar).  A book written in 1938 by Jewish author Emil Ludwig titled A New Holy Alliance would plot out this very strategy.  Hitler learned about this potential alliance, so he reached out to Stalin to sign a peace pact in order to avoid fighting on 2 fronts, though he wanted to avoid conflict altogether.  Plus, the Allies didn’t mention the Soviet Union invading Poland from the East and doing massacres far worse than anything the Germans were accused of doing to Poland during the war (not to mention this allowed for them to etch closer towards Germany without needing to declare war on them in the process).  Plus the Unholy Alliance would later stab Poland in the back after the war and basically hand it over to the Soviet Union on a silver platter post-WWII (and would retain a firm grip on them until the wall fell in 1989, ushering the end of not just the Cold War, but of the Soviet’s hold over Poland).

So, if those massacre numbers are at least in the ballpark (though, honestly, I think just knowing of a massacre of over 5k civilians would be enough to cause outrage and war mongering), and because the Polish newspapers encouraged violence against Germans (which were carried out), and because Britain and France encouraged Poland to hit at Germany to provoke them into a war, let alone Poland’s attacks at the German border that had been occurring since the end of WWI, that puts a different light under this Operation Himmler, this false flag operation.  It hardly even seemed necessary, especially since this operation was carried out August 31st, well after the attacks on German civilians within or near Poland had already started.

On the other hand, there were also reports from Poland that these attacks on German civilians were done in response to the German civilians attacking them.  Possibly to assist German special forces which initiated firefights against the Poles near the border.  There’s a lot of different stories flying around about the incidents here and there, it’s pretty much impossible to keep it all straight or to get a clear picture.  All the more reason to create false flags so that a clear picture can be made for the civilians in Germany to back an invasion of Poland (which was allegedly done to retake that territory lost via the Treaty of Versailles).

The possible reasons for having Operation Canned Goods go into effect become more numerous when taking all these factors into account, but one likely scenario is because Hitler wanted to stop the massacre of Germans within Poland before they got worse, even if he had to have Himmler do false-flags to do it (similar to cops planting evidence on criminals who were actually guilty, but had difficulty finding evidence that could be used in a court of law).  Or maybe Hitler was confident enough in Germany’s chances in a war against Poland, Britian, France, and potentially Russia (a reason I’m hesitant to believe in).  Or maybe it was for the reasons Myles Power implies.  Either way, Germany had reason alone just to respond to the killing of German civilians in or near Poland.

Heinrich Himmler

And of course Germany executed some Polish civilians in retaliation for the massacre.  It was stated mobs were the ones primarily responsible for these atrocities, and last I checked, mobs aren’t made up of soldiers.

Christ, I’ve typed up all this explaining the intricacies of the Jewish boycott and the Poland/Germany relation to the Bloody Sunday incident, and we haven’t even gotten to the fucking Holocaust yet.  In any case, this attempt by Myles to discredit the documentary before it even gets to the subject it wishes to document can be swatted aside.  Plus, this pompous schmuck decided to concentrate on Bloody Sunday, and not the other stuff brought up such as the Unholy Alliance, the “Final Solution” being the deporting of Jews from Germany to Madagascar, and Britain agreeing to give Palestine to the Jews after the war in exchange for the internationalist Jews getting the U.S. involved in the war.  But he doesn’t want to cover those inconvenient points now does he?  Or even the fact that Poland was the first fucking country in Europe to build the first 2 concentration camps, and imprison Germans in them after WWI (let alone Britain being the first country to build a concentration camp anywhere).  Plus the mention of Bloody Sunday wasn’t brought up until a little over 12 minutes had passed, and it’s not a topic that’s dwelled upon in the documentary.

Jesus Christ, I didn’t think I was going to have to make this into a multi-parter.  Will address the other points at a later time.

Europa: The Last Battle (2017) review

So today is April 20th.  A day of infamy.  Where everyone is encouraged to roll a joint and smoke it; bake a batch of edibles and eat ’em.  It’s international pot day!  It’s a day to celebrate!

It’s also Hitler’s birthday.  The man who has been considered the most vile, racist, fascist, inhumane villain ever known to man (some would consider him worse than Stalin).  The man who founded the Nazis.  The man responsible for the Holocaust.  The man responsible for attempting to take over Europe.  The man responsible for making plans for Nazis to set up a base on the moon and eventually take over the world.  Well ok, that last bit might be a bit over the top.

Actually, there are those who say that virtually everything in the previous paragraph is over the top, minus the birthday.  That he wasn’t as villainous as many were and are taught.  That there wasn’t really a Holocaust.  That he wasn’t planning on taking over Europe, then the world, then the moon.  How much of that is true and how much of it isn’t?  Well, a documentary certainly aims to tell as much.

 

Rated: 4 / 5

Understand that any film we credit with changing the world is a distraction. Films don’t change the world. They react to changes in the world.

Sally Jane Black

I disagree with the above quote.  Because it’s been proven that propaganda can sway minds and thus influence a change in a community, in a nation, and in the world.  And they don’t necessarily react to changes either, they can cause these changes.  Many wouldn’t disagree that The Birth of a Nation (1915) made some changes in the United States, breathing new life into the Ku Klux Klan, which stuck around decades afterwards before dissipating again (except in the movies where they are bashed, which seems to happen roughly once a year).  But an even bigger reason to disagree with it is because those who have owned all the major film studios since that very era have pretty much all been Jews.  That in of itself isn’t necessarily a bad thing, since we all like a good movie.  But we do certainly see their influence throughout history.  Same thing with documentaries like Blackfish which affected Seaworld.  Or Super Size Me, which impacted McDonalds.

For instance, the first major film to be released with actual audio (as in you hear what people say or sing) is The Jazz Singer (1927).  In the film, a man who has been rejected by his father because of what he sings, eventually decides to use his voice at a Jewish event to help lift his father’s spirits; so that his father doesn’t die from some bout of depression or something.

And…

Eh, I just don’t have the willpower to type up anything fancy, so I’ll just say what this documentary is.  It’s a long 10+ hour documentary divided into 10 parts (sort of).  It’s not professionally made.  It’a basically a glorified youtuber documentary.  Well that’s not entirely accurate considering YouTube won’t allow this documentary on their site.  But hey, there’s always BitChute (thank God for alternative platforms).  Mostly made by 1 guy by the looks of things.  But he certainly did pool his information from an assload of sources.  Various books, film, podcasts, documentaries, etc.  All of which are listed at the end of the last episode.  The episode lengths vary from 35 minutes to 2 hours (though only episodes 8 and 9 go that long).

And is the documentary overlong?  Kind of.  There are 2 episodes, maybe 3, that could’ve used some trimming.  Here’s basically what the documentary does that bugged me with some of these excessive sequences.  It talks about some event that caused a lot of pain and suffering to a lot of people, and then spends no less than 10 minutes (maybe even 30) showing interviews with these “survivors” who talk about the event(s) and cry about it.  Because this documentary really wants to hit you over the head with that sadness.  In all fairness, these are sad moments.  But they could’ve been condensed.  The point had already been made.  This doesn’t happen regularly, so in the grand scheme of things it doesn’t ruin the whole documentary.  But the second half of the first episode is basically like this, and it can be off-putting to some who would even dare try to watch this thing in the first place.  But stick with it.  You’ll want to at least make it through episode 8 to get the brunt of the impact of this documentary.

And what is this documentary?  Well, for the most part, it basically tells the story of World War II from a perspective you are guaranteed not to have been taught in any school or any university.  But it does more than that, it also covers the Bolshevik Revolution (and how that started and who started it), it covers World War I, it covers the Holocaust, and it then basically jumps ahead to some modern day messages about the current state of things (most of which is basically repetition to those who have been taking a good look at the state of the world through sources that aren’t considered mainstream).  But the main thing it does is state who was behind much of these catastrophic events and world wars.  The Jews, who wanted to establish the dreaded “New World Order,” along with an Ethnostate run by Jews and only occupied by Jews (Israel) to eventually, long term, control the world under a world Communist government.

Yeah, I know, I know, antisemitism, racism, fascism, blah blah blah, I’ve heard it all before, and you’ve heard it all before.  But you likely haven’t heard much of what is in the documentary before.  And it’s worth watching for that alternative perspective.  Because this perspective fills in some gaps that I’ve wondered about ever since learning about these events in school.  Plus it provides a very compelling case that much of what we have been told has been a lie, and provides alternative (or additional) facts that are very much worth pondering.

It’s best if I break it down episode by episode.

“First we take Manhattan, then we take Berlin.”

Episode 1: Primarily states that Jews were the ones that founded these major banks that have their tentacles in everything today, and have always been controlled by Jews.  Just to name one example: the Rothchilds.  The same organization stated to have created the Federal Reserve, which the U.S. has based its currency on ever since Woodrow Wilson allowed that to be in the 1910s.  In addition, it states that the people who organized, led, and funded the Bolshevik Revolution were Jews.  Because the Jews also founded Communism (and yes, Karl Marx was Jewish too).  Thus when Vladimir Lenin led the Bolsheviks into taking over Russia, they turned Russia from Christian to Communist.

Episode 2: Basically talks about how it was those elitist Jews that started World War I in order to get a further grip on Europe (particularly Germany), and spread Communism.  And how the Treaty of Versailles made Germany lose parts of its country, and pay an insane amount of financial reparations for the war.  During post WWI, Germany was in dire straight, where everyone was in poverty and suffered, and how their society became corrupted with, well, similar stuff that many say is corrupting the U.S. today.  Either way you look at it, the Germans were suffering.

Episode 3: Hitler’s rise to power, how he eventually managed to overthrow the current rulers of Germany, kick out the elitist Jews that were running the financial system (basically the equivalent of the U.S. Federal Reserve), and establish a Nationalist-Socialist form of government with its own independent financial system that brought Germany out of poverty and reparation payments.  And transformed Germany into an economic powerhouse.  Even those who believe Hitler was an evil son of a bitch have to admit that this achievement was nothing short of incredible, transforming the nation from one hopelessly in debt to being the most efficient and powerful economy in the world next to the United States in less than a decade.  And then the episode goes on about how it was the best of times, that it was the ideal place to live in, blah blah blah.

Episode 4-5: Well, the Jews weren’t going to stand for this.  They did allegedly want world control after all.  So they can’t have a strong independent nation that doesn’t base their currency on elitist Jew controlled world banks now could they?  So they use their communist influence (as they had communist infiltrators within just about every country, including the U.S.; something Andrew McCarthy tried to fight post-WWII) to get other countries to go to war with Germany.  Starting with Poland, then France and the U.K., and eventually Russia (though Hitler managed to get Stalinist Russia to maintain a peace pact between them for a while before Russia eventually decided to turn on Germany).  And it portrays Stalin, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Dwight D. Eisenhower, and Winston Churchill as major assholes who were influenced by elitist Jews.  As for the Jews in Germany, Hitler did propose a “Final Solution,” but it wasn’t to exterminate the Jews.  Rather, it was to relocate them to Madagascar.  That plan fell through for various reasons.  The documentary also points out how other nations (ie Axis powers) were so inspired by Germany’s sense of nationalism that they were willing to fight for Germany’s cause against the Allies.  What is especially interesting is that there were Jews in Hitler’s army, fighting for his cause, intentionally.  One of the reasons why the documentary points out that it is important to distinguish the elitist Jews from the regular Jews (who may or may not have supported the elitist cause, or even be Communist).

Episode 6: Part of the insurance for winning the war was to eventually get the U.S. involved.  While Roosevelt did want to go along with that plan, America wasn’t exactly pro-war at the time, despite some communist propaganda and front groups (elements of this are backed by a novel I read a portion of titled Blacklisted By History: The Untold Story of Senator Joe McCarthy and His Fight Against America’s Enemies, by M. Stanton Evans).  But then came Pearl Harbor, which was apparently arranged by elitist/communist Jews who had political connections to influence the leaders.  Once that attack took place, that caused American sentiment to turn from anti-war to pro-war.  So they went to war with Japan and Germany (and Italy).  This was the nail in the coffin for Germany, as they had no hope of winning after failing to take the capital of Russia during their initial attack and push (which happened as a result of Hitler learning that Russia was planning on breaking the pact and secretly attacking Germany).  And it was even worse off for Germany once they lost the Battle of the Bulge.  And the Allies firebombed the ever-loving hell out Germany, indiscriminately hitting both the military and civilian population.

Episode 7: Apparently, there was a more effective way to enter Germany and get to the capital city of Berlin besides what the Allies actually did with D-Day.  But they intentionally took the long and hard way through.  Why?  So that Russia could have more time to push westward and be the first to take Germany’s capital.  Why let the Russians get there first?  So they could massacre the population.  The Russians were more brutal than the Germans, and I think even mainstream sources would be willing to admit this.  It was arranged that Russia would rape and pillage and kill their way towards Germany’s capital, where they would continue to do the same.  This frustrated certain military commanders, such as Patton who wondered why they weren’t driving into Germany more efficiently, and why they were receiving orders to halt on occasion.

And then came the post-war.  Even the mainstream narrative can’t disagree with this aspect.  Post-war, the allies treated the Germans in such an inhumane and deplorable manner it baffles the mind.  While it is alleged the Germans killed six million Jews during the Holocaust (something the next episode would address), the Allies caused the death of roughly 9 million Germans during a 6 year period after the war (outnumbering the number of Germans killed during the war).  Via slave labor camps (ie gulags, death camps, some of which were Eisenhower camps) among other reasons.  It was at this point that I thought this was pure incomprehensible insanity; that made me feel ashamed.  And these motherfuckers had the balls to use the piles of German bodies from these camps as historical photos claiming them to be a part of the Jewish victims of the Nazi Holocaust.

In order to help rebuild Germany, there was a forced deportation of Germans from the U.S. (among other countries) to Germany that totaled between 11-12 million.  To help rebuild.

Are you a man of peace
Or a man of holy war
Too many sides to you
Don’t know which anymore
So many full of life
But also filled with pain
Don’t know just how many
Will live to breathe again

A life that’s made to breathe
Destruction or defense
A mind that’s vain corruption
Bad or good intent
A wolf in sheep’s clothing
Or saintly or sinner
Or some that would believe
A holy war winner

They fire off many shots
And many parting blows
Their actions beyond a reasoning
Only God would know
And as he lies in heaven
Or it could be in hell
I feel he’s somewhere here
Or looking from below
But I don’t know, I don’t know

More pain and misery in the history of mankind
Sometimes it seems more like
The blind leading the blind
It brings upon us more famine, death and war
You know religion has a lot to answer for

And as they search to find the bodies in the sand
They find it’s ashes that are
Scattered across the land
And as the spirits seem to whistle on the wind
A shot is fired somewhere another war begins

And all because of it you’d think
That we would learn
But still the body count the city fires burn
Somewhere there’s someone dying
In a foreign land
Meanwhile the world is crying stupidity of man
Tell me why, tell me why

Please tell me now what life is
Please tell me now what love is
Well tell me now what war is
Again tell me what life is

For the greater good of God

— Iron Maiden, For The Greater Good of God

 

Episode 8: And this was the episode that dealt with the Holocaust itself.  It’s one of those episodes you need to see for yourself to get a real grasp of it.  But in general, it basically states that the Holocaust was a lie.  That the “6 million” number was invented long before WWII, that this sacred number can be found in the Jewish book The Talmud itself.  And it was used as propaganda to claim that the Germans were killing that many Jews in Germany even before the Allies could enter that country to confirm this.  As for the “concentration camps,” if you could call them that, there were no gas chambers.  There were shower rooms, and mini-gas chambers used to disinfect clothing, as there tended to be a buildup of lice and diseases if there wasn’t some form of disinfectant (they often sprayed insect-killer on the jews in the camps).  The prisoners were not treated all that harshly.  And the reason many of them were put in these camps in the first place because 98% of them were communists or communist sympathizers (because the elitist Jews were all about control through Communism).  Any serious investigation of these camps proves that there weren’t any gas chambers or mass graves or anything like that.  However, there were plenty of deaths near the end of the war.  Because the Allied bombing runs eventually hit German supply routes, leaving the camps unable to gain supplies, causing many of the prisoners to starve to death, and for the German troops charged with running the camps to abandon them.  There’s more to it than that, but there’s no real way to explain it all in an adequate fashion without reading a book dedicated to it (virtually all of which have been banned from Amazon and any major retailers), or watching some documentary telling it from this perspective (like this one).

Episode 9-10: Basically epilogue episodes that go on for too long, discussing the present day situation and what the elitist Jews that run the major banks, the United Nations, the European Union, and Israel.  How they want globalism, 3rd wave feminism, inclusion, diversity, mass-migration, destruction of culture, etc.  Everywhere except in Israel (or China for that matter, so far).  Their plans for expanding the size of Israel westward towards Egypt.  And the slow awakening of nationalism in various parts of the world as a backlash against these globalist policies.

bq-5c97e923261db

So, yeah.  This documentary has some heavy stuff.  Stuff that is usually dismissed as “revisionist history,” racist nonsense, pro-fascist.  Dismissed without even giving it a thought.  In Europe, it’s illegal to even question the legitimacy of the Holocaust, which makes me even more suspicious of it and more willing to believe the stuff in this documentary.  And the way it’s presented, it’s very very convincing.

However…

… there are some problems here with it.  You have to take into account that every documentary tends to have some element of bias.  And the bias of this documentary tends to overlook that Germany was nationalist to a fault at some points.  For example, the White Rose movement.  How the people (primarily German school students) in that anti-war movement were prosecuted and killed in Germany for spreading anti-war propaganda.  And I doubt that’s the only instance of a German atrocity committed (though I’m willing to listen to those who wish to debunk that, or other alleged atrocities, like how this documentary debunked the Diary of Anne Frank, and the Holocaust).  I’m always suspicious of anything that tries to portray some individual, or some party, some nation, etc., under an angelic light.  And that’s what I was getting with episode 3 primarily.  It was so in love with Hitler and what he did with Germany I’m pretty sure the guy who made the documentary wanted to suck Hitler’s cock.  There’s no such thing as a perfect nation.

bq-5bf9ecbca2965

That being said, I don’t find it far-fetched that Hitler and the Nazis were villianized beyond how they were in reality.  Especially considering where much of the information we gained regarding the Holocaust came from.  Especially considering that, if this New World Order run by elitist communist Jews is to be believed, the Jews own or control roughly 98% of all television networks, major movie studios, major news networks, and major newspapers.  Especially considering how questioning some aspects of this established history is a crime in Europe.  Especially considering how Europe has now passed laws that are going to make a stranglehold on the Internet, censoring sites for “hate speech” among other things (the definition of which is whatever the elites feel like making it).  I mean, just the number of anti-Nazi films that come out on a yearly basis seems to indicate they really want to keep anti-nazi sentiment fresh in everyone’s minds very very badly; even going so far as to promote the idea that “it’s ok to punch a nazi.”  All so that no one will take inspiration for how successful Germany became on an economic and cultural level because of their national-socialist policies (even the word “Nazi” was a slang term created to insult that party).

D1xjqHpWwAAC6yd.jpg large

If even half of the stuff this documentary teaches is true, and it certainly seems like most of it is, then it is a must watch just for the sake of hearing the other side of the story.  To gain another perspective.  To grasp the bigger picture of history.  Or at the very least be familiar with the arguments “revisionists” have.  This is not only a recommended watch, it’s a necessary one.

xlarge

Though that being said, there are portions of episodes 1, 3, and 9 that you’ll probably find yourself skipping through (there’s a portion of each of those episodes where the information gets monotonous).

“You watch those nature documentaries on the cable?  You see the one about lions? Look at this lion. He’s the king of the jungle, huge mane out to here. He’s laying down under a tree, in the middle of Africa. He’s so big, he’s so hot. He doesn’t want to move.

“Now the little lion cubs, they start messing with him. Biting his tail, biting his ears. He doesn’t do anything. The lioness, she starts messing with him. Coming over, making trouble. Still: nothing. Now the other animals, they notice this. And they start to move in. The jackals; hyenas.

“They’re barking at him, laughing at him. They nip his toes, and eat the food that’s in his domain. They do this, and they get closer and closer, and bolder and bolder. ‘Til one day, that lion gets up and tears the shit out of everybody. Runs like the wind, eats everything in his path. ‘Cause every once in a while, the lion has to show the jackals who he is.”