HOLOCAUST, A FRAUD?
Bu yazi toplam 498 defa okundu.
Bu yazi bugun 7 defa okundu.
Sevgili Dostlar ve Kardeşler,
Soykırımlar icat edilen bir dünyadayız.
Amerikan Yahudi Kurumları da küt diye çark ettiler.
Tarihi sorgulamak “yasak” ediliyor.
Ben de Yahudi Soykırımı mes’elesini sorgulamaktayım senelerdir.
Garaudy’nin kitabı da indirilebiliyor internetten.
Mesleğimiz bize dâima hakikati araştırmayı emreder.
Bu web mekânı ise çok ilginç:
http://www.onethirdoftheholocaust.com/index.html
İlâve bir dokümantasyonu da ekliyorum. Lûtfen fevrice ve saldırganca değil, bilimsel kuşkuculukla yaklaşalım mevzuya.
Bilgilerinize kardeşçe sevgi ve saygılarımla arz ederim.
(A German Point of View)
2. HOW DID GERMAN CONCENTRATION CAMPS DIFFER FROM AMERICAN RELOCATION CAMPS WHICH INTERNED JAPANESE AND GERMAN-AMERICANS DURING WORLD WAR TWO?
Except for the name, the only difference was that the Germans interned persons who were a real or suspected threat to the German war effort, whereas the Americans interned persons on the basis of their race or national origin alone.
3. WHY DID THE GERMAN AUTHORITIES INTERN JEWS IN THE CONCENTRATION CAMPS?
Because the Germans considered the Jews a direct threat to their national sovereignty and survival, correctly as it turned out. Jews were overwhelmingly represented in Germany in Communist subversion during the Weimar period. On a per capita basis, Jews were highly overrepresented in government, commercial, and media positions. However, ALL suspected security risks, not just Jews, were in danger of internment once the war broke out.
On March 24th, 1933, international Jewry declared war on Germany and ordered a world-wide boycott of German goods simply because the German government had removed Jews from influential positions and transferred power back to the German people. The boycott order and the Jewish war against Germany were reported in the world print and broadcast media of the time. False stories of German “death camps” were in fact circulated even before the outbreak of World War Two. Therefore the German view of the Jewish people as enemy aliens would seem to have been fully justified.
4. DID SIMON WIESENTHAL ONCE ADMIT THAT THERE WERE NEVER ANY DEATH CAMPS ON GERMAN SOIL?
Yes. In *Books and Bookmen*, April 1975 issue. He claims the gassing of all the Jews took place in Poland.
5. DACHAU IS IN GERMANY. IF EVEN SIMON WIESENTHAL NOW ADMITS IT WAS NOT A DEATH CAMP, WHY DO THOUSANDS OF AMERICAN VETERANS SAY IT WAS?
Because after the Allies captured Dachau (and incidentally murdered dozens of the former staff without trial), thousands of GIs were led through the camp and shown buildings alleged to be gas chambers. This story was later quietly expunged from official Holocaust lore because it became too difficult to maintain in the face of known fact and because Dachau was in the Allied occupation zone where access to the camp was too easy and unrestricted.
En passant, the brief lifespan of the “Dachau death camp” version gave rise to the first critical examination and questioning of the Holocaust myth by historians and by some Allied veterans who noticed discrepancies in what they had seen and what they read in official accounts. It would be many years, though, before this early Holocaust Revisionism gained momentum.
6. AUSCHWITZ IS IN POLAND, NOT GERMANY. IS THERE ANY PROOF THAT GAS CHAMBERS FOR THE PURPOSE OF KILLING PEOPLE EXISTED AT AUSCHWITZ?
No. The “gas chamber” exhibited to tourists at Auschwitz could not possibly have been used to carry out executions; it is far too small and it is not even airtight. In the 1980s, American expert Fred Leuchter, who builds gas chambers for American penal systems, took scrapings from the walls of the Auschwitz “gas chamber” for chemical analysis. He found no cyanide residue at all. The Auschwitz exhibit is a fake, pure and simple, a flimsy tourist trap.
7. IF AUSCHWITZ WASN’T A DEATH CAMP, WHAT WAS ITS TRUE PURPOSE?
It was a large-scale manufacturing complex. Synthetic rubber (Buna) was made there, and its inmates were used as a workforce, in the same way in which inmate labor is increasingly being used in correctional systems throughout the United States today.
8. WHAT ABOUT THE INFAMOUS ZYKLON-B GAS?
Zyklon-B is a commercially manufactured compound of hydrocyanic gas. It has a number of widespread industrial uses, including the fumigation of lice-infested clothing, the purpose for which it was applied at Auschwitz. Zyklon-B is still manufactured worldwide and is commonly used and available today.
9. IF AUSCHWITZ WAS NOT AN EXTERMINATION CAMP, WHY DID FORMER COMMANDANT RUDOLF HOESS CONFESS THAT IT WAS?
Hoess was captured by the Russians and Polish Communists and brutally tortured. He signed his confession, the SOLE SOURCE for the figure of six million dead Jews, in English, a language he could not read. Some pages of the original document are literally stained with Hoess’ blood. Hoess was then conveniently executed so he could not be cross examined.
10. HOW LONG DOES IT TAKE FULLY TO VENTILATE AN AREA FUMIGATED WITH ZYKLON-B?
About twenty hours. The whole procedure is extremely involved and technical. Gas masks have to be used and well trained technicians only are employed.
11. RUDOLF HOESS SAID IN HIS CONFESSION THAT HIS MEN WOULD ENTER THE GAS CHAMBER TEN MINUTES AFTER THE JEWS HAD DIED AND REMOVE THE BODIES. HOW DO YOU EXPLAIN THIS?
It can’t be explained, because it could not have happened like that. Had the Germans done this they would have suffered the same fate as the allegedly exterminated Jews.
12. HOESS SAID IN HIS CONFESSION THAT HIS MEN WOULD SMOKE CIGARETTES AS THEY PULLED DEAD JEWS OUT OF CHAMBERS WHICH TEN MINUTES BEFORE HAD BEEN FILLED WITH GAS. ISN’T ZYKLON-B EXPLOSIVE?
Highly so. The Hoess confession is obviously false and the six million figure as well.
13. HOW COULD SUCH A MASS MURDER PROGRAM HAVE BEEN KEPT SECRET FROM JEWS WHO WERE SCHEDULED FOR EXECUTION? HOW COULD THE POPE, THE VATICAN, THE INTERNATIONAL RED CROSS, AND ALLIED MILITARY INTELLIGENCE NOT KNOW?
Given the acknowledged efficiency and penetration of the OSS, British MI5, and Soviet NKVD into the Third Reich, it could not have been kept secret. Nor can one imagine any reason for the Allies, who were fighting to destroy Germany, not to make use of such a potentially powerful propaganda weapon, had there been any contemporary evidence at all during the war that such an event was occurring.
14. HOW MANY JEWS ACTUALLY DIED IN GERMAN CONCENTRATION CAMPS DURING THE WAR?
About 300,000.
15. HOW DID THEY DIE?
Mainly from recurring typhus epidemics that ravaged war-torn Europe during the period. Typhus is a disease which invariably appears whenever people are jammed together for long periods without bathing. It is carried by lice which infects hair and clothes. Ironically, if the Germans had used more Zyklon-B for disinfectant purposes, more Jews might have survived the concentration camps. Jewish prisoners (as well as many others) also died from starvation and lack of medical attention towards the end of the war when virtually all rail and road transport had come to a standstill due to the intense Allied bombing campaign.
16. WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE WHETHER SIX MILLION JEWS OR 300,000 DIED?
5,700,00. The key question is whether or not there was a deliberate, systematic attempt on the part of the Third Reich to exterminate the Jews of Europe. The evidence clearly shows that there was not, and the focus of world attention now needs to shift to the identity, the activities, and the financial and political motivations of those who have inflicted on all humanity for the past fifty years the grotesque, slanderous, and evil lie that there was a “Holocaust”.
17. MANY JEWISH SURVIVORS OF THE “DEATH CAMPS” SAY THEY SAW BODIES BEING PILED UP IN PITS AND BURNED. HOW MUCH GASOLINE WOULD HAVE BEEN USED TO PERFORM THIS ACT?
A lot more than the Germans had access to or could have afforded to waste during the Second World War, that’s for sure.
18. CAN BODIES BE BURNED IN PITS?
No. It is impossible for human bodies to be totally consumed by flames in this manner as not enough heat can be generated in open pits. [Note From Harold Covington: I can personally confirm from my own observations of both Communist and American atrocities in both the American and Rhodesian armed forces that it is impossible completely to destroy human bodies en masse with either gasoline, napalm, or in any other way in open pits. The Holocaust “experts” who claim otherwise are either parroting what they have been told without bothering to check their facts, or else they are lying.]
19. HOLOCAUST AUTHORS CLAIM THE NAZIS WERE ABLE TO CREMATE BODIES IN ABOUT TEN MINUTES. HOW LONG DOES IT TAKE TO INCINERATE A BODY ACCORDING TO PROFESSIONAL FUNERAL OPERATORS?
About two hours.
20. WHY DID CONCENTRATION CAMPS HAVE CREMATORY OVENS?
To dispose efficiently and sanitarily of the corpses dead from typhus and other diseases.
21. GIVEN A 100% DUTY CYCLE OF ALL THE KNOWN CREMATORIA IN ALL THE CAMPS IN GERMAN-CONTROLLED TERRITORY, WHAT IS THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF CORPSES WHICH IT WOULD HAVE BEEN POSSIBLE TO INCINERATE DURING THE ENTIRE TIME THE CAMPS WERE IN EXISTENCE?
About 430,600.
22. CAN A CREMATORY OVEN BE OPERATED 100% OF THE TIME?
No. 50% of the time is a very generous estimate, or 12 hours per day. Crematory ovens have to be cleaned thoroughly and regularly when in heavy operation.
23. ON THE AVERAGE, HOW MUCH ASH IS LEFT FROM A CREMATED CORPSE?
After the bone is ground down into powder, a separate time-consuming process in itself, about a shoe box full.
24. IF SIX MILLION PEOPLE WERE INCINERATED BY THE NAZIS, WHAT HAPPENED TO THE ASHES?
That remains to be “explained”. Six million bodies would produce literally mountains of ash, tons upon tons. Yet there have been no discoveries of any huge deposits of ash in the Auschwitz area or anywhere else in Europe.
25. DO ALLIED WARTIME PHOTOS OF AUSCHWITZ, TAKEN FROM THE AIR, SHOW ANY SIGNS OF CREMATORIA IN FULL BLAST OPERATION?
No. These photographs do not reveal even a trace of the immense amount of smoke which must have hung constantly over the camp, nor do they show any evidence of the alleged open pits where the bodies were burned.
26. WHAT DID THE INTERNATIONAL RED CROSS HAVE TO SAY ABOUT THE WHOLE “HOLOCAUST” ISSUE?
A report of the visit of an IRC delegation to Auschwitz in September of 1944 pointed out that internees were allowed to receive packages and that rumors of gas chambers could not be verified. The full official report of the International Red Cross on the Second World War makes no mention at all of the so-called Holocaust or any of the wilder allegations connected with the so-called Holocaust.
Interestingly, in 1996, fifty years after the war’s end, the liberal media in America and Europe began running a series of articles claiming that the Red Cross was “full of Nazi sympathizers”. This charge is entirely bogus and may be chalked up to belated Jewish attempts at damage control as the Holocaust myth crumbles steadily in the light of factual examination and critical analysis.
27. IS THE DIARY OF ANNE FRANK GENUINE?
Not as published, no. The evidence compiled by Dietlieb Felderer of Sweden and Dr. Robert Faurisson of France proves conclusively that the published version of the famous diary is a literary hoax. There was a girl named Anne Frank, and sections of the diary appear to be genuine, including several wherein she describes adolescent lesbian sexual experiences which were later excised from the published text.
In 1950 Anne Frank’s father sued author Meyer Levin, the actual writer of the diary, over royalties from the book. A Jewish judge in New York ordered the records of the court case sealed for 100 years. When the original diary was put on display a few years later, it was noticed that the most poignant sections of the book were interpolations written in a forged handwriting in BALL POINT PEN, a writing instrument which was not invented until 1950. The original diary was swiftly removed from exhibit and whisked away into a safety deposit box in Israel. It has never been produced for examination since then despite repeated attempts by scholars to view it.
28. WHAT ABOUT ALL THE NUMEROUS PHOTOGRAPHS AND FILM FOOTAGE ALLEGEDLY TAKEN IN GERMAN CONCENTRATION CAMPS SHOWING EMACIATED CORPSES AND PEOPLE? ARE THESE FAKED?
Some are, but most of the fakery lies in the captioning. Corpses of German air raid victims, for example, are labeled as dead Jews. One famous and oft-reprinted photo purports to show a “Nazi SS man” about to shoot a mother holding her child; on closer examination of the blurry print with a magnifying glass, it is clear to military historians familiar with the uniforms and weapons of the period that the killer is a Red Army soldier wielding a Russian-made carbine.
(The Exterminationist habit of blaming the Germans for atrocities actually carried out by Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin remains common, even though some of the more notorious examples like the Katyn Forest massacre of Polish prisoners have now been properly laid at the door of the Kremlin. That this kind of fraud continues to be perpetrated by Holocaust “experts” is not surprising in view of the fact that almost all of them espouse Marxist or extreme left-wing views and are as quick to apologize for and explain away Stalin’s butcheries as they are to invent fraudulent crimes attributed to Adolf Hitler. The almost universally leftist political and social orientation of Holocaust defenders is important and should always be born in mind when examining their claims; letting Stalin off the hook is almost as important to them as blackening and defaming the memory of Hitler and the German people. A good example of this is Nizkor leader Ken McVay’s refusal to accept any more N.S.W.P.P. e-mail after General Secretary Covington asked him why he did not condemn the mass murders of Stalin.)
29. WHAT WAS THE ROLE OF THE VATICAN DURING THE TIME IN WHICH SIX MILLION JEWS WERE ALLEGEDLY EXTERMINATED?
Had there been an extermination plan being carried out in a predominantly Catholic country like Poland, the Vatican would certainly have been in a position to learn about it. Since no such plan existed, the Vatican had no need to speak out about it.
30. WHAT EVIDENCE IS THERE THAT ADOLF HITLER ORDERED THE EXTERMINATION OF THE JEWS?
None. No documentary evidence of any kind indicating a deliberate extermination plan on the part of the Nazis has ever come to light. No signed order from Hitler, from Reichsfuhrer-SS Heinrich Himmler, or from any other functionary of the Third Reich ordering the extermination of the Jews has ever been discovered. The Nazis were meticulous records-keepers and literally tons of documents were seized by the Allies at the end of the war, so many it took Allied archivists and scholars years to organize, file, and catalog them all. Nothing. Zip. Nada.
31. DID THE GERMANS AND THE ZIONISTS COLLABORATE BEFORE AND DURING THE WAR?
Absolutely. Both groups were interested in removing the Jews from Europe (the Zionists wanted the Jews shipped to Palestine) and they maintained friendly relations throughout the war. The German official in charge of shipping thousands of Jews to then British-occupied Palestine (including future Israeli prime minister Menachem Begin) was Adolf Eichmann; after the war the Holocaust industry considered this secret so volatile and dangerous that Eichmann was abducted by the Israeli Mossad and subsequently murdered in order to silence him.
32. HOW MANY JEWS WERE IN AREAS WHICH CAME TO BE CONTROLLED BY THE GERMANS DURING THE SECOND WORLD WAR?
Slightly less than four million.
33. HOW MANY JEWS FLED DEEP INTO THE SOVIET UNION TO ESCAPE THE NAZIS?
Over two million. The Germans did not have access to them to kill them.
34. IF EUROPEAN JEWS WEREN’T EXTERMINATED BY THE NAZIS, WHAT HAPPENED TO THEM?
After the war most Jews emigrated to Palestine, the United States, Argentina, Canada, and Great Britain. Except for about 300,000, they are all accounted for.
35. HOW DOES THE HOLOCAUST STORY BENEFIT THE JEWISH PEOPLE TODAY?
It shields them from any criticism over their political, economic, and social behavior. It is instrumental in raising immense sums of “guilt money”, especially from the German government. It justifies aid to the state of Israel totaling almost $10 billion dollars per year from various sources. Israel has received almost $70 billion dollars in assorted “Holocaust reparations” and the ante is growing every year. It is clearly in the interest of Israel and the Jewish people to keep the scam going.
36. ARE FILMS LIKE “HOLOCAUST”, “SCHINDLER’S LIST”, AND “THE WINDS OF WAR” DOCUMENTARIES?
Hollywood movies are not history and are not intended to be. They are fictionalized dramas. The characters in movies are actors, not real people, who are being very highly paid for their portrayals of events that did not in fact occur. They read their lines from a screenplay written by Hollywood scriptwriters, a profession where Jews are very highly overrepresented, as they are in the studios and the creative and financial sectors of film making.
Hollywood is such an extremely unreliable source of history that in recent years even mainstream reviewers and commentators have begun to express doubt and suspicion over some films. For example, the character of Oscar Schindler as portrayed by Liam Neeson in Spielberg’s production of “Schindler’s List” was sanitized to the point of being unrecognizable. Schindler was portrayed as almost saintly, and yet none of those still living who remember the man have a single good word to say about him. The real Schindler was a confidence artist, a thief, a libertine and degenerate gambler who indulged freely in forced sexual relations with young female camp inmates, who later abandoned his wife and fled with his mistress to Brazil after embezzling a large sum of money. Other major directors like Oliver Stone have come under fire because their portrayals of historical characters like Nixon and events like the JFK assassination reflect a paranoid obsession with the most bizarre of left-wing conspiracy theories.
37. ABOUT HOW MANY BOOKS HAVE BEEN PUBLISHED WHICH REFUTE SOME ASPECT OF THE STANDARD JEWISH CLAIMS ABOUT THE HOLOCAUST?
Over 100, with more in the works.
38. WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO HISTORIANS WHO DISPUTE THE OFFICIAL VERSION OF THE HOLOCAUST?
A variety of unpleasant things. Significantly, the Jews have always refused to debate the facts of the Holocaust openly with Revisionists. An Internet group allegedly set up for this purpose called Nizkor does not in fact debate Revisionists, but engages in hysterical campaigns of ad hominem abuse against anyone who dares to express any dissent or doubt in the Holocaust orthodoxy. It is clear from many of the postings to Nizkor’s Internet playgroups that they have attracted a number of people, mostly Jews but some left-liberal Gentiles as well, who are motivated by intense racial bigotry and ideological hatred of anyone who disagrees with them, and who in some cases appear to be severely mentally and emotionally disturbed.
The Jews respond to any questioning of the Holocaust with hatred, violence, and persecution, which in itself is the surest giveaway that they have something to hide. In many countries those who ask politically incorrect or searching questions about the Holocaust are arrested, tortured, and imprisoned.
Dr. Robert Faurisson was assaulted by a Jewish gang who beat him so badly that he was almost crippled. In California, a major Revisionist bookseller’s offices were burned, and in Toronto Revisionist author Ernst Zundel’s home was almost destroyed in an arson attack. Zundel was subjected to a bizarre series of show trials lasting over ten years, and after being finally acquitted he has been denied Canadian citizenship and is still battling attempts to deport him to prison and torture in Germany.
An American citizen, Gerhard Lauck of Lincoln, Nebraska, was kidnapped by the German government and at this writing is serving a lengthy prison sentence in Germany for the “crime” of writing pro-National Socialist commentary IN THE UNITED STATES where it is legal. Another American citizen, Hans Schmidt of Florida, was also abducted, held in prison in Germany for almost a year, and released only after an international outcry. Schmidt’s “crime” was writing a pro-Revisionist article, in English, in a newsletter published and distributed in the United States. German nationalist Manfred Roeder has been imprisoned so many times he’s lost count. Revisionists have been stripped of jobs and academic posts, denied tenure in universities, victimized by harassing lawsuits, received bombs in the mail, and subjected to constant death threats from Jews and Marxists.
THESE ARE NOT THE REACTIONS OF INNOCENT PEOPLE. Innocent people who are accused of a crime or a fraud do not respond by trying to kill, imprison, or forcibly silence their accusers. More than anything else, the behavior of the Jews and the governments they influence so strongly proves that the Holocaust is a fraud. If the Holocaust was true, neither the Jews nor any state authority would need to use force to silence criticism, any more than force need be used against people who believe the earth is flat. The arrests, imprisonment, assaults and torchings are the moral equivalent of a full confession on the part of the Jewish people that they are contemptible liars who have imposed the most massive and vicious hoax in history on all of humanity, and have used that hoax as an excuse to rob us blind, steal another people’s country, and then to slaughter that country’s original inhabitants at will, as according to National Public Radio they are doing even now as I type this, in the town of Ramallah.
39. HAVE THESE THUGGISH TACTICS SUCCEEDED IN SILENCING REVISIONISTS?
|
Institute for Historical Review |
Holocaust Survivor Memoir Exposed as Fraud
by Mark Weber
A Holocaust survivor memoir that has received prestigious literary awards and lavish praise has been exposed as a hoax.
In Fragments: Memories of a Wartime Childhood, Binjamin Wilkomirski describes his ordeal as an infant in the Jewish ghetto of Riga (Latvia), where his earliest memory is of seeing his father being killed. Wilkomirski also tells how he survived the terrible rigors of wartime internment, at the age of three or four, in the German-run concentration camps of Majdanek and Auschwitz.
First published in German in 1995, Fragments has been translated into twelve languages. In Switzerland, the country where Wilkomirski lives, the book has been a major best-seller. Two documentary films and numerous personal appearances by the author in schools throughout the country have helped promote the memoir.
The American edition was published by Schocken, an imprint of Random House, which heavily promoted the book with teachers’ study guides and other supplementary materials.
Jewish groups and major American newspapers have warmly praised Fragments. The New York Times called it “stunning,” and the Los Angeles Times lauded it as a “classic first-hand account of the Holocaust.” It received the 1996 National Jewish Book Award for Autobiography and Memoir, while in Britain it was awarded the Jewish Quarterly Literary Prize, and in France the Prix Memoire de la Shoah.
The US Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, DC — a federal government agency — was so impressed that it sent Wilkomirski on a six-city United States fund-raising tour last fall.
This past summer, though, compelling evidence came to light exposing Wilkomirski’s memoir as an literary hoax.
Although he claims to have been born in Latvia in 1939, and to have arrived in Switzerland in 1947 or 1948, Swiss legal records show that he was actually born in Switzerland in February 1941, the son of an unwed woman, Yvette Grosjean. The infant was then adopted and raised by the Doessekkers, a middle-class Zurich couple. Jewish author Daniel Ganzfried, writing in the Swiss weekly Weltwoche, also reports that he has found a 1946 photo of the young Bruno Doessekker (Wilkomirski) in the garden of his adoptive parents.
Comparisons have been drawn between Wilkomirski’s Fragments and The Painted Bird, the supposedly autobiographical “Holocaust memoir” by prominent literary figure Jerzy Kosinksi that turned out to be fraudulent.
Reaction by Jewish Holocaust scholars to the new revelations has been instructive, because they seem more concerned about propagandistic impact than about historical truth. Their primary regret seems merely to be that the fraud has been detected, not that it was perpetrated.
In an essay published in a major Canadian newspaper (Ottawa Citizen, Nov. 18, 1998), Jewish writer Judith Shulevitz arrogantly argued that it doesn’t really matter much if Fragments is authentic. Her main misgiving, apparently, is that the deceit was not more adroit: “I can’t help wishing Wilkomirksi-Doesseker [sic] had been more subtle in his efforts at deception, and produced the magnificent fraud world literature deserves.”
Deborah Dwork, director of the Center for Holocaust Studies at Clark University (Worcester, Mass.), and co-author of Auschwitz: 1270 to the Present (Yale Univ. Press, 1996), agrees that Fragments now appears to be fraudulent. At the same time, though, she expressed sympathy for Wilkomirski, saying that when she met him he appeared “to be a deeply scarred man.” Amazingly, Dwork does not blame him for the imposture, “because she believes in his identity.” Instead, she takes the publishers to task for having “exploited” Wilkomirski. (New York Times, Nov. 3, 1998).
Deborah Lipstadt, author of the anti-revisionist polemic Denying the Holocaust, has assigned Fragments in her Emory University class on Holocaust memoirs. When confronted with evidence that it is a fraud, she commented that the new revelations “might complicate matters somewhat, but [the work] is still powerful.”
Daniel Ganzfried reports that Jews have complained to him that even if Fragments is a fraud, his exposé is dangerously aiding “those who deny the Holocaust.”
American Jewish writer Howard Weiss makes a similar point in an essay published in the Chicago Jewish Star (Oct. 9-29, 1998):
Presenting a fictional account of the Holocaust as factual only provides ammunition to those who already deny that the horrors of Nazism and the death camps ever even happened. If one account is untrue, the deniers’ reasoning goes, how can we be sure any survivors accounts are true … Perhaps no one was ready to question the authenticity of the [Wilkomirski] account because just about anything concerning the Holocaust becomes sacrosanct.
Wilkomirski himself has responded to the new revelations by going into hiding, although he did issue a defiant statement describing the climate of discussion about his memoir as a “poisonous” atmosphere of “totalitarian judgment and criticism.”
http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v17/v17n5p26_Weber.html
Institute for Historical Review
Those who promote what Jewish-American scholar Michael Goldberg calls “the Holocaust cult” (in his book Why Should Jews Survive?) have for decades sought to make the story more “relevant” and “meaningful” for non-Jewish Americans by appealing to patriotic sentiments. This has meant, for example, emphasizing the role of American troops as liberators of German concentration camps during the final weeks of the Second World War.
Adding to this, Holocaust campaigners have sought to appeal to the racial sensitivities of African-Americans by promoting the story that two all-black US army units — the 761st Tank Battalion and the 183rd Combat Engineers Battalion — liberated the infamous Buchenwald and Dachau concentration camps in April 1945. In its issue of May 31, 1988, The New York Times reported, for the first time, that black GIs had liberated Dachau and Buchenwald. The paper cited African-American leader Jesse Jackson as the source.
This story was given much greater prominence in late 1992 with the release of Liberators: Fighting on Two Fronts in World War II, issued as a much-touted “documentary” film and as a lavishly-illustrated book. In the film, two black veterans of the 761st “recalled” their role in liberating Dachau, ramming their tanks against the camp gates and encountering enemy machine gun fire from a burning barn. Also in the film, two elderly Jews who had been inmates in Buchenwald “recounted” their liberation by black GIs.
The “highlight” of the film, reported the Newsletter of the US Holocaust Memorial Council, is a “deeply moving reunion” at Buchenwald of former inmate Benjamin Bender “with two of his liberators,” E. G. McConnell and Leonard Smith. Actually, this “moving reunion” is a staged fraud. “It’s a lie,” confirmed McConnell in 1993. “We were nowhere near these camps when they were liberated … I first went to Buchenwald in 1991 with PBS [television], not the 761st.” No black troops participated in the liberation of either Buchenwald or Dachau.
All this has been known since 1993. The “black liberators” fable was dissected, for example, in a four-page report, “Multi-Media ‘Liberators’ Project Exposed as Fraud,” published in the May-June 1993 Journal. But in spite of the 1993 revelations, the US Holocaust Museum — a federal government center operated by the taxpayer-funded United States Holocaust Memorial Council — has continued to propagate this fraud.
“The Holocaust Museum in Washington, DC, is perpetrating a falsehood; and, worst of all, it knows it,” wrote Mark Schulte recently in The Weekly Standard (August 10-17, 1998, p. 20), an influential “neo-conservative” magazine. On the second floor of the Museum’s permanent exhibition, visitors can view a ten-minute movie. “Spliced into footage of Dachau’s liberation on April 29, 1945,” The Weekly Standard report goes on, “are several photographs of Buchenwald [showing black GIs] taken five days after the camp’s liberation, when a small contingent from the 183rd Combat Engineers delivered water purification equipment.”
Similarly, two books published with the cooperation and approval of the US Holocaust Museum also perpetrate the “black liberators” story. In a lavishly illustrated 1993 guide book, The World Must Know: The History of the Holocaust as Told in the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, author (and Museum official) Michael Berenbaum includes a large photograph (page 188) showing black GIs, identified as “American liberators,” in the Buchenwald camp on “April 11, 1945.” In fact, this photograph was taken five days after the camp’s liberation. This same photo, with a similarly deceitful caption, is also published in Liberation 1945, another work produced in cooperation with the Holocaust Museum.
At the time of the Museum’s opening in 1993, Jewish writer Melvin Jules Bukiet aptly noted: “It’s not Jewish tragedy that’s remembered on the Mall this week; it’s Jewish power to which homage is paid.” (The Washington Post, April 18, 1993, p. C3). Given the Museum’s origins, and the character of those who run it, deceitful history — of which the “black liberators” story is only one example — is fully to be expected.
Associated Newspapers Ltd., 11th July, 2000:
The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering
By Victor Sebestyen
He argues that the pursuit of reparations from Swiss banks and German industrialists for survivors of the death camps is “an outright extortion racket” which will result in an increase of anti-semitism in Europe and America; that the majority of people who claim to have survived the concentration camps are fakes, and that it is time to call a halt to building new Holocaust memorials and museums, such as the exhibition opened by the Queen at the Imperial War Museum last month.
But his most controversial challenge to world Jewry is an attack on the article of faith held by Jews and gentiles throughout the West - that the Holocaust was a unique event that cannot be compared with anything else in history. This belief, argues Finkelstein, which few people dare to challenge, is ruthlessly being used by Jews to justify Israel’s appalling human rights record and create an environment of fear where nobody, either in academia or politics, can discuss the Holocaust honestly and rationally.
Only a Jew could have written this book and found a reputable publisher for it. Only a Jew could have been brave enough to call it The Holocaust Industry, a title which in itself will cause offence. If David Irving had made these claims, he might have found himself once again appearing in the Royal Courts of Justice; the leader of US Muslims Louis Farrakhan would have been placed by American public opinion even further beyond the pale and if Jörg Haider had spoken like this, he would have ensured yet harsher EU sanctions against Austria.
Yet it is hard to level against Finkelstein one of the vilest charges that can be made against anybody in a liberal democracy: Holocaust denial. His father and mother were survivors of the Warsaw ghetto and Nazi death camps and all the rest of their family were exterminated at Treblinka. He is a product of the Holocaust, which, he claims, is why he is battling against its use “not to remember Jewish martyrdom, but for the purposes of Jewish aggrandizement”.
Finkelstein’s tone is often angry and scathing. Sometimes he over-states his case or uses language so far removed from normal academic discourse that some might be tempted to doubt his credentials. But he deserves to be heard, and not only because of his background. He is making some profound points that many younger and more thoughtful Jews have quietly been attempting to debate, but whose voices have been stilled by the establishment, particularly in the US.
History Lessons
The Holocaust, he argues, was barely mentioned in America, or anywhere outside the Jewish State, for the first two decades after the war, when memories were freshest. “I do not remember the Nazi Holocaust ever intruding on my childhood. The main reason for this was that no one outside my family seemed to care about what happened,” he says.
It was only after the Six-Day War in 1967 that the Holocaust “industry” began to boom. “I sometimes think that the worst thing that ever happened to the Nazi Holocaust was that American Jewry discovered it.”
This “discovery”, insists Finkelstein, had nothing to do with fear for the survival of Israel, which after all had spectacularly smashed its enemies in under a week and occupied land along its borders seven times its own size.
The Holocaust was “reinvented” mainly to underpin US strategic interests. Israel became America’s surrogate in the Middle-East and the Holocaust was used to justify the alliance and, later, Israel’s policy towards its Arab neighbours.
“The Holocaust has proven to be an indispensable ideological weapon. Through its deployment, one of the world’s most formidable powers, with a horrendous human rights record, has cast itself as a ‘victim state’ and the most influential ‘ethnic group’ in the US has likewise acquired victim status.
“Considerable dividends accrue from this specious victimhood - in particular immunity to criticism, however justified. Those enjoying this immunity have not escaped the moral corruptions that typically attend it.”
Holocaust ideology
It was the US Jewish elite which turned the Nazi holocaust into the Holocaust. Here Finkelstein enters his most controversial waters and treads on the most tender sensibilities. Jewish leaders, led by people such as Simon Wiesenthal and Elie Wiesel, argue that the Nazi extermination of the Jews was a unique event - and uniquely irrational. Weisel, for example, has maintained that it is a “religious mystery ” unknowable and inexplicable. That, Finkelstein claims viciously, doesn’t stop Weisel charging a standard $25,000 plus a chauffeur-driven car on the lecture circuit in an attempt to explain it.
So entrenched is the belief in the uniqueness of Hitler’s crimes against the Jews that even to challenge it, according to some powerful academics such as Deborah Lipstadt - victor over David Irving in the libel courts - amounts to Holocaust denial. Yet the conviction is itself irrational, argues Finkelstein. No historical event is unique. And, dangerously, it leads to myth-making and distortion.
The uniqueness claim also gives Jews an undeserved “sovereignty over suffering” and Hitler a place in demonology categorically different from Stalin, Mao Tse Tung or Pol Pot. This political correctness has become so extreme on some campuses that to compare the Nazi death camps with an atrocity such as the slaughter of 10 million Africans in the Congo as a result of the Belgian ivory and rubber trade, is met with accusations of Holocaust denial.
The “industry” has built dozens of Holocaust memorials and museums throughout the world, yet there isn’t one to the handicapped victims of Nazism. A higher proportion of Europe’s gipsies than Jews were slaughtered claims Finkelstein, and there’s no memorial to them. Washington DC has a big Holocaust museum, but nothing for victims of the slave trade or of the genocide against American Indians.
Holocaust Fraud
Among the reams of schlock (Finkelstein’s word) in Holocaust literature, there are lies - most notoriously Benjamin Wilkomirski’s book Partings, written in the Seventies, which became a huge best-seller and a vital text in the “industry”. Wilkomirski claimed to have been a child survivor of Auschwitz, when in fact he isn’t Jewish and spent the war growing up quietly in Switzerland.
Thousands of others falsely claim to be survivors of death camps, claims Finkelstein. There were, he says, about 100,000 when war ended, and about a quarter died within two months. Yet the “industry” has claimed that since the early Nineties, 10,000 have been dying a month. “It would mean there were eight million in 1945, but there were only seven million Jews in German-occupied Europe before the war.”
Blood Money
Finkelstein is most scathing about the business end of the industry. “The current campaign…to extort money from Europe in the name of ‘needy Holocaust victims’ has shrunk the moral stature of their martyrdom to that of a Monte Carlo casino,” he writes. Switzerland and Germany were the target of a “shakedown”. After a 15-year battle, the Swiss banks last year agreed to pay more than $200million in compensation for “blood money” allegedly looted from Jewish Holocaust victims before and during the last war. The figure, he argues, was far less than the $7 billion to $20 billion victims had claimed in a series of court actions and probably five times higher than was actually due.
Finkelstein says little of the money will ever be seen by victims; like much of the $12billion compensation paid by Germany over the past 50 years, Jewish organisations will use it to open more museums and set up more departments of Holocaust studies at universities.
In the US, maintains Finkelstein, the Holocaust is “taught” at schools and colleges in far greater depth than the Civil War, the defining moment of US history. The pursuit now of compensation from former Eastern bloc countries such as Poland shows the “industry” has “gone berserk”. It could fuel antisemitism that already shows dangerous signs of increasing.
Finkelstein concludes: “The challenge today is to restore the Holocaust as a rational subject of inquiry. Only then can we really learn from it. The abnormality of the Nazi Holocaust springs not from the event itself but from the exploitative industry that has grown around it. The noblest gesture for those who perished is to preserve their memory, learn from their suffering and let them, finally, rest in peace.”
It’s a stirring call. But peace is the last thing that will break out among Jewry with the publication of this book.
The Holocaust Industry, Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering, is published by Verso on 20 July. http://www.historiography-project.org/admissions/20010801fragments.html
Admissions against Interest about the Holocaust
A Holocaust fraud
By Calev Ben-David
The Jerusalem Post Newspaper
August, 01 2001
(August 1) — A post-modern parable about the pliable nature of historical truth and the ways in which the memory of the Holocaust is manipulated.
In 1995, a new Holocaust memoir titled Fragments, written by one Binjamin Wilkomirski , was published in Switzerland and in several translated editions elsewhere. It purported to tell of the author’s childhood experiences growing up in the Riga ghetto, his deportation to Majdanek and Auschwitz, his experience in a Cracow orphanage after the war, and his eventual adoption by the Swiss family that raised him.
The book received largely positive, even effusive critical praise. A reviewer in Britain’s The Guardian called it “one of the great works about the Holocaust” and a reviewer in the US magazine The Nation actually wrote: “This stunning and austerely written work is so profoundly moving, so morally important, and so free from literary artifice of any kind at all that I wonder if I even have the right to try to offer praise.”
Fragments won several literary prizes, including a National Jewish Book award, and Wilkomirski himself became a celebrity-survivor, giving readings and lectures across the world.
Then in 1998, Swiss-Jewish author, Daniel Ganzfried, who had been skeptical about the book since its publication, wrote an article which charged that Wilkomirski, far from being a Holocaust survivor, was a native-born, non-Jewish Swiss citizen originally named Bruno Grosjean, who had entirely invented the story of his childhood in war-time East Europe and the camps.
Wilkomirski denied the accusation, and because he had indeed been an adopted child, it was not easy at first to establish the facts of his early years. But as other journalists began to poke into the story, the truth of Ganzfried’s charges — and the falsehoods and inventions in Fragments — looked more and more evident, and calls were made for the book to be pulled from the shelves, or at least relabelled as fiction.
Instead the publishers went out and hired a Swiss historian, Dr. Stefan Maechler, to investigate the charges against Wilkomirski. The result, together with the complete text of Fragments, is now being put out by the same companies that published Wilkomirski’s questionable text in the first place.
If the whole affair already sounds like some kind of post-modern parable about the pliable nature of historical truth and the ways in which the memory of the Holocaust is being manipulated, it gets even worse. Maechler makes it absolutely clear that Wilkomirski-Grosjean (he took the former name because of a resemblance to a well-known Jewish violinist, Wanda Wilkomirski) made up everything in Fragments connected with the Holocaust — or borrowed it from other sources, especially Jerzy Kosinski’s novel-memoir The Painted Bird, whose own veracity has been questioned.
Serious doubts had been raised and then ignored about the work from the very beginning. Even worse was the indiscriminate rush to canonize yet another survivor-saint following the book’s publication. The height of this absurdity, reports Maechler, came when Wilkomirski addressed a meeting of the Holocaust Child Survivors Group of Los Angeles, and was tearfully embraced there by a woman named Laura Grabowski, who claimed to remember him from the camps. It later turned out that she was actually a non-Jewish, US-born woman named Lauren Stratford, who had falsely accepted Holocaust reparations and had previously claimed to be the childhood victim of ritual abuse by Satanic cults.
Like other adherents of the so-called “recovered memory” movement in the US, Wilkomirski himself is seen by Maechler to be not some kind of deliberate con-artist, but a psychologically disturbed individual, who gradually created, and then accepted as truth, his fake Holocaust-survivor identity. To this day, even when confronted with absolute proof of his deception, Wilkomirski refuses to admit his scam. Even worse, some of his and Fragments initial admirers refuse to back down from their position — and claim that to now attack the author and his work is to question the very veracity of the Holocaust.
Why were so many people initially fooled by Fragments? Reading it for the first time, it’s not hard to imagine why. Wilkomirski does clearly have some literary talent; what’s more, he very cleverly constructed his impressionistic book — deliberately or not — in such a manner that it evades easy detection. At the very beginning, he writes: “My earliest memories are a rubble field of isolated images and events. Shards of memory with hard knife-sharp edges, and events, which still cut flesh if touched today. Mostly a chaotic jumble, with very little chronological fit.”
Although Holocaust experts were able to later pick out inaccuracies in the text — such as the description of a rat-plague in Majdanek that never took place — it is unlikely a layman would detect Wilkomirski’s forgery.
What is less understandable, however, is why this slim, vague and over-wrought work received such critical acclaim. The answer, of course, is because it deals with the Holocaust, an event that has been lifted out of the realm of normative critical perspective, and elevated into a pseudo-religious sphere of sanctified legend.
No wonder then that some academics are now turning a more jaundiced eye towards the way in which the memory of the Holocaust is increasingly being used — and misused. Maechler himself, at the end of his report, writes: “The rise and fall of the figure of Binjamin Wilkomirski reveals more than just the mechanisms that are now part of the Shoah and its remembrance, and it would be wrong to discuss the phenomenon only within that framework.
“Nonetheless it can be said that the Wilkomirski phenomenon, from the origins of his memories to their reception and exposure, is a litmus test revealing how we all — depending on the nature of our involvement — deal with its aftermath.”
Being cautious to a fault, Maechler doesn’t come out and say “how we all” did on this particular litmus test. But the implication is clear, and I don’t hesitate to say it: this affair is a clear sign that something has gone awry in the way we are remembering the Holocaust and dealing with its aftermath. A Wilkomirski is in many ways as dangerous, if not more so, than a Holocaust-denier like David Irving. We would do well to keep our guard up.
Kerem Doksat
13 Ekim 2007
Ben senin icindeki irkci sesim:
bilimsel olarak 9 milyon sivil insanin ikinci dunya savasinda nereye kayboldugunu aciklamam lazim kendime…
bir de su siteden biraz gercek bilgi edinmem lazim:
http://www.yadvashem.org/
bu yukardaki web mekani cok ilginc
gercekten kamplara gitsen Maydanek’teki insan kullerinden olan tepeyi gozunden kaciramazdim.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Majdanek (resmi bile burda var)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Holocaust
hade diyecegim ki wikipedia cok “bilimsel” bilgi veriyor ama ben irkci oldugum icin bu bilgileri kavrayamiyorum…
insanlarin aileleri oyle birden kayboldu,bir iki degil 6-9 milyon kisi, bulamiyorlar, belki bilimsel olmasi icin marslilarin kacirdiklarini soyliyebiliriz, daha mantikli olur…
tabi dunyayi kendi “dogrularimla” gordugum ve algiladigim icin bunlarin hepsini inkar ediyorum ve “bilimsel” olarak arastirmaya calisiyorum…
cunku ben irkciyim…
BU MESAJI BENİM ADIMI KULLANAN BİRİSİ YAZMIŞ; GENE DE YER VERİYORUM ÇÜNKÜ BENİ IRKÇILIKLA SUÇLARKEN IRKÇILIK YAPAN İLGİNÇ BİR MESAJ. PROF. DR. MEHMET KEREM DOKSAT
common sense
13 Ekim 2007
isimsiz yazacağım çünkü prensip olarak siyasi konulu polemiklere ismimle girmiyorum. ama muhatap olmayayım desem katılmadığım bir yayın sürdürüyorsunuz, fikirlerinizi sadece kendinize saklamıyor, başka platformlara da taşıyorsunuz. dolayısıyla bir tepki vermek durumunda hissettim, ismimden ötürü beni mazur görün.
bu yukarıdaki yorum1 hoşunuza gitmemiş olabilir.
ama fikir tartıştırma yönteminiz başka platformlarda da izlediğim üzere sadece sizinle farklı fikir veren insanın fikrine değil,
kendisine saldırmaktan geçiyor. dolayısıyla benim yorumum da hoşunuza gitmeyecektir, belki bana da saldırabilirsiniz. yazımda söylemediğim şeyleri söylemekle veya yapmadığım halde beni de seviyesizlikle suçluyacak olabilirsiniz. buna dair yapacak birşeyimiz yok.
bir kaç sorum var:
yorum 1′i yazan kişi kinayeli bir biçimde sizin ırkçı olduğunuzu düşündüğünü söylüyor, ama kendi yazısının neresinde ırkçılık yapıyor da siz onu okurlarınıza ırkçı olarak gösteriyorsunuz? tam hangi cümle ırkçı söylem içeriyor gösterin bize!!!!!! işaretleyin.
bir internet yazışma grubunda sizinle aynı fikirde olmadığını söyleyen, fikirlerinize antitez yazıp, hayal kırıklığına uğradığını söyleyen ve sizi de uğrattığı için özür dileyen çocuğu seviyesiz bulmanız ve o gruptan kaçmanızın hikayesi niye bu blogunuzda yer almıyor. cevapları seçe seçe mi yayınlıyorsunuz, sadece en işinize gelen acemice yazılmış olanları yayınlayıp benimki gibi cevapları yayınlamıyor musunuz?
soykırım konusunu tam da ermeni soykırımı kabul edildikten sonra ortaya atıp sonra insanların bunu siyasi olarak yaptığınızı söylemelerine tepki göstermeniz nedendir? yıllardır araştırıyordunuz da tam da tesadüf bugün mü bu soykırımın yalan olduğu sonucuna vardınız!!! bu kadar çok kaynağı bir araya getirmek 60 yılınızı almış olsa gerek. soykırım hakkında tam da bu sıralarda yazı yapmanız ilginç…., amerikadaki yahudi lobilerinin ermeni soykırımı tasarısının geçmemesi için verdiği desteği artık vermiyor olmasından dolayı, yahudi soykırımını inkar ederek intikam almaya çalışıyor olabilir misiniz?
size bir internet yazışma platformunda “bu yazınızda kaynak göstermemişsiniz” dendiğinde zaten gönderdiğiniz web adresinde yazılan yazıların kaynağını, sitenin kendi adresi olarak göstermeniz nasıl açıklanabilir? yazının içindeki her bir maddenin ayrı ayrı kaynakları nerede????? 40 soruyu ve cevabı ben de bir siteye yüklesem ve başka bir yazımda o siteyi kaynak göstersem savunmam bilimsellik kazanır mı?
barış içinde kalmanızı ümit ediyorum.
Mehmet Ilteris
16 Ekim 2007
Sayin Prof. Dr. Dorsat,
Yahudi Soykirimini inkar etmeniz hayret edilecek bir olay.Akademik unvaniniza yakistiramadigim bu davranisi kiniyorum. Siz tarihi sorgulamak mi istiyorsunuz? Pekala o zaman. www.yadvashem.org sitesine girip bakiniz. Lutfen bununla yetinmeyiniz, Prof. Efraim Kaye - Holocaust arastirmacisi ismini google a yazip kendisini arastiriniz. Kendisi sizin gibi Holocaust inkarcilarina karsi en guzel cevaplari veriyor. Umuyorum bunlari okuduktan sonra fikriniz degisir. Tarihi reddetmek kendini reddetmektir.
Saygilarimla,
Mehmet
Prof. Dr. Mehmet Kerem Doksat
17 Ekim 2007
Sayın Beni Suçlayanlar,
Yazımı bir kere daha okumanızı tavsiye edeceğim. Dedelerimin soykırıcı olduğu yalanı Amerikan Yahudi Lobisi’nin de desteğiyle kabûl edildi. Bu süreç tam olarak bittiğinde bunun tartışılması dahi suç olacak. Yâni senato kararıyla tarihçilik yasaklanacak. Akabinde de toprak ve tazminat talepleri gelecek. Sırada Kürt soykırımı yaptığımız palavrası bekletiliyor.
Ben de Yahudi Soykırımı ile ilgili, son ikisi bizzat kendilerinden 3 web mekânını pastaladım ve efendilikle “yorum sizin” dedim.
Şimdi, İspanya’dan kovulduklarında sâhip çıktığımız ve hâlen de memleketin kaymağını yiyen (helâl-i hoş olsun), aralarında epey de kardeşimin olduğu bu insanların “konuşulmasını dahi memnu” ettikleri şeyi sâdece efendice dikkate sundum diye, faşist veya ırkçı oluyorum…
1) Peki, benim dedelerimin kaatil olmadığını dünyaya ileride kim anlatacak?
2) Eğer tarihî bir hâdise hakkında düşünmek dahi yasaksa, ya bir şeylerden korkuluyor, ya bir şeyler gizleniyor, ya da hepsidir. Bilimsel düşünce bunu gerektirir.
3) Ermeni’nin, Kürt’ün, Yahudi’nin kendini koruması, hâttâ iftira atması serbest, benim “bu bize ihânet eden Amerikan Yahudi Lobisi (TÜRK CEMAATİ DEĞİL, BİLAKİS ONLAR ERMENİ MES’ELESİNDE DOĞRU DAVRANDILAR) acaba kendi tarihi hakkında yalan söylüyor mu” demem ırkçılık, öyle mi?
Bir CIA Ajanı Kürtçülük hizmetkârı zat ânında beni Neo-Nazi ve faşist ilân etti. Mesajımı okuyan okumayan (%90′ının okumadığı belli) bütün Yahudi ve Ermeni kökenli (onun da okuyup anlayacak kadar İngilizcesi yoktur) ruh sağlığı çalışanı aynı mesaj üzerine bir entellektüel linç başlattılar. İşin hazin tarafı, adı İÇGÖRÜ olan web mekânında bana saldırı serbest bırakıldı, cevap vermem ise engellendi. Adım “Anti-semitik”e çıktı. Cehâletin bu derecesi ancak tedrîs ile mümkün olur derken, son bir cevap hakkı verildi ama aynı hakaretler muhatabım tarafından arttırılarak. Bravo İÇGÖRÜ’ye ve idarecilerine! Neyse, kendisini ilk fırsatta ziyaret edip bir çayını içip yüzyüze görüşmeyi teklif ettim; bakalım ne yapacak…
Ben Türk’üm ve bana yapılacak hücumlara karşı çıkarım, bu en tabii hakkım değil mi? Bir entellektüel olarak da mücadelemi o plânda yaparım, başkasını bilmem çünkü. Bu web mekânında İsrail’in yaptıkları ile ilgili başka çok yazı var.
Ufak bir not: Ben o kampları gördüm; anlatılanlara uyan çok şey var. Gene de, bir bilim adamı olarak, yanıldığımdan emin olursam, “yanılmışım” derim. Tanıyanlar harbîliğimi ve hasbîliğimi bilir. Zâten neden durduk yerde ortalığı bulandırayım? Herkese ağam beyim deyip paramı kazanıp keyfime bakabilirim.
Ama, ben “soyu kırılmakta” olan bir milletinin ma’şerî vicdanıyım.
Buraya yorum yollarken lûtfen yukarıdaki suâllere cevap verin; romantik hikâyeler anlatmayın.
Daha fazla yoruma şimdilik gerek yok sanıyorum.
Saygılarımla
MKD
ahmet adivar
17 Ekim 2007
bakin ispanya’dan bir gazeteci soykirim hakkinda neler yazmis.
bir de kerem beye hatirlalarim isterse, okudugu universitelerin cogunu 1930′larda nazi almanya’sindan kacmis yahudi profesorler kurdu gelistirdi, ilerletti, bugun ku konumlarina gelmelerinde buyuk faydalari oldu.
bal kaymak deyince aklima geldi
alinti: (Şimdi, İspanya’dan kovulduklarında sâhip çıktığımız ve hâlen de memleketin kaymağını yiyen (helâl-i hoş olsun), aralarında epey de kardeşimin olduğu bu insanların “konuşulmasını dahi memnu” ettikleri şeyi sâdece efendice dikkate sundum diye, faşist veya ırkçı oluyorum…)
malesef ispanyolcadan ingilizceye tercumesini bulabildim:
yaziya gore ispanya’nin ve avrupanin bal kaymagi azalmis…
saygilarimla
daha fazla yoruma gerek yok denmis ama sanirim daha cok yorumlanmasi gerek bu isin… yayinlarsiniz umarim…
———————–
ALL EUROPEAN LIFE DIED IN AUSCHWITZ By Sebastian Vilar Rodrigez
SPANISH NEWSPAPER ARTICLE
KEEP IT FOREMOST IN YOUR THINKING THAT THIS WAS WRITTEN BY A SPANISH WRITER ABOUT SPAIN AND EUROPE.
“ALL EUROPEAN LIFE DIED IN AUSCHWITZ
By Sebastian Vilar Rodrigez(*)
I walked down the street in Barcelona, and suddenly discovered a terrible truth - Europe died in Auschwitz.
We killed six million Jews and replaced them with 20 million Muslims. In Auschwitz we burned a culture, thought, creativity, talent. We destroyed the chosen people, truly chosen, because they produced great and wonderful people who changed the world.
The contribution of this people is felt in all areas of life: science, art, international trade, and above all, as the conscience of the world. These are the people we burned.
And under the pretense of tolerance, and because we wanted to prove to ourselves that we were cured of the disease of racism, we opened our gates to 20 million Muslims, who brought us stupidity and ignorance, religious extremism and lack of tolerance, crime and poverty due to an unwillingness to work and support their families with pride.
They have turned our beautiful Spanish cities into the third world, drowning in filth and crime.
Shut up in the apartments they receive free from the government, they plan the murder and destruction of their naive hosts.
And thus, in our misery, we have exchanged culture for fanatical hatred, creative skill for destructive skill, intelligence for backwardness and superstition.
We have exchanged the pursuit of peace of the Jews of Europe and their talent for hoping for a better future for their children, their determined clinging to life because life is holy, for those who pursue death, for people consumed by the desire for death for themselves and others, for our children and theirs.
What a terrible mistake was made by miserable Europe.
***********************************
*This is a translation of an article from a Spanish newspaper.
(kaynak: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/1004 - orjinal yazisini da google’dan bulabilirsiniz)
common sense
18 Ekim 2007
Psikoloji platformlarında size cevap yazanların cevabını “Meğerse Ben Yahudi Düşmanıymışım” başlıklı olarak ismini de teşhir ederek yayınladınız (üstelik yazısını koymadan sadece adını koyarak) sonradan yayından çıkardınız.
Siz fikir mi tartışıyorsunuz yoksa deplasmanda tartıştığınız birini orda destekçi bulamadığınız için kendi sahanızda teşhir ederek hedef haline getirmeye mi çalışıyorsunuz?
Ancak bahsi geçen yazıda şahsınıza bir yakıştırma ve ithamda bulunduğuna katılmıyorum.yazılan iyi incelenirse, gönderdiğiniz içeriğin kaynağı hakkında yorum yaptığını görülür. Bu kaynağı kullanarak şahsınızın yaptıklarınızın nasıl yorumlanması gerektiği kısmını okuyucuya bıraktı. Ancak bu kaynakları konu ile hiç ilgisi olmayan bir psikoloji platformuna göndermeniz tabiki eleştirilebilir!!!
cevabı yayınlamamış ve cevapta yazmayan suçlamaları yazıyor gibi anlatan bir üst yorum yazıp yayınlamışsınız. cevap yazan amerikan dostu ve türk düşmanı gibi hedef gösterilmeye çalışılmış, ve cevap yazana bir yazışma grubunda şunları yazdınız:
Türklük düşmanlarıyla beraber çalışan, “Kürtler’e yapılan zulüm”, “öteki paranoyası” konularında muazzam ve mufassal faâliyetleriyle tebârüz eden birinin her cümlesinden agresyon fışkıran aşağıdaki mesajına psikolojik açıdan dikkat çekmek istiyorum.
Böylelerinin bu durumlardaki stratejileri klâsiktr: Sıkıştın mı saldıracaksın ve en ağır hakaretamiz cümlelerle suçlayıp aşağılayacaksın. Okuyan da “vay be” diyecek.
Adım adım dezentegrasyona ve iç harbe sürüklenen, bunu alenen ABD’nin ve Amerikan Yahudi Birliği’nin desteklediğinin, “Ilımlı İslâm” diye Büyük Kürt İsraili’ne hizmet verildiğinin kabak gibi ortada olduğu bu günlerde verilen bu tepki çok mânidardır.
Ettiği her lâfı ayna ile karşılıyorum. Bir benim mesajıma bakın, bir de hazretin üslûbuna, kullandığı lisana…”
“Türklük düşmanlarıyla beraber çalışan birinin……”
“Bir CIA Ajanı Kürtçülük hizmetkârı zat ânında beni Neo-Nazi ve faşist ilân etti. ”
Sizce, sizin yazılarınız sıkıştığında saldıran bir hava içermiyor mu???
kanaatimce amacı holkost konusunda halkı bilgilendirmek olan biri farklı görüşlerden, çok taraflı kaynak yayınlardı… amacınız nedir???
“ABD’nin ve Amerikan Yahudi Birliği’nin desteklediğinin, “Ilımlı İslâm” diye Büyük Kürt İsraili’ne hizmet verildiğinin kabak gibi ortada olduğu bu günlerde verilen bu tepki çok mânidardır.”
bu cümleniz anlamlı göründü… sakın sizin tepkinizin içdünyasını açıklıyor olmasın.
“Şimdi, İspanya’dan kovulduklarında sâhip çıktığımız ve hâlen de memleketin kaymağını yiyen (helâl-i hoş olsun), aralarında epey de kardeşimin olduğu bu insanların “konuşulmasını dahi memnu” ettikleri şeyi sâdece efendice dikkate sundum diye, faşist veya ırkçı oluyorum… ”
bir memlekete vatandaşlık bağıyla bağlı olan, herkes gibi askerlik hizmetlerini yapan, çalışıp vergisini veren, kanunlarına bağlı olan, kişiler o memlekette sizce kaç farklı statüye ayrılmalıdır?
kime neyi helal ediyorsunuz?
‘Farklı grupların Memleketteki sanayi ticarete katkılarının ve bunun karşılığında tükettiklerinin nüfuslarına oranını ölçen’ bir araştırma mı yaptınız. hangi verilere dayanarak kaymak yeme eyleminin gerçekleştiğini iddia ediyorsunuz. Yoksa İspanyadan kovulan gruplara devlet ihalelerinin imtiyazlı olarak peşkeş çekildiğine dair belgeler mi var elinizde. Yoksa sadece önyargılarla mı hareket ediyorsunuz.
Bu kovulan grubun içinde epeyi de kardeşiniz var demek; bu kardeşlerin bazılarıyla Psikoloji e-mail gruplarında tartışırken sadece karşı fikrinizi sundu diye “seviyesiz” deyivermenizde sakınca ve samimiyetsizlik yok ama, çünkü hemen evvelki e-mailinizde samimiyet adına “efendice” annelerinin güzel Musevi yemeklerini övmüştünüz.
Zaten önemli olan samimiyet değil iddialarınızın ortaya konulup tartışılması:
ABD’de ki yasanın, geçmemesi için 10000ce dolar harcayan ve gazetelere ilan veren tepkisini koyan bir grup, memleketin cefasına ortakmıdır yoksa kaymağını mı yiyordur?
“Soykırımlar icat edilen bir dünyadayız.
Amerikan Yahudi Kurumları da küt diye çark ettiler.”
“Ben de Yahudi Soykırımı ile ilgili, son ikisi bizzat kendilerinden 3 web mekânını pastaladım ve efendilikle “yorum sizin” dedim.”
Sizce “yorum sizin” mi dediniz yoksa soykırımların icad edildiğinini ilan mı ettiniz.
“Mesajımı okuyan okumayan (%90′ının okumadığı belli) bütün Yahudi ve Ermeni kökenli (onun da okuyup anlayacak kadar İngilizcesi yoktur) ruh sağlığı çalışanı…”
Bu yazınızı biz okuyanlar şu şekilde mi yorumlamalıyız
Yahudi ve Ermenilerin yazılanı anlayacak kadar ingilizcesi olmaz, ve bu bilgiyi vermek ırkçılık, ayrımcılık değildir.
“efendice” bilimsel kaygıyla; bir katiamın abartılmış olabileceğine dair kanıtlar buldunuz, onu mu paylaşacaksınız yoksa şöyle mi?:
“Dedelerimin soykırıcı olduğu yalanı Amerikan Yahudi Lobisi’nin de desteğiyle kabûl edildi.”
“Ben de Yahudi Soykırımı ile ilgili, son ikisi bizzat kendilerinden 3 web mekânını pastaladım ve efendilikle “yorum sizin” dedim.”
“Şimdi, İspanya’dan kovulduklarında sâhip çıktığımız ve hâlen de memleketin kaymağını yiyen (helâl-i hoş olsun) ” …. “diye faşist veya ırkçı oluyorum.”
“Ben Türk’üm ve bana yapılacak hücumlara karşı çıkarım, bu en tabii hakkım değil mi? ”
“Ermeni’nin, Kürt’ün, Yahudi’nin kendini koruması, hâttâ iftira atması serbest, benim….”
“bütün Yahudi ve Ermeni kökenli (onun da okuyup anlayacak kadar İngilizcesi yoktur zaten)…”
bu düşünce algoritması sizce nereye gider,
Barış içinde kalmanızı ümit ederim
Mehmet Kerem Doksat
19 Ekim 2007
İsmini vermekten imtina ederek buraya sürekli yazan bu “common sense”‘i tanıyorum.
Bu yaptığına münazara denir ve sonu gelmez; çünkü dâima bir karşı argüman geliştirilir ve bu da sonsuza kadar sürer.
Ya dürüst olup kendini tanıt, ya da anlamsız mügalâtaya girme derim. Annenin güzel yemeklerine benim için de devam; onları özleyeceğim anlaştık mı evlât?
MKD
common sense
20 Ekim 2007
sizin için fikirlerin içeriğindense, fikri kimin tartıştığı daha önemliyse
İsmim Metin Bencuya.
bana ulaşabileceğiniz e-mail adresimi de özelinize göndereceğim.
ben sizin “dürüst” diye tanımladığınız normlara uyduğuma göre sizi de benim normlarıma göre dürüstlüğe çağırıyor ve konuları tartışma yöntemlerinizi eleştiren sorularıma yanıt bekliyorum.
PS: Bahsedilen tarihi olayları dikkat ettiyseniz sizinle hiç tartışmadım.
Holokostun belgelere dayanarak gerçek olduğu ve 1915 Ermeni olaylarının bir soykırım olarak nitelendirilebilmesi için geçerli kanıt olmadığı kanaatindeyim.
Bana göre:
Soykırım planlamadır ve sistematiktir, soykırım bir endüstridir, soykırım öldürme verimliliğin arttırılması çabasıdır, soykırım lojistiktir, soykırım fabrikadır, soykırım devlet politikasıdır, soykırım geniş kitlelerin vahşete sessiz kalacak kadar umursamamasıdır, soykırım hedefinin yaşadığı yerleri araştırır ve belirler, soykırımın ulaşılması gereken rakkamsal hedefleri vardır, soykırım insanları işe yaramayacak hale gelene kadar çalıştırıp emer ve ancak ondan sonra yokeder….
KeremDoksat.Com » BÜTÜN TÜRK YAHUDİSİ KARDEŞLERİME
21 Ekim 2007
[…] “Soykırımdan en çok çektiğini sürekli dünyaya empoze eden bir milletin ABK şûbesi bize bu fenalığı neden yaptı” diye safça düşünmeye bile gerek görmedim; hesaplar ortada zâten. Sâdece “vicdanen bunu nasıl yapabildiler” diye içime kurt düştü ve mütevâzı web mekânıma internetten bulduğum ve Yahudi soykırımını sorgulayan üç yazıyı kopyalayıp yapıştırdım. Bunlardan birisi Almanlar’a, diğer ikisi ise bizzat Yahudiler’in yorumlarına dayanıyordu ( http://www.keremdoksat.com/2007/10/10/holocaust-a-fraud/ )… […]
Sami Akım
6 Nisan 2008
Mensubu oldugunuz “tas yontanlar” meslegine yakismayan bir kisisiniz. Yaziklar olsun…
Sami Akım
6 Nisan 2008
Asagidaki yorumu yaptiktan sonra bir de ustune birkac soru sormussunuz.
“Şimdi, İspanya’dan kovulduklarında sâhip çıktığımız ve hâlen de memleketin kaymağını yiyen (helâl-i hoş olsun), aralarında epey de kardeşimin olduğu bu insanların “konuşulmasını dahi memnu” ettikleri şeyi sâdece efendice dikkate sundum diye, faşist veya ırkçı oluyorum…”
Dikatimi ceken ilk soru oldu:
“1) Peki, benim dedelerimin kaatil olmadığını dünyaya ileride kim anlatacak?”
Dedelerimizin kaatil olmadigini ilerde dunyaya anlatmak icin Yahudi soykiriminin olup olmadigini tartismaya acmak mi gerekiyor? Ne alakasi var? Hangi mantikla bu gerekliligi kafanizda kurdunuz?
Yoksa niyetiniz dupeduz bagciyi dovmek mi?
Cok afedersiniz ama, belli ki bir Alman-fasist tarafindan hazirlanmis 40 soruluk “bilimsellikten” tamamen kopuk bir yaziyi sitenizde yayinlarsaniz cok tabiidir ki “fasist” damgasini yersiniz. Yersiniz cunku insanlari bilimsel olmaya cagirirken, bilimsellikle alakasi olmayan yazilarla tartisma aciyorsunuz. Bu da niyetinizin cok da “iyi” olmadigini gosterir.
Icinizdeki nefret zaten bircok cumlenizde sakli:
Mesela burada: “Mesajımı okuyan okumayan (%90′ının okumadığı belli) bütün Yahudi ve Ermeni kökenli (onun da okuyup anlayacak kadar İngilizcesi yoktur)…”. Aklinizca Yahudi ve Ermeni vatandaslarimizi yeterli derecede Ingilizceye sahip olmamalari ile asagiliyorsunuz. Cok ayip, elitist yaklasiminiz yuzunden utanmalisiniz kendizinden.
Başka bir yerdeki yazinizda “dürüst Yahudi arkadaslarim…” ifadesiyle baslayan bir cumle kurmussunuz. Cok guzel bir kelime oyunu ile yine bir saldiri var burada Yahudilere. Yani Yahudiler genel olarak dürüst degildir ama siz yine de birkac tane dürüst olanini taniyorsunuz ve onlarin da fikrine danismissiniz bir konuda…
Bu anlayisla mi “butun insanlar ve insanlik” icin mutluluk yuvasi olacak ulku mabedini kurmaya calisiyorsunuz? Utandim, hayretler icerisinde kaldim ve meslegimiz adina cok uzuldum.
Zaten “meslegimiz” aleyhinde yayinlar yapan bir sitede yazilarinizin yayinlaniyor olmasi da son derece dusundurucu.
Lutfen kendiniz ile ilgili bir care bulun. Ya uzaklasin ya da yaklasin ve anlayin…
KSS
Sami Akım
6 Nisan 2008
Bir ekleme daha.
Madem bu kadar meraklisiniz hakikati arastirmaya.
Sizi Almanya’da Bad Arolsen’deki arisvlerini incelemeye davet ediyorum. 60 yil sonra butun Nazi arsivleri halka acildi. Dunyaya egemen olacagini dusunen megaloman Naziler yaptiklari butun insanlik disi faaliyetleri teker teker evet teker teker belgelediler. Yaklasik olarak 17.5 milyon oldurulen veya evlerini terk etmeye zorlanan kisiler ile ilgili detayli belgeler bu arsivlerde mevcut. “Ustunluklerini” butun dunyaya haykirmak icin kullanmayi dusundukleri bu belgelerin bir gun sizin gibi “suphecilere” ders verme niyeti ile kullanilacagini tahmin edemezlerdi sanirim. Buyrun size bilmisellik.
Bu da isin ironisi…
Arsivin halka acilmasiyla ilgili haberin video linkini de ekliyorum.
Belki “arastirmak” istersiniz:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/12/14/60minutes/main2267927.shtml
ya da
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_BQkTwxlHjU
Sami Akım
6 Nisan 2008
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g63zTkDsxfM
Cemil BİLGİÇ
7 Nisan 2008
Kurulu düzene aykırı düşmek, ne büyük günah.
Yorumunuz mu var?