Archive for the Etc. Category

Rabbi admits number of beast’s hidden kabalistic significance

Posted in Etc. on December 13, 2010 by The 800 Pound Gorilla

‘Ask the Rabbi’

Ohr Somayach.edu

Dear Rabbi — You recently wrote: “The numerical value of “Meah Shearim” is 666, a number which has esoteric and kabalistic meaning in Judaism, as indicated by the Vilna Gaon in his commentary to the Zohar.” Now you’ve got me curious: In American media, I only hear of 666 for its mystic significance in Christianity — a negative meaning, associated with “Satan.” So what is the mystic significance of 666 in Judaism?   -Prof. Zev bar-Lev, Dept. of Linguistics & Oriental Languages in San Diego State University

Dear Rabbi — Could you tell us more about the kabalistic meaning of 666? I live in a community with a large conservative Christian presence. Recently there was a big uproar over a supermarket’s ad campaign because they believed the numbers 666 were hidden within. Thank you.   -M. Brinn in Greenville, SC

Dear Professor Bar-Lev and M. Brinn,

Oh, I can’t tell you the answer to your question….It’s a mystical secret!

Just kidding. Sort of. The truth is that the key to mystical secrets are not in any book, they’re in your heart. Even if someone “reveals” a “kabalistic secret,” it remains a secret as long as you are not able to understand it. (So have no fear: The secrets of Kabala are perfectly safe with Madonna.) But I will explain as much as I know on the subject:

The number 666 has significance as the numerical value of the Hebrew verse: “Ata yigdal na koach Ado-nai — Now, I pray, let the Power of my Lord be great.” (Numbers 14:17). This was Moshe’s prayer invoking Divine Mercy on behalf of the Jewish People.

“Mosad Hayesod” cites the Vilna Gaon’s commentary on the Zohar that “the number 666 contains hidden within it exalted and lofty messianic potential.” No other explanation is offered there.

We do know that the number six represents the physical world. The Torah describes the creation of the universe as a six part, six day, process.

Our ancient sources describe the universe as emanating in six directions — north, south, east, west, up, down — from a central point. All physical space and all physical objects have these six dimensions.

666 is six repeated three times. Repeating a concept three times represents the affirmation and strength of that concept.

The number 666 could thus represent the strength and perfection of the physical world, which Judaism teaches will occur in the messianic era, when the physical world will reach its ultimate purpose, to be a vehicle through which the created experience the Creator.

Sources:

· Mosad Hayesod pp. 204-205

· Rabbi Dovid Rossoff, author of “Where Heaven Touches Earth,” Guardian Press

The above article can be found here: http://ohr.edu/ask_db/ask_main.php/277/Q1/


 

Also see ‘Is Lucifer the god of Judaism? Reply to a Jewish scholar’ here:  http://800pg.co.cc/geeklog//article.php?story=20100411073623549

Also see ‘Jewish rock band celebrates child sacrifice’ here: http://800pg.co.cc/geeklog//article.php?story=20090328235418331

Also see ‘Ancient Jews used skulls in ceremonies despite (Mosaic) ban’ here: http://800pg.co.cc/geeklog//article.php?story=20090602220221789

Also see ‘They are going to try to rebuild the temple (pt 1)’ here: http://800pg.co.cc/geeklog//article.php?story=20090607231336389

Also see ‘They are going to try to rebuild the temple (pt 2)’ here: http://800pg.co.cc/geeklog//article.php?story=20090608011014590

Forty-Six Important Unanswered Questions Regarding the Nazi Gas Chambers

Posted in Etc. on November 21, 2010 by The 800 Pound Gorilla

By David Cole

FOREWORDProfessor Deborah Lipstadt, author of Denying the Holocaust: The Growing Assault on Truth and Memory, is the leading voice on college campuses and in the media arguing against intellectual freedom with regard to the holocaust controversy. She is passionate — well, obsessive — about not wanting to exchange views with revisionists.
“[A]t times,” she writes, “I have felt compelled to prove something I knew to be true. I had constantly to avoid being inadvertently sucked into a debate that is no debate and an argument that is no argument.” She adds that revisionism is “totally irrational . . . not responsive to logic” and that “evidence plays no role” in revisionist research.

I’m going to go out on a limb here. I know that Deborah Lipstadt and hundreds of other trained scholars with access to the relevant archives in Europe and the old Soviet Union have studied the Nazi gas chambers for half a century and know everything there is to know about them. Despite this universally accepted fact, I am presenting here a few questions about the notorious homicidal gassing chambers that are being raised by a young scholar named David Cole.

David Cole traveled to Europe twice to make on-site inspections of the still extant “gas chambers.” The lady who financed each of these little expeditions wanted me to go with Cole to direct the project. I thought that would be a nifty idea. I’d never been to Europe and here was my chance. But Cole kept telling me he could handle it on his own. After awhile I got the message. He didn’t want me to go. In the end, each time he went alone, or rather he and a camera woman. I think he was right. He didn’t need direction from me. He handled his responsibilities very well on his own.

When you read David Cole’s 46 unanswered questions about the Nazi gas chambers you may feel yourself hard-pressed — despite what Deborah Lipstadt would have you believe — to find them totally irrational, not responsive to logic, or that evidence plays no role in their design. Of course, you are probably not the towering intellectual that Deborah Lipstadt is, so if you find a few or perhaps more than a few of the 46 questions disturbing in their logic and rationality, precisely because they are based on the physical evidence commonly used to identify the “gas chambers,” why not ring up Professor Lipstadt at Emory University and ask her for the correct answers to these interesting puzzles?

Then pass her answers on to me. I’ll run them by David Cole and see what he has to say about them. Maybe we’ll be able to post Lipstadt’s criticisms of the 46 Questions here, along with David’s response to her criticisms. In the academy they call this process peer review. Ms. Lipstadt would probably point out to you that David Cole is not part of the “academy.” Let’s not call it peer review then. Let’s just call it talking it over. Tell her you have 46 questions about the German gassing chambers and you would like to talk them over with her.

Bradley R. Smith
9 October 1995

The Zyklon-B Issue

AT THE FORMER concentration camps of Auschwitz and Auschwitz-Birkenau, we find the following scenario: The buildings which used to serve as the camp delousing facilities still have extremely high traces of the gas Zyklon B, which was used in these buildings to disinfest clothing, mattresses, etc. Also, there is heavy blue staining on the walls both inside the delousing chambers, INSIDE the hallways between the delousing chambers, and OUTSIDE the building, on the EXTERIOR WALLS of the delousing facilities. However, the interiors of the Krema 1 gas chamber (Auschwitz Main Camp) and the Krema 2 and 3 gas chambers (Auschwitz-Birkenau), where hundreds of thousands if not millions of people are said to have been gassed, show only minute traces of Zyklon B and no blue staining.

Also, the Auschwitz camp barracks and offices, which were fumigated with the Zyklon B from time to time, show similarly minute traces of the gas, and no blue staining.

(1) What explanation can there be for the low levels of traces, and absence of blue staining, in the homicidal gas chambers?

(2) If one suggests that the Zyklon traces in the homicidal gas chambers have been “weathered away”, how can one explain the traces and staining on the OUTSIDE of the delousing complexes…traces which have NOT been weathered away after fifty years?

(3) It has been suggested that the amount of Zyklon B needed to kill people, even cumulative millions of people, would not leave traces as strong as the amount needed to kill lice in the delousing chambers. But when we factor in the Zyklon B traces still existing in the camp barracks and offices, we see that infrequent gassings will still leave SOME traces. Thus, we have the traces in the camp offices and barracks, which reveal what levels of traces would remain, fifty years after the fact, in rooms which were gassed infrequently.

Then we have the delousing chambers, which reveal what levels of traces would remain, fifty years after the fact, in rooms which were gassed frequently. Can it not be expected that the levels of traces in the homicidal gas chambers, while perhaps not being as high as those in the delousing rooms, would AT LEAST be substantially higher than the traces in the buildings which were only fumigated infrequently? Yet the traces in Kremas 1, 2 and 3 are not markedly higher than the office and barracks traces. Does this not suggest that the traces which DO exist in Kremas 1, 2 and 3 come from the same fumigation routine that all the other buildings went through?

(4) Once one has fashioned an explanation for the minute traces and no blue staining in Kremas 1, 2 and 3 at Auschwitz, how does one THEN explain the HIGH levels of Zyklon B traces and DEEP, FLOOR-TO-CEILING blue staining in three of the four Majdanek gas chambers? Far fewer people are said to have been killed at Majdanek than at Auschwitz. The four Majdanek gas chambers would never have had to handle the workload of Kremas 1,2 and 3. Yet whereas Kremas 1,2 and 3 have only minute traces and no blue staining, three of the four Majdanek gas chambers have heavy traces and deep blue staining. How could gassing a GREATER amount of people (at Auschwitz) leave minute traces and no blue staining, yet gassing a much SMALLER amount (at Majdanek) leave heavy traces and deep blue staining?

(5) The gas chambers at the Majdanek camp not only have heavy Zyklon B blue stains on the INSIDE, but also on the OUTSIDE walls, as well. What could account for this? The delousing facilities at Birkenau have heavy blue staining on their outside walls, staining which is said to come from the mattresses which were propped up against the outside walls and beaten after delousing (to rid them of Zyklon B residue). Do the heavy blue stains on the outside walls of the Majdanek gas chambers therefore suggest that these rooms were used as delousing facilities? Isn’t the building which contains the gas chambers labeled the “Bath and Disinfection” complex? If, as with Auschwitz, it is said that gassing people wouldn’t leave blue stains on the INSIDE walls of a homicidal gas chamber, how then, at Majdanek, could gassing people leave heavy blue stains not only on the INSIDE walls but also on the OUTSIDE ones as well?

(6) To sum up the Zyklon B issue, we can take an overview of the Nazi gas chambers and their respective states RE Zyklon B traces:

Krema 1 (Auschwitz Main Camp): Minute traces, no blue staining

Krema 2 (Auschwitz-Birkenau): Minute traces, no blue staining

Krema 3 (Auschwitz-Birkenau): Minute traces, no blue staining.

Majdanek gas chambers 1, 3 and 4: Heavy traces, heavy blue staining (on inside and outside walls).

Dachau gas chamber: No traces, no blue staining.

Mauthausen gas chamber: No traces, no blue staining.

The revisionist explanation for the above is:

Kremas 1, 2 and 3 were not used as gas chambers; — the only Zyklon B they saw was from the routine camp fumigations.

Majdanek rooms 1, 3 and 4 were delousing rooms, like the ones at Auschwitz-Birkenau.

The Dachau gas chamber was a shower.

The Mauthausen gas chamber was a shower

What theory can be offered which explains the wildly divergent states of the gas chambers re Zyklon B traces, while still supporting the concept of mass homicidal gassings at these camps?

 

Unanswered Questions Regarding the Physical Evidence at the Auschwitz-Birkenau Concentration Camp (Poland)

(7) Why was the area between Kremas 2 and 3, the area where thousands of people were marched daily to their deaths, left completely unfenced? The ditches which run the length of the camp perimeter would make a person invisible both to ground fire AND fire from the guard tower. Why would the Nazis risk an attempted escape, especially considering the fact that many inmates were gassed after they had been in the camp for a while, and knew what their fate would be if marched into either of those buildings? Doesn’t the Auschwitz State Museum claim that the inmates would often “riot” as they were being marched toward Kremas 2 and 3?

(8) Why were Kremas 2 and 3 not hidden in any way from the view of the inmates? Isn’t it claimed at the Auschwitz State Museum that gassings were stopped at Krema 1 (Auschwitz Main Camp) and moved to Birkenau because the inmates were starting to get an idea of the homicidal purpose of Krema 1? Why then were Kremas 2 and 3 put in plain sight of all sectors of the Birkenau camp, with no camouflage of any kind? Wouldn’t this just create hundreds of thousands of “eyewitnesses”, with everyone in the camp becoming well aware of the exterminations (and with many of these inmates later transferred to other camps in other parts of Europe to “spread the word” about the gassing program)? How could this profit the Nazis?

(9) It is claimed that there were four holes on the roofs of Kremas 2 and 3, which served as Zyklon B induction holes. The best piece of evidence that these holes ever existed is found in the U.S. aerial photos taken of Auschwitz during the war. Is there any discrepancy between the size of these holes as depicted in the U.S. aerial photos, and the size of the holes as depicted on the model of the Krema 2 gas chamber (on display at the Auschwitz State Museum and the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum), the size as theorized by Jean-Claude Pressac in his book “Auschwitz; Technique and Operation of the Gas Chambers”, the size as depicted in the movie “Triumph of the Spirit” (which recreated a gassing at Krema 2), and the size as described over the decades by eyewitnesses? Indeed, can it be said that the holes as depicted in the aerial photos are ridiculously large…larger than what would have been needed for pouring in a can of Zyklon B gas?

(10) Why are the four holes not present today in the roof slab of Krema 2? The roof slab, though collapsed, is intact and both the top and underside of the roof are still visible. There are two crudely chiseled holes at opposite ends of the roof slab (one is more like a huge crack than a hole), but the other two holes are non existent, and the underside of the roof, with the two-by-fours lining the ceiling still visible, shows no sign of two holes having ever been present. There are also no traces of the two holes on the top of the roof. How can the absence of the two holes, and any traces of the two holes, be explained?

(11) What circumstances would produce the Krema 2 roof slab as we now see it, with two holes visible and the other two non-existent? If the Nazis attempted to erase the traces of the roof holes, why did they stop after two? Why would they expend much effort to erase all traces of two of the roof holes, then not make any effort to erase the two which survived the demolition?

(12) Could the still existing roof holes have been added after the liberation, by the Soviets or Poles? Doesn’t Pressac admit that these two holes don’t correspond with the positions of the holes in the aerial photos (Pressac says that this might be because the roof “shifted” during demolition, but even if the roof “shifted”, that wouldn’t account for why these holes, which were supposed to run in a straight line down the middle of the roof, have changed their positions, and are no longer in a straight line down the middle of the intact roof slab)? These holes are in incredibly bad condition; their edges are consistently rough, with not an inch of smoothness left. And they are no longer circular. They look like someone took a jack-hammer and roughly hammered through the roof slab. It is explained by Auschwitz State Museum officials that the demolition of the roof is what accounts for the awful condition of the holes (that is, they USED to be round and smooth until the demolition).
But if one observes the wreckage of the “undressing room” roof slab, which was similarly destroyed and is now in even worse shape than the gas chamber roof slab, one sees the remains of the undressing room front ventilation hole, which is still round and smooth even after the demolition and fifty years of laying around as rubble. Why did the undressing room roof hole survive intact, while the two still existing gas chamber roof holes emerged from the demolition without even the slightest trace that they had once been round and smooth? If we consider that the two still existing gas chamber roof holes don’t correspond with their supposed position on the roof, can we theorize that MAYBE these two holes were chiseled in after the liberation? It is now admitted by the Auschwitz State Museum that the Soviets, after liberation, drilled four “Zyklon B induction holes” in the roof of Krema 1 (Auschwitz Main Camp). One needn’t assume bad faith on the part of the Soviets (they might have honestly believed that they were “restoring” the roof to the state in which it had once been), but this act clearly establishes that the Soviets DID in fact drill post-liberation “Zyklon B induction holes” in roofs that, at that time, had none. Is it possible that this accounts for the two sloppy “Zyklon B induction holes” in the roof slab of the Krema 2?

(13) It is said that the Nazis destroyed Kremas 2 and 3 in order to hide the proofs of their gas chambers. But what “proof” of gassings would have been provided by Krema 2 if Krema 2 had not been dynamited? There are no heavy Zyklon B traces or blue stains on the walls, and great care was obviously taken to remove even the slightest trace of two of the Zyklon B induction holes. The Krema 2 gas chamber would have resembled an ordinary morgue. Was the destruction of Krema 2 an attempt to hide the evidence of a gas chamber, or simply the destruction of a cremation facility in the face of the advancing Soviets? Were cremation facilities at other camps, camps that were never claimed to have gas chambers, also destroyed?

(14) If one is to believe that four Zyklon B induction holes were at one time in the roof slab of Krema 2, it must be assumed that the Nazis went through great pains to meticulously hide any traces of at least two of those holes. Yet we are told that when the Soviets, after liberation, “reopened” the Zyklon B induction holes in the Krema 1 gas chamber state (at the time of liberation, it was being used as an air-raid shelter), they know exactly where to “reopen” the four holes because the traces where these holes had been were STILL VISIBLE. The idea that the Zyklon B induction hole traces were still visible is supported by the Auschwitz State Museum officials, and by author Jean-Claude Pressac. Why didn’t the Nazis attempt to “cover-up” THOSE holes, especially keeping in mind that the Krema 1 gas chamber had been abandoned as a gas chamber AT LEAST a year before liberation, giving the Nazis more than enough time to erase the traces.
The Nazis were apparently able to do an incredibly good job of erasing the hole traces in the Krema 2 roof, even though time was short (the Nazis knew the Soviets were advancing, and they were busy making preparations to abandon the camp), yet we are told that they did NOT attempt to likewise cover up the hole traces in the Krema 1 roof slab, even though they had at least a year to do so. Why would the Nazis do such a fastidiously good job of hiding the existence of Zyklon B induction holes in a roof that they were then going to dynamite (Krema 2), yet allow the hole traces to remain in a roof that was left intact for the advancing Soviets (Krema 1)? Isn’t that backwards?

 

Unanswered Questions Regarding the Physical Evidence at the Mauthausen Concentration Camp (Austria)

(15) The gas chamber at concentration camp Mauthausen (in Austria) has no locks on the doors, and no holes or fittings where locks may once have been. The doors can be opened from inside or outside. How could human beings have been gassed in this room?

(16) The peepholes in the two Mauthausen gas chamber doors have no hemispherical metal grid covering the glass, as would have been necessary to prevent the victims from knocking out the glass and causing a gas leak. There are no holes or fittings where a grid might once have been. Doesn’t Pressac write extensively about the need for such hemispherical grids? Doesn’t Pressac recount survivor testimony regarding the need for such grids during a homicidal gassing? With no grid, what stopped the inmates from knocking out the glass, using either their hands or the ample shower piping in the chamber?

(17) Why are there no Zyklon B traces, or blue stains, in this chamber?

(18) The hole in the ceiling of this chamber, through which the Zyklon B crystals were supposedly poured, is small enough to be blocked by the inmates hands, and the ceiling is low enough for them to block the hole. How could the Zyklon B be effectively poured in?

(19) There is a large drain in the floor of this room. There are no holes or fittings where a cover for this drain might have been attached. What would stop the victims from brushing the Zyklon B crystals down this drain?

(20) Unlike the Dachau “fake shower room”, which indeed has fake shower heads (which were directly screwed into the concrete to a maze of water pipes which run the length of the ceiling AND across the walls. Doesn’t this room resemble a real shower room? How do we know it wasn’t?

(21) What would have been the wisdom of construction a fake shower room with such a maze of pipes running across the ceiling and walls? Wouldn’t the victims have torn these fixtures down? Doesn’t Pressac write about how the victims in the Auschwitz gas chambers would destroy the electrical fixtures and anything else in the chamber? Wouldn’t the pipes serve as perfect weapons with which to smash a hole through the unguarded peepholes (not to mention the doors have no locks)? And if the prisoners didn’t wish to block the Zyklon B induction hole with their hands, the showers heads would’ve fit inside the hole nicely. Why wasn’t the “fake shower heads screwed directly into the ceiling” method (a la Dachau) employed here?

(22) Considering the absence of Zyklon B traces, locks on the doors, peephole covers, and a viable means of pouring in the Zyklon B, and factoring in the floor drain and the water pipes and genuine shower heads in this room, why can’t we assume this was a genuine shower room?

 

Unanswered Questions Regarding the Physical Evidence at the Dachau Concentration Camp (Germany)

(23) The method of Zyklon B induction for the Dachau gas chamber is claimed to be via two chutes carved through one of the walls, through which the Zyklon B would be poured. What would have stopped the victims from putting their backs against the mouths of these chutes, thus preventing the crystals from entering the room?

(24) If the crystals WERE able to enter the room, the two chutes are located just above two large drains in the floor. There are no holes or fittings where covers for these drains might have been. What would stop the crystals from falling down the drains?

(25) There is a mystery room (not open to the public but visible through several windows) adjoining the gas chamber room. This room appears to have water and steam pipes which appear to lead into the gas chamber. Was the gas chamber room actually a shower? What is the purpose of this “mystery room”? What can be gained by ignoring this room which, it stands to reason, must have had SOME purpose?

(26) It is often said that the Nazis tried to hide the evidence of their extermination program by speaking in code, and rarely speaking of the exterminations on the record. It is similarly held that, as it became clear that they were losing the war, the Nazis tried to destroy the proofs of their crimes (the destruction of the four Birkenau Kremas is said to have been part of this “cover-up”). How, then, does one explain the Dachau gas chamber? The obviously false shower heads are incontrovertible proof of the homicidal purpose of this room. It is impossible not explain away the fake shower heads/a homicidal gas chamber. Yet we are to believe that this gas chamber was NEVER USED. And we are also supposed to believe that the room in its present state is exactly as the U.S. Army found it when the camp was liberated. Now, the details of the liberation of Dachau are well known: Dachau was not taken in some surprise attack. The guards at Dachau knew that the Americans were on their way. Therefore, we are asked to believe that the Nazis, KNOWING the camp would be surrendered, left the gas chamber room (which was not even being USED as a gas chamber) in a state which unashamedly points to its homicidal purpose. Why were the fake shower heads not removed? *

Why was there no attempt at a “cover-up,” like at Auschwitz? Unlike the Auschwitz gas chambers, THIS one was not even in use! What good was an unused room which only served to scream to the world “the Nazis are gassing the Jews”? Why would the Nazis, who were NOT using the “gas chamber” to kill people, leave it in this blatantly homicidal state, especially as the Americans drew closer? Keep in mind that, with the fake shower heads, this room was also impossible to us as a SHOWER. Therefore, this room served NO PURPOSE: it wasn’t used as a gas chamber, and couldn’t be used as a shower. We are asked to accept that the Nazis kept a large, USELESS room in one of the more important buildings in the Dachau camp (the “gas chamber” is located in the building which houses the Zyklon B clothing fumigation cubicles) and that this room remained UNUSED for years but was never stripped of the fake shower heads which pointed irrefutably to the Nazi’s murderous intentions.

Surely, understanding the great pains the Nazis took to keep their gassing/extermination plans a secret, and the great pains they supposedly took at OTHER camps to “hide their crimes” once the Allies were advancing (i.e. the destruction of Kremas 2 through 5 at Auschwitz), we can expect that they would have performed the very simple task of removing the fake shower heads (and perhaps plastering over the marks where the shower heads had been). Why didn’t the Nazis do this?

* There might be a simple answer to the Dachau shower head issue. The height of the ceiling in the “Dachau gas chamber” is presently 7.6 feet. However, in Document L-159, No. 47 of the 79th Congress, 1st Session (Exhibit NO. USA-222; IMT, XXXVII, p. 621), which details the U.S. Army’s investigation of the Dachau camp after liberation, the ceiling of this room is measured at 10 feet high. The fake shower heads which exist today embedded in the 7.6 foot high ceiling are made of sheet metal. Document No. 47 describes the 10 foot high ceiling as having “brass fixtures”, which might very well have been genuine shower heads and pipes but which, in any event, are long absent from the ceiling of this room. Basically, sometime between the liberation of Dachau, and the media blitz regarding the “Dachau gas chamber”, a 10 foot high ceiling with bass fixtures became a 7.6 foot high ceiling with cone-shaped sheet metal fake shower heads. How? I think we can take a guess!
Remember that the record of the U.S. Army (and the U.S. government, for that matter) is not very good when it comes to being honest about Dachau. If we are to assume that the Army created a fraudulent “gas chamber”, it helps to understand that there is already proof that the Army was less than honest when presenting Dachau to the world. Most notable in this respect is the photographic sleight-of-hand which is still employed today (especially at the Weisenthal Center’s high-tech “Museum of Tolerance” here in L.A.) where a photo of a door to one of the Dachau ZYKLON B FUMIGATION CUBICLES, complete with poisonous gas warning, skull and crossbones, and gassing schedule, is shown (often with a soldier standing in front) along with the caption that this is the door to the Dachau “HOMICIDAL” gas chamber (thus giving the impression that Zyklon B gas was used in the alleged homicidal gas chamber). This is pure fraud, and not the kind of fraud that the Army could have perpetrated “by accident”. In pictures released by the Army, the doors to the small fumigation cubicles were portrayed as the doors to the alleged homicidal gas chamber…and this is something that doesn’t happen by accident. For people like my mother and her family, Jews living in the U.S. during the forties, it’s the Dachau gas chamber propaganda that they most clearly remember as their first exposure to the concept of homicidal gas chambers.

 

Unanswered Questions Regarding the Physical Evidence at the Majdanek Concentration Camp (Poland)

(27) Gas chamber 1 has two doors, both of which open INTO the gas chamber room. How can a homicidal gas chamber have two doors which open IN? Wouldn’t the bodies be pressed up against the doors, as described numerous times by eyewitnesses?

(28) The main door into the gas chamber 1 has no locks. It can be opened from either the inside or the outside. There are no holes or fittings where a lock might have been. What stopped the inmates from opening this door?

(29) Gas chamber 1 has a plate glass window in it. There are no holes or fittings around the window where bars or any other kind of cover might once have been. Since the plaster around the window is covered with blue stains, we know that it is the plaster that existed during the time Zyklon B gas was used in this room. If there WERE bars or any other type of cover attached to this window, why are there no traces? What would have stopped the inmates from trying to climb out the window, or breaking the window and causing a gas leak?

(30) There is a room INSIDE gas chamber 1. Why would there be a separate room INSIDE a gas chamber? Doesn’t this room indicate that gas chamber 1 was used for something OTHER than killing people?

(31) Gas chambers 2 and 3 are designed backwards. Chamber 2 has a Zyklon B induction hole in the ceiling, but no Zyklon B traces or blue stains. Chamber 3 has heavy, floor-to-ceiling Zyklon B traces and blue stains, but no Zyklon B induction hole. And, like the roof of Krema 2 at Auschwitz, the ceiling shows no sign of a hole having ever been there. Why would chamber 2 have a Zyklon B induction hole and no traces, and chamber 3 plenty of traces but no hole?

(32) The ceilings in chambers 2 and 4 are low enough so that the Zyklon B induction holes could have been blocked by the victims. What would have stopped the inmates from blocking the holes?

(33) The doors to chambers 2,3 and 4 are built to latch from the outside AND the inside. The latches can be opened from either side. Does this suggest that the rooms were used for something other than killing people?

(34) Getting back to the issue of hemispherical grids covering the peepholes, it is said that the point of these grids was to prevent the inmates from breaking the glass of the peepholes and causing a gas leak. Yet the hemispherical grids attached to the peepholes on the doors of chambers 2, 3 and 4 are attached on the OUTSIDE of the doors. These grids wouldn’t prevent someone INSIDE the room from breaking the glass…but they WOULD prevent someone OUTSIDE the room from doing so. Why are the grids not on the inside? Does this contradict with the statements by Pressac and the eyewitnesses regarding the need for grids in a homicidal gas chamber?

(35) The Majdanek camp is built on a hill. At the top of the hill is the camp crematorium. At the opposite end of the camp, at the bottom of the hill, is the “Bath and Disinfection” complex, which houses the gas chambers. From the Nazi’s point of view, what was the wisdom in putting the gas chambers at the opposite end of the camp from the ovens, and at the bottom of the hill (after each gassing, the dead bodies would have to have been dragged up the hill, the length of the entire camp, to the ovens)?

(36) As the Nazis were preparing to abandon the Majdanek camp, they destroyed the crematorium building. Why were the gas chambers not similarly destroyed? Why would the Nazis leave their weapons of mass murder intact for the world to see? How hard would it have been for the Nazis to destroy the gas chambers, just like they did the crematorium building? At least, shouldn’t the Nazis have filled in the Zyklon B induction holes, which serve as direct proofs of homicidal gassings? Either way, the destruction of the crematorium is clear proof that the Nazis had both the time and the ability to demolish buildings in the camp if they wanted to. Why were the gas chambers not demolished?

(37) In his book Auschwitz: Technique and Operation of the Gas Chambers, Jean-Claude Pressac publishes a photo of the Majdanek gas chambers, with the caption “Photograph taken at the Majdanek concentration camp in June 1979, showing one of the disinfestation gas chambers thought to be a homicidal gas chamber.” On page 555, he also has this to say about the Majdanek gas chambers: “I am sorry to say, and I am not the only one in the West, that the Majdanek homicidal and/or delousing gas chambers are still waiting for a true historian, which is mildly upsetting in view of the fact that the camp fell into the hands of the Russians intact in 1944.” Do these comments suggest that the gas chambers at Majdanek may in fact have been disinfestation gas chambers? At least, don’t these comments suggest that there has not yet been a thorough investigation into the purpose of these rooms? **

(38) To sum up the Majdanek gas chamber issue: If we take Pressac’s comments and then factor in the doors that don’t lock, the doors that open INTO the gas chamber, the doors with latches that can be manipulated from both the outside AND the inside, the window in gas chamber 1, the room inside gas chamber 1, the lack of any Zyklon B induction hole in gas chamber 3, the lack of any Zyklon B traces in gas chamber 2 (which DOES have a “Zyklon B induction hole”), the heavy blue stains on the OUTSIDE of the building, and the location of the building, at the bottom of a hill, at the opposite end of the camp from the crematorium, is it reasonable to suggest that these rooms were delousing chambers?
** In what can only be considered an unfortunate example of how major disputes between Holocaust historians are shielded from the public, the same room Pressac describes in his book as a “disinfestation gas chamber” is featured in the book “The World Must Know,” the official book of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington D.C., written by Museum director Dr. Michael Berenbaum. In that book, Berenbaum describes the room as a HOMICIDAL gas chamber and, what’s more, a CASTING of this room was made for display AT THE MUSEUM, as PROOF of the homicidal gas chambers! Thus, in both Berenbaum’s book AND in the Museum itself, the ONLY material proof given of homicidal gassings is THIS ROOM, a room Pressac staunchly believes to be a disinfestation gas chamber (in fact, in his Auschwitz book, Pressac actually RIDICULES those who say that this Majdanek room is proof of homicidal gassings, and criticizes everyone from the man who prosecuted Faurisson in France to the Majdanek State Museum personnel for perpetuating a fraud).
But does anyone give a damn that the general public, all the millions, might be receiving fraudulent information? Some might suggest that disputes such as these should be kept private so as not to shake the public’s confidence in Holocaust history, or in the Holocaust historians. But don’t you think we have a RESPONSIBILITY not to knowingly feed the public falsehoods or unproven claims disguised as unquestioned facts? Don’t you think we have a responsibility to be honest about our research? If not, what makes us any different from the “historians” of the Soviet Union, or Hitler’s Germany, who knowingly tailored their research to produce a politically expedient conclusion? When the ends begin justifying the means, watch integrity go flying out the window.
As bad as the public misinformation about Majdanek is, the Stalin-esque purging of Pressac’s “Auschwitz; Technique and Operation of the Gas Chambers” from the official record is worse. This master-work of historiography, once loudly heralded in the press (see enclosed clippings), is NOW nowhere to be found when references to Pressac are made. A recent article in “Publishers Weekly,” detailing a forthcoming U.S. Holocaust Museum book containing 29 original essays from Holocaust scholars including Berenbaum and Pressac, not only neglects to mention Pressac’s gas chamber book, but seems to suggest that Pressac’s conversion from revisionist to gas chamber believer came only recently, as he was researching his just-published “slim volume” about the Auschwitz crematorium. The entire period of the 1980’s, which Pressac spent researching his gas chamber book after his “conversion”, is omitted.
Yet scholars around the world continue to use Pressac’s gas chamber book (if they’re lucky enough to have one of the few copies), mainly because, even if one disagrees with Pressac’s conclusions, his book is STILL the best (and the only) single source for the blueprints, construction slips, alteration plans, and inter-office communiques regarding the Auschwitz “gas chambers”. Neither side in this debate agrees entirely with Pressac…but for the gas chamber supporters, his book is an embarrassment because it IS so thorough. It is the most thorough work yet produced about the gas chambers, yet Pressac cannot find that elusive objective proof of gassings. So now, apparently, the historians have just decided to pretend the book doesn’t exist. I’ve always referred to the Pressac gas chamber book as the most popular book that never existed!

 

Four Unanswered Questions About Stutthof

When preparing the original 38 questions, I didn’t bother with the tiny Stutthof “gas chamber” because so few people take it seriously anymore. Stutthof was the camp where the Nazis supposedly made the “human soap.”. When the soap story was dropped, so was much of the testimony about the Stutthof “gas chamber.” However, recently an NBC prime-time news show, “The Crusaders,” decided to revive this rarely mentioned “homicidal gas chamber,” producing a segment about Stutthof that played up the existence of an intact gas chamber at the camp. This segment of “The Crusaders” has now been adopted as part of California’s public school Holocaust-education curriculum. Therefore, I thought a brief overview of, and a few questions about, the Stutthof “gas chamber” were in order

Brief Overview: The Stutthof concentration camp, located 35 km east of Gdansk, was designed for Polish civilians and designated as a “civilian internees camp.” The Stutthof “gas chamber,” a relatively small building (8 meters long, 3 meters wide, and 2.30 meters high) located next door to the camp crematorium (which was destroyed as the Nazis abandoned the camp, and has been rebuilt by the Poles) has walls soaked both inside and out with the tell-tale blue staining that comes from repeated Zyklon B usage. There is a stove and chimney outside, for heating the interior. Inside, a long clay heating conduit runs the length of one wall. This building was clearly a delousing gas chamber. The Zyklon granules would be placed on the heating conduit, and the stove would be fired up. The conduit would become hot, and the granules would release their gas. The two doors would then be opened for natural ventilation. This is an “old style” German Zyklon B delousing chamber, built before the more modern chambers, like the ones at Dachau, were designed (the newer, more energy efficient chambers came equipped with Zyklon evaporators, which would heat the granules on a kind of hot plate, and blow the gas onto the clothes, mattresses, etc. This was more energy efficient because it was a waste of fuel to heat an ENTIRE ROOM when it was only the ZYKLON GRANULES that needed to be warmed up. These Zyklon evaporators remain at Dachau today, in the delousing chambers of “Barrack X.”).
The “evidence” of homicidal usage of the Stutthof gas chamber is a “Zyklon B induction hole” in the roof. We are told that the Zyklon would be poured in through the this hole on the heads of the unsuspecting victims. The roof of this chamber is accessible only via ladder.
Let’s pause to read what Pressac has to say about Stutthof:

“It is not known when this gas chamber FOR DELOUSING PRISONERS’ EFFECTS (emphasis his) was installed. Its dimensions are close to the standard dimensions of those erected by BOOS or DEGESCH…From 22nd June to the beginning of November 1944, it was used as a HOMICIDAL gas chamber for groups of about 100 people, Zyklon B being poured in through a small opening of 15 cm diameter in the roof, a system apparently introduced on the advice of SS Lieutenant Colonel Rudolf Hoess, former commandant of Auschwitz-Birkenau and at that time head of Department D1 of the WVHA-SS (SS Economic Administration Head Office). While the history of this gas chamber is known from TESTIMONIES reported by Father Krzysztof Dunin-Wasowicz, there has been no scientific examination of the “murder weapon” since 1945, which means that we do not know how the chamber functioned as a delousing installation and are unable to provide material proof of its criminal use.

(Pressac cont.) The number of victims is estimated at one or two thousand. The visit (to Stutthof) did not greatly impress us.” (Pressac; “Auschwitz: Technique and Operation of the Gas Chambers” pages 539-540)

The Stutthof Museum personnel agree with Pressac’s claim that this was FIRST AND FOREMOST a delousing chamber, used as such for years, only LATER “converted”into a homicidal one.

Now, let’s ask some questions, picking up from where we left off in the “38 Questions”

(39) The Stutthof “gas chamber” has a large floor drain right in the middle of the room, DIRECTLY BELOW the “Zyklon B induction hole.” Any granules dropped through this hole would automatically go right down the drain. What’s more, the floor of this room is DEPRESSED in the middle, where the drain is, so that any water or, in this case, Zyklon granules, would automatically roll into the drain. what would stop the Zyklon granules from going down the drain, since they were being poured into the room directly over this drain? And, if a few granules missed the drain, wouldn’t they simply roll, or couldn’t the inmates brush them, down the drain?

(40) The roof of this room is low enough so that a tall person could reach up and block the “Zyklon B induction hole.” However, the thoughtful Nazis, by installing the heating conduit that runs the length of on wall, have made it possible for ANYONE, of whatever height, to stand on this conduit and block the hole. What would stop the inmates from blocking the “Zyklon B induction hole,” especially since they would be EXPECTING foul play (this room was the official Stutthof delousing chamber, known as such by all the inmates. No Stutthof inmate would expect to be given a “shower” in this room, and indeed the Stutthof Museum makes no claims about such a deception (neither do the eyewitnesses)?

(41) Why was this building – a clear “proof” of Nazi crimes, what with its ” Zyklon B induction hole,” – not DESTROYED as the Nazis evacuated the camp? Amazingly, the crematorium RIGHT NEXT DOOR was blown up, and, in fact, one side of the gas chamber building was actually HIT by shrapnel from the exploding crematorium. Yet the gas chamber was allowed to remain intact, even though, as reported by the Stutthof survivor interviewed on the “Crusaders” TV show, at the end of the war the Nazis were ordered to KILL EVERY INMATE at Stutthof, in order to erase any evidence of the gassings (by killing all the eyewitnesses). For some unknown reason, this order was never carried out, and the Stutthof inmates were evacuated west.
Why would the Nazis BLOW UP the crematorium, yet leave the “homicidal” gas chamber standing? Why would the Nazis decide to KILL EVERY INMATE in order to “cover up” their crimes, yet leave the PHYSICAL EVIDENCE of those crimes standing? Why wouldn’t the Nazis AT LEAST cover up the “Zyklon B induction hole,” which would serve as CLEAR AND INDISPUTABLE PROOF of homicidal usage (unless we dare to imagine that this hole was put in by the Soviets/Poles, as they ADMIT doing at the building the Nazis abandoned knowing it was soon to fall into Soviet hands. Considering the great pains that the Nazis went through to “cover up” the gassings elsewhere, how hard would it have been to dynamite THIS building along with the crematorium just a few yards away?

(42) Since personal testimony is all we have to go on regarding the homicidal usage of this chamber, and since much of this testimony also mentions the “human soap” – which has long been officially debunked – what evidence do we have that the testimony about the Stutthof homicidal gas chamber is any more reliable than the testimony about the human soap?

I could add one more question (but I won’t), something about the fact that the Stutthof gas chamber is located in full view of all the inmates, inmates who were NOT destined for extermination, and not, to a great extent, Jewish. Strangely, the secrecy-obsessed Nazis also seemed obsessed with conducting their homicidal gassings in the most open, noticeable places possible…especially at the non-“extermination” camps (at Mauthausen, another non-extermination camp, the “gas chamber” is right in the middle of the inmate barracks), thus hoping, I suppose, to create tens or hundreds of thousands of “eyewitnesses” to something the Nazis would not even discuss privately in coded transmissions. Go figure.

The following four questions are based on personal meetings I had during my last trip to Europe in October of 1994. In Lublin, Poland, I met with Tomasz Kranz, Curator of the Majdanek State Museum. I spoke at length with Mr. Kranz, who has been Curator for ten years, in his office on the Majdanek concentration camp site, Two weeks later, in a suburb outside Paris, I met with Jean-Claude Pressac, the celebrated Holocaust author who has become perhaps the man most recognized with defending the gas chamber theory. I met with Mr. Pressac in his office, and got to spend roughly six hours discussing gas chambers, Holocaust history, the demands of publishing in the mainstream, and much more.

For the purpose of this list of questions, I have chosen four simple ones based on these meetings.

(43) Majdanek Curator Tomasz Kranz had to admit, after I raised the same questions I’ve raised in this list, that the biggest Majdanek “gas chamber,” chamber #1, was not intended or used homicidally. Big revelation. With the doors, window, and everything else that precludes homicidal usage, this is a conclusion even a five year old child would come to. Although Kranz could offer no evidence for homicidal usage in the other three chambers, chamber #1 was the only one he was willing to completely jettison as a homicidal room. Pressac went further. He is only willing to even CONSIDER homicidal gassings in chamber #3. Of course, he has no evidence. What’s more, he admits that the Soviets laid down fake “gas piping” in chamber #3 to give the room the appearance of a homicidal gas chamber. This is certainly in keeping with Soviet precedent regarding the mishandling and faking of important historical evidence. Pressac could offer no REAL evidence for gassings in this room. But my question is: Why does Curator Tomasz Kranz continue to allow this room to be represented to tourists and the world as a homicidal gas chamber, when he privately acknowledges it never was? If there is agreement that this room was never homicidally used, why continue to promote it as a death chamber? If the Majdanek Curator and Europe’s most well known Holocaust author express such uncertainty about homicidal usage of this and the other rooms, why are people like me who ask basic questions like these labeled as anti-Semitic irrational cranks? If, as Pressac believes, rooms 1,2 and 4 were not homicidal gas chambers, what evidence is there that anyone was killed in room 3?

(44) At Auschwitz Birkenau, the rooms in Kremas 4 and 5 that are supposed to have been used as homicidal gas chambers all had drains in the floor that led right into the camp sewage system. These floor drains can still be seen today. Since, in these “gas chambers,” it is said that the Zyklon pellets were dumped in loose, what stopped the pellets from going down the drain or being kicked or brushed down by the victims? Pressac was aware of this problem. He has tried to prove that the Zyklon pellets would present no problem. He has tried to prove that the Zyklon pellets would present no danger in the camp sewer, since the water would (in his opinion; this is a debatable point) “neutralize” the poison so it wouldn’t present a danger when going through Birkenau’s large sewage treatment plants. But Pressac misses the point; the question of just how harmful the Zyklon would be in the sewer is SECONDARY to the point that if the Zyklon is IN the sewer that means it’s NOT in the gas chamber doing the job the Nazis intended! If the victims can dump the Zyklon into the sewer, that means they themselves won’t be gassed. How could these rooms have functioned as homicidal gas chambers?

(45) There is a large square manhole in the floor of the Krema 1 “gas chamber” at the Auschwitz Main Camp. The manhole has a concrete cover with a metal handle. It is possible for anybody of normal or even below-normal strength to lift off the lid, and the manhole is large enough for anyone of any size to climb down. What would stop the victims from climbing down the manhole to either escape the gas chamber via the sewer OR at least escape the gas? And even if escape wasn’t possible, what would stop the victims from kicking or brushing the Zyklon B pellets down the manhole and closing the cover? There is something I should mention here, since several times I’ve talked about the possibility of the victims brushing the pellets down floor drains of in this, the worst case yet, a manhole. Zyklon B can kill a human being quite effectively when its gas is INHALED. It kills through the lungs. It doesn’t kill through the skin (unless it is in contact with the skin for a very long period of time and in a very high concentration). Therefore, the pellets could easily be handled by victims in a gas chamber without posing any threat to the victims via absorption through the skin. In fact, a Zyklon mixture was frequently brushed directly onto people’s arms and legs during disinfestation procedures at Auschwitz, and Zyklon was also used in a liquid solution to bathe people in for delousing. As for the Zyklon pellets giving off their gas, it should be remembered that Zyklon B begins giving off gas when warmed. The hotter it is, the quicker the evaporation.

Yet Kremas 1 ( and 2 and 3) were not only UNHEATED but partially or completely UNDERGROUND! All three rooms were used or designed as morgues; they were MEANT to be cold all the time. It has never been explained just how the Zyklon was heated, especially in the freezing winter months. The best that the other side can do is say that the body temperatures of the victims warmed the rooms. But that would take time, and the “confession” of Auschwitz Commandant Höss speaks of a very swift process – herd ’em in, drop down the gas, ventilate the room. No time mentioned to let the victims warm up the room. Zyklon pellets dropped down into a cold room, landing on the cold floor, would not only give off gas slowly, but would be safe to brush down a drain or manhole. What would stop the inmates from doing this? (For the record, there is a floor drain in the Krema 1 “gas chamber” AS WELL as a manhole…but with a manhole of that size, the drain becomes almost irrelevant!)

In 1992 I ran my manhole question past Dr. Franciszek Piper, Senior Curator of the Auschwitz State Museum, and he had no answer. When I ran it by Pressac, he thought I was trying to put one over on him; he didn’t believe there WAS a manhole in Krema 1! I was floored that he had never seen it. We argued about this for some time until I had to go through his files and find a picture of Krema 1 and POINT OUT the damn manhole. Now HE was floored. “Over the last ten years I’ve been to Krema 1 more times than I can possibly count,” he said (in French, of course), ” and I’ve never noticed the manhole!”

“The next time you go, Jean-Claude,” I responded, “you should look down!” “Ah, that is the problem David,” he said. “You look down while I look up.” Well, for the record, I look up too. My aim is to notice things, to take these gas chambers seriously; to walk into these rooms and ask three questions:

“How is this gas chamber supposed to have worked?” “What would have happened if it worked that way?,” “What evidence is there that it did?”

The mainstream historians gloss over the difficult questions. They have nothing to gain by challenging their own beliefs. As a result, all too often they don’t pay attention to the crucial details of their own stories. They come up with their conclusion first, and then they only pay attention to the evidence that supports that conclusion. They don’t look at ALL the evidence.

As a result, the mainstream Holocaust historians have only had to explain the problems and discrepancies in their story (like the absence of Zyklon B traces) after revisionists have pointed out these problems. Mainstream Holocaust historians have never tried to explain problems with the gas chamber story willingly; they’ve always had to be prodded into doing so. (This, by the way, is not a situation unique to Holocaust history. The value of a society where dissent is allowed to exist is that often times it is the existence of two or more opposing sides to an issue that prompts and encourages the search for the truth; each side critiques the other side mercilessly and, therefore, the public is made aware of possible flaws in ALL sides. If a school of thought is insulated from criticism, as Holocaust history is in all the countries where questioning the gas chambers in an illegal and punishable offense, that school of thought can remain unchecked for errors).

As for the manhole, apparently the other side has not yet been able to rationalize its presence in as supposedly homicidal gas chamber. I welcome their attempts. Maybe there’s something I’M missing. It doesn’t matter to me if one proceeds with the hypothesis that there were homicidal gas chambers, or with the hypothesis that there weren’t. As long as we search in good faith for the facts. The only crime is to wish away the difficult questions, pretending they don’t exist and slandering the people who do nothing more than ask them.

(46) Another thing I learned from Pressac is that he believes that the Krema 1 “gas chamber” had THREE “Zyklon B induction holes,” running in a straight line in the ceiling. But the Auschwitz State Museum believes that there were FOUR holes, running in two lines of two holes. When the Poles and Soviets put holes in the Krema 1 roof after liberation, this is the version they installed; four holes in two lines. This is the version that can be seen today in Krema 1. But Pressac says they’re wrong; it was THREE holes in a straight line. Who’s right? Were there three holes or four? And how do we know that there were ever ANY holes? There are no holes present in any of the aerial photos, and there were no holes when the Soviets liberated the camp.

The important question is; HOW can such a debate (three holes or four?) among major Holocaust scholars exist in the first place? It is only because hard evidence for gassings at Auschwitz is so lacking that something like this can still be an issue fifty years later. Whatever the evidence for gassings at Krema 1, it is apparently not good ENOUGH evidence to provide a description of the gas chamber that all scholars can agree on. Now, it would be one thing if we had tons of SUPPLEMENTARY evidence (i.e. Zyklon B traces in the walls that were heavier than all the other rooms, evidence of people entering the building en masse and never coming out, a special ventilation system and heating equipment, or German coded transmissions or documents talking about gassings, etc.); then we could at least say “Well, we know there were gassings, we’re just not sure about the design of the gas chamber.” But there is no supplementary evidence. We have no description of the Krema 1 murder weapon, but we ALSO have no evidence of any murders in Krema 1. Even the best prosecutor in the world would be hard pressed to get a conviction were this case to be tried in any standard American court.

All that we have are testimonies. And just a few. Yet Pressac spends much of his gas chamber book demolishing these testimonies as false. We have the testimony of camp Commandant Hoess, the man who SHOULD have been able to provide us with the best description of the Krema 1 gas chamber, but Pressac, Hilberg, Lipstadt, Chris Browning, and most other Holocaust scholars dismiss his account as unreliable, fabricated, or just plain false. So what’s left? Pressac searches in vain for ANY hard evidence to reproduce in his chapter on Kremas 1, and ends up with nothing. As a result, this chapter is perhaps the most awkward in Pressac’s book. Pressac begins the chapter by affirming his belief in homicidal gassings in this room, but then goes on to offer no evidence, and what’s more he doubts the credibility of the testimonies, which are the only evidence he offers. One is left saying “Jean-Claude Pressac believes in Homicidal gassings in Krema 1…I’m just not sure why.”

What I try to do is look at the evidence that calls gassings into question (the manhole, the floor drain, the lack of Zyklon B traces, the absence of documentary evidence, the lack of evidence in the aerial photos, the lack of ventilation, the fact that the room is extremely cold, etc. etc.) and weigh that against any evidence FOR gassings (a few testimonies which the experts themselves doubt). You can see how a debate over the design of this “gas chamber” can still be raging among mainstream historians; it is because of the lack of evidence.

And it is therefore legitimate to ask, “If you don’t know whether there were three or four holes, how do you know that there were ANY holes?”

The above article can be found here: Forty-Six Important Unanswered Questions Regarding the Nazi Gas Chambers

CAN OF WORMS: AIPAC mired in pornography, prostitution, depositions reveal

Posted in Etc. on November 20, 2010 by The 800 Pound Gorilla

‘AIPAC gets down and dirty in pushback vs. defamation suit’

The Jewish Daily Forward; November 16, 2010

WASHINGTON, DC The espionage case against two senior officials of the pro-Israel lobby in Washington was dropped last year. But it has not been forgotten, and it’s now threatening to draw the lobby into new depths of mudslinging.

Papers filed in the civil lawsuit of former lobbyist Steve Rosen against his previous employers at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee include mutual accusations of using pornographic material at the lobby headquarters, among other allegations. The papers, based on depositions taken from Rosen and from AIPAC principals, dig into the private lives of the involved parties. They also reveal in detail the close ties AIPAC officials held with Israeli diplomats based in Washington.

After reading this stuff, you feel like you need to wash your hands,” one pro-Israel activist said after skimming through the 260-page document, which is laced with graphic descriptions and invasive personal details.

At issue is Rosen’s $20 million defamation lawsuit against his previous employers at AIPAC, who fired him and his colleague Keith Weissman in 2005 — several months after both had been indicted under a rarely used espionage statute because they allegedly received and passed on classified information. AIPAC, in a move that could be seen as meant to embarrass Rosen, revealed in its court filings extensive parts of the depositions, many of them dealing directly with Rosen’s personal life.

In an interview with the Forward after the court documents had been made public, Rosen said he was not deterred, and promised that when he files his own motion in December, the information in it will put AIPAC in the hot seat. “Any embarrassment I suffered as a result of what they filed will be insignificant compared to the embarrassment they’ll suffer after we file our motion,” Rosen said.

Rosen’s civil lawsuit seeks compensation and damages from AIPAC and from its outside public relations adviser, Patrick Dorton, for defamation. Rosen said he suffered severe damage to his reputation when Dorton issued a statement on AIPAC’s behalf announcing that he and Weissman were fired because their actions did not comport with AIPAC standards. This statement was initially understood as being related to the allegations of Rosen receiving classified information and communicating it to others against AIPAC’s policy. But in its motion for summary judgment, filed November 5 with the Superior Court of the District of Columbia, AIPAC cites a wider array of alleged points of misconduct that the pro-Israel lobby now says led to the decision to terminate him.

AIPAC claims that Rosen, who was director of foreign policy issues at the lobby and one of its most senior and well-known employees, had engaged in viewing pornography on AIPAC computers at the lobby’s Washington offices. Partial transcripts of the lengthy videotaped deposition of Rosen, which were made public as part of AIPAC’s motion, show Rosen admitted to surfing pornographic websites from work. But AIPAC’s lawyers insisted on more details:

Q: What type of pornography?

A: Sexual pornography.

Q: What type? Man on man, man on woman?

A: Anything. Anything that occurred to me.

Rosen also added more details than, perhaps, the attorney for AIPAC had bargained for.

“I witnessed [AIPAC executive director] Howard Kohr viewing pornographic material, [Kohr’s secretary] Annette Franzen viewing pornographic material, probably a dozen other members of the staff,” Rosen said in his deposition. He added that, according to a Nielsen survey, more than a quarter of Americans regularly view pornographic websites at their workplace.

Later in his deposition, the former lobbyist also said he had heard from directors at AIPAC about their visits to prostitutes and he claimed Kohr had routinely used “locker room language” at the AIPAC offices.

AIPAC did not seem deterred from getting dragged into a dirty debate. It also chose to include in its court filing an issue relating to Rosen’s personal life with only a vague connection to the lobby’s claim regarding Rosen’s actions being below AIPAC’s standards. AIPAC’s lawyers questioned Rosen in detail about his attempts to find male sexual companions through the online classifieds site Craigslist, an act Rosen referred to as “sexual experimentations.” This information came up in one of Rosen’s divorce cases — he has been married five times — and was supposed to remain under court seal.

The court documents also shed light on Rosen’s attempts to support himself and his family after being fired from AIPAC. The former lobbyist, as the depositions indicate, received cash gifts from several prominent Jewish philanthropists, among them some who are also major donors to AIPAC. The list includes Hollywood mogul Haim Saban, one of AIPAC’s key funders, who gave Rosen a total of $100,000; Daniel Abraham, founder of the Center for Middle East Peace, who gave Rosen, his wife and three children gifts of $5,000 to $10,000; and philanthropist Lynn Schusterman, who paid off a college loan for Rosen’s daughter. The list includes several other backers, including two described as “bundlers” who raised up to $200,000 for Rosen from other donors.

The rationale for introducing this issue is AIPAC’s claim that Rosen did not suffer any financial difficulty following his dismissal or due to Dorton’s claim in AIPAC’s public statement regarding Rosen’s supposed misconduct. Rosen believes that by supporting him these donors, many of them still active AIPAC members, demonstrated their displeasure with the manner in which the lobby treated its two former employees.

The personal and financial details that take up much of the deposition seemed to be tense at times, with flare ups between the attorneys of both sides. But the court papers also shed light on the events surrounding the FBI visit to Rosen’s home on August 27, 2004 that led to the indictment in the espionage case.

The FBI has alleged that Larry Franklin, a Pentagon analyst at the time, passed on national security information to Weissman, who in turn shared it with Rosen. The two former defendants did not know then that Franklin was cooperating with the FBI and that the information he provided them was part of a sting operation.

Rosen and Weissman learned from Franklin that Iranian forces were allegedly operating in northern Iraq and that they were plotting to kidnap Israeli operatives. They then disclosed this information to a senior Israeli diplomat, Naor Gilon, and to Washington Post reporter Glenn Kessler. The depositions reveal that after being confronted by the FBI at his home, in what he described as a “very intense exchange of words” Rosen made a phone call to AIPAC’s legal counsel, who was shaken by the news and asked Rosen to come immediately to the lobby’s headquarters.

Rosen then called Rafi Barak, at the time the deputy chief of mission at Israel’s Washington embassy. Rosen convinced Barak to cancel other appointments and meet immediately at a coffee shop. He described to the Israeli diplomat the encounter he had just had with the FBI and the allegations they made about Israelis receiving classified information. “I probably made some reference to Pollard,” Rosen recalled, and Barak, according to the deposition, “got very upset too.”

AIPAC raises this episode in an attempt to prove that Rosen did not follow directly the instructions of the lobby’s lawyer to come immediately to the office. This could demonstrate how Rosen did not live up to AIPAC’s standards.

But former AIPAC staffer and now liberal columnist M.J. Rosenberg sees more to it. According to Rosenberg, if Rosen proves that his operations, including going to a foreign official to warn him about the investigation, were all part of AIPAC’s standard operating procedures, “that would mean that AIPAC is not a domestic lobbying organization at all, but something very, very different.”

In a statement released by AIPAC from Dorton, the lobbying group said, “As is demonstrated in detail in the pleadings that AIPAC has filed, this is a frivolous lawsuit with no merit. … Rosen’s claims are wildly inaccurate, are undermined by Rosen’s own admissions under oath in his deposition, and constitute a blatant attempt to detract attention from the true and relevant facts.”

The next round in this battle is expected with Rosen’s counter filing on December 2. Both sides can decide to settle the case outside the court before that, or at any phase before it reaches a jury trial.

The above article can be found here: http://www.forward.com/articles/133172/

 

‘AIPAC dirty laundry aired as former staffer sues for defamation’

Haaretz (Israel); November 17, 2010

WASHINGTON, DC — The US Jewish community has been scandalized by details of an increasingly dirty lawsuit, brought by a former AIPAC staffer who was dismissed after he was charged with attempting to spy for Israel.

Steven Rosen was sacked by the America Israel Public Affairs Committee in 2004 after he and fellow staffer Keith Weissman were charged with “mishandling classified information” and passing sensitive information to Israeli diplomats and journalists. The charges against the two, however, were dropped before the case reached a courtroom.

The FBI claimed that it had enough evidence for convictions, but all the charges were dropped nonetheless. The controversial case made headlines again in March 2009 after Rosen filed a civil suit in a Washington, DC court against his former employers for defamation.

In his suit, Rosen demanded damages of $21 million for comments by AIPAC officials, which Rosen claims they knew to be lies, while criminally disregarding the damage it would do to his reputation.

AIPAC submitted a detailed declaration in court at the beginning of November, requesting the dismissal of Rosen’s lawsuit. The document included transcripts of conversation between Rosen and his lawyer and other AIPAC senior officials, intending to prove that the organization had legitimate reasons to fire him.

The AIPAC declaration included recorded statements made by Rosen to a Washington Post reporter in which he says that he does not want to ‘run into trouble’ — a phrase that AIPAC claims proves that Rosen knew that he was doing something wrong.

Later in the conversation, Rosen expresses relief that the United States does not have a law on the books similar to the British law of ‘national secrets,’ according to which journalists can be tried for publishing classified information.

“The significance of this is that the plaintiff knew that the information he passed to the journalist was classified, otherwise there would be no need to mention the law,” the AIPAC deposition read. The organization spent $4.9 million on Rosen’s trial. The deposition mentioned that although the case never came to trial, Rosen was never exonerated.

A large part of the deposition relates to Rosen’s ‘inappropriate behavior,’ claiming that he experimented with sexual liaisons with other married men on Craig’s List and used his AIPAC office computer to surf pornographic websites.

The deposition also claimed that pornographic files were found on Rosen’s computer, a clear violation of AIPAC policy. Additionally, the deposition notes, criminal charges are not something that AIPAC expects from its employees.

For his part, Rosen sees himself as a victim and scapegoat that AIPAC knowingly put at risk with untrue accusations and by ignoring the facts. Rosen rejects AIPAC’s accusations that his actions should not be considered to be work done for the organization, claiming that they are considered to be normal behavior for the lobby.

In response to a request from Haaretz, AIPAC issued the following statement:

“As is demonstrated in detail in the pleadings that AIPAC has filed, this is a frivolous lawsuit with no merit. AIPAC has made it clear during the course of this litigation that it disagrees with Mr. Rosen’s characterization of events relevant to the litigation.

“As the pleadings demonstrate, it is AIPAC’s position that Steve Rosen’s claims are wildly inaccurate, are undermined by Rosen’s own admissions under oath in his deposition, and constitute a blatant attempt to detract attention from the true and relevant facts. We have filed a motion for summary judgment in this case with the court and look forward to resolving these matters in that venue.”

At the time of publication, Rosen had not replied to Haaretz’s request for comment.

The above article can be found here: http://www.haaretz.com/jewish-world/news/aipac-dirty-laundry-aired-as-former-staffer-sues-for-defamation-1.325176

 

Also see ‘Leading neocons subpoenaed in AIPAC spy case’ here: http://800pg.co.cc/geeklog//article.php?story=20080718151425666

Also see ‘AIPAC spies set to walk (a dream scenario for the defense)’ here: http://800pg.co.cc/geeklog//article.php?story=20090305031253821

Also see ‘U.S. to drop spy case against pro-Israel lobbyists’ here: http://800pg.co.cc/geeklog//article.php?story=20090505011422352

A Jewish revisionist’s visit to Auschwitz

Posted in Etc. on November 19, 2010 by The 800 Pound Gorilla

By David Cole (October, 1992)
When I decided last September to take a well-deserved vacation, I thought, what better destination than Europe. After all, as a Revisionist I’d always felt it my duty to see the concentration camps in person. My girl-friend, though, said that she’d like to go to Europe to visit Euro-Disney, the new Disneyland theme park in France.

So I thought for a while about where to go: Auschwitz or Euro-Disney. And as I looked around, and saw the miserable state of the world and this country, the political and social malaise and depression, I realized that if I did take a vacation, I wanted to go to a place as far away from reality as possible: a fantasy land of wondrous fairy tales.

So, of course, I chose Auschwitz.

Now that I’ve gone through the Auschwitz main camp, Auschwitz-Birkenau, Majdanek, Mauthausen, and Dachau, I feel more secure in my position as a Revisionist that there exists no convincing evidence that Jews or anyone else were taken en masse into gas chambers and killed by the Nazis at these camps. In fact, the remains that I inspected at the camp sites seem, in many different ways, to directly contradict these claims.

I returned to the United States with more than 25 hours of video footage from the camps. At Majdanek I uncovered obvious tampering with the buildings exhibited as gas chambers. This evidence was discovered when my attractive camerawoman busted a lock and got into a room that is not open to tourists. There we were able to view several items in their original state, most notably the doors, which were clearly constructed to latch from both the outside and the inside.

The high point of my visit, though, was my interview with Dr. Franciszek Piper, Senior Curator of the Polish government’s Auschwitz State Museum. He has worked there for more than 26 years. On tape, he admits that the so-called gas chamber in Crematory Building (Krema) I, which is shown to half a million visitors a year as a genuine homicidal gas chamber, is in fact a reconstruction– even down to the holes cut into the ceiling. Piper also admits that walls were knocked down and bathroom facilities removed. He went on to tell us that the remains of the “white cottage,” supposed site of the first preliminary gassings at Birkenau, are also reconstructed. This was hardly news to me. Even a quick examination of the remains of the “white cottage” shows that the bricks are not connected in any way, but are simply laid on top of each other like children’s building blocks.

Piper has no problems with the Leuchter Report. He told me that he agrees with Leuchter’s findings regarding traces of ferro-ferric-cyanide in the walls of Crematory Buildings (Kremas) I, II and III. So what is his explanation for this lack of traces in the supposed homicidal gas chambers when, by contrast, there are significant traces in the non-homicidal delousing gas chambers? He told me that the amount of hydrogen cyanide (from Zyklon) supposedly used by the Germans to kill people — unlike the amount needed to kill lice in delousing chambers — was not enough to leave blue (ferro-ferric-cyanide) staining, or appreciable traces.

This argument has problems, though. For one thing, the supposed homicidal gas chambers at Majdanek (which in reality were non-homicidal delousing chambers) have abundant blue staining. So according to Piper’s “Holocaust logic” gassing people in Auschwitz did not leave blue stains, but gassing people at Majdanek did. Talk about a Magic Kingdom! As we spoke, I half expected to see Piper’s nose grow as long as Pinocchio’s!

The importance of Piper’s revelations is obvious. The burden of proof has now shifted decisively to the Exterminationist side. For example, Piper’s admission that the four holes in the ceiling of Crematory Building (Krema) I were put in after the war makes ludicrous the oft-repeated claim of Auschwitz tourists that “Now I’ve seen the gas chambers with my own two eyes.” Now that the often-made claims are no longer valid, can the Exterminationists produce any evidence — a photograph, document, plan, or order — showing that the supposed gas chamber there was ever used to kill people as alleged? Most likely not, but what else is new? We’ve never been asked to accept the Holocaust story on anything but faith, and for me, that’s not good enough.

On the issue of the Holocaust — and perhaps uniquely on this issue — we are told: “Close the books, there will be no more learning, no more discussion, no more questions. Not only will no questions be tolerated, but anyone who dares to ask such questions will be slandered and viciously attacked.”

Now as someone who believes that part of being human is to learn something new everyday, I respond: “How dare you tell me there will be no more learning?” The establishment that maintains the Holocaust story on life support admits that there is no direct proof of homicidal gassings. No order, no document, no pictures, only “eyewitnesses.”

And what of these eyewitnesses? The Holocaust lobby insists that this is convincing evidence. But what kind of evidence is this? In some European countries, a person who denies the gas chambers can be jailed, fined, or physically attacked. He might lose his job, his standing in the community, maybe even his life. Something similar has happened in Canada. In the United States, he might be attacked and vilified. And if he says that he comes by his knowledge from first-hand experience — in other words from helping to run the camps during the war years — then he might easily find himself deported to Israel or eastern Europe, where he might be sentenced to death or at least stripped of his US citizenship and denied due process.

In other words, we only hear of eyewitnesses from one side because witnesses from the other side have been strong-armed into silence. This is governmental coercion of the worst kind, and on a worldwide scale no less. One kind of eyewitness is encouraged, the other is warned that his words might lead to deportation, imprisonment, loss of livelihood, property, and even life. Some great victory for the Holocaust lobby: The game has been fixed!

Let people speak! If only no one else, I demand this for my own sake. I want to know what happened during World War Two, and yet how can I if those who might have firsthand knowledge are told : “Speak only the official line, or suffer the consequences.” I insist on my human right to learn.

There are those who say, “Okay, so maybe the Holocaust is a bit exaggerated, but do we really want to destabilize society by openly talking about all this, possibly encouraging hostility against Jews?” This raises an important philosophical question: Do you believe mankind to be so inherently cruel and stupid that people must be lied to in order to make them behave? If so, then the lies you tell them are only a small bandage to cover up a much greater evil: Lack of confidence in mankind’s ability to handle the truth. And if you truly believe that people cannot handle the truth, but instead need a “Big Brother” to handle it for them, then surely democracy is the most dangerous thing on earth.

Of course, I understand that people can be cruel and stupid, but I also believe in the human ability to learn, and to grow with each new piece of knowledge. Rather than censor information that we subjectively perceive to be “dangerous,” we should teach our children to think critically, to remain open-minded, and to look for truth rather than cling to emotionally appealing falsehoods.

And that is just about all we can do: teach our children and hope for the best, realizing that people cannot be programmed like robots. Eighty years of failed Communism should have taught us that. To use the power of the state to force men to be what the state defines as “good” creates a world far more hellish than the one that is supposedly being prevented. I would rather live in a world where people are free to be cruel and stupid than one in which “goodness” is enforced at gun point.

Keep in mind also that truth, objective truth, does not need threats and intimidation to prevail. We Holocaust Revisionists are often likened to those who said that the earth was flat. But just the reverse is true: It is the other side that acts like a Holy Inquisition, institutionalizing one viewpoint and punishing heretics. Remember: We only accepted that the earth is round after the debate was opened. And since then, the round-earth adherents have not needed false news law s, hate crimes laws, and libel or slander laws to protect the truthfulness of their view. Likewise, all we ask is that the Holocaust story either stand or fall according to the evidence — or lack of it.

While we Holocaust Revisionists sit on a wealth of wonderfully heretical information, can we get it out to the general public? Can we “mainstream” Holocaust Revisionism before it’s too late, that is to say, before all those who have firsthand information of what really happened die off entirely?

As a Jew, it would be wrong for me not to mention the issue of Jewish influence. Influence is a very strange thing. People spend so much time and energy to acquire it and then an equal amount of time and energy denying they have it. Jewish influence does exist. If it didn’t, why would billions of dollars be spent annually by Jewish lobbying groups? That money isn’t to pay for dance lessons for Senators and Congressmen, of course, it’s for influence. Jews must come to terms with the fact that they are not only a powerful and influential group, but have responsibilities that come with that — particularly the responsibility not to abuse power, or, more specifically, to avoid abusing people with that power.

It is a testament to the strength of Revisionist research and scholarship, and to Revisionist tenacity, that all the Jewish influence in the world has not erased this movement. Despite the best efforts of our most clever and determined adversaries, Revisionist books are still read, and the Institute for Historical Review continues to function.

But how much progress are we really making in getting our message to the public? Unfortunately, we’ve been making only tiny *censored*cat steps. I am not a patient man. Every day I fool myself into thinking that I can be patient — I can’t. I don’t want to be a guerilla fighter of the political underground for the rest of my life. The time has come, indeed has never been better, to take Revisionist scholarship to the rest of the world, and if the powers that be try to stop us, we either go around them or if necessary , we go right through them.

Two more years! That’s my new motto. In two years’ time, Holocaust Revisionism should be in the mainstream, squarely in the public eye.

I am sure that we will eventually succeed in getting out our message. Information can be suppressed for just so long. But that’s not enough for me. It’s not enough that fellow Revisionists recognize Professor Faurisson’s scholarship for the brilliant work it is. I want it to be widely recognized as such, and in his lifetime!

So let’s make a concerted effort. Mindful of the recent Jewish New Year, I hereby make a Jewish New Year’s resolution: Two more years! No more sitting in the back of the ideological bus. We’re loud, we’re proud, and best of all, we’re right!


David Cole was raised and educated in Los Angeles, where he lives and works. Because of his support for Holocaust Revisionism, he was assaulted during a meeting at the University of California at Los Angeles on January 22, 1992 by thugs of the Jewish Defense League (JDL), who hit him in the face and bloodied his nose. JDL leader Irv Rubin also tried to push him down a flight of stairs. Later the JDL would make death threats against David and his family causing him to issue a letter of “recantation.”

The above article can be found here: A Jewish Revisionist’s Visit to Auschwitz



The David Cole/JDL affair

On January 2, 1998, David Cole renounced Holocaust revisionism and all of the work that he had done for the cause of historical truth. Many people are wondering what happened. What brought on this change of heart? From all appearances it was a result of threats made against him by the Jewish Defense League (JDL).

In response to his public comments that there are serious flaws in the popularly accepted quasi-historical accounts of the Holocaust, they launched a campaign of hate against him that produced an old-fashioned signed statement of recantation. This campaign included a vicious and threatening diatribe, “Monstrous Traitor,” that offered a reward for his home address and was posted on the JDL website for some weeks or months. When Cole offered them a statement of reversal of the offending opinions, they took down the page aimed at inciting violence toward him and replaced it with the statement of acceptable thought. The JDL used terror tactics openly, and it worked.

Intolerance, threats and force are not typically a good atmosphere in which to find truth. Irrespective of this encounter with intellectual muggers, his work will stand or fall on its own merits in the long term. The film “David Cole interviews Dr. Franciszek Piper” is every bit as valid now as it was prior to the strong-arm intimidation of the man who made it.

The conclusions of David Cole’s film have been confirmed recently in Robert Jan Van Pelt and Deborah Dwork’s, “Auschwitz: 1270 to the Present.” According to Van Pelt and Dwork: “Visitors [to Auschwitz] are not told that the crematorium they see is largely a postwar reconstruction.” (p.363)

CODOH awaits Van Pelt and Dwork’s retraction, but will not be holding its breath in the meantime.


Related Articles:

“In regard to anything relating to the Middle East or Jewish subjects, the USA has many of the characteristics of a totalitarian country and many of the groups who call themselves ‘liberal’ or ‘peace camp’ or ‘radical’ are on that subject the most intolerant, the most totalitarian, the most dishonest and racist. . . . A totalitarian society not only does not tolerate a freedom of opinion, but it cultivates by all means in its power a ‘received opinion,’ which all have to parrot, not only without checking it, but often without any understanding of what it means.

“Perhaps some Americans will think that I exaggerate. But the danger of a totalitarian regime was always thought to be exaggerated before it arrived. Only afterwards, when it was too late, was it found that the society was already totalitarian in some aspects which were merely enlarged.

“There is only one sure antidote to the totalitarian danger: To fight all aspects of totalitarianism in all the parts of one’s society and to follow always the dictum of Socrates that the unexamined life is not worth living, and therefore with the utmost freedom and without fear of any blackmail to examine everything in the light of a universal concept of justice, applicable equally to all human beings.”

— Israeli historian and researcher Israel Shahak

“In forging their own brand of totalitarianism in the US, the Zionists continue to manipulate the victims of the Nazi holocaust as their chief weapon.”

— Alfred Lilienthal, Commentary

 

While this page is ostensibly about David Cole, his case really only serves as an illustration of a problem seldom discussed in public, and therefore not known to most of the public. Cole’s experience demonstrates graphically a fairly benign instance of the methods used around the world, day in and day out, to relentlessly and ruthlessly quash attempts by honest people to examine in detail a historical event of legitimate interest to a great many, if not all people in the West and Middle East. The concern about this is not mollified by the fact that many of those who engage in this program of intimidation through slander, mass propaganda and physical threats do so in sincerity, with a firm conviction that what they do has a greater good which more than justifies its wrongs. We ignore these wrongs at the risk of our legitimate rule of law and our own freedoms. The seeming dichotomy of great wars fought by opposing religions who both seek to convey the love of their God to all people, and who will slaughter millions of them to do that, is no mystery if you look at it from the zealot’s or fanatic’s perspective. The fact that others do not see the greater good at work is due to their own spiritual shortcomings he tells himself, and in the land of the heathen you do what you must to survive and keep the faith. Whatever you must.

Our position on this affliction of the fanatic is a simple one. The one universal good that outweighs all others must be a person’s right to follow any life path they choose so long as they offer no infringement on the rights of others. Our Declaration of Independence speaks of the inalienable rights we all have to our lives, liberty and pursuit of happiness, which is to say the sanctity of our own bodies, freedom of movement and association, and freedom of thought. Those who seek to deprive others of any of these outside the unfortunate but necessary repressions of the State we call justice earn for themselves what they gave. The principle is that of equity at its most basic level. As you deprive others of their liberty, so shall society see that you are deprived in equal measure, because there is no justification for any individual to take away any other individual’s freedoms, even to the smallest part. That power is and must be confined to our mechanisms of government.

The right to harbor unpopular, even intolerant beliefs, and the right to express them are protected by the Constitution, which spells out the unqualified right of all Americans to unfettered freedom of speech. But intimidation aimed at silencing speech, and thus infringing on that right, be it through slander, threats or force, is not so protected. In fact, people who used those exact methods of intimidation to keep blacks from voting found themselves jailed for conspiring to deprive others of their lawful civil rights.

The basis for this was a post-Civil War law passed to address widespread abuses of that kind. That law has expanded quite liberally to include now a variegated collection of non-enumerated rights, such as going to school or working at a job, free of harassment aimed at depriving you of those opportunities. It is not necessary to argue about whether everything falling under this aegis is a legitimate “right” in order to see the illegitimacy of how it is applied, because we will look in a direction that should be a given, toward the inarguable central rights, to see how they fare in the protection game.

It is fashionable now to approve the increasing scope of civil rights law, yet some attempt to make the case that applying it to portions of the Bill of Rights is not proper or not needed. A common rationale is that differences of opinion are private matters that government should not, cannot be involved in. A valid point when only differences of opinion are present, invalid when coercion is applied to limit or deny freedom of speech or deprive someone of their livelihood (such as black-balling dissident authors in the publishing industry). Once coercion enters, the argument is without logic, for if government oversight is valid for protecting any one right then it is valid for all. Politically selected application of justice is a repugnant practice that coarsens and weakens all involved.

Yet that is exactly what is taking place in this country today. Holding generally unpopular views on a number of topical subjects can put you in a class where Justice is truly blindfolded. No one seems to see the blatant abuses committed by those who oppose those views, including vicious beatings on the steps of courthouses, arson, letter-bombs, terrorizing with threats of harm. If you happen to be pushing a topic deemed by popular opinion to be so lacking in merit that it somehow poses a danger to the citizenry, you will find little interest on the part of authorities to address these crimes or lessen their occurrence. This is nothing less than state and public sanctioned vigilantism, or terrorism, and it has no place in societies that would call themselves civilized

One of the hottest areas for this is Holocaust historical revisionism, which to a newcomer seems an oddity. (Emotions run high over history ?? That’s the class you sleep in.) Attempts to point out glaring inconsistencies in the popular and now institutionalized account bring howls of rage from those who disagree. If the initial rage isn’t enough to make someone cease and desist (which it often is), then the ante is raised and will keep on being raised to whatever level is needed to silence the target. It may start with simple slander, automatic and unfounded labels of “anti-Semite”, “denier”, “hater”, “Nazi” and more are pasted on with the often expressed intent of destroying resolve and/or career, legitimate aims because the target is deemed “unfit” to be a member of any decent society. Those who don’t give up are then marginalized by campaigns to convince the public of their evil and 100% erroneous views, their universally undesirable nature. When these aren’t effective enough, then threats of injury or death are employed, such as with David Cole. At the extreme end, people are killed, like American-Arab peace activist Sami Odeh, murdered by a letter-bomb of suspected Zionist origin.

The open existence of and tolerance shown for this despicable practice fouls our national social fabric immensely. This is a major thing we’d like to see the public become aware of and hopefully say, “You know, this seems pretty un-American to me. And even if I’m wrong about that, it sucks to allow people to hurt others because they don’t like their opinions. And I believe government should give some attention to what’s going on.” The rest of our job would then be very easy, as frightened people with much knowledge of the truth of the matter could at last speak openly. We might turn out to be right, and we might be wrong. But it would be settled quickly and we could quit hassling about it. Those who claim their feelings are so tender that this can’t be allowed would be over it before you know it, and life would go on a little more peacefully.

If getting rid of a death-threat by giving in to coercion was what it took for Cole to regain peace of mind, we understand and neither resent nor condemn, only empathize. No one should be faced with an ultimatum to choose between their beliefs and their personal safety in the United States of America. That is a despicable, and in our minds, criminal affair.

We are all forced to recite a government mandated litany affirming a nonsensical collective belief in non-existent Arab terrorists every time we board an airplane. While we docilely play these sheep-like roles in the instilment of our own “good think,” the real terrorists operate publicly and unhindered because they belong to any of a number of designated groups whose excesses one is forbidden to criticize, however legitimately or temperately.

It is disturbing to realize how very far this nation, and much of the Western world, has fallen from the fiery spirit which threw off the yokes of ancient tyrannies in the 18th and 19th centuries, ushering in the Age of Enlightenment. That light now dims because we are all too willing to take “Give me liberty or give me death!” and Newspeak convert it to, “Give me liberty at any cost except personal discomfort or civic involvement.” This is how it comes to be that good men stand and say nothing, how in fact we came to be where we are now.

But let us return to the matter at hand, David Cole’s run-in with the dark side of the strident opposition to open examination of a historical issue. Addressing the possibility that this complete reversal of belief was sincere, then we hope David Cole is successful in his new endeavors whatever they may be. Perhaps we’ll meet on opposite sides in some future debate forum. That would be a treat, because David was always a worthy opponent; quick, well informed, and with a gift for public speaking. He’ll do well in any situation, because he has enough intelligence to sort truth from pretense all by himself.

As long as the moral vigilantes and intellectual terrorists among us allow him to, that is.

— David Thomas 1/18/98

The above article can be found here: The David Cole / JDL Affair



‘David Cole forced to recant his revisionist views

 

What they do to revisionists – A page which recounts case after case of revisionists being attacked for their views.

If you question any part of the Holocaust story, they will call you a “Holocaust denier,” implying that you deny that anything happened, and thus implying that you are either dishonest or insane, or both. They will say that your revisionist arguments are “hate speech,” even though it’s all too obvious where the hate is really coming from.

And they don’t just talk. They beat revisionists up, blow up their cars, burn their homes, put them in jail, and ruin their careers. There have been numerous assassination attempts, one of which was successful: Francois Duprat was killed by a car bomb.

The Töben case — Dr. Fredrick Töben, founder of the Adelaide Institute, was found guilty of “denying the Holocaust.” However, the decision set an important precedent: The judge declared that German law has no jurisdiction over Töben’s on-line writings or publications. The verdict of “guilty” was based only on material he had physically distributed in Germany. This means, for example, that I could not be prosecuted for this web site. So far, so good. That’s a step in the right direction.

Nevertheless, the principle that “the truth of the statement is not a defense” still stands. In Germany, it is illegal to say that there was no gas chamber at Auschwitz, and someone who is charged with this “crime” cannot defend himself, since doing so would require asserting, in court, that there was no gas chamber, and the defendant could be charged again. Not only that, his lawyer could be prosecuted for making illegal statements in his defense.

As George Orwell said, the right to say that 2 + 2 = 4 is fundamental. Given that, everything else follows. We still don’t have that right.


Here is the story of David Cole, as told in nine installments of Ingrid Rimland’s column on the Zündel site: — As of 6/14/2010, the whole series can be found here. There is no guarantee that that link will remain valid.

Part 1 — Ernst Zündel writes,

I have some sad news to report. There has been another defection out of the Revisionist community. David Cole, a young Jew who in the past has done some remarkable Revisionist video recording and on-the-ground work, has crossed over and written a retraction…

David and I video-toured Auschwitz and Birkenau together, and it was an eery feeling for me at the time to have a young American Jew, half my age, explain on camera to me, the German, what he found was wrong with Auschwitz and the Holocaust mass gassing claims in that horror theme park.

David also appeared in Germany on the same platform with me and spoke with courage and conviction about the many inconsistencies of Auschwitz, while German police were present in the hall. He did not flinch or shirk the issues. Truth was Truth to him, and he defended it, regardless of the costs. (…)

I was, by then, a battle-scarred Revisionist veteran, possibly showing the first signs of battle fatigue after going flat out for years in Holocaust trial after Holocaust trial. I remember feeling possibly a little shamed but in any case re-invigorated by the dynamism of this young man.

Part 2 — Some background material: Bradley Smith promotes David Cole’s video, and draws the wrath of ADL. David appears at a revisionist conference.

Part 3 — Excerpts from a letter posted on the JDL site:

What is a David Cole? Is it a sickness? Is it a mental disease? Is Cole merely a human parasite who clings to his ardent Nazi supporters and friends who back his ideas whole-heartedly? After all, this Cole mania that the media have played on, don’t you think it’s time that we flush this rotten, sick individual down the toilet, where the rest of the waste lies? One less David Cole in the world will certainly not end Jew-hatred, but it will have removed a dangerous parasitic, disease-ridden bacteria from infecting society.

Just as we must get rid of this monster, Cole, we must also get rid of the word “revisionism” from our vocabulary. This awful word and Cole, too, must be eliminated altogether. There is no argument. There needs to be no more debates, only the elimination of the Holocaust deniers…

JDL wants to know the location of Holocaust denier David Cole, pictured above. Anyone giving us his correct address will receive a monetary reward. Contact us through e-mail immediately if you have information leading to the current location of David Cole.

Part 4 — This page is about how Jewish organizations failed to come to David Cole’s defense. To me, the most interesting thing here is the quotation at the end: Edmund Burke wrote

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”

Part 5 — Excerpts from David Cole’s retraction:

I would like to state for the record that there is no question in my mind that during the Holocaust of Europe’s Jews during World War II, the Nazis employed gas chambers in an attempt to commit genocide against the Jews. At camps in both Eastern and Western Europe, Jews were murdered in gas chambers which employed such poison gases as Zyklon B and carbon monoxide (in the Auschwitz camp, for example, the gas chambers used Zyklon B). The evidence for this is overwhelming and unmistakable…

I now understand that I owe it to the people I wronged to make a forceful repudication [sic] of my earlier views. I also owe a very large apology, not only to the many people I enraged, and to the family and friends I hurt, but especially to the survivors of the Holocaust, who deserve only our respect and compassion, not re-victimization.

Therefore, to all of the above people, let me offer my most humble and very, very sincere apology. I am sorry for what (I) did, and I am sorry for the hurt I caused…

Part 6 — Ernst Zündel comments,

David has not been well lately, and his mother is apparently gravely ill, which might have been contributing factors in his abject rejection [sic] and apology to the leader of the JDL, Irv Rubin. David acts and talks like one of the accused at one of Stalin’s famous “Purge Trials” in the late 1930s – self-accusatory, groveling, profusely apologizing etc. A hallmark of Stalin’s victims!

Part 7 — From the comments on the CODOH site:

The funny thing about Cole’s retraction is that
in a cosmic way it simply confirms what
revisionists have been saying all along. For over
twenty years, revisionists have said that the
German confessions, wildly inaccurate and
contradictory, were given not so much in response
to direct physical torture as from the desire to
protect themselves and above all their families
from retaliation and hardship. For Cole’s
retraction, the JDL boasts that it was the result
of their previous page, and that Cole “was afraid
for his life and the relatives he supposedly is
taking care of.” So for those who didn’t believe it
possible that the Germans involved in the
concentration camps could have been intimidated
into making abject confessions, the idea is
strikingly confirmed by Cole’s retraction, and
furthermore the JDL is waving the proof right under
your nose.

Part 8 — Excerpts from another message by Ernst Zündel:

I am not a shrink. I have only seen it happen. I am not going to guess what went on in David’s mind and soul as he groped his way towards that fateful day when he must have picked up the phone or faxed to Irv Rubin, who had tormented and stalked him, until David broke down and notarized that statement to Rubin. I do not know what transpired in the months, weeks or days before. Therefore, I cannot judge. The two documents (the JDL death threat followed by David’s recanting) speak for themselves. Any normal, streetwise, or historically knowledgeable person can, and I am sure will, draw his own conclusions.

One observation and warning I must give to people, and it is simply this: The terror unleashed against a target will not stop by the act of recantation or retraction by the victim. That is only the beginning of the process, it is definitely not the end. After the confession or retraction has been extracted or leveraged out of the victim by the tormentors, there will come at first gentle and then ever more brazen and forcefully delivered requests and demands for other information – names of friends, collaborators, mailing lists, financial information, health status of former collaborators, sexual habits, drug or alcohol habits.

By then, the “recantee” is totally isolated, totally vulnerable, totally in the hands of the people he has recanted to – he has not a real friend left in the world, for his whole former network of colleagues, friends, co-workers and emotional support and infrastructure have disappeared, severed by his own action. Recanting might be considered by the individual a “brave act” at first, but it is nothing compared to what follows like a comet’s tail after that first fateful step. (…)

I still feel empathy for David Cole and wish him well… Many letters from Revisionists around the world in response to this development have shown me that they, too, treasure the memory of a brave young Jew who stood up to his own establishment – for as long as he had the strength to do it.

Part 9 — Some final comments by Ingrid Rimland:

A major strike was needed to stop Revisionism from gaining an intellectual foothold on college campuses, even if it meant a brazen threat of “eliminating” a gifted Revisionist speaker and writer who just happened to be a Jew…

One thing is clear: The enemy has bared its teeth. The doleful Elie Wiesel smile has all but disappeared.

 

The above article can be found here: David Cole forced to recant his revisionist views

 

Also see ‘David Cole: The truth behind the gates of Auschwitz’ here: http://800poundgorilla.100webspace.net/geeklog//staticpages/index.php?page=20090401185124248

WHO SPEAKS UP FOR HOLOCAUST SURVIVORS

Posted in Etc. on November 14, 2010 by The 800 Pound Gorilla

WHAT WOULD THE REAL CAMP SURVIVORS TELL US?

Veterans Today 

November 13, 2010

AS MANY AS 90% OF THOSE CLAIMING TO BE HOLOCAUST SURVIVORS MAY BE FRAUDS

By Gordon Duff STAFF WRITER/Senior Editor

Last week, 17 men were arrested in New York for defrauding Germany out of $42 million in payments to phony holocaust survivors.  Tens of thousands of American Jews had filed for pensions from Germany claiming to be concentration camp survivors.  All swore they had been in the camps, told stories about gas chambers, human skin lampshades and such but not a single one had been in a camp at all.  The state of Israel claims to have, alive today, nearly one million holocaust survivors.

As many as 90% of these may well be, not only frauds but many could easily be former concentration camp guards themselves, far more likely than surviving death camps.  What better place to hide than Israel?

With numbers of camp survivors going up each year, we tend to forget we are talking about death camps.  There were few survivors and most of them died immediately after the war.  Those alive were found dying and couldn’t be saved, and most of them weren’t Jews but rather Russians, Gypsies, Communists, trade unionists and anti-Fascists.

Look at the numbers.  There were only 5.3 million Jews listed as living in Europe, outside the USSR, in 1940.  In a rough average, 12 death camps, filled to the brim with gas chambers and crematoriums ran 24 hours a day for 1000 days.  Some are said, in testimony of literally thousands, to have killed from 17,000 to 20,000 per day.  Lets use the figure, 10,000 per day times 12 camps times 1000 days.

Where do a million survivors come from?  I can see a thousand, ten thousand but not 30,000 and certainly not the 15 million necessary to justify the current number of claimed survivors according to typical actuarial tables for healthy adults of the period, those who were not starved and tortured for years.  Look at Vietnam veterans.  Only 700,000 of 2.9 million survive 35 years after the war.  Something is wrong here.

STOLEN VALOR

There are laws in the United States that punish people who wear military medals they didn’t earn or claim other such honors.  When veterans discover someone claiming falsely to have served in war, that individual is arrested but also publicly humiliated.  They are hunted down like dogs.

There are concentration camp survivors living in America, people who suffered incomprehensibly at the hands of the Nazis.  However, there are also, in America we now know, tens of thousands or more who claim falsely to be of the heroic numbers from that period and numbers inside Israel that are unimaginable.  Why are these people not punished?

As a Vietnam veteran, I share a common problem with others.  For 4 decades, I met veteran after veteran, many were children when the war ended, but each claims some honor tied to military service based on a movie or television show.  I have met, over the years, hundreds of such individuals, many at meetings of veterans organizations.  I don’t find it horrible or destructive but it is disturbing and I won’t even remotely begin comparing service in Vietnam with the experience of a death camp.

LAST WEEK

Last week, authorities announced that those who had wrongly filed for benefits had been fooled somehow.  I can see fooling someone as to whether they had seen a televisions show or not but there is only one American I can think of who imagined he had been in a death camp who hadn’t and that was President Ronald Reagan and he only claimed to have visited.  Reagan’s error was based on dementia, not profit or gain.  Not it seems, not only do we have tens of thousands of people who have a single false memory, they seem to remember years of horror, incredible detail and all of it is utterly false.  There is no comparison, not with Reagan, not with Vietnam veterans, not with anyone.

Reagan’s error, despite he respect he is held in and his obvious illness, was been used to defame him countless times.  His error was not only honest but done in the context of human feeling.  How many of the others are lying, not only for financial gain but for something less wholesome?

Why then, in the name of all that is holy, did the authorities and news media immediately write this off as tens of thousands of cases of minor lapses in judgement rather than one of the most horrible moral crimes of all time?

There is no greater disrespect for a holocaust victim than this.

REVISIONISTS AND DENIERS

Two thousand people in Europe are in prison today for questioning some part, no matter how minor, of the holocaust.  The official story of the holocaust is a compendium of testimony of several hundred thousand people as there was little physical evidence left at the end of the war.  Some facilities were reconstructed based on testimony, for historical perspective but in general, it is believed that the Germans destroyed all evidence of death camps and mass graves when they learned they were losing the war.

Thousands of those who find this explanation unsatisfactory and had chosen to disagree, some noted historians, some scientists and some simple troublemakers and activists, have been imprisoned.  At the trials, holocaust victims claimed that such questioning harmed them irreparably.  However, not one holocaust victim has ever spoken up about the endless numbers of phony holocaust victims who besmirch them every day and have for nearly 65 years.  Why is that?

One thing the revisionists claim is that almost every story from the holocaust, including notable books and even world famous holocaust survivors are, in actuality, the worst phonies of all.  The analogy of the “phony veteran” is applicable here.  After each war, endless numbers of those, who for reasons legitimate or not, felt their contribution to the war effort was less than honorable or noteworthy, claim accomplishments they  are undeserving of.  It is also known that combat veterans are seldom seen on bar stools at service organizations talking about heroic exploits.

In fact, as Americans are learning more and more each day, combat veterans have great difficulty surviving coming home and are often homeless, incarcerated and commit suicide in huge numbers.  It would be easy to extrapolate the same for holocaust survivors.  There is no greater potential cause of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder in the history of mankind than the concentration camps of World War 2.  Not only would survivors kill themselves out of guilt, most would suffer greatly shortened lifespans.  This has been amazingly well documented.

This being the case, only a few hundred holocaust survivors could be alive today, not the one million living in Israel.

HONESTY AND TRUTH

Anyone imprisoned wrongly, anyone whose family was killed or whose assets were seized illegally, should be compensated.  Anyone wrongly claiming to be part of a group they are not, one this unique in the history of mankind, deserves punishment.  Why is this not done?  Why is there no normal social pressure to “out” these people and defend the honor of holocaust survivors?

Has anyone ever asked a real holocaust survivor what it is like to see phonies continually on television talking about the holocaust?  Do they forgive?  We will never know, as it seems nobody cares about real holocaust survivors.  The holocaust is brought up when Israel bombs a school or asks for foreign aid but as for the people themselves, these misuses of the suffering of some cheapen human misery and the human condition.

NEVER AGAIN, WHAT DOES IT REALLY MEAN?

If one child was taken away, died in a gas chamber, typhus, shot, it doesn’t matter, one life, this is a holocaust.  If it was done because of race, the crime is doubly evil in nature.   The lesson of “never again” was meant to be a lesson for all mankind to treat every single life with the same honor and respect, not to use the suffering of some as an excuse for financial crime, self delusion or outrageous acts of aggression.

Instead, the holocaust has become theatre, a stage for two sides to debate, to play, to “lawyer” the world to death.  Some feel they should fight the holocaust because it has become a tool of evil.  Some defend it because it is a tool of evil also but they believe the world is evil and only evil men are meant to survive.

Picture the death of a single child.  Then go to the trial of a “holocaust denier.”  Who is evil?  Who is good?  Do any of them ever think of the single child or only how it died, who signed what or how many Palestinian children could be murdered just like that child, in that child’s name perhaps?

THE REAL WAR

Why ask the question if 6 million Jews died?  It is equally possible that 6 million Germans died in the Ukraine and Europe, not soldiers, not in air raids, but in a holocaust type extinction.  This is not talked of but it happened.  All of us, Jews, Germans, the west, all of us, were silent when Josef Stalin killed twice that number or more.  It started before the war and continued after.  The human suffering caused by Stalin was immeasurable but is never spoken of, barely touched on except by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn and now his books are banned.  They fail to conform to popular mythology.

There was nothing pure about the real war as there is nothing pure about wars today.  The myths we may or may not make up to protect some are never really to protect anyone.  The weak and vulnerable are never protected, only the powerful.  This is how the powerful become such and remain that way.  We are such liars.

Nobody ever cared about the holocaust survivors only what using their suffering would bring in honor and riches.  Is this the truth?  Is this the partial truth?  Has anyone asked the hard questions, the real questions?  Isn’t it time that all the survivors got together?  Some voice is needed, a voice that can say “never again’ with authority.

But..”never again”…what?

The above article can be found at: GORDON DUFF: WHO SPEAKS UP FOR HOLOCAUST SURVIVORS

Jesus (peace be upon him) in the Quran and the Talmud

Posted in Etc. on October 19, 2010 by The 800 Pound Gorilla

In his seminal Cairo speech in the summer of 2009, US President (and Zionist front-man) Barack Obama quoted from the respective holy books of the world’s three great monotheistic faiths: Judaism, Christianity and Islam.

The Holy Quran tells us, ‘Mankind, we have created you male and a female. And we have made you into nations and tribes so that you may know one another,'” Obama declared. “The Talmud tells us, ‘The whole of the Torah is for the purpose of promoting peace.’ The Holy Bible tells us, ‘Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.'”

While most Christians, of course, know what the Bible’s New Testament has to say about Jesus, they are often woefully unaware of how he is depicted in the books of the other two faiths.

Those who would call themselves ‘Christian-Zionists’ or ‘Judeo-Christians’ will be shocked to discover that the Muslim Quran treats the figure of Jesus (and his mother, Mary) with the utmost reverence as a prophet of God; while the Jewish Talmud — by the starkest of contrasts — treats Jesus and his mother with a degree of hatred that can only be described as psychotic.

On a Mainstream Jewish site, called “Judaism 101″ I was surprised to see what they had under the section “What does the Talmud say about Jesus?”:

” Rambam and many other prominent Jewish scholars believed that the stories of Jesus are based on Yeshu ben Pandeira, also known as Yeshu ha-Notzri (“Jesus the Branch,” a reference to Isaiah 11:1, a passage about the messiah).”

The position of the Talmud in the Judaeic tradition:

The Talmud is probably the most important Jewish book, even more important than the Bible, even though the Bible is older and holier. The Jewish way of doing things (halakhah) is based on the Talmud much more than on the Bible. Many of the ideas and stories of Jewish life come to us from the Talmud.”

(KOLEL: The Adult Centre for Liberal Jewish Learning)

“The Talmud was created by the Jewish people and the Talmud has, in turn, molded them as a nation.”

“… Talmud constitute the backbone of diverse Jewish knowledge..”

(Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz)

The Talmud on Jesus

“The Talmud claims that this Yeshu was the son of a Jewish woman named Miriam (Mary) who was betrothed to a carpenter (more accurately, their marriage was in the stage of kiddushin, where she is legally his wife but not yet living with him or having sexual relations with him). She was either raped or voluntarily slept with a Greek or Roman soldier known as Pandeira, and Yeshu was the product of that union. Because of the status of Miriam’s marriage, Yeshu is considered to be a mamzer (usually mistranslated as “bastard”, it means the product of an adulterous or incestuous relationship). Some say that he was also a ben-niddah (conceived through intercourse with a woman in a state of menstrual impurity, which is also said to leave a stain on the offspring). The Talmud describes Yeshu as a heretic who dabbled in sorcery and lead the people astray (into idolatry). He was stoned to death by the Sanhedrin for his crimes, and in accordance with the procedure for heretics, his dead body was hung in a tree until nightfall after his death.

Were Jesus and Yeshu the same person? Many Jewish sages in history believed so.”

(http://www.jewfaq.org/looking4.htm )

“… the Jewish Encyclopœdia admits that Jewish legends concerning Jesus are found in the Talmud and Midrash and in ” the life of Jesus ( Toledot Yeshu) that originated in the Middle Ages. It is the tendency of all these sources to belittlethe person of Jesus by ascribing to Him illegitimate birth, magic, and a shameful death. “

Jewish Encyclopædia, article on Jesus; as Cited in: Nesta H. Webster,” Secret Societies and Subversive Movements”, p. 20; Omni Publications, 1964

The following are a couple of quotes from the Talmud :

In Schabbath, 104b :

“They, [the Elders] said to him [Eliezer]: “He(Jesus) was a fool, and no one pays attention to fools.”

book Zohar, III, (282) :

“Jesus died like a beast and was buried in that “dirt heap…where they throw the dead bodies of dogs and asses, and where the sons of Esau [the Christians] and of Ismael [the Turks], also Jesus and Mahommed, uncircumcized and unclean like dead dogs, are buried.”

The second quote has not just attacked Jesus a.s. but also Muhammad s.a.w. Nastaghfirullah!. There is no need to quote further filthy insults against God’s chosen ones. Thus far, the quotes provided are more than sufficient.

If a Christian is reading this, we would like them to contrast this with what the Qu’ran has to say about Jesus a.s.:

From Surah Maryam/Mary, Chapter 19

019.016
And make mention of Mary in the Scripture, when she had withdrawn from her people to a chamber looking East,
019.017
And had chosen seclusion from them. Then We sent unto her Our Spirit and it assumed for her the likeness of a perfect man.
019.018
She said: Lo! I seek refuge in the Beneficent One from thee, if thou art Allah (SWT)-fearing.
019.019
He said: I am only a messenger of thy Lord, that I may bestow on thee a faultless son.
19.020
She said: How can I have a son when no mortal hath touched me, neither have I been unchaste?
019.021
He said: So (it will be). Thy Lord saith: It is easy for Me. And (it will be) that We may make of him a revelation for mankind and a mercy from Us, and it is a thing ordained.
019.022
And she conceived him, and she withdrew with him to a far place.
019.023
And the pangs of childbirth drove her unto the trunk of the palm-tree. She said: Oh, would that I had died ere this and had become a thing of naught, forgotten!
019.024
Then (one) cried unto her from below her, saying: Grieve not! Thy Lord hath placed a rivulet beneath thee,
019.025
And shake the trunk of the palm-tree toward thee, thou wilt cause ripe dates to fall upon thee.
019.026
So eat and drink and be consoled. And if thou meetest any mortal, say: Lo! I have vowed a fast unto the Beneficent, and may not speak this day to any mortal.
019.027
Then she brought him to her own folk, carrying him. They said: O Mary! Thou hast come with an amazing thing.
019.028
O sister of Aaron! Thy father was not a wicked man nor was thy mother a harlot.
019.029
Then she pointed to him. They said: How can we talk to one who is in the cradle, a young boy?
019.030
He spoke: Lo! I am the slave of Allah (SWT). He hath given me the Scripture and hath appointed me a Prophet,
019.031
And hath made me blessed wheresoever I may be, and hath enjoined upon me prayer and almsgiving so long as I remain alive,
019.032
And (hath made me) dutiful toward her who bore me, and hath not made me arrogant, unblest.
019.033
Peace on me the day I was born, and the day I die, and the day I shall be raised alive!
019.034
Such was Jesus, son of Mary: (this is) a statement of the truth concerning which they doubt.

Some  Hadiths on Jesus a.s. :

“What a sweet living it will be after the descent of Christ! What a sweet living it will be after the descent of Christ! The sky will be permitted to rain, and the earth will be permitted to grow plants, so that even if you were to sow your seed on a solid smooth rock, it would grow. And there will be no greed and no envy and no hatred, so that one will pass by a lion and it will not hurt him, and would step on a snake and it will not harm him. There will be no greed, no envy, and no hatred.” (Sahih Al-Jami’, 3919)

“The best of the women of the world are: Mary the daughter of Imran, Khadeejah the daughter of Khuwailed, Fatimah the daughter of Muhammad, and Aasia the wife of Pharaoh.” (Sahih Al-Jami’, 3328)

“The Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, called Fatimah on the day of The Opening of Mecca and spoke to her in secret, and she cried. Then he spoke to her and she smiled. Then when the Prophet died, I asked her about the reason for her cry and smile, and she said,’The Prophet s.a.w., told me that he is going to die, so I cried. Then he told me that I am the best of the wimen of paradise, except for Mary the daughter of Imran, and I smiled.’ “ ( Sahih Al-Tirmidhi, 3873)

“Whoever would be pleased to look at the humility of Jesus, should look at Abu Thar.” ( Sahih Al-Jami’, 3181)

“The one who believes in Jesus and believes in me(Muhammad) shall have two rewards.” (Sahih Bukhari, 3446)

Jesus Christ a.s. or Isa Al-Masih a.s. holds an esteemed position in Islam. Unfortunately, many Christians today such as the late Rev. Jerry Falwell are more prepared to support Jews than Muslims. They would not hesitate to insult, berate and condemn Muslims who love and respect Jesus a.s. while joining forces with the Jews any day of the week (Zionists in particular) who clearly bash and curse their “Lord and Master”. Isn’t it ironic?

The above article can be found here: Jewish vs. Muslim view on Jesus a.s.

JESUS, THE SON OF MARY (peace be upon them)
Verses From The Glorious Quran

He Shall Speak to the People in Childhood and in Maturity

Quran 3:45-51   Surah Ale-‘Imran (The Family of ‘Imran)
Behold! the angels said “O Mary! Allah giveth thee glad tidings of a Word from Him: his name will be Christ (Maseeh) Jesus the son of Mary held in honor in this world and the Hereafter and of (the company of) those nearest to Allah.
“He shall speak to the people in childhood and in maturity and he shall be (of the company) of the righteous.”
She said: “O my Lord! how shall I have a son when no man hath touched me?” He said: “Even so: Allah createth what He willeth; when He hath decreed a plan He but saith to it ‘Be’ and it is!
“And Allah will teach him the Book and Wisdom the Law and the Gospel.
“And (appoint him) an Apostle to the Children of Israel (with this message): I have come to you with a sign from your Lord in that I make for you out of clay as it were the figure of a bird and breathe into it and it becomes a bird by Allah’s leave; and I heal those born blind and the lepers and I quicken the dead by Allah’s leave; and I declare to you what ye eat and what ye store in your houses. Surely therein is a Sign for you if ye did believe.
“(I have come to you) to attest the Law which was before me and to make lawful to you part of what was (before) forbidden to you; I have come to you with a Sign from your Lord. So fear Allah and obey me.
“It is Allah who is my Lord and your Lord; then worship Him. This is a way that is straight.”

Mary, the Daughter of ‘Imran, Guarded Her Chastity

Quran 66:11-12   Surah At-Tahrim (Banning)
And Allah sets forth as an example to those who believe the wife of Pharaoh: Behold she said: “O my Lord! build for me in nearness to Thee a mansion in the Garden and save me from Pharaoh and his doings and save me from those that do wrong”;
And Mary the daughter of ‘Imran who guarded her chastity; and We breathed into her (body) of Our spirit; and she testified to the truth of the words of her Lord and of His Revelations and was one of the devout (Servants).

The Similitude of Jesus Before Allah Is as That of Adam….”Be” and He Was

Quran 3:59-63   Surah Ale-‘Imran (The Family of ‘Imran)
This similitude of Jesus before Allah is as that of Adam: He created him from dust then said to him: “Be” and he was.
The truth (comes) from Allah alone; so be not of those who doubt.
If anyone disputes in this matter with thee now after (full) knowledge hath come to thee say: “Come! let us gather together our sons and your sons our women and your women ourselves and yourselves: then let us earnestly pray and invoke the curse of Allah on those who lie!”
This is the true account: there is no god except Allah; and Allah He is indeed the Exalted in Power the Wise.
But if they turn back Allah hath full knowledge of those who do mischief.

Allah Too Planned and the Best of Planners Is Allah

Quran 3:52-58   Surah Ale-‘Imran (The Family of ‘Imran)
When Jesus found unbelief on their part he said: “Who will be my helpers to (the work of) Allah?” Said the Disciples: “We are Allah’s helpers we believe in Allah and do thou bear witness that we are Muslims.
“Our Lord! we believe in what thou hast revealed and we follow the Apostle; then write us down among those who bear witness.”
And (then unbelievers) plotted and planned and Allah too planned and the best of planners is Allah.
Behold! Allah said: “O Jesus! I will take thee and raise thee to Myself and clear thee (of the falsehoods) of those who blaspheme; I will make those who follow thee superior to those who reject Faith to the Day of Resurrection; then shall ye all return unto Me and I will judge between you of the matters wherein ye dispute.

“As to those who reject faith I will punish them with terrible agony in this world and in the Hereafter nor will they have anyone to help.
“As to those who believe and work righteousness Allah will pay them (in full) their reward; but Allah loveth not those who do wrong.
“This is what We rehearse unto thee of the Signs and the Message of Wisdom.”

They Killed Him Not Nor Crucified Him

Quran 4:155-159   Surah An-Nisaa (The Women)
(They have incurred divine displeasure): in that they broke their Covenant: that they rejected the Signs of Allah; that they slew the Messengers in defiance of right; that they said “Our hearts are the wrappings (which preserve Allah’s Word; we need no more)”; nay Allah hath set the seal on their hearts for their blasphemy and little is it they believe.
That they rejected faith: that they uttered against Mary a grave false charge.
That they said (in boast) “We killed Christ (Maseeh) Jesus the son of Mary the Apostle of Allah”; but they killed him not nor crucified him but so it was made to appear to them and those who differ therein are full of doubts with no (certain) knowledge but only conjecture to follow for of a surety they killed him not.
Nay Allah raised him up unto Himself; and Allah is Exalted in Power Wise.
And there is none of the People of the Book but must believe in him before his death; and on the Day of Judgment He will be a witness against them.

Jesus Shall Be a Sign for the Coming of the Hour of Judgment

Quran 43:57-67   Surah Az-Zukhruf (Gold Adornments)
When (Jesus) the son of Mary is held up as an example behold thy people raise a clamor thereat (in ridicule)!
And they say ” Are Our gods best or He?” This they set forth to thee only by way of disputation: yea they are a contentious people.
He was no more than a servant: We granted Our favor to him and We made him an example to the Children of Israel.
And if it were Our Will We could make angels from amongst you succeeding each other on the earth.
And (Jesus) shall be a Sign (for the coming of) the Hour (of Judgment): therefore have no doubt about the (Hour) but follow ye Me: this is a Straight Way.
Let not the Evil One hinder you: for he is to you an enemy avowed.
When Jesus came with Clear Signs he said: “Now have I come to you with Wisdom and in order to make clear to you some of the (points) on which ye dispute: therefore fear Allah and obey me.
“For Allah; He is my Lord and your Lord: so worship ye Him: this is a Straight Way.”
But sects from among themselves fell into disagreement: then woe to the wrongdoers from the Penalty of a Grievous Day!
Do they only wait for the Hour that it should come on them all of a sudden while they perceive not?
Friends on that Day will be foes one to another except the Righteous.

O Allah Our Lord! Send Us from Heaven a Table Set

Quran 5:112-115   Surah Al-Ma’idah (The Table Spread)
Behold! the disciples said: “O Jesus the son of Mary! can thy Lord send down to us a table set (with viands) from heaven?” Said Jesus: “Fear Allah if ye have faith.”
They said: “We only wish to eat thereof and satisfy our hearts and to know that thou hast indeed told us the truth; and that we ourselves may be witnesses to the miracle.
Said Jesus the son of Mary: “O Allah our Lord! send us from heaven a table set (with viands) that there may be for us for the first and the last of us a solemn festival and a sign from Thee; and provide for our sustenance for Thou art the best Sustainer (of our needs).
Allah said: “I will send it down unto you: but if any of you after that resisteth faith I will punish him with a penalty such as I have not inflicted on anyone among all the peoples.

Who Will Be My Helpers to the Work of Allah? Said the Disciples…

Quran 61:14   Surah As-Saff (The Ranks)
O ye who believe! be ye helpers of Allah: as said Jesus the son of Mary to the Disciples “Who will be my helpers to (the work of) Allah?” Said the Disciples “We are Allah’s helpers!” Then a portion of the Children of Israel believed and a portion disbelieved: but We gave power to those who believed against their enemies and they became the ones that prevailed.

Apostles Who Gave Good News as Well as Warning

Quran 4:163-170   Surah An-Nisaa (The Women)
We have sent thee (O Muhammad) inspiration as We sent it to Noah and the Messengers after him; We sent inspiration to Abraham Ismail Isaac Jacob and the Tribes to Jesus Job Jonah Aaron and Solomon and to David We gave the Psalms.
Of some Apostles We have already told thee the story; of others We have not; and to Moses Allah spoke direct.
Apostles who gave good news as well as warning that mankind after (the coming) of the Apostles should have no plea against Allah: for Allah is Exalted in Power Wise.
But Allah beareth witness that what He hath sent unto thee He hath sent from His (Own) Knowledge and the angels bear witness: but enough is Allah for a Witness.

Those who reject faith and keep off (men) from the way of Allah have verily strayed far far away from the path.
Those who reject faith and do wrong Allah will not forgive them nor guide them to any way.
Except the way of Hell to dwell therein for ever: and this to Allah is easy.
O mankind! the Apostle hath come to you in truth from Allah: believe in him: it is best for you. But if ye reject faith to Allah belong all things in the heavens and on earth: and Allah is All-Knowing All-Wise.


No Difference Between One and Another of the Prophets of Allah

Quran 2:135-141   Surah Al-Baqarah (The Heifer)
They say: “Become Jews or Christians if ye would be guided (to salvation).” Say thou: “Nay! (I would rather) the religion of Abraham the true and he joined not gods with Allah.”
Say ye: “We believe in Allah and the revelation given to us and to Abraham Isma’il Isaac Jacob and the Tribes and that given to Moses and Jesus and that given to (all) Prophets from their Lord we make no difference between one and another of them and we bow to Allah (in Islam).”

So if they believe as ye believe they are indeed on the right path; but if they turn back it is they who are in schism; but Allah will suffice thee as against them and He is the All-Hearing the All-Knowing.
(Our religion is) the baptism of Allah; and who can baptize better than Allah? and it is He whom we worship.
Say: Will ye dispute with us about Allah seeing that He is our Lord and your Lord; that we are responsible for our doings and ye for yours; and that we are sincere (in our faith) in Him?
Or do ye say that Abraham Isma’il Isaac Jacob and the Tribes were Jews or Christians? Say: Do ye know better than Allah? Ah! who is more unjust than those who conceal the testimony they have from Allah? But Allah is not unmindful of what ye do!
That was a people that hath passed away. They shall reap the fruit of what they did and ye of what ye do! Of their merits there is no question in your case.


The Same Religion as That Enjoined on Noah

Quran 42:12-14   Surah As-Shuraa (The Consultation)
To Him belong the keys of the heavens and the earth: He enlarges and restricts the Sustenance to whom He will: for He knows full well all things.
The same religion has He established for you as that which He enjoined on Noah–the which We have sent by inspiration to thee–and that which We enjoined on Abraham Moses and Jesus: Namely that ye should remain steadfast in Religion and make no divisions therein: to those who worship other things than Allah hard is the (way) to which thou callest them. Allah chooses to Himself those whom He pleases and guides to Himself those who turn (to Him).
And they became divided only after knowledge reached them through selfish envy as between themselves. Had it not been for a Word that went forth before from thy Lord (tending) to a Term appointed the matter would have been settled between them: but truly those who have inherited the Book after them are in suspicious (disquieting) doubt concerning it.


Allah Sent down Law (of Moses) and the Gospel (of Jesus) Before the Quran

Quran 3:1-6   Surah Ale-‘Imran (The Family of ‘Imran)
A.L.M.
Allah! there is no god but He the Living the Self-Subsisting Eternal.
It is He Who sent down to thee (step by step) in truth the Book confirming what went before it; and He sent down Law (of Moses) and the Gospel (of Jesus) before this as a guide to mankind and He sent down the Criterion (of judgment between right and wrong).
Then those who reject Faith in the Signs of Allah will suffer the severest penalty and Allah is Exalted in Might Lord of Retribution.
From Allah verily nothing is hidden on earth or in the heavens.
He it is Who shapes you in the wombs as He pleases. There is no god but He the Exalted in Might the Wise.


Allah Sent Jesus the Son of Mary Confirming the Law, Sent Him the Gospel

Quran 5:45-47   Surah Al-Ma’idah (The Table Spread)
We ordained therein for them: “Life for life eye for eye nose for nose ear for ear tooth for tooth and wounds equal for equal.” But if anyone remits the retaliation by way of charity it is an act of atonement for himself. And if any fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed they are (no better than) wrong-doers.
And in their footsteps We sent Jesus the son of Mary confirming the law that had come before him: We sent him the Gospel: therein was guidance and light and confirmation of the law that had come before him: a guidance and an admonition to those who fear Allah.
Let the people of the Gospel Judge by what Allah hath revealed therein. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed they are (no better than) those who rebel.


Clear Signs To Jesus the Son of Mary

Quran 2:253   Surah Al-Baqarah (The Heifer)
Those apostles We endowed with gifts some above others: to one of them Allah spoke; others He raised to degrees (of honor); to Jesus the son of Mary We gave clear (Signs) and strengthened him with the Holy Spirit. If Allah had so willed succeeding generations would not have fought among each other after clear (Signs) had come to them but they (chose) to wrangle some believing and others rejecting. If Allah had so willed they would not have fought each other; but Allah fulfilleth His plan.


Glad Tidings of an Apostle to Come after Me Whose Name Shall Be Ahmad

Quran 61:6-9   Surah As-Saff (The Ranks)
And remember Jesus the son of Mary said: “O Children of Israel! I am the apostle of Allah (sent) to you confirming the Law (which came) before me and giving glad Tidings of an Apostle to come after me whose name shall be Ahmad.” But when he came to them with Clear Signs they said “This is evident sorcery!”
Who doth greater wrong than one who invents falsehood against Allah even as he is being invited to Islam? And Allah guides not those who do wrong.

Their intention is to extinguish Allah’s Light (by blowing) with their mouths: but Allah will complete (the revelation of) His Light even though the Unbelievers may detest (it).
It is He Who has sent His Apostle with Guidance and the Religion of Truth that he may proclaim it over all religion even though the Pagans may detest (it).


Some Apostles You Called Impostors and Others You Slay

Quran 2:87-88   Surah Al-Baqarah (The Heifer)
We gave Moses the Book and followed him up with a succession of Apostles; We gave Jesus the son of Mary clear (Signs) and strengthened him with the holy spirit. Is it that whenever there comes to you an Apostle with what ye yourselves desire not ye are puffed up with pride? Some ye called impostors and others ye slay!
They say “Our hearts are the wrappings (which preserve Allah’s word we need no more).” Nay Allah’s curse is on them for their blasphemy; little is it they believe.


Prophets Zakariya, John, Jesus and Elias: All in the Ranks of the Righteous

Quran 6:83-89   Surah An-An’am (The Cattle)
That was the reasoning about Us which We gave to Abraham (to use) against his people: We raise whom We will degree after degree: for thy Lord is full of wisdom and knowledge.
We gave him Isaac and Jacob: all (three) We guided: and before him We guided Noah and before him We guided Noah and among his progeny David Solomon Job Joseph Moses and Aaron: thus do We reward those who do good:
And Zakariya and John and Jesus and Elias: all in the ranks of the righteous:
And Ismail and Elisha and Jonas and Lot: and to all We gave favor above the nations:
(To them) and to their fathers and progeny and brethren: We chose them. And We guided them to a straight way.
This is the guidance of Allah: He giveth that guidance to whom He pleaseth of His worshippers. If they were to join other gods with Him all that they did would be vain for them.
These were the men to whom We gave the Book and authority and prophethood: if these (their descendants) reject them behold! We shall entrust their charge to a new People who reject them not.


Glory to Thee! Never Could I Say What I Had No Right to Say

Quran 5:116-120   Surah Al-Ma’idah (The Table Spread)
And behold! Allah will say “O Jesus the son of Mary! didst thou say unto men ‘worship me and my mother as gods in derogation of Allah”? He will say: “Glory to Thee! never could I say what I had no right (to say). Had I said such a thing Thou wouldst indeed have known it. Thou knowest what is in my heart though I know not what is in Thine. For Thou knowest in full all that is hidden.
“Never said I to them anything except what Thou didst command me to say to wit ‘Worship Allah my Lord and your Lord’; and I was a witness over them whilst I dwelt amongst them; when Thou didst take me up thou wast the Watcher over them and Thou art a Witness to all things.
“If Thou dost punish them they are Thy servants: if Thou dost forgive them Thou art the Exalted the Wise.
Allah will say: “This is a day on which the truthful will profit from their truth: theirs are Gardens with rivers flowing beneath their eternal home: Allah well-pleased with them and they with Allah: that is the great Salvation (the fulfillment of all desires).
To Allah doth belong the dominion of the heavens and the earth and all that is therein and it is He who hath power over all things.


Say Not “Trinity”: Desist: it Will Be Better for You: for Allah Is One Allah

Quran 4:171-173   Surah An-Nisaa (The Women)
O people of the Book! commit no excesses in your religion: nor say of Allah aught but truth. Christ (Maseeh) Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) an Apostle of Allah and His Word which He bestowed on Mary and a Spirit proceeding from Him: so believe in Allah and His Apostles. Say not “Trinity”: desist: it will be better for you: for Allah is One Allah: glory be to him: (for Exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belong all things in the heavens and on earth. And enough is Allah as a Disposer of affairs.
Christ (Maseeh) disdaineth not to serve and worship Allah nor do the angels those nearest (to Allah): those who disdain His worship and are arrogant He will gather them all together unto himself to (answer).
But to those who believe and do deeds of righteousness He will give their (due) rewards and more out of His bounty: but those who are disdainful and arrogant He will punish with a grievous penalty; nor will they find besides Allah any to protect or help them.


They Do Blaspheme Who Say: “Allah Is Christ the Son of Mary”…

Quran 5:72-77   Surah Al-Ma’idah (The Table Spread)
They do blaspheme who say: “Allah is Christ the son of Mary.” But said Christ (Maseeh): “O children of Israel! worship Allah my Lord and your Lord.” Whoever joins other gods with Allah Allah will forbid him the garden and the Fire will be his abode. There will for the wrong-doers be no one to help.
They do blaspheme who say: Allah is one of three in a Trinity: for there is no god except One Allah. If they desist not from their word (of blasphemy) verily a grievous penalty will befall the blasphemers among them.
Why turn they not to Allah and seek His forgiveness? For Allah is Oft-forgiving Most Merciful.
Christ (Maseeh) the son of Mary was no more than an Apostle; many were the Apostles that passed away before him. His mother was a woman of truth. They had both to eat their (daily) food. See how Allah doth makes His Signs clear to them; yet see in what ways they are deluded away from the truth!
Say: Will ye worship besides Allah something which hath no power either to harm or benefit you? But Allah He it is that heareth and knoweth all things.”
Say: “O people of the Book! exceed not in your religion the bounds (of what is proper) trespassing beyond the truth nor follow the vain desires of people who went wrong in times gone by who misled many and strayed (themselves) from the even way.


Priests and Anchorites to Be Their Lords in Derogation of Allah

Quran 9:30-35   Surah At-Tauba (Repentance)
The Jews call Uzair a son of Allah and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouths; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah’s curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the truth!
They take their priests and their anchorites to be their lords in derogation of Allah and (they take as their Lord) Christ the son of Mary; Yet they were commanded to worship but one Allah: there is no god but He. Praise and glory to him: (far is He) from having the parents they associate (with him).
Fain would they extinguish Allah’s light with their mouths but Allah will not allow but that His light should be perfected even though the unbelievers may detest (it).
It is He who hath sent His apostle with guidance and religion of truth to proclaim it over all religions even though the pagans may detest (it).

O ye who believe! there are indeed many among the priests and anchorites who in falsehood devour the substance of men and hinder (them) from the way of Allah. And there are those who bury gold and silver and spend it not in the way of Allah: announce unto them a most grievous penalty.
On the day when heat will be produced out of that (wealth) in the fire of hell and with it will be branded their foreheads their flanks and their backs “this is the (treasure) which ye buried for yourselves: taste ye then the (treasures) ye buried!”


Christ Does Not Disdain to Serve and Worship Allah

Quran 4:172-173   Surah An-Nisaa (The Women)
Christ (Maseeh) disdaineth not to serve and worship Allah nor do the angels those nearest (to Allah): those who disdain His worship and are arrogant He will gather them all together unto himself to (answer).
But those who believe and do deeds of righteousness He will give their (due) rewards and more out of His bounty: but those who are disdainful and arrogant He will punish with a grievous penalty; nor will they find besides Allah any to protect or help them.


If Anyone Desires a Religion Other than Islam It Will Never Be Accepted

Quran 3:83-86   Surah Ale-‘Imran (The Family of ‘Imran)
Do they seek for other than the Religion of Allah? While all creatures in the heavens and on earth have willing or unwilling bowed to His Will (accepted Islam) and to Him shall they all be brought back.
Say: “We believe in Allah and in what has been revealed to us and what was revealed to Abraham Isma’il Isaac Jacob and the Tribes and in (Books) given to Moses Jesus and the Prophets from their Lord; we make no distinction between one and another among them and to Allah do we bow our will (in Islam).”
If anyone desires a religion other than Islam (submission to Allah) never will it be accepted of him; and in the Hereafter he will be in the ranks of those who have lost (all spiritual good).

How shall Allah guide those who reject faith after they accepted it and bore witness that the Apostle was true and that clear signs had come unto them? But Allah guides not a people unjust.


More in the E-book



Allah: Allah is the proper name in Arabic for The One and Only God, The Creator and Sustainer of the universe. It is used by the Arab Christians and Jews for the God (‘Eloh-im’ in Hebrew; ‘Allaha’ in Aramaic, the mother tongue of Jesus). The word Allah does not have a plural or gender. Allah does not have any associate or partner, and He does not beget nor was He begotten. SWT is an abbreviation of Arabic words that mean ‘Glory Be To Him.’ s or pbuh: Peace Be Upon Him. This expression is used for all Prophets of Allah.



Those who wish to understand the specific and broader meaning of the verses of the Quran, it is recommended that they should also read commentary on these subjects and verses. The English readers will find either Yusuf Ali’s or Maududi’s commentaries a good source. Allama Yususf Ali presents the meaning Ayah (verse) by Ayah with detailed footnotes for relevant words in each verse and includes a detailed index of the topics mentioned in the Quran. Maulana Maududi’s work covers commentary for each Surah (chapter) of the Holy Quran.

Pickthall writes in his foreward of 1930: “… The Quran cannot be translated. … The book is here rendered almost literally and every effort has been made to choose befitting language. But the result is not the Glorious Quran, that inimitable symphony, the very sounds of which move men to tears and ecstasy. It is only an attempt to present the meaning of the Quran-and peradventure something of the charm in English. It can never take the place of the Quran in Arabic, nor is it meant to do so. …”

“The Holy Quran,” Text, Translation and Commentary by Abdullah Yusuf Ali, 1934. (Latest Publisher: Amana Publications, Beltsville, MD, USA; Title: “The Meaning of the Holy Quran,” 1992). A pocket edition of Yusuf Ali’s translation is also available in contemporary English.

“The Meaning of the Glorious Koran,” An Explanatory Translation by Mohammed Marmaduke Pickthall, a Mentor Book Publication. (Also available as: “The Meaning of the Glorious Koran,” by Marmaduke Pickthall, Dorset Press, N.Y. and several Islamic book publishers; Published by several publishers since 1930). Note: The Mentor publication (451 MJ1529 195) contains a few errors/omissions, e.g., in Surah 72: the last part of Verse 2 should read “we ascribe no partner unto our Lord”, and Surah 68: Verse 22 should read “straight” road instead of “beaten” road. In case of any doubt, the reader is advised to check with a copy from an Islamic publisher and also check with an Islamic scholar for the meaning directly from the Arabic original.

The above article can be found here:  http://www.cyberistan.org/islamic/jesusq.htm


What the Talmud Really Says About Jesus

“What exactly is so scandalous? How about Jesus punished in Hell for eternity by being made to sit in a cauldron of boiling excrement? That image appears in early manuscripts of the Babylonian Talmud, as does a brief account of Jesus’ trial and execution—not by the Romans but by the Jewish high court, the Sanhedrin.”

Publisher’s Weekly story on new book called Jesus in the Talmud

Comment by David Duke – The following article appeared in Publisher’s Weekly, a mainstream literary magazine and website. It concerns a new book, Jesus in the Talmud, that exposes the shocking truth about the position of Judaism toward Jesus Christ. It was written by none other than Dr. Peter Schaefer, head of Princeton University Judaic Studies Program and one of the world’s most famous academic authorities on Judaism.  Once again my research and writings have been verified by the most respected of academics. The facts are clear. The Talmud, which is the highest authority of Judaism, not only makes hateful and pornographic attacks against Jesus Christ, it even boasts that the Jewish community, not the Romans, arrested, tried and executed Jesus. In fact, the Talmud exudes so much hatred against Jesus that it claims the Jewish priests subjected his body to a series of four different torturous executions. It is not anti-Semitic to state these facts, it is simply the truth. It is not anti-Semitic to expose Jewish extremism and hatred, again, it is simply the truth. Why is it that radical Christians or Muslims are freely exposed in the mass media, but Jewish extremism is a forbidden subject? Why is it that when a political figure exposes racial or religious hatred among Christians or Muslims, he wins media praise and “humanitarian awards,” but if a political figure dares to expose Jewish hatred and extremism, he himself is called a hater and anti-Semite? The fact is that there is no greater enemy of Jesus Christ and Christianity than Judaism and the Jewish extremists who run Israel and have so much influence over the American media and American politics. (The Washington Post admits that 50-60 percent of political contributions for President come from Jewish sources). Some so-called Christian evangelists are now raising money among Christians to support these anti-Christian, extremist Jews! For a full, thoroughly documented account of this issue, read my new 2007 edition of Jewish Supremacism.

From Publisher’s Weekly —  Will Peter Schaefer’s new book, Jesus in the Talmud (Mar.), be controversial? “I’m afraid so,” Schaefer told RBL. “That’s why I’m nervous.”

His editor at Princeton University Press, Brigitta van Rheinberg, laughed but agreed: “You think, oh, whoa, this is not going to go over well in certain circles.”

Schaefer, who heads up Princeton’s Judaic studies program, has collected and analyzed all the passages in the Talmud that apparently refer to the founder of Christianity, texts that were previously censored from Talmud editions for centuries. In his book he argues—against other scholars—that the scandalous passages indeed refer not to some other figure of ancient times but to the famous Jesus of Nazareth.

What exactly is so scandalous? How about Jesus punished in Hell for eternity by being made to sit in a cauldron of boiling excrement? That image appears in early manuscripts of the Babylonian Talmud, as does a brief account of Jesus’ trial and execution—not by the Romans but by the Jewish high court, the Sanhedrin. The Jewish community, to the extent Jews were even aware of these excised texts, has been content to let them remain obscure and unknown.

Schaefer, a distinguished German-born Christian scholar who describes classical rabbinic literature as “my first love,” has now definitively let the cat out of the bag. This undermines a widespread assumption that, of Judaism’s and Christianity’s respective sacred texts, only the Christian Gospels go out of their way to assail the rival faith, whereas Judaism’s classical texts refrain from similar attacks.

It seems fair to say now, however, that the Talmud is every bit as offensive to Christians as the Gospels are to Jews.

The Talmud’s scattered portrait of Jesus unapologetically mocks Christian doctrines including the virgin birth and the resurrection. Which isn’t to say that the rabbinic invective is meant simply to insult. In his book, the author calls the Talmud’s assault on Christian claims “devastating.”

“It is a very serious argument,” said Schaefer, who emphasizes that the rabbis’ stories about Jesus were never intended as an attempt at historically accurate narrative. Rather, in the classic Talmudic style, they encode legal and theological argumentation in the form of sometimes-imaginative storytelling.

One naturally wonders, when Jesus in the Talmud is published, what the results will be for Jewish-Christian relations. “I certainly don’t want to harm Jewish-Christian dialogue. God forbid,” Schaefer said. But dialogue requires honesty, and “I’m trying to be honest.”

The above article can be found here: What the Talmud Really Says About Jesus!

Please also check out: ‘Israel Shahak: Blowing the lid off the Talmud and Jewish fundamentalism’ Read here

Hungarians Find Glamorous Anti-Zionist Leader

Posted in Etc. on October 17, 2010 by The 800 Pound Gorilla

HenryMakow
September 24, 2010

 

by Jean D’eau
(Budapest Correspondent, henrymakow.com)

Krisztina Morvai is among the very few politicians in Europe who dares to criticize Zionism.

Last year she was herself much criticized by the Hungarian Jewish organization which is a fanatic supporter of Zionism (MAZSIHISZ) because she happened to post this message to them on an online forum:

“I would be greatly pleased if those who call themselves proud Hungarian Jews played in their leisure with their tiny circumcised dicks, instead of besmirching me. Your kind of people are used to seeing all of our kind of people stand to attention and adjust to you every time you fart. Would you kindly acknowledge this is now OVER. We have raised our head up high and we shall no longer tolerate your kind of terror. We shall take back our country.”

She`s a practicing Catholic with three daughters. Her ex-husband, a journalist, is a Jewish socialist. Although she supports fully the Jobbik party, she is not a member. However the party has chosen her as its nominee in the next Presidential election.

I trust her for all she has said and done in accordance with Christ`s teachings.

As for the Jobbik, until today it is in my opinion a genuinely nationalist party, harshly opposed to any form of imperialism. It stands for a family-centered Hungarian society in an independent and neutral nation-state.

Of course many try to discredit it, mainly the governing party (FIDESZ) which is a patsy of the EU (his leader was personally chosen by Soros more than twenty years ago) but also the socialist and the “liberal” parties.

Now you have also to consider this: for some years Zionism is not in good terms with the EU, mainly because the latter wants to get rid of an imperialist Israel in order to extend “peacefully” (aka with the Soros “open-society” brainwashing) the influence of the EU to the North-African Muslim societies.

So, from the point of view of the Zionist leadership, I guess it could be possibly advantageous to support secretly a nationalist party like the Jobbik.
—–

See Krisztina Morvai tell  EU the majority of Europeans are “fed up” with globalization. (Youtube)

—–

From Wikipedia

In the UN Women’s Rights Committee Morvai conducted research into what she called the “inhumane living conditions” of Palestinian women,[15] which resulted in a complaint being filed against her by the Israeli government. [16] In 2006, after she was removed from her UN position, she complained that this was due to Israeli political pressure which resulted in her losing her seat and being replaced by a Hungarian Jewish woman, Andrea Pető, whom she described as “a well-known zionist activist”.[17] Pető, actually an activist of the feminist, Jewish traditionalist cultural foundation Esztertáska, did not receive the necessary votes to be confirmed to the committee. [17] In March 2009 the Jewish Telegraphic Agency[18] and Jungle World quoted an undated and otherwise unreported speech in 2008 in which Morvai “advised” the “liberal-bolshevick zionists” to “start thinking of where to flee and where to hide”.[19] Morvai made a similar suggestion in a letter addressed to the editors of the weekly Élet és Irodalom.[20] In February 2009, Morvai objected to Israel’s offensive in the Gaza Strip and called it a “mass murder” and “genocide” of the Palestinian people and in an open letter to the Israeli ambassador to Hungary wrote that Israel held itself above the law and that its leaders would be imprisoned for their actions in Gaza, she continued, “The only way to talk to people like you is by assuming the style of Hamas. I wish all of you lice-infested, dirty murderers will receive Hamas’ ‘kisses.'” [21] In November 2009, Palestinian Return Centre withdrew Morvai’s invitation to a London conference in support of Palestine.[22]

The above article can be found here: Hungarians Find Glamorous AntiZionist Leader

Council of Conservative Citizens
April 13, 2010 

Major victory in Hungary. Nation swings hard to the right. International media goes ballistic! As France and Britain deteriorate into welfare states with regular race riots, a movement is underway to save Hungary from the same fate. Jobbik, a Hungarian political party routed deep in family and tradition, has taken 17% of the vote in the first round of Hungarian national elections. The British and French media, co-conspirators in destroying their own nations, are going ballistic. Every single article about Jobbik is pure namecalling and slander, with out any actual facts. Jobbik are simply  called “nazis” over and over and over.

Jobbik, or “Movement for a Better Hungary,” opposes the ceding of sovereignty to the EU and wants Hungarian first economic and immigration policies. Or as the far-left media calls it “reviving the 3rd Reich.”

Jobbik scored 2% in Hungarian national elections in 2006. However the collapse of the French “rainbow nation” dream into weekly race riots has been a wake up call for those in central and eastern Europe. Then in the 2009 EU elections, Jobbik took 15% of the Hungarian vote. They have also been scoring between 12-20% in various regional and municipal elections.

The Hungarian Centrist party received 53% and the Socialist party received 19%. A rival socialist party focusing mainly on environmental issues got 7%.

The Hungarian socialist party has been crushed, and Hungary has made a huge swing to the right. In the 2006 national election, the socialists received 49% and the centrists 42%. Two other left of center parties received about 6% each. Jobbik received 2%.

Europe’s march to the right has been a trend all over Europe for the past couple years. However, the shift in Hungary is very dramatic.

Photo: Jobbik MEPs pose with British National Party MEP Nick Griffin.

The above article can be found here: Major victory in Hungary. Nation swings hard to the right. International media goes ballistic!

Youtube – David Irving examines the anti-Jewish revolution that took place in Hungary during the 1950s, a struggle for self determination against Zionist occupied government, that is still going on to this day (1995 lecture excerpt) — http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvcfRXqkYuk

Please also check out “Hungarian police challenge ‘Zionist government’ ‘Proud Hungarians must prepare for war against the Jews’