As I've been saying all along, It is true that the US govt is not subservient to some secret zionist cabal or to Israel, however the intersets of zionism and the ruling class in the united states are more or less the same. The end result, for the time being is much the same as it would be if Zionists actually did control Us policy.
- Status
What is it with zionists and re-phrasing everything ? Can't you ever make up your mind ?
Funniest thing ever again Ot , you break the records here . USA and morality ......
And you know israel is only moral when your peoples are made of value more than the peoples who inhabited palestine before you , which is racism .
Hitler was morally superior as well , as the Aryan peoples were Ubermenschen and need Lebensraum to develop their brilliant and perfect selves in so everybody was logically needed to make place for them , it was never about hate .... not untill the Final Solution .
The Europeans in India and Indonesia were on their moral right side as well , as they were of a superior race bringing civilization to barbarians .
None of those countries had any virtues , they simply declared themselves virtuous nomatter what because it was them that acted whatever out , they were superior thus they were right .
There are some Jewish peoples who do this exactly in the same way , pointing out ontologic differences between Jews and non-Jewish , declaring Jews superior .
Because you have to be so much superior would you wish to be morally on the right side when you come into a strange land and you murder thousands natives , chase peoples from villages , humiliate them and occupy them , play them around in whatever way you wish for 55 years already .......
How can you be morally right ? Because you are Jewish and therefor it is your land ?
How are you morally backing this ? Almost all ethical theories that we have aside of superiority of Jews , disprove your conclusion .
Yes it is , you show me which administration last 20 years has had any critics of Israel in it , if not was filled with zionists on the sensitive cases ?
Loans ? How about donations ? How about Veto ? How about setting the world standard to be pro Israel or face US-consequences ?
But what you dont understand is that these are leftist-rightist communication problems and not Israel-Amerikan issues . It's Labor/Democrats VS Likud/Republikans .
None have any power , their regimes can be from mars it does not matter when you have no possibilities . Upsetting those who you need for oil is ridiculous because none of them cares about Israel but about cars and jet set life in Monaco .
It's all rhetorik , Fahd and Arik are both laughing about it as we speak , and thats from those who actually pay attention .
So disprove it logically . Take a look again at those names listed on those . rather relevant positions , are they not zionists (or the new name u wnana give em) ? Now forget USA , but do they not controll the departments they have leadership of and are responsible for the policies made there ?
Quite some Arab Jews would have a greed with you not all to long ago
What is "Islam" then ? You imagine something that you can't define and judge it peacefull/not peacefull .
It is the system of peace . That it is why it is called peace .
Because to be ruled by people who worshipp GOLD and pray to the Almighty $ is very dangerous indeed.
So, Proud Syrian, you have a problem with people that make Mammon (money and gold) their god. How does this translate into hating Jews? Or are you making a gross generalization that all Jews worshop money and gold? Isn't that wrong? I was under the impression they worship Yahweh.
So, Proud Syrian, you have a problem with people that make Mammon (money and gold) their god. How does this translate into hating Jews? Or are you making a gross generalization that all Jews worshop money and gold? Isn't that wrong? I was under the impression they worship Yahweh.
P
Proud_Syrian
Guest
Oh yeah, when someone watch FOX JEWS like you, he will become so absurd and pathetic....
ISLAM DENOUNCES TERRORISM, DOES AMERICA DENOUNCE TERRORISM ?
http://www.americanstateterrorism.com
http://www.islamdenouncesterrorism.com
P
Proud_Syrian
Guest
No, the majority of Jews are athiests, judaism for them is RACE...
of course it is not correct to generalize, but the vast majority of jews worshipp money and gold, let us be frank about it...
P
Proud_Syrian
Guest
So, why Jews hate everyone who is not jew ? well, the answer can be found in their holy book, the talmud:
''The modern Jew is the product of the Talmud..."
"Babylonian Talmud", published by the Boston Talmud Society, p. XII
The Jews refer to the remainder of Earths inhabitants, the non-Jewish peoples, as "Gentiles", "Goyim". Let's see what the Jewish Talmud teaches the Jews concerning the non-Jewish majority, i.e. those who are not part of Jahve's "Chosen People":
"The Jews are called human beings, but the non-Jews are not humans. They are beasts." Talmud: Baba mezia, 114b
"The Akum (non-Jew) is like a dog. Yes, the scripture teaches to honor the the dog more than the non-Jew." Ereget Raschi Erod. 22 30
"Even though God created the non-Jew they are still animals in human form. It is not becoming for a Jew to be served by an animal. Therfore he will be served by animals in human form."
Midrasch Talpioth, p. 255, Warsaw 1855
"A pregnant non-Jew is no better than a pregnant animal."
Coschen hamischpat 405
"The souls of non-Jews come from impure sprits and are called pigs." Jalkut Rubeni gadol 12b
"Although the non-Jew has the same body structure as the Jew, they compare with the Jew like a monkey to a human."
Schene luchoth haberith, p. 250 b
"If you eat with a Gentile(non-jew ), it is the same as eating with a dog." Tosapoth, Jebamoth 94b
"If a Jew has a non-Jewish servant or maid who dies, one should not express sympathy to the Jew. You should tell the Jew: "God will replace 'your loss', just as if one of his oxen or asses had died"." Jore dea 377, 1
"Sexual intercourse between Gentiles is like intercourse between animals." Talmud Sanhedrin 74b
"It is permitted to take the body and the life of a Gentile."
Sepher ikkarim III c 25
"It is the law to kill anyone who denies the Torah. The Christians belong to the denying ones of the Torah." Coschen hamischpat 425 Hagah 425. 5
"A heretic Gentile you may kill outright with your own hands."
Talmud, Abodah Zara, 4b
"Every Jew, who spills the blood of the godless (non-Jews), is doing the same as making a sacrifice to God."
Talmud: Bammidber raba c 21 & Jalkut 772
And many more verses.......NO WONDER, THEY ARE KILLING AND SLAUGHTERING THE PALESTINEANS IN PALESTINE...
Nazi jewish killers.
''The modern Jew is the product of the Talmud..."
"Babylonian Talmud", published by the Boston Talmud Society, p. XII
The Jews refer to the remainder of Earths inhabitants, the non-Jewish peoples, as "Gentiles", "Goyim". Let's see what the Jewish Talmud teaches the Jews concerning the non-Jewish majority, i.e. those who are not part of Jahve's "Chosen People":
"The Jews are called human beings, but the non-Jews are not humans. They are beasts." Talmud: Baba mezia, 114b
"The Akum (non-Jew) is like a dog. Yes, the scripture teaches to honor the the dog more than the non-Jew." Ereget Raschi Erod. 22 30
"Even though God created the non-Jew they are still animals in human form. It is not becoming for a Jew to be served by an animal. Therfore he will be served by animals in human form."
Midrasch Talpioth, p. 255, Warsaw 1855
"A pregnant non-Jew is no better than a pregnant animal."
Coschen hamischpat 405
"The souls of non-Jews come from impure sprits and are called pigs." Jalkut Rubeni gadol 12b
"Although the non-Jew has the same body structure as the Jew, they compare with the Jew like a monkey to a human."
Schene luchoth haberith, p. 250 b
"If you eat with a Gentile(non-jew ), it is the same as eating with a dog." Tosapoth, Jebamoth 94b
"If a Jew has a non-Jewish servant or maid who dies, one should not express sympathy to the Jew. You should tell the Jew: "God will replace 'your loss', just as if one of his oxen or asses had died"." Jore dea 377, 1
"Sexual intercourse between Gentiles is like intercourse between animals." Talmud Sanhedrin 74b
"It is permitted to take the body and the life of a Gentile."
Sepher ikkarim III c 25
"It is the law to kill anyone who denies the Torah. The Christians belong to the denying ones of the Torah." Coschen hamischpat 425 Hagah 425. 5
"A heretic Gentile you may kill outright with your own hands."
Talmud, Abodah Zara, 4b
"Every Jew, who spills the blood of the godless (non-Jews), is doing the same as making a sacrifice to God."
Talmud: Bammidber raba c 21 & Jalkut 772
And many more verses.......NO WONDER, THEY ARE KILLING AND SLAUGHTERING THE PALESTINEANS IN PALESTINE...
Nazi jewish killers.
Quite some Arab Jews would have a greed with you not all to long ago
oh, how i beg to differ.
now, don't be rewriting history here :m:
==========
PS,
i don't know whether these quotes are real or not (believe me i'll check this out. i wouldn't be surprised if they were mistranslated or taken out of context)....even if they are... please show me a single hassid who's committed murder or even assault. it's freakin unheard of. but even that, i guess, is too violent for you, because islam is a 'religion of peace'
should i start with the examples?
and let's not start talking about the infinite wisdom from the quran about beating up your wife for misbehaving.. or chasing down the jew and killing him and how trees and rocks refuse to hide him because he's so vile.
oh, how i beg to differ.
now, don't be rewriting history here :m:
==========
PS,
i don't know whether these quotes are real or not (believe me i'll check this out. i wouldn't be surprised if they were mistranslated or taken out of context)....even if they are... please show me a single hassid who's committed murder or even assault. it's freakin unheard of. but even that, i guess, is too violent for you, because islam is a 'religion of peace'
should i start with the examples?
and let's not start talking about the infinite wisdom from the quran about beating up your wife for misbehaving.. or chasing down the jew and killing him and how trees and rocks refuse to hide him because he's so vile.
shrubby pegasus
Registered Senior Member
none of the muslims i have ever met are blood thirsty and worship death. otheadp i doubt you know any muslims with your infinite capacity to hate
P
Proud_Syrian
Guest
The term ‘anti-Semite’ used to mean “somebody who hates Jews”. Now it refers to anybody who the Jews hate.”
I understand you beg to differ , and I understand that your history books in Israel told you different as such is required for the state's ideology , however before you came Mizrahim lived in peace together with Muslims under Islamic Law .
It is so sad that the persucuted chose a place and a peoples to retalliate upon with whom/where their Jewish "brothers" were safe , while they allied with their haters and persecuters .
Don't you think it's sad that it had to turn out this way ?
I do not know weither all are within context , and I do know that not all are interpreted as a lay man might believe , but they do exist and there are some Jews who uphold them . It is exactly this psychology that was taken along into zionism , this is the moral code that makes everything right.
Don't lie man , you don't have to trash something else because yours (and you're not even rleigious) is being attacked . Qu'ran does not promote beating your wife or trees hiding Jews ...
P
Proud_Syrian
Guest
The French Hero who refused to be intimidated by the nazi jews....
http://www.albawaba.com/news/index.php3?sid=261272&lang=e&dir=news
You praise even Chirac as a hero ? You really are a whore of the "Gods" arent you ?
in case you haven't noticed i quoted PS's sentence and changed it around a little.. the whole thing was sarcastic.
i have many muslim friends from different countries.... while he's never even seen one on the street.
------
syrian poodle:
have you ever met a jewish man in your life?
your brain is so simple, it soaks up propaganda like a dry sponge soaks water. why don't you read up a little from an independent source instead of repeating like a good boy (without even thinking) all the nonsense you've been told? why don't you try to make friends with jews?
no... these ideas don't even come to your brain...
it can't be "racial"... my conclusion, your regime has beaten this info into you...independant thought is discouraged... and your fragile mind cannot comprehand that you might be wrong.
ghassan:
it's not my history books that are wrong, it's yours.
the mizrahim that live in israel have their own stories to tell, in their own words. they are my history books (among other stuff i've read)
i do understand though the "arab" needt to "rewrite" history to make their crimes against their jewish populations disappear.
are you familiar with the term "Dhimmi"?
Last edited:
otheadp
I am very well aware of the term , I am affraid you are rather not that aware of its implications . I know of the story the Mizrahim have to tell , not only about their history in Arabia but about their wonderfull stay and treatment in Israel just as well .
I am the last to claim some perfect relationship of joy and harmony , but Jews in Arab lands had lived a good life , more came to Arabia from Europe (Sefardim) as the Inquisition expelled them , and they were welcomed as if indeed they eturned home .
My information does not come from Arabs or Muslims , you should try to hold that in your mind every time you wish to dissaprove something that I assert .
I have no relation with any Arab need to rewrite history , nor would such rewriting fit logically when it is rather the story of the new nation that needs to be created within a distinct and manipulative presentation to begin with . Before Herzl even was born Jews already lived in Arabia , and their history is for everyone to see that cares to research the issues .
I have pointed out quite some things in threads regarding the relationship of Mizrahim and their land , as well as the mass-migration from Iraq and what was the cause of it . Issues that have been brought forth by Jews themselves , former-zionists even .
Do I now once more have to dig up evidence that shows satisfactory living from Jewish perspective within Arab lands ? They were not the ones trying to make any state , nor were they the ones who would be valued centrally as the heart of the Jewish state . They were the orientals , and let us not pretend as if they were the Europeans , or the Israeli's that you may desire them to be .
Before we would look at any of the actual history , the question remains Otheadp : Do you not feel wrong about this attitude towards the Arabs and the accusations of rewriting history (which is rather an attempt for demonizing Arabic-Jewish relations from your side) , while you at the same time ally/admire/identify with the West , while their history
toward the Jewish peoples could not be whiped out even with a million explenations of Jewish conspiracy's and non-functional gaschambers ?
Why do you transform everything they have done to you into an accusation towards us ?
How is that fair in any way ?
There is a scholary work regarding Jews and their history on the Arabian Peninsula called A History of the Jewish People and is edited by Haim Hillel Ben-Sasson .
Perhaps you would think of that name when you see the extracted texts , before you will engage in refuting my supposed sources :
Jews Under Islamic Rule
You see the difference is that the only ones who would produce the attitude toward this situation that you are showing , are core-zionists .
It is easily shown what you have been reading :
http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/anti-semitism/Jews_in_Arab_lands_(gen).html
I am aware of the presentation of facts Ot , why are you not aware that we are not binded to their perspective of things ?
I am very well aware of the term , I am affraid you are rather not that aware of its implications . I know of the story the Mizrahim have to tell , not only about their history in Arabia but about their wonderfull stay and treatment in Israel just as well .
I am the last to claim some perfect relationship of joy and harmony , but Jews in Arab lands had lived a good life , more came to Arabia from Europe (Sefardim) as the Inquisition expelled them , and they were welcomed as if indeed they eturned home .
My information does not come from Arabs or Muslims , you should try to hold that in your mind every time you wish to dissaprove something that I assert .
I have no relation with any Arab need to rewrite history , nor would such rewriting fit logically when it is rather the story of the new nation that needs to be created within a distinct and manipulative presentation to begin with . Before Herzl even was born Jews already lived in Arabia , and their history is for everyone to see that cares to research the issues .
I have pointed out quite some things in threads regarding the relationship of Mizrahim and their land , as well as the mass-migration from Iraq and what was the cause of it . Issues that have been brought forth by Jews themselves , former-zionists even .
Do I now once more have to dig up evidence that shows satisfactory living from Jewish perspective within Arab lands ? They were not the ones trying to make any state , nor were they the ones who would be valued centrally as the heart of the Jewish state . They were the orientals , and let us not pretend as if they were the Europeans , or the Israeli's that you may desire them to be .
Before we would look at any of the actual history , the question remains Otheadp : Do you not feel wrong about this attitude towards the Arabs and the accusations of rewriting history (which is rather an attempt for demonizing Arabic-Jewish relations from your side) , while you at the same time ally/admire/identify with the West , while their history
toward the Jewish peoples could not be whiped out even with a million explenations of Jewish conspiracy's and non-functional gaschambers ?
Why do you transform everything they have done to you into an accusation towards us ?
How is that fair in any way ?
There is a scholary work regarding Jews and their history on the Arabian Peninsula called A History of the Jewish People and is edited by Haim Hillel Ben-Sasson .
Perhaps you would think of that name when you see the extracted texts , before you will engage in refuting my supposed sources :
Jews Under Islamic Rule
You see the difference is that the only ones who would produce the attitude toward this situation that you are showing , are core-zionists .
It is easily shown what you have been reading :
http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/anti-semitism/Jews_in_Arab_lands_(gen).html
I am aware of the presentation of facts Ot , why are you not aware that we are not binded to their perspective of things ?
P
Proud_Syrian
Guest
Six Million?
Should someone be considered a "Holocaust denier" because he does not believe -- as Matas and others insist -- that six million Jews were killed during World War II? This figure was cited by the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg in 1945-1946. It found that "the policy pursued [by the German government] resulted in the killing of six million Jews, of which four million were killed in the extermination institutions."
Yet if that is so, then several of the most prominent Holocaust historians could be regarded as "deniers." Professor Raul Hilberg, author of the standard reference work, The Destruction of the European Jews, does not accept that six million Jews died. He puts the total of deaths (from all causes) at 5.1 million. Gerald Reitlinger, author of The Final Solution, likewise did not accept the six million figure. He estimated the figure of Jewish wartime dead might be as high as 4.6 million, but admitted that this was conjectural due to a lack of reliable information.
Human Soap?
Is someone a "Holocaust denier" if he says that the Nazis didn't use Jewish fat to make soap? After examining all the evidence (including an actual bar of soap supplied by the Soviets), the Nuremberg Tribunal declared in its Judgment that "in some instances attempts were made to utilize the fat from the bodies of the victims in the commercial manufacture of soap."
In 1990, though, Israel's official "Yad Vashem" Holocaust memorial agency "rewrote history" by admitting that the soap story was not true. "Historians have concluded that soap was not made from human fat. When so many people deny the Holocaust ever happened, why give them something to use against the truth?," said Yad Vashem official Shmuel Krakowski. (note 4)
Extermination Policy?
Is someone a "Holocaust denier" if he says that there was no order by Hitler to exterminate Europe's Jews? There was a time when the answer would have been yes. Holocaust historian Raul Hilberg, for example, wrote in the 1961 edition of his study, The Destruction of the European Jews, that there were two Hitler orders for the destruction of Europe's Jews: the first given in the spring of 1941, and the second shortly thereafter. But Hilberg removed mention of any such order from the revised, three-volume edition of his book published in 1985. As Holocaust historian Christopher Browning has noted:
In the new edition, all references in the text to a Hitler decision or Hitler order for the "Final Solution" have been systematically excised. Buried at the bottom of a single footnote stands the solitary reference: "Chronology and circumstances point to a Hitler decision before the summer ended." In the new edition, decisions were not made and orders were not given.
A lack of hard evidence for an extermination order by Hitler has contributed to a controversy that divides Holocaust historians into "intentionalists" and "functionalists." The former contend that there was a premeditated extermination policy ordered by Hitler, while the latter hold that Germany's wartime "final solution" Jewish policy evolved at lower levels in response to circumstances. But the crucial point here is this: notwithstanding the capture of literally tons of German documents after the war, no one can point to documentary evidence of a wartime extermination order, plan or program. This was admitted by Professor Hilberg during his testimony in the 1985 trial in Toronto of German-Canadian publisher Ernst Zuendel.
Auschwitz
So just what constitutes "Holocaust denial"? Surely a claim that most Auschwitz inmates died from disease and not systematic extermination in gas chambers would be "denial." But perhaps not. Jewish historian Arno J. Mayer, a Princeton University professor, wrote in his 1988 study Why Did the Heavens Not Darken?: The "Final Solution" in History: " . . . From 1942 to 1945, certainly at Auschwitz, but probably overall, more Jews were killed by so-called 'natural' causes than by 'unnatural' ones."
Even estimates of the number of people who died at Auschwitz -- allegedly the main extermination center -- are no longer clear cut. At the postwar Nuremberg Tribunal, the Allies charged that the Germans exterminated four million people at Auschwitz. (note 10) Until 1990, a memorial plaque at Auschwitz read: "Four Million People Suffered and Died Here at the Hands of the Nazi Murderers Between the Years 1940 and 1945." During a 1979 visit to the camp, Pope John Paul II stood before this memorial and blessed the four million victims.
Is it "Holocaust denial" to dispute these four million deaths? Not today. In July 1990, the Polish government's Auschwitz State Museum, along with Israel's Yad Vashem Holocaust center, conceded that the four million figure was a gross exaggeration, and references to it were accordingly removed from the Auschwitz monument. Israeli and Polish officials announced a tentative revised toll of 1.1 million Auschwitz dead. (note 12) In 1993, French Holocaust researcher Jean-Claude Pressac, in a much-discussed book about Auschwitz, estimated that altogether about 775,000 died there during the war years.
Professor Mayer acknowledges that the question of how many really died in Auschwitz remains open. In Why Did the Heavens Not Darken? he wrote (p. 366):
. . . Many questions remain open . . . All in all, how many bodies were cremated in Auschwitz? How many died there all told? What was the national, religious, and ethnic breakdown in this commonwealth of victims? How many of them were condemned to die a 'natural' death and how many were deliberately slaughtered? And what was the proportion of Jews among those murdered in cold blood among these gassed? We have simply no answers to these questions at this time.
Gas Chambers
What about denying the existence of extermination "gas chambers"? Here too, Mayer makes a startling statement (on page 362 of his book): "Sources for the study of the gas chambers are at once rare and unreliable." While Mayer believes that such chambers did exist at Auschwitz, he points out that
most of what is known is based on the depositions of Nazi officials and executioners at postwar trials and on the memory of survivors and bystanders. This testimony must be screened carefully, since it can be influenced by subjective factors of great complexity.
Forensic Investigations
In his 1988 book, Professor Mayer calls for "excavations at the killing sites and in their immediate environs" to determine more about the gas chambers. In fact, such forensic studies have been made. The first was conducted in 1988 by American execution equipment consultant, Fred A. Leuchter, Jr. He carried out an on-site forensic examination of the alleged gas chambers at Auschwitz, Birkenau and Majdanek to determine if they could have been used to kill people as claimed. After a careful study of the alleged killing facilities, Leuchter concluded that the sites were not used, and could not have been used, as homicidal gas chambers. Furthermore, an analysis of samples taken by Leuchter from the walls and floors of the alleged gas chambers showed either no or minuscule traces of cyanide compound, from the active ingredient of Zyklon B, the pesticide allegedly used to murder Jews at Auschwitz.
A confidential forensic examination (and subsequent report) commissioned by the Auschwitz State Museum and conducted by Institute of Forensic Research in Krakow has confirmed Leuchter's finding that minimal or no traces of cyanide compound can be found in the sites alleged to have been gas chambers.
The significance of this is evident when the results of the forensic examination of the alleged homicidal gas chambers are compared with the results of the examination of the Auschwitz disinfestation facilities, where Zyklon B was used to delouse mattresses and clothing. Whereas no or only trace amounts of cyanide were found in the alleged homicidal gas chambers, massive traces of cyanide were found in the walls and floor in the camp's disinfestation delousing chambers.
Another forensic study has been carried out by German chemist Germar Rudolf. On the basis of his on-site examination and analysis of samples, the certified chemist and doctoral candidate concluded: "For chemical-technical reasons, the claimed mass gassings with hydrocyanic acid in the alleged 'gas chambers' in Auschwitz did not take place . . . The supposed facilities for mass killing in Auschwitz and Birkenau were not suitable for this purpose . . ."
Finally, there is the study of Austrian engineer Walter Lueftl, a respected expert witness in numerous court cases, and former president of Austria's professional association of engineers. In a 1992 report he called the alleged mass extermination of Jews in gas chambers "technically impossible."
YOU ARE THE JUDGE !
Should someone be considered a "Holocaust denier" because he does not believe -- as Matas and others insist -- that six million Jews were killed during World War II? This figure was cited by the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg in 1945-1946. It found that "the policy pursued [by the German government] resulted in the killing of six million Jews, of which four million were killed in the extermination institutions."
Yet if that is so, then several of the most prominent Holocaust historians could be regarded as "deniers." Professor Raul Hilberg, author of the standard reference work, The Destruction of the European Jews, does not accept that six million Jews died. He puts the total of deaths (from all causes) at 5.1 million. Gerald Reitlinger, author of The Final Solution, likewise did not accept the six million figure. He estimated the figure of Jewish wartime dead might be as high as 4.6 million, but admitted that this was conjectural due to a lack of reliable information.
Human Soap?
Is someone a "Holocaust denier" if he says that the Nazis didn't use Jewish fat to make soap? After examining all the evidence (including an actual bar of soap supplied by the Soviets), the Nuremberg Tribunal declared in its Judgment that "in some instances attempts were made to utilize the fat from the bodies of the victims in the commercial manufacture of soap."
In 1990, though, Israel's official "Yad Vashem" Holocaust memorial agency "rewrote history" by admitting that the soap story was not true. "Historians have concluded that soap was not made from human fat. When so many people deny the Holocaust ever happened, why give them something to use against the truth?," said Yad Vashem official Shmuel Krakowski. (note 4)
Extermination Policy?
Is someone a "Holocaust denier" if he says that there was no order by Hitler to exterminate Europe's Jews? There was a time when the answer would have been yes. Holocaust historian Raul Hilberg, for example, wrote in the 1961 edition of his study, The Destruction of the European Jews, that there were two Hitler orders for the destruction of Europe's Jews: the first given in the spring of 1941, and the second shortly thereafter. But Hilberg removed mention of any such order from the revised, three-volume edition of his book published in 1985. As Holocaust historian Christopher Browning has noted:
In the new edition, all references in the text to a Hitler decision or Hitler order for the "Final Solution" have been systematically excised. Buried at the bottom of a single footnote stands the solitary reference: "Chronology and circumstances point to a Hitler decision before the summer ended." In the new edition, decisions were not made and orders were not given.
A lack of hard evidence for an extermination order by Hitler has contributed to a controversy that divides Holocaust historians into "intentionalists" and "functionalists." The former contend that there was a premeditated extermination policy ordered by Hitler, while the latter hold that Germany's wartime "final solution" Jewish policy evolved at lower levels in response to circumstances. But the crucial point here is this: notwithstanding the capture of literally tons of German documents after the war, no one can point to documentary evidence of a wartime extermination order, plan or program. This was admitted by Professor Hilberg during his testimony in the 1985 trial in Toronto of German-Canadian publisher Ernst Zuendel.
Auschwitz
So just what constitutes "Holocaust denial"? Surely a claim that most Auschwitz inmates died from disease and not systematic extermination in gas chambers would be "denial." But perhaps not. Jewish historian Arno J. Mayer, a Princeton University professor, wrote in his 1988 study Why Did the Heavens Not Darken?: The "Final Solution" in History: " . . . From 1942 to 1945, certainly at Auschwitz, but probably overall, more Jews were killed by so-called 'natural' causes than by 'unnatural' ones."
Even estimates of the number of people who died at Auschwitz -- allegedly the main extermination center -- are no longer clear cut. At the postwar Nuremberg Tribunal, the Allies charged that the Germans exterminated four million people at Auschwitz. (note 10) Until 1990, a memorial plaque at Auschwitz read: "Four Million People Suffered and Died Here at the Hands of the Nazi Murderers Between the Years 1940 and 1945." During a 1979 visit to the camp, Pope John Paul II stood before this memorial and blessed the four million victims.
Is it "Holocaust denial" to dispute these four million deaths? Not today. In July 1990, the Polish government's Auschwitz State Museum, along with Israel's Yad Vashem Holocaust center, conceded that the four million figure was a gross exaggeration, and references to it were accordingly removed from the Auschwitz monument. Israeli and Polish officials announced a tentative revised toll of 1.1 million Auschwitz dead. (note 12) In 1993, French Holocaust researcher Jean-Claude Pressac, in a much-discussed book about Auschwitz, estimated that altogether about 775,000 died there during the war years.
Professor Mayer acknowledges that the question of how many really died in Auschwitz remains open. In Why Did the Heavens Not Darken? he wrote (p. 366):
. . . Many questions remain open . . . All in all, how many bodies were cremated in Auschwitz? How many died there all told? What was the national, religious, and ethnic breakdown in this commonwealth of victims? How many of them were condemned to die a 'natural' death and how many were deliberately slaughtered? And what was the proportion of Jews among those murdered in cold blood among these gassed? We have simply no answers to these questions at this time.
Gas Chambers
What about denying the existence of extermination "gas chambers"? Here too, Mayer makes a startling statement (on page 362 of his book): "Sources for the study of the gas chambers are at once rare and unreliable." While Mayer believes that such chambers did exist at Auschwitz, he points out that
most of what is known is based on the depositions of Nazi officials and executioners at postwar trials and on the memory of survivors and bystanders. This testimony must be screened carefully, since it can be influenced by subjective factors of great complexity.
Forensic Investigations
In his 1988 book, Professor Mayer calls for "excavations at the killing sites and in their immediate environs" to determine more about the gas chambers. In fact, such forensic studies have been made. The first was conducted in 1988 by American execution equipment consultant, Fred A. Leuchter, Jr. He carried out an on-site forensic examination of the alleged gas chambers at Auschwitz, Birkenau and Majdanek to determine if they could have been used to kill people as claimed. After a careful study of the alleged killing facilities, Leuchter concluded that the sites were not used, and could not have been used, as homicidal gas chambers. Furthermore, an analysis of samples taken by Leuchter from the walls and floors of the alleged gas chambers showed either no or minuscule traces of cyanide compound, from the active ingredient of Zyklon B, the pesticide allegedly used to murder Jews at Auschwitz.
A confidential forensic examination (and subsequent report) commissioned by the Auschwitz State Museum and conducted by Institute of Forensic Research in Krakow has confirmed Leuchter's finding that minimal or no traces of cyanide compound can be found in the sites alleged to have been gas chambers.
The significance of this is evident when the results of the forensic examination of the alleged homicidal gas chambers are compared with the results of the examination of the Auschwitz disinfestation facilities, where Zyklon B was used to delouse mattresses and clothing. Whereas no or only trace amounts of cyanide were found in the alleged homicidal gas chambers, massive traces of cyanide were found in the walls and floor in the camp's disinfestation delousing chambers.
Another forensic study has been carried out by German chemist Germar Rudolf. On the basis of his on-site examination and analysis of samples, the certified chemist and doctoral candidate concluded: "For chemical-technical reasons, the claimed mass gassings with hydrocyanic acid in the alleged 'gas chambers' in Auschwitz did not take place . . . The supposed facilities for mass killing in Auschwitz and Birkenau were not suitable for this purpose . . ."
Finally, there is the study of Austrian engineer Walter Lueftl, a respected expert witness in numerous court cases, and former president of Austria's professional association of engineers. In a 1992 report he called the alleged mass extermination of Jews in gas chambers "technically impossible."
YOU ARE THE JUDGE !
It has no relevance to him , as it merely feeds the propaganda purposes he invisions against Jews .
- Status