In the book for which Elie Wiesel is most
famous, namely Night, which is
recommended reading in public schools across this country, Wiesel paints an
horrendous picture of life in Auschwitz from April 1944 to January 1945 when he
was there. Although many hundreds of thousands of Jews were supposedly gassed
there during this time, Wiesel makes no mention of gassings or gas chambers
anywhere in his book, as Jürgen Graf and Robert Faurisson have pointed out to
us. He does however claim to have seen flames from the chimneys and Dr. Mengele
wearing a monocle. Both claims are clearly lies.
When the Russians were
about to overrun Auschwitz in January 1945, both Elie and his father "chose" to
go west with the retreating 'Nazis' and SS rather than be "liberated" by
America's greatest ally. They could have told the whole world about Auschwitz
within days--but, both Elie and his father as well as countless thousands of
other Jews chose instead to trek west with the 'Nazis' on foot at night in the
middle of one of the coldest winters and continue working for the defense of the
Reich thereafter. In effect, they chose to collaborate.
Some of Wiesel's
exact words in Night are:
"The choice was in our hands. For once we could decide our fate for
ourselves. We could both stay in the hospital, where I could, thanks to my
doctor, get him [the father] entered as a patient or nurse. Or else we could
follow the others. 'Well, what shall we do, father?' He was silent. 'Let's be
evacuated with the others,' I told him."
Elie's tale in this regard is
corroborated by other "survivor" accounts including that of Primo Levi. In
Levi's book Survival in
Auschwitz, we have his words for January 17th, 1945:
"It was not
a question of reasoning: I would probably also have followed the instinct of the
flock if I had not felt so weak: fear is supremely contagious, and its immediate
reaction is to make one try to run away."
But he's talking here about
running away with the 'Nazis'--and not 'Nazis' who were mere rank and file party
members but supposedly the worst of the worst. He's talking here about running
away with the same 'Nazis' and SS who had supposedly carried out the greatest
imaginable mass murders of Jews and others in the entire history of the
universe. He's talking about running away with the people who supposedly did the
actual killings of thousands daily for several years. But, according to his own
words he would probably have gone with them nonetheless, except that he was not
feeling good that day; he was feeling weak. The "fear" that he overcame was
clearly fear of the Russians and not the 'Nazis;' there is no mention of fear of
what the 'Nazis' and SS might do when the evacuees entered the forest or
sometime later.
The choices that were made here in January 1945 are
enormously important. In the entire history of Jewish suffering at the hands of
gentiles what moment in time could possibly be more dramatic than this precious
moment when Jews could choose between, on the one hand, liberation by the
Soviets with the chance to tell the whole world about the evil 'Nazis' and to
help bring about their defeat--and the other choice of going with the 'Nazi'
mass murderers and to continue working for them and to help preserve their evil
regime. In the vast majority of cases, they chose to go with the 'Nazis'.
The momentous choice brings Shakespeare's Hamlet to mind:
"To remain, or
not to remain; that is the question: to remain and be liberated by Soviet troops
and risk their slings and rifles in order to tell the whole world about the
outrageous 'Nazis'--or, take arms and feet against a sea of cold and darkness in
order to collaborate with the very same outrageous 'Nazis.' Oh what
heartache--ay there's the rub! Thus conscience does make cowards of us all."
So what was the final score--here a drum roll seems fitting in the
background as Vanna White comes onto the stage with the sealed envelope and the
answer to the great riddle. The envelope is torn open and the choice is--drum
roll again--according to Levi himself 800 choose to remain in Auschwitz, but
20,000 choose to go and collaborate with the 'Nazi' mass murderers. Wow! Such a
surprise--already!
We see the same deliberate pro-'Nazi' collaboration
in the "survivors" from Schindler's
List. In their well-known story, as the Russians were about to overrun
Plaszow just thirty miles down the road to the east from Auschwitz in November
1944, Schindler and more than a thousand Jews chose to go west with the
retreating 'Nazis' rather than hang back and be "liberated" by the Soviets. Some
even spent the next several weeks at Auschwitz--and none were gassed, not even
in the movie. The hoax has certainly had its day. If there had been any kind of
extermination of Jews at all Auschwitz, all of the Jews in Cracow and Plaszow
would have known about it as well. All of the Jews who went west in effect also
denied the Holocaust albeit only with their hands and feet. The Jews themselves
were the first true Holocaust deniers, and it is about time they get all the
credit they deserve.
The rather simple analysis of Holocaust survivor
tales I have given here is an easy to understand refutation of the hoax in
general. I urge all readers to reexamine "survivor accounts" for themselves but
critically and systematically. The internet with search engines like Google
allows anyone to analyze literally thousands of survivor accounts in seconds for
major flaws of the type I have discussed. Just search for keywords like
"evacuation" or combinations of words like "holocaust survivor Auschwitz."
One last piece of literature for this discussion is the highly acclaimed
book Sophie's Choice by William
Styron. What does Styron have to say about Sophie or any other Auschwitz
survivor going west in January 1945? The book is a novel, but it is an
historical novel by a great writer and intellect--or so we are told--and where
we might find an explanation or insight for Elie's kind of choice. But there is
really nothing there. The important choice Sophie made in the book was between
her two children; which one should be killed in the gas chamber and which one
should live? Certainly, that would have been a heart-wrenching choice and worthy
of a great novel--but as to the later choice to go west with the 'Nazi' mass
murderers, even the murderers of one of those same precious children, there was
nothing except for the following:
"The Russians were coming and the SS
wanted the children destroyed. Most of them were Polish; the Jewish children
were already dead. They thought of burning them alive in a pit, or shooting
them, but they decided to do something that wouldn't show too many marks and
evidence. So in the freezing cold they marched the children down to the river
and made them take off their clothes and soak them in the water as if they were
washing them, and then made them put on these wet clothes again. Then they
marched them back to the area in front of the barracks where they had been
living and had a roll call. Standing in their wet clothes. The roll call lasted
for many, many hours while the children stood wet and freezing and night came.
All of the children died of being exposed that day. They died of exposure and
pneumonia, very fast."
If anything like that had actually happened, it
would have been all the more reason to stay in Auschwitz and wait for the
Soviets to arrive rather than go west with the 'Nazis' and the SS. I dare say
there is not even the slightest corroboration for Styron's tale of the freezing
children--but his obscene tale is published and widely disseminated without any
serious resistance at all--such is the state of literature in America today.
Although Styron does not tell us, Sophie apparently chose to trek west with the
Nazi murderers as well.
The fact is that hundreds of thousands of Jews
chose to collaborate and help defend the Reich and Europe because they knew
perfectly well, from their own experience over several years, that they would be
treated well and given food, shelter, medical attention, protection and more
(they were probably paid for their works as well) from the SS. Why else would
they have possibly chosen to go west with the Nazis. Fear of communism or the
Soviets? Many Jews were communists themselves. I dare say, every Jew knew the
Soviet Union was their friend where Jews were protected and had risen to
positions of influence and power out of all proportion to their numbers. And
yet, they generally preferred to go west. Obviously, the Jews were either in
deep denial, or the Holocaust story is a monstrous hoax just as revisionists
claim.
The horrors in many camps at the end of the war were an indirect
result of Allied bombing and strafing.
The SS were indeed the good guys
and all of us owe them our eternal gratitude for keeping at least part of Europe
free from communism--and that is what almost certainly gave the rest of the
world a chance as well. The Jews must have understood that--but, of course, when
the war was over they changed their tune completely: they were suddenly the
greatest victims in the entire history of the world and, of course, deserved
special consideration far above and beyond everyone else who suffered in the
war. The truth is that six months earlier they were lining up by their own
choice to stay with and work for the Nazis.
No doubt, Anne Frank and her
father were among the Jews who preferred the company of alleged Nazi murderers
rather than that of the Soviets. That is why she died in Bergen-Belsen, far to
the west, rather than in Auschwitz. The good guys were the Nazis.