I think I'll put a disclaimer up front here. Links should not be construed as full endorsement of the linked material. In some cases, I link to material with which I mostly disagree. So, please don't jump to false conclusions regarding this post. It's not possible for me to take every point of every person and give a thumbs up or down on each one. I haven't seen every person's every point and certainly would have to think about them and to qualify my own positions about them. Only God knows each of our hearts and minds through-and-through.
The more I look into this, the more I believe the story that six million Jews were exterminated, most of them by gassing, is at best a deliberate exaggeration.
The videos embedded below are quite thorough. Obviously, the information is being censored especially in Germany and other parts of Europe. The Zionists are trying hard to make academic inquiry illegal in the US too. Don't let them get away with it. In fact, start demanding that Europe reverse its utterly stupid anti-holocaust-denier laws.
There were no human skin lampshades. There were no shrunken heads — heads of Jews shrunk by Nazis. There was no soap made of the fat of Jews. It was all a pack of lies designed to drum up sympathy so the Zionists could get away with ethnic cleansing in Palestine.
From the videos, even though one might not necessarily come to the exact same conclusion as the video authors, it becomes clear that of the few "survivors" of the "extermination" camps, they can't possibly all be telling the truth.
In addition, the mathematical examples in the first video are a bit crude but serve the broader point that it is highly unlikely the 6 million figure is even remotely correct.
Let me say that the "Hoefle Telegram" (not mentioned in the videos below) is used to hold up the figure of 1,274,166 Jews being exterminated at Treblinka, Belzec, Sobibor, and Lublin Majdanek. That Hoefle Telegram though should not simply be assumed to be genuine. The British government, in conjunction with US neocons and Israel Zionists, is a proven liar of gigantic proportions. For the sake of Empire, whether the British "leadership" is at the top or simply a lesser part next to the Americans, the British government has and does and will lie.
- A recent and hugely important example concerns the infamous 45-minute claim that Saddam Hussein's Iraq could launch missiles that could hit the UK in 45 minutes.
- Let's not forget the Downing Street Memos either. The British government knew full well that the George W. Bush administration was offering up fake information to convince the American people to go to war. It knew that Bush suggested painting a US jet in UN colors and then flying it in such a way as to provoke Hussein to shoot it down.
- Of course, what with the North Woods plan designed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff under John F. Kennedy, who could put it past Bush and his neocon cronies that they wouldn't have shot the jet down themselves and simply claimed Saddam had done it?
- The Spot Resolutions showed that President Polk couldn't say where Mexicans had crossed into the US where they supposedly killed US soldiers. Polk invaded Mexico and ended up with huge swaths of land as concessions or spoils.
- The USS Maine apparently was blown up from the inside, but it was blamed on the Spanish so the US could take over the remnants of the Spanish Empire.
- The Lusitania was loaded with munitions and deliberately sent into German-submarine infested seas and with an escort. It's sinking was the rallying cry for the US to enter WWI.
- The McCollum Memo shows that the Franklin Roosevelt administration had and followed a plan devised to antagonize Japan into drawing first blood so the US could enter WWII with the American people duped into believing it was all Japan's fault.
- The Gulf of Tonkin "incident" was the Lyndon B. Johnson administration lying that the North Vietnamese had attacked the US Navy off the coast of North Vietnam. It was the rallying cry for the US to hugely ramp up the Vietnam War.
- The USS Liberty was savagely and deliberately attacked by the Zionists Military of Israel with Lyndon Johnson's collusion. It was supposed to sink, likely so that the Arabs could be blamed and the US would have a pretext to hit them. The whole thing underwent a huge cover-up.
- Ronald Reagan's administration of course lied through its teeth about Grenada. The college students there were never under any threat, but Reagan and his team made that all up for a pretext to stomp on the tiny island to, among other things, move the spot light off Reagan's failures, as he had been sinking in the polls right before the lies and invasion.
- Reagan also lied and lied and lied about the Nicaraguan Contras, who were nothing more than the remnant of Anastasio Somoza's fascist National Guard. The Nicaragua Sandinistas weren't perfect, but they represented too much anti-fascism for Ronald Reagan. They did give up power democratically. According to Reagan, they were never supposed to be democratic. Huge evils went on in Central America at the hands of the CIA and US military and propped up US fascist dictatorships. Much it is still being copied around the world and especially in Iraq.
- George H. W. Bush told huge lies about Panama too as a pretext to invade. The stories allowed out by the US military were completely sanitized. Thousands of innocents lost their lives.
- The Kuwaiti incubator babies was a completely fabricated story told by the George H. W. Bush administration and the President himself that Saddam Hussein's invading military had murdered many Kuwaiti babies that were in incubators. The idea that the Iraqis could do such a thing was a moral outrage to the American people. It was a lie used to trick the American people into agreeing with the first major American attack on Iraq.
- Dick Cheney was his Secretary of Defense at the time, and Cheney told a huge lie about Iraq having arrayed its military along the Saudi border. The Russians produced satellite photos showing that there was no such amassing of Iraqi tanks, etc., along that border or anywhere near it. It was all a lie by Cheney (typical for him).
- Then there were the stories told by the Clinton administration as certain fact about the Serbs committing huge atrocities against the Muslims. However, most of the stories were completely false. The many and huge mass graves never showed up. There were some atrocities but no where near on the scale suggested by the Clinton psy-ops propagandists. Once that became clear to the American people though, it was already too late.
- The government does not simply aim its lust for power and control at foreign policy for Empire. It also aims it inward (domestically). The government is not of, by, and for the people. It is of, by, and for the elitists, the Plutocrats who buy the government. This is why Jesus made clear that mammon is the enemy of the people.
- Let's not forget that the 1993 World Trade Center bombing happened because the Clinton administration's FBI supplied the explosives.
- A couple of days later, Clinton started the Waco Siege against the Branch Davidians, admittedly a strange cult with a rather large stock pile of weapons. However, I have always maintained that the government could easily have picked up David Koresh on one of his trips to town. They could have defused any situation rather than ending up as they did: burning the place down killing many men, women, and children who were afraid of governmental overreach. The government proved their point in many respects; and in doing so, the government reinforced many people's worst nightmares about that government.
- The bombing of the Murrah Federal Building was tied to Waco but what with the governmental track record (pattern) being exposed here, not in the way the government alleges. There is strong reason to believe that as with the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, the government (FBI, CIA, Pentagon, etc.) was handling Timothy McVeigh, et al.
Note: Just because someone is from either what is called the far-right or far-left does not inherently mean that everything he or she says should be automatically dismissed. Doing that is a major error. Discernment demands that we each endeavor to sort truth from falsity. We know of no one save God who is perfect in knowing and speaking/imparting truth. All others have partial truth at best.
Ben Partin is what is called a conservative Christian. He's obviously a militarist. He fears the loss of the Bill of Rights under the U.S. Constitution. He fears its loss to Marxist Communism. Frankly, so do I but not for the same reasons or in exactly the same way General Partin does.
I am a communist and Christian, which is saying the same thing twice. I am not a Marxist in that I do not agree with Marx's materialism or prescription. I know that Marx "borrowed" communism from the earliest Christians and Jesus, who really understood that communism was the original family structure (and still is in the best families).
I have to tell you that the General is absolutely correct that many, many materialists want sexual license, to be corrupted and to corrupt, and are out to destroy Jesus and Christianity (one and the same) because the spirit of Jesus is the only thing standing in their way at this point, not Islam, not Hinduism, not Buddhism, etc. They want to have sex any which way they want to and to Hell with the negative consequences for humanity and individuals within it. Well, that brings Hell. Mark my words.
Perhaps what the General fails to see is that the founding fathers of the US also had this same streak running through them, and hence, the US Constitution is not the end all be all and should never be conflated with Christianity but should be rather seen as being relative to Christianity as the Old Testament is also seen as relative to it — to be fulfilled in its best aspects, to be enhanced, to be freed of inherent hypocrisy, and to replace it. Therefore, there must be a New World Order and a One World System, but it must be the anti-coercive Sermon on the Mount in all of its implications.
That said, I am willing to listen to General Partin about the explosions in, and demolition of, the Murrah Federal Building because he truly is an expert on the subject and obviously not afraid to speak truth to power (worldly, Satanic, whether proverbial or actual power).
Here's a video of the General speaking on the subject of the Murrah building among other things: [Description: USAF Brig. General Ben Partin (Ret.) addresses the Wallace Institute on the Oklahoma City bombing, the Waco massacre, and world communism; Santa Clara, California, June 1998.]
See also: The Eglin Blast Effects Study (EBES).
- Going back a bit in time, we see other domestic false-flags aimed at not only the supposed "right" but also the "left." Here's a prime example: The Haymarket Bombing. There are many others.
- Then there's 9/11. The 9/11 Commission was late, under funded, and had its hands tied behind its back. Most of the probing questions that needed to be asked and to be followed up upon were not even asked. It was a complete cover-up and attempt to white wash the neocons. We don't know how deep or wide the criminal conspiracy went or still goes, but there was and remains a criminal conspiracy within the US government. 9/11 definitely did not happen the way the government's official version claims it did. At the very least, Building 7 was prepared for implosion (controlled demolition) well before 9/11. The war games held that day were timed to cause huge confusion and to add to the rather lame attempt at plausible deniability. How much George W. Bush knew in terms of the details remains to be seen, but he definitely knew the attack was part of the Empire's plan for a pretext to invade the Middle East and to throw off the Vietnam Syndrome, which was the American people having a proper aversion to war and especially wars drummed up by liars.
- Then came the Anthrax Attacks, which were obviously a government (CIA/Pentagon) operation. The material ended up being proven to be US military made. We also know that the targets were those daring to brave (although they caved) against the neocons, who were put on CIPRO (the anti-anthrax antibiotic) just in time before the attacks were unleashed.
Prime Ministers stoop to that level and go along too.
- 7/7 (July 7, 2005) has many of the same telltale signs of 9/11. Some independent investigators have made rather exhaustive examinations of the events and have rightly concluded that the official story just doesn't add up.
- The same may be said of the earlier 2004 Madrid Train Bombings, were we know that the Spanish government had infiltrated and deliberately aided and abetted the bombers — supplying the explosives for instance.
- The 2006 Mumbai Train Bombings and the 2008 Mumbai "Terrorist" Attacks are loaded with unanswered questions. There's just too much to go into the details here; otherwise, this post would end up book-length.
Why raise all of these different events when discussing the veracity of the statements concerning Treblinka, Belzec, Sobibor, Lublin Majdanek, Auschwitz, and other places and alleged places? Well, it is amazing just how few people upon which the whole holocaust narrative is based. The next video makes that perfectly clear. That video also makes it clear that the testimonies of those "witnesses" have been systematically scrubbed because those witnesses otherwise come off as being ridiculous. Even the so-called "dean" of holocaust historians, a man held up by the likes of Norman Finkelstein, Raul Hilberg, relies heavily upon very selective, excerpted materials which by doing so, avoids the very embarrassing matters raised by opposingdigits.com, the videos compilers.
There's no reason to just accept a supposed decoded Nazi cable about how many people were transported to which "camp."
When coupled with the following, it becomes abundantly clear that just as with 9/11, the whole holocaust narrative needs to be thoroughly re-investigated.
A Tour of the Auschwitz Concentration Camp:
[This next video was removed — likely censored (the usual case) by Zionists who didn't want you to be allowed to see it so you'd remain ignorant in their attempt to retain the undeserved, even illegal, upper hand. It won't work. The truth will out.]
The following should appear at the end of every post:
According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":
Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.
Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.
Political Campaign Intervention
Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.
Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.
Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:
- Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
- Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
- Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
- Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
- Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office
Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:
- The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
- Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
- We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
- When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
- It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
- We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
- We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
- When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
- We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
- It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.
And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)