Idiot Netanyahu invents new story of who "burned" the jews

Published by carolyn on Wed, 2015-10-21 22:06

Netanyahu-Merkel press conference in Berlin on Oct. 21, 2015

Netanyahu hates the Palestinians so much that he's now tryng to make them equally guilty with the "Nazis" for exterminating 6 million of his precious jews during WW2.

In a meeting with Jewish leaders yesterday, he said the World War II-era Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini, played a "central role in fomenting the final solution" by trying to convince Hitler to destroy the Jews during a 1941 meeting in Berlin.

"Hitler didn't want to exterminate the Jews at the time, he wanted to expel the Jews," Netanyahu told the group. "And Haj Amin al-Husseini went to Hitler and said, 'If you expel them, they'll all come here.' 'So what should I do with them?' [Hitler] asked. He said, 'Burn them.'"

The holohoax hoax-storians quickly objected to Netanyahu's unexpected change in the sacred story. "Any attempt to deflect the burden from Hitler to others is a form of Holocaust denial," said Moshe Zimmermann of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem.

This took place on the eve of Netanyahu's trip to Berlin to meet with German cohort Angela Merkel. There, standing side by side with Merkel, he changed his story, denying that he was exonerating Hitler of the responsibility for the Holocaust, but added that Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas was nevertheless glorifying the Grand Mufti.

"The real question should be directed not at me but at president Abbas: why is he and the Palestinian authority glorifying the official mufti of Jerusalem as a Palestinian icon? They call him the father of the Palestinian nation, this is a war criminal who was sought for war crimes."

Can't be glorifying any enemy of Israel, even if it's done by their own people. Clearly, he wants to denigrate the heroes of the Palestinians, and at the same time make the Palestinian nation as guilty as is the German nation. Control through guilt is a Jewish specialty.

Merkel remained non-plussed and said, as the good servant she is:

"Germany abides by its responsibility for the Holocaust. We don't see any reason to change our view of history. We are very clear in our minds about the National Socialist's responsibility for the breach of civilisation that was the Shoah."

She also said (in a rote kind of way) "the security and existence of Israel are part of the German raison d'etat, and this will remain so." [Unacceptable! This was NEVER a decision made by the German people; it was made at Nuremberg and continues to be enforced by the victors of WW2 but really, now, solely by the United States.]

So we expect that from Merkel, but here is something else to think about. Even though she speaks against building more Jewish settlements on Palestinian land (but doesn't enforce it in any way), she wimpily said "Israel has an obligation to protect its own citizens" and added that Palestinians should condemn "everything constituting the support of terror."

The problem is that Merkel doesn't believe in protecting her own citizens! As a total hypocrite, she knows that this monster Netanyahu would never allow Muslims to migrate into Israel because he is protecting his Jews and Israel's Jewish culture. Merkel stands there and supports him, while denying her own people the same.

Netanyahu behaves as a spoiled little boy, an over-indulged brat. Mutti Merkel is there to indulge him, at the expense of her own people. Both Netanyahu and Merkel muss weg.

Comments

Much ado about nothing. It was clear that Bibi's statement in no way implied that "Hitler had not ordered the extermination of the Jews".  Bibi was simply inventing the tale according to which the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem had given Hitler the idea of exterminating the Jews.

Such silliness offers the revisionists the sole benefit of yet another opportunity to render obvious the complete absence of any documents showing us where and when Hitler might have ordered the Jews' extermination. Such order having never existed, the liars indulge in speculation, in all directions and on any occasion.

Hitler’s January 30, 1939 speech (i.e. just before the war) sometimes invoked to "prove" that such an order did exist, is no proof of anything. Hitler was doing then what any belligerent is inclined to do just before the start of a conflict. He said to the enemy: "You want to  exterminate us? It’s we who’ll exterminate you". Warrior's rhetoric, posturing like that of the heroes in Homer.

Best wishes. R. Faurisson

An important fact about Hitler's speech of 30 January 1939, about which Professor Faurisson comments, is that word therein usually rendered as "extermination" is Vernichtung. Hitler's specific words were: "die Vernichtung der jüdischen Rasse in Europa."
 
Apart from Professor Faurisson's point about the overheated rhetoric of war, which is quite true, that statement can only be taken as evidence that Hitler intended to kill all the Jews in Europe if Vernichtung unambiguously meant killing or annihilation.
 
There are many contexts where the word Vernichtung clearly does not mean killing or annihilation. You can translate it as destruction but even this is often hyperbolic. Ruin is probably a good rendering.
 
For example, indicating the limits of the specifically British agenda against Germany in the First World War, Hitler says:
"Mit der kolonial-, wirtschafts-, und handelspolitischen Vernichtung Deutschlands war das britische Kriegsziel erreicht...."
"With the colonial, economic, and commercial destruction of Germany, the British war-aim was reached...."
 
The words Vernichtung Deutschlands there do not mean that Germany ceased to exist. It means that Germany suffered enormous setbacks.
 
Given that Vernichtung does not have to mean killing, deportation of all Jews from Europe would certainly constitute a Vernichtung of "the Jewish race in Europe."

Merkel is an absolute traitor. Even if you whole hearted buy the guilt trip, you would reason that Germany pays Israel some money or so, but raison d'etre is a strong word. It basically means reason to exist, purpose in life. Shouldn't Germany's raison d'etre be Germany's security? 

This is not from Merkel. This goes way back. Remember when someone said, "If the holocaust were not upheld, the whole German legal structure, or the foundation of the  German state, would collapse." I have to look that up, but it was often quoted.

So there is some legal basis to this. The agreement that every chancellor is said to have to sign? The basis of the two plus four treaty? You're familiar with all of this. I think Merkel was just repeating what she sees/knows as inevitable -- the cost for Germans to continue as a "German" nation. But if it's not going to be a German nation, then hell with it. I would like the people to rise up against this occupation, even if it meant their government would be taken over by some "council." Then the world would see what was going on. But Germans will never do that, I'm afraid. They're long-suffering. 

Today, some migrants set their tents on fire in a Slovenian camp. They didn't get enough food and blankets, they said. They're not long-suffering.

It is clear that for the Jews the Holocaust is a weapon. They used it against the Germans, against Europeans and against Whites in general. Now that a Third Intifada threatens to emerge in Palestine, they use it against the Palestinians. Whether that contradicts everything they have said before, doesn't bother these habitual liars the least. "Chutzpah" is a virtue for Jews.

">"the security and existence of Israel are part of the German raison d'etre"

">Now THAT'S something I never heard before. Though the pompous self importance sort of tells the origin of it. This is the most absurd statement, and wonder is someone paying, or more likely, threatening Merkel? I mean she's obviously not stupid like some lesser politically involved there who ascribe to this kind of stuff. In any case I prefer to think she is somehow being forced and, further, doubt the usual argument about how she's jockeying for her fourth term (well that's out) or concerned about her legacy, because statements like that are usually made by people who would actually BE concerned about things like that to the point of betraying country or sacrificing lives. Looks like they will soon be openly in charge.

It was Germar Rudolf who said the whole legal system in Germany would collapase, I think.
 
Magnificent piece of idiocy from Bibi.  I think he's just dug an open pit upon which the Holohoax narrative will be roasted.

A German politician or well-known journalist.

GR may have talked about it. But we really need sources, not "I think."

Merkel actually said ‘Germany’s support for Israel’s security is part of our national ethos, our raison d’être.’

Raison d’etat (your quote) translates to national interest, or reason of state, while raison d’être has more gravity and means she’d rather sacrifice Germany and its people than having Jewland’s security threatened, which is what is currently happening. She’s destroying the German people to serve Israel.

I think this “Auschwitz is part of our identity” nonsense began in the 80s with the likes of Weizsäcker, Fischer, …. Weizsäcker uttered “not NATO, but Auschwitz as raison d’etat.”

The blemish in Netanyahu’s invented dialogue 'If you expel them, they'll all come here.' 'So what should I do with them?' [Hitler] asked. He said, 'Burn them.'
is that the Jews eventually came to Palestine, even though Hitler had allegedly burnt them.

You are right about distinguishing between raison d'etat and raison d'etre. Easy to miss. There are different versions of this quote.

I can't come up with the right search terms to find what I'm looking for. But here is a contemporary reference to it from January of this year.

 “There is no German identity without Auschwitz,” President Joachim Gauck said.

Fealty to the remembrance of the Holocaust is the common denominator among all the parties in the Bundestag.

This is not just Jews talking. It has been stated by Germans in the government, in a legal sense, since like you say, around in the 80's ... if not earlier.

I looked it up again, she said “Staatsräson” in German, which would be raison d’etat, yet it was translated into raison d’être in most publications & protocols.

Thanks for checking this out. It's very important to get it right. I took it from Der Spiegel German-language story. Deutsche Welle did not give Merkel's entire comment on the holocaust flap. They only quoted her as saying:  "Germany abides by its responsibility for the Holocaust. We don't see any reason to change our view of history." It's clear from this that they won't discuss this openly.

Raison d'etat fits much better. This tells us it is foundational to the "new" German state, post 1945, that they recognize their eternal debt to Israel (at least it cannot be the German state that wipes it away) and their guilt for the "Holocaust". They cannot question it. And they must keep all anti-Semitism, all pro-Hitlerism, pro-National Socialism outlawed. Zero tolerance. This has to be in written form somewhere. Well, we know Germany is bound by the judgements of the Nuremberg Tribunals 100%. That is in the treaty signed at reunification. The NPD is the only party that questions that, but I'm not sure how directly.

So this Allied-imposed post-war government does not represent the German people at all. It represents those who created it - the enemies of the German people!!! Thus the brainwashing continues in order to keep the younger Germans from realising their true situation, and the occupiers can point to Germany as a success, but not totally. When Justice Minister Maas threatens to charge Germans with sedition, he's using laws written by the foreign occupiers. These are all true facts.

 Extract from CNN:
 
Still, the very fact of its appearance indicates that the German intelligence community is increasingly dissatisfied with the role of being a vassal of the United States (the definition applied to Europe by Zbigniew Brzezinski), imposed on Western Germany after World War II. 
 
Gerd-Helmut Komossa reveals the uncomfortabletruth about the post-war conditions, dictated by the US and its allies. The state treaty, dated May 21, 1949 and classified by BND as top secret, suggests restrictions of state sovereignty of the Federal Republic of Germany, introduced for a period until 2099.
 
These restrictions include the provision that the winning coalition exercise complete control over Germany's mass media and communications; that every Federal Chancellor is to sign the so-called Chancellor Act; that the gold reserve of Germany is kept under arrest. In fact, all the German Chancellors, including the incumbent Chancellor Angela Merkel, pay their first foreign visit necessarily to the United States. 
 
This astonishing picture is not a fancy concoction of a political leftist. It is drawn by a military man whose mind has accumulated the experience of several crucial stages of development of the European civilization and Germany in particular. Gen. (Ret.) Gerd-Helmut Komossa took part in World War II and later in the Cold War. Possessing huge amounts of information, he analyzes the existing mechanisms of global policy with strong criticism.
 
In addition, the newly-built army was supposed to purchase weapons and materiel solely from the United States. During the last two decades, Washington has been trying to force Germany into military partnership in globalistic control. However, the massive effort to get Germany involved in US operations in Somali and Bosnia, as well as in campaigns in Serbia, Iraq and Afghanistan, has brought about a reverse result, sparking a shift in approach in German strategic circles.
 
Though most of the German officers were not originally inclined against America, a lot of them being educated in the United States, they are now experiencing disappointment and even disgust with Washington's policies. These officers realize that the hegemonistic policy is destined for destruction of socioeconomic systems of particular nations and whole regions, while the so-called order Washington is trying to impose is just a synonym for chaos. Gerd-Helmut Komossa, in his former capacity of MAD (Military Counterintelligence) Director, was frequently called "a soldier with political thinking".
 
NATO General Secretary Jaap de Hoop Scheffer accused the Bundeswehr of idleness in military operations in the region, and insisted that Germany "increase flexibility" and expand its military mission to the southern regions of Afghanistan.
 
However, the United States and its allies don't care much for moral problems. As the secret treaty is valid until 2099, Germans are supposed to go and fight where they are told to.
 
http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-183232
 
There is your smoking gun. The book has been around for a few years and it explains everything. The largest book stores in Germany refuse to stock it. Oh as for your "council" idea. Its not far off as a well known German prophet Alois Irlmaier who said that Germany will be divided in the end with only one piece being run by a government and the other two by a council type setup. At first I ignored the guys writing until you brought it up now talking about a council of sorts.
 
 

Hi Charles,

Thiis is not what I am looking for, but it is very interesting and I have read about it before. I don't see anything that is "impossible" or too far out, especially for 1949, except the 2099 end date - 150 years! Did they figure it would take that long to re-wire those naturally nationalistic Germans?

This page explains a lot as to why Germany is still held hostage. From August 1945 it was under the rules of the Potsdam Conference, where Stalin pretty much got his way from a sick Churchill succeeded by Clement Attlee and an inexperienced Truman (though Roosevelt wouldn't have done any better). This didn't change until 1990 and the German Reunification process, in which both Germany's had to willingly accept the terms of the Potsdam Agreement! I take it that originally they had no choice, but in 1990 they agreed to choose it, in order to be able to reunite their country. This supposedly made Germany a fully sovereign nation. How sick is that? They are still under this agreement from 1945 but are called sovereign! It's a lie.

The Potsdam Agreement had a lot to do with Germany's territory. Poland and the Soviet Union got big chunks, as we know. After 1990 the Soviet Union/Russia had to leave and remove it's military forces, but nothing changed with Poland. The two Germany's had to agree on the present border with Poland and give up any future claims, along with claims against other territorial changes that had been made. Poland insisted on its own separate treaty with the reunified Germany to be signed in addition, and they got it.

So Germany is still under the Potdam Agreement, it seems to me. This was the agreement that gave its blessing to the expulsion of ethnic Germans, which was carried out in brutal fashion in which millions of German women and children, plus elderly, died. Never has there been an apology, let alone any reparations!

I don't think Germany would have stayed quiet all these years unless they had no choice. So the secret "treaty" of 1949 could be the key. But it's secret! And who in Germany had the authority to sign it?  I will have to get the book.

(Source: Grosse Wendig 4, s. 721-731: Claus Nordbruch: "Kanzlerakte und Brandt-Briefe")
 
Komossa has admit in the newsletter "Junge Freiheit" that he thought the faked document was genuine. The faker had admitted his falsifications before this. The whole text in his book was based on this fakery. Nordbruch says that Komossa is right but the documet is a fake. Still the things are just about like the "document" tells us.
 
The famous "Brandt"-letters are also a fraud. A communist Egon Bahr has told about them. Willy Brandt was a traitor from the beginning and the other kanzlers too. They will not get any surprises when they become kanzlers. Maybe there are things like that but the kanzlers are traitors.

Many people in Germny and around the world are still spreading this "document". I read about it from the Eurokurier 4/2013. Straight away I wrote an article about the "document". But after that I remembered some headlines in the "Grosse Wendig" and I read those articles. Claus Nordbruch's article is quite convincing. Konrad Adenauer has said: "Wir sind keine Mandaten des deutschen Volkes, wir haben Auftrag von Allierten" (Arnim: ie Deutschlandakte, s. 17/2008). The foundations of the BRD and the public treaties are enough to enslave Germany. There is no need for these "Kanzler-akte". Maybe there are some secret treaties etc. too. It is possible. Every councellor must get the approval from the USA (international Jewry) before he/she can became a councellor.

Thanks a lot, Repe. This is very helpful. I agree with you in that I don't think there's a need for a secret treaty, since Germany is already bound by so many known "treaties" and agreements. I talked about the Potsdamn Agreement above, incorporated into the Final Settlement treaty. All nothing but thievery.

You said:
The problem is that Merkel doesn't believe in protecting her own citizens!
However, Merkel is a by herself a jew (her mother was jewish)... So, her own people are jews - and they are protected by her. Its an interesting fact, isnt it?

Please supply the proof that Merkel's mother was Jewish. I've heard it said a lot but the evidence brought forth is not compelling enough. She appears as such a typical German frau.

Hm... I did try to verify my statement, but I didnt find an official proof. I am sorry for that - it wasnt my intention to spread misinformation! I was just pretty sure that my statement was based on official facts, but it looks like that they were only inofficial.
 
Most of all there was a video, that i watched and that was very memorable for me: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_nOA9IQxy1k But i watched it now again and it wasnt a real proof.
 
However during my little research i found this very interessting german article (I think it is pretty truthworthy):
http://globalfire.tv/nj/15de/juden/18nja_merkel_vollstreckt_den_bann.htm
Merkels Grandfather was called Ludwig Kazmierczak and Kazmierczak derives from Kazimierz. Kazimierz is one of the biggest jewish centres in poland.
 
It also states this interessting part: Als 2005 ein biographisches Filmdokument über diese Frau erstellt wurde, um die Deutschen auf die neue Israel-Kanzlerin  einzustellen, stellte Frau Kasner-Merkel natürlich auch ihr Büro vor. Dabei zeigte Angela Kazmierczak-Merkel  auf "ein Bild der Erde, aus dem Weltraum aufgenommen." Niemand wäre dabei etwas Besonderes aufgefallen,  wenn sie nicht persönlich folgenden Kommentar dazu abgegeben hätte: "Wenn man genau hinsieht, kann man  Israel erkennen." [2]
 
Translated (sorry if my english is not very well): When 2005 a biographical filmdocument was created about Merkel to prepare the Germans for their new Israel-chancellor, she showed of course her office. During this visit, Angela Kazmierczak-Merkel pointed at "a picture, which was a photography that showed the earth from the outer space." Nobody would have recognized something special, if she wouldnt have said the following sentence about the picture: "If you look very carefull, you can catch sight of Israel." [2]
 
[2] = FAZ, Frankfurter Allgemeine
http://www.faz.net/aktuell/feuilleton/kino/fernsehportraet-die-frau-aus-der-uckermark-1255860.html
I think that can also tell much about this person. I mean, yes its just a little detail... However, if I see also how much awards she did get from jews... There are summa summarum just SO MANY of these little details.

I read everything you linked to (with the aid of Google Translate) and it is very interesting. I've read before about the grandfather and the name Kazimierz/Kasner, and her saying you can see Israel in the photo of the earth from space. She also seems to have pushed her way to the top rather ruthlessly.

But probably the reason her possible Jewish genetics is never brought up is because it's illegal in Germany to ask whether someone is Jewish or not. Or else it's just completely frowned upon So if Merkel doesn't want to discuss it, no one else can initiate it. Isn't that right, Emil?

But whether she has the genetics or not, she is abnormally fond of Israel. In that video she was speaking Hebrew in Jerusalem, when she never tries to speak any other language, so why that one? She said on that occasion: 

"This historical responsibility for Israel is part of the raison d'etat of my country This means that the security of Israel is to me, as German Chancellor, never negotiable.

What I've been trying to get at is where did that idea of "raison d'etat of Germany" come from. Where is it in the constitution or whatever else?" Why don't people ask that? Merkel is not the first to say this -- it's been said for a long time. I want to see the official words on that.

Merkel said the same thing during her press conference with Netanyahu. Is it only to Jews that she repeats those words? And it seems to me that she WANTS those Arab Muslims in Germany very much. She's not only tolerating them, she wanted them!

Add new comment