The 'Holocaust' Lie - Made in America
No one denies that America and Germany incarcerated certain fractions of
their populations under guard as war measures in the 1940s. Americans
like
to forget that at least 120,000 Americans of Japanese extraction were
rounded up and put in concentration camps in the western United States for
the duration of the war. However, they never permit the Germans to forget
that Jews in German-controlled areas of Europe were treated likewise,
though
the reason was the same-a specific group was detained because some unknown
fraction within it was a danger to the war effort and neither country was
willing to risk letting it remain free for possible sabotage. There is no
dispute about this. It happened.
However, what credible historical investigators worldwide now assert-and
with excellent reasons-is that the German Reich did not give murderous
orders concerning, and in fact did not actually murder, the Jews in its
camps. The Jews suffered more in Germany than the Japanese suffered in
America because the enemy's carpet bombing of Germany eventually destroyed
the country's ability to properly maintain the camps. Everybody
practically
starved toward the end, Jews included. We must remember that Germany had
perfectly good reasons to distrust the Jews as a group. As a nation
within
a nation they had utterly betrayed the country in World War I and moreover
had literally declared worldwide economic and political war against
Germany
in 1933.
Auschwitz, Poland
Notwithstanding the understandably bad feelings against Jews in Germany,
there were no despicable gas chambers or murderous crematoria. No
tattoos.
No lampshades. There were no sadistic plots but merely a war effort that
failed-nothing for Germans to be ashamed of then or now. The indictment
alleging systematic extermination of the Jews was and is false. Evidence
was fabricated and/or purposely misrepresented and depositions falsified.
In fact, the "Holocaust" Lie was manufactured in America to justify the
murder of captured German leaders as a precursor to the subordination of
Germany, the Zionist-Jewish theft of Palestine, and genocidal American
interference in the national affairs of Europe, each of which continues
today.
German lawyer Horst Mahler, probably the most brilliant political mind in
Europe today, with a vast knowledge of history and politics, recently
attempted to travel to Tehran to talk about the foregoing at a conference
called by Iranian historical scholars. The government of Germany-which is
not an independent power even today in such matters-promptly ordered Herr
Mahler's pass****t to be confiscated. On January 29, 2006, he protested in
a
letter to a certain Judge Dehne. Here in essential part (as translated by
James Damon) is what he told the judge in that case (we omit footnotes and
edit slightly for brevity):
Horst Mahler
"Perhaps it still has not gotten through to you that the leaders of world
Jewry-especially the brothers Jacob and Nehemiah Robinson, the 'King of
Dias****a Jews' Nahum Goldmann, the 'Emperor of America' Felix Frankfurter,
the 'Right Hand of President Roosevelt' Sam Rosenman, and Rabbi [Stephen]
Wise-did in fact meet together and conspire in order to lend credence to
the
historical lies of the 'International Military Tribunal' for the so called
'Nuremberg Trials' conducted against the leaders of the Reich, which the
Jewish leaders planned in detail.
Samuel Rosenman
"The Holocaust laws of the OMF [Organizational Form of a Modality of
Foreign
Rule-i.e., the current Federal Republic of Germany] are continuing the
judicial tradition of Stalinist show trials introduced into Germany by the
victorious Allies with the International Military Tribunal. Far from
being
guided by a quest for reality and justice, they are a 'continuation of the
war effort of the allied nations' in the words of U.S. Chief Prosecutor
Robert Jackson. The OMF/Federal Republic courts which impose the
Holocaust
laws are nothing but a cover for despotic rule by the enemies of the
Reich.
"Following unconditional capitulation by the Wehrmacht at the end of World
War II, the victorious Allies had the power to write the history of the
period as they saw fit. Not surprisingly, they labeled the Germans as
'criminal,' just as they had attempted to do during the First World War.
They then established their postwar order of global Mammonism, based on
the
historical lies they fabricated. There is no possibility that our enemies
could ever be inclined to give up the fruits of their victory over the
Reich. They have always been determined and are still determined to hold
onto them and protect the source of their wealth.
Willy Meller: 'Hour of Fate'
(1944
"He who builds his house on lies fears nothing more that the truth, which
can tear it down at any time. This is the reason why, where
historiography
is concerned, the courts of the OMF/Federal Republic are bound to uphold
the
lies of the victorious powers in complete disregard for German public
opinion. These courts are forced to uphold the Allies' lies against the
Reich leader****p exactly as they were proclaimed in the Nuremberg show
trials . . . .
"According to Article 19 of its statute dated 8 August 1945, the
International Military Tribunal was not bound by rules of evidence.
According to the Article 20 of the same statute, the court could admit or
reject evidence as it desired. Thus, rebuttal evidence that the defense
could have used to counter the prosecutors' charges was frequently not
taken
into consideration.
"The basis of verdicts formulated by the Nuremberg court contain recitals
of
facts relating to the causes of the Second World War and the actions of
German armed forces. According to Article 7 (1) [an FRG statute], they
may
not be questioned by German courts and authorities, even in the light of
new
historical evidence. Regarding content of school books, the ministries
for
education and the arts are also bound by these recitals of fact.
"Mr. Dehne, you know very well what is expected of you. By enforcing the
Holocaust lies against historical truth you are acting as a direct agent
of
the destructive will of our enemies. Enforcement of the 'laws' of the
OMF/Federal Republic assures that no actions can ever impair the interests
of the Jews.
"Where Holocaust law is concerned, it is stated very openly. This
situation
necessitates a brief discussion of the Nuremberg Tribunal, which is a
disgrace to Western civilization.
"The credit for inventing the Tribunal goes to two Lithuanian Jews, the
brothers Jacob and Nehemiah Robinson, while credit for actual
implementation
belongs to the Jewish World Congress. World Congress President Nahum
Goldmann, the 'King of the Dias****a Jews,' praised its creation as 'one of
the greatest acts in the history of international justice and morals.'
Nahum also gives us an idea of how Jewish circles were employed to
introduce
this idea to the U.S. government.
Nahum Goldmann (R) with Henry Kissinger
"He writes: 'Under the leader****p of the two brothers Robinson, the
Jewish
World Congress devoted a great deal of energy to the mental and moral
preparation of these trials. To the great credit of the Roosevelt
Administration, it unerringly adopted their principles and was able to put
them through against the doubts of many among the Allies, especially in
England.' Goldmann's account informs us just how this came about:
In the war years 1941 and 1942 we received information from Geneva
concerning the destruction of Jews in the Nazi camps. This prompted Wise
to
decide that we had to visit the President and insist that the Allies warn
the Germans about the consequences of their brutal policy and their
certain
punishment after the War. We arranged a weekend meeting with Rosenman
in
his summer villa near Roosevelt's "Hyde Park" in order to discuss what he
should recommend to the President in Wa****ngton on Monday.
Franklin
Roosevelt
It was a hot morning and we sitting on Rosenman's veranda without jackets
and ties when we suddenly heard the signal that the President's car always
gave. We suddenly realized that Roosevelt was coming to see Rosenman. We
began putting on our coats and ties, but Rosenman said this was not
necessary since Roosevelt attached no im****tance to formalities. Very
soon
the President's car stopped in front of the veranda, and before we could
greet him, Roosevelt humorously remarked: "Well now, this is
interesting-Sam Rosenman, Stephen Wise and Nahum Goldmann sitting here
discussing what orders they want to give the President of the United
States!
Just imagine what the Nazis would give for a picture of this little
scene."
We began stuttering that we were discussing an urgent message from Europe
that Rosenman wanted to show him on Monday. But Roosevelt just winked and
said: "That's fine. Sam can come to see me on Monday and tell me what I'm
supposed to do." Then he drove off.
"In another place Goldmann expresses the pleasures of exercising power
even
more intimately: 'Seduction can turn into passion. The sensation of
seducing a woman might be more intense momentarily, but winning a
statesman
is something very similar . . . . During the time I lived in America
nearly
all presidents-Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy, Johnson and Nixon-had their
"Court Jews," wealthy people who helped finance their election campaigns
and
influential leaders of the Jewish community.'
"Another prominent 'Court Jew' was Felix Frankfurter, to whom Roosevelt
was
always 'very personally attached.' For many years Frankfurter was 'one of
the most influential personalities in Wa****ngton,' which made him a
competitor for the sobriquet 'Emperor of America' among some Jews. Many
of
Frankfurter's students were appointed to high positions in the Roosevelt
administration. Goldman remarked that 'Frankfurter had no desire to
perform
on stage, but he derived all the more pleasure from pulling strings behind
the scenes.'
Felix Frankfurter
"While the British government argued in favor of summarily executing
captured German leaders-at least 50,000 of them-Stalin favored the show
trials that were dear to his heart. The United States was also interested
in such trials. Under international law, however, it was not possible to
punish military personnel for carrying out orders. When Jacob Robinson
suggested placing captured Germans before a tribunal anyway, American
judges
on the Supreme Court said he was crazy. 'What was unusual about the
wartime
actions of the Nazi officers?' they asked. It might have been possible to
place Hitler and even Göring before a court, but certainly not ordinary
military men who conducted themselves as loyal soldiers and carried out
orders. Finally Robinson succeeded in persuading Supreme Court Judge
Robert
Jackson to accept his point of view.
"Robert H. Jackson (1892-1954), a close friend and trusted adviser of
President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, had served as Assistant Attorney
General from 1936 to 1939 and as Attorney General in 1940 and 1941. He
was
of the opinion that an Allied military tribunal would be 'a continuation
of
the war efforts of the allied nations.' At war's end Jackson was sent to
Europe with instructions to juridically brand Germany for all time as the
aggressor nation solely responsible for World War II.
Georg Slyterman von Langeweyde: 'Knight' (ca. 1935)
'Victory or defeat rests in God's hands/But we are masters and
king of our honor.'
Caption
(translation)
"On Roosevelt's orders, Judge Samuel Rosenman had gone to London at the
beginning of April 1945 in order to develop plans for a collective trial
of
'German War Criminals.' On 5 April Lord Chancellor Sir John Simon, head
of
the British juridical system, had argued for summary execution of Hitler
and
his cohorts without any kind of trial. British Attorney General Sir David
Maxwell Fyfe informed Rosenman that he also was 'personally in favor of
the
method of summary execution.' On the next day, however, Simon announced
that Wa****ngton needed 'judicial proceedings before executions.'
"Obviously, those who thought up the tribunal idea had persuaded the
'head
of the British legal system' of the advantage of having a high ranking
international 'Judiciary' create the 'manifest obviousness' necessary to
sup****t the historical lies about German criminality and war guilt. But
would any judge accept the idea that the victorious Allies' shooting of
50,000 captured National Socialists proved the 50,000 victims had
committed
the cruel deeds of which they were accused by their enemies? That was
most
unlikely. Any 'judge' who accepted the notion that being a victim of
murder
proves that the victim of murder had committed a capital offense and
therefore makes his guilt obvious, would presumably land in an insane
asylum.
"After Roosevelt's death, and with the acquiescence of the President
Truman,
Rosenman officially offered Jackson the post of chief prosecutor at the
victors' tribunal. The offer came with this stipulation: The captured
Nazis should first receive a 'fair trial'-and then be hanged!
'Extraordinarily happy about the offer,' Jackson accepted immediately. He
had long defended the thesis that in the 20th Century, 19th Century
concepts
about war no longer applied. He also believed that the USA, on account of
its 'leader****p role in the world,' was entitled to intervene in any
military conflict and act as it saw fit. Jackson announced that in order
to
'secure the moral leader****p of the USA' he was authorized to 'prove,'
with
the help of a military tribunal, that 'these damned Germans were solely
responsible for the war . . . . We need a scapegoat on which to foist the
world's evils for a long time to come.'
Robert
Jackson
"In consultations preparatory to the tribunal, Jackson ignored the
objections advanced by the European allies that the accused could prove,
based on do***ents seized in France, that the Reich was not responsible
for
the outbreak of World War II; rather, the War had been forced on Germany.
They pointed out that the do***ents would prove that England, France, and
the USA had all backed Poland in its stubborn and aggressive attitude
toward
Germany. After all, Poland had mobilized twice before Germany mobilized.
In July 1939, Polish Marshall Rydz-Smigly publicly stated before officers
in
Thorn that 'Poland wants war and Germany will not be able to prevent it,
even if it wants to.' Furthermore, Roosevelt had for all practical
purposes declared war against Germany in 1941. The German Declaration of
War was completely legitimate, given the provocative American aggressions
against German ****ps and its violation of neutrality by delivering weapons
to the British.
"None of that could be mentioned during the trial, of course. Germany
must
be branded and condemned as the sole guilty party, and the European war
had
to be presented as German aggression from the very beginning. Brigadier
General Telford Taylor, later the chief American advisor for the
prosecution, objected that it would not be possible in a fair trial 'to
push
through the absurd notion of Germany's sole guilt-rather, the opposite
will
come out.' Finally the USA had driven Hitler into a Polish trap from
which
he was unable to extricate himself: Churchill and Roosevelt had agreed
on
the complete annihilation of the German Reich from the very beginning.
Troika: Stalin, Roosevelt, and Churchill
"To this Jackson retorted: 'Who's talking about a fair trial? Of course
the
Germans will try to accuse the Allies of pursuing a policy that forced
them
into war. I expect that, since I know about the do***ents seized from the
German Foreign Office. They all come to the same conclusion: "We have no
way out. We must fight; we are encircled; we are being strangled:" Well,
it would be a catastrophe if this trial got into a discussion about the
political and economic causes of the war. That could cause an unending
disaster in both America and Europe . . . .
"Taylor concluded, 'That means the question of who is guilty of starting
the
war must be avoided at all costs . . . it must not be allowed to come up.'
That, however, would be possible only if Jackson could succeed as
lawmaker,
in setting up the rules of the game for a perfect trial by simply
forbidding
all discussion of the causes of the war before the tribunal. Jackson took
Taylor's remarks as his guidelines and remarked: 'If all do***ents and
statements to this effect are rejected by the court as irrelevant or
unim****tant, the war policies of the Western Powers, Poland and the USSR
cannot be discussed.'
Pax Americana
(Anon.)
"Taylor expressed the idea in a metaphor, saying 'The shark pool of
European
politics between the wars must appear as a carp pond with one single evil
pike swimming around.' Jackson added 'And this pike-Hitler naturally-must
by the end of the trial have mutated into a monstrous killer shark,
threatening to devour all the little fish and striving for world
domination.' On 6 June 1945 Jackson reassured Truman with a re****t
setting
out the new 'legal concepts' along with his plans for the course of the
trial, which included a London conference with jurists from all the other
allies. This conference took place in London between June 26 and August
8.
"The French Professor of international law, Dr. Gros, began by pointing
out
that 'wars of aggression' did not represent a criminal violation of
international law . . . . If the war were thought of as a 'criminal act
of
individuals,' however, the law could be bent. The latest book by Trainin
[the Soviet expert on international law who took part in the conference]
states that 'A war of aggression is to be regarded as an international
crime
in the sense of the discussions held at the League of Nations.'
Compensation
can be demanded, but criminal penalties do not ensue. For this reason, he
said, one may not invent a punishment. Trainin would have liked to come
to
a different conclusion; but, as he stated, a 'war of aggression' entails
no
criminal liability. Furthermore the Joint Declaration made at the Yalta
Conference in February 1945 made no mention of the crime of aggressive
war.
Adolf Hitler (Fidus, 1941)
Adolf
Hitler (B. Bleeker, 1937)
"Jackson reacted to these objections with indignation. He said that the
U.S. had conducted total war and paid no attention to international law,
unless it had reason to fear retaliation by the enemy. Furthermore, since
the U.S. was the most powerful victor, no one was in a position to hinder
it
from introducing new guidelines in the interest of the Allies. With this
in
mind he had worked out his own proposal for the prosecution. It contained
the following main points: 'Offensive war, invasion, attack in violation
of
international laws and treaties, along with war as an instrument of
national
policy.' He stated that he considered charges of war atrocities as being
of
'secondary im****tance.'
"In the course of further discussions he explained: 'As far as specific
charges are concerned, the United States are particularly interested in
developing the (new) criminal charge of waging aggressive war, in order to
depict Germany's entire conduct of the war as illegal. This is because,
during the War, I suggested certain measures to President Roosevelt that
under international law could be justified only with the theory that
Germany's
conduct was illegal. In order to justify these measures, the United
States
have [sic] a particular interest in judicially establi****ng the illegality
of the German war.'
"The French appeals court judge Robert Falco gave Jackson something to
consider by pointing out that 'If we go through with this, the court will
be puni****ng the Germans for crimes with which the Allies can also be
charged.' Thus the problem was, how could the victors conduct in
international court, an international trial for violation of international
law, in which Germany's violations of international law would be pilloried
and punished, but theirs would not? It had to be anticipated that the
world
would hurl the response 'But you did the same thing!' back in the victors'
faces, and the judges from neutral countries would throw out the whole
trial.
" 'At the end, the whole thing would turn into an international tribunal,'
Falco lamented. At this point Jackson dropped his mask. His response
was,
'You must understand that it is not going to be just an international
tribunal, but an international military tribunal! And nobody will have a
say about its composition except we and we alone. All the judges will be
picked from countries that took part in the War. We will be the ones who
frame the court charter, determine the composition of the court, and write
the legal code for the court. We will be the court prosecutors and the
court judges. In this trial neither the accused nor the witnesses will
have
a right to testify freely, except perhaps Hermann Göring.'
Reichsmarschall Hermann Goering
"Here Prof. Gros interjected that 'If lawmakers, prosecutors and judges
are
all the same persons, this fact alone will constitute a decisive
objection.
In every legal system with which I am familiar, such a composition would
be
illegal and impossible.' Again he raised the question: 'Besides, how can
men who have committed no criminal acts still be accused and sentenced?
We
French may think that such a thing would be politically desirable, but it
is
not possible under international law.'
"Jackson had no response to that except a cynical rejection of legal
procedure by stating 'I must admit that international law is weak and
unclear in sup****t of our position . . . . We simply have to explain that
the Germans are personally responsible.' Prof. Gros still could not
follow
his thought. He objected: 'The acts of which the German leaders can be
accused is an old familiar story, but the fact remains that no one has
ever
declared such deeds to be criminal violations of international law. If we
do this now, it will be a case of ex post facto lawmaking.'
"Prof. Gros's objection did not impress Jackson in the least: 'You may be
right,' he replied. "Precisely for that reason, explanations and
discussions
of the principles of international law must be restricted to the minimum
in
the courtroom.' At this point British Attorney General Maxwell-Fyfe
interjected: 'What we want to avoid in this trial is a discussion about
whether or not the proceedings are violations of international law. We
shall simply state what international law is and then not allow any
discussion of whether it is international law or not.'
"Jackson reiterated the quintessence of the discussion in these words:
'You
are entirely right. After all, the Allies are still technically at war
with
Germany, even though its military and political institutions have
collapsed.
Our military court represents a continuation of the war effort of the
Allied
nations . . . . As the victors, we see it as our undisputed right to keep
secret from the court every do***ent and every witness that could prove
damaging to us.' Prof. Gros again objected, 'But that is turning the
entire European legal tradition upside down. So we are not interested in
establi****ng the truth here, we are just interested in winning a judicial
victory?' Jackson: 'That's right. And since all the advantages are on
our
side, our victory before the court is assured.'
Arno Breker: 'Departure of the Warrior' (1942)
"Thus the Nuremberg Tribunal was and remains to this day a triumph of
power
over the law, committed by criminals who wrapped themselves in judges'
robes.
"On 8 August 1945 the London conference ended with the 'Agreement on the
Prosecution and Punishment of the Principal War Criminals of the European
Axis Powers' including the court statute for this court that was appended
to
the agreement. The protocols of the London sessions were illegally
published
four years later as the 'Re****t of Robert H. Jackson.' If they had been
made public in 1945, in any trial conducted according to English Common
Law,
they would have caused a mistrial. As soon as they knew of these
discussions, the judges would have had no choice except to discontinue the
trial or begin anew. Those present at the London conference understood
this
perfectly well: any verdict that was reached before the trial would have
to
be overruled. The judges who participated in the London discussions were
clearly compromised. They were obligated to recuse themselves, but they
failed to do this. The precise index of sources for this matter may be
found in Hans Meiser's book 'Das Tribunal,' a computerized copy of which
is
appended hereto.
"When one realizes that the International Military Tribunal was nothing
except a victors' consortium for murder, it becomes clear . . . that . . .
the so-called 'judges' at Nuremberg accomplished nothing more than
rationalizing the murder of the Reich leader****p [and] . . . have
mercilessly delivered the entire German nation for all time to the
'Auschwitz Cudgel,' with which our enemy is annihilating the soul of the
German nation.
ISBN No. 1591480019
"The 'manifest obviousness of the Holocaust' alleged by the courts of
OMF/Federal Republic of Germany is but an empty phrase. There is no
evidence for the event conjured by this battle cry, as is clearly
demonstrated in the appended book by Germar Rudolf: 'Vorlesungen über den
Holocaust-Strittige Fragen im Kreuzverhör' ('Lectures on the
Holocaust-Controversial Issues Cross Examined'), Castle Hill Publishers,
P.O. Box 118, Hastings, TN34 3ZQ, UK (April 2005) [Americans should visit
http://vho.org/store/USA
to purchase this illustrated 568-page book (ISBN
No. 1591480019) in English. For all non-Europeans Castle Hill's address
is
253 W. 72nd Street, #1711, New York, NY 10023 USA].
"Mr. Dehne, perhaps you now understand the panic with which world Jewry is
reacting to [Iranian] President Ahmadinejad's announcement that Iran will
sponsor a scientific commission and conference to investigate the
authenticity of the Holocaust. If, as you state, my participation in the
conference planned by the Iranian government would threaten 'serious
consequences' for the Bundesrepublik, then you have said everything about
the Federal Republic that needs to be said.
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
"The Bundesrepublik, along with the Basic Law, is doomed to vanish on the
day when 'a constitution goes into effect that has been created by the
German nation in a free election.' (Article 146 of the Basic Law.) This
will be the day when the German nation through its Reichsordnende
Versammlung (Constitutional Convention) officially rejects the historical
falsifications sponsored by the enemies of the Reich and reclaims its
sovereignty. That day is coming sooner than you think. The Tehran
conference will greatly facilitate the dissolution of the Federal
Republic,
since it is constructed on a great lie that will be demolished in Tehran:
the Holocaust Lie.
"In conclusion [said Horst Mahler], I would like to remind you that the
German Reich continues to exist. Its laws are still in effect. They can
not at present be carried out, for the reason that foreign domination, in
clear violation of international law, is hindering the Reich by force from
doing so,. When the Reich's ability to function is again secured, actions
such as yours will be punishable as treason."
End of 'The "Holocaust" Lie'
|
