Keith Woods' twitter-thread about how the Holocaust-narrative got legs - 1,5 million views!

[Hektor]

Just now in Britain's Daily Mirror there is a story about George Floyd and the third anniversary of his death. The story talks about nothing having changed and white supremacy still being a big issue in the US and Europe which I would strongly disagree with.

Then in the comments a complete plank of a lunatic makes this comment which is astonishing, truly gobsmacking. Of course he admits to being a jew and brings the holocaust into it without saying the word holocaust.

Nothing at all has changed. I marched in London on consecutive weekends after George Floyd. My daughter was one of the organisers of protests in Cambridge but British society as is American and the EU is still riddled with white supremacy. A year after George Floyd 70 million people motivated by white supremacy voted for Donald Trump, Brexit despites its catastrophic failure still has its many white advocates, the far right is the main opposition in France and Germany. Jews have never felt more targeted in the west. I feel the same fear now that my ancestors did when they fled Tsarist Russia to the UK. It will take many years until whiteness is abolished. We need tougher laws against racism and anti-Semitism a whole new school curriculum based on anti-racism and tv and media to reflect societies increasing diversity. When the people of the UK are all one mix with no supreme group then maybe then we will see peace and justice.

These people really exist. Just see how many people he accused of being racists who are on the verge of committing mass murder against his type and those of the George Floyd persuasion...

Yeah, and it's rather insane what they do. They think they can gas light and insult White people and when they react negatively towards this in anyway than that's 'racist', 'white supremacist' or any of the other phantasy-terms they like to use. It's the "If you do what I want, than you are selfish, hostile and oppressing met' type of attitude. This was more subtle in the past, which is why they win field with this and also get away with this. It was disliked, but people generally weren't hostile towards it. But them having won cultural concessions and even dominance, incited them to get more aggressive and demanding.

The prototype is of course "The Holocaust" and the Jewish victim complex... That charade was played cleverly and hence worked... And since it worked more people started copying this. All those feeling inferior, 'not liked' or not 'worshipped enough' by others now play this game. It stimulates their narcissism and (passive) aggressiveness as well. So one is actually dealing with people that have major psychopathological issues there.

[Rockartisten]

Don't know who Keith Woods is and frankly I don't care, he has verbal diarrhea and just proves that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

I don't find fault with this statement:

It is difficult to overstate how much everything since 1945 is shaped by the spectre of the Holocaust.
The period since is the story of the religious underpinning of the West shifting from Christianity to a new foundation built on a single commandment: "never again":
https://twitter.com/KeithWoodsYT/status ... 1886909441

In fact he is spot on there. The Holocaust isn't 'like a religion', it is THE RELIGION of the West. It effectively has replaced Christianity as religious underpinning in virtually all Western Societies. As Claude Lanzmann said: "Auschwitz is the Refutation of Christ".
They created a mythical Hitler a Hitler 2.0. and used him to replace Jesus and Satan at the same time.
One isn't from the Devil any longer, one is "like Hitler" or "another Hitler", when one wants to make war against someone. For the degenerate West Putin is 'another Hitler' and Putin fights the Ukrainian regime, because they are "Nazis". And people buy this on both sides.

(Supposed) Sayings of Hitler are used to give statements moral authority, even if that is in an inverted way. If Hitler said something, we have to be against it. If he was against something, this suddenly has moral credence now. Look at virtually any social, cultural or political issue that was on the agenda the past 8 decades and you probably will see what I mean. Unless you really don't want to. And some really don't, as that would actually destroy their religion and they don't want this. Their identity and moral framework would seriously suffer, once the Hitler Myth (and the Holocaust is essentially to this) would be destroyed.

It's perhaps a good idea to write a longer essay on this or even a book.... One doesn't even have to 'deny the Holocaust', just debate it's cultural function during the past 80 years. Not that I think that the publishing industry will be too fond of it. But they could really invoke "Holocaust Denial Laws" against the publishers, distributors and/or writers.

Fun fact: The Holocaust Timeline started long before 'Hitler'... which gives it a 'prophetic' underpinning.

Then we would have something like this:

Hitler is the new devil.
The nazis are his demons.
Nationalist leaders are the new antichrist.
Holocaust deniers are the new pagans.
Anti democratic is the new worldly.

The new holy spirit is popular science.
The new church is the media.
The priest is the anchorman.
The bishops its experts.

Climate change is the new Armageddon.
Paradise is global government.
Hell is being banned from all social media.

What about the jews? They are still jews I guess. Ah, yes... They will give us our new jesus. Silly me.

I would read that book. Could be a good laugh. Sensmoral of the story. The story never really changes, only the setting.

[Hektor]

....

Then we would have something like this:

Hitler is the new devil.
The nazis are his demons.
Nationalist leaders are the new antichrist.
Holocaust deniers are the new pagans.
Anti democratic is the new worldly.

The new holy spirit is popular science.
The new church is the media.
The priest is the anchorman.
The bishops its experts.

Climate change is the new Armageddon.
Paradise is global government.
Hell is being banned from all social media.

What about the jews? They are still jews I guess. Ah, yes... They will give us our new jesus. Silly me.

I would read that book. Could be a good laugh. Sensmoral of the story. The story never really changes, only the setting.

Close.

Hitler has for sure the supreme role. A sort of a devil incarnate.
The leadership are the demonic principalities.
Nazis sort of the heathen and pagans.
Germans are the demonically possessed.

Holocaust Deniers are heretics.
Right-wingers Neonazis witches.
The gaslighting stands in for the Holy Spirit.

The Jews are kind of Christ, even if they don't have the same authority... The victim role is more infantile.

And I think you got a point. The "New Jesus Christ" will likely be Jewish... After all they are waiting for their messiah still.


Society and Culture seem to have an underlying structure according they are working. Times change, but that structure remains roughly the same.

[cold beer]

In fact he is spot on there. The Holocaust isn't 'like a religion', it is THE RELIGION of the West. It effectively has replaced Christianity as religious underpinning in virtually all Western Societies. As Claude Lanzmann said: "Auschwitz is the Refutation of Christ".

That's a powerful quote. Where can I find it?

[Hektor]

In fact he is spot on there. The Holocaust isn't 'like a religion', it is THE RELIGION of the West. It effectively has replaced Christianity as religious underpinning in virtually all Western Societies. As Claude Lanzmann said: "Auschwitz is the Refutation of Christ".

That's a powerful quote. Where can I find it?

I see it's 'all over the internet. But apparently it was in a French journal:

French Zionist propagandist Claude Lanzmann, the producer of a long and unspeakably dull film about the holocaust (the title of this film is Shoa, the Hebrew word for "catastrophe", which is often used by Jews as a synonym for "holocaust") makes no effort to conceal that the holocaust cult is to replace Christianity: "If Auschwitz is something other than a horror of history, then Christianity totters in its foundations. Christ is the Son of God, who went to the end of the humanely endurable, where he endured the cruellest suffering. (...) If Auschwitz is true, then there is a human suffering with which that of Christ simply cannot be compared. (...) In this case, Christ is false, and salvation will not come from him. (...) Auschwitz is the refutation of Christ." (Les Temps Modernes, Paris, December 1993, p. 132, 133.)
Nowadays, a large percentage of the Jews do not believe in God any more, but virtually all of them believe in the Six Million. The Zionist leadership cunningly exploits the holocaust to unite the World's Jews by keeping them in a constant state of hysteria and persecution mania, insinuating that only if the Jews stick together will they be able to ban the threat of a new holocaust.
https://aaargh.vho.org/fran/actu/actu03 ... 3/Graf.pdf

Discussed elsewhere:
https://wlcentral.org/node/1185

Jews are generally careful at the moment to speak out against Christ/Christianity. Simply, because they don't want to lose the support from the 'Christian Zionists' and 'Israel Fetishists" in Christian circles. They rely on this support to be able to do what they do. And I think they also monitor strictly what their popularity ratings are, especially with Christians.

[cold beer]

Thanks Hektor. It's unforunate that Lanzmann's comment appears in a French newspaper. But the fact that Shamir verifies it is more than adequate. He makes powerful comments on the subject himself.

[Hektor]

Thanks Hektor. It's unforunate that Lanzmann's comment appears in a French newspaper. But the fact that Shamir verifies it is more than adequate. He makes powerful comments on the subject himself.

I wonder, if one still can get a facsimile copy on this... One can scan it then and add a translation to this.
The Antirev camp also affirms the quote, is just furious about it 'being abused'... (Yeah, I know, sounds hypocritical of them to claim something gets abused).

And well, it isn't isolated neither. It's not that Lanzmann sucked it out of his thumb. There is a whole genre of "Theology after Auschwitz" or " Holocaust Theology". And there are associations, NGO's, publications, etc. dealing with it.

[cold beer]

Thanks Hektor. It's unforunate that Lanzmann's comment appears in a French newspaper. But the fact that Shamir verifies it is more than adequate. He makes powerful comments on the subject himself.

I wonder, if one still can get a facsimile copy on this... One can scan it then and add a translation to this.

That is exactly my thought. I think it so much more powerful to have the citation. Even to have the article and manually enter the pertitent text into a translator and take a screenshot.
That quote spells out a very sinister underlying objective of these storytellers.

[Hektor]

Thanks Hektor. It's unforunate that Lanzmann's comment appears in a French newspaper. But the fact that Shamir verifies it is more than adequate. He makes powerful comments on the subject himself.

I wonder, if one still can get a facsimile copy on this... One can scan it then and add a translation to this.

That is exactly my thought. I think it so much more powerful to have the citation. Even to have the article and manually enter the pertitent text into a translator and take a screenshot.
That quote spells out a very sinister underlying objective of these storytellers.

Yes, will all the garbage quotes making the rounds, people get less eager to trust them.
So a facsimile in clear print would be better. Translation get be added.

[Whodunnit?]

Here is the video version:

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

This is just about the "ideas" - you know, for (((Soziologists))) everything is just an idea, reality is perception, which is why things that never happened are real if it is real in your mind, we are all just actors in a stage play (see Erving Goffman) - that made the "Never again" and the forever-protection of Jews the Raison d'être of every state that has a jewish population.
Keith knows. But this is not revisionist content. Yet it reaches people who are into people like Ben Shapiro, Alex Jones, Steven Crowder or Matt Walsh. People who still might think it's the democrats, the cabal, the communists or even "Operation Paperclip-Nazis and Nazi-collaborators like the Bushes and Gates' that secretly undermined the USA and are now using the ADL to scapegoat Jews". <- If you are not informed, that is literally what Alex Jones just told his audience. It is also useful to just know this.

[Hektor]

Here is the video version:

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

This is just about the "ideas" - you know, for (((Soziologists))) everything is just an idea, reality is perception, which is why things that never happened are real if it is real in your mind, we are all just actors in a stage play (see Erving Goffman) - that made the "Never again" and the forever-protection of Jews the Raison d'être of every state that has a jewish population. ...

Sociology was NOT started by (((them)))... It's a misconception people got after WW2, since many sociologists and psychologists were Jewish.

The early sociologists (psychologists) were Westerners. German, French, English people and perhaps several others in this. Like virtually all the humanities and many other arts and sciences. What was done in sociology, psychology, anthropology was part of theological training. It was considered part of the arts and less of the sciences or the historical faculties. Methodologically it was first more deductive and later became more inductive in it's approach.
Jews joined the band wagon during 'emancipation', which opened access for them to secular universities. That field may have interested them because, because the rabbis - being a theological elite - may have had their own interest in sociology and psychology... After all they also had their own mystical anthropology already. And they had interest into controlling their own communities and equip their merchant class with ways to 'manage the Goyim'... With Jews already putting a high emphasis on literacy, the percentage of them qualifying for university would be larger than the one among non-Jews. Far higher at times. And those Jews had the backing of their whole communities. While the Goy would be mostly on its own, given that Western cultural is more individualist than the collectivist culture of the Kahal.

I don't dispute that *some* Jews performed well in the arts and sciences, usually assimilated ones, but they also come up with a lot of nonsense and mischief that is rather, putting it mildly, detrimental. There works often have the character of story telling as can be seen with characters like Freud and also Einstein. Or are compendiums summarizing the 'state of the art' in the respective fields. That will be cited more, since more people 'bought the book' as being useful for their own studies in the field. Being cited adds to the reputation and Jews know what the value of reputation is. The actual hard work on research and theory development had been done by other, less well known characters who are into academia for the interest mostly and not for 'being interesting' to others.

Psychology... Psychoanalysis became something like a cult there. This wasn't as much the case with sociology. but also there was a tendency to see society through a Marxist, environmentalist lenses. It removed the emphasis from people being individual actors that shape their environment towards people being shaped by their environment. In combination with psychoanalysis people are seen as 'repressed' in terms of satisfying their desires. Removing restraints on desire was seen as 'liberating'. While it is actually a necessity to curb desires and lust in order to be able to perform and function within society and to be mastering nature through work and reasonable usage thereof. Unrestrained desire and maximized 'self-realization' will create people that will be rather pesky towards themselves and others. And it will form a society that will be less and less pleasant, full of narcistic, egoistic, arrogant people. Will of course need new systems of controls, since the cultural norms that control behavior will be working less and less. They work on 'authoritarian personalities', but not on 'liberated individuals'.

[cold beer]

Keith Woods is in the Nick Fuentes-camp now. Fuentes and his followers also aren't believers, but they also don't want to lose their reach by going to hard on that topic. A lot of young people approach the topic of the Holocaust in a different way: instead of engaging in a serious discussion, they either ridicule it or just say (and I quote Fuentes): "I don't care about your dead grandmother". Which in my opinion is a good strategy for them. Young people don't have any personal connection to world war 2.

Sounds to me like Fuentes is doing his best to discredit as many of his followers as he can by having them appear as inhumane as the alleged perpetrators of the 'holocaust'. Recall that on Jan. 6th he was urging his followers to ignore the police and invade the Capitol building.

[Hektor]

Keith Woods is in the Nick Fuentes-camp now. Fuentes and his followers also aren't believers, but they also don't want to lose their reach by going to hard on that topic. A lot of young people approach the topic of the Holocaust in a different way: instead of engaging in a serious discussion, they either ridicule it or just say (and I quote Fuentes): "I don't care about your dead grandmother". Which in my opinion is a good strategy for them. Young people don't have any personal connection to world war 2.

Sounds to me like Fuentes is doing his best to discredit as many of his followers as he can by having them appear as inhumane as the alleged perpetrators of the 'holocaust'. Recall that on Jan. 6th he was urging his followers to ignore the police and invade the Capitol building.

It indeed sounds like back-chatting. And I think it's designed to provoke that response at least at times. The other response is "I'm so sorry for your grandmother"... So the Holocaust industry is actually quite manipulative in the way they use the 'dead grandparents theme'.

There is of course people that notice the manipulation and get angry responding in ways that 'are not nice'. And they aren't even that wrong. Why should I care about each and every person's "dead grandmother"? You don't care about mine neither? And in fact I don't think you really care, your respect for your grandparents is indeed so low... All you can think about is using them for financial and political gain.

[cold beer]

Keith Woods is in the Nick Fuentes-camp now. Fuentes and his followers also aren't believers, but they also don't want to lose their reach by going to hard on that topic. A lot of young people approach the topic of the Holocaust in a different way: instead of engaging in a serious discussion, they either ridicule it or just say (and I quote Fuentes): "I don't care about your dead grandmother". Which in my opinion is a good strategy for them. Young people don't have any personal connection to world war 2.

Sounds to me like Fuentes is doing his best to discredit as many of his followers as he can by having them appear as inhumane as the alleged perpetrators of the 'holocaust'. Recall that on Jan. 6th he was urging his followers to ignore the police and invade the Capitol building.

It indeed sounds like back-chatting. And I think it's designed to provoke that response at least at times. The other response is "I'm so sorry for your grandmother"... So the Holocaust industry is actually quite manipulative in the way they use the 'dead grandparents theme'.

There is of course people that notice the manipulation and get angry responding in ways that 'are not nice'. And they aren't even that wrong. Why should I care about each and every person's "dead grandmother"? You don't care about mine neither? And in fact I don't think you really care, your respect for your grandparents is indeed so low... All you can think about is using them for financial and political gain.

I understand, people want to express anger in response to false accusations. But "no one cares about your dead grandmother" is self defeating, because the entire array of holocaust propaganda relies on emotion.
His followers should be made aware that he is the first cousin of Ray Epps

[Whodunnit?]

Keith Woods is in the Nick Fuentes-camp now. Fuentes and his followers also aren't believers, but they also don't want to lose their reach by going to hard on that topic. A lot of young people approach the topic of the Holocaust in a different way: instead of engaging in a serious discussion, they either ridicule it or just say (and I quote Fuentes): "I don't care about your dead grandmother". Which in my opinion is a good strategy for them. Young people don't have any personal connection to world war 2.

Sounds to me like Fuentes is doing his best to discredit as many of his followers as he can by having them appear as inhumane as the alleged perpetrators of the 'holocaust'. Recall that on Jan. 6th he was urging his followers to ignore the police and invade the Capitol building.

I think that's just genuine and represents his generation.
If you read a typical British book on the British terror bombing of Germany, you won't find a lot of empathy. Pretty much all British historians - with few exceptions - try to justify it by arguing that it made some strategic sense and contributed to the victory. The purpose can just be that it made Hitler mad, so he wasted enourmous ressources on the V1 and V2-programm to take revenge, instead of using the 3 billion Reichsmark these missiles cost on fighters. Well, Winston, the Germans didn't have the fuel for 3 billion-worth of fighters, and in the end they lost when they lost their sources for fuel. So this bombing was entirely unnecessary, by 1943 everybody knew that dead civilians won't make Hitler surrender.
At the same time they do a "whatabout-ism" where they refer to the "enormities" and "barbarities" of the Germans, which basically is an unspoken "they had it coming anyway". In my opinion, there is nothing that makes burning children alive justifiable. No argument. But for a lot of British historians, if it contributed to the allied victory, it does. So in that framework, what is the crime the Germans commited? That they killed Jews without a strategic purpose? What is the difference between burning children by "throwing them in flaming pits" and dropping napalm on them? That you touch the victims? It has the same effect.

It all boils down to one thing, and it became very obvious in the last few years. I am not pro-Russian, but I was amazed to see regular people rejoicing over footage of burning Russian tanks or dead Russian soldiers, basically watching this without an ounce of empathy and acting more like it's a football game. A lot of people even write messages like "Only a dead Russian is a good Russian" or "don't take prisoners, kill them all". The last 3 years have convinced me that this is how the "Normie" really is. He only has empathy for people who are on his team. I don't buy this fake pity at all. It is just part of decency to pretend to feel bad for jews, and it is indecent to bring up German suffering.
So Fuentes is just honest here.

You also have to take into account that 1) young people don't have this childlike trust of authorities. The reason is that they grew up with the knowledge that their government is lying, they lied about Sadam Hussein, they lied about Savo Milosevic, they lied about Ghaddafi and Assad, they lied about everything. So whatever they say, it can all be lies. 2) young people are very desensitized, because they grow up with all kinds of horrible stuff on the internet. You can't shock them with the "Death Mills"-footage, and they are aware that there is a lot of cruelty in this world that their government doesn't care about at all. For over 20 years now you have the Mexican "narcos" sadistically murdering tens of thousands of people right at the US border, and the US government only made an issue out of it in the last few months. 3) they don't have a personal connection to WW2. They don't feel like they have to defend their fathers or grandfather who "stormed the beaches of Normandy" or sat in the bombers.
So how are they supposed to feel when some Jews tells the story of some of his ancestors dying 80 years ago?