Showing posts with label Schizophrenia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Schizophrenia. Show all posts

Wednesday, 16 August 2017

The Police Concept of History

"A Marxist might say that with 9/11, we enter the world of radically false consciousness, where the superstructure has become completely detached from social and material reality in a way that Marx never contemplated in his writings. 

A suggestive study that addresses precisely this complex of problems is Joseph Gabel’s 1975 False Consciousness: An Essay on Reification. Gabel sees reification (hypostatization) as the making of people, ideas, and time into things. His point of departure is the gross fact of mass belief in ideological chimeras, specifically Nazi and Stalinist ideology. The 9/11 myth is of a piece with these.


Gabel elaborates a lengthy definition of the political world view which is correlated with alienated and manipulated political life under the rule of schizophrenic/autistic ideologies which exhibit a low degree of fidelity to reality. Gabel called this the “police concept of history;” if he were writing today, he might well have called it the intelligence community or CIA theory of history. 

Gabel writes: “The police concept of history is the negation of the historical dialectic, in other words the negation of history. . . . History’s driving force is not the ensemble of objective forces but good or evil individual action . . . since the ‘event’ is no longer understood as the normal substratum of the course of History, but as miracle or catastrophe; it is no longer dependent on scientific explanation but on black or white magic. In the Manichean diptych of this view, the hero (leader) and the traitor represent two poles of the same principle of reificational negation of the autonomy of history. It is therefore a pseudo-history, a non-dialectical result either of success due to the genius of the leader or failure explicable through treason; an authentic ‘syndrome of external action’ permits the privileged system to evade eventual responsibility. 

The police concept of history represents the extreme form of political alienation; it is both a sociocentrism which dichotomizes the world into a privileged system [the US] and a non-privileged remainder [the Arab and Islamic world], and a phenomenon of consciousness of a Islamic world], and a phenomenon of consciousness of a schizophrenic nature. Since the privileged system is considered as perfect, extra-temporal and extra-dialectical, the event–particularly the unfavorable event–can only be explained by means of external action; it is experienced as an unexpected, ‘undeserved’ catastrophe, which is no longer integrated into the normal course of events whose succession constitutes the threat of concrete, dialectical temporality. 

One can compare this ensemble with the two specific elements in the clinical picture of schizophrenia, the syndrome of external action and the deranged experience of the end of the world (Weltuntergangserlebnis, abbreviated as WUE by German authors), the clinical translation of the appearance of the dialectic in a reified world which can accept the event only as a catastrophe.” 

(Gabel 115–116, with my interpolations) 

Here we have the principal elements or memes of the 9/11 myth in a clinical description a quarter century before the fact. The event has nothing to do with real historical forces. The realities of world commodity flows and of the world financial system in particular go out the window. Bin Laden and al Qaeda provide a deus ex machina of absolute evil and black magic. 9/11 is the undeserved catastrophe or WUE, experienced as a nightmare out of the blue. In order for such notions to gain mass acceptance, the American ideology had to already have traveled a considerable distance down the road towards schizophrenia and autism, and such mass acceptance has in turn further accelerated that descent.

For Gabel, schizophrenia is a loss of contact with reality and with history. His definition of schizophrenia depends heavily on the notion that, for the schizophrenic, development over time has become incomprehensible, while relations in space have become all-important. In space we can often choose to move, but time does not permit this. Therefore there is a close relationship between a radically anti-historical view of the world, as for example among the neocons and the Bush regime, and the syndromes of clinical schizophrenia, prominent among whose symptoms Gabel sees morbid rationalism, understood as a weak hold on reality: 

In the light of recent work, schizophrenia appears as a loss of the sense of personal history, and psychotherapy therefore consists of a reconstruction of the totality of the person with a reintegration into history. From the viewpoint of the investigator the schizophrenic loss of the historico-dialectical perception of reality can be seen in the form of a preponderance of the spatial factor or as a loss of experienced time: as over-spatialization or as sub-temporalization.” (Gabel 116) 

Gabel’s work here dovetails with that of Frank, who points to Bush 43’s notorious refusal to discuss the details of his youthful debauchery before the age of about 40. It is as if these episodes were repressed and no longer accessible to memory–at least, in Bush’s own propaganda patter. Frank is certainly on firm ground when he points to the fundamentalist belief structure of Bush and of so much of his base as representing a rejection of human history, personal history, and of natural history as well: “Just as fundamentalist creationist teachings deny history, the fundamentalist notion of conversion or rebirth encourages the believer to see himself as disconnected from history. George W. Bush’s evasive, self-serving defense of his life before he was born again displays just this tendency. . . . To the believer, the power of spiritual absolution not only erases the sins of the past, but divorces the current self from the historical sinner.” (Frank 59–60) 

A vital part of the WUE brought about inside the perfect system by evil forces is that these evil forces are axiomatically seen as coming from outside of that perfect system. Evil is always external, never home grown, as it was for the racist southern sheriff who thought that all racial tensions were the work of outside agitators. “The result is that when the evidence of the historicity of existence forces itself on the misoneism (hatred of change) of reified consciousness, it appears as an unexpected catastrophe, inexplicable and often attributed therefore to external action. . . . For sociocentrism, the privileged system being perfect, any change (particularly any unfavorable change) is the work of external maleficent powers.” (Gabel 288 and note) Gerhard Wisnewski has related this idea most directly to 9/11. As Wisnewski points out, “from outside” is the central slogan of the official version of 9/11. “The impression is produced that the perpetrators came ‘from outside’: from outside of the building, from outside of America, even from outside civilization. The official version of these events screams ‘outside, outside, outside.’” (Wisnewski 143) 

In a world axiomatically defined by terrorism, the Manichean outlook seems destined to win out. Sanguinetti saw something similar in Italy at the beginning of the strategy of tension: “In view of terrorism presented as absolute evil, evil in itself and for itself, all the other evils fade in to the background and are even forgotten; since the fight against terrorism coincides with the common interest, it already is the general good, and the State, which magnanimously conducts it, is good in itself and for itself. Without the wickedness of the devil, God’s infinite bounty could not appear and be appreciated as is fitting.” (Sanguinetti 3) 

Gabel insists again and again on the key role played by the loss of the historical dimension, and it is clear that this problem was shared by twentieth-century America with Nazi Germany and with Soviet Russia. Anglo-American propaganda exhibits an overwhelming tendency to demonize enemy leaders: Noriega, Milosevic, bin Laden, and Saddam Hussein are notable examples, but the tendency goes back to Kaiser Wilhelm at the very least. Today the explicit speech of propaganda is conducted on the overtly infantile plane: good guys and bad guys, of bad actors, and most of all terrorists. Gabel writes: “ 

For Gabel, this is another symptom of reification (hypostatization): “As a prisoner of a universe where space takes the place of duration, man in the reified world cannot understand history as the expression of creativity and spontaneity. Consequently the undeniable fact of change forces itself on this ‘consciousness of immediacy’ as a catastrophe, as a sudden change from the outside that excludes mediation. . . . Seen in this perspective, history appears as a function of demiurgic action. An external force (God, the hero, a party) transcends the efficiency of its autonomous dialectic. Reified consciousness is essentially ahistorical: mens momentanea sive carens recordationem [a mind in the moment, or lacking memory], said Leibniz on this subject.” (Gabel 151) 

Here is history reduced to a fairy tale, with the cocaine-abusing, alcoholic, mentally-impaired Bush as the hero of the good, and the rich, misfit, raving ideologue bin Laden as champion of evil. How can hundreds of millions of people believe in such a product? Gabel discusses the stress on biological heredity and race as one of the leading anti-historical features of the Nazi outlook, and there is evidence that Hitler was also well aware of this. Gabel points out that Nazi ideology, with its glorification of race and biology, was marked by “morbid rationalism in its worst form.” Gabel argues that “any unfavorable event for this racial pseudo-value is itself extra-historicized and ‘understood’ in terms of treason or conspiracy: the ideology of national socialism is logically inseparable from the theory of the ‘stab in the back.’” (Gabel 117) 

If fascism comes to the United States, it is now certain that its ideology will prominently feature the 9/11 events as a stab in the back to a benefactor by an ungrateful and treacherous outside world; fascist neocons are already spouting this point of view. Ironically, the German request for an armistice in 1918, which Hitler later condemned as a stab in the back by Social Democratic politicians, was actually the work of Field Marshal Ludendorff and other future backers of Hitler. 

As for 9/11, which Bush blames on the Arab and Muslim world, it too had some of its main backers inside the US military and intelligence services.

Tuesday, 26 July 2016

Queen of the Damned

Singer Mary J Blige would always mention how Aaliyah’s death totally changed her life. After reading interviews with Mary J about the singers death, it makes one wonder…
Interview with Oprah Magazine:
Oprah: What brought you to that point? I know 9/11 was traumatic for you.
Mary: Yes. And Aaliyah had just died. [Recording artist Aaliyah's plane crashed on August 25, 2001.] My life was her life. She was surrounded by people who weren’t telling her the real deal. We weren’t close friends, but I’d talked with her a couple of times. I very well could’ve been the woman on that plane.
Oprah: It was your wake-up call.
Mary: Yes. I was doing a show at the Apollo Theater in Harlem. Kendu and I weren’t married yet, and I overheard him say, “If Mary comes in this house drunk tonight, I’m gonna leave her.” So during the performance, “I kept thinking, I’m going to go home sober and tell him I’m not gonna drink anymore.” After the show, I received a call from the girl who always got the drinks and drugs. When I went to her house, she had the biggest bottle of wine she could find on the table. I took off all my makeup and just sat there. “You want a glass of wine?” she asked. I said no. I got up and left for home at 10 o’clock that night. Normally, I’d be stepping in the house at 4 in the morning. When I came in without alcohol on my breath, Kendu said, “I’m so proud of you.” That same night, we got the call: Aaliyah was dead.
Oprah: Has your transformation compelled you toward a greater responsibility in your artistry and lyrics?
Mary: Absolutely. One reason I turned my life around is that I realized millions of fans were following my example. I don’t want to be responsible for killing us. I want to be responsible for uplifting us. In the song “Family Affair,” I sing about getting drunk….
A different interview:
“MARY J BLIGE gave up her drink and drug-fueled lifestyle after experiencing the shock of fellow R+B star AALIYAH’s untimely death.
The 34-year-old singer became paranoid about her own demise after hearing the ROMEO MUST DIE beauty had been killed in a plane crash in the Bahamas in 2001.
Blige explains, “She (Aaliyah) wasn’t a close friend. It was just that when I saw her die, that’s when I discovered the fact that I’m next.I don’t know how or when, but I’m next.
“I don’t know what kind of freak accident they’re going to put me in, or what kind of overdose of heroin they’re going to sort out, but at the end of the day, I knew I was next. “I just thought, I’m scared.”
“…I don’t even know what to say. Uh. I just know that, that was a murder. You know what I’m saying? That was a spiritual murder whether people know it or not because God don’t kill people. You know what I’m saying? Whether people know it or not. I could go deeper. For a lot of people I would really have to bring proof. You know what I’m saying? from what I learned. She was cut down from the prime of her life. It’s so unfair…I believe it wasn’t her time because from what I know, it ain’t suppose to go down like that. Simple obedience like, your gut always warns you. Your gut never lies to you. Something like luggage, clothes and jewelry and all this madness that we worship, it’s called false idols. We really need to look at the bigger picture right now and how honey could be here right now…”

'Movie vampire told me to kill'
Allan Menzies said he was visited by a vampire
A man accused of murdering his friend has told a court how he "wanted to go out and murder people" after watching a vampire film about 100 times.

Allan Menzies, 22, claimed that he was ordered to kill Thomas McKendrick by a character in the movie Queen Of The Damned.

He said at the High Court in Edinburgh that he was told he would be rewarded with immortality and become a vampire "in the next life".

Mr Menzies said he was visited in his West Lothian home by the female vampire Akasha, who was played in the film by the late US singer Aaliyah.

He was giving evidence on the sixth day of his trial.

Bedroom visits

Mr Menzies denies killing Mr McKendrick, who he had known since he was four years old, on 11 December last year and attempting to defeat the ends of justice.

The jury has been told that his offer to plead guilty to culpable homicide on the grounds of diminished responsibility was rejected by the Crown.

Mr Menzies, from Fauldhouse, said Akasha visited him in his bedroom.

"In general terms, she started off having conversations with me and it ended up that I had basically agreed with her that if I murdered people I would be rewarded in the next life," he said.

" I heard it in my mind, basically, that the two of them were plotting to kill me  "
Allan Menzies
"I would be made immortal in the next life - a vampire, basically."

He said that he believed Mr McKendrick and another friend, Stuart Unwin, wanted to kill him.

"I heard it in my mind, basically, that the two of them were plotting to kill me," he said.

Mr Menzies told the court he had killed Mr McKendrick using a bowie knife, a kitchen knife and a hammer.

But he said his father Thomas and Mr Unwin had been responsible for disposing of the body.

He said he had not told the police about this to protect his father.

State hospital

Mr Menzies told the court that Akasha had continued to visit him after the killing, but he rejected demands that he kill more people.

He also said the film character had visited him at Carstairs, where he has been a patient for five months.

Mr Menzies said he was "disappointed" that there were no other vampires in the state hospital.

Earlier, two psychiatrists said that Menzies was not suffering from a severe mental illness at the time of the attack.

Personality disorder

Defence counsel Donald MacLeod suggested his client suffered from paranoid schizophrenia.

However, that was rejected by consultant forensic psychiatrists Derek Chiswick and Colin Gray.

Dr Chiswick, 58, said he believed Mr Menzies suffered from an "anti-social personality disorder".

But he said it was "extremely unlikely" that he was a paranoid schizophrenic.

Thursday, 13 August 2015

Jim Callaghan, MI5 and the Police View of History

"Oh, Harold's just a Walter Mitty..." 

- Prime Minister Jim Callaghan, 
as quoted by Tony Benn on SIS malfeasance

"It can be shown that both Wilson and Heath are under Soviet control through Dick Vagaukas(?) and Lord Rothchild... 

Callaghan could be a good choice because of his role as Police Federation representative, but he also has 'financial skeletons' relating to Welsh banking matters in his cupboard. Roy Jenkins is the unknown quantity but his 'liberal' policies at the Home Officer have not helped his cause with the establishment - he is also very close to Wilson and could therefore be discredited with him"

The 'Clockwork Orange' Documents,
British Army Intelligence & MI5,
January 1974


Gabel elaborates a lengthy definition of the political world view which is correlated with alienated and manipulated political life under the rule of schizophrenic/autistic ideologies which exhibit a low degree of fidelity to reality. Gabel called this the “police concept of history;” if he were writing today, he might well have called it the intelligence community or CIA theory of history. 

Gabel writes: “The police concept of history is the negation of the historical dialectic, in other words the negation of history. . . . History’s driving force is not the ensemble of objective forces but good or evil individual action . . . since the ‘event’ is no longer understood as the normal substratum of the course of History, but as miracle or catastrophe; it is no longer dependent on scientific explanation but on black or white magic. In the Manichean diptych of this view, the hero (leader) and the traitor represent two poles of the same principle of reificational negation of the autonomy of history. It is therefore a pseudo-history, a non-dialectical result either of success due to the genius of the leader or failure explicable through treason; an authentic ‘syndrome of external action’ permits the privileged system to evade eventual responsibility. 

The police concept of history represents the extreme form of political alienation; it is both a sociocentrism which dichotomizes the world into a privileged system [the US] and a non-privileged remainder [the Arab and Islamic world], and a phenomenon of consciousness of a Islamic world], and a phenomenon of consciousness of a schizophrenic nature. Since the privileged system is considered as perfect, extra-temporal and extra-dialectical, the event–particularly the unfavorable event–can only be explained by means of external action; it is experienced as an unexpected, ‘undeserved’ catastrophe, which is no longer integrated into the normal course of events whose succession constitutes the threat of concrete, dialectical temporality. One can compare this ensemble with the two specific elements in the clinical picture of schizophrenia, the syndrome of external action and the deranged experience of the end of the world (Weltuntergangserlebnis, abbreviated as WUE by German authors), the clinical translation of the appearance of the dialectic in a reified world which can accept the event only as a catastrophe.” (Gabel 115–116, with my interpolations) 

Thursday, 16 July 2015

The Most Important People You've Never Heard Of : Franciszek Ząbecki

Franciszek Ząbecki

I quote The Enemy [Wikipedia] : 

"Lieutenant Franciszek Ząbecki (8 October 1907 – 11 April 1987) was a station master at the village of Treblinka. During the German occupation of Poland in World War II, Ząbecki worked as a dispatcher for the Deutsche Reichsbahn; he also became a secret soldier in the underground Armia Krajowa (AK), collecting classified data and reporting to the Polish resistance on the Holocaust transports that went to Treblinka extermination camp. 

Over 800,000 Jews were murdered there in the course of Operation Reinhard, the deadliest phase of the Holocaust in Poland.

Ząbecki himself estimated that number to be 1,200,000 people.

After the war, Ząbecki testified at the trials of German war criminals, including SS officer Kurt Franz, and the commandant of Treblinka extermination camp, Franz Stangl. His incriminating evidence against them included original German waybills produced by the Reichsbahn, which proved that the "Güterwagen" boxcars crammed with prisoners on the way to Treblinka extermination camp, were returning empty. Ząbecki secretly stole a batch of waybills in 1944 from the control house to serve as physical proof of the ongoing extermination program. 

From July 1942 until the end of war, Ząbecki regularly delivered his reports about the Holocaust trains to the Polish government-in-exile."

"Treblinka station after WWII. Please notice that Treblinka station was outside the death camp Treblinka. Trains with Jews were divided here, often in 3 or 4 parts and by using small locomotive pushed to the death camp. During the time of train return to Treblinka from the death camp, the people were gassed and when new set of wagons entered Treblinka death camp, the peoples from the former train set were already murdered and when new set of wagons entered Treblinka death camp, the peoples from the former train set were already murdered and removed from gas chambers."

This is a photograph of this area in the diagram :

This is NOT THE CAMP - 
this is the Treblinka Village public station on the main line, where deportees were disembarked prior to being moved onto the processing centre at Treblinka II, 

via THIS disused section of track...

Timetable from Warschau Danz Bf (Umschlagplatz) to Treblinka. 
"Leerzug zurück" - Empty back are used in the above timetable.

"From August 6, 1942, until further notice, a special train with resetlers is running from Warsaw Danz BF [Danzig railway station] to Treblinka and running empty back [Leerzug zurück] as follows:

The departure of one train per day was scheduled:

"1/. P Kr 9085 / 9.30 / Warsaw Danz Bf - Małkinia - Treblinka," with departure at 12:25 PM, arrival at 4:20 PM, and return

"2/. Ln Kr 9086 / 11.30 / Treblinka - Małkinia - Warsaw Danz Bf" with departure at 7:00 PM and arrival at 11:19 PM.[820].

58 type 1G boxcars + 2 boxcars of type 1C (cattle cars with breakcabin) were used.

Obvious Observations :-

Assuming the documentary record of the Deutsche Reichsbahn waybills he produced out of thin air after 20 years to be genuine (and I assume that they are, based upon the following observation), this is not  proof that Jews were being killed at Treblinka.

At best, it is proof that Jews were arriving at Treblinka by rail and not leaving there on the same trains they arrived in - which is precisely what you would expect to see if the Jews are being deported further East (as we know was the plan, at least in Berlin at this time), and Treblinka was merely a transit camp, as survivors testimonies overwhelmingly state it to have been.

So, in short, his waybills are not proof that any crime has been committed, certainly not that Treblinka was an extermination centre, which it clearly was not, especially given the quality the SS personnel assigned to it, who were hung out to dry in the subsequent Treblinka Trials.

It's also interesting that he claims to have been forwarding copies of all of his waybills to the Polish "government" [nobody elected these people] in exile in London, meaning the anti-Communist "democratic" (again, these were Polish military officers that no-one elected) of General Sikorsky, the Polish military leader based in London who was ostensibly assassinated with his staff in Gibraltar in 1943 on orders from Churchill, seemingly to appease Stalin and more than likely terroristiclly discipline his Free French counterpart, the notoriously truculent and ungracious General DeGaulle - how was he getting these things to London in 1943? Was he in fact passing them to the local Polish militia or the Communist Resistance, who subsequently became the Polish government..?

Obvious questions :-

Where was this man in 1945, when we needed this kind of documentary evidence?

Why is he coming forward now?

If he was in the Polish Underground in 1942, is it not possible he is in the (anti-Soviet) Polish Underground now? 

What is his relationship to the Polish Communist Party, and the Catholic Church..?

In 1964, did (West) Germany still owe Poland money, and did Communist Poland badly need the money? My guess to both caseswould be "Yes it did."

How does this series of events relate to international public debacle of the Eichmann Trial in Jerusalem in 1961 and the farcical eyewitness testimony presented in court concerning Treblinka, because it's clear that it did.

Aktion T4 S.S. Gassing Veterans at Treblinka

"Initially no distinction was made between Jewish and non-Jewish adult patients. But in April 1940 local health authorities were required to provide details of all Jewish patients within their jurisdictions. Beginning in January 1940, these Jewish patients were transferred to the killing centres and gassed. Ludwig "Israel" Alexander was the first person and the only Jew listed on the Eglfing-Haar transport list of twenty-five men destined for Grafeneck on 18 January 1940. The name "Israel," which all male Jews were forced to take on after 1 January 1939, indicates that Alexander was considered Jewish under the Nürnberg racial laws. Alexander was thus probably the first handicapped Jewish patient murdered in the gas chamber of a ““euthanasia”” killing centre. 

From 1941 Jewish patients were sent to the Generalgouvernement, and there either shot or killed in gas vans. In reply to enquiries from the families of the murdered, Gekrat stated that the victims gassed in Brandenburg or liquidated in Poland had been sent to an asylum in Chelm (sometimes referred to as “Cholm”), in the Lublin District of Poland, and even mailed death notices from Chelm containing fictitious dates of death in order to add to the deception. Aktion Cholm, as it was known, proved particularly lucrative for T4, since it was not only possible to collect the gold teeth and jewellery of the deceased, but also their hospital fees, which continued to be received for some months after the actual date of death. By this stage, the medical condition of Jewish patients had become irrelevant. They were killed simply because they were both Jewish and a patient. Very shortly, one of those qualifications also disappeared. Selected members of the staff of T4 began killing Jews on a gigantic scale at the Nazi death camps in Poland  solely because they were Jews. 

The fourth manifestation of ““euthanasia”” was the so-called “Aktion 14f13.” This was the code name given to the extension of T4 operations to the concentration camps. Doctors visited the camps, but did not conduct medical examinations. Prisoners were ostensibly assessed by similar criteria to those applied to the handicapped. In practice, those who had artificial limbs, wore spectacles or had “unsatisfactory” personal histories, were routinely selected for extermination. Again, simply being Jewish was enough to incur a death sentence. Those prisoners selected were transported to either Hartheim, Sonnenstein, or Bernburg for gassing. By the war’s end the victims of Aktion 14f13 probably numbered about 20,000. 
By the summer of 1941, knowledge of the ““euthanasia”” programme had become widespread, in part because the killings were taking place on German soil. The Nazis were quick to learn the lesson. Future killing centres would be established far away, where possible in isolated areas. Aware of growing public disquiet, and in the wake of explicit sermons preached by a number of churchmen, in particular Bishop Clemens August Graf von Galen of Münster, on 24 August 1941, Hitler ordered the suspension of adult ““euthanasia””. But children’s ““euthanasia””, Aktion 14f13, and the so-called “wild” ““euthanasia”” of adults in hospitals continued. The suspension should more accurately be called a pause for reorganization. "

A Comment on this from David Irving :

When you think about it, it makes no sense at all - why would the SS (a police body) be getting involved with T4, which was a medical program, inflicted on people who were hardly in need of excessive physical coercion or manhandling? It's counter-intuitive, and again, this was not secret, so why involve the personnel or resources of the secret police?

The basis for my question was on the level far more relating to individuals rather than the SS at an institutional level - there has obviously been a vast retrospective effort to trace the actual or alleged involvement of individual Reinhadt personnel (particularly at Treblinka, I notice) with T4, and say "Oh, they were involved in the T4 'Mercy Killings', they were obviously experienced with this sort of thing, so they were brought to Treblinka, Sobibor etc. to do it again", which is (at best) leading the witness to the extreme.

Most of the after-the-fact attempts to tie Reinhardt personnel to T4 seem dubious at best, and when you look into it, reveal that these people were not of the sort of intellectual calibre you would entrust such supposedly vital state secret operations to - so I am just trying to sort out in my own mind at present what's true and what's false.

For instance : "In late 1939 Franz was summoned to Hitler's Chancellery and detailed to take part in the Action T4 euthanasia program. Franz worked as a cook at Hartheim, Brandenburg, Grafeneck and Sonnenstein. In late 1941, he was assigned as cook at T4 headquarters.

On 20 April 1942, Franz was promoted to Oberscharführer (Staff Sergeant). In spring of 1942, Franz, along with other veterans of Action T4, went to Lublin concentration camp complex in the Generalgouvernement, and was posted to the Bełżec extermination camp, where he stayed until the end of August 1942."

That all strikes me as being prima face not true, in very large measure. It's ridiculous. This man is supposedly a cook, then a staff sergeant, then the commandant of a death camp. It's absurd.

The three people I have identified who are probably most worthy of careful study are this mysterious Polish stationmaster, Franciszek Ząbecki, Erwin Lambert and (for similar reasons) Dr. Hans Münch, all these people who for various reasons came forward and effectively turned King's evidence and survived the various post-Nuremberg trials by liberally testifying against all of their former colleagues.... 


Posted by  on Tuesday, August 12, 2014 · 57 Comments 
Ever since posting (via my publisher) my expanded views regarding Treblinka and the “Reinhardt” camps, I have been accused of “attacking” other revisionists, and I have been told that my position is the result of A) JDL threats, B) a payoff from “the Joos,” C) my alcoholism, D) my grief over my mother’s health, E) my neocon beliefs, and F) – all of the above.
I appreciate that some of you feel as though you know my life better than I do. But if I can momentarily be qualified by you eminent experts as an authoritative source on my own life, I will state that A) the JDL has made no attempt to contact me since I resurfaced, something I am very pleased about; B) I can’t even get dicks like Larry Elder to pay me for work I did before my “outing.” Hell, I wish a few “Joos” would offer me a check these days, but no dice; C) my alcoholism makes me irritable, but not stupid; D) my mother’s health situation has vastly reduced the amount of time I can spend on other things, but it hasn’t made me dim; E) my political beliefs have no bearing on my history work. If I make a historical claim, I back it up with facts and documents. Where I stand on abortion or Obama or legalized pot or school vouchers or Israel or gender Apartheid in Muslim nations is irrelevant, because I either make my case for my historical claims based on facts and documents, or I fail.
Two small observations:
1)  What transpired recently with Bradley Smith and Faurisson (through his proxy Leuchter) is not new. New to you, maybe. But that doesn’t mean it’s new. Back in 1994, the exact same thing happened. Faurisson attacked me with personal insults, he used a proxy (Henri Roques), I got angry at Smith for acting like a scared little lackey of Faurisson’s, and Smith responded by sending my personal correspondences (faxes that time) to dozens of other revisionists.
The only difference this time is that Faurisson has a new proxy (Roques is dead, so in comes Leuchter), and Smith now has social media with which to send around my private emails.
Regarding Faurisson, I tackled his poor historiography in a very lengthy piece I wrote in 1995. As Faurisson ceased to create new or relevant work decades ago, I can add nothing to what I wrote back then.
And Smith? I’m not automatically against publishing private correspondences. I did it to Michael Shermer in my book. But I published them in full and with a detailed explanation of why they were relevant to Holocaust history beyond my personal beef.
Smith publishes private emails because he confuses airing dirty laundry with open debate. Mainly it’s because he’s too lazy, old, and ill to come up with any actual new material. In this most recent instance, he published my private correspondences in truncated form and with no context. And when I attempted to add context, he accused me of trying to “exploit my dying mother to help me win the sympathy of the reader.”
No, asshole. I was attempting to give context to private emails that you chose to publish in an edited form. Here’s an idea – don’t keep posting private emails. But if you do, don’t attack the person whose emails you put online for trying to provide context to things that were never intended to be seen publicly.
That Bradley would post my private emails and then accuse me of “exploiting” my “dying mother” is beyond vile. It’s probably the worst thing anyone has ever done to me. I will never forgive him.
Also, Smith recently dredged up and posted Faurisson’s ‘94 attacks against me without linking to my response from ‘95. That’s Bradley’s “open debate” for you.
For everyone who is acting as shocked as a Southern gal with the vapors over my Treblinka views, I will refer to that piece I wrote about Faurisson in ‘95. I never thought I’d ever say “thank God for Nizkor,” but, well, thank God for Nizkor, for preserving the piece:
As an example, I’ll point specifically to Faurisson’s response to David Irving’s “Journal of Historical Review” essay/conference speech on the Goebbels diary, appearing in the letters section of the current “Journal of Historical Review” (March/April ’95). Faurisson quotes from the March 27, 1942 Goebbels diary entry, and then writes “In itself, this last sentence (“Broadly speaking, one can probably say that 60 percent of them will have to be liquidated, while only 40 percent can be put to work” – Goebbels) tends to show that the Reich Minister of Propaganda did not know for sure that there was a German policy to physically exterminate the Jews, either totally or in part.”
“IN PART?” What does he think Goebbels is referring to, if not a liquidation IN PART. Faurisson is pulling an old “exterminationist” trick here by quoting a passage and then TELLING us what we’ve just read, hoping we won’t notice any incongruity between the passage and Faurisson’s explanation. Faurisson is quoting a passage that speaks of exterminations in part – AT LEAST in part, and then he TELLS us that we in fact HAVEN’T just read what we’ve read – with no explanation given to clarify why Goebbels isn’t actually saying what he so clearly seems to be saying. I think Faurisson has grown too used to having his word taken as gospel. Naked emperors don’t only exist on the “exterminationist” side. Faurisson’s description of the March 27 Goebbels diary entry reminds me of page 120 of dear old Mel Mermelstein’s book, where he shows a picture of Krema 1 and writes in the caption “note the pipes and shower heads above.”
The importance (to me) of this Goebbels diary passage is that for the first time we have a reliable piece of evidence which points to a plan of separation between those Jews fit for “labor” and the rest, who “have to be liquidated.” Hate it though some of us may, this fits the “exterminationist” model much better than it does the revisionist one. If revisionists wish to explain this passage some other way, they’ll have to do better than the explanation offered by Faurisson. For myself, I can say that the meaning of this Goebbels diary passage, IN RELATION to events occurring at that time, has yet to be adequately explained by any revisionist.
These days, I am saying nothing new. New to you, maybe. But not new. If you formed an opinion of me based only on partial samples of what I said or wrote in the ‘90s, that isn’t my fault.
Which brings me to…
2)  The most intellectually weak and embarrassingly stupid position that anyone can take is, “I’m so great that no one could possibly disagree with me. Therefore, if someone CLAIMS to disagree with me, it’s not because they actually do. It’s because they’re lying, or they’ve been coerced, or threatened, or paid off. But it’s simply not in the realm of possibility that someone might actually hold views that contradict mine.”
I dealt with that shit constantly during my GOP days, when leftists routinely accused me of having been “paid off” by the Koch Brothers or Rupert Murdoch, because surely no one could actually be a conservative by sincere conviction.
To everyone who wants to dismiss my views on Treblinka by kidding themselves that I really don’t believe what I’m saying, I implore you, don’t go down that road of intellectual foolishness. It’s neither my drinking nor my grief nor the JDL nor anything else that is “making” me take this position. I actually think I make a good, strong case. Plus (as I just pointed out) I was saying similar things twenty years ago.
Disagree with me, sure. But don’t claim that I’m only pretending to disagree with you. Allow that I can actually form ideas and have opinions on my own.
Eric Hunt doesn’t allow this. He claims to psychically “know” that David Irving and I are just pretending to disagree with him. It’s actually quite astounding that Irving, a man I have neither seen nor spoken to since 1995, would collaborate with me on a plot to pretend to disagree with Hunt, a man I have never met and whose name was unfamiliar to me until a few months ago when Smith pointed out “he’s the Wiesel elevator felon.”
Which brings me to this. And I’m going to use my words carefully here, not out of respect for Hunt, but out of respect for several mutual friends who have asked me to tread lightly. So this is me treading lightly:
Eric, your defense at your criminal trial was that you are “mentally ill” and “delusional.” Please know that I take schizophrenia very seriously. It is a tragic disease, and it has affected several people who are very close to me. I am not mocking you; I wish you only the best. But you are in no way qualified to judge what men like David Irving and I are thinking. You are in no position to claim some type of clairvoyance regarding us, son. I think you have a few too many issues of your own to deal with.
Hunt obviously put a good deal of time into his 9,000-word reply. Not for his sake, but to better clarify the reality of the “Reinhardt” camps, I’ll spend a bit more time stating the obvious.
And, indeed, how much more obvious can it be? The Korherr Report, commissioned by Himmler, written by the top SS statistician for Himmler’s eyes only, states that “evacuations” from “the territory of the Reich and including the eastern territories and further in the German area of power and influence in Europe from October 1939 or later until 31.12.1942” add up to 2,419,656 Jews.
Korherr, whose report is considered authentic by even the most extreme revisionists like Mattogno and Graf, clearly states that those “evacuees” are no longer in ghettos and concentration camps. Further, Korherr states that “From 1937 to the beginning of 1943, the number of Jews in Europe has diminished by an estimated 4 million, partially due to emigration, partially due to the excess mortality of the Jews in Central and Western Europe, partially due to the evacuations especially in the more strongly populated Eastern Territories, die hier als Abgang gerechnet werdenwhich (which are here counted as departed).”
The “evacuees” were not in ghettos or camps. Europe (ALL of Europe under German control – West, Central, and East) had LOST approximately 4 million Jews by 1943. The causes for the “loss?” Emigration (which Korherr rightly points out was prohibited in autumn 1941), excess mortality caused by deaths-over-births (including old age and suicide, which Korherr mentions specifically), and post-1941 EVACUATIONS.
Hunt accuses me of reading too much into Korherr’s “code words.” “Code words?” Son, do you speak German? “Abgang” is not a code word. It is a really straightforward German word. It means gone, departed, dispatched.
And “zurückgegangen,” the term Korherr uses to describe the state of European Jewry and the 4 million figure, is also not a code word. Again, it’s a straightforward, normal term for “decreased,” “declined,” or “diminished.”
No code words, Eric. The “evacuees” are gone, but not by emigration, suicide, or old age. They are GONE. Employing no “code words,” Korherr states unambiguously that they are gone from Western Europe, Central Europe, and Eastern Europe. Employing no “code words,” Korherr states that there are approximately 4 million fewer Jews in all of Europe (Western, Central, and Eastern) – a four million Jewish DECREASE, DECLINE – as the result of pre-1941 emigration from the Reich proper, excess deaths from old age and suicide, and EVACUATIONS. Evacuees are counted as “departed.”
There is no evidence, not one ounce of evidence, that the nearly 2.5 million Jews counted as evacuees were simply transferred somewhere else. There is ample evidence that thousands of evacuees were indeed used for labor. A thousand here, a thousand there. But we’re talking about a total figure of almost two-and-a-half million. Plus, we’re talking about a hell of a lot of “Jews unfit for labor” in that group. The revisionist challenge, for those who won’t accept the conclusion held by me, Irving, and Weber, is to account for this massive number of Jews (where were they sent? There are ample records that they were sent to the Reinhardt camps…why no records of where those millions of people ended up next?) and – most significantly – where were all of the unemployable Jews sent?
Mattogno and Graf play games. They cite a few reports of Polish Jews sent to labor camps or ghettos during the “Reinhardt” phase, but again and again, in every instance they mention, it deals with employable Jews needed for labor, often by forces outside the SS. None of this makes an appreciable dent in the nearly 2.5 million figure. To make their case, revisionists have to show where groups of millions were sent to be resettled. 1,000 employable Polish Jews sent to work for the Luftwaffe doesn’t cut it.
Look at this little game that Mattogno and Graf play in “Treblinka: Transit Camp or Extermination Camp.” Citing Christian Gerlach’s “Kalkulierte Morde,” Mattogno and Graf crow, “The deportation of Polish Jews to White Russia was, according to C. Gerlach, ‘extremely extensive.’”
Oh, THAT’S where they went! Belarus! Case closed. Let’s move on. The believers’ morphine has been administered. No need to fret about this supposed “problem” again.
Except that Mattogno and Graf, who use the “extremely extensive” quote to end their chapter titled “Final Destination of Jews Deported to the East,” employ the quote misleadingly, and don’t tell you what comes after it. “Umfangreichsten” (Gerlach’s term) is better translated as “most extensive,” and Gerlach was using that term in a chapter titled “Die Verschleppung von Juden aus anderen Ländern nach Weißrußland.” Of transports to Belarus from the Protectorate, France, the Netherlands, Hungary, and Poland, Gerlach states that the “most extensive” figure was for the Polish Jews (in comparison to the other transports).
And here Mattogno and Graf lose in spectacular fashion. After committing themselves to Gerlach as a credible source, here’s what comes after “most extensive” (so as not to be accused of monkeying with the translation, I’ll use revisionist Thomas Kues’ translation from the Inconvenient History website):
Most extensive were probably the deportations of Polish Jews to Belarus. Also in this case it was the question of labor forces. The offices and enterprises of the SS and Police in the so-called “Rußland-Mitte”, roughly corresponding to the eastern [military administered] part of Belarus, were to be concentrated in two cities: Mogilev and Bobruisk. In Mogilev there existed the already described forced labor camp of the HSSPF, in Bobruisk there was in early 1942 a need for manpower in connection with the construction of a large base planned for theWaffen-SS. The head of the supply commander’s office of the Waffen-SS and Police of Rußland-Mitte, SS-Standartenführer Georg Martin, got the idea to establish a “KL” (concentration camp) and have Jews sent to it from Warsaw. On the intervention of the RSHA 960 Jewish men and youths, part of them summoned by an appeal, part of them arrested during razzias in the Warsaw Ghetto, were then transported to Bobruisk on 30 May 1942. On 28 July a further train with Warsaw Jews reached Bobruisk; part of the Jews were sent on to Smolensk. In Bobruisk the Jews also had to perform work for units of the Wehrmacht. Of the approximately 1,500 deportees only 91 male Jews were involved in the retreat to Lublin in September 1943, since all the others had fallen victims to the constant Selections, the toil, the starvation and the terrible maltreatment. Moreover there were possibly one or more transports whose passengers were shot immediately at arrival.
Several thousand Jews, sent for labor. Not several hundred thousand employable and unemployable Jews sent for resettling. And these are the transports that Gerlach describes as the “most extensive.” So, a few thousand is the “most extensive?” Wow. Mattogno and Graf should have left Gerlach alone. He doesn’t help their case. Once again, we see small transports for labor only, an infinitesimal fraction of the 2,419,656 evacuees listed by Korherr.
Mattogno and Graf should have left Kube alone as well. In their zeal to find ANY evidence of Polish Jews who actually were sent into the Eastern territories, the authors write:
Finally, the arrival of at least one transport from the Warsaw Ghetto at a location east of Treblinka has been documented beyond any question. On 31 July 1942, the Reichskommissar for White Russia, Wilhelm Kube, sent a telegram to the Reichskommissar for the Ostland, Heinrich Lohse, in which he protested the dispatching of a transport of “1,000 Jews from Warsaw to work at Minsk,” because this would lead to danger of epidemics and an increase in partisan activity.
Another spectacular Mattogno/Graf fail. After committing themselves to the fact that the Kube/Lohse telegram is authentic and reliable, they fail to quote the entire thing. I’ll do that now:
Re: Combating Partisans and Aktion against Jews in the Generalbezirk of Belorussia
In all the clashes with the partisans in Belorussia it has proved that Jewry, both in the formerly Polish, as well as in the formerly Soviet parts of the District General, is the main bearer of the partisan movement, together with the Polish resistance movement in the East and the Red Army from Moscow. In consequence, the treatment of Jewry in Belorussia is a matter of political importance owing to the danger to the entire economy. It must therefore be solved in accordance with political considerations and not merely economic needs. Following exhaustive discussions with the SS Brigadefuehrer Zenner and the exceedingly capable Leader of the SD, SS Obersturmbannfuehrer Dr. jur. Strauch, we have liquidated about 55,000 Jews in Belorussia in the past 10 weeks. In the area of Minsk county Jewry has been completely eliminated without any danger to the manpower requirements. In the predominantly Polish area of Lida, 16,000 Jews were liquidated, in Slonim, 8,000, etc.
Owing to encroachment by the Army Rear Zone (Command), which has already been reported, there was interference with the preparations we had made for the liquidation of the Jews in Glebokie. Without contacting me, the Army Rear Zone Command liquidated 10,000 Jews, whose systematic elimination had in any case been planned by us. In the city of Minsk about 10,000 Jews were liquidated on July 28 and 29. Of these 6,500 were Russian Jews – mainly old men, women and children – and the rest, Jews incapable of work, who were sent to Minsk in November of last year by order of  the Fuehrer, mainly from Vienna, Bruenn, Bremen and Berlin. The District of Sluzk has also been relieved of several thousand Jews. The same applies to Nowogrodek and Wilejka. Radical measures are planned for Baranowitschi and Hanzewitschi. In Baranowitschi there are still another 10,000 Jews in the city itself, of whom 9,000 will be liquidated next month.
In the city of Minsk about 2,600 Jews from Germany have remained. In addition all of the 6,000 Russian Jews and Jewesses remained alive who were employed during the Aktion by various units [of the Wehrmacht]. In future, too, Minsk will remain the largest Jewish element owing to the concentration of armament industries in the area and as the requirements of the railroad make this necessary for the time being. In all other areas the number of Jews used for work will be reduced by the SD and myself to a maximum of 800, and, if possible, 500, so that when the remaining planned Aktionen have been completed there will be 8,600 in Minsk and about 7,000 Jews in the 10 other districts, including the Jew-free Minsk District. There will then be no further danger that the partisans can still rely to any real extent on Jewry. Naturally I and the SD would like it best if Jewry in the Generalbezirk of Belorussia was finally eliminated after their labor is no longer required by the Wehrmacht. For the time being the essential requirements of the Wehrmacht, the main employer of Jewry, are being taken into consideration.
In addition to this unambiguous attitude towards Jewry, the SD in Belorussia also has the onerous task of continually transferring new transports of Jews from the Reich to their destination. This causes excessive strain on the physical and spiritual capacities of the personnel of the SD, and withdraws them from duties within the area of Belorussia itself.
I should therefore be grateful if the Reichskommissar could see his way to stopping further deportations of Jews to Minsk at least until the danger from the partisans has been finally overcome. I need 100 percent of the SD manpower against the Partisans and the Polish Resistance Movement, which together occupy the entire strength of the not overwhelmingly strong SD units. After completion of the Aktion against the Jews in Minsk, SS Obersturmbannfuehrer Dr. Strauch reported to me this night, with justified indignation, that suddenly, without instructions from the Reichsfuehrer, and without notification to the Generalkommissar, a transport of 1,000 Jews from Warsaw has arrived for the local Luftwaffe Command.
I beg the Reichskommissar (already warned by telegram) to prevent the dispatch of such transports, in his capacity as supreme authority in Ostland. The Polish Jew, exactly like the Russian Jew, is an enemy of the German nation. He represents a politically dangerous element, a danger which far exceeds his value as a skilled worker. Under no circumstances should the army or the Luftwaffe import Jews into an area under civil administration, either from the Generalgouvernement or from elsewhere, without the approval of the Reichskommissar, as this endangers the entire political task here and the security of the Generalbezirk. I am in full agreement with the Commander of the SD in Belorussia that we should liquidate every transport of Jews not arranged, or announced to us, by our superior officers, to prevent further disturbances in Belorussia.
Do these sound like the words of a man who is running a bucolic no-kill resettlement village for Polish (and other) Jews? That transport of 1,000 Jews that Mattogno and Graf wave above their heads like the Stanley Cup was unexpected and unwanted. Plus, there’s all that talk from Kube about mass murder. But I think you probably got that point already.
I’ll add that just two months after getting the final Korherr Report, Himmler ordered the Ostland ghettos permanently closed, with any Jews capable of work being sent to camps, and the remainder being “evacuated to the East.” Uh, this is the fucking Ostland. There IS no “east.” This is as far east as Nazi territory went. What more proof is needed that, in this instance, “evacuated to the East” is a euphemism?
So even if one wants to place the Ostland ghettos as the final “resettlement” destinations, two months after the final Korherr Report, the ghettos were dissolved. Where you gonna put those 2.4 million Jews NOW, bright boys?
Oh, and let’s not forget that in May of ‘44, Himmler bragged at Sonthofen about how secure the Eastern Front is because the Jewish ghettos of the General Government have been removed from “existence:”
I am convinced that things would look bleak for the front that has been built up to the east of the Government General if we had not resolved the Jewish problem there, if, for example, the ghetto in Lublin, or the massive ghetto in Warsaw, with its 500,000 inhabitants, were still in existence.
If your position is that Himmler moved the Polish Jews CLOSER to the front, from Poland to the Ostland, can you comprehend how stupid that sounds in light of Himmler’s remarks at Sonthofen? Basically, you would have Himmler say, “I strengthened the front by removing the Polish Jews from areas close to the front and putting them in areas even closer to the front. If large Jewish communities still existed in the General Government, it would be a threat to the front. So what a good thing that I put all of those Jews WAY closer to the front!”
C’mon…just use your logic. That’s a damn stupid theory. Himmler is CLEARLY stating that the removal of the Jews from the General Government has made the front more secure. He is patting himself on the back for REMOVING hundreds of thousands of Jews from an area that close to the front. And your position is that he “resettled” them in the Ostland, right at the front? So, Himmler is saying that 500,000 Warsaw Jews were a threat to the front when they were in Warsaw, but not when they’re at the front itself? Seriously?
Please. Stop being stupid. The Jews had not been resettled to the Ostland. It’s as clear as day.
And before you say, “well, that there Sonthofen speech was probably a fake cooked up by them Holohoaxers,” remember that this is the same speech in which Himmler informed the generals that the Hungarian Jews were being brought to German territory to be used as labor. Why would the “Holohoaxers” fabricate a speech that annihilates the core of the 1944 Auschwitz extermination story?
The Ostland ghettos, like the Reinhardt camps, were part of a deadly enterprise. Korherr gave the recap. 2.4 million Jews were not frolicking freely in the Ostland ghettos or in the Reinhardt Camps. Thousands of Jews did avoid death during the Reinhardt period through labor, but one cannot account for the over 2.4 million departed Jews who were not in camps or ghettos except by admitting that they were departed Jews who were not in camps or ghettos.
If I could make it any more simple, I’d have to use finger puppets.
In his reply to my first statement on Treblinka, Eric Hunt pointed out that the Minsk ghetto isn’t mentioned in the Korherr Report. He’s not helping his case. You know what else isn’t mentioned by name in the report? Treblinka, Sobibor, Belzec. The purpose of the report was to inform Himmler of how many Jews had died, how many were alive, and where the living were held. There was no need to list by name the one-way death stops. That info was covered in the section of “departed” evacuees.
To show that my views regarding the Ostland ghettos are not the product of my Joo-ishness or alcoholism, I’ll quote someone else on the topic:
Meanwhile, from mid-November 1941 onward, the Reichsbahn sent trainloads of Jews – rounded up in Vienna, Brünn (Brno), Bremen, and Berlin – direct to Minsk, while others went to Warsaw, Kovno, and Riga. At Kovno and Riga the Jews were shot soon after. At Minsk the German Jews survived at first, but not for long: the Nazis liquidated 35,000 of the native Russian Jews at Minsk to make space for the newcomers, who were housed in a separate ghetto, the ‘Hamburg Ghetto’ – indicating the city that the first consignment had come from….Wilhelm Kube, Rosenberg’s general commissioner of White Ruthenia, would record on July 31, 1942, that ten thousand had been liquidated since the twenty-eighth, ‘of which 6,500 were Russian Jews, old folk, women and children, with the rest unemployable Jews largely sent to Minsk from Vienna, Brünn, Bremen, and Berlin in November last year on the Führer’s order.’
You know who wrote those words? David Irving, in “Hitler’s War.” And yet he was still welcomed at IHR conferences and Zundel rallies all throughout the ‘90s. He wasn’t called a sellout or a traitor. Oh sure, Faurisson attacked him. But Faurisson is a sick man. The more important point is, the revisionist audience back in my day was somewhat different from the audience of today. There was no insistence on Faurissonian “purity.” A man like Irving could be celebrated for his skill, even if some in the crowd disagreed with his conclusions.
Not anymore. The Faurissons and Grafs and Mattognos have taken over, and a self-described “delusional” like Hunt has become a respected authority.
Fredrick Toben, on some white supremacy podcast (I think it’s called the Nutty Nordic Chuckle-Time White Purity Partycast, or something like that) recently lamented the “new” positions taken by me, Weber, and Irving. “New?” I’ve been saying similar things since the ‘90s, and Irving long before. We didn’t change; revisionism did. It’s a shame. For some of us, it used to be about the challenge of doing research and filling in the gaps in knowledge that others had ignored. It was about eschewing identity politics and politics in general, in favor of the pursuit of facts, wherever they might lead.
Even if, let’s say, only 15% of the revisionists I mixed with in the ‘90s actually felt that way, that was enough to make it rewarding. It’s not rewarding now. Don’t get me wrong – I’ve met some incredibly cool people since being thrust back into revisionism. I’d go so far as to say I’ve made several new “friends for life,” and even more new Facebook friends who I truly look forward to meeting in person someday. I’m simply making the point that, for me, the scene has changed.
Here’s something that may best personify my angst – Eric Hunt seems downright unapologetic for knowingly misleading his viewers in his Treblinka video:
In the first cut [of the Treblinka video] I said “This is a report from September 1942, of the Joint Distribution Committee providing medical aid to 600,000 Polish-Jewish refugees in Asiatic Russia.” I also showed a newspaper article. The day of release, Germar Rudolf corrected this and pointed out that they were evacuated well before Treblinka was alleged to have been gassing Jews by the trainload. It’s obvious these Polish Jews were evacuated by the Soviet Union. The mistake was a result of putting an old misidentified placeholder into an early draft, rushing to get the project out and not running it by other people….I kept the older version up simply because the comment page was more active.

So that’s where we are now? Spreading false and misleading information is perfectly acceptable in revisionist circles because a “comment page is more active?” Using Youtube’s free and convenient annotations feature to correct an error is considered an undue burden?
This is the state of revisionism right now?
Thomas Wolfe once wrote, “Stay the fuck away from redheaded fashion models who’ll dial your life back to 1994.” I think he also wrote “You can’t go home again,” which, come to think of it, would have been a better quote for me to use here. Because indeed, you can’t go home again. So here’s where I exit the elevator that Eric Hunt is riding in.
Given the choice, I’d rather take the stairs.
(Pictured above: Cole, Faurisson, Irving, Weber, Graf, Mattogno, Zundel, and others, from 1994. You’re not likely to see this group get together again soon)

My Response to the fine Mr. Cole/Stein :

Much about the Reinhardt camps, Treblinka in particular is extremely complicated and confusing, which is likely why both Revisionists and Exterminationists often focus on Auschwitz and occasionally Mjadanek to the exclusion of all else, as things are much more cut and dried.

After much puzzling over this, I THINK I have figured out what is going on here – for a start, there were two Treblinkas and two rail platforms. And we only have diagrams and widely circulated ariel photographs of one of them.

In Through the Outdoor

So this is essentially a shell-game – the reason it’s perfectly possible for 1.5million people to enter a camp and there then be no record of them ever leaving again, but also NO BODIES and NO MASS GRAVES evident and have an authentic paper trail which reflects that is because they are arriving and being processed at one rail terminal, marched two miles down the road following intake and then placed back on a DIFFERENT train at a DIFFERENT railhead the following day – so if you only have the arrivals and departures for camp number 2 (which is the case) and you pretend that there never was a camp number 2, they essentially appear to have disappeared and never left; whereas in reality, most of them probably left the following day on foot, were marched from Treblinka II to Treblinka I and were reboarded onto a different train travelling East from a different platform.

What happened is that in around 1964, following the Eichmann Trial debacle, this Polish citizen suddenly came forward, from behind the Iron Curtain, after 25 years, and he was the STATIONMASTER at Treblinka Railway Station, working for the German rail company throughout the entire war and he has complete records of all the arrivals throughout the war – incredibly, the Reich paid the rail fares for everyone deported by train to the rail company, on a per-person, per-mile standard rate, so these are VERY accurate figures.

His story that at the time, he was also a member of the Polish underground and was sending copies of all the records to resistence throughout the war, and has had copies of them the whole time – this was the entire evidentiary basis for the 1960s Treblinka Trials in Germany.

So, this gentleman was stationmaster at Treblinka railway STATION until 1943, when the station was closed to the public (who rode right past the “death camp” of Treblinka II on thier way to the station adjacent to Treblinka I.

So he only has half the records, and that makes sense – of course he doesn’t have a record of the departures from th other camp, because there was no station there open to the public, just a spur adjacent to the second camp, with a platform and a ramp just like the ones inside Auschwitz, not open to the public.

I can’t answer what happened to the inmates after that, but I cannot believe that they are in the ground under Treblinka II, there simply isn’t the room and there is no evidence of corpses or mass graves under the site of the camp. It’s just not supportable.

The idea that 1.5 million people or more were just wandering around Russia and Ukraine on the Eastern Front does so preposterous, I agree, but it is certainly possible and not without precedent – they are only a problem for the Germans so long as they end up on the German side of the lines, and the Germans did everything they could to retain control of the rail lines as deep into Soviet Territory as possible, and then they become the Russian’s problem – the Russians would have to deal with them and process them, with no way to know who were true refugees and who were Nazi spies or anti-communist partisans posing as refugees to conduct acts of terrorism and sabotage behind their front – they would have had no choice but to send everyone to Siberia and sort them all out at a later date, and there is good evidence to support the idea that that is just what happened.

And again, there is. MAJOR precedent for this – pre-Soviet Russia and Germany remained at war between Feburary and October 1917, but the Germans apparently had complete control over all rail traffic into Russia at least as far as St. Petersberg throughout this entire period, because they were able to ensure safe passage across the entire Eastern Front for not just Lenin but every single exiled radical and political émigré, Bolshevik, Anarchist and Pacifist Liberal they could get their hands on and send them directly into the heart of the enemy camp to cause maximum chaos and disruption to knock Russia completely out of the war by inducing a collapse on the home front – they attempted exactly the same thing in Ireland the previous year.

So in sum – over the course of 9 months in 1917, the German High Command successfully delivered and dumped several hundred or thousands of radical Jews deep behind Russian lines, using the Russian’s own railways, with the intent to cause maximum chaos and confusion and knock the Russian Empire out of the war; and it worked REALLY well – the true authors of the October Revolution were Hindenberg and Luddendorff.

It’s not therefore not at all unreasonable to conclude that between 1941 and 1944, the German Reich successfully delivered and dumped several hundred thousand mostly very poor, elderly and infirm Jews behind the Soviet lines, using the Soviet’s own railways, with the intent to cause maximum chaos and confusion and knock the Soviet Union out of the war – rule No.1 of military strategy is that if you try something that works, is cheap and low risk and creates logictical headaches and problems for the enemy whilst reducing your own, do it and keep doing it as often as possible.

Keep up the good work, Mr. Cole/Stein.