I was in Auschwitz two times and I saw with myself the realy true. The Swedish people were sitting this man on plane back to England same day he was arriving to Sweden. Move him to a desert or uninhabited island there he can talk free.
What all of you people attacking Irving do not understand is that problem most people have with the Holocaust is not that they think it's fake, but that it receives 99% of the attention, whereas other genocides, some even bigger (7 million ukrainians in 1932, tens of millions of people in GULAG and China) have to share the rest 1%. There are thousands of hollywood movies about the Holocaust and not one about the other such crimes. It is because the Holocaust has become a source of money.
@thepredatorpl Whereas recently it has received more attention that other events, it certainly did not beforehand. As for tens of millions of deaths (ie more than 20 million) in the gulag - what evidence have you for this. There is also no evidence that seven million Ukrainians died in 1932. By gross exaggeration of the numbers you insult those who did die. As for it being a source of money, no doubt you are also attacking westerns, police and sex films because they too are a source of money
@alanheath, not only were there evidence of those numbers before 1989, but there are even more now, after the opening of the soviet archives. I recommend you "The black book of communism" - a very thorough study by a group of professors, all ex-communists, who using the archives prove that the MINIMUM number of people killed in the USSR and China is more than 40 million. And unlike with the Holocaust, demographic census actually does show a huge decline in population. Watch "The soviet story"
@thepredatorpl I have read the black book and nowhere does it say anything about seven million Ukrainians dying in 1932 nor 20 million in the gulag. Furthermore there are census figures from the Soviet Union and these do not back up your claims either. As for your claim that the holocaust of the Jews is not reflected in the census figures can you back up this absurd claim as I have spent a great deal of time looking at census returns in the inter war years and I can assure you that it does.
@alanheath, i do not know what black book you have read, the one i did, written by 6 franch and one polish professors states clearly numbers and they are much higher than 20 million. To deny the communist genocide (and the fact that it is the biggest in history) is absurd with all the evidence there is after the opening of the archives and only hard core marxists do that nowadays. Whereas the european census does show the death or migration of millions of europeans, jewish statisticsbefore...
@thepredatorpl I bought it in Polish when it came out. You claim that 20 million people died in the gulags and seven million Ukrainians died in 1932. You cannot support this with a page reference in the book because it is not there. You are using your own hatred of Jews (for whatever reason) as a pathetic attempt to pervert history. You clearly also do not know what genocide means - it is not the same as mass murder.
@alanheath, and after the war, conducted by jewish organizations and the jews themselves, show no disapearance of 6 million people. The difference is only 3 million and that includes immigration. Anyhow, i do not want to get into that debate as i neither specialise in it, nor do i really care - i do not deny the holocaust or support it. Yet i do get frustrated when it is presented as the biggest genocide, when it is probably 10 times smaller than the innocent murders in the communist countries.
@thepredatorpl What Jewish census does not show evidence of the Shoah? You are making this up - the same as you make up silly figures of communist atrocities. You certainly do not specialise in it but are clearly an example of what the denier liars seek to achieve. To convince the ignorant.
@alanheath, "The ignorant" believe what 45 years of leftist propaganda has taught them - that the second world war was like a kids movie about the battle of good versus evil - the evil nazis against the good allies. The nazis started the war, killed millions and the allies, including the USSR, stopped them. This ignorant interpretation avoids the fact that the war was started by the nazis AND soviets in an alliance and that the soviets murdered much more civilians before the war, durign it and..
@thepredatorpl You - representing the ignorant - are in a very good position to judge what the ignorant believe so I cannot comment. However no serious person puts this as black versus white given Soviet crimes and as you rightly point out the war started because of an alliance between the Nazis and Soviets without which the war would probably not have happened at all.
... after that. The communist countries were protected by the propaganda of the leftists and immune from any investigation, until the system fell apart and the archives opened. Then we saw the things Solzenitcin wrote were true and indeed millions were murdered. The leftsits that defended them for decades had nothing to say and started shifting the subjects, yet i can see there are still some hard-liners like yourself who simply deny the facts, which is as ignorant as denying the holocaust.
@thepredatorpl There was plenty of material available on communist crimes before 1989 as anyone who was then alive will tell you - including in communist countries which you clearly never spent any time in - unlike me.
I asked you to justify your assertion that 7 million Ukrainians died in 1932, 20 million people died in the gulag and the existence of a Jewish census.
You won't give an answer as you made this up. However you will continue to go off on a tangent throwing out more accusations.
@alanheath, hilarious post in so many ways - first of all i am FROM a communist state - my mother is Bulgarian and my father Polish, i have lived in both countries, my family on both sides has been persecuted by the communists and my polish family also by the nazis before that. Second of all, i gave you the name of a book at least and can give you more, whereas you haven't given anything that points the communist victims as less than 20 million. I will give you books and links in the next post.
@thepredatorpl I fail to see what is hilarious at mass murder but you may. The book you said does not back up your claim which you made up. The Soviet census returns also do not back up your claim either - unlike the Shoah where census returns clearly show the Jewish population missing. As you are 23 and claim to have lived in a communist country, you must have a remarkable memory. I cannot remember anything before I was four years old - unless of course you are making this up as well.
@katasaifa Your saying Hoess' testimony can be discounted is your personal opinion. He gave the figurre
2 1/2million plus 1/2m dead. The Communist Polish government said 4m. The present government with whom antisemitism is again in style says 1.1. Yas Varshem says the figure is uncertain. Fact is that the Nazis destroyed records to cover up crime and all, high or low are estimates. I don''t see how it can be much less than 2 million. Anyway we are talking about human tragedies, not statistics.
The Holocaust was a Nazi policy and Hitler knew about it.
Hitler, 1939-1-30:
"If international finance Jewry inside and outside of Europe should succeed once more in plunging nations into another world war, the consequence will not be the Bolshevization of the earth and thereby the victory of Jewry, but the annihilation of the Jewish race in Europe."
hey what a turn around in david Irving. he is obviously being threatened and most likely drugged. i don't mean this video per se. we all know there were no gas chambers and the 6 million figure is physically impossible. the jews don't play fair wake up we are dealing with a bloodsucker.
@up2space Of course yes, threatened and drugged!!! You denier liars will resort to any nonsense to promote your hatred. Six million deaths is perfectly possible - WW2 claimed eight times as many lives. The only bloodsucker I see are the denier liars.
@alanheath3 what will you say after the white race is exterminated? we never existed? christianity was a minor cult? we know the deal all is fair in jew warfare. look what you did to palestine.. thrown out of every god loving country now the world.. it's your destiny with the devil
@up2space Of 6bn people in the world more than half are white so there is no danger of extinction, if white people were some sub species of homo sapiens (which they are not - but lets pretend) they would have the WWF classification of 'least concern'.
Christianity is the commonest religion in the world - if you accept Catholicism as Christianity.
I visited Palestine a couple of times, what r u claiming I did?
The devil is probably another figment of your imagination.
@alanheath3 your full of shit i know who you work for you want to be friendly when your handshake has blood on it.. i don't need you or your bullshit.. the jews are parasites and the white race is being squeezed into extinction... there you go.. i only need to ask you do you believe in Yahweh the Christ? or are you a jew or a banker dildo? it's your own dignity on the line.... face yourself in the mirror and know you were scum
@up2space Oh dear the same Christian hatred, a religion of hate that has caused it to be the greatest criminal organisation in the history of the world.
The white 'race' is not being squeezed into extinction - look at the numbers. According to the WWF risk of extinction comes with 1,000 individuals left.
I would believe in the existence of Christ if there were any proof of his existence but there is not.
Yahweh refers to God in whom I also don't believe.
@alanheath3 the more i come across people that are completely ignorant of the truth, the better I feel about discovering the truth. however, it also saddens me, because we need more white people on board, maybe one day you find that one youtube video that changes your life forever. We are pro-active. Why do we have to wait until only 1,000 of us are left? That doesn't make any sense. There is no proof of any god, of any faith. so, are you an atheist because of that?
@up2space You seem to be completely ignorant of the truth . There are around 2.5bn white people in the world - look around you, how many white people there are. They are everywhere.
My atheism is reinforced when I see the hatred of those that believe in religion and the disgusting crimes they do in the name of their gods. Look at your hatred and racism. That is good enough reason not to believe in this superstition and violence.
@alanheath3 finally alan i knew you'd come around. please believe my friend, i am not about hate i am about survival peruse my vast video collection pick what you like but hopefully you will find the truth. i know it will be easy to dismiss me and my collection but do yourself a favor do it for yourself be selfish. see you bro
@alanheath3 As of 2008, there are only around 1.4 billion "White" people in the world. How you can come up with 2.5 billion whites out of a global population of 6.9 billion people will remain your personal secret for the rest of time. :p
@WiredDragoon The population of India is around 1.1bn almost all of whom are white. That leaves 300m for the rest of world according to this silly statement. I presume the racists however decide who is 'white' and who is not.
Complete Fraud! He is simply a carnival barker. He is currently trying to sell strands of the Fuhrer's hair. He doesn't specify pubic or otherwise. I guess he wants to encourage all possible markets. He is also trying to verify bone fragments ..supposedly of the Fuhrer to sell to "rich Americans". Neo Nazis and Islamic Fascist just adore him.
nobcheesy - AJP Taylor cause a lot of waves by arguing that Hitler's foreign policy was no different from that of mainstream Germany. He discounted "Mein Kampf" and said Hitler improvised as opportunities arose. Right or wrong, it forced people to look at those events from a different angle, which did not change but added other dimensions to the story. So actually, even the most mischievous act of revision CAN be helpful. Strangely, the dimension added by this fat old prick added NOTHING at all.
emosdieslow removed his comment, but sent it to me. Here it is: "You guys need to get over yourselves. So all anti semites are just dogs? LOL. The jews were kicked out of many of the most advanced civilizations of their times. Of course, they're all "dogs" right? LOL It's never the poor jews fault, huh. You two really are a joke."
Yes anyone who denies the holocaust or is a racist is a dog in my book. And no the Jews have never deserved the persecution they have received.
Quoting Mr. Justice Gray in his libel verdict,"Irving has for his own ideological reasons persistently and deliberately misrepresented and manipulated historical evidence;...for the same reasons he has portrayed Hitler in an unwarrantedly favourable light, principally in relation to his attitude towards and responsibility for the treatment of the Jews;...he is an active Holocaust denier; ...he is anti-Semitic and racist, and...he associates with right-wing extremists who promote neo-Nazism."
There are no facts in Irving's statement! There is Irving's obfuscation of the facts and his use of other convenient facts--e.g., the fact that the Germans destroyed Auschwitz when they retreated and what you see has been rebuilt from their original plans--to conceal a very grave truth, that the Nazis murdered millions of people and that there were gas chambers at Auschwitz-Birkenau.I don't know what kind person you wish to be, but think about it! Denying such evil is a terrible responsibility!
Look, I'm only interested in the evidence, and am a rookie in investigating the holocaust. I'm not looking to hurt anyones feelings. Of course Irving stated facts. I do know that they presented the "rebuilt" gas chamber as authentic, wich was a lie. Very suspicious. There were other lies uncovered. I hear German confessions were inacurate and contradictory, but have yet to research them.
"They" never presented the rebuilt gas chambers as authentic! Who is "they" anyway? Poland was in the hands of the Polish Communist Party and behind them was Stalin. They rebuilt Auschwitz about 10% of the camp so that the world would know what happened there. The had the plans and used them to rebuild.
Look I can give you the names of 120 people know to friends of mine who were murdered in these camps!
watch the david Cole videos."they" are the officials at Auschwitz. "The Cole videotape interview proves that the people who run the Auschwitz State Museum had made a practice of fabricating 'proofs' of homicidal gassings. Keep in mind that over the years millions of tourists have been told that 'Krema 1' is in its original state, while officials knew that 'original state' is a ie."
I visited Auschwitz. We were told exactly what happened there. The retreating Germans did everything they could to erase it; what you see was rebuilt. No lies!
Whatever was destroy or rebuilt does not gainsay the millions who died there. I have names; I know people who knew: a son who survived because his family got him out of Germany because he kept having fights with Hitler Youth and his family though he was endangering them. They all died; he survived. Think on it! What are you up to?
Cole's video proves nothing of the sort and if you claim that you have not seen it. Furthermore Cole later admitted his video was a hoax and apologised for it.
In what years are you claiming that Krema 1 was told to 'millions of tourists' as being in its original state.
The reconstruction of Krema 1 started in the Nazi period when it was changed into a shelter.
Try doing your own research by using original documents and not by repeating denier liar falsifications.
Rudolf Hoess made very frank statements to the Nuerenberg Tribunal which can be read in its original form. He also wrote estensively, going into great detail about how his organization of the slaughter at Auschwitz Birkenau was so much superior to the proceedures at Treblinka. He was a real pro.
Holocaust deniers are usually just antisemitic dogs trying it on.Occasionally some decent people get drawn in because they think they are seeing a hidden truth beneath the surface.THIS IS NOT THAT CASE!
The only reason for holocaust denial is anti semitism and a desire to falsifiy the past and nothing else. No Nazi put on trial ever denied it. No holocaust denier liar has ever done any research other than to repeat the lies of other denier liars.
Although as a dog lover I do resent you referring to denier liars as 'dogs' as dogs do not falsify things for their own pecuniary requirements!
In the case of antisemites we are talking about a kind of animal that nature never gave rise to. Labelling it a "dog", a manged, rabies infected creature, is merely a descriptive convenience.
But I think we can agree that dogs do not invent lies with the object of falsifying history for either their own racist purposes or financial gain as the denier liars do.
answer this , at the end of the war it was said that 6 million jews had died in the gas chambers 3 million at auschwitz, the polish goverment revised this figure down to 1 million in the 1980s so why has the 6 million figure not been revised down to 4 million
The Nazis kept records, some of which were destroyed. Records in the possession of the German government tally up to around 6 million. Eichmann in his 1955 interview with the Dutch journalist (and former SS) put the figure at 10 million, but that may be only be his bragging.
But tell me polskich, would 4 million make you feel the Holocaust was less of a holocaust?
Btw, this evening I have received 5 messages from holocaust deniars all from people with odd names like yours. Coincidence?
i am not denying anything i simply asked a question and there was not 10 million jews in europe prior to the start of world war to a fact that you well know
By the way, there were 10 million people of Jewish ancestry in Europe, but I don't think that anyone but Eichmann has ever claimed that that many were murdered by the Nazis. Remember also, that the Nazis defined a "Jew" as anyone who had one grandparent of Jewish ancestry.
Mr. Heath: I am glad to have stumbled upon this site: Your interview & footage suggest an inspiring & accessible new model for historical & documentary work.
Also, I appreciate that your refutation of the "show me the proof" mantra rests upon an important historiographical axiom: Gaps in the documentary record inform the historian's interpretative judgment, just as the presence of data do. These gaps do not, as such, imply the soundness of one interpretation or another.
In the preceding comment, I meant to say, "interviews & footage"; in fact, I did not mean this interview in particular, but rather, your interviews with those who experienced history firsthand. They remind us that history isn't merely a matter of polemics & discourses.
polskich, of course there were 10 million Jews in Europe, most of they lived secular lives completely integrated into the nations to which they belonged. A large number even "nationalized" their names. They were integrationalists, not Zionists: asking to be accepted fellow human beings. Hitler gave the boost to Zionism. The way in which gentiles turned on those of Jewish extraction seemed to confirm what the Zionists had been saying: don't fool yourself. Gentiles will never accept you. Tragic!
no. but the numer is signicant, because it means that 2 million people did not die! so its 4? maybe 3? maybe 2? its still horrible and a crime but 6 sounds nice. so we will roll with that.
No! 6 million is the documented figure--no less than 6 million were killed. It was more, but for 6 million the documentation is there: the recotds of Einsatzgruppen, of death camps (Treblinka, Sobibor, Auchwitz Birkenau, Maidenek) and the estimated 15000 other camps the Nazis established in Europe.
The documentation is copious and clear. No one is guessing here! It's not a question of nice sounding numbers!
Panzermatt, you are playing light-headedly with big issues here. Be carefull!
i am not playing. i respect every death on both sides. but i want proof! it is not there. not complete. the figure 6 million was bandied about before the war, so thats whwre that came from. and id the polish bring the numbers for auchwitz down, why does the number remain the same? is this not debatable? and why should i be carefull?? its free speech? no? mosad? i live in ireland and to debate the holocaust is not a crome, unlike the other so called free eu countries.
There are a host of excellent studies--look at the Wiki entry for The Holocaust --which sites them and even prints one document--a report to Eichmann on the liquidation of 1.25 million in just one extermination campaign.
Btw, if you put the holocaust together with the deliberate murdering of Soviet civilians, the Germans murdered in excess of 17 million. They went berserk!
I do not claim only Germans can do these things--althought they must hold some kind of record. People are savage!
"The figure 6 million was bandied about before the war" etc.
Don't get too hung up on repeating numbers, panzermatt. If you want to, you can make any number appear in pretty well any context and use it as circumstantial evidence of anything you like.
Example: Joseph Goebbels wrote on 27th March 1942 "Not much will be left of the Jews. By and large, one can say that 60 percent of them will have to be liquidated".
Wannsee total =11 million. 6 million again - from a Nazi!
no it would make no difference if its 6 or 3. so why can you go to prizon in my country for deying some obviousily false parts of the oficial holocaust story or even discussing this subject? i can go to prizon for publicly saying that 2000 people cant fit in 200square maters gas chamber at once, doscuss proprieties of zyklon-b or efficiency of crematoriums.this is taboo. if you touch it youre called naonazi or antisemite
You can go to prison for denying the holocaust in countries where antisemitism has existe.has created havoc. Only an antisemite would get hung up on the issues of crematoria efficiency or the number of Jews that can fit into a gas chambre. The millions killed is an incontestable fact.
@mc0558 wasnt Rudolf Hoess' confession obtained under torture? His family were threatened, he was deprived of sleep and had no lawyer present. I dont profess to be an expert on the subject. Just dont think you can cite a confession gained through torture as proof of anything being the case... Correct me if Im wrong.
@SuperScientists No he wasn't tortured! Hoess didn't so much confess as bathe in the glory of his accomplishments. Even on the scaffold he gloated over his victims. Hoess was a pig to the end. Hoess is not that dissimilar from David Irving, a man who serves the nazi cause with historical lies and rationalizations for which he has been convict in a court of law and served time. Another nazi scum bag.
I've yet to see any proof of gas chambers that weren't built after WWII. If anyone knows where there is proof of their existence let me know. Insult me & prove how full of it you are, I notice anyone who raises questions on this subject is immediately attacked & I just wanna say bring it on suckas, prove it!
I bet you have never been to a single archive, never looked at the archaelogical evidence, never interviewed a single witness. So how could you have seen any proof.
I have never seen proof that Australia exists, but unlike the idiotic denier liars, I am not so stupid as to claim because I have not seen it then it does not exist.
Why can't both sides look at the historical record dispassionately? Clearly there is enough first rate Jewish scholarship to uncover the real facts and prove Irving wrong, if in fact he is. Has the affirmative evidence ever been compiled and presented in a comprehensive fashion? If not, why not?
If I accept what's in the history books as gospel,then I must wonder why were Germans (starting in the late 40s, America and Canada advertised like crazy in Germany newspapers and magazines for German tradesmen and technicians and professionals) and even Nazis (operation Paperclip) permitted to immigrate to the USA so soon after the War?
Something tells me there's lots of stuff we don't know about American, British and Soviet
actions during World War II. Why is there still so much classified?
I read Hitler's War by David Irving in the late 1970s. If memory serves, Irving suggested that Hitler could have not known about the holocaust (deliberate killing of 6 million jews) and that Himmler was probably directly responsible for it.
Speaking of Russia, I hear that one must be careful visiting there. If the Russians like you, they won't let you leave. Now, is that just humour, or is there some truth in that?
They have to acknowledge something in order to deny it and in denying it they give it a whole heck of a lot more publicity than it would ordinarily get.
They accuse the jews of exploiting the H and yet they're actually helping by offering free advertising! LOL!
Maybe that is part of the reason for denial, but the problem is the language the deniers use. Accusing the victims of terrible crimes of being liars is not a basic human instinct but that of someone who has another agenda, in my opinion.
Talk about stating the obvious - the whole conspiracy theory introduced by deniers is motivated by rabid antisemitsm. You don't have to be Jewish to recognize this. It's common sense.
And in more than sixty years they have not come up with one single shred of evidence to back up their absurd claims. Not one. Not one denier has ever done any research. Instead they resort to lies, that Krege was in Treblinka or Rudolf who quotes as his sources himself - only using alibis of course.
Have a look at Germar Rudolf. He invents people - now around 48 confirmed cases of him inventing names which he then quotes trying to sound scientific which are then quoted by the others. The question then arises can we term someone a denier liar who takes Rudolf in trust not knowing the falsity of the work he or she is reading.
I would advise any reader to refer to the Wikipedia entry about Irving and his works if they truly wish to understand his extremist ideological stance that impacts upon his ability to relay a true account of historical events particularly where Jews are involved.
For those that like to complain about the poor quality of my films this is your chance to have some input.
My Sony Cybershot - used for all films here but one - has given up on me. I do not want to buy a video camera - just a compact camera which I can carry around in my pocket.
Stalin was not our ally at the beginning of the war, he was an ally of Hitler and that was the reason the second world war started.
As for Churchill being a monster, unless you give specific examples then it is difficult to comment. As David Irving would say, this is the cowardly use of the passive voice.
I consider Churchill to be one of the greatest living Statemen who led Britain through their darkest hour to Victory.Stalin on the other hand was prepared to deal with Hitler(Ribbentrop/Molotov Pact)
You are right as always Alan - I've had a very long day so I meant to say "greatest Statesman of all time".He was still an Imperialist as was the time but Britain was a benevolent Empire unlike the Genocidal nazis.
Well I don't really think you can call any empire benevolent. Imperialism and benevolence are two words that don't exactly go together. But you can certainly argue that as empires go, the British one was probably the least unbenevolent!
and all the agiences of the govt and you will know there is a holocaust and this terrible travisty did occur from the eyewitness testomony from ss men and imprisioned men women and children, there is plenty of photographic and video evedience of the killings that the nazis have
Hitler was on OUR side. We gave him millions, built up his army, to fight communist Russia. Then we came in from behind. It was beautifully organized, but the underestimation of germany's power cost us thousands of lives, and almost the war. But we prevailed. As for the jews, well, sadly all evidence of such a holocaust does not really exist. Nor would it make any sense, on himmlers part, to spend millions of dwindling dollars on the execution of free labour. The truth hurts dont it?
hello well it seems as if you have some of your facts mixed, as someone of historical knowledge and historical facts and evedience, something Mr Irving never has but knows how to spectulate against, if you are looking for a document that says hitler or himmler or any of hitlers underlings wrote a document or several giving orders to murder and kill and rape it was never written but look at the facts learn the truth behind the nazi's policies
Stalin's signing of the Non-Aggression Pact was the fault of British and French fickleness. If they had embraced an alliance with the Soviet Union, which in the end Britain had to do anyway to save herself, it is doubtful that Hitler would have dared attack Poland. His ruinous economic policies in Germany might have had time to kick in and the whole Nazi regime have collapsed.
As for Churchill, he is a man who had his moment of greatness and that was enough to offset all is many stupidities.
This is a very good argument although it does accept a certain amount of hindsight. The UK did send a delegation to Russia but it took the scenic route by slow boat which just confirmed to Stalin that we were not serious. Of course the west + Poland thought that they could deal with Hitler on their own and on the face of it maybe that seemed a realistic proposition.
I share your opinion on the ruinous lunatic crypto sociailist economic policies of the third reich!
It wasn't only the mode of travelling to Moscow that put Stalin off. He had many reason to doubt the sincerity of GB, especially, and Fr. People forget that the USSR had a perfectly viable alliance with France and Czechoslovakia that was repudiated by both countries at the Munich Conference. Polish territory separating Cz from USSR made it impossible for Stalin to help Cz without Polish approval, but of course Poland was in on carving up Cz--Teschen--and refused. The USSR was isolated!
One has to accept the fact that Britain DID NOT want an alliance with the USSR, and it forced France to abandon its alliance with her. (The lesson of WWI for France was that she would have lost the war in 1916 if it hadn't been for the Brits; Brit dictated French policy.) No doubt that Brits reckoned that to ally with the USSR would, assuming they beat Germany, mean GB acquiessing in the USSR's dominance of central Europe. In the end, Hitler's successes left GB with no alternative.
Moment of greatness ha, Churchill was a Drunk, military incompetent. look at what irving has to say about Churchill.He certainly cant be questioned on what he says about Churchill.The most overrated leader of all time
@sceanable Unlike Hitler who undoubtedly was militarily incompetant causing the deaths of hundreds of thousands of German soldiers, Churchill did not get involved to anywhere like the same extent and never expected people to fight a hopeless position to the last bullet. Churchill was the man of the moment, something Nazis can't stand as he denied them victory.
You're a fool! Stalin was an ally of Hitler before he ever aligned himself with the US & Britain to fight Germany. Last time I checked neither the US & Eisenhower nor the Brits & Churchill enacted any twisted racial ideologies, viewed everyone non-Aryan as 'subhuman', and built a network of camps to dehumanize, abuse, torture, and systematically murder Jews, Slavs, gypsies, and political dissidents by the millions. The Nazis did. So who are the monsters here?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Churchill was a known racist, and the British Empire carried out mass extermination of rebels in Africa. Add that up with over a hundred years of other crimes.
Are you serious, alanheath? I suggest you read Imperial Reckoning. Superb book. Caroline Atkins wrote it, a Harvard trianed historian. Look her up on YouTube. Yes, British history is cruel and brutal and genocidal also.
Look at the facts. Millions were poured into Germany for the rebuilding of their army...the fact hitler became friends with Stalin only highlights the point. It was an orchestarted attack on communism. The Queen is German. The persecution of the jews, and anyone else non- German was no doubt Hitler's Agenda. But the true perportraitors are the german people, the officers, those on the front of it. Hitler was sending the jews to palestine..the brittish blockaded it.
I agree with bigox8. The winners of war always write the history books. Just because we happen to come from the winning side, does it make our side right? Had Hitler won, Churchill would be considered a monster and their point of view would be the right one. The situation in Iraq and Afghanistan is a perfect example. Westerners are told each and everyday that what we are doing is right, but is it? Whoever controls the media, controls the message.
The winners of wars do not write the history books and the best example is to look at the literature on Vietnam. There is a huge amount of material written by Germans from foot soldiers to the memoirs by people such as Guderian, Speer and others. Any serious student of this period should be looking at these works to get a full picture of what happened.
Ive read foot soldiers memoirs and Speers memoirs, thats why I don't believe that the germans were all monsters like the allies have taught us to think since WW2.
Totally...many of them were quite good people...but remember the einzatsgruppen, himmler, eichmann etc were the same nationnality. Not all germans were monsters...but many were.
I do not think anyone has said all Germans are monsters, I can even recall the commando war stories for boys where most Germans were portrayed as normal people.
I have interviewed several Germans and I have every sympathy for the hardships they faced. Unfortunately they did not have much choice in the system they were fighting for.
R u on crack? Winners don't write the history books? Who does then, the loser? lol. IF Germany won the war, do u think Hitler would be viewed in the same light? No. Chruchill, Roosevelt, etc, would be the evil ones. Stay off the drugs!
I insult u cuz what u r saying is wrong. Who controls the message? All those u just mentioned, or perhaps the victors of WWII who are all on the UN security council and control all the media which influences world-wide opinion. So r u telling me they don't control the message? .
The winners of the Vietnam war were on the UN security council? Or the 100 years war? Are you saying that Guderian et al are on the security council???
The UN does not own all the media in the world, it is not a business. It does not control messages.
Obviously I appreciate why you have to insult, given the silliness of your argument. Please check what the UN is if you do not believe me.
I never said the entire UN; rather those who are at the top of the food chain and the US leads the pack. All the top media corporations are US owned and reflect the opinions of the US, not the world. They helped win the war and became the super power. So u can't say the victor doesn't control the message.
First, read what you wrote. Second there is a difference between media companies that report news and publishing companies that publish books. The UN is not a media corporation. Most major media corporations are not US owned and in any case do not reflect American interests but the interests of their share holders. Media companies are not super powers. You clearly do not know the difference between businesses and the American government.
Ever hear the expression "4th branch of gov't"? It refers to the media. We r talking about WWII here, and when it comes to info about it, who leads the charge? Who has the most influence? Of course there are other opinions and u can find them online, @ bookstores, etc, but their effect is limited; whereas the US isn't. If not the US, then who and why isn't their doctrine always used to represent history as oppose to the jewish-controled American gov'ts interpretation of history???
You clearly do not understand what the media is. I have already explained the difference and you cannot understand. If you think a German soldier for example who fought at Stalingrad and then wrote a memoir was on the victorious side and is a tool of the Jewish controlled American govt then that is up to you.
use common sense. Which will have more access to world opinion, ex german soliders or US media? Ur insane if u think both r equally valued. Ur also insane if u think Jews don't control US media. Take a look at all the oweners and CEOs of these companies. Almost all jewish.
Sorry, but you are clearly very silly. We are discussing history and not current events. You clearly cannot tell the difference between a history book and a newspaper.
I also see that your silliness demonstrates itself in racism.
What are the biggest media companies in the world? Who are the CEOs?
The owners are shareholders, mainly on stock markets.
If i am wrong, explain how Irving went to jail? It's because he goes against mainstream western thinking on WWII and the holocaust. IF u deny it, or question it, u can go to jail. So who controls the message??
Ive never heard anyone mention the mass murder of germans after WW2 thats probably because they're afraid of getting themselves locked up, ill say it again why do we have to believe what the allies want us to? if germany had won the war they'd have told lies are we saying the allies have never lied?
Where are you claiming that the mass murder of Germans after WW2 took place? Approximately when (month/ year?
Who are you alleging was responsible? How many victims are you claiming (approximately)? Tens, hundreds, thousands, hundreds of thousands, millions, tens of millions?
Because history is written by the winners, silly! Great point! One horrible part of WW2 history that has not been told is the mass murder of the German people after the wars end. Google "Gruesome Harvest" and read this and ask yourself why haven't we heard about THIS holocaust!?
Gospel truth?...people aren't stupid you cockhead. Everyone makes up their own mind about the history of ww2. Even though the allies won...i personally think the germans fought better. I also think that the allies acted quite badly throughout the war...and could have won it sooner. However i never think for a second that Hitler was on the right side of the conflict...(which you are trying to say)
Thats about the right amount over 27 million people voted in the UK in the 2005 elections Tony Blair got back into power with 9.5 million votes so you can't say Hitler got in through the back door.
First the proportions are different. Second and most importantly Tony Blair did not introduce an enabling act, start concentration camps, abolish other parties, terrorise the opposition etc.
Mr. Irving questions the reconstruction of the gas chamber in the main camp of Auschwitz. Since there are pictures of the facility taken before its partial demolition, its reconstruction can scarcely be called a "fake". The Pyramids in Teotihuacan have been reconstructed. Does this make them a "fake"?
In fact nearly all of the wonderful castles we have in our countryside have to a large degree been reconstructed (even if they are in ruins). So now we know the Tower of London is also a fake. The sign outside the gas chamber at Auschwitz 1 makes it quite clear the building was reconstructed.
The authenticity of the protocols and many cited Talmud are shaky, and if you want to demonstrate that Judaism teaches that its ok to abuse Gentiles and take their land, then you need not go further than the Bible.
It is amazing to me that discourse by a noted historian draws only such heatedly Zionist commentary about protocol and dogma. Could we please try to understand and empathize with how incredibly insane the Second World War was?
First what is written in the protocols of Zion? Second have you read them? And if you have read them it is quite clear from the religious references that the writer was not Jewish but a Christian. On the other hand the writer had a very deep understanding of the way to power. Maybe one day I will do a historical analysis of this. It was probably written by the Ochrana (which did not employ Jews) and as Nicholas II himself expressed disapproval of this type of propaganda.
The answer is quite clear, there is no difference in the Jewish religion between a Jew and a non Jew as far as the right to life is concerned. I asked where it is written that Jews are superior and you probably cannot give me the source - go to sources if you seek the truth.
I cant believe there are people so stupid as you, i thought i had seen it all but you are something else!! Jews are liars?? Get a grip and do something with your life other than slagging off religions
Therefore if I have understood you correctly most Jews are liars because they are Zionists and their religion teaches them they are superior to non Jews according to you. Only that most Jews are not Zionists and do not live in Israel. And secondly what part of their religion teaches them that they are superior to others? Where is this written? And where - in your opinion - is it written that morality does not apply to them?
So if I have understood you correctly, most Jews are liars although not always whereas some Jews are not liars as far as unspecified topics as concerned and they possibly tell the truth.
This has been flagged as spam show
I was in Auschwitz two times and I saw with myself the realy true. The Swedish people were sitting this man on plane back to England same day he was arriving to Sweden. Move him to a desert or uninhabited island there he can talk free.
Odysses100 1 month ago
Proof - if any were needed - that the British still produce the best eccentrics in the world.
TerrySleeper 8 months ago 2
What all of you people attacking Irving do not understand is that problem most people have with the Holocaust is not that they think it's fake, but that it receives 99% of the attention, whereas other genocides, some even bigger (7 million ukrainians in 1932, tens of millions of people in GULAG and China) have to share the rest 1%. There are thousands of hollywood movies about the Holocaust and not one about the other such crimes. It is because the Holocaust has become a source of money.
thepredatorpl 8 months ago
@thepredatorpl Whereas recently it has received more attention that other events, it certainly did not beforehand. As for tens of millions of deaths (ie more than 20 million) in the gulag - what evidence have you for this. There is also no evidence that seven million Ukrainians died in 1932. By gross exaggeration of the numbers you insult those who did die. As for it being a source of money, no doubt you are also attacking westerns, police and sex films because they too are a source of money
alanheath 8 months ago
@alanheath, not only were there evidence of those numbers before 1989, but there are even more now, after the opening of the soviet archives. I recommend you "The black book of communism" - a very thorough study by a group of professors, all ex-communists, who using the archives prove that the MINIMUM number of people killed in the USSR and China is more than 40 million. And unlike with the Holocaust, demographic census actually does show a huge decline in population. Watch "The soviet story"
thepredatorpl 8 months ago
@thepredatorpl I have read the black book and nowhere does it say anything about seven million Ukrainians dying in 1932 nor 20 million in the gulag. Furthermore there are census figures from the Soviet Union and these do not back up your claims either. As for your claim that the holocaust of the Jews is not reflected in the census figures can you back up this absurd claim as I have spent a great deal of time looking at census returns in the inter war years and I can assure you that it does.
alanheath 8 months ago
@alanheath, i do not know what black book you have read, the one i did, written by 6 franch and one polish professors states clearly numbers and they are much higher than 20 million. To deny the communist genocide (and the fact that it is the biggest in history) is absurd with all the evidence there is after the opening of the archives and only hard core marxists do that nowadays. Whereas the european census does show the death or migration of millions of europeans, jewish statisticsbefore...
thepredatorpl 8 months ago
@thepredatorpl I bought it in Polish when it came out. You claim that 20 million people died in the gulags and seven million Ukrainians died in 1932. You cannot support this with a page reference in the book because it is not there. You are using your own hatred of Jews (for whatever reason) as a pathetic attempt to pervert history. You clearly also do not know what genocide means - it is not the same as mass murder.
alanheath 8 months ago
@alanheath, and after the war, conducted by jewish organizations and the jews themselves, show no disapearance of 6 million people. The difference is only 3 million and that includes immigration. Anyhow, i do not want to get into that debate as i neither specialise in it, nor do i really care - i do not deny the holocaust or support it. Yet i do get frustrated when it is presented as the biggest genocide, when it is probably 10 times smaller than the innocent murders in the communist countries.
thepredatorpl 8 months ago
@thepredatorpl What Jewish census does not show evidence of the Shoah? You are making this up - the same as you make up silly figures of communist atrocities. You certainly do not specialise in it but are clearly an example of what the denier liars seek to achieve. To convince the ignorant.
alanheath 8 months ago
@alanheath, "The ignorant" believe what 45 years of leftist propaganda has taught them - that the second world war was like a kids movie about the battle of good versus evil - the evil nazis against the good allies. The nazis started the war, killed millions and the allies, including the USSR, stopped them. This ignorant interpretation avoids the fact that the war was started by the nazis AND soviets in an alliance and that the soviets murdered much more civilians before the war, durign it and..
thepredatorpl 8 months ago
@thepredatorpl You - representing the ignorant - are in a very good position to judge what the ignorant believe so I cannot comment. However no serious person puts this as black versus white given Soviet crimes and as you rightly point out the war started because of an alliance between the Nazis and Soviets without which the war would probably not have happened at all.
alanheath 8 months ago
... after that. The communist countries were protected by the propaganda of the leftists and immune from any investigation, until the system fell apart and the archives opened. Then we saw the things Solzenitcin wrote were true and indeed millions were murdered. The leftsits that defended them for decades had nothing to say and started shifting the subjects, yet i can see there are still some hard-liners like yourself who simply deny the facts, which is as ignorant as denying the holocaust.
thepredatorpl 8 months ago
@thepredatorpl There was plenty of material available on communist crimes before 1989 as anyone who was then alive will tell you - including in communist countries which you clearly never spent any time in - unlike me.
I asked you to justify your assertion that 7 million Ukrainians died in 1932, 20 million people died in the gulag and the existence of a Jewish census.
You won't give an answer as you made this up. However you will continue to go off on a tangent throwing out more accusations.
alanheath 8 months ago 2
@alanheath, hilarious post in so many ways - first of all i am FROM a communist state - my mother is Bulgarian and my father Polish, i have lived in both countries, my family on both sides has been persecuted by the communists and my polish family also by the nazis before that. Second of all, i gave you the name of a book at least and can give you more, whereas you haven't given anything that points the communist victims as less than 20 million. I will give you books and links in the next post.
thepredatorpl 8 months ago
@thepredatorpl I fail to see what is hilarious at mass murder but you may. The book you said does not back up your claim which you made up. The Soviet census returns also do not back up your claim either - unlike the Shoah where census returns clearly show the Jewish population missing. As you are 23 and claim to have lived in a communist country, you must have a remarkable memory. I cannot remember anything before I was four years old - unless of course you are making this up as well.
alanheath 8 months ago
@katasaifa Your saying Hoess' testimony can be discounted is your personal opinion. He gave the figurre
2 1/2million plus 1/2m dead. The Communist Polish government said 4m. The present government with whom antisemitism is again in style says 1.1. Yas Varshem says the figure is uncertain. Fact is that the Nazis destroyed records to cover up crime and all, high or low are estimates. I don''t see how it can be much less than 2 million. Anyway we are talking about human tragedies, not statistics.
mc0558 10 months ago
The Holocaust was a Nazi policy and Hitler knew about it.
Hitler, 1939-1-30:
"If international finance Jewry inside and outside of Europe should succeed once more in plunging nations into another world war, the consequence will not be the Bolshevization of the earth and thereby the victory of Jewry, but the annihilation of the Jewish race in Europe."
qwertypoiu4321 1 year ago
hey what a turn around in david Irving. he is obviously being threatened and most likely drugged. i don't mean this video per se. we all know there were no gas chambers and the 6 million figure is physically impossible. the jews don't play fair wake up we are dealing with a bloodsucker.
up2space 1 year ago
@up2space Of course yes, threatened and drugged!!! You denier liars will resort to any nonsense to promote your hatred. Six million deaths is perfectly possible - WW2 claimed eight times as many lives. The only bloodsucker I see are the denier liars.
alanheath3 1 year ago 2
@alanheath3 what will you say after the white race is exterminated? we never existed? christianity was a minor cult? we know the deal all is fair in jew warfare. look what you did to palestine.. thrown out of every god loving country now the world.. it's your destiny with the devil
up2space 1 year ago
@up2space Of 6bn people in the world more than half are white so there is no danger of extinction, if white people were some sub species of homo sapiens (which they are not - but lets pretend) they would have the WWF classification of 'least concern'.
Christianity is the commonest religion in the world - if you accept Catholicism as Christianity.
I visited Palestine a couple of times, what r u claiming I did?
The devil is probably another figment of your imagination.
alanheath3 1 year ago
@alanheath3 your full of shit i know who you work for you want to be friendly when your handshake has blood on it.. i don't need you or your bullshit.. the jews are parasites and the white race is being squeezed into extinction... there you go.. i only need to ask you do you believe in Yahweh the Christ? or are you a jew or a banker dildo? it's your own dignity on the line.... face yourself in the mirror and know you were scum
up2space 1 year ago
@up2space Oh dear the same Christian hatred, a religion of hate that has caused it to be the greatest criminal organisation in the history of the world.
The white 'race' is not being squeezed into extinction - look at the numbers. According to the WWF risk of extinction comes with 1,000 individuals left.
I would believe in the existence of Christ if there were any proof of his existence but there is not.
Yahweh refers to God in whom I also don't believe.
So I was scum but now I am not?
alanheath3 1 year ago
@alanheath3 the more i come across people that are completely ignorant of the truth, the better I feel about discovering the truth. however, it also saddens me, because we need more white people on board, maybe one day you find that one youtube video that changes your life forever. We are pro-active. Why do we have to wait until only 1,000 of us are left? That doesn't make any sense. There is no proof of any god, of any faith. so, are you an atheist because of that?
up2space 1 year ago
@up2space You seem to be completely ignorant of the truth . There are around 2.5bn white people in the world - look around you, how many white people there are. They are everywhere.
My atheism is reinforced when I see the hatred of those that believe in religion and the disgusting crimes they do in the name of their gods. Look at your hatred and racism. That is good enough reason not to believe in this superstition and violence.
alanheath3 1 year ago
@alanheath3 finally alan i knew you'd come around. please believe my friend, i am not about hate i am about survival peruse my vast video collection pick what you like but hopefully you will find the truth. i know it will be easy to dismiss me and my collection but do yourself a favor do it for yourself be selfish. see you bro
up2space 1 year ago
@alanheath3 As of 2008, there are only around 1.4 billion "White" people in the world. How you can come up with 2.5 billion whites out of a global population of 6.9 billion people will remain your personal secret for the rest of time. :p
WiredDragoon 9 months ago
@WiredDragoon The population of India is around 1.1bn almost all of whom are white. That leaves 300m for the rest of world according to this silly statement. I presume the racists however decide who is 'white' and who is not.
alanheath 9 months ago
@alanheath3 Well said, that is the plain truth. I was wrong to criticise a guy who speaks up against the denier idiots.
jegspillerpiano 1 year ago
Complete Fraud! He is simply a carnival barker. He is currently trying to sell strands of the Fuhrer's hair. He doesn't specify pubic or otherwise. I guess he wants to encourage all possible markets. He is also trying to verify bone fragments ..supposedly of the Fuhrer to sell to "rich Americans". Neo Nazis and Islamic Fascist just adore him.
AgouraMo 1 year ago 2
Oh dear, you would have thought that the cameraman would do a test shoot to see if it was audible.
Valelacerte 2 years ago
it actually blows my mind that this fat old prick has made a living out of questioning/denying the holocaust.
nobcheesy 2 years ago 4
nobcheesy - AJP Taylor cause a lot of waves by arguing that Hitler's foreign policy was no different from that of mainstream Germany. He discounted "Mein Kampf" and said Hitler improvised as opportunities arose. Right or wrong, it forced people to look at those events from a different angle, which did not change but added other dimensions to the story. So actually, even the most mischievous act of revision CAN be helpful. Strangely, the dimension added by this fat old prick added NOTHING at all.
mc0558 2 years ago 2
emosdieslow removed his comment, but sent it to me. Here it is: "You guys need to get over yourselves. So all anti semites are just dogs? LOL. The jews were kicked out of many of the most advanced civilizations of their times. Of course, they're all "dogs" right? LOL It's never the poor jews fault, huh. You two really are a joke."
Yes anyone who denies the holocaust or is a racist is a dog in my book. And no the Jews have never deserved the persecution they have received.
mc0558 2 years ago 8
Quoting Mr. Justice Gray in his libel verdict,"Irving has for his own ideological reasons persistently and deliberately misrepresented and manipulated historical evidence;...for the same reasons he has portrayed Hitler in an unwarrantedly favourable light, principally in relation to his attitude towards and responsibility for the treatment of the Jews;...he is an active Holocaust denier; ...he is anti-Semitic and racist, and...he associates with right-wing extremists who promote neo-Nazism."
mc0558 2 years ago
Why don't you argue the facts that he is stating in the video. Oh, that's right, you are unable to do so.
emosdieslow 2 years ago
There are no facts in Irving's statement! There is Irving's obfuscation of the facts and his use of other convenient facts--e.g., the fact that the Germans destroyed Auschwitz when they retreated and what you see has been rebuilt from their original plans--to conceal a very grave truth, that the Nazis murdered millions of people and that there were gas chambers at Auschwitz-Birkenau.I don't know what kind person you wish to be, but think about it! Denying such evil is a terrible responsibility!
mc0558 2 years ago
Look, I'm only interested in the evidence, and am a rookie in investigating the holocaust. I'm not looking to hurt anyones feelings. Of course Irving stated facts. I do know that they presented the "rebuilt" gas chamber as authentic, wich was a lie. Very suspicious. There were other lies uncovered. I hear German confessions were inacurate and contradictory, but have yet to research them.
emosdieslow 2 years ago
"They" never presented the rebuilt gas chambers as authentic! Who is "they" anyway? Poland was in the hands of the Polish Communist Party and behind them was Stalin. They rebuilt Auschwitz about 10% of the camp so that the world would know what happened there. The had the plans and used them to rebuild.
Look I can give you the names of 120 people know to friends of mine who were murdered in these camps!
mc0558 2 years ago 2
watch the david Cole videos."they" are the officials at Auschwitz. "The Cole videotape interview proves that the people who run the Auschwitz State Museum had made a practice of fabricating 'proofs' of homicidal gassings. Keep in mind that over the years millions of tourists have been told that 'Krema 1' is in its original state, while officials knew that 'original state' is a ie."
emosdieslow 2 years ago
I visited Auschwitz. We were told exactly what happened there. The retreating Germans did everything they could to erase it; what you see was rebuilt. No lies!
Whatever was destroy or rebuilt does not gainsay the millions who died there. I have names; I know people who knew: a son who survived because his family got him out of Germany because he kept having fights with Hitler Youth and his family though he was endangering them. They all died; he survived. Think on it! What are you up to?
mc0558 2 years ago 8
Cole's video proves nothing of the sort and if you claim that you have not seen it. Furthermore Cole later admitted his video was a hoax and apologised for it.
In what years are you claiming that Krema 1 was told to 'millions of tourists' as being in its original state.
The reconstruction of Krema 1 started in the Nazi period when it was changed into a shelter.
Try doing your own research by using original documents and not by repeating denier liar falsifications.
alanheath 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Cole was harassed by the JDL.
emosdieslow 2 years ago
He has not claimed that. It seems to me like just another denier liar falsification
alanheath 2 years ago
Rudolf Hoess made very frank statements to the Nuerenberg Tribunal which can be read in its original form. He also wrote estensively, going into great detail about how his organization of the slaughter at Auschwitz Birkenau was so much superior to the proceedures at Treblinka. He was a real pro.
Holocaust deniers are usually just antisemitic dogs trying it on.Occasionally some decent people get drawn in because they think they are seeing a hidden truth beneath the surface.THIS IS NOT THAT CASE!
mc0558 2 years ago 9
The only reason for holocaust denial is anti semitism and a desire to falsifiy the past and nothing else. No Nazi put on trial ever denied it. No holocaust denier liar has ever done any research other than to repeat the lies of other denier liars.
Although as a dog lover I do resent you referring to denier liars as 'dogs' as dogs do not falsify things for their own pecuniary requirements!
alanheath 2 years ago
In the case of antisemites we are talking about a kind of animal that nature never gave rise to. Labelling it a "dog", a manged, rabies infected creature, is merely a descriptive convenience.
mc0558 2 years ago
But I think we can agree that dogs do not invent lies with the object of falsifying history for either their own racist purposes or financial gain as the denier liars do.
alanheath 2 years ago
answer this , at the end of the war it was said that 6 million jews had died in the gas chambers 3 million at auschwitz, the polish goverment revised this figure down to 1 million in the 1980s so why has the 6 million figure not been revised down to 4 million
polskich 2 years ago
The Nazis kept records, some of which were destroyed. Records in the possession of the German government tally up to around 6 million. Eichmann in his 1955 interview with the Dutch journalist (and former SS) put the figure at 10 million, but that may be only be his bragging.
But tell me polskich, would 4 million make you feel the Holocaust was less of a holocaust?
Btw, this evening I have received 5 messages from holocaust deniars all from people with odd names like yours. Coincidence?
mc0558 2 years ago
i am not denying anything i simply asked a question and there was not 10 million jews in europe prior to the start of world war to a fact that you well know
polskich 2 years ago
I am only citing what Eichmann himself claimed.
By the way, there were 10 million people of Jewish ancestry in Europe, but I don't think that anyone but Eichmann has ever claimed that that many were murdered by the Nazis. Remember also, that the Nazis defined a "Jew" as anyone who had one grandparent of Jewish ancestry.
mc0558 2 years ago
There are a number of points here.
For example.the claim that if a persons place of death is incorrectly reported ergo the person is still alive. Pretty absurd denier liar argument.
Who said that three million Jews died at Auschwitz? Denier liars can't answer that one.
According to the Nazis own figures, there were over 11 million Jews in Europe at the beginning of 1942 - after the murder campaign had started.
Censuses before the war clearly show the population at this type of level.
alanheath 2 years ago 2
Mr. Heath: I am glad to have stumbled upon this site: Your interview & footage suggest an inspiring & accessible new model for historical & documentary work.
Also, I appreciate that your refutation of the "show me the proof" mantra rests upon an important historiographical axiom: Gaps in the documentary record inform the historian's interpretative judgment, just as the presence of data do. These gaps do not, as such, imply the soundness of one interpretation or another.
idealtypical 2 years ago 2
In the preceding comment, I meant to say, "interviews & footage"; in fact, I did not mean this interview in particular, but rather, your interviews with those who experienced history firsthand. They remind us that history isn't merely a matter of polemics & discourses.
idealtypical 2 years ago 2
After the Nünberger Law is a Quarter Jew not a Jew, but he cant get a Officer and self Halfjews fight in Wehrmacht!
19Max33 2 years ago
Pardon?
bigboxbobby2 2 years ago
polskich, of course there were 10 million Jews in Europe, most of they lived secular lives completely integrated into the nations to which they belonged. A large number even "nationalized" their names. They were integrationalists, not Zionists: asking to be accepted fellow human beings. Hitler gave the boost to Zionism. The way in which gentiles turned on those of Jewish extraction seemed to confirm what the Zionists had been saying: don't fool yourself. Gentiles will never accept you. Tragic!
mc0558 2 years ago 3
no. but the numer is signicant, because it means that 2 million people did not die! so its 4? maybe 3? maybe 2? its still horrible and a crime but 6 sounds nice. so we will roll with that.
panzermatt 2 years ago
No! 6 million is the documented figure--no less than 6 million were killed. It was more, but for 6 million the documentation is there: the recotds of Einsatzgruppen, of death camps (Treblinka, Sobibor, Auchwitz Birkenau, Maidenek) and the estimated 15000 other camps the Nazis established in Europe.
The documentation is copious and clear. No one is guessing here! It's not a question of nice sounding numbers!
Panzermatt, you are playing light-headedly with big issues here. Be carefull!
mc0558 2 years ago
i am not playing. i respect every death on both sides. but i want proof! it is not there. not complete. the figure 6 million was bandied about before the war, so thats whwre that came from. and id the polish bring the numbers for auchwitz down, why does the number remain the same? is this not debatable? and why should i be carefull?? its free speech? no? mosad? i live in ireland and to debate the holocaust is not a crome, unlike the other so called free eu countries.
panzermatt 2 years ago
There are a host of excellent studies--look at the Wiki entry for The Holocaust --which sites them and even prints one document--a report to Eichmann on the liquidation of 1.25 million in just one extermination campaign.
Btw, if you put the holocaust together with the deliberate murdering of Soviet civilians, the Germans murdered in excess of 17 million. They went berserk!
I do not claim only Germans can do these things--althought they must hold some kind of record. People are savage!
mc0558 2 years ago
@panzermatt
"The figure 6 million was bandied about before the war" etc.
Don't get too hung up on repeating numbers, panzermatt. If you want to, you can make any number appear in pretty well any context and use it as circumstantial evidence of anything you like.
Example: Joseph Goebbels wrote on 27th March 1942 "Not much will be left of the Jews. By and large, one can say that 60 percent of them will have to be liquidated".
Wannsee total =11 million. 6 million again - from a Nazi!
MSM4U2POM 2 years ago
no it would make no difference if its 6 or 3. so why can you go to prizon in my country for deying some obviousily false parts of the oficial holocaust story or even discussing this subject? i can go to prizon for publicly saying that 2000 people cant fit in 200square maters gas chamber at once, doscuss proprieties of zyklon-b or efficiency of crematoriums.this is taboo. if you touch it youre called naonazi or antisemite
dzonybazuka84 2 years ago
You can go to prison for denying the holocaust in countries where antisemitism has existe.has created havoc. Only an antisemite would get hung up on the issues of crematoria efficiency or the number of Jews that can fit into a gas chambre. The millions killed is an incontestable fact.
mc0558 2 years ago
"Only an antisemite would get hung up on the issues of crematoria efficiency or the number of Jews that can fit into a gas chambre"
are you out of your fucking mind?
" The millions killed is an incontestable fact"
agreed
dzonybazuka84 2 years ago
Comment removed
MSM4U2POM 2 years ago
@mc0558 wasnt Rudolf Hoess' confession obtained under torture? His family were threatened, he was deprived of sleep and had no lawyer present. I dont profess to be an expert on the subject. Just dont think you can cite a confession gained through torture as proof of anything being the case... Correct me if Im wrong.
SuperScientists 10 months ago
@SuperScientists No he wasn't tortured! Hoess didn't so much confess as bathe in the glory of his accomplishments. Even on the scaffold he gloated over his victims. Hoess was a pig to the end. Hoess is not that dissimilar from David Irving, a man who serves the nazi cause with historical lies and rationalizations for which he has been convict in a court of law and served time. Another nazi scum bag.
mc0558 10 months ago
You've been reading the wrong books, sunshine.
TerrySleeper 3 years ago
I've yet to see any proof of gas chambers that weren't built after WWII. If anyone knows where there is proof of their existence let me know. Insult me & prove how full of it you are, I notice anyone who raises questions on this subject is immediately attacked & I just wanna say bring it on suckas, prove it!
danmanjones 3 years ago
I bet you have never been to a single archive, never looked at the archaelogical evidence, never interviewed a single witness. So how could you have seen any proof.
I have never seen proof that Australia exists, but unlike the idiotic denier liars, I am not so stupid as to claim because I have not seen it then it does not exist.
alanheath 3 years ago
Q: How many Holocaust Deniers does it take to change a light bulb?
A: 1000. One to change it; 999 to furiously deny that it was changed.
TerrySleeper 3 years ago
Good one! I doubt you would find 1,000 holocaust denier liars but it makes the point.
I have much more material on the holocaust on this site as you may have noticed.
alanheath 3 years ago
Why can't both sides look at the historical record dispassionately? Clearly there is enough first rate Jewish scholarship to uncover the real facts and prove Irving wrong, if in fact he is. Has the affirmative evidence ever been compiled and presented in a comprehensive fashion? If not, why not?
artyphax 3 years ago
And what would you call his court case?
alanheath 3 years ago
Irving is determined to adhere to his preferred version of history, even if the evidence does not support it.
He is an anti-Semite, a racist and a Fascist, the contents of whose speeches and interviews often displays a distinctly pro-Nazi and anti-Jewish bias.
He is determined to manipulate the historical record in order to make it conform with his political beliefs. This manipulation is deliberate.
Hence the hostility from professional historians and Holocaust survivors.
TerrySleeper 3 years ago 3
If I accept what's in the history books as gospel,then I must wonder why were Germans (starting in the late 40s, America and Canada advertised like crazy in Germany newspapers and magazines for German tradesmen and technicians and professionals) and even Nazis (operation Paperclip) permitted to immigrate to the USA so soon after the War?
Something tells me there's lots of stuff we don't know about American, British and Soviet
actions during World War II. Why is there still so much classified?
Fersommling 3 years ago
In my research I have never really come across stuff that was classified other than in Germany to see the names of people blacked out.
alanheath 3 years ago
I read Hitler's War by David Irving in the late 1970s. If memory serves, Irving suggested that Hitler could have not known about the holocaust (deliberate killing of 6 million jews) and that Himmler was probably directly responsible for it.
Speaking of Russia, I hear that one must be careful visiting there. If the Russians like you, they won't let you leave. Now, is that just humour, or is there some truth in that?
Europeans, I want to hear from you.
Fersommling 3 years ago
So far I have been able to leave when I wanted to.
alanheath 3 years ago
Mr. Irving is has two real talents , as a researcher and as a self publicist.
he lacks one talent - he needs to acquire modesty.
behblc 3 years ago
You need an external microphone irvings audio is too low, I cant even hear half of what he says and you are way too loud.
JudeoFascism 4 years ago 2
Irving is a moron
KmaenLaiKwai 4 years ago
I would like to sell this guy the Broklynn
Bridge.
Brough1111 4 years ago 2
Goto David Irving visits Aushwitz to find proof of gas cmabers as discovered by DI...
5:07 "This is the site of the first gas chamber."
See? The revisionists plant the trees - and in time they cut them down themselves.
I mean talk about worthless. DI placing flowers at Auschwitz!
But thank you for locating the A gas chamber, we knew you'd come round in the end.
napoleonbone 4 years ago 2
Let's all be grateful for revisionists.
Seriously!
They have to acknowledge something in order to deny it and in denying it they give it a whole heck of a lot more publicity than it would ordinarily get.
They accuse the jews of exploiting the H and yet they're actually helping by offering free advertising! LOL!
H denial revisionism - you couldn't make it up!
Oh! Pardon me...you retard neos already did!
napoleonbone 4 years ago 2
Yes this is true, you don't have to go far before finding a stone and when turning over.
it has a creepy crawling thing under it.
There are those you acuse those that were vistims but that is the way with denial,
it must create a self rightousness in it's own cause, you can not reason you must only take up arms. This is all.
Brough1111 4 years ago
Bearing in mind that those arrested were not arrested for holocaust denial at all but other charges. What did they claim before they had this?
alanheath 4 years ago
Casting your enemy in an evil sinister fashion is as much a part war as bullets and bombs, everyone engauged in WW-II is hiding
something(as I have learned)
Now the liars cause "truths" to be suspect! So in the end my only choice is, who is the least of the several liars.
This is why we can not all agree!
uzijohn 4 years ago
Denial is a basic human instinct, especially
when the truth is so hard to comprehen. The
are belief systenms built on faith and some
on facts. The Halocaust is based on facts and
countless accounts by allied sholdiers including Russian, American, British, and also
accounts by German citizens that testified
not under distress.
Brough1111 4 years ago 3
Maybe that is part of the reason for denial, but the problem is the language the deniers use. Accusing the victims of terrible crimes of being liars is not a basic human instinct but that of someone who has another agenda, in my opinion.
alanheath 4 years ago
Talk about stating the obvious - the whole conspiracy theory introduced by deniers is motivated by rabid antisemitsm. You don't have to be Jewish to recognize this. It's common sense.
historicrecord 4 years ago 2
And in more than sixty years they have not come up with one single shred of evidence to back up their absurd claims. Not one. Not one denier has ever done any research. Instead they resort to lies, that Krege was in Treblinka or Rudolf who quotes as his sources himself - only using alibis of course.
alanheath 4 years ago
The deniers quote each other - they would really be a hilarious sham if the subject matter wasn't so tragic.
historicrecord 4 years ago 2
Have a look at Germar Rudolf. He invents people - now around 48 confirmed cases of him inventing names which he then quotes trying to sound scientific which are then quoted by the others. The question then arises can we term someone a denier liar who takes Rudolf in trust not knowing the falsity of the work he or she is reading.
alanheath 4 years ago
The Deniers don't have a case so they are compelled to fabricate their evidence.They are exposed over and over again.
historicrecord 4 years ago
I would advise any reader to refer to the Wikipedia entry about Irving and his works if they truly wish to understand his extremist ideological stance that impacts upon his ability to relay a true account of historical events particularly where Jews are involved.
historicrecord 4 years ago
For those that like to complain about the poor quality of my films this is your chance to have some input.
My Sony Cybershot - used for all films here but one - has given up on me. I do not want to buy a video camera - just a compact camera which I can carry around in my pocket.
What camera should I buy and why?
alanheath 4 years ago
god bless israel and her beautiful nukes
AAispurelove 4 years ago
churchhill was a monster so was eisenhouer, and the lies perpetrated against the germns is outrageous. I wont mention stalin our ally.
xtiml 4 years ago
Stalin was not our ally at the beginning of the war, he was an ally of Hitler and that was the reason the second world war started.
As for Churchill being a monster, unless you give specific examples then it is difficult to comment. As David Irving would say, this is the cowardly use of the passive voice.
alanheath 4 years ago
Dresden? some would call Churchill a monster after that whats your opinion alan?
bigox8 4 years ago
I disagree.
alanheath 4 years ago
I consider Churchill to be one of the greatest living Statemen who led Britain through their darkest hour to Victory.Stalin on the other hand was prepared to deal with Hitler(Ribbentrop/Molotov Pact)
historicrecord 4 years ago
I think you mean greatest statesmen of all time... or as I would say statespersons...
Unless, like Elvis, he is still alive...
alanheath 4 years ago
You are right as always Alan - I've had a very long day so I meant to say "greatest Statesman of all time".He was still an Imperialist as was the time but Britain was a benevolent Empire unlike the Genocidal nazis.
historicrecord 4 years ago
"Britain was a benevolent Empire"
Bullshit.
TrystanCJ 4 years ago
Well I don't really think you can call any empire benevolent. Imperialism and benevolence are two words that don't exactly go together. But you can certainly argue that as empires go, the British one was probably the least unbenevolent!
mihohobaba 4 years ago 8
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Or has Irving says "The man who destroyed two empires, one of them the enemies"!
Who where the Focus who financed Churchill
BarryCFCOK 3 years ago
and all the agiences of the govt and you will know there is a holocaust and this terrible travisty did occur from the eyewitness testomony from ss men and imprisioned men women and children, there is plenty of photographic and video evedience of the killings that the nazis have
kenjessel 3 years ago 2
Hitler was on OUR side. We gave him millions, built up his army, to fight communist Russia. Then we came in from behind. It was beautifully organized, but the underestimation of germany's power cost us thousands of lives, and almost the war. But we prevailed. As for the jews, well, sadly all evidence of such a holocaust does not really exist. Nor would it make any sense, on himmlers part, to spend millions of dwindling dollars on the execution of free labour. The truth hurts dont it?
castHiMself 3 years ago
the truth does hurt. that is why denier liars do not like it
goatandcart 3 years ago 2
hello well it seems as if you have some of your facts mixed, as someone of historical knowledge and historical facts and evedience, something Mr Irving never has but knows how to spectulate against, if you are looking for a document that says hitler or himmler or any of hitlers underlings wrote a document or several giving orders to murder and kill and rape it was never written but look at the facts learn the truth behind the nazi's policies
kenjessel 3 years ago
Stalin's signing of the Non-Aggression Pact was the fault of British and French fickleness. If they had embraced an alliance with the Soviet Union, which in the end Britain had to do anyway to save herself, it is doubtful that Hitler would have dared attack Poland. His ruinous economic policies in Germany might have had time to kick in and the whole Nazi regime have collapsed.
As for Churchill, he is a man who had his moment of greatness and that was enough to offset all is many stupidities.
mc0558 2 years ago 4
This is a very good argument although it does accept a certain amount of hindsight. The UK did send a delegation to Russia but it took the scenic route by slow boat which just confirmed to Stalin that we were not serious. Of course the west + Poland thought that they could deal with Hitler on their own and on the face of it maybe that seemed a realistic proposition.
I share your opinion on the ruinous lunatic crypto sociailist economic policies of the third reich!
alanheath 2 years ago 2
It wasn't only the mode of travelling to Moscow that put Stalin off. He had many reason to doubt the sincerity of GB, especially, and Fr. People forget that the USSR had a perfectly viable alliance with France and Czechoslovakia that was repudiated by both countries at the Munich Conference. Polish territory separating Cz from USSR made it impossible for Stalin to help Cz without Polish approval, but of course Poland was in on carving up Cz--Teschen--and refused. The USSR was isolated!
mc0558 2 years ago 5
One has to accept the fact that Britain DID NOT want an alliance with the USSR, and it forced France to abandon its alliance with her. (The lesson of WWI for France was that she would have lost the war in 1916 if it hadn't been for the Brits; Brit dictated French policy.) No doubt that Brits reckoned that to ally with the USSR would, assuming they beat Germany, mean GB acquiessing in the USSR's dominance of central Europe. In the end, Hitler's successes left GB with no alternative.
mc0558 2 years ago 4
Moment of greatness ha, Churchill was a Drunk, military incompetent. look at what irving has to say about Churchill.He certainly cant be questioned on what he says about Churchill.The most overrated leader of all time
sceanable 2 years ago
@sceanable Unlike Hitler who undoubtedly was militarily incompetant causing the deaths of hundreds of thousands of German soldiers, Churchill did not get involved to anywhere like the same extent and never expected people to fight a hopeless position to the last bullet. Churchill was the man of the moment, something Nazis can't stand as he denied them victory.
alanheath3 1 year ago
You're a fool! Stalin was an ally of Hitler before he ever aligned himself with the US & Britain to fight Germany. Last time I checked neither the US & Eisenhower nor the Brits & Churchill enacted any twisted racial ideologies, viewed everyone non-Aryan as 'subhuman', and built a network of camps to dehumanize, abuse, torture, and systematically murder Jews, Slavs, gypsies, and political dissidents by the millions. The Nazis did. So who are the monsters here?
SabuPtolemy 4 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Churchill was a known racist, and the British Empire carried out mass extermination of rebels in Africa. Add that up with over a hundred years of other crimes.
TrystanCJ 4 years ago
What mass extermination of rebels in Africa? References? Sources? Dates? Facts???
alanheath 4 years ago
Are you serious, alanheath? I suggest you read Imperial Reckoning. Superb book. Caroline Atkins wrote it, a Harvard trianed historian. Look her up on YouTube. Yes, British history is cruel and brutal and genocidal also.
AeneasNYC 3 years ago
In other words you don't know. No references to back up these allegations other than to say there is a book on the subject.
alanheath 3 years ago
Look at the facts. Millions were poured into Germany for the rebuilding of their army...the fact hitler became friends with Stalin only highlights the point. It was an orchestarted attack on communism. The Queen is German. The persecution of the jews, and anyone else non- German was no doubt Hitler's Agenda. But the true perportraitors are the german people, the officers, those on the front of it. Hitler was sending the jews to palestine..the brittish blockaded it.
SumGODLyHoUR 3 years ago 2
I agree with bigox8. The winners of war always write the history books. Just because we happen to come from the winning side, does it make our side right? Had Hitler won, Churchill would be considered a monster and their point of view would be the right one. The situation in Iraq and Afghanistan is a perfect example. Westerners are told each and everyday that what we are doing is right, but is it? Whoever controls the media, controls the message.
aaron4159 4 years ago
The winners of wars do not write the history books and the best example is to look at the literature on Vietnam. There is a huge amount of material written by Germans from foot soldiers to the memoirs by people such as Guderian, Speer and others. Any serious student of this period should be looking at these works to get a full picture of what happened.
alanheath 4 years ago
Ive read foot soldiers memoirs and Speers memoirs, thats why I don't believe that the germans were all monsters like the allies have taught us to think since WW2.
bigox8 4 years ago
Totally...many of them were quite good people...but remember the einzatsgruppen, himmler, eichmann etc were the same nationnality. Not all germans were monsters...but many were.
polpiv4tifi 4 years ago 2
I do not think anyone has said all Germans are monsters, I can even recall the commando war stories for boys where most Germans were portrayed as normal people.
I have interviewed several Germans and I have every sympathy for the hardships they faced. Unfortunately they did not have much choice in the system they were fighting for.
alanheath 4 years ago
R u on crack? Winners don't write the history books? Who does then, the loser? lol. IF Germany won the war, do u think Hitler would be viewed in the same light? No. Chruchill, Roosevelt, etc, would be the evil ones. Stay off the drugs!
aaron4159 4 years ago
First of all by silly insults you show how weak your arguments are.
Who do you think wrote the memoirs of people like Guderian, Speer, Hoess, Eichmann and thousands of foot soldiers???
Nearly all the literature on the Vietnam war was written by the losers.
You can even find accounts of the 100 years war by the losers.
Stop the insults and open your eyes.
alanheath 4 years ago
I insult u cuz what u r saying is wrong. Who controls the message? All those u just mentioned, or perhaps the victors of WWII who are all on the UN security council and control all the media which influences world-wide opinion. So r u telling me they don't control the message? .
aaron4159 4 years ago
The winners of the Vietnam war were on the UN security council? Or the 100 years war? Are you saying that Guderian et al are on the security council???
The UN does not own all the media in the world, it is not a business. It does not control messages.
Obviously I appreciate why you have to insult, given the silliness of your argument. Please check what the UN is if you do not believe me.
alanheath 4 years ago
I never said the entire UN; rather those who are at the top of the food chain and the US leads the pack. All the top media corporations are US owned and reflect the opinions of the US, not the world. They helped win the war and became the super power. So u can't say the victor doesn't control the message.
aaron4159 4 years ago
First, read what you wrote. Second there is a difference between media companies that report news and publishing companies that publish books. The UN is not a media corporation. Most major media corporations are not US owned and in any case do not reflect American interests but the interests of their share holders. Media companies are not super powers. You clearly do not know the difference between businesses and the American government.
alanheath 4 years ago
Ever hear the expression "4th branch of gov't"? It refers to the media. We r talking about WWII here, and when it comes to info about it, who leads the charge? Who has the most influence? Of course there are other opinions and u can find them online, @ bookstores, etc, but their effect is limited; whereas the US isn't. If not the US, then who and why isn't their doctrine always used to represent history as oppose to the jewish-controled American gov'ts interpretation of history???
aaron4159 4 years ago
You clearly do not understand what the media is. I have already explained the difference and you cannot understand. If you think a German soldier for example who fought at Stalingrad and then wrote a memoir was on the victorious side and is a tool of the Jewish controlled American govt then that is up to you.
alanheath 4 years ago
use common sense. Which will have more access to world opinion, ex german soliders or US media? Ur insane if u think both r equally valued. Ur also insane if u think Jews don't control US media. Take a look at all the oweners and CEOs of these companies. Almost all jewish.
aaron4159 4 years ago
Sorry, but you are clearly very silly. We are discussing history and not current events. You clearly cannot tell the difference between a history book and a newspaper.
I also see that your silliness demonstrates itself in racism.
What are the biggest media companies in the world? Who are the CEOs?
The owners are shareholders, mainly on stock markets.
What are your sources for your silly claims?
alanheath 4 years ago
If i am wrong, explain how Irving went to jail? It's because he goes against mainstream western thinking on WWII and the holocaust. IF u deny it, or question it, u can go to jail. So who controls the message??
aaron4159 4 years ago
No it was not the reason he went to jail. Read the transcripts of the trial and what the charge was.
alanheath 4 years ago
Alanheath, you seem to be holding the fort against the barbarians here and doing it very well. If you need relief, let me know!
mc0558 2 years ago 9
Any help is gratefully appreciated!
alanheath 2 years ago
Ive never heard anyone mention the mass murder of germans after WW2 thats probably because they're afraid of getting themselves locked up, ill say it again why do we have to believe what the allies want us to? if germany had won the war they'd have told lies are we saying the allies have never lied?
bigox8 4 years ago
Where are you claiming that the mass murder of Germans after WW2 took place? Approximately when (month/ year?
Who are you alleging was responsible? How many victims are you claiming (approximately)? Tens, hundreds, thousands, hundreds of thousands, millions, tens of millions?
alanheath 4 years ago
Why should we take the allies version of history about WW2 as the gospel truth? why? why? why?
bigox8 4 years ago
Because history is written by the winners, silly! Great point! One horrible part of WW2 history that has not been told is the mass murder of the German people after the wars end. Google "Gruesome Harvest" and read this and ask yourself why haven't we heard about THIS holocaust!?
williamsquire 4 years ago
Are you claiming that the Allies deliberately mass murdered the Germans after the end of WW2?
Undoubtedly many innocent Germans were murdered by the Soviets during the last days of the war but to claim that we have not heard of this is absurd.
alanheath 4 years ago
Gospel truth?...people aren't stupid you cockhead. Everyone makes up their own mind about the history of ww2. Even though the allies won...i personally think the germans fought better. I also think that the allies acted quite badly throughout the war...and could have won it sooner. However i never think for a second that Hitler was on the right side of the conflict...(which you are trying to say)
polpiv4tifi 4 years ago
Brainwashed people make up their own minds yes same as brainwashed people made up their minds to elect Hitler.
bigox8 4 years ago
Less than one third of those that voted, put their cross next to that of the Nazis.
alanheath 4 years ago
Thats about the right amount over 27 million people voted in the UK in the 2005 elections Tony Blair got back into power with 9.5 million votes so you can't say Hitler got in through the back door.
bigox8 4 years ago
First the proportions are different. Second and most importantly Tony Blair did not introduce an enabling act, start concentration camps, abolish other parties, terrorise the opposition etc.
alanheath 4 years ago
Mr. Irving questions the reconstruction of the gas chamber in the main camp of Auschwitz. Since there are pictures of the facility taken before its partial demolition, its reconstruction can scarcely be called a "fake". The Pyramids in Teotihuacan have been reconstructed. Does this make them a "fake"?
Harry W. Mazal OBE
hmazal 4 years ago 2
In fact nearly all of the wonderful castles we have in our countryside have to a large degree been reconstructed (even if they are in ruins). So now we know the Tower of London is also a fake. The sign outside the gas chamber at Auschwitz 1 makes it quite clear the building was reconstructed.
alanheath 4 years ago
The authenticity of the protocols and many cited Talmud are shaky, and if you want to demonstrate that Judaism teaches that its ok to abuse Gentiles and take their land, then you need not go further than the Bible.
LawrenceErnie 4 years ago
Where is that written in the Bible? Source? I do not know where it is.
alanheath 4 years ago
"Neonazis" actually dont like Irving. They see him as a cop-out.
LawrenceErnie 4 years ago
Thank you for this information. I shall tell him and see what he says.
alanheath 4 years ago
It is amazing to me that discourse by a noted historian draws only such heatedly Zionist commentary about protocol and dogma. Could we please try to understand and empathize with how incredibly insane the Second World War was?
seatoshiningsea 4 years ago
First what is written in the protocols of Zion? Second have you read them? And if you have read them it is quite clear from the religious references that the writer was not Jewish but a Christian. On the other hand the writer had a very deep understanding of the way to power. Maybe one day I will do a historical analysis of this. It was probably written by the Ochrana (which did not employ Jews) and as Nicholas II himself expressed disapproval of this type of propaganda.
alanheath 4 years ago
The answer is quite clear, there is no difference in the Jewish religion between a Jew and a non Jew as far as the right to life is concerned. I asked where it is written that Jews are superior and you probably cannot give me the source - go to sources if you seek the truth.
alanheath 4 years ago
I cant believe there are people so stupid as you, i thought i had seen it all but you are something else!! Jews are liars?? Get a grip and do something with your life other than slagging off religions
shurbcpfc 4 years ago 3
Therefore if I have understood you correctly most Jews are liars because they are Zionists and their religion teaches them they are superior to non Jews according to you. Only that most Jews are not Zionists and do not live in Israel. And secondly what part of their religion teaches them that they are superior to others? Where is this written? And where - in your opinion - is it written that morality does not apply to them?
alanheath 4 years ago
So if I have understood you correctly, most Jews are liars although not always whereas some Jews are not liars as far as unspecified topics as concerned and they possibly tell the truth.
alanheath 4 years ago
All Jews are liars? About everything? Or just on particular topics?
alanheath 4 years ago