Published in: on September 25, 2016 at 3:04 am  Leave a Comment  

Recent Exhibit and National Socialist meet-up in Bulgaria







Published in: on September 25, 2016 at 3:03 am  Leave a Comment  

“It can be yours, no money down, 0% interest, and I will throw in a box of Bahlsen Choco Leibniz w/Milk cookies”


H-“let’s take her for a spin down the Autobahn. I like what I’m hearing and seeing even more. Joe get in, we’re going for a ride.”

Ohne Titel

Eva with Adolf’s new car . “taking the Benz to the Tea haus, be right back”

Published in: on September 24, 2016 at 5:15 am  Comments (1)  

Published in: on September 23, 2016 at 9:06 am  Leave a Comment  

Response to Bernie Farber’s “Denial” editorial in the National Post by Carolyn Yeager


BERNIE FARBER IS THE FORMER LONG-TIME DIRECTOR OF THE CANADIAN JEWISH CONGRESS, therefore a long-time fighter for Jewish interests. After retiring, he is now CEO of another Jewish organization, the Mosaic (as in Moses) Institute. His father was a Polish Jew who says he lost his first family in the “Holocaust,” while he alone survived and came to Canada.

Farber praises the new Deborah Lipstadt film “Denial” in his Sept. 20 editorial in the Canadian National Post, a newspaper of which he is a semi-regular contributor. He confidently sets out to demolish David Irving and holocaust revisionists, knowing he will receive no blow-back for telling lies. And lies he does tell, while utilizing the familiar method of accusing those he is lying about of being liars. Yes, it is pure Jewish argument.

Farber starts out with the “fine acting and superb character development” of the film, which had its world premiere in Toronto recently. He then directly hits “Holocaust denial” as “hateful propaganda” that states “the Holocaust never occurred.” First lie.

In Bernie Farber and Deborah Lipstadt’s world, revisionism equals holocaust denial (their term) and to deny the holocaust is to deny any persecution of Jews. Simplissimus. In this deliberate confusion of terms and meanings, the film “Denial” portrays David Irving as proclaiming “the Holocaust” never happened.

Revisionists do not deny that Jews were forced into concentration & labor camps and ghettos during WW2 – but do dispute what happened to them in those places. To question the grotesque narrative developed by the Jews and their six million legend does not equate to “denying the holocaust.” To say it does, like Farber and Lipstadt do, is deliberately stating a major falsehood. Why do they feel the need to propagate this lie? Clearly, to stop people from reading or listening to the reasonable questions and powerful arguments of the perfectly respectable revisionists.

Farber goes on to quote a U.S. Senator from the 80s and 90s, saying “Daniel Patrick Moynihan hit the nail on the head when he noted, ‘You are entitled to your opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts.’” Farber is turning things upside down because it’s he, Farber, who is the one making up facts. He said this in reference to his charge that holocaust deniers invented the hateful proposition “that world Jewry made up [the holocaust story] to secure monetary reparations from Germany to help the fledgling state of Israel.” He calls such a belief “a damnable lie often perpetrated by sophisticated liars like Irving.”

“Politicians around the world, and especially in the United States, are increasingly spouting political rhetoric that is demonstrably false, racist and bigoted,” he wrote, by which he is actually pointing at Donald Trump! He claims the film’s director, Mick Jackson, was alluding to Trump when he noted that “the movie refers to Irving as a ‘liar, a racist and a demogogue’ and added sardonically, ‘Does that sound familiar’?” Jackson is cleverly killing two birds with one stone.

I dispute Farber’s claim that the Jewish desire for “monetary reparations is a damnable lie.” On the contrary, it is well-known that vast amounts of time and energy have been expended by the World Jewish Congress in the interests of drawing every last dime from Germany, and now from any other European country they can mount a claim against – in the name of holocaust reparations for Jews. The money machine is so addictive that now heirs of ‘survivors’ are bringing claims if they can show their relatives did not get as much as they should have while they were alive. We’ve also been through the corruption scandals that plagued the Jewish Claims Conference when it was proved that high-and-mid-level managers added false names in order to personally benefit themselves financially. So Bernie Farber is on very shaky ground (actually standing on Jello) when he insists these wide-spread beliefs that the holocaust has become a money-making endeavor are “damnable lies.”

Cherry-picking from the trial testimony

Farber then cherry-picked a couple of sentences from the trial transcript to give a biased impression of what occurred. He misrepresents Robert Jan van Pelt, who was an expert witness at the Irving vs Lipstadt trial, although not really an expert. Farber writes: “… it was Robert Jan van Pelt, a cultural and architectural historian from the University of Waterloo, who arguably helped put the final nail into Irving’s Holocaust denial coffin.”

In fact, van Pelt was a disaster as a witness. He was forced to admit that the four alleged “insertion holes” for Zyklon B in the roof of Crematorium 2 could not be found. These alleged insertion holes were claimed by Lipstadt to have been on blueprints of the crematorium that she had seen! It was a total lie. Van Pelt then tried to push the ridiculous speculation that the Nazis covered up the holes before blowing up the building – without presenting any evidence for it. Irving also got van Pelt to admit that he was only a professor of cultural history, not an expert on architecture at all.

Farber does the same with the trial judge, Sir Charles Gray. He quotes Gray’s final decision, but ignores that the Justice famously said: “I have to confess that, in common I suspect with most other people, I had supposed that the evidence of mass extermination of Jews in the gas chambers at Auschwitz was compelling. I have, however, set aside this preconception when assessing the evidence …”

Gray had to acknowledge “the apparent absence of evidence of holes” (on page 490 of the verbatim transcript) and conceded that “contemporaneous documents yield little clear evidence of the existence of gas chambers designed to kill humans.” (p. 489). Still, he found in favor of Lipstadt because of the ‘justification defense’ used by the defendants.

Unsurprisingly, Bernie Farber closes by leveling the charge of anti-Semitism against all revisionists. He calls it “the longest hatred” and adds that, in spite of it, “from time to time, facts will triumph over fictions.” Well, that is the biggest fiction of all – that holocaust believers are in possession of the facts. Farber failed to show even one instance of it in his editorial.

Published in: on September 23, 2016 at 8:22 am  Leave a Comment  

Eric Hunt Analyzes the New Holocaust “Denial” Movie

The new Hollywood film “Denial” starring Rachel Weisz as Deborah Lipstadt is due to be released. Part 1 presents a brief introduction to Holocaust Revisionism, shows the trailer for the film “Denial” which will be analyzed closer in later parts, and includes an analysis of the casting and pre-production casting changes to the movie “Denial.” The filmmakers make Irving look like a monster and Lipstadt like an angel. Deborah Lipstadt demonizes Revisionists yet parroted bogus Soviet propaganda claim of 4 million Auschwitz dead

Published in: on September 22, 2016 at 10:21 am  Comments (1)  

“Volkish” For Race Asked To Be Brought Back By German Nationalist Party


BERLIN – A leading member of Alternative for Germany, the nationalist party whose recent elections successes have shaken the country’s political system, faced fierce criticism Monday after calling for a racially charged term favoured during the Third Reich to be rehabilitated.

Party co-chairwoman Frauke Petry said in an interview published Sunday that words such as “voelkisch” shouldn’t be taboo any longer. The term refers to people who belong to a particular race and was frequently used by the Nazis – their party paper was called Voelkischer Beobachter.

“We should finally regain a relaxed, not uncritical but normal way of dealing with our nation and terms such as ‘Volk’ and words that are derived from it,” she told weekly Welt am Sonntag. Asked whether she would include the word “voelkisch,” Petry responded that she doesn’t use the term herself but dislikes the fact that it is only used negatively.

READ MORE: Merkel’s party loses to anti-immigration nationalists in German state vote

“Let’s work on giving the term a positive connotation,” she said.

Her remarks prompted a swift backlash from politicians, commentators and historians who warned that Petry’s party – known by its acronym AfD – was trying to legitimize ideas that were once at the core of Adolf Hitler’s Nazi ideology.

“Her statement that one should work on giving the term ‘voelkisch’ a positive meaning is disgusting,” daily Neue Westfaelische wrote in an editorial. The paper accused Petry of trying to blur the lines between conservative and extreme-right opinions.

Volker Beck, a Green Party lawmaker who heads the German-Israeli parliamentary group, called Petry’s comments “dangerous arson.”

“The voelkisch ideology of the 20th century resulted in National Socialist race hatred and the mass murder of Auschwitz,” Beck said.

AfD has become a potent electoral force in Germany since it was founded three years ago, sweeping into four state Parliaments on a wave of anti-migrant sentiment this year, most recently in Mecklenburg Western-Pomerania. The party is polling double-digit figures in advance of a vote in the city-state of Berlin on Sunday.

Along the way, AfD has tried to portray itself as the only true defender of the German “Volk.”

Although it has a common root with the English word “folk,” the term Volk gained an ethnic connotation in the early 19th century to signify the unity of German people who lived in dozens of mini-states across Central Europe. Nationalist sentiment didn’t evaporate with Germany’s unification in 1871 but rather grew into a myth of German uniqueness in the world.

The Nazis latched on to the term, and encapsulated it in their slogan, “Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Fuehrer” – “One People, One Nation, One Leader”

“There’s a fundamental difference with the word as it’s used in the French or English-speaking world,” historian Pascal Begrich said.

While some of its uses are ambiguous – such as AfD’s regular call for popular referendums, or Volksabstimmungen – other phrases have raised eyebrows.

When one of the party’s local chapters posted a Christmas message to Facebook followers urging them to think about their responsibility toward the “Volksgemeinschaft” – the community of people belonging to the same Volk – experts pointed out that this was a phrase straight out of the Nazi dictionary.

AfD rallies commonly include placards accusing Chancellor Angela Merkel and her government of being “Volksverraeter” – traitors to the Volk – for allowing hundreds of thousands of migrants into Germany last year.

READ MORE: Far-right nationalists strong in German vote, Merkel suffers setback

Gideon Botsch, a political scientist at the University of Potsdam who has watched AfD’s rise, said the party has absorbed ideas from far-right thinkers who claim that Germany’s white population is being intentionally diluted.

The notion that a conspiracy is behind the recent influx of migrants to Germany has echoes of the country’s dark past, Botsch warned.

“They try to avoid openly anti-Semitic images but it’s clear that there are close parallels to anti-Semitic and anti-Jewish ideas,” he said.

Heidrun Kaemper, a linguist at the Institute of German Language, noted that AfD’s rhetoric is imbued with notions of “us” and “them.” The party’s program portrays migrants as uneducated and their women as excessively fertile compared with “women of German origin.”

AfD’s focus on national self-interest has already translated into concrete proposals to strengthen Germany’s armed forces, weaken international institutions such as the EU that were designed to keep Germany’s power in check after World War II, and return to the principle of granting citizenship only to those who can prove they have German blood.

AfD also wants more “positive, identity-inspiring aspects of German history” to break up what it calls the “current focus of Germany’s culture of remembrance on the period of National Socialism.” It’s the only time the party mentions the country’s Nazi past in its program.

So far, AfD’s tone and message seem to be striking a chord among a growing number of Germans, especially those who feel unrepresented by established parties.

“They are reacting to a mood in the population,” said Botsch.

Published in: on September 22, 2016 at 9:46 am  Leave a Comment  

Making The Best Of A Bad Situation


Published in: on September 21, 2016 at 10:41 am  Leave a Comment  

Tempelhof Airport, 2016

Published in: on September 21, 2016 at 10:34 am  Leave a Comment  

Ursula Haverbeck – August 2016 – The Hooton Plan and the Migrant Crisis

haverbeck_hooten plan.jpg


SUBTITLED IN ENGLISH BY DIDI 18, this is an almost 30 minute video by Ursula Haverbeck explaining why Europe is being invaded … it’s all in the Hooten Plan!

Only one book describing the Hooten Plan is still available, but only in German. Ursula tells us that four of the five points of the Jewish plan for Europe are already completed, so there is no time to waste.

She begins by saying that the 20th Century has been called “The Jewish Century” by two prominant writers, one of whom is Yuri Slezkine, who wrote a book of that title. He said the plans for the upcoming century were set at the 100 year Memorial Congress of 1889 [Memorial for the French Revolution of 1789]. The plan included:

the wars;

the breaking up of Germany after the war;

the abdication of three emperors – the Austrian, Prussian and Russian Czar;

and on a map dated around 1890 the words “Land of Social Experiments” was printed across Russia.

Haverbeck then continues to map out the major political events of the 20th Century, culminating in the migrant invasion of Europe of the 21st that we are experiencing now (again centering in Germany). She does an extraordinary job; it’s a must watch!

Published in: on September 21, 2016 at 9:37 am  Leave a Comment