Showman Schwarzbaum should himself be investigated for fraud

Published by carolyn on Wed, 2016-02-17 01:31

Auschwitz concentration camp survivor Leon Schwarzbaum presents an old photograph showing himself (L) next to his uncle and parents who [allegedly] died in Auschwitz, during a press conference in Detmold, Germany, 10 February 2016. EPA

By Carolyn Yeager

Putting 90+ year-olds on trial for working in a forced labor camp  when they were 20 is a mockery of justice driven by the “Holocaust” Lobby. Leon Schwarzbaum obviously works with that Lobby.

In the current trial in Detmold, Germany, this 94-year old has played a major role as an Auschwitz survivor accusing former SS guard Reinhold Hanning of … well, it's not clear. Mr Schwarzbaum is one of around 40 Auschwitz "survivors" who are co-plaintiffs in the case under the German legal system.

But a glaring problem is that there is no information about Schwarzbaum anywhere on the Internet, including German Wiki, except for this particular trial. Schwarzbaum is described by The Telegraph newspaper in the UK as: “a Berlin resident and former art dealer who survived Auschwitz and lost 35 members of his family in the Holocaust.”

That's the full extent of what can be discovered about him. So I ask: Who says he lost 35 members of his family? By what authority do we believe that? Only by his own self statement. In a taped interview with Deutsche Welle from his richly appointed Berlin home (watch it here; he is obviously wealthy, healthy, and has had a very good life), DW describes him as a former art dealer. But no questions are asked of him personally, such as how long was he in Auschwitz? When and where was he arrested? Why was he arrested? As usual with “holocaust,” everything the “witness” says is accepted on his own testimony and no questions are asked.

If I lived in Germany, I could pull out a photo of me with my parents and siblings, even aunts, uncles and cousins who are all dead now. In truth. And I could say they perished at Auschwitz, but I alone survived for some lame reason. If it were for the benefit of the "Holocaust" Lobby, I would be believed without question. And what sympathy I could wallow in.

Leon Schwarzbaum shows what he says is his Auschwitz tattoo number in a 2015 file photo. Markus Schreiber / APA

Oh, Schwarzbaum showed a tattoo on his arm [note the expensive watch], the only one of the three to do so. Does that mean Sonders and de Vries, his co-plaintiffs in the courtroom, don't have tattoos? They were also selected for work and not "extermination." So that is one problem. Another is that Schwarzbaum's tattoo doesn't look regular – it's too far up on his forearm and it curves downward instead of following a straight line. It looks like it was applied by a drunken sailor – and maybe it was. The last three numbers are noticeably larger than the first three. The number appears to be 132624, with the 4 being drawn really wide. I have never seen an Auschwitz tattoo that looks like this, and therefore I am sceptical—but it could be authentic.

Another problem though: Mr. Schwarzbaum's testimony is completely unbelievable—the usual outlandish horror stories that all Jews tell. He said he recalled seeing “truckloads of naked Auschwitz prisoners being driven in open trucks to the gas chambers, screaming while their arms reached toward the sky" --  except it's proven there were no such gas chambers in Auschwitz.

He said “the unbearable smell of burning flesh was ever present” -- which is impossible from crematoriums. He said “flames came out of the crematorium chimneys and especially they could be seen at night" -- another impossibility that he did NOT ever see.

But he also said that where he was located, he was not able to see the crematoriums, and he said he worked outside the camp and that is why he survived while the rest of his family didn't. So it's clear he is only repeating the common stories that he's heard others say. Which is to say he's lying.

More of the nonsense he spouts was reported by the Daily Mail which loves to give it credibility (thus destroying their own credibility):

He also recounted the starvation and constant fear of dying that plagued prisoners after they were taken to Auschwitz.

Those who sought to escape were ripped to death by dogs and their bodies left as a warning to others, he said, adding that regular executions and the endless stream of people sent to the gas chambers sowed terror.

He said: 'I was constantly afraid of dying from hunger or being selected (for the gas chamber).

'The food was terrible and insufficient. It was not even potatoes but potato peelings, impossible and insufficient for hard labour.'

He says he goes to schools and anywhere he can to tell his story—the one above that is completely untrue. So its fair to ask if anyone has checked to see if his name with birthdate is registered at Auschwitz. I'm sure no one has.  No proof is ever required for him to tell his completely false and impossible stories even in a court of law. This is what the unregulated growth of “Holocaust-mania” in schools and media has done to our justice systems and to our societies in general.

And let's remember that Schwarzbaum and his two fellow “witnesses” do not claim that they ever laid eyes on Reinhold Hanning because they didn't; they can't say anything about what he actually did at Auschwitz. The charges against Hanning are based only on what it is believed he had the opportunity to do! The testimony of Schwarzbaum and his two sidekicks really has nothing to do with Herr Hanning, but is meant to show that terrible conditions existed in the camps so that public opinion will accept a guilty verdict of "170,000 counts of accessory to murder" against this harmless 94-year old man.

His job as one of the guards who met the trains that brought inmates into the main (small) camp is magically translated into guilt for 170,000 murders that in reality didn't even take place.

Grandstanding in the courtroom

This totally dishonest Schwarzbaum is even allowed to play bully in the courtroom. On his way in, he played up to the press by saying,

It’s about justice for me. I’ll look into his eyes and see if he’s honest. Because the truth is most important. I don’t want revenge, don’t want him tormented in prison. He’s just an old man like me. But I cannot forgive him.”

Can't forgive him for being a born German who was loyal to his country? What else would he need to be forgiven for? What Schwarzbaum really means is that he can't forgive what happened to Jews -- which Reinhold Hanning was not responsible for.

Then from the witness box, Schwarzbaum addressed Hanning directly, which is not allowed by ordinary mortals in ordinary trials:

“We are about the same age and we will soon both be before the highest court. I want to call on you to tell the historical truth. Speak here about what you and your comrades did.”

What a ploy! Just because the Jew has aged better than the German [who is hard of hearing and may not even have heard what was said], the Jew is playing bully and grandstanding in the courtroom about "telling the truth.” It's all showmanship and make-believe, since he himself is the least truthful of all, and he  must know it!

When, oh when will these professional accusers be allowed to be accused in turn, and investigated? That is a day we look forward to.


As I understand German law was changed a few years ago for John Demjanjuk, so that nothing has to be proven against a camp-guard for him to be guilty of a crime. If he was there, he is guilty.
The idea of prisoners screaming on their way to the gas-chambers is absurd, because the concept, in the traditional Holocaust myth, is that they are tricked into entering a gas-chamber without realizing it. If the prisoners are panicked, they become unmanageable, and then they require a lot more manpower to control.
Guy Walters (who endorses the Holocaust as such) made the same objection against stories (increasingly popular in recent years) about guards swinging babies by their legs and smashing their skulls in front of their mothers, "for the simple reason that killing babies in front of their parents is not the best way to pacify a train full of prisoners." Walters also suggests that most guards probably did not want to kill babies.

As I wrote in my previous article on this trial, the "new interpretation" of the law allows for Reinhold Hanning to be "tried for 170,000 counts of“accessory to murder” because of a coordinated attempt by Jewish groups and German prosecutors to increase the reach of the law in “Holocaust” cases."

I quoted from Deutsche Welle :

Until recently, participation in the Holocaust was not a crime, and defendants could only be convicted for a specific provable act of murder or torture. But the way the mass executions were carried out virtually absolved everyone involved of a specific prosecutable act - at least according to the interpretation of most post-war German state prosecutors.

It was only with the conviction in 2011 of John Demjanjuk - a former guard at the Sobibor death camp - that this interpretation changed.

So you're not adding anything new. And in fact, it is possible that the higher court may rule in the Groening appeal against the "new interpretation" of the law because it make a laughing-stock of German Jurisprudence -- except from the standpoint of the Jewish Lobby. The "new interpretation" is only a precedent that could still could be overturned by a the highest court.

I don't think what Guy Walters wrote 3 years ago has any relevance to the point I am making in this article, which you seem to have missed.

Okay, sorry to be such a no-good son of a bitch.

I accept your apology ... and feel better now. Smile

Hello to your web site more later

Nice to see you two make up!  Loved the International Jew series you did together.

Regardless of all the Holo-mania I thought a court was where one was to take seriously testifying about things that may have happened, in the presence of god and with the idea of getting to the truth! The court shows no concern for this (nor the defending advocate or he would have objected to the repeated lying) and seems, far from trying to get at the truth and taking it seriously and makeing it clear it is the court's sacred mission - to have resigned itself to conducting a propaganda exercise for the "benefit" of manipulating public opinion. Everyone involved seems to take it that way: -Soon the complaining Jews will be through with their exercise; we must humor them; soon so-and-so will be in jail or dead - and then we can get on with life.
How can it be these things are repeated and repeated just in this one case - every day - that everyone knows is lies!? without so much as a request from anyone - or a PRETENCE of being a judge who is concerned with the effects her decisions may have on everyone, future generations - or influencing the stupid old Jews to keep on lying while "they got a good thing goin'".  (-cause you know that's what they're thinking.)
While DW's little quote up there proves there are still some Germans with a lot of intellectual vigor, this kind of... well I would compare it to purpose-socialized trendys poking at their cell phones completely divorced from any kind of reality except the propaganda they're reading off the phone - in the worst Alex Jones-described sense... That's the kind of being we have running a court there - otherwise she would stop the nonsense and address the issues of facts and truth rather than allowing this contrived and probably rehearsed agreed-upon lying to go on - because it is an insult to both the German court involved, and to god.
And this is why I fear for the cause of Holocaust truth - this is the kind of "intellectual vigor" that is used to argue everything now, including presidential elections. (It took fifty years of Jewish backwardation to get to the point where now someone like Trump actually looks good. Listen to how they talked fifty years ago on Youtube.) There's hope we'll recover and Trump will expose the 9/11 fiends but there'll be something else. And if arguing about the Holocaust turns into just a bunch of dumb trendies and... ARGUING WITH JEWS? WHO ARE SERIOUS about having their enabling lies preserved as truth? Who will defend us? fogedaboudit.