generated by an Adobe application 12.00

‘THE TRILLION DOLLAR LIE – THE HOLOCAUST- VOL II’ – PHOENIX JOURNALS #40

CHAPTER  14

REC  #2    HATONN

FRI., NOV. 15, 1991   12:15 P.M.   YEAR 5, DAY 091

THE  NATURE  &  CONDITION  OF  WAR-TIME

CONCENTRATION  CAMPS

 

In his recent book ADOLF HITLER (London, 1973), Colin Cross, who brings more intelli­gence than is usual to many problems of this period, observes astutely that “The shuffling of millions of Jews around Europe and murdering them, in a time of desperate war emergency, was useless from any rational point of view” (p. 307).  How many of you can relate to just having family and relatives, say a large family of 20, to a special Thanksgiving dinner and they are there as your guests for the week-end.  Taking this tiny little “blip” of possibility a bit fur­ther; now take this lit­tle gathering for three days of meals, bathing, sleeping, etc., etc., and multiply it to 50, 100, 1000—now try a million—3 million—6 million!  Now, while you are trying to fix this celebration dinner, you also have a full-blown bombing war going on, the power goes off and you have no cooking facilities, the dog kills the cat after it ate the pet ca­nary, the babies are teething and have chicken pox and the in-laws find dust on the furniture.  Now, you have to stop what you are do­ing and murder all these people and dispose (totally) of the bodies for you must not have any evidence of the act remaining!  You may actually, at this point, feel like doing just that—but it becomes totally impractical to consider as a feasible course of action.  Does it not leave consid­eration of possibilities of per­ceptions which are sim­ply not true?  You ones must begin to put these things into reasonable perspective and THEN look at pos­sibilities and PROBABILITIES.

 

At the point above it becomes necessary to question the likeli­hood of this irrationalism, and whether it was even possible.  Is it likely that, at the height of the war when the Germans were fighting a desperate battle for survival on two fronts, they would have conveyed millions of Jews for miles to supposedly elabo­rate and costly slaughter houses?  To have conveyed three or four million Jews to Auschwitz alone (even supposing that such an inflated number existed in Eu­rope, which it did not), would have placed an insuperable burden upon German trans­portation facilities which were strained to the limit in supporting the far-flung Russian front.  To have transported the mythical six mil­lion Jews and countless numbers of other nationalities to in­ternment camps, and to have housed, clothed and fed them there, would simply have par­alyzed their military operations.  There is no reason to suppose that the efficient Germans would have put their military fortunes at such risk.

 

On the other hand, the transportation of a reasonable 363,000 prisoners to Auschwitz in the course of the war (the number known to be registered there) at least makes sense in terms of the compulsory labor they supplied.  In fact, of the 3 million Jews living in Eu­rope, it is certain that no more than two million were ever interned at one time, and it is probable that the num­ber was much closer to 1,500,000—that is a LOT of people.  You shall see later, in the “Report of the Red Cross”, that whole Jewish populations such as that of Slovakia avoided detention in camps, while others were placed in community “ghettos” like Theresienstadt.  Moreover, from western Europe deportations were far fewer.  The estimate of Reitlinger that only about 50,000 French Jews from a total pop­ulation of 320,000 were de­ported and interned has been already noted.

 

The question must also be asked as to whether it could have been physically possible to destroy the millions of Jews that are alleged.  Had the Germans enough time for it?  Is it likely that they would have cremated people by the million when they were so short of manpower and re­quired all prisoners of war for pur­poses of war production?  Would it have been possible to de­stroy and remove all traces of a million people in six months?  Could such enormous gath­erings of Jews and executions on such a vast scale have been kept secret?  This secrecy, you must re­member, was kept from the very inmates in the orthodox view of this matter—there are NO witnesses to any gassing—not even inmates of the camp!  These are the kind of questions that the critical, thinking person should be asking.  And he will soon discover that not only the statistical and documentary evidence given here, but simple logistics combine to discredit the legend of the Six Million.

 

Although it was impossible for millions to have been murdered in them, the nature and condi­tions of Germany’s concentration camps have been vastly exaggerated to make the claim plausi­ble.  William Shirer, in a typically reckless passage, states that “All of the thirty odd principal Nazi concentration camps were death camps” (ibid. p. 1150).  This is totally untrue, and is not even accepted now by the principal propagators of the extermi­nation legend.  Shirer also quotes Eugen Kogon’s THE THE­ORY AND PRACTICE OF HELL (N.Y. 1950, p. 227) which puts the total number of deaths at all of them at the ridiculous figure of 7,125,000, though Shirer admits in a footnote that this is “undoubtedly too high”.

 

“DEATH  CAMPS”  BEHIND  THE  IRON  CURTAIN

 

It is true that in 1945 Allied propaganda did claim that all the concentration camps, particu­larly those in Germany itself, were “death camps”, but not for long.  On this question, the eminent American historian Harry Elmer Barnes wrote: “These camps were first presented as those in Germany, such as Dachau, Belsen, Buchenwald, Sachsenhausen and Dora, but it was soon demonstrated that there had been no systematic extermination in these camps.  Attention was then moved to Auschwitz, Tre­blinka, Belzec, Chelmno, Jonowska, Tarnow, Ravensbruck, Maughausen, Brezeznia and Birkenau, which does not exhaust the list that appears to have been extended as needed” (Rampart Journal, Summer 1967).  What had happened was that cer­tain honest observers among the British and American occupation forces in Germany, while admitting that many inmates had died of disease and starvation in the final months of the war, had found no evidence after all of “gas chambers”.  As a result, eastern camps in the Russian zone of occupation such as Auschwitz and Treblinka gradually came to the fore as horrific cen­ters of extermination (though no one was permitted to see them), and this tendency has lasted to the present day.  Here in these camps it was all supposed to have happened, but with the Iron Curtain brought down firmly over them, no one has ever been able to verify such charges.  The Communists claimed that four million people died at Auschwitz in gigantic gas chambers ac­commodating 2,000 people—and no one could argue to the contrary.

 

What is the truth about so-called “gas chambers”?  Stephen F. Pinter, who served as a lawyer for the United States War De­partment in the occupation forces in Germany and Austria for six years after the war, made the following statement in the widely read Catholic magazine Our Sunday Visitor, June 14th, 1959:  “I was in Dachau for 17 months after the war, as a U.S. War Department Attorney, and can state that there was no gas chamber at Dachau.  What was shown to visitors and sight­seers there and erro­neously described as a gas chamber was a crematory.  Nor were there gas chambers in any of the other concentration camps in Germany.  We were told that there was a gas chamber at Auschwitz, but since that was in the Russian zone of occupation, we were not permitted to investigate since the Russians would not allow it.  From what I was able to de­termine during six postwar years in Germany and Austria, there were a number of Jews killed, but the figure of a million was certainly never reached.  I interviewed thousands of Jews, former inmates of concentration camps in Germany and Aus­tria, and consider myself as well qualified as any man on this subject.”

 

This tells a very different story from the customary propaganda.  Pinter, of course, is very astute on the question of the crematory being represented as a gas chamber.  This is a frequent ploy be­cause no such a thing as a gas chamber has ever been shown to exist in these camps, hence the deliberately misleading term of “gas oven”, aimed at confusing a gas chamber with a crema­torium.  The latter, usually a single furnace and similar to the kind of thing employed today, were used quite simply for the cremation of those persons who had died from various causes within the camp, particularly infectious diseases.  This fact was conclusively proved by the Ger­man archbishop, Cardinal Faul­haber of Munich.  He informed the Americans that during the Allied air raids on Munich in September 1944, 30,000 people were killed.  The archbishop re­quested the authorities at the time to cremate the bodies of the victims in the crematorium at Dachau.  But he was told that, unfortunately, this plan could not be carried out; the cremato­rium, having only one furnace, was not able to cope with the bodies of the air raid victims.  Clearly, therefore, it could not have coped with the 238,000 Jewish bod­ies which were allegedly cremated there.  In order to do so, the crematorium would have to be kept going for 326 years without stopping and 530 tons of ashes would have been created.

 

CASUALTY  FIGURES  REDUCED

 

The figures of Dachau casualties are typical of the kind of exaggerations that have since had to be drastically revised.  In 1946, a memorial plaque was unveiled at Dachau by Philip Auer­bach, the Jewish State-Secretary in the Bavarian Government who was con­victed for embez­zling money which he claimed as compensation for non-existent Jews.  The plaque read: “This area is being retained as a shrine to the 238,000 individuals who were cremated here.”  Since then, the official casualty figures have had to be steadily re­vised downwards, and now stand at only 20,600, the majority from typhus and starva­tion only at the end of the war.  This deflation, to ten percent of the original figure, will doubtless continue, and one day will be applied to the legendary figure of six million as a whole.

 

Does it now make sense WHY the Zionists are causing LAWS TO BE MADE TO MAKE IT UNLAWFUL TO EVEN SPEAK OUT IN THE POSSIBILITY THAT THE ORTHO­DOX ZIONIST TALE OF THE HOLOCAUST IS IN ERROR?  THE ONLY WAY TO SI­LENCE TRUTH IS TO COVER IT AND MAKE IT ILLEGAL TO SPEAK OF THE SUB­JECT.  This is also WHY ones who disagree with the Phoenix material will effort to STOP YOU FROM SEEING IT AND WHY IT IS BURNED AND BANNED—TO KEEP YOU-THE-PEOPLE FROM FINDING TRUTH!!

 

Another example of drastic revision is the present estimate of Auschwitz casualties.  The ab­surd allegations of three or four million deaths there are no longer plausible even to Reitlinger.  He now puts the number of casualties at only 600,000; and al­though this figure is still exag­gerated in the extreme, it is a sig­nificant reduction on four million and further progress is to be expected.  Shirer himself quotes Reitlinger’s latest estimate, but he fails to reconcile this with his earlier statement that half of that figure, about 300,000 Hungarian Jews were supposedly “done to death in forty-six days”—a supreme example of the kind of irresponsible nonsense that is written on this subject.

 

Another thing that seems strange to me is WHY would ones who are so without mercy and so heinous bother with the middle step of providing gas chambers?  You didn’t bother to even kill the troops you buried in the Eisenhower camp holes nor in the trenches in Iraq.  Why, then, would not the people be placed di­rectly into the ovens to be both killed and cremated?  There seems to be totally illogical and inefficient methodology at play in this scenario.  Do you sup­pose it was to insure that the Polish gas salesman, who later became Pope, could continue in busi­ness?  Come, come, chelas—God gave you brains with which to REASON!

 

HUMANE  CONDITIONS

 

That several thousand camp inmates did die in the chaotic final months of the war brings us to the question of their war-time conditions.  These have been deliberately falsified in innumer­able books of an extremely lurid and unpleasant kind.  The Red Cross Report, examined be­low, demonstrates conclusively that throughout the war the camps were well administered.  The working inmates received a daily ration, even throughout 1943 and 1944, of not less than 2,750 calories, which was more than double the average civilian ration in occupied Germany in the years after 1945.  The internees were under regular medical care, and those who became seri­ously ill were transferred to hospital.  All internees, unlike those in Soviet camps, could re­ceive parcels of food, clothing and pharmaceutical supples from the Special Relief Division of the Red Cross.  The Office of the Public Prosecutor conducted thorough investigations into each case of criminal arrest, and those found innocent were released; those found guilty, as well as those de­portees convicted of major crimes within the camp, were sentenced by military courts and exe­cuted.  In the Federal Archives of Koblenz there is a direc­tive of January 1943 from Himmler regarding such executions, stressing that “no brutality is to be allowed” (Manvell & Frankl, ibid. p. 312).  Occasionally there was brutality but such cases were im­mediately scrutinized by S.S. Judge Dr. Konrad Morgen of the Reich Criminal Police Office, whose job was to investi­gate ir­regularities at the various camps.  Morgen himself prose­cuted commander Koch of Buchenwald in 1943 for excesses at his camp, a trial to which the German public was invited.  It is significant that Oswald Pohl, the administrator of the concentra­tion camp system who was dealt with so harshly at Nuremberg, was in favor of the death penalty for Koch.  In fact, the S.S. court did sentence Koch to death, but he was given the option of serving on the Russian front.  Before he could do this, however, Prince Waldeck, the leader of the S.S. in the district, carried out his exe­cution.  This case seems ample proof of the serious­ness with which the S.S. regarded unneces­sary brutality.  Several S.S. court actions of this kind were conducted in the camps during the war to prevent excesses, and more than 800 cases were investigated before 1945.  Did some go unaccounted for?  Certainly, I would imagine—do you know what goes on in your prisons?  What about Rodney King of Los Angeles?  All we suggest is that you open your eyes and LOOK.

 

I FIND IT QUITE REMARKABLE THAT THE GERMANS HAVE CONTINUALLY URGED THOROUGH INTERNA­TIONAL INVESTIGATIONS INTO THESE ACCUSA­TIONS AND THE EVIDENCE WAS TORN DOWN AND THE ZIONISTS ALWAYS ARE THE ONES WHO REFUSE TO ALLOW LOOKING INTO THE POSSIBILITY OF INAC­CURACIES.  NOW, IT IS ILLEGAL TO EVEN SPEAK OF THIS MATTER IN GER­MANY—SO HOW SHALL JUSTICE BE FOUND?  EVEN YOUR PRESIDENT BUSH HAS GIVEN SERVICE TO THE SHRINES—WHO WILL GIVE HEARING IF THE FACTS ARE DENIED PUBLIC SCRUTINY?  DOES THIS NOT SMACK OF “COVER-UP”—READ MY LIPS??

 

DHARMA, IN YOUR BLACKEST MOMENTS, CHELA, AS WE WRITE AND THE THREATS FLOW—KNOW THAT IF NOTHING MORE IN THIS LIFE-TIME—YOU ARE GIVING HEARING TO A NATION CONDEMNED FOR THAT WHICH THEY DID NOT COMMIT!  THEY HAVE ASKED FOR HEARING AND THE TRIBUNALS OF “INJUSTICE” HAVE MADE IT ILLEGAL TO INQUIRE.  WORLD, YOU ARE IN SERI­OUSLY GRAVE CIRCUMSTANCE!  AHO.

 

Morgen testified at Nuremberg that he discussed confidentially with hundreds of inmates the prevailing conditions in the camps.  He found few that were undernourished except in the hospi­tals, and noted that the pace and achievement in compulsory labor by inmates was far lower than among German civilian workers.

 

The evidence of Pinter and Cardinal Faulhaber has been shown to disprove the claims of exter­mination at Dachau, and we have seen how the casualty figures of that camp have been contin­uously revised downwards.  The camp at Dachau near Munich, in fact, may be taken as fairly typical of these places of intern­ment.  Compulsory labor in the factories and plants was the or­der of the day, but the Communist leader Ernst Ruff testified in his Nuremberg affidavit of April 18th, 1947 that the treatment of prisoners on the work details and in the camp of Dachau re­mained humane.  The Polish underground leader, Jan Piechowiak, who was at Dachau from May 22nd, 1940 until April 19th, 1945 also testified on March 21st, 1946 that prison­ers there re­ceived good treatment, and that the S.S. personnel at the camp were “well disciplined”.  Berta Schirotschin, who worked in the food service at Dachau throughout the war, testi­fied that the working inmates, until the beginning of 1945 and despite increasing privation in Ger­many, re­ceived their custom­ary second breakfast at 10 a.m. every morning.

 

In general, hundreds of affidavits from Nuremberg testify to the humane conditions prevailing in concentration camps; but em­phasis was invariably laid on those which reflected badly on the German administration and could be used for propaganda pur­poses.  A study of the documents also reveals that Jewish wit­nesses who resented their deportation and internment in prison camps tended to greatly exaggerate the rigors of their condition, whereas other nationals in­terned for political reasons, such as those cited above, generally presented a more balanced pic­ture.  In many cases, prisoners such as Charlotte Bormann, whose ex­periences did not ac­cord with the picture presented at Nurem­berg, were not permitted to testify.

 

UNAVOIDABLE  CHAOS

 

The orderly situation prevailing in the German concentra­tion camps slowly broke down in the last fearful months of 1945.  The Red Cross Report of 1948 explains that the satu­ration bombing by the Allies paralyzed the transport and communications system of the Reich, no food reached the camps and starvation claimed an increasing number of vic­tims, both in prison camps and among the civilian popula­tion of Germany.  This terrible situation was compounded in the camps both by great overcrowding and the consequent outbreak of typhus epidemics.  Overcrowding occurred as a result of prisoners from the eastern camps such as Auschwitz being evacuated westward before the Russian ad­vance; columns of such exhausted people arrived at several German camps such as Belsen and Buchenwald which had themselves reached a state of great hardship.  Belsen camp near Bremen was in an especially chaotic condi­tion in these months and Himmler’s physician, Felix Kersten, an anti-Nazi, explains that its un­fortunate reputation as a “death camp” was due solely to the ferocity of the typhus epidemic which broke out there in March 1945 (MEMOIRS 1940-1945, London 1956).  Undoubtedly these fearful conditions  cost several thou­sand lives, and it is these conditions that are repre­sented in the photographs of emaciated human beings and heaps of corpses which the propa­gandists delight in showing, claiming they are victims of “extermination”.

 

WHAT EXCUSE DO YOU HAVE FOR YOUR NATION WHO CONTINUES TO STARVE AND KILL BY DISEASE, THE PEOPLE OF IRAQ?  YOU CONTINUE TO REFUSE TO AL­LOW FOOD AND SUPPLIES INTO A NATION DYING OF STARVATION AND LACK OF FACILI­TIES TO SUSTAIN LIFE.  HOW WILL YOU DEAL WITH THIS HISTORI­CALLY?  OH YES, I FORGOT—YOU WILL MAKE IT ILLE­GAL TO SPEAK OF IT!  SO BE IT.

 

A surprisingly honest appraisal of the situation at Belsen in 1945 appeared in Purnell’s HIS­TORY OF THE SECOND WORLD WAR (Vol. 7, No. 15) by Dr. Russell Barton, now superin­tendent and consultant psychiatrist at Severalls Hospital, Essex, who spent one month at the camp as a medical student after the war.  His account vividly illustrates the true causes of the mor­tality that occurred in such camps towards the war’s end, and how such extreme con­ditions came to prevail there.  Dr. Barton explains that Brigadier Glyn Hughes, the British Medical Of­ficer who took command of Belsen in 1945, “did not think there had been any atrocities in the camp” despite discipline and hard work.  “Most people,” writes Dr. Barton, “attributed the condi­tions of the inmates to deliberate intention on the part of the Ger­mans...Inmates were eager to cite examples of brutality and neglect, and visiting journalists from different countries inter­preted the situation according to the needs of propaganda at home.”

 

However, Dr. Barton makes it quite clear that the conditions of starvation and disease were un­avoidable in the circumstances, and that they occurred only during the months of 1945.  “From discussions with prisoners it seemed that conditions in the camp were not too bad until late 1944.  The huts were set among pine trees and each was provided with lavatories, wash basins, show­ers and stoves for heating.”  The cause of food shortage is also explained.  “German medical offi­cers told me that it had been increasingly difficult to transport food to the camp for some months.  Anything that moved on the autobahns was likely to be bombed...I was surprised to find records, going back for two or three years, of large quantities of food cooked daily for dis­tribution.  At that time I became con­vinced, con­trary to popular opinion, that there had never been a policy of deliberate starvation.  This was confirmed by the large numbers of well-fed inmates.  Why then were so many people suffering from malnutrition?...The major rea­sons for the state of Belsen were dis­ease, gross overcrowding by central authority, lack of law and order within the huts, and inadequate supplies of food, water and drugs.”  The lack of order, which led to riots over food distribution, was quelled by British Machine-gun fire and a display of force when British tanks and armored cars toured the camp.  

Apart from the unavoidable deaths in these circumstances, Glyn Hughes estimated that about “1,000 were killed through the kindness of English soldiers giving them their own rations and chocolates.”  As a man who was at Belsen, Dr. Barton is obvi­ously very much alive to the false­hoods of concentration camp mythology, and he concludes: “In trying to assess the causes of the conditions found in Belsen one must be alerted to the tremendous visual display, ripe for pur­poses of propaganda, that masses of starved corpses presented”.  To discuss such condi­tions “naively in terms of `goodness’ and `badness’ is to ignore the constituent factor...”.

 

To be continued at the next writing.  Thank you.

 

http://fourwinds10.com/journals/pdf/J040.pdf  

 

April 11, 2011