- Various investigators have studied the Diary. The following
very brief comments are based on work by Dr Robert Faurisson of France
and by Ditlieb Felderer (of Jewish-Swedish parentage), who both visited
the Anne Frank museum in Amsterdam and went to considerable lengths to
study the problem.
-
- Dr Faurisson spent nine hours interviewing Anne Frank's
father in Switzerland in an effort to clear up the matter, concluding that
Mr Frank and others had very substantially adapted and enlarged an original
manuscript for financial gain, creating in the process a fraudulent document
used in thousands of schools across the western world which helps promote
sympathy for Zionism.
-
- 1. Life Magazine, 15 September 1958, has a photo of Anne
Frank on the cover against the background of what is clearly and unquestionably
the 'childish', non-cursive handwriting of a very young girl, say 12 years
old or younger. Compare this with the handwriting reproduced in a popular
softcover edition of the diary, that of Pan Books. In numerous reprintings
over decades Pan has included a sample of 'her' writing (cursive) and even
a signature attributed to her, both unquestionably and undeniably produced
by a very mature adult, say fifty years or older. (Anne Frank's father
was born in 1889). This publisher clearly has contempt for the intelligence
of their readers. Other editions of the Diary often have either one or
the other handwriting style attributed to Anne Frank. The 'childish' handwriting
is also reproduced in a French Livre de Poche edition with a date four
months later than the date included in the sample in the Pan edition. Find
a copy of the Life edition in a library and check for yourself.
-
- 2. A report in the New York Post (dated October 9 1980,
early editions only) called Anne Frank may not have inked that famous diary
says that the German Federal Criminal Investigation Bureau (BKA) examined
the diary and concluded that portions of the work were written with a ball
pen, only available from 1951.
-
- 3. Anne Frank's father Otto Frank refused to allow any
interested party to inspect the diary in spite of 'growing charges of fraud'.
-
- 4. Dr Faurisson compares different editions of the diary
in different languages and notes strange changes, insertions and omissions,
often substantial, showing a continuing creativity at work long after Anne's
death.
-
- 5. Both Felderer and Dr Faurisson analyze the diary and
note many kinds of contradictions and improbabilities.
-
- 6. Professor Arthur Butz of Northwestern University says
'I have looked over the diary and don't believe (its authenticity). For
example, already on page 2 one is reading an essay on why a 13 year old
girl would start a diary, and then page 3 gives a short history of the
Frank family and then quickly reviews the specific anti-Jewish measures
that followed the German occupation in 1940. The rest of the book is in
the same historical spirit.' (Butz, Hoax of the Twentieth Century (1977)
p37).
-
- 7. Dr Alfred Lilienthal, the courageous anti-Zionist
Jewish author of The Zionist Connection, notes 'Any informed literary inspection
of this book would have shown it could not possibly have been the work
of a teenager. Writer Meyer Levin won a suit in the New York Supreme Court
against Otto Frank, Anne's father, for 50 000 dollars as an "honorarium
for his work" on the diary' (The Zionist Connection p819).
-
- 8. All of this evidence from more than 20 years ago has
in no wise stopped the continuing re-printing and publication of the diary,
and the major US media have kept quiet about the issue. (Shhht! Zionism
must be propped up, no matter what the cost to historical truth!)
-
- 9. Anne Frank died of typhus, not in the 'gas chamber'.
Typhus caused the adoption of measures including the shaving of heads,
showering and the fumigation of clothing using Zyklon B insecticide, all
(ironically enough) to SAVE lives rather than the opposite. These well-intended
efforts have been turned around into the most transparent lies by the Holocaust
industry - why would the Nazis shave heads, if not to control typhus-spreading
lice? To fill pillows with lice-infested human hair? Come on! Why did 'gassing
apparatus' have to be 'disguised' as showers?According to the Encyclopaedia
Britannica Micropaedia (1975), Otto Frank was hospitalized (!!!) at Auschwitz
(!!!) and survived the war (!!!).
-
- The vast hordes of 'survivors' in the 1980's and 1990's
across the western world have been a wonderful confirmation of the Holocaust
deniers' standpoint. (Last night I watched one of those Jewish-produced
lawyer-police TV dramas, in this case with a storyline based on an insurance
company enriched through sales of policies to Holocaust victims. The action
takes place today, 21st century, but the program still has a Holocaust
survivor as a witness! People have been so successfully conditioned to
always be conscious of the sacred Holocaust that the extraordinary phenomenon
of ever-present Holocaust survivors does not pose a problem.)
-
- 10. Anne Frank's Diary was instrumental in turning Dr
Robert Faurisson of the University of Lyons II into a confirmed, committed
holocaust revisionist. He has virtually sacrificed his life (he has received
tremendous vilification and was seriously injured in an attack by Jewish
thugs) for the pursuit of the truth surrounding the subject, in spite of
being not of German but of French-Scottish ancestry, with a socialist,
not national-socialist political alignment. A lecturer in literature where
he specialized in close textual analysis, receiving acclaim for his studies
of poems by Rimbaud and Lautréamont, he had set his students the
task of analyzing the Diary, and came to the conclusion that it was a fraud.
The opposition he received to his announcements of this convinced him that
there was a powerful political element who were highly intolerant of historical
truth where the Holocaust was concerned.
-
- This led him to investigate other aspects of the subject,
and his eventual discovery that the 'gas chambers' as popularly described
even by "respectable" Holocaust academics, were scientifically
impossible. Numerous other investigators, including various university
academics, have confirmed this viewpoint. His first conclusions concerning
the 'gas chambers' were published in 1978 and 1979 in the French daily
Le Monde.
-
- His overall conclusion: the entire saga is a politically
inspired concoction to support Zionism, with financial and other political
benefits as well. As Norman Finkelstein of the City University of New York
writes in his book The Holocaust Industry, "The Holocaust has proven
to be an indispensable ideological weapon. Through its deployment, one
of the world,s most formidable military powers, with a horrendous human
rights record, has cast itself as a 'victim, state' and the most successful
ethnic group in the United States has likewise acquired victim status.
-
- Considerable benefits accrue to this specious victimhood
in particular, immunity to criticism, however justified " (p3). Every
single aspect of the Holocaust is open to fundamental question, from the
Nuremberg Trials where the victors were the judges and tortured Germans
to obtain confessions, to the capacity of the incinerators of the crematoria.
Finkelstein notes "The Israeli Prime Minister,s office recently (1999)
put the number of "living Holocaust survivors" at nearly a million,
(page 83). On page 127 he further notes "If 135,000 former Jewish
slave laborers are still alive today, some 600,000 must have survived the
war. That's at least a half-million more than standard estimates.
-
- If Jews only constituted 20% of the surviving camp population
and, as the Holocaust industry implies, 600,000 Jewish inmates survived
the war, then fully 3 million inmates in total must have survived. By the
Holocaust industry,s reckoning, concentration camp conditions couldn,t
have been that harsh at all; in fact, one must suppose a remarkably high
fertility and remarkably low mortality rate. If, as the Holocaust industry
suggests, many hundreds of thousands of Jews survived, the Final Solution
couldn,t have been so efficient after all - exactly what Holocaust deniers
argue' (pp127-8).
-
- Faurisson in a letter to the editor of the New Statesman
dated 30 November 1979 (carefully unpublished) says the following: 'Regarding
the tortures systematically inflicted on the German soldiers and officers
by the Allies, one should read Sir Reginald Paget's book Manstein: His
Campaign and His Trial (Collins, 1951). On page 109 one finds that the
(US) Simpson Inquiry Commission "reported among other things that
of the 139 cases they had investigated, 137 had had their testicles permanently
destroyed by kicks received from the American War Crimes Investigating
Team."' [It is worth tracking down a copy of Paget's book just to
check this quote if you are of the doubting kind.] This gives some idea
of how the Holocaust 'truth' was imposed retroactively on the desperate
and utterly demoralised German people in the post-war period.
-
- Sources:
-
- Life Magazine, 15 September 1958
-
- Anne Frank's Diary, Pan Books edition
-
- Anne Frank's Diary - a Hoax by Ditlieb Felderer (1979),
Institute for Historical Review
-
- Analysis of the Anne Frank Diary by Dr Robert Faurisson,
The Journal for Historical Review, vol 3 no 2, Summer 1982.
-
- Hoax of the Twentieth Century by Professor Arthur Butz
(1977)
-
- The Zionist Connection by Dr Alfred Lilienthal (1978)
|
No comments:
Post a Comment