Allied 'evidence' manipulation at Dachau

[hermod]

The NS-policy to regard Jews as Aliens is however a bit older than 1939. The relationship was however not entirely hostile before that. This was something that unfolded over time. But Jewish hostility did start early. Already while Hitler became Chancellor of Germany this was the case ('Judea declares war on Germany') with the boycott of German goods. The issues was divisive among Jews, because there was also a conflict of interest in this (Jews trading with German firms for example). There were also debates among them on the matter:
https://archive.org/details/TheAntiGermanBoycott
That does not mean that the boycott didn't damage Germany's foreign trade or relationship with other countries. There was also the issue of bad mouthing of NS/Hitler/Germany in the foreign press. That was of course notice in NS-Germany as well. On the other hand there was a period were there was some good cooperation with NS-Germany by Zionist organizations. The Reichsvereinigung of Jews in Germany was mostly cooperating with the German authorities until the end of the war. Mind you, they acted as if there was no Holocaust until the end.

It should be noted that German measures towards Jews were merely a reaction to Jewish action as well as Allied action. They became tougher with time. Discrimination, Deprivation, Expropriation and Internment of Germans took place in Allied countries. But that matter is virtually ignored, when German policies towards Jews are discussed and presented. When actions against Germans come up, the same people will however immediately bring up supposed German actions, when crimes against Germans are pointed out. As far as historiographers are concerned, they demonstrate their bias and lack of sincereness on the matter by this.

All the leaders of the anti-German boycott and hostility in general were hardcore Zionists such as Samuel Untermyer, Stephen S. Wise and Vladimir Jabotinsky. They agitated against NS Germany not because they were unhappy to see the Jews excluded in Germany (Why would they have been unhappy about being proven right? Makes no sense.) but because they needed an intensification of the anti-Jewish measures in order to keep the gates of Palestine wide open despite the firm Muslim resistance against that policy of foreign invasion & dispossession. In 1930, the Zionists had managed to have the anti-Zionist Passfield White Paper cancelled through the agitation of public opinion in Britain. The catastrophe for their colonial project had been averted, but they knew that the gates of Palestine could be closed again at any time. So the Zionists of the 1930s never stopped pressuring the British government with the creation of a refugee problem in Central Europe.

As the American Jewish Committee (see the link above) was not yet a Zionist organization, their opposition to the anti-German boycott is no surprise.

Also skipped from the narrative is the matter of Germany collapsing. Which would necessarily lead to the question, why that was happening. But it is pretty obvious that when infrastructure gets bombed and destroyed that this will also have economical effects like undersupply, which leads to 'people trying to help themselves', which leads to more undersupply. The effect was however useful for the later narrative creation given that starvation and undersupply will produce ugly pictures useful for dark propaganda efforts. And well the looting by former concentration camp inmates was the reason not simply releasing them. That was a huge dilemma in 1945. Of course all that needs to be ignored or belittled to maintain the extermination narrative.

But it even appears in the IMT transcript:

DR. KAUFFMANN: To what do you attribute the particularly bad and shameful conditions, which were ascertained by the entering Allied troops, and which to a certain extent were photographed and filmed?

HOESS: The catastrophic situation at the end of the war was due to the fact that, as a result of the destruction of the railway network and of the continuous bombing of the industrial plants, care for these masses-I am thinking of Auschwitz with its 140,000 internees-could no longer be assured. Improvised measures, truck columns, and everything else tried by the commanders to improve the situation were of little or no avail; it was no longer possible. The number of the sick became immense. There were next to no medical supplies; epidemics raged everywhere. Internees who were capable of work were used over and over again. By order of the Reichsfuehrer, even halfsick people had to be used wherever possible in industry. As a result every bit of space in the concentration camps which could possibly be used for lodging was overcrowded with sick and dying prisoners.
https://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/04-15-46.asp

(It appears that Hoess was allowed to say a lot of things that contradicted the narrative, with only the gassing/extermination tales being added and embedded in his testimony. Notably even exterminationist Historiographers don't believe anymore what Hoess said, although they assume that extermination/gassing is true anyway)
Starvation and undersupply persisted years after 1945. Not only in Germany, but also neighboring countries. .

The German population was saved from a similar fatal fate by the notorious German thoroughness and orderliness. At least for a while.

https://postimg.cc/LYZth1h0

https://postimg.cc/bSk40rVm

Any good liar knows that the best lies are lies with a grain of truth because most people believe that if a verifiable part of a story is true then the whole story is true. That's why Hoess was allowed to tell true things about health disaster in German concentration camps.

https://postimg.cc/DJvjwFR6

Lootings by KL inmates or not, releasing people from disease-ridden places such as the very last German concentration camps at that time would have been a criminal sanitary nonsense. The Allies quarantined the German camps they had captured for several months after their military victory. No other way out.

As said, there where various reasons. As for the concentration camps in the East. There is indication that of the inmates didn't want to fall into the hands of the Red Army (as did many civilians). Given the knowledge they may have had of Bolshevik incursions in Eastern Europe, they obviously had reasons for this.

But yes, the German experience with what happened at the end of World War One combined with the demand for 'unconditional surrender' will have had huge influence on NS decision making. Also something that gets easily ignored.

Bolshevik brutalities or not, the 3rd Reich needed many forced laborers to avoid defeat anyway. When a country even needs to build underground factories to keep fighting a war, it also necessarily needs many workers to perform that titanic task. That's obvious.

[borjastick]

but because they needed an intensification of the anti-Jewish measures in order to keep the gates of Palestine wide open

Hermod

Indeed the jews could, for the most part, have left Germany and other neighbouring countries without much grief or fuss. But they were held back and the system was scuppered by the jews themselves or at least the zionist agitators who wanted this golden opportunity to go without missing the chance to ensure an israel state created for them. Such was the desire for israel to come into being the zionist masters really wanted a)jews to die on the streets to cement their claim to israel and b)ensure only good jews, those with some to bring to the table, should be able to go to the promised land.

This is well covered in the most excellent book Founding Myths of Modern Israel.

[hermod]

but because they needed an intensification of the anti-Jewish measures in order to keep the gates of Palestine wide open

Hermod

Indeed the jews could, for the most part, have left Germany and other neighbouring countries without much grief or fuss. But they were held back and the system was scuppered by the jews themselves or at least the zionist agitators who wanted this golden opportunity to go without missing the chance to ensure an israel state created for them. Such was the desire for israel to come into being the zionist masters really wanted a) jews to die on the streets to cement their claim to israel and b) ensure only good jews, those with some to bring to the table, should be able to go to the promised land.

This is well covered in the most excellent book Founding Myths of Modern Israel.

a) The Zionist leaders of that time didn't want Jews to die on the streets to cement their claim to Israel because they needed as many settlers as possible (dead people are not very useful as settlers) and because they only needed to make the world believe with atrocity propaganda that millions of Jews had died of the Jewish people's "homelessness" (as they used to put it back then) in order to achieve that goal.

b) I suppose you meant "with some money to bring to the table." As I said in point a, the Zionist leaders of that time wanted as many Jewish settlers as possible, not only the rich ones (the author of The Founding Myths of Modern Israel, Roger Garaudy, was a Communist, i.e. a guy biased against rich people). That was the Nordau Plan, a little-known scheme named after the major Zionist pioneer Max Nordau who wanted to dump as many Jews as possible into Palestine as fast as possible after the First World War. The devisers of the Nordau Plan didn't even hesitate to force millions of displaced Jews to live in tents for several years if necessary. The promoters of the Nordau Plan were Zionists who thought that a gradual colonization of Palestine (aka "infiltration," in Zionist jargon) was impossible and would inescapably be stopped soon or late by the Arab natives eager to keep their homeland for themselves. What happened next proved them right, when the British government was compelled by Arab resistance to put an end to the Zionist colonial enterprise in Palestine (see the MacDonald White Paper of May 1939).

[borjastick]

Not so Hermod. The Zionist extremists (aren't they all) were quite relaxed about jews dying in Nazi processes as long as they got their main prize, that of a state of israel.

The Memorandum of the Rescue Committee of the Jewish Agency clearly stated that. Also the same point made in 'Zionist Policy and the Fate of European Jewry', in Yad Vashem Studies, Jerusalem, vol. 7 p.199

As Garaudy said 'The Jewish state was more important to them than the lives of jews themselves'.

[hermod]

Not so Hermod. The Zionist extremists (aren't they all) were quite relaxed about jews dying in Nazi processes as long as they got their main prize, that of a state of israel.

The Memorandum of the Rescue Committee of the Jewish Agency clearly stated that. Also the same point made in 'Zionist Policy and the Fate of European Jewry', in Yad Vashem Studies, Jerusalem, vol. 7 p.199

As Garaudy said 'The Jewish state was more important to them than the lives of jews themselves'.

They didn't care that some Jews were dying during WWII, but they cared that not too many of them were dying in the process because colonial enterprises need colonizers and dead people can't be colonizers.

Is the memo you're refering to the memo in which Yitzhak Gruenbaum reportedly said "One Cow in Palestine is worth more than all the Jews in Poland."??? If so, I don't believe in the sincerity of that reported statement. His son Eliezer was a Kapo at Auschwitz during WWII. That "quote" sounds like propaganda BS fabricated for a postwar use.

[Hieldner]

The Americans certainly used what corpses they found there for propaganda purposes; stacking them up in and around the crematoria for politicians, journalists, cameramen and Joe Public to see. Denierbud showed in One Third how the corpses at Ohrdruf were left out in the spring sunshine for weeks so that as many US troops as possible (who were ordered to visit) would see them and realise 'why they were fighting.'

If some dead bodies were lying around in the camp, it would have been only logical to additionally transport some of the dead bodies lying all around Germany at that time to the respective camp to create an even bigger heap of corpses. If the psychological warfare unit had any ethical considerations about such an action, those would have disagreed with their immediate directives to demonize the enemy.

All the corpses in the Buchenwald and Dachau footage are severely emaciated, meaning they likely died from typhus, and were very unlikely to be the bodies of duty-fit German soldiers who died from bullet wounds.

There were many typhus victims at that time in Germany, Jewish and non-Jewish. Why would a psychological warfare or some other unit not have headed to the nearest hospital to pick up more bodies or collect typhus victims from different camps and pile them up where the film team was currently located? Also, in almost no case are there any signs of decomposition of the bodies in the Allied horror movies (except those dug up). So all the dead prisoners would have had to drop dead fairly recently before liberation in every camp.

Sorry K0nsl, but I think the 'American brought corpses to Dachau and Buchenwald for propaganda purposes' claim is completely ridiculous and will have the anti-revs laughing.

If you think about it, it isn’t ridiculous but a completely logical action to take for the Allies.

Without knowing too much about it, is there a chance that train full of dead bodies, was Psych Warfare or OSS trying to get the bodies there to create an atrocity spectacle like they did at Buchenwald?

Yes, of course. There are other cases where there is at least a strong suspicion that the Allies did exactly this.

Auschwitz

It is now an accepted fact that the Soviets filmed the Auschwitz liberation movie weeks or months after liberation on January the 27th 1945. Yet, we see emaciated corpses lying around in the mud of the camp (“over 600”). Are those victims of the Nazis that were just left there without decomposing or were those corpses brought in from somewhere else later?

The Liberation of Auschwitz (includes 1945 original Red Army footage): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0V0RMf2qU18 (See 12:30, embedding doesn’t seem to work).

Bergen-Belsen

The following is an Allied propaganda broadcast in German public media about a female guard at Bergen-Belsen and the only one who, completely voluntary, gave an interview to a Bergen-Belsen memorial foundation in 2004, Hilde M. She was a camp guard only since March 1945 until liberation, nevertheless she was put into prison for a year and the testimony for the memorial resulted in a trial against her years later. She explains that she knew nothing of emaciated corpses lying around in the camp, didn’t notice any smell and says she had no idea why the camp commandant brought in dead prisoners when she was told one day to carry corpses around. The Brits would have had every opportunity and reason to bring in even more corpses.

The daily Holocaust: a female concentration camp guard remembers


Translation of transcript:

Moderator Anja Reschke:

No, we didn't know anything about that. It is the classic argument of many Germans who experienced the National Socialist era. They saw nothing, heard nothing about the persecution of Jews and mass extermination. It is astonishing how the human soul can repress what it has experienced, how one can free oneself from feelings of guilt and imagine one's own, better reality for decades. The bad feeling deep inside - sometimes it comes up, then the person must firmly convince himself that everything was good. All this can be observed in the case of the woman we are talking about now. No, we didn't know anything, she says. Yet she was right in the middle of the Holocaust. As a guard in the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp. Anne Ruprecht reports.

She recently celebrated her 90th birthday. Hilde M. A cheerful old lady, "young at heart" and active in the church community for decades - according to a local newspaper three years ago. Hilde M. did not tell the editor anything about her past before 1945 at that time.

This past can be found here. In the memorial of the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp. Here, among the names of the perpetrators, is her name: Hilde Lisiewitz. Her maiden name. And in the archives of the memorial site there are three and a half hours of film material that has received little attention so far. In 2004, Hilde M. gave herself up for an interview here. She was the only SS guard from the concentration camp who had the courage to speak about this time. Like many, she had been conscripted into service. In the interview, Hilde M. remembers the work of the concentration camp inmates more than her own task: namely, guarding them.

Quote Hilde M., concentration camp guard 1944/45: " Turnips, rutabagas. We had to fetch them, they had to load them, and they had to drag them back to the camp, to the kitchen. And once I was in the kitchen, where they peeled the potatoes. That's when I had to watch them work."

The kitchen where she supervised prisoners was located in the middle of Bergen-Belsen concentration camp, in the middle of the main camp, right next to the prisoners' barracks. In her memory it was different:

Quote Hilde M., concentration camp guard 1944/45: "We didn't come into the camp and see the dead. Or anything or a crematorium. We didn't get in there. We stayed outside the main camp."

Reporter: "But you were able to see inside?"

Hilde M.: "It was very big and our barracks were right at the front at the beginning. You couldn't see in."

People were dying by the thousands and in plain sight in the camp, here later footage taken by the British. Between the beginning of March alone, when Hilde M. begins her service in Bergen-Belsen, and the liberation, over 28,000 people die, almost 700 a day.

Anita Lasker-Wallfisch survived Bergen-Belsen. She remembers the death that surrounded her in the camp.

Quote Anita Lasker Wallfisch, survivor of Bergen-Belsen concentration camp: Then it started to decay. The stench! Yes, that is difficult to describe. Normally you don't see corpses after they have died, they are buried there. There they lay and decomposed. Before our eyes."

Even in Bergen, seven kilometers away, residents can smell the stench of corpses. But not Hilde M.

Quote Hilde M., concentration camp guard 1944/45: "No, I didn't smell anything! We didn't smell it like that. We couldn't even imagine what was happening in the camp. Nobody talked to us about it. We probably didn't ask, were afraid to ask."

Quote Anita Lasker-Wallfisch, survivor of Bergen-Belsen concentration camp: "She didn't have to ask. I mean, the woman lives, lives in illusions. There was no need to ask anything, everything was there. Nothing has been hidden."

April 15, 1945: the British liberate the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp. They place the camp commandant Kramer, SS men and women under arrest. Also Hilde M, whose name at that time was Lisiewitz. In the coming days, they are to bury some 10,000 corpses - the victims of their mass murder. In Hilde M.'s memory, they become people who were already dead when they came to the concentration camp.

Quote Hilde M., concentration camp guard 1944/45: "Oh yes! You see, I forgot all about that. And one fine day we were told to carry corpses. And only then did we see how many corpses there were. That Kramer, our commandant, should not have taken them in. Why did he bring the dead, let them into his camp?"

Reporter: "Did you yourself look for an explanation of how all this happened? Who was responsible?"

Hilde M.: "Sure, we said, how could this happen? Above all: Why didn't we know anything? None of us knew anything about what was going on in the camp."

Reporter: "You say you didn't know, but when you saw it, how did you deal with it, what did it mean to you?"

Hilde M.: "Then we were angry with Hitler and that he had started this war. He knew what was going on. We didn't know that."

In the fall of 1945, 47 SS men and women from Bergen-Belsen had to stand trial before a British military tribunal. Among them was Hilde M.

Quote Hilde M., concentration camp guard 1944/45: "Everybody got a lawyer and then he said: You have a very bad - a very difficult charge. And I said: But I haven't done anything here. In the short time you were here? And then he told me: on the way to the beets I attacked a woman, hit her and with the stick I always had I beat her up and with my boots I kicked her to death. And I had to laugh. I said, "That's ridiculous! It's just - "

In the trial Hilde M. denies most of it. At the time, she at least admitted that she had hit prisoners "in the face with her hand. [...] Because they stole [...] and I couldn't chase them away [...] that's why I had to hit them."

Almost 60 years later, she doesn't remember that either. She had never beaten prisoners.

Quote reporter: "We also know from survivors' accounts that of course this kitchen was also a workplace where they had the opportunity to eat anything at all."

Hilde M.: "Yes, and we had to be careful that they didn't steal."

Reporter: "What happened if someone got caught?"

Hilde M.: "They were chased away, well at least that's what we did, we women. That's when I read that I gave someone a slap in the face. I can't imagine that at all!"

In the fall of 1945, 47 SS men and women from Bergen-Belsen had to stand trial before a British military tribunal. Among them was Hilde M.

Hilde M., concentration camp guard 1944/45: "Everybody got a lawyer and then he said: You have a very bad - a very difficult charge. And I said: But I haven't done anything here. In the short time you were here? And then he told me: on the way to the beets I attacked a woman, hit her and with the stick I always had I beat her up and with my boots I kicked her to death. And I had to laugh. I said, "That's ridiculous! It's just - "

In the trial Hilde M. denies most of it. At the time, she at least admitted that she had hit prisoners "in the face with her hand. [...] Because they stole [...] and I couldn't chase them away [...] that's why I had to hit them."

Almost 60 years later, she doesn't remember that either. She had never beaten prisoners.

Quote reporter: "We also know from survivors' accounts that of course this kitchen was also a workplace where they had the opportunity to eat anything at all."

Hilde M.: "Yes, and we had to be careful that they didn't steal."

Reporter: "What happened if someone got caught?"

Hilde M.: "They were chased away, well at least that's what we did, we women. That's when I read that I gave someone a slap in the face. I can't imagine that at all!"

In the end, her sentence was one year in prison.

Quote Hilde M., concentration camp guard 1944/45: "In any case, I got off quite well."

Hilde M. served her prison sentence in Hamburg Fuhlsbüttel, after which her new, different life began.

Quote reporter: "Did you go back to Bergen-Belsen after that?"

Hilde M.: "Oh yes! Oh, haven't I told you yet? Bergen-Belsen, I was there once. Must have been with my son, probably with my children. And we were standing against a wall and there were pictures of us on it and I saw myself there and I looked around, so afraid. Then I think: if someone recognizes you here! Then I was afraid and I said: Let's go away! So I left right away."

Hilde M. is now 93 and still lives in Hamburg. She does not respond to our interview requests. But little should have changed in her version of the truth.

Quote reporter: "Do you sometimes still think about that whole time?"

Hilde M.: "When I can't sleep, sometimes you have a night when you just can't sleep, then I recite to myself everything I told you today. So not everything like that, but something like that. That's why it's still in my head. Because I always think about that time. And that I was actually lucky. With my family. With my children."

Quote Lasker Wallfisch, survivor of Bergen-Belsen concentration camp: "It's madness! Completely innocent people were killed there. She put that out of her consciousness-. So, good luck to her! But that doesn't change the facts!"

Romanian Revolution 1989

This is a case where Soviet and American intelligence agencies worked together to psychologically manipulate people with corpses to get rid of another dictator, Ceausescu. The German documentary Checkmate - strategy of a revolution "a case study in American and Soviet foreign policy" by Susanne Brandstätter about the Romanian revolution in 1989 contains a segment where the use of already dead bodies to fake a massacre of the state security apparatus is documented:

The blood toll in Timisoara - over 4000 dead are claimed. Alleged victims are put on display - in reality a fake, as old autopsy sutures prove.

Gheorghe Ratiu, head of the Internal Security Department of the Securitate in 1989: "In Brasov, Romania, there was a similar movement in November 1987. Since no one died, people calmed down. And then, when there was a recurrence, the conclusion was drawn that until enough people died, until blood was shed, the people would not rise up."

Local citizen: "These are not victims from the revolution, these people here. You can tell when you look at them they're all cut open, and everything."

Reporter: "Who killed these people, also the Securitate?"

Citizen: "No, they died [naturally]. All kinds of people."

https://archive.org/details/fake-dead-bodies-used-in-romanian-revolution-1989

[borjastick]

Not so Hermod. The Zionist extremists (aren't they all) were quite relaxed about jews dying in Nazi processes as long as they got their main prize, that of a state of israel.

The Memorandum of the Rescue Committee of the Jewish Agency clearly stated that. Also the same point made in 'Zionist Policy and the Fate of European Jewry', in Yad Vashem Studies, Jerusalem, vol. 7 p.199

As Garaudy said 'The Jewish state was more important to them than the lives of jews themselves'.

They didn't care that some Jews were dying during WWII, but they cared that not too many of them were dying in the process because colonial enterprises need colonizers and dead people can't be colonizers.

Is the memo you're refering to the memo in which Yitzhak Gruenbaum reportedly said "One Cow in Palestine is worth more than all the Jews in Poland."??? If so, I don't believe in the sincerity of that reported statement. His son Eliezer was a Kapo at Auschwitz during WWII. That "quote" sounds like propaganda BS fabricated for a postwar use.

What you are failing to see, deliberately perhaps, is that the zionists cared little for jews themselves and massively for their victory in bringing about a zionist state. That jews would die under German control was in their minds a benefit because it would shine extra light and publicity on the fate of jews and thus the need for the international community to grant them the state of israel. Garoudy writes correctly, and no I don't care what religion or political complexion he had. Zionists knew that jewish blood on the streets was essential to achieving their greater aim.

Also Garoudy correctly identified that zionists wanted good jews, those who could bring some skills and be worth something to the illegal fledgling state of israel. What they didn't want was the mass of useless, feckless jews they knew inhabited large areas of eastern europe. The wandering jew type.

If you read the book you might find it very useful, I have even though when I bought my copy it was rare and very expensive. Most helpful it has been too, packed with quotes, background info and observations.

[Hektor]

@Hermod

All the leaders of the anti-German boycott and hostility in general were hardcore Zionists such as Samuel Untermyer, Stephen S. Wise and Vladimir Jabotinsky. They agitated against NS Germany not because they were unhappy to see the Jews excluded in Germany (Why would they have been unhappy about being proven right? Makes no sense.) but because they needed an intensification of the anti-Jewish measures in order to keep the gates of Palestine wide open despite the firm Muslim resistance against that policy of foreign invasion & dispossession. In 1930, the Zionists had managed to have the anti-Zionist Passfield White Paper cancelled through the agitation of public opinion in Britain. The catastrophe for their colonial project had been averted, but they knew that the gates of Palestine could be closed again at any time. So the Zionists of the 1930s never stopped pressuring the British government with the creation of a refugee problem in Central Europe.

As the American Jewish Committee (see the link above) was not yet a Zionist organization, their opposition to the anti-German boycott is no surprise.

Let's bend it back to Dachau.

There was a movie made about Dachau BEFORE World War Two. Not sure when it was released. But I can recall having seen it as a child. I recall a grown ups remark wondering "How the Americans could have known so much about the concentration camps" before world war two. Can't recall the title right now. But I think Dachau was involved and it was definitely made in 1938/1939.

[hermod]

What you are failing to see, deliberately perhaps, is that the zionists cared little for jews themselves and massively for their victory in bringing about a zionist state. That jews would die under German control was in their minds a benefit because it would shine extra light and publicity on the fate of jews and thus the need for the international community to grant them the state of israel. Garoudy writes correctly, and no I don't care what religion or political complexion he had. Zionists knew that jewish blood on the streets was essential to achieving their greater aim.

I had already understood your point. But repeating it isn't proving it.

With the full control of the mainstream mass media the Jews already had at that time, the Zionists didn't need millions of Jews dead. They only needed millions of Jews PORTRAYED as dead, killed because without a country for themselves. With millions of Jews portrayed as dead but actually alive and uprooted (displaced), that time's Zionists had the propaganda hoax AND all the settlers they needed to achieve their colonial goal.

Also Garoudy correctly identified that zionists wanted good jews, those who could bring some skills and be worth something to the illegal fledgling state of israel. What they didn't want was the mass of useless, feckless jews they knew inhabited large areas of eastern europe. The wandering jew type.

Roughly, the Zionists of the 1930s wanted the money of the rich Western Jews to resettle as many poor Eastern Jews as possible in Palestine. The Zionist Eastern Jews such as Chaim Weizmann, Nahum Sokolow, Stephen S. Wise (leader of the U.S. Zionists but born in Hungary), and Vladimir Jabotinsky hardly regarded the Western Jews as real Jews. The former considered the latter unpious acculturated people with some Jewish customs & Jewish blood ("some" because of the high level of intermarriage among the Western Jews). The Eastern Jews courted the Western Jews for their money but certainly despised them. Unlike what Garaudy believed, the recently-deghettoized Eastern Jews were most highly regarded by the leaders of the Zionist movement in the 1930s & 1940s. One could even say that Zionism was above all a reactionary movement devised and created to reghettoize those Jews before they could migrate to America & British countries and drop their Jewish customs & blood there. The founders of the Zionist movement such as Max Nordau (the co-founder of the World Zionist Organization with Theodore Herzl) regarded ghetto as a shelter, a protection against the acculturation of life among Goyim, not as a prison.

https://postimg.cc/G4rR044d

If you read the book you might find it very useful, I have even though when I bought my copy it was rare and very expensive. Most helpful it has been too, packed with quotes, background info and observations.

I've already read it. As a native French speaker, I could find it at a fair price a long time ago. But I couldn't fail to notice some of Garaudy's Communist biases and to disagree on some of his conclusions.

[hermod]

Let's bend it back to Dachau.

There was a movie made about Dachau BEFORE World War Two. Not sure when it was released. But I can recall having seen it as a child. I recall a grown ups remark wondering "How the Americans could have known so much about the concentration camps" before world war two. Can't recall the title right now. But I think Dachau was involved and it was definitely made in 1938/1939.

Possible. FDR made it clear in the very first years of WWII that the German concentration camps would be and remain the focus point of American anti-Fascist & anti-Nazi propaganda ("the very altars of modern dictatorships," as he poetically put it in 1940). And in 1939, the Polish ambassador to Washington, Jerzy Potocki, reported to his government that atrocity propaganda about German concentration camps was going mad in America before WWII had even begun.

https://postimg.cc/Mfv7pZXG

https://postimg.cc/NL5CMB3T

[borjastick]

None so blind as those who will not see.

Your own fixed views on this issue are impossible to get past because no matter what is right in front of you, you are blind.

For the hard of understanding, no matter what is your native tongue, not all jews were required in Palestine by the zionist extremists. It is quite clear that is the message and evidenced left right and centre in this book. Read again with an open mind and learn matey. A dead jew or in this case many dead jews were an advantage to zionism. They were not expecting nor trying to get advantageous media coverage , there was a war about to start and jews were hated by Hitler.

This cannot be so hard to understand, can it?

[hermod]

None so blind as those who will not see.

Don't be so hard with yourself.

Your own fixed views on this issue are impossible to get past because no matter what is right in front of you, you are blind.

For the hard of understanding, no matter what is your native tongue, not all jews were required in Palestine by the zionist extremists. It is quite clear that is the message and evidenced left right and centre in this book. Read again with an open mind and learn matey. A dead jew or in this case many dead jews were an advantage to zionism. They were not expecting nor trying to get advantageous media coverage , there was a war about to start and jews were hated by Hitler.

This cannot be so hard to understand, can it?

You just sound like an exterminationist zealot on this one...

(no offense intended)

[borjastick]

None so blind as those who will not see.

Don't be so hard with yourself.

Your own fixed views on this issue are impossible to get past because no matter what is right in front of you, you are blind.

For the hard of understanding, no matter what is your native tongue, not all jews were required in Palestine by the zionist extremists. It is quite clear that is the message and evidenced left right and centre in this book. Read again with an open mind and learn matey. A dead jew or in this case many dead jews were an advantage to zionism. They were not expecting nor trying to get advantageous media coverage , there was a war about to start and jews were hated by Hitler.

This cannot be so hard to understand, can it?

You just sound like an exterminationist zealot on this one...

(no offense intended)

Offence taken. Prat.

[hermod]

Offence taken. Prat.

Offending those who call the people disagreeing with them "prat(s)" is no problem.

many dead jews were an advantage to zionism. They were not expecting nor trying to get advantageous media coverage

After the MacDonald White Paper on Palestine had been passed (May 1939), the Zionists crucially needed to get advantageous media coverage (Holohoax atrocity propaganda). Without the pressure of an aroused public opinion generated by such a media coverage, Zionism was doomed to fail once and for all within the next 10 years because an Arab-dominated unitary state of Palestine was to be established by Britain before May 1949. If the Zionists of the 1940s had proved unable to force the abrogation of the British White Paper of 1939, there would be no state of Israel today and no hope to establish one in the future. Perhaps no political group ever needed an advantageous media coverage more than the Zionists of the 1940s did.

[Hektor]

Let's bend it back to Dachau.

There was a movie made about Dachau BEFORE World War Two. Not sure when it was released. But I can recall having seen it as a child. I recall a grown ups remark wondering "How the Americans could have known so much about the concentration camps" before world war two. Can't recall the title right now. But I think Dachau was involved and it was definitely made in 1938/1939.

Possible. FDR made it clear in the very first years of WWII that the German concentration camps would be and remain the focus point of American anti-Fascist & anti-Nazi propaganda ("the very altars of modern dictatorships," as he poetically put it in 1940). And in 1939, the Polish ambassador to Washington, Jerzy Potocki, reported to his government that atrocity propaganda about German concentration camps was going mad in America before WWII had even begun......

I think I may have confused it a bit. But the movie I had in mind was released in 1944 (No idea when production started though).

The Seventh Cross is a 1944 American drama film, set in Nazi Germany, starring Spencer Tracy as a prisoner who escaped from a concentration camp.

I recall Jerzy Potocki. And I think it is worthwhile investigating him and what he wrote and said further. What he said will however be dismissed by adherents of the Holocult. Simply because he is a Pole and hence genetically predisposed to Anti-Semitism. Yes, this is a subtext in debates. Because you have German, Polish or whatever ancestors you can be disqualified out of hand. I'd guess lots of Americans have German, Polish, etc. ancestry... So do many Europeans. In South Africa virtually all Afrikaans-speaking Whites DO HAVE some German ancestry and many of the others as well. I also met some Poles here during my studies. And they were interested about WW2 as well. I asked them about the Jews. The Pole said that he couldn't give an answer due to him not knowing them personally, but what he heard about them 'wasn't very good'. So there is of course a pretext with Poles about Jews, but doesn't that relate to their previous experiences with them (as a group)?

With the Germans it was a bit different. Prior to WW2 most (rural) Germans won't know a lot about them anyway. Jews were concentrated in some areas usually urban to metropolitan. Although some country sides had them as well. e.g. as cattle traders, but also as loan sharks. They were also seen differently as a cattle trader was indeed useful at times. They had to be a bit more careful with their sellers/buyers since bad business practices could backfire there. The high mobility is however an incentive to drop 'good business practices', since once you have the name of being a scoundrel, you simply move to elsewhere.

What I wonder is how Americans did react to that kind of movies, atrocity articles, rallies, etc. During War Time it should be clear that what they get shown is hardly based on first hand information and that the government would have an ulterior motive on what they published about their enemy. But people tend to go for the 'golden mean'-fallacy. So if a government report said "They killed a 1000"... they'd say, "perhaps not a thousand, perhaps it's a 500 or perhaps even less"... That this is pure thumb-sucking or deception most won't be ready to outrightly admit. After all. They could not prove that it is untrue. And don't all the Newspapers say that? "They can't be all lying at once, can they"?.
And of course people tend to think that they are smarter than they really are: "If they'd ly to me, I'd immediately have noticed that". So their own overestimation of themselves gets into the way of reasonability there. I've noticed that over and over again. Not only in connection with Holocaust and World War Two.

The seventh cross got a trailer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_jOC1SUVF7U

No idea, if it is complete online. Given the age there isn't a legitimate claim to copyright.