Yuku free message boards

Scott Smith 01 wrote:

---

This is amply documented and all you have to do is look at newspaper microfiche and contemporaneous sources.

Secretary Morgenthau and his international Bankster deputy Harry Dexter White (suspected to actually be a Soviet agent) were the brains behind such things as the Morgenthau Plan, the War Refugee Board Report (which was the first time the U.S. government gave any official sanction to Zionist gaschamber propaganda). The Zionists aren't the Plutocracy but they have been infiltrating it for so long there is hardly any meaningful difference. That is the reality and that is the "new order of the ages." They devised a certain morality play to form the foundation of their Internationalist and financial order--but mostly it just worked out as such.

See, the problem is that you are looking for a few conspirators in smoke-filled rooms rather than a collusion of interest-groups with more comprehensive agendas than lying about Nazis. Your paradigm is wrong. How does one document ideologies and the teleology of urban legends? That is how the Holocaust has become the sacred cow of history, as the corporate news media accordingly makes legend into reality in an endless ideological feedback loop. This seems pretty sinister but most of this probably wasn't planned by Zionists, Communists, or the Hyde Park Plutocracy--it just wound up that way.

"Gassing Jews" was merely useful propaganda (which is still useful) and that was meant as a morality play for the New World Order, the new global politico-economic system itself. What peace meant to them was not that wars would go away or that conflict and killing would end, and certainly nothing to do with justice and humanitarian aims, but simply that all Gentile nations were to be balkanized and aligned into specific investment-opportunity blocs. They would all now essentially serve the new regime or be put on trial as a collective for warcrimes. The whole world was now the oyster for Wall Street mergers-and-acquisitions. This is draped in morality but that has little to do with anything beyond marketing crocodile tears.

For Westerners with traditions of individuality and pluralism, we have to get worked up to a frenzy for crusades, and we are outdone by our own moralism and hypocrisy. The Ostjuden learned in the Middle Ages when Christians were not allowed to practice Usury that this is how you market ideas (and products) to Westerners who might otherwise be hostile to you. This may be arm-chair philosophy, but it is surely no accident that Raphael Lemkin, the Internationalist lawyer-propagandist who coined the modern term Genocide, was of Polish Jewish extraction--nor that Harry Dexter White was of Lithuanian Jewish extraction. White was one of the key architects of the Bretton-Woods agreement after the war, and all post-Bretton Woods economies are "global" and subject to the highest bidder. Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace is costly, though, and there is a lot of interest to wring out of the masses for payment of debts, so it helps if there is an ideological yoke of Tolerance to make people tolerate their own bondage and discourage meaningful discontent.

If I am just being paranoid about Joos, would it still be paranoia if all the bankers and foxes watching the chicken coop were Mormons? If one or two percent procure the public interest as their own, does this remain "the public" interest? Do they buy it out of the goodness of their hearts? What if Scientologists ran the news media, or the Rastafarian Lobby ran the State Department? Could we trust their history of key events, their memorializing, and their telling? Would we even consent to pass laws against non-Believers for fear of offense?

I don't see how I can make it any simpler. No, it is not a "Jewish plot" but I never said that it was. The logic is easy to follow, and I'm not sure what I am supposed to prove.

Still no evidence for any of your assertions. The big fallacy as always is assuming that any one faction within any one government could influence the conduct of very junior officers and NCOs on the ground and force them to make Germans lie.

None of you guys, including all the gurus, have ever given a coherent account of Allied war crimes investigations. It predated the liberation of the camps and involved pretty much every military force in the ETO. It involved the French back home, the Belgians, the Dutch and of course it involved the Poles and the Soviets.

Just to take the first of CCS's stupid 'angles', Grossman and Ehrenburg were prominent Soviet reporters who were Jewish and part of the JAFC. They were not investigators; they got privileged access to investigations conducted by regular Soviet judge advocate units, who answered to a cumbersome chain of command. Let me spell it out for you in the case of Treblinka:

Stalin > Stavka
>
Red Army General Staff and administrative branches (eg head of JAG branch, head of political administration, etc)
>
1st Belorussian Front
>
65th Army

So, at what executive level was it decided to fake Treblinka in August 1944? Did the Soviets wait for Polish Jewish survivors to come out of the woodwork and do it all locally - which would imply Batov's 65th Army dunnit? Or did they get a directive from the Front commander or the Front Commissar to fake yet another site, along with Majdanek, which was being done by someone else? Or did it come all the way down from Beria and the NKVD, after a Politburo meeting?

Of course, you don't know. But you - meaning all of you, from Mattogno on down through CCS to shyster - could at least guess in a manner that might be described as vaguely intelligent, and not simply beg more questions that you cannot answer coherently.

And by guess, I mean use reasoned inferences to at least come up with a plausible hypothesis that might be tested if someone visited an archive and saw the files. From what I have seen of Soviet files, there is very little indication that Moscow Centre was capable of controlling and faking investigations happening more than 1000km away. Like all governments, information passed bumpily across different departments and lost in detail and quality en route. That's just a fact of bureaucratic life; that's how modern government reports work. Even under communism, people like executive summaries and one page memos cc'd from across the hall. They are busy doing a million things and they are most of all, subject to bureaucratic inertia. Yet you guys expect bureaucracies to suddenly leap into action and pull rabbits out of the hat, repeatedly.

Ideology does not exist as a mystical vapour or miasma, it is embodied in institutions and expressed through them. That is why institutional analysis is one of the key objects of research for history, political science and sociology. We 21st Century human beings are more than capable of discerning the subtle differences in factions within governments, even totalitarian ones, and following the trail of evidence that shows why certain policies and practices were done. They do not just appear out of thin air by telepathy.

The really insulting thing is I could probably make it up better than you guys could - all of you. A vaguely intelligent attempt to explain Soviet investigations might for example claim that there was competition between different armies and fronts to conjure up the tallest tales. That would make sense, wouldn't it? 1st Belorussian Front liberated Majdanek, Treblinka and Sobibor, while 1st Ukrainian Front liberated Belzec and Auschwitz. It's well known that Zhukov and Konev were military rivals, and Stalin used this to egg on both fronts in the race to Berlin. So by analogy...

Yet all we ever get from you guys is 'the Soviets', coupled with naming irrelevancies like Morgenthau and Harry Dexter White.

Come again? The WRB report was produced by Slovak Jews in Slovakia, and passed by underground channels to Switzerland, whereupon it was promptly passed to every interested party (WJC, Czechoslovak government in exile, the SIG*, the British Foreign Office/its embassy, and the American State Department/its embassy). Then the basic details appeared in the newspapers, worldwide, in July 1944. There is no evidence of changing anything between the arrival of the report in Switzerland and its publication by the WRB. I have seen a copy of the original German report after it arrived in about June 1944 - in the files of the Czech representative in Switzerland - and it is identical. It was simply translated. It was soon enough published in its entirety in France and Switzerland, quite independently of the WRB version in English.

Let's say there were different guys at the head of the WRB and they did not publish the Vrba-Wetzler report. What difference, honestly, would this have made? It is magical thinking to assume that all of a sudden, the entire US government apparatus, including the military, who are the absolutely crucial players here, decided to "embrace the story" just because some guys in the Treasury Department wanted them to. There is moreover no paper trail suggesting that they did anything of the sort, and it cannot be argued that there would not be at least some sign of collusion in the files of some agency or another.

So now you have to get from the Treasury Department to the War Department. You could start by reading the literature, e.g. Kochavi's Prelude to Nuremberg, and seeing where in the dying days of the Roosevelt administration and the first days of the Truman administration, the necessary policy discussions were held. Considering that one faction in the US government, like one faction in the British government, wanted to simply shoot war criminals out of hand, there's a lot of 'splaining to do.

Then you have to show how between November 1944 or so, and April-May 1945, bureaucrats in Washington coordinated with each other, and then dictated policy to the ETOUSA command based in Britain and France, who then dictated policy to the armies in the field - 1st, 3rd, 5th, 7th, 9th US Armies - and their JAG departments. You have to account for the JAG officers in command of 12th and 6th Army Groups. And of course, it'd help if you can explain how this tied in with the British War Office, 21st Army Group, and the mixed 15th Army Group in Italy.

Then you have the wild cards, like the OSS, whose paper trail suggests a significant degree of incomprehension as well as a ruthless realpolitik about saving certain war criminals from prosecution for anti-Soviet reasons. There's now an entire book on that subject.

It's much simpler to read the files, and go, hmmm, it really looks as if these guys were the passive recipients of information received from below, i.e. as soon as they started liberating camp survivors and capturing German guards, they accumulated affidavits and interrogations, which they then sent upwards. That means, the interrogators hadn't got a clue what they were going to hear. They asked questions that by our standards of knowledge today were really dumb. They had no script, no bleuprint, and they sure as hell didn't have telepathy. They were not in a position to arm-twist or browbeat. Most of all, they didn't inhabit a climate that was especially concerned or focused on war crimes. The shock of liberating the camps was quite genuine.

Simply relying on Naming the Jew (I'm really looking forward to hearing your explanation of how Colonel Mickey Marcus executed his will to make US army interrogators in the field make Erich Muhsfeldt tell tall tales) and claiming that the whole thing was an 'urban legend' is not enough for rational people.

Try again, this time offering detail, in such a way that you manage to avoid 'they' or 'the British' or 'the Zionists' or appealing to telepathy.