Were We Told the Truth about World War 2?

[FatFreddy]

Here's some interesting stuff I've found about WW2. It gives totally different reasons for why it started and what happened during it.

If the links to these videos don't work, do YouTube searches on the titles.

Hitler's War - What the Historians Neglect to Mention
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_q ... tion&sm=12

Hitler Saved Europe From Stalin
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_q ... alin&sm=12

Who Started World War II? by Viktor Suvorov
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_q ... orov&sm=12

Churchill's War
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_q ... +War&sm=12

Mark Weber speaks on Hitler's Place in History
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_q ... tory&sm=12

Adolf Hitler: Explains His Reasons For Invading The Soviet Union
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_q ... nion&sm=12

Watch the above video here without having to log in.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=0a0_1301486247

Adolf Hitler: Explains Reasons For Invading Poland
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_q ... land&sm=12

David Irving - The Faking of Adolf Hitler for History
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_q ... tory&sm=12


Former Religious Jew On Holocaust Myths
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_q ... yths&sm=12

"Robert Faurisson: The Problem Of Gas Chambers - (Le Probleme Des Chambres a Gaz)."
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_q ... %22+&sm=12

Auschwitz - Why The Gas Chambers Are A Myth
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_q ... Myth&sm=12

ONE THIRD of the HOLOCAUST
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_q ... UST+&sm=12

BUCHENWALD A Dumb Dumb Portrayal Of Evil
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_q ... vil+&sm=12

"Judea Declares War on Germany"
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_q ... %22+&sm=12

The Complete David Cole and Mark Weber on the Montel Williams Show
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_q ... how+&sm=12

A Holocaust Debate: Mark Weber vs Michael Shermer
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_q ... rmer&sm=12

The Dachau Gas Chamber
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4nY6T46aGA#t=1474

"Holohoax Completely Exposed by David Cole"
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_q ... e%22&sm=12

"Holocaust Liars. Were the Germans Stupid?"
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_q ... F%22&sm=12


http://www.polskawalczaca.com/viewtopic ... 36&t=18054
(excerpt)
-----------------------------------------------------
No Evidence Of Genocide

One of the most important aspects of the Red Cross Report is that it clarifies the true cause of those deaths that undoubtedly occurred in the camps toward the end of the war. Says the Report: "In the chaotic condition of Germany after the invasion during the final months of the war, the camps received no food supplies at all and starvation claimed an increasing number of victims. Itself alarmed by this situation, the German Government at last informed the ICRC on February 1st, 1945 ... In March 1945, discussions between the President of the ICRC and General of the S.S. Kaltenbrunner gave even more decisive results. Relief could henceforth be distributed by the ICRC, and one delegate was authorised to stay in each camp ..." (Vol. III, p. 83).

Clearly, the German authorities were at pains to relieve the dire situation as far as they were able. The Red Cross are quite explicit in stating that food supplies ceased at this time due to the Allied bombing of German transportation, and in the interests of interned Jews they had protested on March 15th, 1944 against "the barbarous aerial warfare of the Allies" (Inter Arma Caritas, p. 78). By October 2nd, 1944, the ICRC warned the German Foreign Office of the impending collapse of the German transportation system, declaring that starvation conditions for people throughout Germany were becoming inevitable.

In dealing with this comprehensive, three-volume Report, it is important to stress that the delegates of the International Red Cross found no evidence whatever at the camps in Axis occupied Europe of a deliberate policy to exterminate the Jews. In all its 1,600 pages the Report does not even mention such a thing as a gas chamber. It admits that Jews, like many other wartime nationalities, suffered rigours and privations, but its complete silence on the subject of planned extermination is ample refutation of the Six Million legend. Like the Vatican representatives with whom they worked, the Red Cross found itself unable to indulge in the irresponsible charges of genocide which had become the order of the day. So far as the genuine mortality rate is concerned, the Report points out that most of the Jewish doctors from the camps were being used to combat typhus on the eastern front, so that they were unavailable when the typhus epidemics of 1945 broke out in the camps (Vol. I, p. 204 ff) - Incidentally, it is frequently claimed that mass executions were carried out in gas chambers cunningly disguised as shower facilities. Again the Report makes nonsense of this allegation. "Not only the washing places, but installations for baths, showers and laundry were inspected by the delegates. They had often to take action to have fixtures made less primitive, and to get them repaired or enlarged" (Vol. III, p. 594).

(articles)
http://www.ihr.org/books/hoggan/21.html
http://northerntruthseeker.blogspot.se/ ... d-how.html

(online books)
http://www.jrbooksonline.com/PDF_Books/ ... %20War.pdf
http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/thottc/
http://www.johnkaminski.info/pages/the_ ... ss_war.pdf
http://www.watchmenfaithministries.com/ ... _1928_.pdf
(I haven't read the above books yet)

Here are some good websites for further research.
http://ihr.org/
http://codoh.com/
http://vho.org/
http://www.nazigassings.com/index.html

There used to be a good site called "War on You" whose forum had a "Holocaust" section. It was full of good info. It's gone off-line for a while. Try googling it from time to time. It might come back.


I'm not taking a firm stand on the above as I wasn't there to see it. It all seems pretty plausible though. I wouldn't simply rule it out.

[SydneyPSIder]

This thread should be removed. I'm not interested in discussing the misrepresentations and distortions of history in it as some sort of manifestation of supposed 'free speech'. Both my grandfathers served in the RAF during WWII, and half of London had to be evacuated. Equally well, huge swathes of Germany have never been rebuilt following civilian bombing by the Allies to bring about an end to the war. There were ongoing tensions between European superpowers, no question, and self-interested politics certainly applied before, during and after every major conflict. That does not serve as some sort of apologetic for German actions under the Nazis, the nature of fascism as a proposed 'benevolent' totalitarian system of government and so on. 'Communistic' Russian totalitarianism and fascistic totalitarianism have more similarities than differences, so playing the Russian bogeyman card gets you nowhere. The US under the Bushes is increasingly trending in that direction, also, as was the US prior to WWII, where eugenics and population control were seen as quite acceptable ideas.

Hitler was a madman. The Nazis violated every code of human decency and individual human rights. Expressing the sentiments above in Germany today would get you arrested and jailed.

[ProfWag]

[FatFreddy]

[FatFreddy]

I watched this a while back. I just came across it again.

An alternate look at WW1 & WW2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ry37mKMh04U
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrLtoC5Eg0w
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_cXTm6X8Fw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qx00Q_u8SbM

[SydneyPSIder]

can you at least embed a few of the prominent ones in [youtube] tags ? a lot of them are running commentaries by dodgy-sounding revisionist historians. you're telling us that the eyewitness accounts of Holocaust survivors are all fake?

[FatFreddy]

[FatFreddy]

Here are some online books.
http://vho.org/dl/ENG.html

I'll bet you couldn't find those in American libraries or bookstores.

[SydneyPSIder]

[Misha]

[SydneyPSIder]

[ProfWag]

The preponderance of evidence of the Holocaust is so overwhelming that to deny it existed is nothing less than gross racism and anti-semitism. I won't get involved.

[Misha]

It is always healthy in any society to be able to debate controversial issues. Great truths have been found and help further understanding that such historical mistakes and misrepresentations of that truth are never repeated. Having any discussion on any topic is in adherence to the Socratic philosophy. Let us not fear those who would stifle such debates as being labeled a racist or anti-semitic. Using fear and guilt to suppress any debate in a democratic society flies in the face of our most cherished Amendment which guarantees that lone voice for truth.

[FatFreddy]

Thanks for the support Misha.


There's one obvious lie told by the US government to the American people. Americans are taught that the German people turned savage and wanted to take over all of Europe to increase German territory. If we listen to these two speeches of Hitler's,...

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=0a0_1301486247
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_q ... land&sm=12

...we can see that the German soldiers and people thought they were defending their territory and righting old wrongs during the war.

I'm not saying that Hitler wasn't lying to get the people and soldiers to support him when he made those speeches. It's possible that he was lying but at least we know what the people and soldiers were (perhaps wrongly) thinking.

This is one clear lie by the government. There may be others.

[SydneyPSIder]

This thread is a bit tantamount to running a thread full of David Icke videos entitled 'Were We Told the Truth about Shape Shifting Reptiles Running Everything?'

Nonetheless, my potted version history of the causes of WWII goes something like:

- 1870 - Franco-Prussian War. France worried about German unification. France lost, including Alsace-Lorraine region. Driven by fear of German Emperor also being asked to run Spain as the automatic successor which would have pincered France and made them deeply uncomfortable. German Emperor is quite arrogant about this.

- 1912 - WWI - another Franco-German war, with France determined to make amends for the Franco-Prussian War losses, particularly Alsace. Allies win this time. Concerns over Prussian militarism etc, Prussia no longer exists as a country after the war. France wins, exacts crippling terms of reparation along with UK etc, possibly partly to maintain Germany in a weakened state. Churchill had converted British Navy to oil, knew oil was in the middle east and Britain didn't have any, took advantage of the war to attack and break up the weakening Ottoman empire so the victors (France and England) could carve up big slices of the middle east as 'spheres of influence' and get the oil. Very convenient.

- 1939. Hitler, the Nazis, et al, with Germany reeling under crippling terms of reparation, had risen during the 1930s trading on the average German's resentment about the conditions they were living under since losing WWI. Promised a lot of victories, an attractive millennial movement (thousand year Reich), etc, as long as everyone was obedient and followed orders. Rise of fascism as an organising political structure which was held to be A Good Thing by many for some reason. Spain, Portugal and Italy also fascist by now. Mussolini like the idea of a resurgent Roman Empire as well, although he didn't want to have to work too hard for it. Strong anti-Semitic feeling already existed throughout Europe - France, Russia, England, Germany, everywhere. Clash of communists and fascists as two extreme organising principles. Jewish ppl associated with communist movements also.

Hitler rearms. Decides he doesn't want to just stop the terms of reparation, he may as well go for broke and take the whole place over and unify Europe under enlightened German rule, from Britain to western Russia, the way it should be. Prague will be the new capital of everything. Annexes German-speaking part of Czechoslovakia under a pretext of reunification. Annexes Austria as well. Goes into Poland. Britain declares war in some concern at this point. Certainly there were machinations afoot with Russia signing a non-aggression treaty at this point and so on. Let's not overlook the alliance of Germany with Japan, who had similar imperialistic ambitions in Asia, with illusions of racial purity and a harsh and strongly militaristic bent, to take over every other Asian country by force and simultaneously get rid of European colonial influence for 'the good of the people'.

As I understand it, Britain pleaded with France to reduce the terms of reparation and stop punishing Germany to the extent they were prior to WWII, but France would have none of it. The original terms of settlement were of the order of paying the equivalent today of $100,000 for every single person killed by Germany in WWI and so on. That was a lot of money to repay, hence leading to the hyper-inflation of the Weimar Republic in the 1930s. ('You want millions of marks? Here's millions of marks.')

Note that ethical thinking seemed to be a bit impoverished up until the fallout of WWII as a turning point -- it was held to be very noble to be in a regiment and go to war, war was seen as a suitable and ethical solution to any diplomatic issue, was normal and natural and good for nations, and the victors frequently looted artworks, statues, jewellery, etc from the losers, and so a lot of artifacts regularly moved around Europe. Europe has had nearly 70 years of relative peace and relative prosperity after happily engaging in ever escalating destructive wars. To some extent the US acted as an experimental control group to demonstrate that a large country with a large population NOT going to war too much would prosper better. At least not going to war with equal opponents.

David Irving's apologetics seem to overlook some rather fierce and ruthless German cultural characteristics of the time, however, of the Prussian military variety. He frequently makes reference to certain cultural differences, then brushes them off. I think these differences were a key part of the problem that he overlooks.

My main points being there was a history of Franco-German hostilities going back a long way, that there was constant tension in Europe between a number of superpowers, that colonialism to a great extent was the result of such competitive pressures, that annihilation was a constant concern, that governments were capricious, whether ruled by hereditary nobles or new republics, that war was seen as a noble and necessary solution to many diplomatic problems, that there was not a well-developed ethics of individual human rights in that context, that this resulted in a kind of Germanic megalomania as an ego defence mechanism from WWI, etc.

In the final analysis, Hitler's ideas for Europe were so great, his intentions so noble, the sacrifice to German people so minimal and his tactics so workable that his own senior officers attempted to kill him over and over again.

That there were machinations about what the outcomes of the war might deliver should come as no surprise -- all the other superpowers had their own agendas -- including limiting the power of Germany as an ongoing potential threat to stability in Europe.