Our Mission: To Disrupt the global slander
and help build a more honest world
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.
|