Telegraph revealed gas chambers 3 years before liberation

[Hektor]

Holocaust Memorial Day: Telegraph revealed Nazi gas chambers three years before liberation of Auschwitz
The Telegraph disclosed the existence of Nazi gas chambers and the “mass killing” of Jews almost three years before the liberation of Auschwitz on Jan 27, 1945

It was under the headline “Germans murder 700,000 Jews in Poland”, that this newspaper reported the “greatest massacre in the world’s history” on June 25, 1942.
The story was remarkably detailed and accurate, yet the credit belongs neither to this newspaper nor the anonymous “Daily Telegraph reporter” who was the author. All the facts were supplied by Szmul Zygielbojm, a member of the Polish government in exile who made it his mission to inform the world about the Holocaust.
After arriving in London in 1942, Zygielbojm used a clandestine network of contacts across occupied Poland to gather eyewitness accounts of the fate of Jews. The particular information in The Daily Telegraph’s story was smuggled to London on microfilm hidden inside a key.
The newspaper was able to report that gas chambers were being used for industrialised murder from November 1941 onwards – and “an average 1,000 Jews were gassed daily”. The story methodically lists the death toll from massacres in seven different towns and cities.
“In many places Jews were deported to ‘unknown destinations’ and killed in neighbouring woods,” reads the story. “In Vilna 50,000 Jews were murdered in November. The total number slaughtered in this district and around Lithuanian Kovno is 300,000.”

Post-war investigation established that hundreds of thousands of Jews were killed in mass shootings in Nazi-occupied areas of the former Soviet Union – just as this story made clear. “In Rovne the murders began early in November. In three days and nights nearly 15,000 men, women and children were shot,” reads the report.
In the pages of The Daily Telegraph, Zygielbojm succeeded in revealing the mass murder of Jews. But he was dismayed by the lack of public reaction.
As early as August 1941, Winston Churchill had denounced the atrocities against the Jews as a “crime without a name”. Yet Zygielbojm detected no wave of revulsion sufficient for the Allies to take special steps to obstruct the Holocaust.
The Telegraph chose to report the “greatest massacre in the world’s history” on page five of a six-page newspaper.
Zygielbojm’s informants were taking immense risks and their reports were meticulously accurate, yet he often encountered indifference, disbelief or even suspicion.
When The Telegraph’s story appeared, Zygielbojm’s wife, Manya, and their son, Tuvia, were still living in occupied Poland as prisoners in the Warsaw Ghetto. Both died during the razing of the Ghetto in 1943.
Crushed by this tragedy - and by the weight of indifference towards the fate of the Jews - Zygielbojm took his own life on May 11, 1943.
“The responsibility for the crime of the murder of the whole Jewish nationality in Poland rests first of all on those who are carrying it out,” he wrote. “But indirectly it falls also upon the whole of humanity, on the peoples of the Allied nations and on their governments, who up to this day have not taken any real steps to halt this crime. By looking on passively upon this murder of defenceless millions tortured children, women and men they have become partners to the responsibility.”



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/worl ... hwitz.html

Or how about the stories being so "accurate" because the Allies made propaganda stories part of historiography?

[hermod]

Holocaust Memorial Day: Telegraph revealed Nazi gas chambers three years before liberation of Auschwitz
The Telegraph disclosed the existence of Nazi gas chambers and the “mass killing” of Jews almost three years before the liberation of Auschwitz on Jan 27, 1945

It was under the headline “Germans murder 700,000 Jews in Poland”, that this newspaper reported the “greatest massacre in the world’s history” on June 25, 1942.

Or how about the stories being so "accurate" because the Allies made propaganda stories part of historiography?

Yes, Hektor. The privilege of defining what is accurate and what is "just a pack of lies" is the victors' most precious spoil.

As they seem fond of accuracy, the title of this news article should have been: The Telegraph revealed German gas chambers 29 years before liberation of Auschwitz and used them for anti-German atrocity propaganda in both world wars.

I can't believe they dare celebrate the 70th anniversary of Auschwitz liberation with the embarrassing origins of the alleged German gas chambers. Amazing Chutzpah !!



That's what I call accuracy.

The Telegraph's 'accuracy' is nothing but deliberate deception of public opinion...

[hermod]

Holocaust Memorial Day: Telegraph revealed Nazi gas chambers three years before liberation of Auschwitz

As early as August 1941, Winston Churchill had denounced the atrocities against the Jews as a “crime without a name”.

Another nice deception by the London Daily Telegraph. Churchill's speech mentioning "a crime without a name".was not about "atrocities against the Jews" as alleged by the Telegraph. It was about the savage war on the Eastern front. Churchill was talking about "the Russian patriots who defend their native soil" and the word "Jew" wasn't even mentioned in that speech (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jso ... 82441.html). And when did wartime speeches told by political leaders working to fuel their country's war effort with propaganda become reliable historical sources proving anything in the first place? That's not history. That's not even journalism.

[Inquisitor]

And so continues the bizarre dichotomy wherein the glorious Allies alternately claim to have known nothing whatever of this alleged mass-murder of "millions" of Jews, or to have had explicit knowledge of it YEARS before war's end - depending whom one asks and when, of course.

The "holocaust" means never having to be consistent - Hell, it means never having to make any sense at all!

How very convenient.

------

[hermod]

And so continues the bizarre dichotomy wherein the glorious Allies alternately claim to have known nothing whatever of this alleged mass-murder of "millions" of Jews, or to have had explicit knowledge of it YEARS before war's end - depending whom one asks and when, of course.

The "holocaust" means never having to be consistent - Hell, it means never having to make any sense at all!

How very convenient.

Contrarily to some of his statements during WW2 (not the one of August 1941), Churchill said in a speech before the House of Commons on August 1, 1946: “I must say that I had no idea, when the war came to an end, of the horrible massacres which had occurred; the millions and millions that have been slaughtered. That dawned on us gradually after the struggle was over.”

Such a dichotomy was essential for the success of the Nuremberg mock trials. Blaming some Nazi leaders on 'trials' for the crimes allegedly planned and ordered by other dead Nazi leaders was a breeze. That trick worked perfectly well and even Goering ended as a Holocaust believer who blamed Himmler for having perpetrated in absolute secrecy what was in numerous Allied newspapers during the war.

[Hektor]

And so continues the bizarre dichotomy wherein the glorious Allies alternately claim to have known nothing whatever of this alleged mass-murder of "millions" of Jews, or to have had explicit knowledge of it YEARS before war's end - depending whom one asks and when, of course.

The "holocaust" means never having to be consistent - Hell, it means never having to make any sense at all!

How very convenient.

Contrarily to some of his statements during WW2 (not the one of August 1941), Churchill said in a speech before the House of Commons on August 1, 1946: “I must say that I had no idea, when the war came to an end, of the horrible massacres which had occurred; the millions and millions that have been slaughtered. That dawned on us gradually after the struggle was over.”

Such a dichotomy was essential for the success of the Nuremberg mock trials. Blaming some Nazi leaders on 'trials' for the crimes allegedly planned and ordered by other dead Nazi leaders was a breeze. That trick worked perfectly well and even Goering ended as a Holocaust believer who blamed Himmler for having perpetrated in absolute secrecy what was in numerous Allied newspapers during the war.

One needs to look at intelligence reports during the war. Not the releases for publishing (which may claim all kinds of BS), but the once they gathered internally.

Hermann Goering having no knowledge of the Holocaust until the Nuremberg show trials?
Now that's a bit rich isn't it?

The Telegraph reporting on alleged gassings in Serbia (world war one) as well as in Poland (world war two) should be a real eyeopener.

[hermod]

Holocaust Memorial Day: Telegraph revealed Nazi gas chambers three years before liberation of Auschwitz
The Telegraph disclosed the existence of Nazi gas chambers and the “mass killing” of Jews almost three years before the liberation of Auschwitz on Jan 27, 1945

It was under the headline “Germans murder 700,000 Jews in Poland”, that this newspaper reported the “greatest massacre in the world’s history” on June 25, 1942.
The story was remarkably detailed and accurate, yet the credit belongs neither to this newspaper nor the anonymous “Daily Telegraph reporter” who was the author. All the facts were supplied by Szmul Zygielbojm, a member of the Polish government in exile who made it his mission to inform the world about the Holocaust.
After arriving in London in 1942, Zygielbojm used a clandestine network of contacts across occupied Poland to gather eyewitness accounts of the fate of Jews. The particular information in The Daily Telegraph’s story was smuggled to London on microfilm hidden inside a key.
The newspaper was able to report that gas chambers were being used for industrialised murder from November 1941 onwards – and “an average 1,000 Jews were gassed daily”. The story methodically lists the death toll from massacres in seven different towns and cities.
“In many places Jews were deported to ‘unknown destinations’ and killed in neighbouring woods,” reads the story. “In Vilna 50,000 Jews were murdered in November. The total number slaughtered in this district and around Lithuanian Kovno is 300,000.”

Post-war investigation established that hundreds of thousands of Jews were killed in mass shootings in Nazi-occupied areas of the former Soviet Union – just as this story made clear. “In Rovne the murders began early in November. In three days and nights nearly 15,000 men, women and children were shot,” reads the report.
In the pages of The Daily Telegraph, Zygielbojm succeeded in revealing the mass murder of Jews. But he was dismayed by the lack of public reaction.
As early as August 1941, Winston Churchill had denounced the atrocities against the Jews as a “crime without a name”. Yet Zygielbojm detected no wave of revulsion sufficient for the Allies to take special steps to obstruct the Holocaust.
The Telegraph chose to report the “greatest massacre in the world’s history” on page five of a six-page newspaper.
Zygielbojm’s informants were taking immense risks and their reports were meticulously accurate, yet he often encountered indifference, disbelief or even suspicion.
When The Telegraph’s story appeared, Zygielbojm’s wife, Manya, and their son, Tuvia, were still living in occupied Poland as prisoners in the Warsaw Ghetto. Both died during the razing of the Ghetto in 1943.
Crushed by this tragedy - and by the weight of indifference towards the fate of the Jews - Zygielbojm took his own life on May 11, 1943.
“The responsibility for the crime of the murder of the whole Jewish nationality in Poland rests first of all on those who are carrying it out,” he wrote. “But indirectly it falls also upon the whole of humanity, on the peoples of the Allied nations and on their governments, who up to this day have not taken any real steps to halt this crime. By looking on passively upon this murder of defenceless millions tortured children, women and men they have become partners to the responsibility.”



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/worl ... hwitz.html

Or how about the stories being so "accurate" because the Allies made propaganda stories part of historiography?

When The Telegraph deleted an article reporting that the newspaper which revealed Hitler's world-famous [alleged] gas chambers during WWII was The Telegraph, you know that the info is important. And inconvenient to some influential people...

Infographics contrasting the atrocity propaganda of WWII and WWI, and looking at the genocide of Germans
viewtopic.php?t=14896&start=15#p108467

[Hektor]

....

When The Telegraph deleted an article reporting that the newspaper which revealed Hitler's world-famous [alleged] gas chambers during WWII was The Telegraph, you know that the info is important. And inconvenient to some influential people...

Infographics contrasting the atrocity propaganda of WWII and WWI, and looking at the genocide of Germans
viewtopic.php?t=14896&start=15#p108467

Indeed it is. But one only realizes this once on reflects on the matter. And most people only observe how others react and then copy this.

That the same publication first lies about atrocities and then does again report on similar ones, should ring a bell with people. But guess what some geniuses do. They now 'conclude' that because the second atrocity propaganda was must have been true, that there is something true to the first one as well. Reverse logic is the modus operandi there.

[Whodunnit?]

Crushed by this tragedy - and by the weight of indifference towards the fate of the Jews - Zygielbojm took his own life on May 11, 1943.

In many ways, Jews are actually hilarious. You see? Jews kill themselves if you don't believe in the Holocaust. This is why it's banned to deny it happened. Some jew might slit his wrist. It's very important for them.

[hermod]

....

When The Telegraph deleted an article reporting that the newspaper which revealed Hitler's world-famous [alleged] gas chambers during WWII was The Telegraph, you know that the info is important. And inconvenient to some influential people...

Infographics contrasting the atrocity propaganda of WWII and WWI, and looking at the genocide of Germans
viewtopic.php?t=14896&start=15#p108467

Indeed it is. But one only realizes this once on reflects on the matter. And most people only observe how others react and then copy this.

That the same publication first lies about atrocities and then does again report on similar ones, should ring a bell with people. But guess what some geniuses do. They now 'conclude' that because the second atrocity propaganda was must have been true, that there is something true to the first one as well. Reverse logic is the modus operandi there.

No surprise. But that reaction just shows that the most ardent, fanatical & inconvertible Holocult believers have understood how big & important that fact (i.e. the info that the first paper on the Nazi gas chambers was a mere rehash of a paper on the Central Powers' gas chambers) is. Their reaction should motivate us to utilize and publicize that inconvenient fact as much as possible. I couldn't advise revisionists too much to make their own infographics on that fact and to post their best works on social networks.

[Hektor]

....

No surprise. But that reaction just shows that the most ardent, fanatical & inconvertible Holocult believers have understood how big & important that fact (i.e. the info that the first paper on the Nazi gas chambers was a mere rehash of a paper on the Central Powers' gas chambers) is. Their reaction should motivate us to utilize and publicize that inconvenient fact as much as possible. I couldn't advise revisionists too much to make their own infographics on that fact and to post their best works on social networks.

People with some critical thinking skills, will probably notice that there is something seriously wrong with that picture. The rest anyway ardent Holocaust believers. Their delusion will only fall ultimately. But there is perhaps 10% of people that will notice and know they got to take stuff circulating through the media without verifiable proof with a grain of salt.

Another issue is challenging 'public historians' with the matter. That must be done well. When the doubting starts there, the cracks can get better.