Who is to Blame for the Orthodox Historical Narrative?

[ConfusedJew]

Where did this idea of the Holocaust come from? Why did people make it up? How did thousands of people, including alleged perpetrators decide to confess to the Holocaust? Is there any other recorded hoax in the course of human history that has been at a fraction of this scale?

I don't see how this is humanly possible, let alone plausible. Will somebody please explain to me how anybody could possible even do this?

The origin of the Holocaust narrative, is primarily with the Poles, who first started to report on mass arrests and killings. Escaped Polish and Slovakian prisoners provided the early narrative for what was happening at the death camps.

So-called Holocaust revisionists cannot bring themselves to believe that the Poles and Slovakians could pull off a mass hoax, so they try to blame the Jews and Soviets.

This checks out. Polish resistance and government-in-exile in London began sending reports in 1941–1942 about German atrocities. Escaped prisoners from camps like Auschwitz and Treblinka (including Polish Catholics and Slovak Jews) provided some of the earliest eyewitness accounts.

The Witold Pilecki Report (1943): A Polish resistance fighter voluntarily entered Auschwitz, documented the killings, and escaped.

The Vrba–Wetzler Report (1944): Two Slovak Jews escaped Auschwitz and gave a detailed account of the extermination process, which was later confirmed. The report detailed the layout of the camp, the gas chambers and crematoria, and the arrival and selection process for transports.

These reports reached the Allies, the Vatican, and neutral countries before the liberation of the camps. Early reports were sometimes doubted because the scale of the atrocities seemed unbelievable.

Early testimonies came from Poles, Slovaks, Jews, Belgians, French, and Soviet POWs, not just one group. German records like the Einsatzgruppen reports, the Höfle Telegram, and camp records later corroborated the reports.

When Allied and Soviet forces liberated the camps, they found gas chambers and crematoria remains at Auschwitz-Birkenau and Majdanek, mass graves and human remains were documented at Treblinka, Sobibor, and Belzec, survivor testimony corroborated the early escapee reports in striking detail.

The thing that all of the Holocaust deniers ignore is that similar reports were independently reported confirming the same atrocities. Not necessarily every detail with 100% accuracy, but the core claims of the Holocaust. It would be virtually impossible for that to occur by random chance.

[Wahrheitssucher]

…How did thousands of people, including alleged perpetrators, decide to confess to the Holocaust? …

I don't see how…

Ah, but isn’t that because you don’t want to see?

Did you know that there were post-war show-trials for the functionaries and guards at camps where there were no mass-gassings?

Did you know that there are camps that people now know never had any ‘mass-gassing’ murders. Yet the British and French courts managed to obtain confessions which were particularly detailed on the bogus claims of mass-murder-by-gas at these.

So a few questions for you, confused jew:

Q1. why were there ANY allegations at all of mass gassings at camps that had no functioning, homicidal gas chambers?
Q2. from whom did the allegations come?
Q3. why did the Allies believe the claims and then hang men innocent of the crimes they were falsely accused of?

Do please answer.

Notice that CJ didn’t answer.

They are not complicated questions.
The problem with them appears to be that HONEST answers do not serve CJ’s agenda to obfuscate historical truth.

[ConfusedJew]

These are not serious questions, and they betray a serious lack of critical thinking in you. Surprise surprise I know, but here we are.

Consider that Germany was cleaved in two, East vs West, and almost immediately after the war, the world was equally cleaved in two via the Cold War, also East vs West. I will assume you never heard of the Cold War, but a chain of events happened from the cleaving of Germany in two onwards, that had literal near-apocalyptic, world ending results for the entirety of mankind. I'm sure you probably don't believe this or never heard of it, but there's nothing I can do about that.

One of the first triggers in the Cold War was called the Berlin Blockade, I again will assume you've never heard of this, but you can ask your buddy ChatGPT and i'm sure it will give you some slop that at least partly corroborates what I am about to tell you. The Soviets ring-fenced the entire city of Berlin (with a population of millions) with no access to resources like food or coal. Each "half" of the former Allies, East & West were hurled into a massive propaganda war against each other in this apocalyptic death struggle, especially to engender buy-in from German citizens who only a few short months/years earlier were the literal superpower in the world, and doubly so for Berliners.

This doesn't make any sense. You think the Cold War occurred because of splitting Germany into two? You have cause and effect backwards.

Nazi Germany was not a world superpower, it was a dominant regional power in Europe for a short period of time that collapsed due to expanding too quickly and aggressively.

[Nessie]

....
The thing that all of the Holocaust deniers ignore is that similar reports were independently reported confirming the same atrocities. Not necessarily every detail with 100% accuracy, but the core claims of the Holocaust. It would be virtually impossible for that to occur by random chance.

No reports of mass shootings came out of the Baltic States and Ukraine, in 1941-2, in large part, because so many of their citizens were participating in those shootings. Retrospectively, those states now admit to that participation. Romania killed many of its Jewish citizens, independently of the Nazis, taking the opportunity alignment with the Nazis presented, to run its own Holocaust. The wartime Romanian government did not publicise those mass shootings. There is no attempt to deny it happened, since.

The so-called "orthodox narrative" comes from every country occupied or aligned to the Nazis during WWII.

[Nessie]

...

Did you know that there were post-war show-trials for the functionaries and guards at camps where there were no mass-gassings?

Holocaust deniers on X, like to trend an IRC report, that lists 11 camps, with a total death toll of 271k. Over quarter of a million dead in so few camps, is somehow seen as acceptable. The camp staff responsible deserved to be put on trial.

Did you know that there are camps that people now know never had any ‘mass-gassing’ murders. Yet the British and French courts managed to obtain confessions which were particularly detailed on the bogus claims of mass-murder-by-gas at these.

How were the confessions bogus?

Q1. why were there ANY allegations at all of mass gassings at camps that had no functioning, homicidal gas chambers?

In part because of rumours and in part because of Action 14f13, where prisoners were sent from camps to be gassed at other places that did have gas chambers.

Q2. from whom did the allegations come?

Prisoners and staff admissions.

Q3. why did the Allies believe the claims and then hang men innocent of the crimes they were falsely accused of?

Loaded question. There was sufficient evidence to convict, the staff were guilty of murder.

Do please answer.

I would like to share with you two remarks.

The first comes to us from Dr. Butz.
In a letter of 18th November 1979 addressed to a British weekly (New Statesman) about a long article by Gitta Sereny (2 November 1979) he made the observation that it is quite strange to claim to base a historical thesis like that of the formidable massacres of millions of human beings on ...confessions.
That claim is still harder to defend when you know that those confessions came from persons who had been conquered and that the ones who obtained those confessions were the conquerors.

My second remark is to recall that, in the cases from Ravensbrück — where people now know that there never was any ‘mass-gassing’ — the British and French courts obtained confessions which were particularly detailed on the alleged gassings.

People speak to us about the three principal confessions of Auschwitz [Höß, Kremer and Broad], but they no longer speak to us at all about the three principal confessions of Ravensbrück: that of the camp commandant, Suhren, that of his adjutant Schwarzhuber and that of the camp physician, Dr. Treite.

Question: do you know what was the size of that ‘gas chamber’ that never existed?
Answer: nine meters by four and one half meters.

Question: Do you know where it was located?
Answer: five meters away from the two crematory ovens.

Question: Do you know how many persons were gassed there? [...etc., etc.]

...Two of the three persons who confessed at Ravensbrück were hanged, and the third [supposedly] committed suicide.

What is horrible is that without this lie about the "gas chambers" they would perhaps have saved their lives.
In regard to Suhren, Germaine Tillion wrote... that he began by displaying a "stubborn bad faith" in the course of his two trials (one at Hamburg, by the British and one at Rastatt, by the French). She adds this terrible sentence: "But, without that gas chamber created by him on his own initiative two months before the collapse, he could perhaps have saved his life”.

In regard to Schwarhuber — who confessed immediately — Tillion wrote these still more terrible lines, each word of which I ask you to ponder:
“According to the English investigators, from the first moment he had coolly faced his position, he judged himself lost and either to have peace (and the small privileges to which the prisoners who do not deceive the examing magistrates have a right), or else due to lassitude, indifference or to quite another reason, he took his course and held to it, without regard for himself or for his accomplices.
He was not a brute (like Binder or Pflaum); he had an intelligent expression, the appearance and behaviour of a psychologically normal man”.

~~ Professor Robert Faurrison. Summer 1981.

www.ihr.org/jhr/v02/v02p103_Faurisson.html

...

Regarding Ravensbruck;

https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/ ... vensbrueck

"Beginning in 1942, in accordance with “Operation 14f 13,” the SS transferred them to the sanitarium at Bernburg, which, equipped with gas chambers, had served as a killing center for people with physical and intellectual disabilities within the framework of the so-called "Euthanasia" Program of the Nazi regime. The SS sent around 1,600 female prisoners and 300 male prisoners to their deaths at Bernberg in the spring of 1942; around half of these prisoners were Jewish, at least 25 were Roma (Gypsies), and at least 13 were Jehovah's Witnesses."

"In early 1945, the SS constructed a gas chamber in Ravensbrück near the camp crematorium. The Germans gassed between 5,000 and 6,000 prisoners at Ravensbrück before Soviet troops liberated the camp in April 1945."

[Stubble]

These situations are so different that they aren't even comparable. There was no pressure or incentive for Hoss to write a memoir.

Nothing like that has ever happened before in history at the level of an entire nation.

Do you have evidence to that effect?

He wrote a tool that you pick up and wield not as the propaganda it truly is, but, as a truth that you see in the impossible written throughout it.

He didn't even read his 'confession' and yet you assert that he wrote his memoir...of his own volition and without being compelled, censored, or instructed...

[HansHill]

This doesn't make any sense. You think the Cold War occurred because of splitting Germany into two? You have cause and effect backwards.

Nazi Germany was not a world superpower, it was a dominant regional power in Europe for a short period of time that collapsed due to expanding too quickly and aggressively.

??? What is this utter slop.

The Cold War started immediately after WWII because of an incurable incompatibility in worldview between the East and West. One of those incompatibilities was the future of Germany and specifically the future of Germany in its rightful place in Europe.

The Western Allies in fact saw Germany, even in its post-war decimation and ruinous state, as the engine to European revival, while simultaneously seeking to deny it's economic resources to the SU, who they themselves bitterly sought German economic reparations at the expense of Germany in their own drive to spread Communism West:

As Marshall explored what should be done, the ideas of European economic recovery and German revival blended together in new ways. What Europe needed most was coal, steel, and industrial machinery, and a Germany unshackled from economic restraints might provide all three. Even FDR and the French had talked of using German resources for the benefit of Europe, so in a way, this was an old idea. Yet if the words were similar, the meaning was far different from what the late president and the French had had in mind. They had envisaged giving Germany’s neighbors first claim on its resources, not, as Marshall’s advisers were saying now, making Germany the “locomotive” of European recovery.

Daniel Harrington - Berlin on the Brink

LOL - Germany was outperforming most other countries on most metrics you could care to imagine. You, being a Jew, are in denial. Cope more.