Re. brain sizes: Einstein's and women's
Aetyr at nc.rr.com
Tue Oct 1 17:33:47 EST 2002
My Father liberated Dachau, and Bergen Belsen. He told us very
graphically what he saw.
It sickens me that they couldn't wait at least until ALL the
eyewitnesses were dead before they started that lying crap.
Once I asked him if it were true if the Germans did not know of
those camps, and he said, No. You couldn't miss the smell, and
nothing else smells like mass death.
"John Knight" <jwknight at polbox.com> wrote in message
news:cDkm9.94783$S32.6300099 at news2.west.cox.net...
> Continued from "Nuremberg: The Crime That Will Not Die" :
> That was the reality. Judge Jackson, handling the prosecution
> most important trials was a man with presidential ambitions who
> high profile carved out of a self-serving stage: The Nuremberg
> to be the launching pad of his presidential race. The Nuremberg
> not selected from, or composed of, judges of the neutral Swiss,
> neutral Swedes, or some more distant African, Asian or Latin
> countries. American civilian judges to a large extent made up
the core of
> the Allied judges--not military career officers, who might have
> understanding and compassion for what the military leaders and
> government under extreme war time conditions lived through.
They could have
> undoubtedly had a greater appreciation of why some of the
> were undertaken by Germany in the desperate days of the war.
> country club" experienced set of small town American judges
> Furthermore, the Allied victors blatantly carried on their war
> Germans by other means long after the shooting had stopped--not
by bombs and
> bullets but this time by falsely diagnosing psychologists or,
> giving torturers a free hand: cynical and brutal investigators
> and frequently did, mistreat, beat, whip, starve, suffocate and
> their prisoners into giving confessions and statements which
were as cruelly
> extracted as were the confessions from witches during the
> witchcraft trials of the Dark Ages.
> The injustice of the Nuremberg Trials was testified to not only
> Fiske Stone, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United
> also Iowa Supreme Court Justice Charles F. Wennerstrum, a man
> Midwest, who sat on one of the tribunals trying lesser alleged
> criminals after the war.
> Wennerstrum pointed out in a celebrated and controversial
interview given to
> a reporter of the Chicago Daily Tribune that frequently the
> and some of the prosecutors were Jews who had fled Nazi Germany
> back in Allied uniforms to torment and seek revenge on the
> Socialists who had wanted to expel the Jews from European
> because they considered them harmful to the war effort and to
> European civilization.
> Here is how the article described the lot that came to post-war
> settle private scores, as seen through Justice Wennerstrum's
eyes, after he
> quit in disgust:
> "If I had known seven months ago what I know today,"
> friends as he packed to leave for America, "I would never have
come here. .
> . The initial war crimes trial here was judged and prosecuted
> Russians, British and French with much of the time, effort and
> devoted to whitewashing the Allies and placing the sole blame
for World War
> II upon Germany.
> "What I have said of the nationalist character of the
tribunals," the judge
> continued, "applies to the prosecution. The high ideals
announced as the
> motives for creating these tribunals has not been evident.
> "The prosecution has failed to maintain objectivity aloof from
> vindictiveness, aloof from personal ambitions for convictions.
It has failed
> to strive to lay down precedents which might help the world to
> The entire atmosphere here is unwholesome. Linguists were
> Americans are notably poor linguists. Lawyers, clerks,
> researchers were employed who became Americans only in recent
> backgrounds were embedded in Europe's hatreds and prejudices. .
> added) (Chicago Daily Tribune, 23 February 1948)
> In other words, the Allies supplied the interrogators, most of
> some of the victims, who had had a lifetime of experience in
> Jews and thus recognized them, have stated. Those of us who are
> can speak German can easily discern the ethnicity of some of
the accusers by
> their mere accents and patterns of speech, even in radio
> Most of the evidence in the trials was "documentary," selected
by the Allies
> from the large tonnage of captured records. The document
selection was made
> by the prosecution. The defense had access only to those
documents which the
> prosecution considered material to the case and were made
available to the
> defense. The Allies could choose to release or to hide and/or
> documents which did not fit their post-war strategy or plans at
> The Allies admitted elsewhere that their propaganda Ministries
> Intelligence Services had previously forged Nazi stamps, Nazi
> passports, orders, ID cards etc. which fooled the Nazis many
> they were so perfect and over which the Allied propagandists
gloat to this
> day. It does not take a great leap of the imagination to think
> same Allied Government agencies, their personnel and forgers of
> could do now with all the captured genuine German
> facilities, the captured type writers, rubber stamps and tons
> heads of all sizes and description and of any National
> organization you care to mention.
> Even setting aside questionable "documentary" evidence, let's
look at some
> of the accused's "testimony"--how it was extracted, and what it
> Like vile exclamation marks, at the heart of the Nuremberg
> certain words: "Genocide" "Gas chamber." "Six million." These
words, and the
> value judgment concepts they connote, were derived largely from
> admissions and affidavit of one man, Rudolf Hoess, the one-time
> Kommandant at Auschwitz.
> Rudolf Hoess was the Allies' most important witness to the
> affidavit and his testimony were quoted extensively both by the
> and in the judgment of the IMT at Nuremberg, as well as by the
press. It was
> his testimony which laid the foundation and validated the claim
of the ". .
> . extermination of millions of people by gas at Auschwitz."
> "confession" is heavily relied upon by historians like Raul
> others as a primary documentary source to this day.
> It is true that Hoess witnessed at Nuremberg to horrendous
> he also confirmed the "truth" under oath of an affidavit which
he agreed to
> sign for the prosecution. In it, he confessed to having given
orders for the
> gassing of millions of victims. The affidavit, by the way, was
in English, a
> language he did not speak or understand, according to family
> We now know from the book "Legions of Death" that Rudolf Hoess
> almost to death by Jewish members of the British Field Police
> capture and badly mistreated thereafter until he gave this very
> "testimony" and "affidavit" used by the Allies propagandists
ever since. You
> be the judge. Here is an excerpt from this book by Rupert
> by Hamlyn Paperbacks, page 235:
> At 5 PM on 11 March 1946, Frau Hoess opened her front door to
> intelligence specialists in British uniform, most of them tall
> and all of them practiced in the more sophisticated techniques
> and merciless investigation.
> No physical violence was used on the family: it was scarcely
> and children were separated and guarded. Clarke's tone was
> low-key and conversational.
> He began mildly: "I understand your husband came to see you as
> last night."
> Frau Hoess merely replied: "I haven't seen him since he
> Clarke tried once more, saying gently but with a tone of
reproach: "You know
> that isn't true." Then all at once his manner had changed and
> shouting: "If you don't tell us, we'll turn you over to the
> they'll put you before a firing squad. Your son will go to
> It proved more than enough. Eventually, a broken Frau Hoess
> whereabouts of the former Auschwitz Kommandant, the man who now
> himself Franz Lang. Suitable intimidation of the son and
> precisely identical information.
> When they found Hoess, here is how the capture played out.
Clarke, one of
> the participants, recalls it vividly:
> "He was lying on top of a three-tier bunker wearing a new pair
> pyjamas. We discovered later that he had lost the cyanide pill
most of them
> carried. Not that he would have had much chance to use it
because we had
> rammed a torch (flashlight) into his mouth."
> Hoess screamed in terror at the mere sight of the British
> Clarke yelled: "What is your name?"
> With each answer of "Franz Lang," Clarke's hand crashed into
the face of the
> prisoner. The fourth time that happened, Hoess broke and
admitted who he
> The admission suddenly unleashed the loathing of the Jewish
sergeants in the
> arresting party whose parents had died in Auschwitz following
> signed by Hoess.
> The prisoner was torn from the top bunk, the pyjama ripped from
his body. He
> was then dragged naked to one of the slaughter tables, where it
> Clarke the blows and screams were endless.
> Eventually, the Medical Officer urged the Captain: "Call them
> you want to take back a corpse."
> A blanket was thrown over Hoess and he was dragged to Clarke's
> the sergeant poured a substantial slug of whiskey down his
> Hoess tried to sleep.
> Clarke thrust his service stick under the man's eyelids and
> German: "Keep your pig eyes open, you swine." . . .
> The party arrived back at Heide around three in the morning.
The snow was
> swirling still, but the blanket was torn from Hoess and he was
made to walk
> completely nude through the prison yard to his cell. It took
three days to
> get a coherent statement out of him.
> This statement, tortured and terrorized out of him, was the one
we are all
> familiar with--the "proof" for the so-called "gassing of the
> Historians today are finally admitting that Hoess is a totally
> witness--and is it any wonder? He spoke of a concentration camp
> which does not even exist. He swore that 2,500,000 people were
> burned at Auschwitz and a further half million died of disease,
for a total
> dead of three million. The Toronto Sun of July 18, 1990 claimed
> The Washington Post, on the same date, also mentioned 1.5
> from an article by Krzyszlov Leski, we have the following:
> Poland has cut its estimate of the number of people killed by
the Nazis in
> the Auschwitz death camp from 4 million to just over 1 million.
> The vast majority of the dead are now accepted to have been
> claims by the former Polish communist government that as many
> in Hitler's largest concentration camp. . .
> The new study could rekindle the controversy over the scale of
> final solution."
> Shevach Weiss, a death camp survivor and Labor Party member of
> Parliament, expressed disbelief at the revised estimates,
saying: "It sounds
> shocking and strange." . . .
> Shmuel Krakowsky, head of research at Israel's Yad Vashem
> Jewish victims of the Holocaust, said the new Polish figures
> "The 4 million figure was let slip by Capt. Rudolf Hoess, the
> Nazi commander. Some have bought it, but it was exaggerated." .
> But the Polish authorities said accurate estimates of the
> could only be made by studying German documents seized by the
> But Moscow has refused to return the archives.
> A most convenient excuse! In 1989 I organized a write-in
> persuade the then-Soviet Leader Gorbachev to release the
> Registers captured in 1945 when the Red Army took over the
> complex. A few months afterwards this actually happened.
> these all-important documents to the Red Cross, which showed in
> detail why people had died in Auschwitz, the cause and time of
> birth, address etc.
> 74,000 names of people who had died were listed, of which only
> 30,000 were Jews, along with an almost equal number of Poles
and members of
> other nationalities.
> The incredibly shrinking Holocaust! The "millions" that we have
> for half a century and that we hear and read about still today
> with the "testimony" beaten out of poor Hoess on that horrible
> defeated Germany.
> Historian Christopher Browning finally had to admit in a recent
> article that Hoess was an unreliable witness. Browning stated
> ". . . Hoess was always a very weak and confused witness. The
> use him all the time for this reason, in order to try and
> memory of Auschwitz as a whole." (Holocaust Revisionism Source
> p. 1)
> But does that invalidate the Revisionist claims or their
strategy? Not at
> all. On the contrary. After all, Hoess's testimony was used as
> on which the entire Holocaust myth about mass gassings was
> the first place. Revisionists have concentrated on Hoess
> he is probably the most important source for Holocaust
> conclusions on and exaggerations about the Holocaust. Raul
> wrote the "Bible" of the "Holocaust," The Destruction of the
> (Holmes & Meier, Revised Edition, 1985 ) relies on Hoess's
> heavily, and Hoess was the primary witness relied upon by the
> Tribunal in their judgment regarding the "extermination of the
> though he told the court of having been savagely tortured.
> What's more, Hoess's treatment by the Allies and the total
> his "evidence" are not unusual. We don't know how many of the
accused at the
> Nuremberg trials were badly mistreated, since references in the
> transcripts to their mistreatment was expunged from the record.
> again! Material damaging to the Allies was expunged from the
> An example is Streicher's testimony. Streicher was reported in
> Times as having testified that he was tortured, whipped, spat
on, and forced
> to drink from a latrine. (Streicher Opens His Case, The Times,
> 1946). His testimony was later expunged from the record of the
> the active participation of the prosecution, the president of
> and even his own defense lawyer!
> Other traces of the brutal treatment of the Nuremberg
> have survived. One of these witnesses was Gauleiter Sauckel's
> threats to his family, which did remain in the transcript.
> testimony in May of 1946, Sauckel testified that he signed a
> though he did not know what was in that document, after his
family of 10
> children was threatened with deportation to Russia.
> And finally, it must not be forgotten that t his is the only
> proceeding conducted in the name of civilized nations where
there was no
> appeal mechanism to a parallel or higher authority for a review
> proceedings or any verdicts that this so-called international
> tribunal arrived at. Their judgments over the leadership of
> populous state, against whom they had just fought a murderous,
> genocidal war, were final and deadly.
> Keep all that in mind as you read, watch and listen to all the
> hype in the mass media on television and radio of these days.
And for what?
> The Jewish leader Nahum Goldman spells it out for you in his
> book, The Jewish Paradox, Pages 123-125, admitting to the
mother of all
> frauds. In his own words, at the conclusion of the agreement
> obtained from Dr. Adenauer, the German Quisling State's first
> Allied-appointed chancellor,
> ". . . the Germans will have paid out a total of 80 billion. .
. Without the
> German reparations that started coming through during its first
ten years as
> a state, Israel would not have half of its present
infrastructure: All the
> trains in Israel are German, the ships are German, and the same
> electrical installations and a great deal of Israel's industry
. . . and
> that is setting aside the individual pensions paid to
> today receives hundreds of millions of dollars in German
currency each year
> . . . In some years the sums of money received by Israel from
> been as much as double or treble the contribution made by
> international Jewry. Nowadays, there is no longer any
opposition to the
> principle. (emphasis added)
> Not anywhere you look!
> After the Nuremberg Trials and Proceedings are stripped of the
> smoke screens which surrounds them, it can be put quite
> The Allies did it all. The Allies fought a war on foreign
shores--in part to
> establish the State of Israel. The Allies lent a willing hand
> ambitions that grew out of the Zionist camp. By means of the
> trials, the Allies helped the establishment and financing of
Israel. So as
> to secure Israel, the Allies and their personnel became
> researchers, interrogators, prosecutors, judges and
> one! The Allies supplied the "experts" who sifted through the
> documents, which were all totally in Allied control,
> incriminating documents, discarding exonerating evidence. These
> investigators were told only to "find" incriminating documents
> hapless accused, as I was told by the American scholar Charles
> who had been one of these Allied researchers, and who testified
at my own
> trials. These researchers were told were told to ignore the
> might have spared the lives of the accused German leaders. When
all was said
> and done, there was not even an appeal.
> U.S. Chief Justice Harlan Fiske Stone, speaking of the American
> Prosecutor, Jackson, finally had this to say, as mentioned in
> Press hard cover, cited before, p. 746 :
> "Jackson is away conducting his high grade lynching party in
> remarked. "I don't mind what he does to the Nazis, but I hate
to see the
> pretense that he is running a court and proceeding according to
> This is a little too sanctimonious a fraud to meet my
> Some sanctimonious fraud!
> Some record for the Allies to be "proud of"--to have helped
> a sick, perverted Marxist/Zionist inspired legal farce that
would condemn to
> death the leaders of the only military effort ever undertaken
to stop the
> "evil empire" from bringing to us all their "hate law"
> Are now the chickens coming home to roost? That's how America
and the "free
> world" have showed their gratitude to the defenders of Europe
> Civilization: by hanging brave and honest men who tried so
valiantly for so
> long to stop the decadence and the hypocrisy of what we now
> shuddering, ". . . the coming New World Order"!
> I bow my head in reverence to those who were judicially
> Nuremberg. They were the world's martyrs, not villains. Not one
> would have been condemned to death in a fair trial. Not one!
> forget they sacrificed an entire nation, and in the end
themselves, to save
> Western civilization. They were defeated by thugs in robes and
> uniform and by the conspiracies hatched by shysters from the
> shtetls of Eastern Europe.
> The concepts expressed in this document are protected by the
> right to freedom of speech, as guaranteed by the First
Amendment of the
> Constitution of the United States, reaffirmed by the U.S.
Supreme Court as
> applying to the Internet content on June 26, 1997.
> E-Mail us! Ingrid Rimland: irimland at zundelsite.org .
> Only in case you found grammar, spelling, layout or programming
> please contact our webmaster: webmaster at zundelsite.org
> Subscribe to our world famous ZGrams
> Contact the Zundelsite
> 3152 Parkway #13, PMB109,
> Pigeon Forge, TN,
> 37863, USA.
More information about the Neur-sci