Why The Holocaust Must Be Questioned

[skeaky]

My cock is 12" long and 5" inches in diameter....spend the next 7 years debating what I said and you will accomplish the same thing as you have with this thread.

Fuck, you are stupid people

 

[davro]

It was so good, i read it twice!!

I read it and found it interesting.
I`m no Nazi but I find putting someone in prison for stating a belief,however mis-guided it may be to be an act of Fascism ironic given the circumstances.
When I was at school we were told 2 million Jews died in the holocaust,that was a given here for years until suddenly it became 6 million.Irving and others have disputed the figures and given the recent inflation I`d be interested to know exactly where the figures come from,both figures that is.
Yes it was an atrocity but used by the state of Israel as some kind of justification for the many carried out by them,surely they of all people should be taking the moral high ground.The western world should hang it`s head in shame at the praise heaped on Sharon,a former terrorist implicated in the massacre of civilians and wanted by the British on that basis years before the disgrace that was Sabra and Shatilla.And why should I give a shit about "The Holocaust" any more than I do about Stalin`s victims,the millions Mao killed or even the 2 million Vietnamese killed in an illegal and disgusting war?All are stomach-churning examples of man`s inhumanity to man and it`s kind of hard to have any sympathy at all for Israel when they`re killing kids playing soccer and firing missiles at random into civilian areas.The Holocaust was evil but having laws like the people who did it is dis-respecting the victims as is the Facism of the Israeli government.

 

[davro]

My cock is 12" long and 5" inches in diameter....spend the next 7 years debating what I said and you will accomplish the same thing as you have with this thread.

Fuck, you are stupid people

Best to give it a miss then skeaky and stick to your colouring books.

 

[Don K Dyck]

I've never seen anyone so full of bitterness and hatred as woody. What a sorry sack of shit.

Thank you for your totally irrelevant and meaningless contribution to this interesting discussion, Mules

 

[woody54]

My cock is 12" long and 5" inches in diameter....spend the next 7 years debating what I said and you will accomplish the same thing as you have with this thread.

Fuck, you are stupid people

To those who are happy with intellectual dishonesty to support a religious myth, that is fine and your free choice, but just be honest and admit truth is secondary to your irrational beliefs in the Holocaust Industry.

Luckily, the world is not totally populated with those prepared to live in fantasyland.

 

[woody54]

And why should I give a shit about "The Holocaust" any more than I do about Stalin`s victims,the millions Mao killed or even the 2 million Vietnamese killed in an illegal and disgusting war?.

Yours is a commonly held view by those with no direct cultural connection to Jewry.It is far easier for non Jews to coldly analyse the facts comparatively.

The 6 million stems from Judaisms lore as the sacrifice Jews must make in burning fires of punishment to cleanse their sins to enable them to return to Israel. The 6 million story first appeared in Jewish publications in Europe in co-ordination with the Ukraine famines when the Zionists were pushing their Balfour agreement rights to Palestine at the end of WWI but unfortunately the Ottomann Empire retained control from Britain for some years. The 6 million story faded from public sight quite quickly.

The mathmatics of reality bear no relativity to the religious icon of the Holocaust of religious myth. That 6 million is unimpeachable yet the public at large has been trained into thinking it is also the official death toll of Jewry in the Gas Chambers. The admissions of reduced death tolls at various sites of war camps has not led to any reduction in general Jewish rhetoric that 6 million died, the point being two totally different things are being deliberately obfuscated to protect the myth and protect the Shoah extortion racket being run from Israel. Israel itself only came into existence based on international sympathy generated by the outlandish and overstated war stories of the type presented to the Nuremburg courts. To expose their veracity now calls Israels legitimacy and right to exist into question.

That official European demographic records indicate there did not appear to be a significant loss of Jews in Europe during the Nazi campaigning is a reality no Holocaust supporter is prepared to address. 6 million would be significantly obvious even to the most bigotted observer.

 

[woody54]

Thank you for your totally irrelevant and meaningless contribution to this interesting discussion, Mules

Have you noticed Mules has been quiet lately. Too good to last

 

[woody54]

I've never seen anyone so full of bitterness and hatred as woody. What a sorry sack of shit.

Britain is to blame for what Israel represents in this world now.
It was understandable conspiring in the Balfour agreement to drag America into the war and improve the funding for the war effort, but it was the subsequent manipulations and protective activities in Palestines under British management that prevented the Arabs from rising to the threat of non semitic outsiders and "driving the foreign invaders into the sea".

The British controlled the TransJordan military system from a serious attempt to protect their national interests, while at the same time assisting and arming Jewish groups like the Haganagh, who were even then involved in a subversive , terrorist war to destabilise British control of TransJordan.

So without the British protection, the concept of a Jewish homeland would have remained in places like Madagascar or Uganda, the types of places where all good white European colonists were going in those days.

Given a free hand, the Arabs would have swept the zionist terrorists into the sea just as the rhetoric claims. So it is the British you should hate, Mules but you should hate yourself more for knowing so little about that you hold dear.

 

[EnglishMuffin]

I'm 23.

I'm not fat.

 

[woody54]

I'm 23.

I'm not fat.

.... yet!!!

Nature is cruel.

 

[Lovelynice]

That white mist is unburned fuel, the predictable result of overchoking an engine. Diesel fuel is usually pretty stable stuff, nonvolatile and with a high flash point. BUT, in this condition - atomized, aereated and heated, it would be dangerous. If they tried this in any gas chamber, one spark and the resulting explosion would blow the building apart.

In fact, they'd suffocate faster WITHOUT the engine. Diesel engines operate with a surplus of oxygen. If there isn't a load on the engine - and how could they ever put a load on the engine, mounted on a static platform at a gas chamber? - diesel exhaust contains life supporting amounts of oxygen at up to 80 percent of full power.

Above that, the oxygen levels drop below the lethal level - BUT - if you're pumping diesel exhaust into a chamber full of people, the extra oxygen provided by the engine, while not enough to sustain life, will extend the process of suffocation. For hours. AND - you can't run a diesel engine at 100% power for hours on end. The resulting carbon particles will wear out the piston rings in just a few days, and gum up the fuel injector.

So what you're basically saying is that to achieve the result of killing people with a diesel engine's exhaust inside of a few hours would require the diesel engine to be under a very heavy load somehow (by being fitted to an electricity generator perhaps, since it's stationary), with a badly tuned engine that's being half-suffocated so that most of the exhaust is that nasty white unburned fuel, and that this would have to be achieved for hours and hours with the likely result after a few days of use that the piston rings would have to be replaced and the fuel injector would be gummed up (so the engine would need a fairly thorough overhaul every few days).

But, doing all this makes it also dangerous for the guards and everyone else as the vapourised fuel is going to be extremely flammable and one spark could make the place go up like what would be expected from a fuel-air explosion (BOOM!), and this could happen from a spark either from the engine or from static electricity from the people themselves. Were the alleged victims naked and their hair shaven before they went in? Because that would reduce the risk of an explosion. Do eyewitnesses report that the guards wouldn't smoke around this and that there was a rule against it? I think it would be dangerous to even enter the room until all the fumes had been pumped out, but the vapourised fuel could still explode while being pumped out couldn't it? (a little spark from the fans and BOOM! again). Did the sondercommando enter the room naked and shaven as well ? (Because otherwise the merest spark from static on their clothing or hair would blow the building sky high)

Of course, even if this could be done, it's nothing like the mere 30 minutes or so that the (apparently not quite credible) 'eyewitness' Gerstein claimed or any of the other similar claims.

At the very least, there appears to be an enormous exaggeration on the effectiveness of the 'diesel gas chambers' to the point where it seems as if the whole story was made-up by people who wrongly assumed that "nasty horrible smoke" equals "nasty horrible levels of carbon monoxide", and makes the entire story of the 'diesel gas chambers' and 'gas vans' look suspiciously fictional.

Yes, thats what the Germans discovered too. Thats why the changed to the gas chambers.

Yes, Lovely, we all saw it, you were talking about the gas chambers, and BEIL didn't notice. OR the nursing home volunteer who does his reading for him didn't finish it for him. But, be of good cheer. BEIL claimed he has a graduate degree, so you can now offer hope to any other illiterates you meet in life.

As BEIL just proved, reading comprehension skills are not a necessary criteria for admission.

Yes, BlueEyes, I was already talking about the 'gas chambers'. The 'diesel gas chambers' which were in EVERY allaged 'death-camp' except Auschwitz and in the allegedly murderous 'gas-vans'.

I think what you're thinking of is the Zyklon-B using alleged 'gas chambers' but the problem is that if the Nazis had completely changed to such, that means that they sent the majority of 'victims' to Auschwitz; which didn't happen as only 1.1 million are alleged to have been killed there, the rest of the (MAGIC NUMBER TIME!) six million were supposedly killed in these alleged 'diesel gas chambers' - which apparently are an unworkable hypothesis and are stretching credibility.

Lovelynice, do you REALLY want to join this group of hatemongers?

I believe that the 'hate' is really on the side of those who resist any questioning of their world view. The Holocaust story has become very much akin to a religion and I don't think any other historical subject arouses a religious reaction as much as the Jewish holocaust does. It is probably more politically and personally dangerous in the United States and Europe to question the Holocaust than it is to question Allah in a Taliban mosque. For the sake of perspective, keep in mind that people are going to criticize your religion, whether it is based on fact or not.

Labelling anyone who questions the facts as an 'anti-semite', a 'hatemonger', or a 'racist' is not constructive nor is it truthful. Free and open discussion without intimidation and insults is almost completely lacking on this subject.

You need to learn to be objective without instantly branding/assuming that anyone who questions the holocaust as being a racist. You also need to consider that in many Western nations at the current time, for any academic to even question some of the cornerstones of the holocaust is careeer suicide, and possibly dangerous to themselves and their families. In some countries courts have ruled that the facts are irrelevant, and that certain things must not be said whether they are true or false. In others, a defendant in court who tries to explain or defend a forbidden view will be charged on the spot with a fresh offense. Even his lawyer can be fined or be imprisoned for trying to mount a legal defence. In one case a judge ordered that a bookseller's entire stock (innocent as well as offending titles) be burned!

It's like we're all living in the 16th Century with witch-burnings and mock trials mounted by the Inquisition. Publicly question the Holy Church of the Jewish Holocaust and your whole family could be taken away from you, your careeer ruined, and possibly you could be killed.

 

[miles]

Given a free hand, the Arabs would have swept the zionist terrorists into the sea just as the rhetoric claims. So it is the British you should hate, Mules but you should hate yourself more for knowing so little about that you hold dear.

Jesus, your mind is warped. You must lead one miserable life.

 

[krastner]

Jesus, your mind is warped. You must lead one miserable life.

Gee miles.I will bet that you don't know that your hero, Clark Gable, died of rectal cancer from taking it up his ass in Hollywould all those years. He was a flammer of the first order. He is quoted as wanting to say in GTW "frankly my dear,I take it in the ass . Now ..Originally Posted by miles
I've never seen anyone so full of bitterness and hatred as woody. What a sorry sack of shit.
Do you ever do anything but flame (like your hero)
You are the true shit..and I do mean pig shit too.

 

[captain snakebite]

Britain is to blame for what Israel represents in this world now.
It was understandable conspiring in the Balfour agreement to drag America into the war and improve the funding for the war effort, but it was the subsequent manipulations and protective activities in Palestines under British management that prevented the Arabs from rising to the threat of non semitic outsiders and "driving the foreign invaders into the sea".

The British controlled the TransJordan military system from a serious attempt to protect their national interests, while at the same time assisting and arming Jewish groups like the Haganagh, who were even then involved in a subversive , terrorist war to destabilise British control of TransJordan.

So without the British protection, the concept of a Jewish homeland would have remained in places like Madagascar or Uganda, the types of places where all good white European colonists were going in those days.

Given a free hand, the Arabs would have swept the zionist terrorists into the sea just as the rhetoric claims. So it is the British you should hate, Mules but you should hate yourself more for knowing so little about that you hold dear.

Just for argument's sake, let's ask how far back in time are we prepared to go to get at the root of the issue?

Now correct me if I'm wrong here, but around 2,000 years ago there was a kingdom of Judea right where Israel is now, right?

Then the Roman Empire stomped it's hobnailed sandals all over Judea? (under Roman rule, it pretty much ceased to exist as a Nation Kingdom around 60 - 80 years after the Jesus palaver, then was progressively assimilated over the next century or so)

Then a few hundred years later the Roman Empire adopted Christianity, giving birth to the Holy Roman Empire?

Which is basically the Catholic Church?

So - if the Vatican (in it's earlier, SPQR-toting incarnation) hadn't fucked up Judea, wouldn't the Jews have had a homeland all along, pretty much exactly where Israel is - a good 400 years before Mohammed was even born?

 

[krastner]

My cock is 12" long and 5" inches in diameter....spend the next 7 years debating what I said and you will accomplish the same thing as you have with this thread.

Fuck, you are stupid people

Now I got it...You are a zionist Jew...How do I know ? Because you lie and not even good lies at that. Just like they do. Do you realize that a dick twelve inches long and five inches around would look like a needle., albiet a long one. But still a needle.

Your lie is just like the zionist Jew lies. They are idiotic lies....and they expect everyone to believe them just like you expect everyone to believe yours..

 

[Don K Dyck]

Yours is a commonly held view by those with no direct cultural connection to Jewry.It is far easier for non Jews to coldly analyse the facts comparatively.

The 6 million stems from Judaisms lore as the sacrifice Jews must make in burning fires of punishment to cleanse their sins to enable them to return to Israel. The 6 million story first appeared in Jewish publications in Europe in co-ordination with the Ukraine famines when the Zionists were pushing their Balfour agreement rights to Palestine at the end of WWI but unfortunately the Ottomann Empire retained control from Britain for some years. The 6 million story faded from public sight quite quickly.

The mathmatics of reality bear no relativity to the religious icon of the Holocaust of religious myth. That 6 million is unimpeachable yet the public at large has been trained into thinking it is also the official death toll of Jewry in the Gas Chambers. The admissions of reduced death tolls at various sites of war camps has not led to any reduction in general Jewish rhetoric that 6 million died, the point being two totally different things are being deliberately obfuscated to protect the myth and protect the Shoah extortion racket being run from Israel. Israel itself only came into existence based on international sympathy generated by the outlandish and overstated war stories of the type presented to the Nuremburg courts. To expose their veracity now calls Israels legitimacy and right to exist into question.

That official European demographic records indicate there did not appear to be a significant loss of Jews in Europe during the Nazi campaigning is a reality no Holocaust supporter is prepared to address. 6 million would be significantly obvious even to the most bigotted observer.

Good post Woody, thanks

There is some detail on the Balfour Declaration available on Google. It appears that the British government playing their usual game of double dealing, both the Arabs and T E Lawrence, to 'protect their oil interests' from the possible ravages of the damned Americans.

 

[unculbact]

Now correct me if I'm wrong here, but around 2,000 years ago there was a kingdom of Judea right where Israel is now, right?

Then the Roman Empire stomped it's hobnailed sandals all over Judea?

Ok. I will correct you. You are wrong.

In and around 100-0 A.D., there was no Jewish nation or Kingdom. There was also no Judea, that's a Roman word, they stuck that label on after they got there. What we now know as the Holy Land was divided amongst several feuding warlords. Two Jewish brothers, rival warlords, got involved in a nasty war, and one of them asked the Romans to intervene. With trade routes under threat, they agreed. That's how the Romans got there.

In otherwords, the Romans intervened in a Jewish civil war. The Holy Land was their Vietnam, and like Vietnam, they got bogged down for decades. Being smarter than Americans, in the end, they won.

Read The Wars Of The Jews by Flavius Josephus. Don't let that Roman name fool you. He was a Jewish general until he defected to the other side.

So - if the Vatican (in it's earlier, SPQR-toting incarnation) hadn't fucked up Judea, wouldn't the Jews have had a homeland all along, pretty much exactly where Israel is - a good 400 years before Mohammed was even born?

The answer is no. Again, Josephus has all the answers you need.

 

[unculbact]

So what you're basically saying is that to achieve the result of killing people with a diesel engine's exhaust inside of a few hours would require the diesel engine to be under a very heavy load somehow (by being fitted to an electricity generator perhaps, since it's stationary)

Yeah. Without a load, the exhaust will have enough oxygen to support life, except at extremely high revs. There was some speculation for awhile that maybe the Germans did hook it up to a generator - though, a generator alone won't provide a load, it has to be RUNNING something, so they wondered if at places like, say, Belzec, the Germans ran their seachlights full blast during the day to put a load on the engine.

But, all the stories say that at the Reinhardt camps, the diesel's were the big twelve-cylinder jobs pirated from Russian T-34 tanks. Turbodiesel technology is tricky, it took them decades to figure out how to make diesel locomotives, which have generators attached to the diesel, the train itself moves on electric motors.

The generator and engine have to be finely balanced, or one will wreck the other. There was no generator designed to be run by a Russian T-34 engine. Then, there's the problem of spare parts for a foreign engine, and other tricky technological issues - for instance, the T-34 diesel ran with 16 GALLONS of lubricating oil, which it went through very quickly. Where, in a time of petroleum shortages, would they get that much lube oil?

Of course, the "diesel exhaust" story was selected only after a whole bunch of other, stranger stories were discarded. At Treblinka, the Black Book Of Polish Jewry said that they were steamed to death, a claim only dropped in 1946. The same book claimed at both Belzec and Treblinka, 500 people at a time entered the chambers, which then hydraulically lowered them into a pool of water, and they were all electrocuted. And others, even more lurid.

Of course, even if this could be done, it's nothing like the mere 30 minutes or so that the (apparently not quite credible) 'eyewitness' Gerstein claimed or any of the other similar claims.

I'm corresponding with the guy who discovered that there are six different versions of the Gerstein confessions. Of course, as you may know, he was, by government decree, stripped of his doctorate for doing so, though his research was impeccable. The first time that ever happened in the eight centuries of the French university.

Yes, BlueEyes, I was already talking about the 'gas chambers'. The 'diesel gas chambers' which were in EVERY allaged 'death-camp' except Auschwitz and in the allegedly murderous 'gas-vans'.

Ask any auto mechanic about the feasibility of running engine exhaust through the cargo cab of a truck. After he stops laughing, IF he ever stops laughing, you'll get quite a story about why it's impossible. AND insane.

 

[Don K Dyck]

Ok. I will correct you. You are wrong.

In and around 100-0 A.D., there was no Jewish nation or Kingdom. There was also no Judea, that's a Roman word, they stuck that label on after they got there. What we now know as the Holy Land was divided amongst several feuding warlords. Two Jewish brothers, rival warlords, got involved in a nasty war, and one of them asked the Romans to intervene. With trade routes under threat, they agreed. That's how the Romans got there.

In otherwords, the Romans intervened in a Jewish civil war. The Holy Land was their Vietnam, and like Vietnam, they got bogged down for decades. Being smarter than Americans, in the end, they won.

Read The Wars Of The Jews by Flavius Josephus. Don't let that Roman name fool you. He was a Jewish general until he defected to the other side.




The answer is no. Again, Josephus has all the answers you need.

Uhmmm . . . I think Roman occupation of Palestine may go back a little further than 100AD.

The Maccabbean Wars between the Maccabbee brothers and the occupying Roman forces (?) occurred around 150BC I think. I must look it up in Howard Fast, My Glorious Brothers, Panther, Bodley Head (1960).

 

[unculbact]

Uhmmm . . . I think Roman occupation of Palestine may go back a little further than 100AD.

The Maccabbean Wars between the Maccabbee brothers and the occupying Roman forces (?) occurred around 150BC I think. I must look it up in Howard Fast, My Glorious Brothers, Panther, Bodley Head (1960).

You're probably right. I meant my post to mean 100 BC to 0 AD, but it might be longer. It's been a decade since I read Josephus.

 

[Holly Delight]

The US became involved in the second world war after the bombing of pearl harbour and declared war on Japan and her Axis allies.

The US was in it before Pearl Harbor. It was called Lend Lease. Americal pilots also joined the RAF and flew for England before Dec 1941.

 

[Lovelynice]

Ask any auto mechanic about the feasibility of running engine exhaust through the cargo cab of a truck. After he stops laughing, IF he ever stops laughing, you'll get quite a story about why it's impossible. AND insane.

I did.

Boom-pop-BANG ! As overpressure builds up and either blows the doors open, shatters the windows (if any), pops rivets, etc. Or, if everything is VERY HEAVILY reinforced, no more air can go through and the engine dies. All of the other things are far more likely though.

Is that what you meant?

Somebody told me that these alleged (and now fantastical) 'Gas-Vans' were driven around rather than sitting idle. No wonder there's none left. They all blew up.

 

[unculbact]

I did.

Boom-pop-BANG ! As overpressure builds up and either blows the doors open, shatters the windows (if any), pops rivets, etc. Or, if everything is VERY HEAVILY reinforced, no more air can go through and the engine dies. All of the other things are far more likely though.

Is that what you meant?

Heh. Kinda. But one figures that the Germans would have been smart enough to put some sort of clapper valve in to make sure that they didn't burst the van apart like that.

What the mechanics pointed out to me is that an exhaust line is the length it is for a reason. Too short, and there isn't enough draft to pull air through the engine cylinders. Too long, and the exhaust cools down, becomes denser, and creates a back pressure that interferes with air intake. If they screwed with the length of the exhaust line to pump it into the back of the truck, they'd wind up with major engine problems in a very short time.

The problems inside the van are notable. First off, there is no small amount of soot in diesel exhaust (and the gas-vans are always described as Saurer trucks - the Saurer company, after 1914, made nothing but diesel powered vehicles) which would build up on the walls and floor. Any unburned fuel, predictable with a short exhaust line acting as a de facto choke, would also build up in the van. While it would take awhile, both items would lead to a fire hazard.

A huge problem the mechanics pointed out is the heat. Diesel exhaust, depending on the engine make, comes out at a temperature of between 900 and 1,400 degrees Farenheit.

In that van, without the gases cooling from expansion via Boyle's Law the way they do after leaving a tailpipe, the heat would build up very, very quickly. The people inside would have cooked before they choked.

Heat also leads to rust, take a look at your muffler for proof of that. The heat would have rusted the inside of the van in only a few weeks.

Finally, the heat creates thermal stresses in the metal. This is no small matter, even in this day and age, and with insulated walls, heated or refrigerated trucks still have problems with thermal stresses. The heat will warp the metal, and soon you won't be able to close the doors - or maybe, open them. If there's a big temperature difference between outside and inside (for instance, pumping exhaust into the van in the middle of a Russian winter) the stresses will be so great you may very well crack the metal, especially if it's been rusted from the inside heat.

To top it off, running exhaust into the van would raise the exhaust gas temperature all the way back to the exhaust manifolds, since there would still be some backpressure in the van even with a clapper valve, restricting airflow through the engine. And as it says here, high exhaust temperature is a great way to ruin a diesel engine.

few things will damage or kill a diesel engine faster than excessive exhaust gas temperature (EGT)...

A restrictive exhaust system can also reduce the airflow through the engine, resulting in a rich condition.

http://www.bankspower.com/Tech_whyegt.cfm

A rich (too much fuel, too little air) mixture will always raise exhaust temperature, in part due to "afterburning" in the exhaust manifolds. And that will wreck the engine. And the xhaust system in these "gas-vans" would have been definitely restricted.

Also, from the testimonies you read of what allegedly happened at Chelmno, where supposedly 150,000 people were killed in gas-vans, or on the Russian Front, they didn't drive the vehicles when gassing, they left them stationary. With the transmission in neutral, once again, there's no load on the engine, so there's considerable oxygen (up to 9.5 percent!) in the exhaust, even at full power. One description I read said they ran the engines full blast for 30 to 45 minutes at a time, which would have played hell with the radiator, especially on a hot summer's day.

Finally, in 2002, the United States did a perfectly good job suffocating captured Afghanis in tractor-trailer vans. The HolocaustTM story is that people were packed like sardines into these gas-vans. If they had been hermetically sealed, then under the well known formula:

t = v/20n (10-0.4) = 0.48 (v/n)

Where t is time spent in the van, v is the volume of the van, n is the number of occupants, the constant 20 the number of liters of carbon dioxide exhaled by a person in one hour, .4 the number of liters of carbon dioxide normally present in a cubic meter of air, and 10 is the lethal level of carbon dioxide.

In a gas van with a volume of 24 cubic meters, (847 cubic feet) filled with 80 people (3.3 cubic feet per person) there is a v of 583 cubic feet, or 16.5 cubic meters. Every minute, the people create 26.6 liters of carbon dioxide.

Lethal CO2 concentration in the van is 1.65 cubic meters or 1,650 liters. There were already 66 liters of CO2, so we need 1,584 more liters to kill everybody in the van. 80 people exhaling a sum of 26.6 liters of CO2 per hour means that everybody in the van suffocates in 62 minutes. Why fill it with exhaust at all?

Nobody has ever produced a picture, or blueprints of a gas-van, or come up with an engineering report on how such a thing could possibly have worked. It's not too hard to figure out that they never existed.

Just another dramatic creation of Soviet propaganda.

 

[woody54]

Of course that MUST be right. We brought the US into the War to further our own intrests in the middle east.... Not because we had half the German armed forces sat on the other side of the english channel bombing our cities to shit and preparing for an invasion.

The US became involved in the second world war after the bombing of pearl harbour and declared war on Japan and her Axis allies.

You know shit tbh

A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

The Balfour agreements dates from 1916 and was definitely in the interests of England at the time and for their part , the Zionists used their influence to drag America into WWI.

Getting the era right helps a lot in giving your posts context.

 

[krastner]

A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

The Balfour agreements dates from 1916 and was definitely in the interests of England at the time and for their part , the Zionists used their influence to drag America into WWI.

Getting the era right helps a lot in giving your posts context.

Originally Posted by Letsgocommando
Of course that MUST be right. We brought the US into the War to further our own intrests in the middle east.... Not because we had half the German armed forces sat on the other side of the english channel bombing our cities to shit and preparing for an invasion.

The US became involved in the second world war after the bombing of pearl harbour and declared war on Japan and her Axis allies.

You know shit tbh

The US became involved in the war with Germany because Roosevelt was a bastard, just like old fat winnie. Roosevelt let the pearl harbor attack happen to give him a chance to go to war with Germany so him and Churchill could get together on shipe and have a circle jerk. Some kind of fetish with the two old creeps. Lord Balfour, of Jewish blood, naturally, was afraid of germany. One of the only countries in the world that they could not fool like they had America and Britain as to their goal of world domination. You figure.

Yes I know shit..I have been to England several times and cuckolded many Englishmen.