The Truth Behind The Gates Of Auschwitz

[IlluSionS667]

yep, some atrocities are higher profile than others, get over it.  doesn't make any of them less appalling, and the maxim "two wrongs don't make a right" springs to mind.

The problem is that the side that commited the most and the more extreme attrocities during WW2 is to this day hailed as a liberator and the pinnacle of freedom and justice, whereas the other side is constantly defamed and accused of genocide as well as all sorts of terror. That is a complete and utter distortion, resulting in most people drawing wrong conclusions and having a warped view of reality. That's why all this is so very important.

[Lucifer]

and yet it doesn't negate the facts that millions of people - jews, gypsies, homosexuals, jehovah's witnesses, people with diabilities -  were slaughtered inhumanely and for political motives.

history repeats itself - the american forces are known to have committed atrocites in iraq, as were the british forces, and i hardly have to mention rwanda, or zimbabwe, etc., etc., etc.

what i'm saying here is that your argument rests on saying, "we're allowed to do unnacceptable things cos other people have."  that doesn't wash, and never will.

[IlluSionS667]

and yet it doesn't negate the facts that millions of people - jews, gypsies, homosexuals, jehovah's witnesses, people with diabilities -  were slaughtered inhumanely and for political motives.

Those aren't facts. That's just plain propaganda.

Like I said, German crimes were EXAGGERATED whereas allied crimes were IGNORED or EXCUSED. The most horrible war crimes were commited by the allies and not the Germans.

history repeats itself - the american forces are known to have committed atrocites in iraq, as were the british forces, and i hardly have to mention rwanda, or zimbabwe, etc., etc., etc.

Indeed. What you somehow fail to grasp, is that they not only are the bad guys today but also during WW2. The world would have been a much better place is Hitler had won the war and the American-English-French-Sovjet alliance had lost.

what i'm saying here is that your argument rests on saying, "we're allowed to do unnacceptable things cos other people have."

What I'm saying is "He's kicked me in the face and gets away with it, while I'm being put in jail and accused of physically attacking someone because I pinched his arm".

[Nocturnalist!]

When the British and American "humanitarians" invaded Germany in 1945, they robbed, tortured, raped and murdered millions in the name of "democracy", "freedom" and "justice". These allied "humanitarians" destroyed centuries of precious art and hundreds of thousands of people with attrocious phospherous and atom bombs in a matter of days.

Atom bombs exploded in Germany? That certainly is news to me. I always thought two were exploded in Japan only with no British involvement. I agree that the use of the Atom bombs in Japan were ghastly... but I'm looking back from today. Back then the Atom bomb didn't have the name it has today. No denying the truth that America is the only nation to have used atomic bombs in anger though. But that was against Japan.

[Nocturnalist!]

The problem is that the side that commited the most and the more extreme attrocities during WW2 is to this day hailed as a liberator and the pinnacle of freedom and justice, whereas the other side is constantly defamed and accused of genocide as well as all sorts of terror. That is a complete and utter distortion, resulting in most people drawing wrong conclusions and having a warped view of reality. That's why all this is so very important.

Who started invading other countries and basically started the war? Are you saying that Nazi Germany was the better of the two sides?

EDIT: Ah I see a few posts later that is exactly what you are saying.

[Nocturnalist!]

The world would have been a much better place is Hitler had won the war and the American-English-French-Sovjet alliance had lost.

I think that is an abomnible notion. That is a revolting thing to say.

[IlluSionS667]

When the British and American "humanitarians" invaded Germany in 1945, they robbed, tortured, raped and murdered millions in the name of "democracy", "freedom" and "justice". These allied "humanitarians" destroyed centuries of precious art and hundreds of thousands of people with attrocious phospherous and atom bombs in a matter of days.

Atom bombs exploded in Germany? That certainly is news to me.

The first sentence was a reference to Germany in 1945. The second sentence was a reference to WW2 as a whole. This should have been obvious from the context.

I always thought two were exploded in Japan only with no British involvement.

The phosperous bombs dropped on Germany came from both British and American bombers, though.

I agree that the use of the Atom bombs in Japan were ghastly... but I'm looking back from today. Back then the Atom bomb didn't have the name it has today. No denying the truth that America is the only nation to have used atomic bombs in anger though. But that was against Japan.

So? The phosperous rain on Dresden was no less horrific than the atom bomb dropped on Hiroshima.

Who started invading other countries and basically started the war??

England was the nation with the largest colonial empire and had waged many wars to consolidate or increase its power. The Boer wars, where concentration camps were used by the British to starve civilian women and their children, was a particularly horrible war started solely for the profit of the British elite. It was this nation that started WW2 when it declared war on Germany because German soldiers had set foot in Poland as a consequence of a German-Polish conflict the Poles didn't wish to solve anymore (as a consequence of English promises to Poland).

Are you saying that Nazi Germany was the better of the two sides

The world would have been a much better place is Hitler had won the war and the American-English-French-Sovjet alliance had lost.

I think that is an abomnible notion. That is a revolting thing to say.

It only sounds revolting because you equal the Third Reich with terror and genocide. Once you see how much of a historical fiction that is and once you learn of the terror commited by the English and Americans, the balance clearly shifts in favor of Germany.

I know it's all hard to believe and I don't want you to take anything I say here for granted. Do your own research as objectively as possible and one day you'll find out I'm right.

[The_Chosen_One]

I think I'll stick with mel Brooks, Spike Jones and Charlie Chaplin on this one. They seem like more creditable sources than some reviisionist Nazi propagandists.

Third positionists.... turd positionists.

[TheoK]

When the British and American "humanitarians" invaded Germany in 1945, they robbed, tortured, raped and murdered millions in the name of "democracy", "freedom" and "justice". These allied "humanitarians" destroyed centuries of precious art and hundreds of thousands of people with attrocious phospherous and atom bombs in a matter of days.

Atom bombs exploded in Germany? That certainly is news to me. I always thought two were exploded in Japan only with no British involvement. I agree that the use of the Atom bombs in Japan were ghastly... but I'm looking back from today. Back then the Atom bomb didn't have the name it has today. No denying the truth that America is the only nation to have used atomic bombs in anger though. But that was against Japan.

They planned to drop an atom bomb on Germany. If the war in Europe had continued for ½ year more or so, they probably would have used it against Germany.

[TheoK]

The world would have been a much better place is Hitler had won the war and the American-English-French-Sovjet alliance had lost.

I think that is an abomnible notion. That is a revolting thing to say.

No, the world probably would have been a better world for White people in northern Europe at least. Instead of this stupid European Union there had been a Great Germanic Reich in northern and central Europe.

[attachment deleted by admin]

[The_Chosen_One]

The Sapnish civil war indirectly led into the 2nd world war after Hitler backed one side (may have been Franco). Hitler became chancellor in 1933 and got Germany out of the tail end of the depression. Then within 4 years he wanted to expand and take over the Sudatenland. He marched East, and in 1939 invaded Poland. Before this, Chamberlain and the others (De Gaull, Mussolini, Hitler and at least a couple of others) met with the plan of appeasement, which failed. Hitler went on his march and declared the Third Reich would be the most powerful force for the next 1000 years. War was declared by Britain on Sept 3 1939, when it was announced by Chamberlain. Australia joined as part of the Commonwealth, and Hitler's plan to take over Europe and the world was underway. So blaming Engalnd for previous conflicts such as the Boer war (which the Germans and Afrikaners actually started) is total bullshit. Get your facts right in future, instead of reading from Goebbels' handbook, dickhead.

[IlluSionS667]

The world would have been a much better place is Hitler had won the war and the American-English-French-Sovjet alliance had lost.

I think that is an abomnible notion. That is a revolting thing to say.

No, the world probably would have been a better world for White people in northern Europe at least. Instead of this stupid European Union there had been a Great Germanic Reich in northern and central Europe.

It wouldn't have been better just for the Germanic world. Do note that the loss of Germany did not only lead to the desitructive influence of American culture-imperialism in the Germanic and Romanic world but also to the dominion of Sovjet tyranny all over the Slavic world for almost half a century.

The Sapnish civil war indirectly led into the 2nd world war after Hitler backed one side (may have been Franco).

Then why is it that Spain managed to remain neutral throughout WW2 and Franco even managed to stay in charge after national-socialist Germany and fascist Italy had lost the war?

Hitler became chancellor in 1933 and got Germany out of the tail end of the depression. Then within 4 years he wanted to expand and take over the Sudatenland.

Sudetenland is traditional German land and was inhabited by a majority of Germans that was nevertheless oppressed by the Czech autorities. Besides that, the Anschluss of Sudetenland occured with the permission of England and France.

He marched East, and in 1939 invaded Poland. Before this, Chamberlain and the others (De Gaull, Mussolini, Hitler and at least a couple of others) met with the plan of appeasement, which failed.

The plan failed because it was never intended to succeed.

Hitler invaded Poland because Poland unilaterally withdraw from negotiations that had been going on since 1934 between Polish and German authorities on topics like the treatment of ethnic Germans in Poland (who were oppressed by the Polish government), the Danzig harbor (which was boycotted by the Poles in favor of their new harbor Gdynia) and the possibility of a corridor (a freeway would have been sufficient) to link East-Prussia with the German mainland. This unilateral withdrawal was the result of English promises made to Poland.

Hitler's plan to take over Europe and the world was underway.

Oh please...... Just because Hitler decided it was tactically interesting to gain control of countries like Belgium, Holland or Norway as England was waging its war against Germany, that doesn't mean that Germany wanted to take over Europe.... let alone the world.

So blaming Engalnd for previous conflicts such as the Boer war (which the Germans and Afrikaners actually started) is total bullshit.

The Boer wars started because the Boers refused to let Cecil Rhodes take control of the gold and diamond mines. It was a pure economical war caused by Britain.

Get your facts right in future, instead of reading from Goebbels' handbook, dickhead.

Get your facts right in future instead of reciting "democratic" propaganda, you degenerate moron.

[Lucifer]

and yet it doesn't negate the facts that millions of people - jews, gypsies, homosexuals, jehovah's witnesses, people with diabilities -  were slaughtered inhumanely and for political motives.

Those aren't facts. That's just plain propaganda.

ah, now i see.

no point in discussing anything with you anymore, then.  you're a bigot, and won't listen to anything anyone else has to say who disagrees with you.

what was that about accepting dogma without questioning again?

and i feel sorry for you for being sucked in by propaganda: i thought for a cuntisecond or so, that you might have a brain.  now i see you're just as much a sheep as the rest of them.

go away and learn how to think, would you?

move along folks, nothing more to see here.  no point in arguing with someone who gets his opinions from pamphlets.

/makes note: must remember to speak to my uncle who was part of the concentration camp clear-up after WW2, and ask him about it again, er, sorry, i mean his propaganda.

[IlluSionS667]

and yet it doesn't negate the facts that millions of people - jews, gypsies, homosexuals, jehovah's witnesses, people with diabilities -  were slaughtered inhumanely and for political motives.

Those aren't facts. That's just plain propaganda.

ah, now i see.

no point in discussing anything with you anymore, then.  you're a bigot, and won't listen to anything anyone else has to say who disagrees with you.

I do listen to other opinions. You just can't expect me to actually agree with them without any arguments.

The claim that "millions of people - jews, gypsies, homosexuals, jehovah's witnesses, people with diabilities -  were slaughtered inhumanely and for political motives" is nothing but plain propaganda is proven fact. If you really were willing to question everything, you would also be willing to question the claim that  "millions of people - jews, gypsies, homosexuals, jehovah's witnesses, people with diabilities -  were slaughtered inhumanely and for political motives".

what was that about accepting dogma without questioning again?

My views on the Holocaust myth are the result of scientific inquiry only. I also used to believe that "millions of people - jews, gypsies, homosexuals, jehovah's witnesses, people with diabilities -  were slaughtered inhumanely and for political motives" but it is my questioning everything that led me to discover this is a fallacy.

and i feel sorry for you for being sucked in by propaganda: i thought for a cuntisecond or so, that you might have a brain.  now i see you're just as much a sheep as the rest of them.

You're the one being suckered in by propaganda, I'm afraid.

go away and learn how to think, would you?

I'm a trained IT Consultant and I spend a significant amount of my spare time reading, philosophising and discussing on topics like politics, history and science. I probably think more in an average day than you do in a month.

/makes note: must remember to speak to my uncle who was part of the concentration camp clear-up after WW2, and ask him about it again, er, sorry, i mean his propaganda.

Your grandfather probably did experience horrible things, but that doesn't mean he was witness to genocide. There is a way to explain the horror American soldiers witnessed at Dachau and Bergen-Belsen that doesn't imply genocide and that has been proven beyond reasonable doubt by Holocaust Revisionists.

[The_Chosen_One]

Every piece of what you quoted to my response is factually incorrect, and empirically flawed in it's concept by a truly flawed individual.

Spain stayed neutral because they new that whoever backed Hitler would ultimately be turned on, as France and Italy were. It was especially dangerous, and given the toll of the civil war, they could afford to do nothing else. Italy sapped sides at the drop of a hat, and the only thing that saved France was the resistance.

Czech mistreatment? Bullshit. The Czechs had the same thing happen to them when the Nazis marched through toward Russia as had happen to the Pols. The Pols were quite within their right to stick it to Hitler, given that he wanted THEIR land and their territory. 1939 proved them right.

You are an idiot. Hitler's sweeo all through France, Italy, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, Hungary, Romania, Belgium, into England, Russia, and even Egypt proved he was after European domination. Look at the numbers and the territory, you bigotted ponce. You'll see your 'facts' are nothing but hyperbole.

The final solution was to not only get rid of the Jews from Germany, but to wipe them off the face of the Earth. Hitler was part Jewish (his mother's side) and he destroyed and razed his own village to rid the world of any trace that he was. He claimed to have been born as an Austrian, but everybody knew he had Jewish ancestry.

So it's you who needs to read some proper facts, and stop blighting this forum with your lies and revisonist bullshit.