Eichmann tapes

[NLH]

Sometimes, it seems to me, that some of the so called holocaust witnesses testify to their having seen events that never happened. The brain is surprisingly easy to fool at times.

Indeed, one of many...



But this is getting off topic, so you can search for details on the liar Rosenblat elsewhere on this site.

Anyway, back to the Eichmann Tapes.

[Dresden]

Barrington James said:

"Sometimes, it seems to me, that some of the so called holocaust witnesses testify to their having seen events that never happened. The brain is surprisingly easy to fool at times"

That's true Mr. James, but in this case, Eichmann probably didn't say all of the things that he is alleged to have said, otherwise "they" would release the tapes and transcripts and advertise them to the world.

[Barrington James]

Or he may have made his confession with the naive belief that the would not be sentenced to death if he did so....Or, more than likely, that his children and their children would not be killed if he confessed....Men confess to crimes they did not do for such reasons.....That is why there were so many confessions at Nuremberg of events that did not happen, and could never have happened scientifically, mathematically or logically.

BJ

[Dresden]

Barrington James said:

"Or he may have made his confession with the naive belief that the would not be sentenced to death if he did so....Or, more than likely, that his children and their children would not be killed if he confessed....Men confess to crimes they did not do for such reasons.....That is why there were so many confessions at Nuremberg of events that did not happen, and could never have happened scientifically, mathematically or logically"

There are all kinds of reasons for people to say things, but you seem to be missing the point of my comment, which is:

If Eichmann said what he is alleged to have said; if the recordings and "transcripts" are that damning.....

They would be made public!!!.....they would have been shown on world-wide Television for weeks, maybe months.....possibly years!

They would be plastered across every anti-Revisionist website in the world.....Yad Vashem, the ADL, Nizkor, the USHMM and hundreds of other websites would be shoving it down the throats of Revisionists and laughing.

There would be hundreds of Youtube videos showing it; it would be freely downloadable and encouraged to be spread.

But NONE of this is happening.....all we get is people telling us what it allegedly says, and what Eichmann "seems" to imply.

[neugierig]

Gabi Weber, a German journalist, did some good work on the Eichmann saga. She all but proved that Eichmann was not kidnapped by Mossad. Her newest work is a You-Tube effort, titled “Disinformation - the wanted historical lie of Mossad”



I started to listen to the German version of it, it disappeared for some reason. One of the documents provided states that Sassen had good contacts to the American Ambassador in Buenos Aires, and that he also worked for “Time” and “Life”, was an informant.

Regards
Wilf

[Barrington James]

Oh, sorry, I just reacted. You are correct.....thanks.... You reminded me just now of the mystery of the old Sherlock Holmes story, "The dog that didn't bark" ....not that the supporters of the holocaust myths are dogs...

B.J.

[Dresden]

Barrington James said:

"You reminded me just now of the mystery of the old Sherlock Holmes story, "The dog that didn't bark"

That's a good analogy/comparison....."The Dog that didn't Bark"

[Kingfisher]

Gabi Weber, a German journalist, did some good work on the Eichmann saga. She all but proved that Eichmann was not kidnapped by Mossad. Her newest work is a You-Tube effort, titled “Disinformation - the wanted historical lie of Mossad”



It is the second article down. I started to listen to the German version of it, it disappeared for some reason. One of the documents provided states that Sassen had good contacts to the American Ambassador in Buenos Aires, and that he also worked for “Time” and “Life”, was an informant.

Regards
Wilf

Wilf,

If she argues Eichmann was "not kidnapped by Mossad" could you tell us non-German-speakers briefly what she does think happened?

Thanks

K

[borjastick]

The one thing that strikes me with these so called comments by and about Eichmann is the claim he witnessed mass murder and gassings. I confess my knowledge of Eichmann detail is a bit thin but is there any documented record that places him in any of the so called 'death camps' during the period of say May 1942 and spring 1944?

[neugierig]

OK Gentlemen, try this.



Regards
Wilf

[note: url in previous posts mentioning this video corrected to this one. M1]

[neugierig]

Here is what Gabi Weber has on the Eichmann kidnapping, and remember, she is not a Revisionist.
http://www.gabyweber.com/dwnld/artikel/ ... 20ENGL.pdf

I don’t remember if this is mentioned here, but Frau Weber had to take the German spook agency, the BND, to court to get the Eichmann files. When she did, large portions were blackened out, why?

My take on it: It is possible that Eichmann did work for the Israelis in some capacity. “The Holocaust” story did not really take hold after the war, something had to be done. So, Eichmann was put on trial and a short while later the Frankfurt show was performed. I have a copy of a “Foreign Service Dispatch”, here are some excerpts (I could maybe post all of it, but it is a lousy scan):

It is a "Foreign Service Dispatch", marked confidential, Security classification, dated February 7.1961.
"Subject: The Eichmann Trial and the Allegations Against State Secretary Dr. Globke. A conversation with Hessian Attorney General Fritz Bauer."(Declassified 2-7-05)
(Comment: Globke played an important role in the Weber discoveries)

"The following main points emerged in private conversations January 30 with Hessian Attorney General Fritz Bauer (SPD), who has been pushing allegations of complicity in Nazi war crimes against State Secretary Dr. GLOBKE, and who has recently visited Israel on several occasions in connection with the forthcoming trial of EICHMANN, in whose apprehension by Israeli Agents in Argentina last year he played a definite, though still obscure role, and with whom he talked in Israel in early January:
(Comment: Nothing about the Mossad, a handwritten note reads: "also see comment on last page. The comment reads: "The reporting officer suspects, though he can in no way document his supposition, that Bauer may well be connected in some high-ranking capacity with the Israeli Intelligence Service in West Germany)

"1) That Bauer and the SPD would continue to the maximum juridically feasible and politically
profitable point to push allegations of complicity in Nazi war crimes against Globke;
(Comment: What have politics to do with a criminal investigation?)
2) That the Israeli government was going slowly with the Eichmann trial in general, and would g particularly slowly with damaging allegations against prominent West Germans during the trial, for political and diplomatic reasons which Bauer himself accepts as fully valid;
(Comment: read this slowly)
3) That Eichmann had revelations to make which could be somewhat damaging to Globke, though it was doubtful that he would in fact make them.
(Comment: Why would he not voice those allegations, and what were they?)
4) That it was even more doubtful that Eichmann would make significant revelations against others in Bonn, though this was not known in Bonn, where uneasiness prevailed
(Comment: Same as above)"
It goes on to talk about Servatius and his role and then we read: "During the conversation Bauer also revealed that he had exact and undoubtable (this is what it says) information that as of December 1959, Martin BORMANN was still alive. He indicated that this information had come from Eichmann, but he would not elucidate further, nor reveal anything about Bormann's alleged location"

Later on:
"In fact however, there was little reason for anyone in Bonn to lay awake nights, worrying about the Eichmann trial, as the press was speculating. No one in the Israeli government, least of all BEN GURION himself, Bauer went on, wanted to complicate or in any way exacerbate German-Israeli relations. These were, on the whole, viewed as developing favorably by the Israelis.'
(Comment: And here we must remember what Weber has dug up, that Ben Gurion would thread lightly and not expose any of the nuclear deal between Germany and Israel. Bauer would of course give no specifics, but if one reads between the lines. After all, why not make hay with Eichmann, tell the Germans what rotten mass murderers they are. But nothing, in fact the Frankfurt trial was needed to "convince" Germans of their "guilt")
"Bauer did not think that Israel would be in any sort of a hurry with the Eichmann trial, on the contrary; nor did he think the trial would be particularly sensational. He seems to feel all parties involved would "behave wisely" and that Ben Gurion's main aim would be to secure "historical light" for internal educational purposes within Israel ("Ben Gurion thinks the new generation in Israel is as unbelieving of Jewish passivity in the face of mass murder as the new generation in Germany is unbelieving of mass German guilt", Bauer said)"
(Comment: "All parties involved would "behave wisely"? Really? This would include Eichmann then. Ben Gurion's thoughts are also of note, why not prove that the Holo happened right there and then?)

It continues:
"Bauer indicated that he was uncertain as to the true role being played in the case by Cologne attorney Robert Servatius, who has undertaken Eichmann's defense. Without saying so directly, Bauer hinted some feelings on his part that Servatius might be in the employ of the Bonn government, to keep the latter closely informed on the trial and to ensure the silence of Eichmann on a number of matters that might prove embarrassing to Bonn."
(Comment: Servatius did indeed thread lightly, still, what would those embarrassing matters be?)

And finally:
"During the conversation, Bauer clammed up completely on questions regarding the method of
Eichmann's apprehension and his part in it (beyond admitting the latter), which he called "irrelevant historical questions"..."
(Comment: Oh really, "irrelevant"? Hmmm)”

I did this for someone, ignore my comments. Was Eichmann hanged? We don’t know.

Regards
Wilf

[NLH]

I have yet to reply to this, but on December 24th I received a second reply from the publishers of those books I mentioned on page 3 of this thread, but thought I would share:

Hi ******, perhaps you would be kind enough to reciprocate with an explanation for me. If Eichmann has been consistent in his written and recorded testimony about (a) Hitler ordering the mass killing of Jews (following through on a public warning he made in 1939 that should Germany suffer a war brought upon it by powerful Jewish interests – “the Jews throughout Europe would be the losers”) and as a consequence of that order witnessing (b) the mass shooting and gassing of Jews in the camps – why so many “revisionists” refuse to accept Eichmann’s testimony as historical fact.

I agree that there can be much debate about the number of Jews killed, and even a debate on alleged construction and use of gas chambers (a “converted van”, and a “submarine engine” are a long way from establishing a planned extermination program for the mass gassing of Jews).
In my opinion the debate should focus on these historical issues – not about the two crucial points above that Eichmann consistently makes in his testimony. Eichmann consistently claims Hitler issued the order, and Eichmann consistently claims to have witnessed some killings by shooting and gassing. To suggest Eichmann is lying about these two crucial points, simply because it does not fit with the revisionist account of history, seems to me to be completely irrational.

Would you be kind enough to clarify the issues of this debate for me, as I’m obviously missing some crucial point in the revisionist argument.

Best wishes

***

Black House Publishing Ltd
152 City Road | London | EC1V 2NX
Tel: +44 (0) 843 289 1781

[Hektor]

OK Gentlemen, try this.



Regards
Wilf

[note: url in previous posts mentioning this video corrected to this one. M1]

OK, one time through this. They don't speak it out loudly, but does that also mean that there might be some good reasons why the trial, especially Eichmann's role, comes over that staged.

The video doesn't question the quintessence of the official narrative, but casts some doubt on the credibility of it all.

[neugierig]

Hektor, Gabi Weber does not question the official version of “The Holocaust”. What she has done casts doubt on the kidnapping tale. One could say that by extension it should also cast doubt on the trial. From the Bauer interview, referred to above:

"Bauer did not think that Israel would be in any sort of a hurry with the Eichmann trial, on the contrary; nor did he think the trial would be particularly sensational. He seems to feel all parties involved would "behave wisely" and that Ben Gurion's main aim would be to secure "historical light" for internal educational purposes within Israel ("Ben Gurion thinks the new generation in Israel is as unbelieving of Jewish passivity in the face of mass murder as the new generation in Germany is unbelieving of mass German guilt", Bauer said)"

Those of us able to think critically agree that “The Holocaust” tale is the most unbelievable tale ever told, aside from the OT, same source. This is why it had to be ‘history light’, to condition the public, with details to be filled in later. And that was done, eyewitnesses telling ever more absurd stories.

Regards
Wilf

[Hektor]

Hektor, Gabi Weber does not question the official version of “The Holocaust”. What she has done casts doubt on the kidnapping tale. One could say that by extension it should also cast doubt on the trial. From the Bauer interview, referred to above:
....

She better not - Since she stays in Germany I presume.

But no matter what side of the debate you are on.... and there may be more then two, one can not help to find the whole thing kind of bizarre.

Q. Personally, you were not an anti-Semite?
A. No, not personally, using this term "anti-Semite" in the sense of "anti-Jewish."
Q. And in this context you also said the following in your police interrogation - on page 114: "Some of my second mother's relatives married Jews..."
A. Yes.
Q. You had a Jewish aunt - called Dorczi?
A. Yes.
Q. And you said that the daughter of this marriage - according to the Nuremberg Laws - was a half-Jewess?
A. Yes...
Q. I am quoting: "...I think in 1944, but definitely in 1943 - she was able, with your approval, to leave for Switzerland..."
A. Yes. Q. You said: "Of course I authorized this. By this I mean that I had no innate hatred of Jews." And in conjunction with this, you said that the same uncle - apparently the husband of this Jewish aunt - if I understand you correctly...
A. Yes.
Q. ...came to you again and asked you to intervene on behalf of a Jewish couple from Vienna. And after that you continue: "I simply mean by this that I had no innate hatred of the Jews." What happened with the Jewish couple from Vienna, about whom your uncle came to see you? Did you give your authorization, or did you reject the request?

http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/e/eic ... 06-06.html

State Attorney Bar-Or: Mr. Cohn, you have spoken about the Ha'avarah. Do you remember the name in German of this project?

Witness Cohn: Kapitaltransfer nach Palaestina. (Capital Transfer to Palestine). There arose problems around this matter. The people from Sarona* {*Sarona - a German Templar Colony near Tel Aviv.} rose up. They were opposed to it. They were already Nazis. They had a local Nazi party branch in Sarona. We heard that on the German side opinions on the subject differed and that they were waiting for a decision to be handed down from high up. One day that decision was indeed given: the operation is to be continued.

Presiding Judge: In what year was that, approximately?

Witness Cohn: The difficulties were in 1937 till 1938, the beginning of 1938, but I do not remember exactly.

State Attorney Bar-Or: Do you remember the name "Paltreu?" Can you explain its meaning?

A. ""Paltreu" was a Schwestergesellschaft, a sister company of the Ha'avarah. There the money was paid in Reichsmark and then they got the money at the Ha'avarah office in Tel Aviv.

Q. Were there any special restrictions affecting the ability of the Jews of Germany to emigrate?

A. With regard to emigration to other countries - it was very difficult. There were no relaxations. On the contrary, there was greater restrictions.

Presiding Judge: What does that mean?

Witness Cohn: With regard to emigration to other countries, other than Palestine, there were many difficulties. Any emigration is like a serious surgical operation for middle class persons getting on in years, and that surgery became even more difficult.

http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/e/eic ... 15-02.html

Q. At the end of March you appeared at the Hotel Metropol?

A. Yes.

Q. Whom did you meet there?

A. We were led by an SS man who told us the he was taking us to Adolf Eichmann. We entered. It seemed that he addressed him as "Sturmbannfuehrer." The man wore uniform and sat behind a large desk.

Q. Do you remember what was the nature of Eichmann's uniform?

A. A black SS uniform, which later became so well-known to us. We had previously discussed amongst ourselves, for we knew that something had to happen, that someone had to take over the direction of Jewish affairs. Eichmann sat behind a large desk. We had to stand. He asked our names and a description of the sphere of our activities in Jewish life. Adolf Boehm and the others introduced themselves. When Eichmann heard the name Adolf Boehm, he asked: Are you the Adolf Boehm who published the History of Zionism? When Adolf Boehm answered affirmatively, the Accused replied: "Very interesting. I studied this work in detail. In particular I was interested in that passage on a certain page," and he began to recite by heart the full contents of this page. We exchanged amazed glances. Thereupon Eichmann made some remarks in Hebrew, and said: "You should not be surprised, I speak Hebrew and Yiddish fluently, since I was born in Sarona" [German Templar Colony in Paletine].

Q. Did Eichmann speak some words in Hebrew?

A. Yes.

Presiding Judge: What did he say in Hebrew? Can you recollect?

Witness Fleischmann: No, I didn't understand them, but in particular my colleague Goldhammer, who spoke Hebrew fluently, understood them.

State Attorney Bar-Or: Did the conversation, or whatever....

http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/e/eic ... 16-06.html

Having Jewish relatives, claiming not to be an "anti-semite", being born/linked to Sarona in Palestine, Speaking Yiddish/Hebrew is not impossible, but it sounds quite strange.