'Nazi Grandma,' sentenced for denying Holocaust, goes to prison

[Tywysog Cymru]

DISCLAIMER: I have no particular opinion on this matter one way or the other.

As far as I am aware, the Nazi treatment of Jews was not invoked as casus belli prior to US entry into WW2.

That did not start happening until after the war was over, when it began to be used as an "after the fact" justification.

(And IIRC, the Roosevelt administration even had a ship full of Jewish refugees sent back to the Nazis with the Jews still on it. That's more than just a little difficult to reconcile with a "save the Jews" policy ...)

Given the above, it would not have been necessary for that purpose.

Thus, if the Holocaust was indeed fabricated, it would have been for some other reason(s) - with post facto justification for having entered into the war being a "side effect" of this.

But it still doesn't make sense. There was strong anti-war sentiment in America in the interwar period, sure. But as soon as Pearl Harbor happened everyone except the most hardcore pacifist or a foreign agent was behind the war effort. Japan attacked America, Japan's Allies declare war on America. How many people are going to question that justification? Plus, America won. Notice how its common to criticize the Vietnam War or the 2003 Iraq War but not the 1991 Iraq War. That's because most people aren't going to question the justification of a war that was won.

Do you understand the state religion? Probably you have never thought deeply about it. It's designed so that you don't. But who is Satan in the current state religion? Answer: Hitler. Can someone be Satan if they just happened to fight a war that was a little bit aggressive? Come on, everybody's done that.

No, you need something more. A powerful story, rising to mythic proportions. His evil has to be unheard-of-ly unimaginable. He has to have done things that don't even make any sense, they're so gruesome and evil. Also, it's very, very important to whom he is supposed to have done these evils.

Control the state religion of the world's most powerful land, control their collective guilt, and thou shalt control the world.

And everyone just decided to fall in line with this conspiracy? Millions of survivors, millions of American, British, and Soviet soldiers, and to top it all off, people who confessed to their crimes. The odds are so low that they all lied.

I dunno and I never really gave it much thought until recently. Whilst I was on hiatus earlier this year I got stuck watching educational television with Mr A and ended up getting sucked into the Nazi documentaries on Netflix. The last one I watched was about the Nuremberg Trials and a few things didn't sit right with me. BTW, this documentary was certainly one sided and when I watch or hear something like that my first inclination is to try to remember the truth lies somewhere in the middle.

Here are the most glaring issues I had with the Nuremberg Trials.

1) Goering. From what I learned of him as a man, I don't think he would've been down with the death camps.
2) Hess. He was insane. They knew he was insane and he was tricked into testifying. Not cool, IMO.
3) Speer got off with jail but his subordinate hung, I think. Can't remember if he committed suicide.

I'm not saying any of these guys were what I would consider decent people but I don't believe they got a fair trial and that doesn't sit right with me. I also thought Goering made some very good points, not only in his testimony, but also in the comments he made in court mocking the process.

I think I saw that Documentary a few years ago. Netflix also has one on the Military Tribunals for Japan. One of the defendants, I believe Tojo, appeals to the Indian lawyer by pointing out the hypocrisy of the British condemning imperialism.

There are too many confessions, too many eyewitnesses, for the holocaust to have been a hoax. I think there was a guy who died recently who ended up confessing to involvement in Auschwitz decades after the fact. He was just a bookkeeper IIRC and wasn't there for long before he was transferred to the front. He decided to tell his story, even though he would be put on trial for it, because he heard some people at a bar claiming that the holocaust didn't happen.

 

[Occam's Banana]

But it still doesn't make sense. There was strong anti-war sentiment in America in the interwar period, sure. But as soon as Pearl Harbor happened everyone except the most hardcore pacifist or a foreign agent was behind the war effort. Japan attacked America, Japan's Allies declare war on America. How many people are going to question that justification? Plus, America won. Notice how its common to criticize the Vietnam War or the 2003 Iraq War but not the 1991 Iraq War. That's because most people aren't going to question the justification of a war that was won.

I agree. That was my whole point. The US did not enter WW2 because "the Holocaust."

Nevertheless, the Holocaust is still often invoked as an "after the fact" justification for US entry into WW2.

If the latter claim does not make sense to you, then you'll have to interrogate someone who has made it. I have not.

 

[H_H]

And everyone just decided to fall in line with this conspiracy?

No, not everyone. But one very important group of people did.

Millions of survivors, millions of American, British, and Soviet soldiers, and to top it all off, people who confessed to their crimes. The odds are so low that they all lied.

Ahh, they didn't. They didn't all lie. Only the ones you've heard their story lied. Who are a very certain group of people, who happen to constitute all of the people who run entertainment, TV, movies, newspapers, publishing houses, and the preponderance of billionaires more generally.

What a coinkydink.

You know, I've never seen a film about the Armenian Genocide. Have you, Cymru? Hmm.

Ursula Haverbeck, for instance, didn't lie. She was there. Eyewitness. She has stated what really happened and what she really saw. Of course, she's in prison for the rest of her life, so she doesn't exactly have a strong platform, does she? I wonder when we'll see a movie about the WWII era based on her documentary testimony. I wonder how many other people are going to step up and tell what really happened after seeing the wonderful accolades and glorious things that have befallen Ursula. Incentives matter.

Anyway, it's just a ridiculous, preposterous lie. Proves the propaganda tactical point that the more-so's the better. I mean, German engineers deciding to make millions of people into lampshades and soap? Because that makes sense and is a workable plan? Tell me with a straight face that's even plausible.

 

[Danke]

 

[Danke]

 

[Tywysog Cymru]

I agree. That was my whole point. The US did not enter WW2 because "the Holocaust."

Nevertheless, the Holocaust is still often invoked as an "after the fact" justification for US entry into WW2.

If the latter claim does not make sense to you, then you'll have to interrogate someone who has made it. I have not.

I wasn't trying to argue with you there, I was pointing something out. I was just saying that it would be pointless to have an after the fact justification for a war that America won and almost no one opposed at home.

No, not everyone. But one very important group of people did.

Ahh, they didn't. They didn't all lie. Only the ones you've heard their story lied. Who are a very certain group of people, who happen to constitute all of the people who run entertainment, TV, movies, newspapers, publishing houses, and the preponderance of billionaires more generally.

What a coinkydink.

You know, I've never seen a film about the Armenian Genocide. Have you, Cymru? Hmm.

Ursula Haverbeck, for instance, didn't lie. She was there. Eyewitness. She has stated what really happened and what she really saw. Of course, she's in prison for the rest of her life, so she doesn't exactly have a strong platform, does she? I wonder when we'll see a movie about the WWII era based on her documentary testimony. I wonder how many other people are going to step up and tell what really happened after seeing the wonderful accolades and glorious things that have befallen Ursula. Incentives matter.

Anyway, it's just a ridiculous, preposterous lie. Proves the propaganda tactical point that the more-so's the better. I mean, German engineers deciding to make millions of people into lampshades and soap? Because that makes sense and is a workable plan? Tell me with a straight face that's even plausible.

She shouldn't have gone to prison, I'll give you that.

What I was saying is that there were allied soldiers who saw the camps as they liberated them, then there were survivors who told their stories, then there were Nazis who confessed. All evidence points to the Holocaust happening.

 

[Danke]

 

[Swordsmyth]

I dunno and I never really gave it much thought until recently. Whilst I was on hiatus earlier this year I got stuck watching educational television with Mr A and ended up getting sucked into the Nazi documentaries on Netflix. The last one I watched was about the Nuremberg Trials and a few things didn't sit right with me. BTW, this documentary was certainly one sided and when I watch or hear something like that my first inclination is to try to remember the truth lies somewhere in the middle.

Here are the most glaring issues I had with the Nuremberg Trials.

1) Goering. From what I learned of him as a man, I don't think he would've been down with the death camps.
2) Hess. He was insane. They knew he was insane and he was tricked into testifying. Not cool, IMO.
3) Speer got off with jail but his subordinate hung, I think. Can't remember if he committed suicide.

I'm not saying any of these guys were what I would consider decent people but I don't believe they got a fair trial and that doesn't sit right with me. I also thought Goering made some very good points, not only in his testimony, but also in the comments he made in court mocking the process.

[h=1]Tyranny at Nuremberg[/h]

 

[Suzanimal]

There are too many confessions, too many eyewitnesses, for the holocaust to have been a hoax. I think there was a guy who died recently who ended up confessing to involvement in Auschwitz decades after the fact. He was just a bookkeeper IIRC and wasn't there for long before he was transferred to the front. He decided to tell his story, even though he would be put on trial for it, because he heard some people at a bar claiming that the holocaust didn't happen.

I believe parts are true. If you see my comment from earlier (quoted below), I believe it's true to a degree but I don't believe the most horrific offenses were as widespread as I was lead to believe in hs history class. Auchwitz was in Poland where I believe the worst atrocities took place.

A bit of both, really. I believe it was mostly A but there were a few death camps in Poland (I think:o) that would certainly qualify for answering B. I guess my answer falls mostly to A with a few exceptions. When it comes to the exceptions, it's my suspicion that only the people involved and their superiors knew exactly what was going on there. That's my very limited take on what happened with knowledge I've picked up watching documentaries.

 

[Danke]

His uncle wasn't in the military and Auschwitz was liberated by the Russians.

 

[Danke]

Another lie:

[video=youtube;Fv4jnlkxOaw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=11&v=Fv4jnlkxOaw[/video]

 

[dannno]

It suddenly occurred to me why H_H was so adamantly anti-Peter Schiff

 

[H_H]

She shouldn't have gone to prison, I'll give you that.

How generous. You left-leaning have been so gracious and generous in your hegemony. But should she be expelled from polite company, unpersoned, fired, un-careered, and her life ended and destroyed? Tell me you'd oppose that.

I'll wait.

What I was saying is that there were allied soldiers who saw the camps as they liberated them

They didn't see any Holocaust, though.

then there were Nazis who confessed

but more who didn't.

then there were survivors who told their stories

Ahh yes indeed. About how they watched with their own eyes as their whole extended families were made into lampshades and furniture covers and soap. Sold to the soapmakers. How sad. Again: Tell me with a straight face that's even plausible.

 

[H_H]

It suddenly occurred to me why H_H was so adamantly anti-Peter Schiff

Is he Jewish?

Ahh, just looked it up: he is.

I've tried to be nice and positive to Peter the last couple years, ever since my infamous thread, because I do agree with him politically, for the most part. One exception has always been his aggressive/bellicose foreign policy stance. And now, it occurs to me: it's a rabidly pro-fighting-wars-for-Israel stance as well.

Indeed, as the world turns and years pass, everything eventually all fits together and makes sense, dannno.

 

[dannno]

Is he Jewish?

Ahh, just looked it up: he is.

I've tried to be nice and positive to Peter the last couple years, ever since my infamous thread, because I do agree with him politically, for the most part. One exception has always been his aggressive/bellicose foreign policy stance. And now, it occurs to me: a rabidly pro-fighting-wars-for-Israel stance as well.

Indeed, as the world turns and years pass, everything eventually all fits together and makes sense, dannno.

7:25

 

[H_H]

"That doesn't mean we should waste it on... wars of aggression." -- Peter Schiff

OK, well that is a good quote. Nothing to disagree with there. I thought I remembered a pattern of pretty bellicose statements he made, too, esp. during his campaign. But, I could very well be wrong. It's been a long time.

I stand corrected. Thank you for correcting me, dannno.

 

[dannno]

"That doesn't mean we should waste it on... wars of aggression." -- Peter Schiff

OK, well that is a good quote. Nothing to disagree with there. I thought I remembered a pattern of pretty bellicose statements he made, too, esp. during his campaign. But, I could very well be wrong. It's been a long time.

I stand corrected. Thank you for correcting me, dannno.

Ron Paul wouldn't have chosen a neocon as the economic adviser to his Presidential campaign..

As far as your investment strategies, we will see, you may have the bigger alpha now but we aren't investing for today are we so we will wait for tomorrow.

 

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

They make holocaust jokes.

Why did so many Jews go to Auschwitz? The fare was free.

How many Jews can you fit in a Volkswagen? Two in the front, two in the back, and the rest in the ashtray.

Why did the Auschwitz shower heads have 12 holes? Because Jews have 10 fingers.

What is the difference between a bar of soap and a Jew? Answer: A bar of soap doesn’t die after 45 seconds in the shower.

 

[Weston White]

Another lie:

...Which father would that be tough? lolz

 

[H_H]

Ron Paul wouldn't have chosen a neocon as the economic adviser to his Presidential campaign..

As far as your investment strategies, we will see, you may have the bigger alpha now but we aren't investing for today are we so we will wait for tomorrow.

My investment strategy is still the same. For the money that you can't afford to lose:

25% in gold. *This is significantly more gold, by the way, than Peter Schiff recommends!* Solid, actual gold. No mining stocks.
25% in stocks. Total stock market fund. No individual bets.
25% in 30-year US Treasury Bonds. Weird choice, I know, but it works. This is essentially the anti-gold in the portfolio.
25% in cash, in the form of a ladder of short-term treasury bills or notes, and also month-to-month expenses in an easily accessible form, such as a checking account or simply paper cash. This is the anti-stocks.

This covers everything, by the way. Your whole wad. Cash reserve is built in to the portfolio -- no additional cash reserve is needed (as in all or virtually all other investment plans).

The beauty of this plan: it just goes along. Hum de dum de dum. I hardly ever even check it, and I never worry about it. I am not tempted to move in and out of positions, a practice that almost always results in losing massive amounts of money (vs. what you could have had sitting tight).

No excitement. And yet good gains. The top chart in this bank of charts sums it up. Blue, blue, blue... bo-o-o-orring. The chart for the traditional 60-40 split far more vibrantly exciting and colorful. That's a bad thing.

Good bet that mapping out a Schiff portfolio for the past couple decades is gonna give really colorful picture, too. Not to pick on him. Betting on and the shifting fortunes of mining companies and South-east Asian countries is a fine thing to do -- with money you can afford to lose. But not with the converse, not with your retirement, not with your life savings. In my opinion.

​