Our Mission:
To Disrupt the global
slander
and help build a more honest world
by Georges M. Theil
Speech given at the Teheran Conference
I must express my thanks to those who have,
with immense courage, made it possible to organise and hold such a conference
as ours. This date of December 11-12, in this magnificent capital, could
truly be a turning point in world history, I’m not afraid to say so; it
marks the real beginning of the end of the unimaginable repression endured
by the world for more than sixty years now. This
oppression, this enslavement, this disgrace for mankind, this crime against
humanity — let’s finally dare to say it — is the gigantic lie of the alleged
Shoah, the alleged genocide of the Jews between 1941 and 1945, the
greatest slander in all of human history, imposed first of all on the West,
then by osmosis, from the fact of a progressive “globalisation”, on the
whole of the world, and most particularly the Moslem world. But,
in fact, isn’t the regular description of the “Shoah” merely in line with
a “largely majority opinion”, as some will try to tell us, in a tone of
false objectivity? No, it isn’t! For the simple public discussion on the
subject is impossible, on pain of fines and imprisonment. The author of
these remarks knows a thing or two about that. But,
very happily, there are some serious showings of resistance to the oppression,
some refuzniks, and there have been since the start of the myth’s construction
and setting in; and they are still around, despite the terror imposed by
the enemies of historical truth; one shining proof is the holding of this
conference.
Origin and fundaments of the “sacred lie” Let’s address things at their roots. The Jews,
it is known, nomads by essence, are a variety of the human species (I don’t
employ the term ethnic group, still less that of race) disseminated amongst
the nations of the world and also, in part, since 1948, sovereignly established
in the land of Palestine. This
human grouping feels closely knit by a specific, non-proselytising religion,
by common beliefs and ritual practices, and cemented by certain time-honoured
formal instructions; it is self-renewed by a strong endogamy, maintained,
finally, by racialist behaviour (that is, by a strong awareness —
or pervasive sensation — of its specificity, its particular identity not
to be sullied by any miscegenation), a feeling of superiority as against
the non-Jew, “justified” by a pervasive presence in the Jewish mind of the
Talmud and the so-called “scriptures” wherein their Yahweh supposedly anointed
the Jewish people with the status of “chosen”. This
pretension, in the eyes of any being of normal psychological makeup, is
an aberration, a monstrosity, the manifestation of a mad conceit. Let’s
take them at their word, objectively. To make a judgment as to the possible
superiority of one people to others, one must at the very least be able
to measure that people’s contribution, on balance with that of others, to
the advancement of mankind in fields as various as philosophy, the fine
arts, literature, philology, architecture, the sciences, that is, the fields
of biology and medicine, mathematics, physics, chemistry and technology
— relating to energy, transport, telecommunications —, actions to conserve
the cultural and environmental heritage, etc. And here, precisely, they
are hardly to be seen in a good position. These
Jews, therefore, a nomadic grouping at the start, wandering from Mesopotamia
to Egypt, regularly chased from their points of settlement in host countries,
afterwards slowly went about emigrating, from the beginning of the Christian
era, to Europe and North Africa, to a lesser degree to neighbouring nations
like those of the Persian and Ottoman empires, and have practically always
found themselves confronted with hostility on the part of the host peoples.
At first sight this might be attributed (in Europe) to the Christian religion,
which, from the outset, took the stance of a foil to the Jewish religion,
although the two were of a common stem: it has been said with some reason
that Christianity is radically opposed to Judaism, just as children of the
same family often are. And the early Christians propagated the notion of
a deicide people applied to the Jews, alluding to the New Testament’s account
of the prophet Jesus’s being put to death by crucifixion at the instigation
of the Jews: this Jesus, claiming to be the announced and awaited Messiah,
had not only had the nerve to proclaim himself “King of the Jews” but also
had dared, in a manner the Jews found unpardonable, to proclaim that there
were no longer any Jews, that there were no longer any Gentiles, but that
there were only children of God! Intolerable words for a community claiming
to be chosen by (its) God, and genuinely revisionist ones! This
myth of the chosen race is, in my opinion, the real main thread of the Jews’
behaviour up to today, and the very basis of the fantastical lie of the
alleged “Holocaust”. But in
the West, as must indeed be acknowledged, the Christian religion has been
slowly crumbling under the battering blows of Luther, Voltaire, Nietzsche,
Strauss and Renan. It’s not so much that the West has become atheist, but
the Christian religion seems to many incapable of supplying answers to the
modern world’s difficulties. Still in the West the slow emergence, in the
16th century, of rationalism with the Renaissance, the calamity
of the Inquisition and the burnings at the stake associated with it, the
steady rise of the natural sciences, the 18th century Enlightenment,
the collapse of the French monarchy perceived by the inciters of the Revolution
as being linked to religion for the great ill of the people, the German
philosophical thinkers and researchers of the 19th century had
two important results: the slow disaffection of the West with its centuries-old
religion, as I’ve said, and the emancipation of the Jews (until then “held
in check”) installed in Europe and her colonies. Logically,
the old anti-Semitism ought thus to have disappeared, since its clearest
cause (the hostility of the Christians towards a deicidal people) was henceforth
becoming greatly relativised in an ambience of secularisation. But nothing
of the kind! In effect there was to be witnessed, from the mid-19th
century onwards, the beginning of their veritable emancipation, a veritable
invasion by the Jews of European society’s dominant positions, places of
decision-making and influence: the newspapers, the political and economic
networks, the world of banking — a phenomenon quite often attended by embezzlement,
corruption, fraudulent arrangements. And the old, simplistic antisemitism
turned into a more rational, fundamental antisemitism, as of the late 19th
century, throughout the whole social and political spectrum. To such
an extent that episodes like the Dreyfus affair, where a Jewish officer
in the French army had fallen into trouble on suspicion of spying for the
German enemy, and was prosecuted, found guilty and sent to a penal colony,
took on extraordinary proportions, Dreyfus’s Judaity being enough to condemn
him for some, and, for his coreligionists and friends, to exonerate him!
He was, in the end, pardoned following a review of his trial, but a certain
doubt subsisted and the traces left behind took a long time to be erased. A glimmer
of clear-sightedness showed itself at that period in the person of Bernard
Lazare, a writer of Jewish origin who in his work Antisemitism, its History
and Causes agreed that antisemitism was perfectly explainable by the
fact of the Jews’ own behaviour in the societies that accommodated them,
behaviour that, overall, was loathsome, in which greed, political and financial
scandals, corruption, fraudulent business operations organised by and with
them, held the biggest place. And this
brings us to the 20th century. Already
the Jewish organisations that had well perceived this problem, precisely
this enmity so likely to arise between Jews and non-Jews as soon as they
came into contact with each other, imagined that the long-term solution
could only be the settling of the Jews in a land of their own, undisputed
and free to welcome them. Thus did Theodor Herzl, in 1896, launch his famous
call for a return to a “Jewish national home”, veritable founding of political
Zionism, an idea that got the very active support of the rich barons Hirsch
and Rothschild. This idea, this hope for a land of their own, made its way
in the world’s Jewish milieus up to the moment of the decisive swing, with
the help of the First World War, that was the Balfour Declaration of 1917,
beginning a turning point in that conflict to the detriment of the Central
Empires and their Ottoman ally. And so in this way the Zionist movement
had set its heart on the land of Palestine, thereby initiating a major problem
with the communities living in that territory, Moslems in their majority
with scattered Christian elements. A terrible
wrong that can only be explained by the racialist and religious fanaticism
embedded in the Jewish tradition.
The text of the “Balfour Declaration”
Here is the statement of intent addressed
by British politician Arthur Balfour, Foreign Secretary under David Lloyd
George (and a former Prime Minister himself), to Lord Rothschild, vice president
of the Board of Deputies
of British Jews:
Foreign
Office,
November
2nd, 1917.
Dear
Lord Rothschild,
I have
much pleasure in conveying to you, on behalf of His Majesty's Government,
the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations which
has been submitted to, and approved by, the Cabinet:
"His
Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of
a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours
to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood
that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights
of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political
status enjoyed by Jews in any other country".
I should
be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of the
Zionist Federation.
Yours
sincerely
Arthur
James Balfour
And the
events relating to the war of 1914-1918 cannot be dissociated from Jewish
influence, henceforth omnipresent. The vile Treaty of Versailles, which
meant to seal the ruin of Germany and her enslavement for 80 years to come,
was perceived by many Germans as the bitter fruit of a Jewish betrayal,
since the Jews representing Germany (Erzberger, Rathenau…) at the preparation
of that baleful treaty had been accomplices of the victors, thus a party
to the crushing of what was, however, their German homeland. The seizure
of power in Russia by the Bolsheviks in 1917 can also be perceived as a
taking hold of the Russian people by the Jews, and the Russians’ subsequent
yoking to an ideology both insane and messianic can be seen as a Jewish
operation. So true is it that Communism and its Bolshevist offshoot were
a wholly Jewish affair: from Marx to Lasalle, to Trotsky to the Bund and
to the masters of the USSR, all is Jewish in Communism and Bolshevism. The
Russian royal family were assassinated shortly after the coup d’état by
a group of Jewish Bolsheviks full of incandescent hatred. The funding for
the 1917 Bolshevik insurrection’s preparation and carrying out was entirely
seen to by Jewish bankers, Lenin’s financiers at the banks Schiff, Warburg,
Loeb etc. Soon
afterwards, all the attempts to install Bolshevik republics by force in
Germany and the former Austria-Hungary were equally led by Jews, who sowed
bloodshed and economic ruin in their wake; their names are known. This
awareness of a “Jewish grip on the peoples of Europe”, as is known — yet
no one dare say it —, was at the origin of the ascent of Hitler, veritable
child of Versailles, who promised to create a new Germany that would become
prosperous as soon as she had been rid of Jews. A promise that he set about
putting into effect: with his arrival in office began the departure of the
Jews of Germany — and later those of Austria and the outlying German territories
— by virtue of incentives, deterrents or, from 1935, laws, and it must indeed
be noted that this process was concomitant with a formidable economic and
industrial redevelopment. And such success, with its risks of contagion,
could not leave States like the English-speaking countries or even France,
where the Jews were very influential in all political and economic spheres,
indifferent: the confrontation had now become inevitable. Already, let’s
recall, the Jews of the whole world had declared war on Germany, in the
famous full front-page headline of March 24, 1933, just seven weeks after
Hitler’s coming to power: “Judea Declares War on Germany”; Judea not being
a State, it was a matter of announcing a total boycott of Germany, an all-out
psychological war by the worldwide networks under Jewish influence, and
that is what happened. It is altogether surprising that this “declaration
of war” should have come about when Hitler had been in office for less than
two months and had not taken any special measures against the Jewish community
in Germany. What
followed is well known, leading to the declaration of war on Germany, in
September 1939, by England and France. Hitler’s unbending determination
in wanting to reshape Europe by seeking cohesion amongst the populations
that made it up (and an expulsion of the Jewish communities thereof), together
with the rather unforeseen harshness of the war in the East, led him to
adopt a policy of “penning” the Jews in forced labour camps. A measure that
is quite certainly harsh for those affected by it, even if the concentration
camps (“invented” by the British forty years earlier during their South
African “Boer War”) were not a new or original German idea (the United States
was soon to create similar camps on its own territory to intern persons
of Japanese origin, including those who had no other citizenship than American).
A measure bearing, for the populations thus transferred, all the hardships
inherent in crowded and insufficiently hygienic conditions: dyspepsia, epidemics
and, therewith, excessive mortality, something which, for that matter, is
not peculiar to the German camps of the last war: the French and later the
Americans were themselves to note the far more awful state of the Vietnamese
camps! And it was from here that was launched the gigantic tall tale, transformed
into calumny, of the programmed putting to death of six million Jews in
those camps. With the whole of the world’s communications media (the non-Moslem
world, of course) being in the hands of Jewish groups, already in that era,
it was easy for them to spread the slander throughout the world. A technical
consultant to president Roosevelt, one Theodore N. Kaufman, an influential
American Jew, published in March 1941 a terrible book: Germany Must Perish;
widely distributed and translated, it clearly expounded the organisation
and the putting into operation of a genocide of the Germans: all men and
women of reproductive age (males under sixty, females under forty-five)
were to be sterilised, quickly and methodically. It would take a few months
for 20,000 surgeons (and more if necessary) carrying out 25 sterilisations
per day to neuter 48 million German males and females. Henry
Morgenthau, another influential Jew in Roosevelt’s entourage, for his part
urged a plan for killing the Germans by organised famine. At the
same period Stalin’s own darling “poet”, Ilya Ehrenburg, railed his exhortations
to the Red Army soldiers, exuding the worst racial hatred: “Kill all the
Germans! Kill the German children in their mother’s womb!”
Their Master Word: “Denying the obvious!”
An insult to human intelligence?
For informed people, for minds the least bit keen on things to do with physics
and chemistry, the possibility of the very existence of the crime weapon
as it’s presented to us (and on paper only!), that is, the utilisation of
“the homicidal gas chamber followed by the cremation of the victims, all
carried out continuously” is an utter impossibility. And also, no operation
of this kind, not even a haphazard one, could have been so much as contemplated
without an order issued from the summit of the State, i.e. from Hitler himself.
No army in the world, no superior officer anywhere would undertake such
an operation without an order! And still less, if I may say so, the German
army! If a supposed order of this nature had existed but then, in spite
of all, disappeared, there should most certainly remain, in the thousands
of tonnes of records seized by the Allies, numerous references to such an
order, numerous directives and specifications for the building and running
of such installations: not a single one has been found, either direct
or indirect! There should also remain in those records bits and traces
of related budgetary and accounting information, of abnormal deliveries
of goods: there is no such thing either. Then, are there at least some architectural
remnants left? An important remark here. Let’s
reason, if you will, by reductio ad absurdum, as is often done in
mathematics and physics to demonstrate that a proposition is impossible
or absurd. If the
“Nazi gas chambers” existed and functioned, they must necessarily have been
made of hard and heavy material, let’s say concrete, and so, by definition,
impossible to transport! It’s easy enough to calculate that a concrete structure
measuring 200 square metres in ground area and 2.5 metres in height and
with walls 15 centimetres thick, set on a concrete slab, will weigh at least
— without the slab — 80 tonnes. How is
one to believe that the Germans, pressed by the Soviet advance, obliged
to evacuate a given camp by forced marches in the snow, would have taken
such installations away? Since the camp of Auschwitz was occupied by the
Russians after the Germans had evacuated it along with those inmates who
were in good enough health, abandoning all the facilities (kitchens, modern
sanitary and medical equipments, various workshops) and even the totality
of the camp records, including the prisoner rolls and mortality registries,
it is altogether excluded that they should have carried off with them “mass
killing installations” of such weight. Additional proof: the Germans had
also abandoned the clothing disinfection units — present in all their camps
— perfectly visitable still today at the Auschwitz complex. This
would leave us the task of analysing the remains or ruins along with the
blueprints or architectural drawings, which, in the case of Auschwitz, have
also been entirely conserved. That work was done first by Robert Faurisson,
followed by other researchers such as Fred Leuchter (invited to Auschwitz
by Faurisson in 1987 when not yet a revisionist but merely a specialist
in executions by gassing) and Germar Rudolf, who further consolidated it
thanks to the erudition of the eminent chemist that he is. The results left
no room for dispute: none of the places presented as having been homicidal
gas chambers offered any trace of hydrogen cyanide salts — which must necessarily
have been there had the places been hydrogen cyanide gas chambers — contrary
to the disinfection facilities (still visible) having operated with the
product called Zyklon B — a solid substance that gave off hydrogen cyanide
(a potent insecticide) when subjected to a rise in temperature in those
purpose-built units equipped with a powerful ventilation mechanism, perfected
by the Germans already before the war, incidentally. No rebuttal, no counter
report has been offered by the upholders of “extermination by gas chambers”
to answer the two devastating reports by Leuchter and Rudolf. What
with the homicidal gas chambers’ never having been able to exist, and thus
never having existed, the conclusion is simple: there never were in the
camps any installations for the mass killing of the detainees; the only
detainee deaths imputable to the camps, therefore, apart from possible executions
of inmates who had committed offences, were those due to disease, to epidemics
quite frequent once prisoners are herded together in problematic hygienic
conditions, a cause of death made greater by the diffusion of illnesses,
such as typhus, spread essentially by lice. Let’s recall that antibiotics
and sulphonamides were at the time, respectively, not yet perfected and
not readily available. The frequent disinfection of prisoners’ effects and
their replacement by clean ones, and the disinfecting showers or baths for
the prisoners themselves were thus the sole possible protection for the
camp populations, including the guards. The possibility that these methodical
measures may have strongly impressed the detainees, to the point of making
some believe that Zyklon B disinfectant might also serve to kill people,
is not to be ruled out amongst a population ready to accept practically
any rumour, a phenomenon extremely well-known in groups of barracks-dwellers.
Let’s add that the systematic cremation of corpses could bring on, in certain
categories of inmate, a very frightened reaction: the burning of the dead
could also be seen by Jewish detainees as an abominable sacrilege, for reasons
of religious practice. Finally,
as is known, the last months of the war, from January to May 1945, were
a true apocalypse for Germany. The incessant bombing raids by the Anglo-American
air forces on civilian populations and infrastructures, the horrors accompanying
the advance of the Red Army, the near total penury of provisions for the
camp populations, arising from the destruction of supply logistics, too
often resulted, in the final three months of the war, in the camps’ becoming
places where people could only die. Hence those images (smugly) diffused
by the Allies of skeletal inmates of certain camps. Under the emotional
effect thus produced, the greater public hardly ask themselves any questions
in the face of captives emaciated from under-nourishment: it is very
easy to tell people that if those inmates were in such a state it was because
there had been a diabolical will to have them slowly starve to death.
So powerful
is the image! For want of photos, no one asks himself the question how 85
million proved victims of Communism, killed in the USSR and its satellites
in the name of the Marxist-Leninist faith, happen to have died! No one even
asks whether those dead were cremated, buried, covered over in ditches!
No one dare propose that it might be worthwhile to explore scientifically
the sites of the various gulags! But, in truth, those dead are not worthy
of interest: must Communism, blood-soaked Jewish set-up as it was, be above
guilt? If so an explanation is in order. Such
was, and still is, Germany’s drama. * But the
crowning point of hatred had not yet arrived when the war ended in May 1945.
The Jews are in general not chivalrous folk. They well knew that the Germans
had not perpetrated more horrors — doubtless far fewer — than the Allies.
Hatred and its instrumentalisation would reach their peak with the staging
of the Nuremberg trial in October 1945. An ignominious trial, unique in
history, where the victor was seen judging the vanquished, with founding
principles such as “The Tribunal shall not be bound by technical rules of
evidence”; it “shall not require proof of facts of common knowledge”
(sic). It is not my intent here to go over the judicial disgrace
that was this so-called trial. People like Carlos Porter have done so in
striking manner. The pinnacle
of calumny was reached at the end of the proceedings when the figure of
six million Jewish victims was launched by a “witness” (Wilhelm Höttl) who,
as was to be discovered quite soon, was an agent of the American OSS (forerunner
of the CIA). The main
point at Nuremberg, “tribunal” of vengeance, was to put to death, with the
aid of an imitation trial, the senior German leaders, which was done and
which satisfied the Jews’ phenomenal hatred for the Germans, their thirst
for vengeance against those who had dared to try to “live without Jews”.
The World Media Dictatorship:
Slander erected as obligatory truth
Henceforth, thanks to “Nuremberg”, the way was open for the establishment
of a worldwide “dictatorship of the gas chambers”. We are
today swamped with fictitious accounts, pseudo-testimonies, repetitive films
telling us ad nauseam of the Jewish people’s hardships, the Germans’ nastiness
towards them, the reparations that should be paid out again and again to
the survivors of that era, to their children and grandchildren, their heirs
and successors, the State of Israel which, for that matter, lives mainly
on American and German grants, and is “threatened with a new Holocaust”
by its Moslem neighbours… And everything
is put into operation to have us believe in the existence of that weapon
of mass destruction: “the gas chamber” of Auschwitz, yes, Auschwitz for,
especially due to the advances of revisionism which, making its way forward,
had easily reduced to naught the “gas chambers” of all the other camps where
the liars claimed they’d existed, there no longer remain any others… Still,
my dear friends, do like me, go visit it carefully, bring friends along
to visit it too, you won’t see any trace of gas chambers. Of course, on
the door (a wooden door!) of what is left of a small semi-interred hospital
you will indeed see a sign reading “Gas chamber in its original state”,
but you’re not obliged to believe a sign; if you are just a little technically
minded, the prank will be as plain as day. As a friend with a good scientific
background said to me recently, anybody with an IQ over 90 and who’s looked
into the question a bit cannot believe in the gas chambers! The revisionist
reasoning got the better of all that nonsense; and so those on the opposing
side saw red. The work and findings of Faurisson, to name but him,
caused deadly worry towards the end of the 80s in spheres having an interest
in the slander: they are called “exterminationists” but I personally prefer
to call them slanderers. There was only one thing left for those
slander-propagandists to do, a solution as abject as their lie: prevent
all discussion, all scientific research, all debate on the question of the
sacrosanct “gas chamber”; laws had to be prepared that would punish such
reasoning severely. In France it was the Gayssot Act, named for the Communist
MP who submitted the bill but in fact concocted by chief rabbi Sitruk and
the (Jewish) former Socialist Prime Minister Laurent Fabius; thus, strictly
speaking this law, dated July 13, 1990, is indeed Judeo-Bolshevik in character.
It punishes with fines and imprisonment anyone who publicly emits doubt
about the “findings” of the aforementioned Nuremberg tribunal. The Jewish
organisations have succeeded in imposing laws of the same type in practically
all European nations. The Germanic countries, Austria, Germany and Switzerland,
are particularly well “taken care of”: in the first two, a five-year prison
sentence is regularly applied to any public disputant of the figures
launched at Nuremberg! What’s more, in the German-speaking lands it
is not even conceivable for a defendant to argue on the merits of the case:
the “six million” are a dogma, and a dogma cannot be debated. An unimaginable
degeneration of our rights, an incredible obscurantism imposed, veritable
crime against thought, and crime against mankind. And it’s
there — we’ve understood — that that the Nuremberg trial, monument of iniquity,
is indeed the founding act of the enslavement of us all, Germans and Austrians
in the first place (but not their leaders, accomplices in the slander),
of Europeans by direct osmosis with them, finally of the Palestinian people,
martyred in the name of an alleged “holocaust” which has served as a pretext
for the pure and simple theft of what was their land for over a thousand
years! My dear friends, let’s never forget that these two martyrdoms are
linked. Closely. They have one and the same poisonous source. Yes, an unimaginable
suffering is the lot of these millions of human beings, crushed, martyred
in all possible ways by the criminal slander of the “gas chambers” and the
alleged “genocide of the Jews”.
The other side of the problem I have long believed, ever since I began having serious doubts on the consistency
of the alleged “Holocaust”, that we must mobilise against this gigantic
lie. How? In concrete terms, we started by diffusing brochures like Did
Six Million Really Die?, we prepared short lampoons or leaflets distributed
in sensitive places; on a higher level we were able to open, in Paris, a
revisionist bookshop, publish quality periodicals, as did our friends at
the Institute for Historical Review in the US, sabotage holocaustic symposiums
where our interventions caused confusion and sometimes panic! Those
were the good times! We sensed the fear growing in their ranks: yet a base
individual, the pharmacist Pressac, let himself be bought and hired by the
Jewish Inquisitor Klarsfeld to draft and publish a big block of a book claiming
to demonstrate the existence and functioning of the gas chambers at Auschwitz,
whereas he was incapable, in that very book, of showing a drawing of one,
not even a sketch, or of describing the workings, even sketchily!
And who in the end demonstrated but one thing: the existence of cremations
in that camp! And who dared, the poor wretch, to effect a drastic reduction
of the number of presumed dead at Auschwitz, an initiative that earned him
the distinction of being ostracised soon afterwards by his own sponsors! And Faurisson
was savagely assaulted in September 1989, in a park near his house, by a
few young Israelis determined to kill him. He got away with a smashed jaw
and some painful after-effects. Let us salute him here. The Gayssot Act
came in shortly afterwards, as I’ve said, and from then on our struggle
against repression had to take on other forms. * The arrival of this horrid law, a veritable admission of the adversaries’
impotence, was for us revisionists the moment to take a short break, and
to reflect on an aspect that we had previously refused to see: if the enormous
slander of the “gas chambers” can continue to prosper, even in educated
circles (my friend would say: amongst those with an IQ above 90), it’s because
there is… something else. First
of all, it is obvious that many people cannot imagine such an enormous swindle;
they don’t imagine that the truth (exactitude) can be shut away to this
extent, to the point of being considered reprehensible by the courts. Any
normally constituted being will have the greatest difficulty in subscribing
to the idea of belief in a lie being spread by force.
In order to function, belief in a lie
must be imposed and, doubtless, accepted as well
It is astonishing to note, amongst the greater public, that the belief in
the “gas chambers” is not only standard but that it’s also one of the “anchoring
points” of their mental equilibrium. To have a large number of people enter
a room, willingly or not, in which an asphyxiating gas is then spread about,
then to remove the same people, reduced to corpses, to another, generally
abutting building, where they are then cremated in assembly-line fashion
seems, to most, an altogether possible and therefore plausible procedure.
Practically no one knows anything — apart from the lethal aspect — about
the properties and the way of using Zyklon B or the hydrogen cyanide gas
(CNH) that it gives off following exposure to a certain rise in temperature.
No one knows, for example, that its use necessitates a powerful ventilation
for several hours afterwards of the rooms or objects treated, or that it
sticks to surfaces! The statement about the removal of gassed corpses and
their transport to the crematorium is thus an aberration uttered in ignorance.
Such a task would have brought on the death of the body-handlers themselves. And then,
the crematoria…! The complete
cremation of a single corpse demands an hour and a half; a simple arithmetical
calculation shows straight away the impossibility of cremating the alleged
number of daily victims. Besides, we are well aware, as concerns Auschwitz,
of the chronology of those installations’ coming into service, their periods
out of service due to defects, their operating times and capacities; everything
confirms the lying nature of the claim of the number of daily killings by
gas followed by cremation.
Why then is it nonetheless believed?
Because
this tall tale, this monstrous slander, falls onto ground that has been
prepared to accept it beforehand. The Germans have long been known for their
technical ability, their unquestionable professionalism in making sure that
work is done well. They have also constantly had, in times of conflict,
soldiers of an unbelievable tenacity, an astonishing courage, surely a reflection
of their behaviour in civilian life. And what else? Remember too that they
are also — and have been for a long time — brilliant chemists: German chemistry
is still, in 2006, the first in the world by dint of its capabilities, its
patent registrations, its resourcefulness, its exports throughout the globe.
Moreover
others have for long crafted an image of them as cruel, and as partisans
of a “vertical and icy” order; the origin of this is doubtless, in our country,
to be found in the 1870 Franco-Prussian War, where the Uhlans, selected
for their height and robustness, were quickly categorised as cold-hearted,
pitiless warriors. True anti-German racism, developed in France after 1870
(under the colours of Revanche), deeply affected people’s minds:
against all logic the Germans were henceforth spoken of as savages, uncultured,
simple-minded predators, uncivilised beings; yet their contribution in the
sciences and technology, philosophy, music was already incomparable. And
that only made them more detestable still! This was something well beyond
the childish hatred of the dunce for the pupil at the top of the class…
It was Germany against the rest of the world!
It was
thus easy for Jewish agitators, at first fascinated by the Germany of Bismarck,
established there in comfortable positions, to turn against their host country
and set about looting, deceiving and exploiting it; Hitler, aware of this
wicked abuse, which must absolutely be halted, put into operation, as I’ve
said, a series of measures meant to move the Jews away from all positions
of authority, then move them away full stop. Die Juden sind unser Unglück:
the Jews are our misfortune! One may
thus understand the hatred borne by the Jews against the nation that had
dared do that; this hatred was easily shared by the populations that had
had to suffer under German occupation between 1939 and 1945. The extraordinary
conjunction of interests between the Jewish communities and a fair portion
of the non-Jews of Europe and America accounts for this persistently present
hostility — often unconscious — towards Germany. And the average American
just as much as the average European, culturally trained to respect the
authority of res judicata, generally thinks, even if vaguely aware
that at Nuremberg there had been a good share of vengeance exacted by the
winners against the losers, that, all the same, the trial had a solemn and
approximately “just” quality about it. This is why the Germans have been
forced to accept it all, most often with resignation. So it
is that the official belief in the “gas chambers” and thus in the “Holocaust”
was initiated at Nuremberg with the apparent authority of res judicata.
However, at bottom this is false: at Nuremberg nothing was proved, and
thus nothing was judged: statements were made and recorded. To this
day, Germany is still a flattened country, psychologically crushed, under
the tutelage of Israel, in fact. One may even ask oneself the fundamental
question whether this present German State is democratic and legitimate:
the three powers then occupying the western part of the country (US, Britain,
France) decided unilaterally in 1948 to create, throughout the territory
comprised of their respective zones, the existing federative State…! Sixty
years after the end of armed hostilities, no peace treaty has yet been signed!
And with this in mind we see the answer is a terrifying one: hostilities
quite simply did not end with May 1945! And in
today’s Germany the psychological damage is such, after the humiliation
suffered in the immediate post-war period, then the apparent resurrection
of the country in the years from 1950 to 1966, and thereafter the rise in
strength of the myth of the alleged “Holocaust” and the alleged “gas chambers”,
that at present she is in danger of death. Yes, in danger, of death. The
omnipresent drubbing in the media and public forums in Germany for the past
forty years has been such that a profound spiritual depression is perceptible
to anyone who knows how to meet, talk with and listen to the Germans. With
a most frightful result: the young people, crushed and demoralised by the
permanent calumny against the very essence of German ethnicity, refuse to
procreate sufficiently for a renewal of the generations! “What good is it
to have children if our nature, our country are, deep down, criminal? If
our elders coldly exterminated six million Jews, that is an inexpiable crime
and we deserve a slow death for it! Let’s not have any more German children!”
There you have the consequences of this slander, at the subliminal stage,
working like a cancer inoculated by the propagandists of the alleged “Holocaust”
and the alleged “gas chambers”! One other
aspect, amongst the most horrible, of the “gas chamber” and “Holocaust”
slander is that Germany’s neighbours and alleged friends have been almost
happy to accept as well this twaddle which possessed, and still possesses,
the advantage of maintaining Germany in an accursed state and thus one of
subjection. For us Westerners the lie of the “Holocaust”, let’s say rather
“the lie of the gas chambers”, is thus indeed a potential factor of civil
war. Even
the Moslem peoples cannot remain passive onlookers. The installation, by
force and by the blackmail of the “Holocaust”, of Israel in the Middle East,
the bloody oppression of the Palestinian people, the war against Iraq, the
threats against the Islamic Republic of Iran, are an extraordinary revelation
of the insane arrogance, duplicity and rapacity of the Jewish organisations
and Israel.
Conclusion The gas chambers, or rather, the “slander of the gas chambers” is thus
indeed an instrument of oppression of billions of human beings whose only
common characteristic is their not being Jewish. And Israel,
the Jewish communities and the United States (an unwilling instrument of
Judaic aggression) cannot go on in this way. The lie they protect by force,
that they propagate with their bought-off media, must be dismantled. We must
therefore tirelessly diffuse and strengthen the idea of respect for exactitude
in history, promote free debate of information, try to arouse reflections
on the utter impossibility of the existence and operation of this mythical
object, the “Nazi gas chamber”. We must
endeavour with all our strength to throw the alleged gas chambers into the
rubbish bins of History! And we shall succeed, for the promoters of the
fraud are at the end of their tether; we’re going to force them to accept
free discussion, free debate, which will lead to their undoing. No gas
chamber, therefore no “Holocaust”; consequently: the State of Israel is
an imposture. Its peaceful but inexorable dissolution is a necessity for
peace in the world. Yes,
ladies and gentlemen, the day is not far off when there will finally arise,
for the great good fortune of all, a world rid of the gas chambers, where
the Jews themselves will finally be reconciled with the rest of the world
by their acknowledgement of the imposture. We know that the reconciliation
will have to be imposed, for it is obviously not desired by the slanderers.
And that is their very distinction from the others. Their unique destiny!
Their transcendental difference! But they
will, in the end, give in. And then
there will no longer be either Jews or Gentiles, but only children of God.
|