What are good facts to show that Jews are greedy rats? I have someone who won't see that they push cultural enrichment, says mixed dna is stronger than being pure. The holocaust was a genocide, stand with isreal, doesn't agree they've been kicked out of 100+ countries. Says lgbt being pushed down our throats is just a trend that people like. And I'm a hatefilled hillbilly.
The jewish problem
Blake Richardson
Other urls found in this thread:
youtu.be
youtu.be
youtu.be
youtu.be
youtu.be
youtu.be
youtu.be
youtu.be
youtu.be
youtu.be
youtu.be
youtu.be
youtu.be
youtu.be
youtu.be
youtu.be
archive.is
youtu.be
cis.org
archive.is
thezog.wordpress.com
thezog.wordpress.com
thezog.wordpress.com
thezog.wordpress.com
thezog.wordpress.com
thezog.wordpress.com
thezog.wordpress.com
thezog.wordpress.com
thezog.wordpress.com
thezog.wordpress.com
thezog.wordpress.com
thezog.wordpress.com
thezog.wordpress.com
thezog.wordpress.com
thezog.wordpress.com
thezog.wordpress.com
thezog.wordpress.com
thezog.wordpress.com
pastebin.com
archive.is
twitter.com
Lincoln Morris
卐 - WHITE GENOCIDE & JEWISH INFLUENCE
======================================
>RABBI Yosef Tzvi Ben Porat explains why Hitler hated Jews.
youtu.be
>Endgame - White Genocide
youtu.be
>THE JEWISH QUESTION
youtu.be
>The Jewish-Bolshevik Decimation of the Russian People
youtu.be
>Jewish financiers and the Russian Revolution
youtu.be
>Putin confirms, 85% Jews behind Bolshevism
youtu.be
>The Talmudic basis of Jewish supremacy
youtu.be
>Miscegenation illegal in (((Our Greatest Ally)))
youtu.be
>Jews pushing immigration for white nations
youtu.be
>Barbara Lerner Spectre
youtu.be
>Jewish Supremacism
youtu.be
>Noel Ignatiev
youtu.be
>Mainstreaming white genocide
youtu.be
>Sarkozy on forced misecegenation
youtu.be
>Ben Freedman on World Zionist wars
youtu.be
>Alon Ziv promoting interracial couples
youtu.be
>Alon Ziv defending Jews refusing to breed outside their race
archive.is
>The Frankfurt School of Cultural Marxism
youtu.be
Jackson Mitchell
卐 - Jews in High Places
>Steinlight: 'The Jewish Stake in America's Changing Democracy'
cis.org
archive.is
--------------------------------------
thezog.wordpress.com
thezog.wordpress.com
thezog.wordpress.com
thezog.wordpress.com
thezog.wordpress.com
thezog.wordpress.com
thezog.wordpress.com
thezog.wordpress.com
thezog.wordpress.com
thezog.wordpress.com
thezog.wordpress.com
thezog.wordpress.com
thezog.wordpress.com
thezog.wordpress.com
thezog.wordpress.com
thezog.wordpress.com
thezog.wordpress.com
thezog.wordpress.com
Elijah Foster
>mixed blood is better than Pure
Bentley Hill
see, newfag, if you actually DID browse the NatSoc general threads, archived information, and learned before debating you wouldn't have to make this thread
Jackson Ortiz
Oh yeah, because no other race is greedy. Nazi cucks are nigger tier. Always have to blame someone for your problems.
Nolan Young
...
Aaron Howard
...
Jackson Turner
Jews admit to making up the extra 5 million death toll in the holocaust to gain sympathy from non Jews. This begs the question, why should we believe them about the 6 million if they used the 5 million to gain sympathy too?
>The “5 million” has driven Holocaust historians to distraction ever since Wiesenthal started to peddle it in the 1970s. Wiesenthal told the Washington Post in 1979, “I have sought with Jewish leaders not to talk about 6 million Jewish dead, but rather about 11 million civilians dead, including 6 million Jews.”
>Yehuda Bauer, an Israeli Holocaust scholar who chairs the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, said he warned his friend Wiesenthal, who died in 2005, about spreading the false notion that the Holocaust claimed 11 million victims – 6 million Jews and 5 million non-Jews.
“I said to him, ‘Simon, you are telling a lie,’” Bauer recalled in an interview Tuesday. “He said, ‘Sometimes you need to do that to get the results for things you think are essential.’”
>“I have been to many Yom Hashoah observances — including those sponsored by synagogues and Jewish communities — where eleven candles were lit,” she wrote in an article in the Jewish Review of Books in which she lacerated Wiesenthal’s ethical standards. “When I tell the organizers that they are engaged in historical revisionism, their reactions range from skepticism to outrage. Strangers have taken me to task in angry letters for focusing ‘only’ on Jewish deaths and ignoring the five million others. When I explain that this number is simply inaccurate, in fact made up, they become even more convinced of my ethnocentrism and inability to feel the pain of anyone but my own people.”
William Flores
...
Benjamin Barnes
Jews can be a bit of a disgruntling topic. They’re never talked about except as a sinless people that we are not allowed to criticize in Western societies, and to go from that to a place where they are constantly criticized can be quite overwhelming. It wouldn’t be such a big issue if it wasn’t a major underpinning justification for so much of what Sup Forums (and many others) detest in modern society. Of course, being such a substantial pillar Sup Forums is more than happy to attack it, although many people express skepticism at/pol/’s claims (such as the Einsatzgruppen’s main purpose being anti-partisan warfare). While I won’t try to get into the specifics of each or argue about the validity of evidence, there are major holes in the official story that should cast doubt in the mind of even the most firm believer. To this end, there are seven questions that should be asked:
Why would the Nazis even kill Jews?
If they had them in concentration labor camps, why kill them instead of putting them to work doing useful labor? In the middle of a total war, labor is a precious resource, and yet the Nazis are supposed to have been stupid (or hateful) enough to kill millions of potential laborers while being smart enough to manage the whole operation and keep it secret? This doesn’t seem to add up.
If they did kill millions in an organized genocide, why use such inefficient methods?
For a people so renowned for their efficiency, the Germans do not seem to possess this quality when it comes to the Holocaust. Gas chambers, gas cars, ovens… even electrical racks or masturbation machines (according to some “eyewitnesses”): all of these are extremely inefficient and wasteful. Some are downright goofy. With millions of rounds of ammunition being produced monthly, and weapons certainly not being scarce, why would the Nazis not just use a cheap bullet to kill millions?
Austin Bailey
They would have the necessary materials in less than a month rather than the countless resources needed to produce deadly gases, burn people alive, or electrocute them. Would the Nazis really have chosen such inefficient methods of extermination during a war decided by resources, knowing that by choosing these more gruesome and inefficient methods they were condemning millions of their own countrymen to death? Knowing that choosing to do so would likely lead to the defeat of their country and the subjugation of their people?
Why are so-called eyewitness accounts given such weight and believed to be so trustworthy?
In modern criminal courts we do not lend such power to eyewitnesses, especially if there is a conflict of interests and they are also victims. And yet when it comes to the Holocaust, all we seem to need as evidence are the claims of the self-reported victims, without evidence or substantiation. This is a serious lapse in historical and public integrity, and yet it is never discussed. What is worse is some of the outright lies and fabrications of these eyewitnesses that have proven to be so–such as the soap and lampshades myth that was quietly dropped. If it is possible for these “eyewitnesses” to lie about this, is it not possible for them to lie about other events? Furthermore, why is there no weight given to the effects of trauma and group psychology, such as would be considered when examining the testimonies of eyewitnesses in criminal cases? Eyewitness testimonies are rarely fully accurate, and oftentimes will wildly differ from each other–exaggerating some facts, downplaying or outright omitting others, and sometimes even creating details entirely. Yet for all of this, there is no consideration, and we take claims of Nazi masturbation machines at face value.
Colton Turner
Why are the only purported death camps investigated by Soviets?
Of all the camps investigated, it was only the ones specifically investigated by the Soviets–in zones which the Allies were forbidden to enter–that were claimed to be death camps. By choosing to believe this claim, we are, in effect, putting faith in Soviet claims of German atrocities. Given that the Soviets blamed many of their own against the Germans, fabricated other claims, and instigated countless more atrocities than could be ever attributed to the Nazis, are their claims really so valid? Should we really be giving them so much weight?
Why is it that it is only Jewish Holocaust supposed victims that are talked about?
Even according to the official narratives, Jews were only a fraction of the total number of victims claimed by the Holocaust, and yet they are focused on almost exclusively. Where are the tears shed for the millions of Poles killed? The hundreds of thousands of Russians and other Slavs? Where are the tears and Holocaust museums and novels and commemorations for these victims? If the Holocaust is truly such a horrifying and shocking event that must live ‘forever’ in our memories, lest it be repeated, why are so many of its victims forgotten? Why are they shoved by the wayside, pressed into the footnotes of history? Are they not also worth our tears? Do they not deserve reparations just as the Jewish victims received? Why is it we never see any mention of this?
Jason Nguyen
...
Charles Taylor
Why is the Holocaust so important anyway?
In terms of the total death toll, it is not the largest. In terms of brutality, it is not the worst. In terms of the amount or percentage of the targeted ethnic group eliminated, it is not the most successful. It is not the most recent genocide. It was not the first genocide. All of this is true, and yet the Holocaust is treated as a unique horror and taught and repeated in perpetuity. Why? What makes the Holocaust so uniquely horrifying and evil? Was it simply that the targeted ethnic group was Jews? Are other ethnic groups not worth our tears? Why is there barely any mention of such horrifying events as the Rwandan genocide? Why are there no mentions of such atrocities as the Armenian genocide by the Turks, the millions of whites killed by the Soviets during the Holodomor, or the countless others killed in various other Asian states throughout the past hundred or more years? Where is the course in schools about these events? Why are they not apparently worth the media’s attention?
If the Holocaust is so undeniably true–so thoroughly established–why is it illegal in many countries to question it at all?
Why is the supposed truth in fear of criticism? Do we ban discussion and argument over whether the Earth is, in fact, round? Should it be illegal to question whether the Roman Empire ever existed? Of course not. Such thinking is preposterous, and there is no need to ban that which is, to the best that we can determine, truthful. And yet this does not apply to the Holocaust, for some reason. Despite numerous holes, revisions, and changes in the Holocaust narrative, questioning any or all of the purported “facts” will get you, in many countries, your own cell in jail–merely for espousing a healthy skepticism that is applied equally to other areas of life! It should be clear that if the Holocaust requires an environment free of criticism to survive, it is not, at least in whole, the truth.
Leo Ramirez
Why did Elie Wiesel and countless other Jews survive the Holocaust if it was the intention of the Third Reich to eliminate every Jew? Elie was a prisoner for several years; other Jews survived even longer. Most of these “survivors” were ordinary people who did not have any unique expertise that the Germans could have exploited. There was no logical reason for them to be kept alive if the goal was extermination. The very existence of more than a million survivors even today, some sixty years later, contradicts one of the basic components of the Holocaust; i.e. that the Germans had a policy to eliminate every Jew.
Why is there no mention of the Holocaust in Churchill’s six volume History of the Second World War, the wartime memoirs of either De Gaulle or Eisenhower, or any of the other lesser luminaries who wrote about the Second World War? Keep in mind all these were written years after the war ended and thus after the Holocaust had been allegedly proven by the Nuremberg Trials. With regard to the Holocaust, the silence of these “cognoscenti” is deafening!
What was an inmate infirmary (and a brothel) doing in Auschwitz if in fact it was a death camp?
Why would the Germans round up Jews from their far-flung empire (thereby tying up large numbers of personnel and rolling stock, while fighting a world war on two fronts) to deliver people to “death camps” hundreds of miles away to simply execute them upon arrival? Wouldn’t a bullet on the spot have appealed to the legendary German sense of efficiency?
Henry Jenkins
Why, after seventy years, have historians been unable to come up with a single German document that points to the Holocaust? Should we believe the likes of Raul Hilberg that in the place of written orders there was an “incredible meeting of the minds” by the literally tens of thousands of people who would have had to coordinate their actions in order to carry out an undertaking of this magnitude?
Why is is still insisted upon that six million Jews were killed when the official Jewish death toll at Auschwitz, the flagship of the Holocaust gulag, has been reduced from an immediate post-war figure of 4 million to a figure of less than 1 million? Why do many respond to this observation by saying, “What’s the difference whether it’s six million or one million?” The answer is that the difference is five million. Another difference is that saying so can get you three years in an Austrian jail… just ask David Irving!
All of Germany’s wartime codes were compromised, including the one used to send daily reports from Auschwitz to Berlin. The transcripts of these messages make no mention of mass executions or even remotely suggest a genocidal program in progress. Furthermore, it has been insisted that the Germans used a kind of euphemistic code when discussing their extermination program of the Jews–e.g. “final solution”, special treatment, resettlement, etc. Why was it necessary for them to use such coded euphemisms when talking to one another unless they thought their codes had been cracked by the Allies? And then why would they still use cracked codes?
Luis Richardson
The water table at Auschwitz lies a mere 18 inches below the surface, which makes claims of huge burning pits for the disposal of tens of thousands of victims untenable.
Initially, claims were made that mass executions in homicidal gas chambers had taken place in camps located within the boundaries of the old Reich (e.g. Dachau, Bergen-Belsen). “Evidence” to that effect was every bit as compelling as what is offered for other camps–located in occupied Poland–yet without explanation in the early sixties we were told that this was not the case and that all the “death camps” were located in the East (i.e. Poland), outside (some would say conveniently) the probing eyes of western scholars.
No one has been able to reconcile the eyewitness accounts that personnel entered the gas chambers after 20 minutes without any protective gear, and the fact that Zyklon B was a “time release” fumigant that would have had a lethal capability for at least another 24 hours. And that even after 24 hours the corpses would have themselves remained sufficiently contaminated by the hydrogen cyanide gas that they would have had the capacity to kill anyone who touched them who was not wearing protective gear.
Why do we no longer hear claims that the Germans manufactured soap, lampshades, and riding britches from the bodies of dead Jews? Could it be that in the light of modem forensics and DNA knowledge these claims are totally untenable?
Why do we no longer hear claims that huge numbers of Jews were exterminated in massive steam chambers or electrocuted on special grids? “Evidence” of this was presented at Nuremberg–evidence that sent men to the gallows.
Elie Wiesel has been described as “the Apostle of Remembrance,” yet in his memoir, Night, which details his stay at Auschwitz, he makes no mention of the now infamous homicidal gas chambers. Isn’t this a bit like one of the Gospels making no mention of the Cross?
Caleb King
Virtually every survivor who was examined at Auschwitz says that he or she was examined by the infamous Dr. Mengele.
According to survivor testimony, hundreds of thousands of Jews were executed at Treblinka and then buried in mass graves in the surrounding area. Why is it that extensive sonar probing of these burial grounds reveals that this alleged final resting place for Holocaust victims has remained undisturbed since at least the last ice age?
“Proof” of the Holocaust rests primarily on survivor testimony. There is little, if any, hard evidence. The best of this has been described by Jean Claude Pressac as merely “criminal traces.” Even Judge Grey who presided at the Irving-Lipstadt Trial commented that he was surprised the evidence pointing to the Holocaust was “extremely thin.” To paraphrase Arthur Butz, “a crime of this magnitude would have left a mountain of evidence.” Where is it? There was more hard evidence against O. J. Simpson at his trial and he was found innocent.
Why has Holocaust revisionism been criminalized in at least eleven countries? What other historic truth needs the threat of prison or the destruction of one’s career to maintain itself? Should someone be sent to prison for expressing skepticism about the official Chinese claim that they suffered 35 million dead in World War II?
Kevin Price
...
Cooper Gomez
Why do the court historians insist that “denying the Holocaust” is like denying slavery or saying the Earth is flat? The leading Revisionists are first rate scholars who hold advanced degrees from the world’s leading universities. Is there anyone comparable among those who say the world is flat or that slavery never existed? Notice again that it is not illegal to say the Earth is flat or that slavery never existed. The truth of these things does not seem to need legal protection.
Promoters of the Holocaust have expressed concerns about remembering the Holocaust once the last survivors die. Why haven’t Civil War historians expressed similar concerns since the last survivor of that conflict died in 1959?
Survivors of the Holocaust have testified that smoke billowed from the crematoriums as they consumed the bodies of murdered victims–some eyewitnesses even claimed they could detect national origins by the color of the smoke. How can this be reconciled with the fact that properly operating crematoriums do not produce smoke of any color?
According to the official version of the Holocaust, hundreds of thousands of Hungarian Jews were rounded up in mid-1944 and sent to Auschwitz, where most were gassed immediately upon arrival and their bodies were disposed of by burning in huge open air pits using railroad ties and gasoline. Why is that there is no evidence of these huge funerary pyres in the high resolution surveillance photos taken by Allied aircraft overflying the camp on a daily basis during this time period? Furthermore, why have no remains been found, since open pit burning, even when gasoline is used, generates insufficient heat to totally consume a body?
Elijah Cruz
All of the liberated camps were littered with corpses; is there a single autopsy report or any other forensic evidence that shows that even a single one of these deaths was a consequence of poison gas?
The death toll for the Holocaust relies exclusively on population statistics provided by Jewish sources; has any independent demographic study been produced that shows that approximately six million Jews were “missing” at the end of the war?
Why do the wartime inspection reports of camps made by the International Red Cross contain no references to mass executions? It strains credulity that such monumental crimes could be hidden. The only explanations are that either these crimes were not occurring or that the Red Cross was complicit in a cover up.
Why has there been no effort to respond to the Leuchter Report?
“The Holocaust was technologically possible because it happened.” Why is this intellectually bankrupt argument, which turns scholarship on its head, considered by the promoters of the Holocaust as historical truth, and considered a sufficient response to the mounting Revisionist evidence to the contrary?
Henry Cox
What other historical truths rely to the extent that the Holocaust does on so-called “eyewitness” testimony, and why have none of these witnesses ever been cross-examined?
According to the official version of the Holocaust, the Jews remained ignorant of their fate until the very end–so skillful were their Nazi murderers in deceiving their victims. How can this ignorance be reconciled with the fact that the Jews have historically been, as a group, the most literate and highly informed people on the planet, with legendary access to the highest echelons of government?
Landon Turner
...