Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Dec. 7, 2024 - Jim Fetzer

01:48:16

The Holocaust Encyclopedia - Germar Rudolf with Victor Hugo Vaca, Jr. - Dec 4, 2024

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hi, this is the Maverick artist, Vicky Hugo, reporting modern art gonzo journalism for the Modern Art Music Movement.
	It is December 4th, 2024, reporting from the former Soviet Union, Republic of Georgia, near the border with Russia, Turkey, Armenia, and Azerbaijan.
	My job is not to be politically correct.
	It is to witness, observe, analyze, and document the beautiful chaos that surrounds us all so that future generations can understand how we got to this moment in time where I am blessed to be joined by author and historian.
	And also, I do believe you are a chemist of sorts.
	I'll allow you to give more or correct me if I'm wrong.
	But this gentleman's name is Girmar Rudolph.
	And welcome to the show, sir.
	Please fill in the blanks or correct me if I'm wrong with any of that.
	Well, thank you for having me on your show.
	Yes, I'm a chemist.
	I have a what they call in Germany diploma degree, which is somewhere between an English master's and PhD.
	And then I did prepare a PhD thesis and that got intercepted because of other work I have done.
	I have done another PhD style research And this is in private, and that was like something like a PhD thesis and PhD antithesis, so matter and anti-matter, and they annihilated each other.
	So the private research, which is why you invited me, I assume, because that private research was of a politically incorrect topic, that is, forensic research into what's generally referred to the Holocaust, a special topic Their subtopic of the Auschwitz concentration camp and in particular their chemical issue.
	That's where I came in with my chemical knowledge.
	Whether or not the infamous Zyklon B, supposed to have been used to murder up to a million Jews, could have left any chemical traces in the buildings where it is said to have been deployed.
	And if so, whether it could have withstood the weathering of the past 40-50 years at the time when I was taking samples.
	And if so, whether any of these traces can still be found.
	So a chain of questions that I was asked to answer by a legal defense team when I was supposed to write an expert report and show up on various trials as an expert witness to testify about this issue.
	And that's what got me on the journey, which eventually got me here.
	So I noticed before the show that you do have a sense of humor, which is interesting because if you watch my show, I do a show with the last Dutchman.
	And when I told him that I was having a German on my show, he goes, oh, those Germans, they don't have a very good sense of humor.
	But I think with that chemical joke that you just said in the beginning, that you obliterated it or one canceled the other...
	That was a good chemistry joke, so I appreciate your sense of humor there.
	We're going to get into a topic that people don't find funny, but the thing is we have to be able to laugh at ourselves because one of the things that you are doing and that I do using satire is poking holes in the false narrative that we've been fed and that is continually fed because we're made to feel guilty.
	About not going along with the lies that we are being fed, along with sweets.
	So when you watch television or when you watch these Hollywood movies, you're supposed to believe everything that you see is true.
	But you, using the scientific method and critical thinking and open-mindedness, Have shattered that reality that we're supposed to just accept.
	And so I want to go through this with you.
	In particular, the book that you have, The Encyclopedia of the Holocaust.
	You have it there if you could show it.
	I'm going to leave in the description section the manner in which you can purchase this book, which I highly recommend, especially if you're an educator, and also if you are homeschooling your children.
	Because what they're doing, and when I say they, and I want to ask you who you think the they is, they are brainwashing you, especially if you are a white person or a German.
	I've met many Germans living here in the former Soviet Union, and Between Them and I, when we speak in private, they say they realize that they're being given white guilt.
	But out in public, they have to keep their heads down in shame.
	You guys have been forced to live a life of shame.
	And it's actually making the young people there commit suicide at a record rate for something that they had nothing to do.
	So I want to get into all those things with you.
	The first question I have for you is, what are some of the things that you've found most shocking When you were creating the encyclopedia of the Holocaust, and I don't necessarily mean like acts that were done, although I would like you to include that, but also the lies, because I think you've noticed something about the psychology of humans and how we have believed some of these lies that were fed to us.
	You've unloaded a huge load of questions and issues on me.
	I want to go to the very beginning when you were talking about germs not having humor, and there is some truth to it.
	Now, you need to understand that germs for centuries have been under the pressure of not making jokes about any topic that could get you in societal trouble.
	Now, a lot of jokes live from the tension of what people expect, and then the punchline is a sudden twist that goes completely against expectations, goes then when it goes into the societal or political era, It goes into the area of political incorrectness.
	And that has been at the border of being illegal.
	In Germany.
	So when we are talking about Germans not having humor, they have been for centuries exposed to the problem that if you make certain jokes about certain things, you can get in legal trouble and find yourself fined or end up in prison.
	So humor, under certain circumstances, can be punishable with jail in Germany.
	And that is a situation that has been around for a long time.
	It's gotten worse during the Third Reich, released afterwards, and now it's gotten worse again.
	We're right now in a situation To give you an example, the German word for joke is witz.
	Okay?
	Witz!
	Witz.
	Now, the shortest German joke is Auschwitz.
	Wow!
	Gotcha.
	And that can get you in prison.
	Because you're making a joke about Auschwitz and calling Auschwitz a joke.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	With up to five years in prison.
	Okay?
	But it's a joke.
	That's amazing.
	Sometimes people say it anyway, the shortest German joke is Auschwitz.
	But it comes across properly only in the German language because the German word for joke is Witz.
	That being said, I lost now my train of thought, or rather the final concept.
	That was a great example of a joke.
	That was fantastic.
	I was asking you, with the encyclopedia of the Holocaust, things you've learned, what were some of the takeaways that you did as far as the psychological What is the condition of the humans that we will just accept whatever our overlords tell us to be true?
	From the six million number, it wasn't five million eight hundred and ninety-nine thousand.
	If you say that, you can get arrested in certain countries in the world.
	Like, who actually did the count?
	It wasn't six million and one.
	You know, things like that.
	Just go through the list of things that you found while you were reading this.
	Working on the encyclopedia itself requires a definition.
	I have been in that field of study since the early 1990s, and the very first book came out in 1993. Actually, two of them...
	You are muted.
	Hold on a second.
	You're muted for some reason.
	Just hang on.
	I don't know if it's on your end or my end.
	Can you say something, please?
	All right.
	One, two, three, four, five.
	Okay, yes, you're back.
	For some reason you were muted there.
	You were talking about the catalyst for your research into the Holocaust.
	I have under my belt now 35 years of research and publishing in the area, and I am the lead editor of a series that's called Holocaust Handbooks.
	You can find that online actually under holocausthandbooks.com.
	It's 53 volumes of archival and forensic research, and some of them are more overviews of the topic.
	And I have lived in that field of study, immersed myself literally for 35 years.
	So I would say there's very little that can shock me still when it comes to discrepancies of what we're told officially.
	And what I find out, because I have done that kind of basic exploration and discovery Decades ago.
	Now, when I sat down to write the Holocaust Encyclopedia, that requires, of course, encyclopedic knowledge of the field and that I can have only because of the 35 years.
	It wasn't so much the discrepancies between the official narrative and what I had found out with the archives forensic research and so forth to be actually fact and accurate.
	But more connecting dots that I hadn't seen before.
	We all think about, and you raised that issue initially, who's done it?
	We all think about, ask our question, well, if that is not true, the story we are told to one degree or another, who is responsible for it having been skewed so badly?
	And the finger pointing goes very quickly and there's an assumption where it was the Jews, that's actually the starting point of German governmental persecution or prosecution of people who say the Jews did that in order to, that started in the 60s and 70s when Germany started going after people saying something like that.
	The reason for that is obvious because most survivors, most people who were incarcerated in Third Reich camps had a Jewish background.
	And therefore you have the most witnesses and the most suspects who could have twisted, exaggerated or invented stuff.
	However, when I went through the encyclopedia, then you really have to put things together and get things all interconnected and lining up and being consistent from entry to entry.
	And not repeat yourself and have to refer to other entries and then you really need to know all your entries and all the stuff at once.
	For 35 years I've done one topic and subtopic after another, but not really getting the overview, the whole picture.
	When I did the encyclopedia, I really had to get my act together in this regard.
	And that's when I started to connect the dots and see who's done it.
	And it wasn't the Jews.
	What I found out...
	No.
	The Jews were the primary...
	Jews, I should say, people with Jewish background.
	That's a better way of describing it, because not everybody who has a Jewish background is considering themselves a Jew.
	But the Third Reich was very general and putting everyone in that category that had just Jewish ancestors.
	Anyway, they were, of course, the primary witnesses, as I mentioned.
	However, we're talking about the core of the Holocaust narrative.
	That is said to have unfolded in what's generally called the extermination camps.
	They were either pure extermination camps or mixed extermination and forced labor camps.
	We're talking about six main camps where it is supposed to have happened, whatever it is, and we can discuss that.
	But that's where everybody agrees, that's where the main story unfolded.
	Excluding right now mass shootings in the East, particularly between, in temporarily, so German-occupied Soviet Union.
	That's a different issue.
	Massacres in wars happen, and they have happened there too.
	I will focus on what's iconic about the Holocaust, and that is the gas chambers.
	That's the unique tool that's said to have been deployed there for this genocide, and that is not recorded Before or ever since in the history of mankind.
	So that's kind of the primary unique aspect, the technologically advanced machinery of mass murder in this iconic, unique location called Gas Chamber.
	Six camps where it's mostly said to have happened.
	Auschwitz, Belzec, Majdanig, Germno, Sobibor and Treblinka are the names of those six.
	They are all located in what's today called Poland.
	The story started off during the war, in late 1941, get the first reports, and it evolved in 42 and 43, mainly, or I should say almost exclusively, by reports coming out of Poland, being transferred from the Polish underground, the Polish resistance movement.
	As you know, every country that was occupied by the Germans had some resistance movement, so did the Poles.
	And they transferred their messages to the Polish government in exile in London and from there it got distributed and disseminated out in the world.
	So we have the first talking about gas chambers coming from that resistance movement.
	And that's where the foundations for that story, but also the discrepancies and the contradictions were laid.
	The stories about electrocution chambers, about vacuum chambers, about steam chambers, or any kind of murder method you could deploy in a chamber was claimed at one point or another.
	So it was highly inconsistent.
	And then the war is over.
	The Soviets occupy what is today Poland.
	Briefly create a number of quote-unquote expert reports about the camps they have overrun.
	And I chose that word with intention because I said the Red Army never liberated anyone.
	They didn't even liberate the camp of Auschwitz.
	If you look at witness accounts of female prisoners being raped and other prisoners being deported to Siberia.
	So no one was liberated by the Red Army.
	Except maybe some communists who made Korea within their system.
	But all the rest, they went just from one dictatorial regime to another.
	Another lie that you realized that you stumbled upon.
	Yes.
	There's so many historical lies and that's what's so fascinating and why I implore people, especially people who are homeschooling educators, to get your encyclopedia of the Holocaust.
	It's really important because it's not just the lie of the Holocaust and the number of victims there.
	We're not denying that a Holocaust happened, right?
	I mean, I have people on my channel that say, oh, you really believe the Holocaust happened?
	No, the Holocaust did happen.
	Am I incorrect in saying that?
	And please correct me if I'm wrong.
	It needs clarification, not necessarily correction.
	direction, we need to talk about what is the Holocaust.
	Yeah, the Holocaust is a umbrella term that covers an entire continent.
	Three years and a zillion of different alleged or actual crime locations.
	All of them are to one degree or another independent and you cannot address this multitude of various events stretching over so much time and space with just one term and say I deny or confirm.
	You have to look at all these subsection and need to figure out what part of it do I find confirmed with the evidence that we can find.
	And what do we have to revise and what do we have to reject?
	And in each case, it may look different.
	So, saying I deny or confirm or accept the Holocaust, this makes no sense because the term itself is an umbrella term that covers too much to be handled with just one word, deny or accept.
	Therefore, it makes no sense.
	Is that why they chose it?
	And who chose to call it the Holocaust?
	Do you know where the origin of that term came from?
	Well, Holocaust with lowercase h has been used by the New York Times to denote massacres or pogroms against Jews since the turn of the 19th to the 20th century, so 125 years by now, long before the Second World War.
	Now, uppercase h, as we have it now as a kind of a trademark, That became generally accepted only with the miniseries that was called Holocaust that was aired on US TV in 1978. Before that, it was not known under that term in general.
	So that's a relatively recent development.
	Now, let me get back to...
	What was it known as?
	What was it called?
	Because that's the thing, as a person who does podcasts, I have to be able to speak to people.
	Like some people go, oh, there's no such thing as a virus.
	Why do you call it the coronavirus?
	Well, what else am I supposed to call it?
	So what I'm referring to the Holocaust before that film, and I remember that film series, what was it known as?
	What was the Holocaust known as?
	That's a good question.
	That was...
	Some called it in the Jewish Hebrew sphere, it was the Shoah, and it's still called that way.
	Shoah?
	Hebrew for catastrophe, if I'm not mistaken.
	And in the other areas, Looking at the track record, for instance, in the International Military Tribunal, it was just generally referred to as the extermination of the Jews and genocide against the Jews.
	So I didn't have a special term to it yet.
	Holocaust was used here and there, but not universally accepted or known.
	The reason I say that, and that's interesting that you point that out, because when you say the genocide of the Jews, but you're not allowed to talk about the genocide of the Palestinians.
	So in essence, what the people are claiming to be victims of right now are repeating themselves historically at this moment in time and trying to subterfuge that, if that's the proper word, or just bury it, so that people don't relate the Holocaust To what's happening now in Palestine.
	Do you see a relation to that?
	And I'm not talking about the gas chamber usage, but just in the genocide of these people in Palestine.
	Well, yeah, there's, of course, John.
	I have actually given a presentation on that at the Jewish problem conference in June, talking about Judaism's and Zionism's sword and shield.
	Which is the Holocaust that gives them the permission to get away with pretty much everything and give them justification to preemptively strike against whoever they consider to be a threat to them.
	And this is what we see what's happening in Palestine and Gaza, because we have this brief incursion of a few Palestinians causing a few casualties.
	And now they think we can use that as a preemptive As a justification to preemptively strike and wipe out all Palestinians.
	If you look at some justifications that Israeli leaders have made of what they're doing, that is a program of genocide.
	Preferably, if there weren't any resistance in the world, they would just wipe the plate and be done with it and turn Gaza into a parking lot with no one being alive.
	That's pretty much a repetition of the Book of Joshua for all the Christians out there.
	I probably know if you go to the Bible and the Book of Joshua, it tells the story of how the Holy Land was allegedly occupied or taken possession of by the Jews after they had wandered through the desert coming from Egypt and they wiped out every tribe that lived there because God has given them The land, not only, but the order explicitly to kill everyone.
	Men, women, children, infants, has to be wiped out on the order of God.
	It's the book of Joshua, and that's kind of the script that they're following right now.
	And the religious leader actually are explicit about that.
	And the references to Amalek is a reference back to the book of Joshua and the conquest of the Holy Land.
	It is a program, allegedly God-ordered, Of genocide of everyone who is occupying what they consider their land.
	And that's just a kind of...
	It didn't happen 3000 years ago.
	Israeli scholars agree today that is a myth.
	The conquest of the Holy Land under Joshua didn't happen.
	That's just a myth, a creational myth for the state of Israel, for the Jewish people.
	It didn't happen back then, but it's happening now.
	It's been happening since 1948, slowly but surely, wiping everyone or pushing everyone out that's in the way and that's not considered to be Jewish.
	You know, ethnically speaking, if you look at the genetic heritage, the new Jewish occupants coming from Europe, they have no genetic link to the Middle East, whereas the Palestinians there have links there.
	Palestinians, they are Minority Jewish, but mostly Christian and Muslim or used to be the Christians have been on a lot of pressure on there and less and less of them.
	But anyway, but they are basically the Jews of 2000 years ago who first to a large degree converted to Christianity.
	Because Christianity is kind of a Jewish sect, so it just changed their allegiance a little bit and their ideology.
	And of course, after the Muslim conquest of the Middle East in the seventh, eighth, ninth, 10th century, Many of them converted to Islam.
	So the Palestinians are the descendants of the original Jews, not the immigrants coming mainly from Eastern and Central Europe before, during and after the Second World War.
	Thank you for the side topic.
	I want to get you back on track.
	Before we get back on track, I just want to make sure.
	So your investigation into the Holocaust, per se, is based on the use of the gas chambers as a modern instrument of mass extermination of human beings.
	Can I assume that that would be the definition then of the Holocaust, since you mentioned that it was termed that after that movie in the 1970s?
	Right.
	Okay.
	If I were to condense down the Holocaust to the real essentials, what sets it apart to the many other massacres and genocides we've had in the history of mankind, I would say there are three main issues, three main conditions that the Holocaust has allegedly met,
	and that is a plan, the intention, a plan, and the implementation of a plan to kill all, if not at least most, of the Jews that came into Into the range of the National Socialists.
	So plan, intention, and implementation.
	Secondly, it's the unique weapon of murder.
	The murder weapon is the homicidal gas chamber.
	And the third is the result.
	Six million Jews, that's the iconic figure.
	Now, if we're talking about this issue, then the claim that I make is there was no intention, there was no plan, And most certainly there was no implementation of a plan because there's not a documentary trace of a plan or implementation of a plan anywhere in the huge records that have survived from the Third Reich.
	When it comes to the homicidal gas chambers, the only place that homicidal gas chambers have ever existed is here in the United States for capital punishment.
	That's where they were being built for one or two persons only.
	Of course, it's a mass gas chamber when we're talking about individual gas chamber for execution for people who have been sentenced to death.
	And they were built since the mid-1920s, but they were decommissioned at the end of the 20th century, so they are not operable anymore.
	But that's where we have the only documentary traces, blueprints, plans, all the rest that comes with it, of You would expect if the Third Reich had done a similar thing on a million-fold quantity and intensity,
	that you have at least as many traces of engineers planning, testing, blueprints, and then records of how it was done, what needed to be changed, and so forth, and so on.
	There's nothing.
	What the mainstream historians basically rely on is reinterpreting, and that's a nice way of putting it, documents that are innocuous, at the most ambiguous as to what they mean.
	However, if you put them in the context of all the documents, it's clear that they don't mean anything harmful.
	And then taking this cherry-picked evidence out of context, reinterpreting it, and making something out of it that it doesn't mean.
	That's the only way they can come to the conclusion that there is any documentary trace.
	However, if you put it back into the context, it disappears.
	And when it comes to this...
	Everything that you just said in certain countries would be considered illegal and could get you thrown in jail.
	Am I correct or incorrect for that?
	By the way, I agree with your analysis of those three points not being...
	So that would put both of us in jail.
	Yes.
	Up to 20 years in Austria.
	You have six years in Italy, if I'm not mistaken.
	Five years in Russia and Israel and Germany.
	Up to one year, I think, in France.
	When it comes to European countries, the list of European countries that do not have declared it illegal is actually shorter than the ones that do.
	I think right now we have 27 countries worldwide, 28, that actually have declared it illegal.
	Canada among them.
	Sweden has been the last one to join.
	CARTA is a special case because they have also created the institution of peace bonds, Orwellian New Speech.
	Peace bonds is when somebody, because of this track record, is suspected to make public statements that would disturb the public peace in order to save public peace from this potential Disruption by someone voicing his opinion, they can put people up to one year in prison without a crime having been committed, let alone any trial have been done.
	So you can preventively put people in prison to shut them up because they have a track record of speaking out about things.
	This is exactly the tool that the National Socialist used starting in 1933 to put away dissidents We had a track record of being troublemakers and put them in what they call protective custody.
	The Canadians now call it a peace bond.
	That sounds even better because it's not even custody in there.
	It's a peace bond to ensure the graveyard peace of society.
	Now, I'm assuming, correct me if I'm wrong, you're not saying these things to be anti-Semitic or to identify as a Nazi or white supremacist or anything.
	You're basing this on critical analysis as a chemist, as a researcher.
	You have documented evidence to back up that claim.
	And I'm Saying this because I have also done my research and I've seen this work that people like you have done.
	And that's why I'm saying as an open-minded critical thinker that yes, that doesn't make sense.
	The numbers don't make sense.
	Like just on a logical level.
	What is making these people who claim to be leaders, who claim to be so intelligent, so intellectual, so smart, not open their eyes to the reality that you're just placing in front of them and saying, look, you could look at it for yourself.
	What's happening?
	Coming to the ideological part, I've just said that what Canada is doing is horrible.
	In consideration, without crime and without due process, the Nazis did the same.
	I depend myself on free speech on civil rights and I cannot justify any regime that tramples civil rights underfoot.
	Whether it be the Canadian or any one of the other 27 countries that ban free speech or it was in history the National Socialist.
	I'm sure having this intense feeling of justice, I would have gotten in trouble during the Third Reich myself.
	I would have turned into a dissident and ended up in a camp there as I ended up in prison in Germany for the books I've written.
	So I'm not defending any authoritarian regime, whether they call themselves a leader system, as the Third Reich did, or a democratic system.
	Democracy is basically a situation where two wolves and a lamb decide what's for dinner.
	If it's not guarded by civil rights that are inalienable and unquestionably cannot be violated, democracy is just a lynchmark.
	It's not a value in and of itself.
	You need to have inalienable civil rights and rights to self-determination, I want to throw in there for good measure too.
	And with that strong statement, I would be at a war footing, not just with today's quote-unquote democracies who trample civil rights underfoot, but with a third right too, or any authoritarian regime in history.
	So I'm not defending any of what's happened.
	Back then or what's happening now?
	For me, it's a matter of looking into the evidence and getting the record straight.
	We all know the wisdom that the first casualty of war is truth.
	That is true for today's wars, whether you could look in Gaza or Ukraine, the propaganda that's being thrown around or in history.
	And the Second World War has been the worst war ever in the history of mankind.
	And because it was so catastrophic, The stakes were so high on all sides.
	It is clear that propaganda and lying was most intense during that conflict as well.
	And it has ended with one side having total victory, plowing the other on underground and with them then writing the history.
	The victors write the history and they're never objective or accurate.
	So there is correction needed and correction has been In certain areas declared illegal by the people who have been by the systems that have either prevailed during that war or been put in place after the war by the victors as we are seeing in Germany.
	So revising what you find in history based on new evidence or new evaluation of old evidence is something normal.
	Looking critically into knowledge that Our parents or teachers tell us and scrutinizing whether they got it right is an essential part of history.
	And when we're talking about the evidence, we're talking about the witnesses have told story.
	The primary tool of the historian is source criticism.
	Criticizing, scrutinizing, looking again into what a person claims.
	And I want to be very clear here when we're talking about Evidence, strictly speaking, an eyewitness account is not evidence.
	If I claim pigs can fly, That doesn't make pigs fly.
	If I find six million people who confirm me, yes, we saw pigs fly, that still doesn't make pigs fly.
	Then I have six million claims that pigs fly.
	And if I have six million people who claim they were gas chambers, that still doesn't make gas chambers a reality.
	I have to look into the app.
	What is evidence?
	You have the physical remains.
	Like with every murder, you can tell a million times And have a lot of witnesses that this person, your neighbor, killed someone or many people.
	If you don't find a body, if you don't find a trace, you can't even identify who was killed.
	In most cases, people were killed, but we don't know the names.
	We're just claiming people were killed.
	We don't find traces of the body, traces of the murder weapon of any kind, nor in the document, nor in the forensic record.
	We don't find any traces that the murderers have left in pursuance of their crime, and what is normal for any Murder case that would get thrown out if you don't have a body, if you don't have any trace of the body, if you don't have any evidence of a murder weapon, and so forth.
	You have no select to stand on as a prosecutor, the case wouldn't even go to court.
	And that's where we hear when we are talking about these things.
	We are going into the archives.
	The Germans have not, to a large degree, when it comes particularly to Auschwitz and Maedan, like two of the major camps where things are said to have happened, they have not destroyed the documents.
	There's often a claim that the Germans destroyed everything, therefore we can't prove it.
	Well, if you can't prove it, Now you are saying you cannot only prove it, but you also say they have destroyed it.
	Now you have to prove, A, that they destroyed it, B, what they destroyed, and C, you still have to prove it.
	You're making your situation worse.
	But we find the records for Auschwitz.
	Every nail and every bolt that was ever set, every brick and every piece of steel that was ever used in building this or that is documented.
	Tens, hundreds of thousands of documents.
	They are all there.
	We can neatly reconstruct how the camp was built and what building was used for which purpose.
	It's all there.
	There's no trace of gas chambers.
	As a matter of fact, the places where it says to have happened, there's plenty of documentation showing exactly what they were used for, constantly used for.
	There was no room for a gas chamber in those places.
	They were used as morgues as they are claimed to have been on the blueprints and all the documentation.
	There were morgues.
	People were dying in this camp.
	And I need to say here, We have documented for Auschwitz 135,500 deaths, we can pretty much tell them by name, who died of disease mainly.
	Typhus epidemic was raging in the camp for basically a whole year, costing huge amount of victims, but other diseases, dysentery and typhoid fever and so forth, because of dramatically bad hygienic conditions in this crowded camp that Improved during 43 and 44, but when we're talking 42, 43, it was catastrophic.
	A camp that existed basically for four or five years, causing 135,500 victims due to quote-unquote natural causes, that's to say, not intentional homicide.
	But neglect, of course, if the SS stuffs people in there, it's not prepared to handle them, there is responsibility there, there's no doubt.
	So it was at least gross neglect, but it was not intentional homicide.
	So, a catastrophic amount of people died there, and it has to be said it was a catastrophe, particularly the Jews that were deported from France, who were dumped right at the side in the camp, right at the time in this camp when this typhus epidemic was completely escalating.
	We can track them to the death records, to the death certificate, most of them who died, none of them ended up in the gas chamber, they died mostly of typhus, and we can name them.
	A catastrophe.
	And the burden is to be taken by the German government who ran the thing, the camp in a catastrophic way, in an irresponsible way.
	Deexplicable by the wartime situation, they were desperate to get manpower anywhere to get their war productions going.
	But the way they went about it was catastrophic.
	So Making it a crime to say 135,000 people live there because you're minimizing the Holocaust.
	How careless are we?
	135,500 people died there.
	It is a catastrophe.
	It's the biggest casualty number that we have for any camps in the German region and others are not trailing too far behind.
	So we're talking about massive injustice and massive neglect That was done causing these casualty figures, and it has to be blamed on who's responsible for it.
	It was an intentional genocide in terms of wanting to immerse murder the people, but they were put under conditions that were not preventable under the circumstances.
	They shouldn't have been deported in the masses.
	If you have a typhus epidemic, you stop deporting, but they didn't stop.
	Coming back to the gas chambers, I mentioned six camps, they were all in Poland.
	The Polish started doing the war, doing the propaganda.
	The Soviets moved in, did a little bit of a propaganda show with every camp they overran, but then handed it over to the Polish judiciary, who then was doing interrogations of inmates, former inmates, they could lay their hands on, they would testify about all these camps.
	And there were basically four Polish individuals who were Doing the investigation for these six camps.
	One of them was actually handling three of the camps.
	And that is, this is of Lukashkiewicz, he was doing Majdanik, Treblinka and Sobibor.
	We had a historian handling Balzac because there were basically no witnesses.
	And Auschwitz was done by Janssen and the general camp was done by Betnaz.
	So we have these four individuals.
	They interrogate the witnesses.
	And they from this completely disconnected, in most cases, disconnected, chaotic assembly of contradictory, inconsistent witness accounts that tell any story you like.
	For instance, when we're talking about Treblinka, we have electrocution, vacuum chambers, engine exhaust chambers, steam chambers, anything goes.
	How do you make a consistent story out of it?
	That we are still taught today.
	How did you get from the anarchy of complete witness testimony chaos to the streamlined, somewhat consistent story that is told today?
	And that's where these four Polish individuals come in.
	They take this, cut out what seems completely implausible and agree In some ways, and we don't know whether they intentionally agreed, whether that was co-orchestrated and who did it, but evidently at the end they all agree for the camp Treblinka, Sobibor and Balsek on engine exhaust gas.
	In Auschwitz, Maedanek is supposed to have Maedanek cyclone B plus a little bit of carbon monoxide.
	Anyway, there's still discrepancies, but basically At the end, each single one of the camps has a consistent story that has nothing to do with the witness account chaos that it's supposed to be based on.
	So extreme cherry picking of witness and the most extreme case that shows you that this story is extremely fishy is the case of Sobibor.
	It's the smallest of these camps.
	When it comes to initially claimed witness death toll, just 300,000, 200,000, depending on who you ask, compared to A million or so, half a million that is claimed for the others.
	And you look at the witness testimony that were deposited with this Polish investigative judge right at the end of the war.
	And the witnesses there, almost all of them agree on a scenario where the gas chamber used chlorine as a gas.
	And once the deed was done, The floors of these gas chambers would open up downward.
	They would just collapse sideways with some hydraulic thing and all the dead victims would fall into some basement area where there were train railway carts on tracks.
	They would right away fall in there and then they would be driven out either to mass graves or to to pyres to be incinerated.
	So we have the early testimonies who kind of all agree on it.
	The few that don't agree have made no statement about the mechanics.
	So you have the majority and no contradicting witness testimony elaborating on this sophisticated engineering feat, these chambers with collapsible floors.
	And you look at what is the claim today.
	Today, the streamlined version is that murder happened not with chlorine, but with engine exhaust.
	That there were no collapsible floor, no basement underneath, no tracks, no trolleys, but that was just a normal room.
	The entries, the victims entered through one door, and on the other end of the chamber was another door, and there the victims were just dragged out by people and dragged to mass graves, all impires, and that's it.
	So there is no relationship between what the witnesses testified, all of them Jews, and what this is of which Kashkiewicz made out of it.
	He threw out all witnesses.
	And copied the version he had just created earlier for the Treblinka camp, where he had done a similar thing.
	He had a good number of people claiming diesel exhaust in normal gas chambers.
	He took their story, threw away all the others, streamlined the account, and then copied it over to Sobibor and ignored all witness accounts.
	And these are the stories that we're stuck with.
	If I say historian, you go to the sources, to the origin of it, the original testimony, when memory was fresh and to a large degree unadulterated by later massive mass media and societal influences.
	We're talking about an event in history or of history, I should say, that has been reported and spoken about like no other in the history of mankind ever before.
	All channels of society, all channels of media talking about the Holocaust, The influence on the memory of survivors by the story being told and retold and reported about and quote-unquote documented in documentaries and in books is massive.
	What a witness tells you, you can see a lot of witnesses testifying right after the war and testifying 20-30 years later.
	There is a streamlining going on in their memory.
	They told complete discrepancy and contradiction After the war and 20 years later they testify at the, for instance, the Eichmann trial in 61 or during the German Auschwitz trial in 65, 66 and later in other trials.
	Suddenly they are streamlined.
	They have all agreed on a version because that's the version that has been agreed on and has been publicized through all channels of society for 20, 30 years and there they are agreeing.
	Late testimonies are worthless because they are so adulterated, so polluted by all kinds of other sources.
	You have to really go to the very early ones that have not been exposed to these influences, or very little, I should say, and that when memory really was fresh, because who remembers details 20, 30, 40 years later?
	Can't rely on it.
	And you look at it and it's complete chaos.
	Those Polish judges have created a story out of whole cloth of four Polish individuals, I should say.
	One of them was a historian, the other three were investigative judges.
	That had nothing to do with the real situation on the ground with the witness claims and has nothing to do with the documentary record that we do have.
	Nothing to do with the forensic record because they went into the camps and tried to find, according to the witness accounts, tried to find mass graves and traces And back then, they came out basically empty-handed, they couldn't confirm it, but left it at that.
	We found those early expert reports about their forensic research being basically failures as well.
	That's when you connect the dots.
	The Polish judiciary, of course, was communist, Stalinist after the war, and they were planning to make communist show trials.
	In the Stalinist era, the communist show trials, they were legendary for being completely orchestrated.
	They were theatrical performances that were absurd, if not to say grotesque at times.
	That started before the war, and Stalin continued during the war and continued after the war.
	And there were a number of them addressing Auschwitz, Majdanek, for which these Polish judges created their case for the prosecution.
	And the defense had, back then, they were basically second.
	Like in all the Stalinist show trials, the defense counsels for defendants are assistant prosecutors in Stalinist show trials.
	They are not defendants.
	Defense lawyers.
	So that's where the story was created.
	It was created in Poland by Poles, and as far as I could verify, those four people had been crucial and central for the creation of the narrative for these six camps.
	None of them have any Jewish background.
	Does that mean there's no Jewish influence?
	It can be certain with Jews being so adversarial and hostile to the Third Reich that Jews who were coming back into Soviet-occupied Poland as occupiers or as people who had fled and just came back,
	that they had an anti-German, anti-Nazi attitude and that they were relied upon building up the new administration, that there were Jews somewhere also in the judicial administration.
	I don't know.
	I'm not an expert on that.
	There may be influence on really who instructed These Polish investigative judges to come up with which narrative was their instruction, was there a policy, a conspiracy within the Polish judiciary, the Polish government in general?
	Was that even orchestrated on a higher level from the Kremlin itself?
	We don't know.
	But knowing how Stalinist show trials were orchestrated is clear that there was orchestration by someone.
	That's a really good question that you just asked.
	Who influenced those four judges?
	Will you be doing a deep dive into that to find out the answer in your research from here on in?
	You know, you would have to go into the Polish archives to do some deep digging there.
	And first of all, I have no passport because Germany refused to renew my passport, my German citizen, because of the things I'm doing.
	They have numerous arrest warners out against me.
	One way of trying to catch me is by not issuing me a passport.
	I'm safe in the United States, therefore, I don't care.
	I can't travel, so I wouldn't be able to do it myself.
	But even if any revision is showing up in Poland trying to get access to an archive, if you get access to any archive, you have to identify yourself, sign paperwork that you wouldn't do any harm, damage, and this and that, and all the rest of it, and identify yourself to the point that they can hold you responsible and can check your background.
	Because now in Europe, for the most part, these archives are forbidden territory for dissident researchers.
	In Germany, you can get access to archives only if you are an accredited researcher, like an assistant or a full professor at a university, or you have An invitation, a letter by a professor saying you have legitimate research and then you can get that.
	I would not be able to get that even though I have contacted a few professors who are friendly, they cannot expose their support to me because they would get in trouble.
	If I went anyway to an archive like that, if I could travel or any of my friends who can and have any kind of profile being Registered, so to say, in their red flag lists as a dissident researcher.
	All the administrator at the archive is seeing your ID, goes into the back room, calls the police, and you get arrested.
	So for the better part of the past 25 to 30 years, or 25 years, yeah, it started changing in 98, 99, when Germany Put their own archives under lock and key in this sense, I've just described, and put other countries in Eastern Europe, particularly under pressure to do the same.
	And Poland has done the same, introduced an anti-Holocaust denial, or I would say anti-Holocaust contesting law on the books in 1998. So we have to be a little bit subversive here and a little bit Furtive in our approach of doing things by working with people who are sympathetic but are not on anyone's radar.
	That makes it a little bit complicated.
	I cannot see myself doing it because I have so much on my plate running the Holocaust Encyclopedia website.
	By the way, as the name says, holocaustencyclopedia.com.
	Freely accessible there, also free download, so you don't have to buy it, but you can also purchase it there.
	Running that, which needs repeated updates, I'm running the Free Speech Lobby Group, Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust.
	That's where I'm the manager of that, and then I'm involved as a production manager on Armreg Limited, which is the publishing branch, armreg.co.uk, where we sell all kinds of books.
	HolocaustHandbooks.com.
	I mentioned that website.
	I'm in charge of that.
	So you see, there's a lot of things that I'm doing, which already put my plate full.
	I have dropped out of doing research myself many years ago.
	I'm in publishing, free speech lobbying, and showing up at shows like I do with you now.
	As I said, I'm locked down in the United States.
	I can't travel.
	That would have to be a topic to be addressed and researched by others.
	I'm the one who would Love to see the results and publish it with enthusiasm.
	It would be interesting to find answers to these questions, but I wouldn't be able to do the research.
	Sorry for the long-winded answer.
	That's okay.
	The reason why I am interested in that is because I myself, as a researcher, am noticing, as you have, That a lot of the things that we are taught are lies, and they are fed to us by people who are puppets.
	So from what you have just described, these four non-Jew, I would assume that they are known as Goy, they were the puppets.
	The same way that we are witnessing right now how the people who are at the highest levels, the central bankers, those who print out the money, That create the debt slavery, that finance both sides of the war, they self-identify for the most part as Jews.
	If you look at Black Rock, Vanguard, State Street, who are the executives at the highest levels, they're not the Amish, they're not the Seventh-day Adventists or anything like that.
	They identify as Jews.
	We see that now.
	With the cabinet of Donald Trump, who some people say he converted to Judaism, but the point that I'm making is when you start researching all this, even the recent American history with the Donald Trump trials,
	how they use lawfare to accuse him of all sorts of things, and how they use the propaganda that's finance and Created really by the Pilgrim Society, which are these Freemasons, these secret societies.
	But when you start researching the Freemasons, essentially that's Judaism for the Goy.
	And then when you start researching what happened in the Weimar Republic and what was the catalyst for Hitler wanting to get rid of the Jews, it was because of the usury that the Jews do.
	And when you start researching history and seeing that they were expelled from 109 countries thousands of times, and now I see that they're doing that where you're living, my homeland, the United States, and the people aren't being given the proper information.
	From the 2020 election that was clearly stolen, when you see it from my perspective, the outside looking in through the looking glass, the whole world knows that Joe Biden did not get 81 million votes.
	And now it's even clearer seeing that Kamala Harris somehow managed to lose anywhere between 13 million to 21 million votes.
	In this past election.
	So obviously there was something wrong.
	And the only ones who don't see that there's anything wrong are the people in the United States, just as I guess what happened when you were living in Germany.
	Everybody has that myopic view where they don't want to criticize.
	They don't want to look inside because they, I don't know, I guess they're just afraid of admitting that they made a mistake.
	In this case, the mistake being, like you said, the narration, the story that's been given by these four Polish judges that are now accepted as the reality.
	And like you said, you're not diminishing the Holocaust if you say that 153 or let's say 160,000 died in a certain camp.
	But the 6 million number, that's shown to be something that was predetermined.
	When you see the newspapers dating back to before World War I and even afterwards, they had that 6 million number.
	They used these numbers.
	And they just keep repeating it and repeating it until it's in your brain and you start believing these things.
	And that's what's happening in the United States right now.
	So that's why I think it's so important that we don't just accept what CNN and MSNBC and this X-22, trust the plane.
	These people are lying to you, but they lie to you with such confidence and such repetition that eventually you end up believing that.
	And I think that's the problem that I see My address is on my personal website.
	It's not a secret.
	How do you see that in relation to where you are right now in the United States as a German?
	Now, what's your perspective of my homeland?
	Do you see how these people that surround you, they're believing the narrative, this fake narrative?
	First of all, I'm aware that there is an issue with Jews and their power and influence and their ways of doing things.
	People of Jewish background.
	I'm trying to stay out of it.
	I'm trying to be the researchers getting to the historical facts and trying to find out who did what, but not necessarily singling out any group simply because contesting the mainstream Holocaust narrative is already a third rail topic.
	I don't have to exacerbate my private, my personal situation by Piling the quote-unquote Jewish problem or Jewish question on top of it.
	So I'm trying to stay clear of it.
	When it comes to why people don't see it, I must say I've done my research on the power of taboos.
	That's what we're talking about here.
	I had a professor friend of mine, professor of sociology in Germany, Who made a simple test when he was talking about primitive societies taboos.
	And he said that it is something that in modern society we don't do anymore, that we flagellate people if they violate a taboo, call for the police, incarceration.
	And then he made a test, informed a couple of his students to be observers and record what's happening.
	He went to the podium instead of teaching sociology, he suddenly presented The main arguments of Holocaust revisionism against the existence of homicidal gas chambers.
	And that was in Germany in the late 1970s, early 1980s.
	And the reaction of the students was exactly the same, down to the physiological reaction of getting all upset and increased blood pressure and getting red in the face and starting screaming, calling for the police and so forth, as you have it in primitive societies, quote-unquote, when, for instance, they have a holy tree and you go next to the holy tree and piss against it because it's your habit of pissing against the holy tree.
	You didn't know that's a holy tree, but you have it coming.
	That's the same reaction.
	When you violate the Holocaust, because it's taboo.
	People drink, are being fed the narrative with the mother's milk, so to say.
	And almost always in society, particularly in Israel and in Germany.
	They grow up with it.
	It is unthinkable that something that is so deeply inculcated in your brain could be untrue.
	But even more so, it is a taboo.
	It is a Pavlovian reflex.
	Pavlov has found this reflex in dogs.
	You can train a dog with a certain symbol.
	They do a certain reaction.
	And you can train the same thing into humans.
	That's what you see here.
	The automatic, subconscious, impulsive reaction of shutting down your rational Thinking capacities and resorting to lower brain functions of being upset, excited, angry, and wanting to lash out and wanting to silence whoever disturbs your peace of mind or feeling comfortable in the world that you've grown up with.
	This is basically what it is.
	It has very little to do with rational thinking, with rational rejection of the obvious.
	I have the same problems getting over my Reflexive reactions to the violation of that taboo, because I was raised just the same way until the age of 27. I believed in infirmly, would have never questioned it.
	Also because if you question it, you're being seen by society as a Nazi, as a anti-Semite, as a right-wing extremist.
	All these things you don't want to be associated with, you don't want to be anywhere near with, and you avoid it like the devil avoids the holy water, even though it's kind of inverted here.
	Anyway, To overcome this, you need to have a rational attitude that supersedes your gut reaction of revulsion, and just look at the fact, even though you would think they come from Nazis, even if a Nazi has an argument, if the argument is correct, it's still a correct argument, even if a Nazi says.
	Can you accept that?
	You find out then, in the second look, it's not even a Nazi.
	He has been branded a Nazi because the positive B don't want you to listen to his arguments.
	Because calling someone a Nazi makes you not listen to him.
	Perfect.
	That's the way it works.
	Which is not to say that there aren't Nazis who do the same thing.
	There are two things.
	But that's the way it functions on a societal level.
	It has functions ever since human society has existed for thousands, tens of thousands of years.
	A society has a taboo and it safeguards it with these kind of mechanisms that are implanted into our brains, into our behaviors.
	That is kind of human nature.
	Because a society can be stable only if we agree on a set of behaviors that keeps it cohesive, that keeps it together, particularly in times of conflict, in times where things can go wrong.
	You need to automatically, reflexively, Pavlovian style, have people react the correct way.
	Now, if it is the correct way, it's fine.
	If it's the wrong way and it threatens the society's existence because it's getting off the track and ends in a shipwreck like we have it now with things not Being peaceful and prosperous, but pushing for more wars and wars and conflict, then it turns into a threat.
	And then this man, this built-in behavioral pattern that we all humans can have and do develop if conditioned properly, It turns into a problem.
	That's what we see here.
	And as a scientist, you can never accept taboos.
	It's actually exactly the area where you have to look, because taboos shield from critical eyes, hide something that society doesn't want you to see.
	That's where the closet is with the skeletons.
	That's where most discoveries can be made.
	That's where you have to look.
	You get yourself in trouble because you're called all kinds of names, whether it was a witch in the medievals or a Nazi.
	Now, it doesn't matter.
	To look into whether witches and devils really exist or whether the gas chambers and the six million really exist.
	It's centuries apart, same story.
	And that's where we are and we have to deal with it.
	Let's see if your scientific critical thinking mind can overcome the white guilt and German upbringing that you have been put through.
	Now that you're living in the United States in a culture that accepts wokeism and you're surrounded by people Who can self-identify as anything they want.
	During the Republican debate with Kamala Harris, who identifies, actually she's an Indian woman, but she identifies as a black woman.
	And Trump, the soon to be commander in chief, said, oh, well, you can be whatever you want.
	So for my audience who listens in all the time, I self-identify as a fat black Jewish lesbian taco trapped in a man's body with Asperger's syndrome and a Soros Holocaust survivor who dated Anne Frank.
	So I already see that there's a little bit of the non-scientist coming out in you because in your facial expression and when you rewind this you will see the German guilt is starting to come out because now you're seeing me as a Jew.
	So I'm going to ask you to explain to me, now, realizing that I self-identify as a Jew, and I can self-identify as anything, because, as you know, living in the United States, men can get pregnant.
	So, that being said, age is just a social construct, as Kamala Harris says.
	So I am, in fact, the youngest Holocaust survivor, and I did date Anne Frank.
	So those people who claim that Anne Frank did not exist, they're lying.
	I'm living proof that she existed because she was my girlfriend.
	The other thing is, just like those judges were able to make up that story, and now everybody believes the story that those four Polish judges did, you would be racist because I'm a Black person to not believe my story.
	That being said, if we can continue this interview, And if you can now express to me as a Black Jew some of the most ridiculous stories that you came across that are in the Encyclopedia of the Holocaust of how people claim to have been exterminated.
	I think some of the stories were that they drowned in feces and stuff like that.
	Can you tell me what some of the most ridiculous claims were made?
	Yeah.
	The favorite part of the encyclopedia is the very first entry and I did not make up the way the alphabet is organized.
	But the first entry is absurd claims.
	So it stands at the very beginning of the encyclopedia, and I thought, oh, that's maybe not good, but it's kind of programmatic because it has all the observed claims that are...
	So you start reading the encyclopedia.
	It's actually, I've seen that with many people.
	They read it cover to cover.
	Encyclopedias are not meant to be read that way, but it's so chock full of interesting, mind-blowing information that people just can't put it down, particularly when you get the primer like this.
	Now, the favorite entry, there are a couple of favorites, but the last one I edit, and it makes me chuckle too, That I missed in the first run and I ran into it again when I had to verify a quotation.
	Some witness claimed that they went into the swamps surrounding the Birkenau camp.
	So Auschwitz-Birkenau was an area that was a confluence of three rivers.
	It was a swampy area.
	So they had swamp gas come out of this, so biogas from decomposing material, organic material, and these people were sent, these inmates were sent into the swamp to collect the swamp gas, this biogas, bring it back in order to then be used to gas the Jews.
	Wow!
	Yeah, it's absolutely great.
	No, it doesn't.
	It's methane, and yeah, you would probably be able to suffocate people with farts, basically, because that's nothing else than smelling like farts.
	So putting people in the gas chamber and expose them to a lot of farts, which, by the way, is a cartoon that a Swedish revisionist once made, depicting here you see a gas chamber.
	That shows a room, a person strapped to a seat, and it has very many openings in the wall, Where asses are stuck in and these people are farting.
	This is a gas chamber.
	And this ties in exactly as you find eyewitness accounts for every nonsense that you can come up with.
	And I didn't think to ever find confirmation for this for this cartoon, which he got in trouble, which is illegal.
	You're making perverse fun of the Holocaust gas chamber clean.
	But there is the witness saying kind of the same thing.
	I couldn't Believe it.
	It's in there now in the online, the printed version.
	We're just updating it and it will be in the next edition, which comes out early 2025. I notice, and you will too when you look back on this, this is at that one hour and 15 minute mark.
	You, your scientist, you said, well, you have to be able to look past the taboo.
	I've noticed, and you will too, that you can no longer look at me the same way.
	You're looking away, you're doing...
	You're getting nervous.
	I'm making you nervous.
	The German in you is coming out.
	The German guilt in you is coming out because of this.
	So that's why I tell people they should get this because it's a weapon.
	The Jews have weaponized this.
	Look, when I take this off, You become more calm, but when I put this on, you get a little bit nervous.
	And so I don't want to make you nervous, and I apologize, but it's fascinating.
	You've quite literally shown, as a scientist, the impact of this little cloth, which has made all of mankind, not just people in the United States, And people in Germany, but it's become an infection.
	It's incredible.
	Like you said, because I put this on, I can now have sex with little children because it says it in the Talmud.
	I can use lies to circumvent the non-Jews because it says it in the Talmud.
	I am one of God's chosen people.
	Of course, I don't tell you that my God is Lucifer.
	Yes?
	More to the point, David Cole, who is confessing as being of Jewish extraction.
	Went to the Auschwitz camp in 1992 to interview the historian there in charge of the archives and to make a tour, a critical tour, of the exhibit there showing in Ellert's gas chamber, which is a quote-unquote reconstruction.
	It's actually a fake.
	There's nothing reconstructed there.
	It's all made up.
	Showing how the tourist guides Lie and how the curator actually tries to set the record straight that, yeah, we're lying, but it's complicated.
	He did that.
	A normal person going in there, he wouldn't have just been able to get an interview granted without appointment by the curator of the museum.
	But he was successful because he did exactly the same thing as you.
	He came with a Yeromulke on his head and he was identified by everyone as a Jew.
	And so both the tour guides as well as the museum's director, they were just groveling and granting him any wishes.
	He used that then to expose them as frauds, and that's a very successful video, which got him in a lot of trouble.
	He got death threats from some of his Jewish compatriots later.
	But yeah, that's exactly the power of the Yarmulke.
	Yeah, you should get one of these.
	I think it would help you with your career, because if you wore this and then you explained what you're explaining, people would be more prone to take you seriously.
	It's sad.
	I don't want to do that because it's sad.
	Am I wrong or am I right?
	Have people called you a Nazi?
	Of course.
	They called me all kinds of names, as I mentioned.
	But that actually wouldn't stop them from doing that.
	Then you're still a Nazi.
	Jews can be Nazis.
	As a matter of fact, the way they behave right now, there's not much of a difference between the picture we have painted of the Nazis during the war and what is currently happening in Gaza.
	Nazi and Jew is not a contradiction.
	There weren't Jewish Nazis.
	As a matter of fact, a lot of the highest ranking were Jews.
	I never found that out until I moved out of the United States.
	As Goering said, I decide who is a Jew.
	Milch, who was general of the German army.
	He was what they call a half-Jew.
	But because he was such a good general and such a proud German patriot, he was declared not to be a Jew.
	So, as I mentioned, being a Jew or not, that depends on the circumstances.
	And I don't want to cater to this.
	I don't want to use it.
	Take me as I am.
	You look at my name, Germar, can't get any more German.
	And Rudolf, you have the Dolph in there, like in Adolf, it's a bad name to have.
	So you get marked and then my birthday is actually the same as that of Joseph Goebbels.
	I didn't pick it!
	Okay, my father gave me the name, my father's family had that last name, and that my mother gave birth two days or three days early on the birthday of Joseph Goebbels, which I didn't find out until 10 years ago when somebody rubbed it in my face.
	Thinking he would do me a favor and I was kind of embarrassed.
	I said, oh my God, why can't I just be Tom Smith born in some day?
	But it is what it is.
	The stars have aligned as they have aligned and I'm not getting sucked down that drain of making anything of who I am.
	I'm trying to be exact.
	I'm trying to be accurate.
	I'm trying to get to the facts of the matter and to the roots of the problem and let the evidence decide And everything else, you know, science is profoundly not about people who are doing the science but about their arguments and results.
	Well, and you know what?
	You've got a great sense of humor.
	You're a really good sport.
	I didn't mean to do that experiment, but I am also a bit of a scientist.
	And we found out that you may be able to take the scientist out of the German, but you can't take the German guilt out of the scientist.
	And that's what you've proven today with your inability to handle when somebody puts one of...
	It's like this turns out to be like a cross to a vampire when you put this on in front of a German.
	It's incredible.
	Not just a germ.
	It works very best with germs, but it works in this society.
	It works pretty much everywhere.
	In Western society.
	Yeah, that needs to change, because until we are able to get over That little beanie, we're fucked, to put it monthly.
	A friend of mine, Bradley Smith, who actually founded the Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust, he said, you know, Jews are such a small minority that we, as the majority, give them the power and let them get away with it.
	We, first of all, are to be blamed.
	You are 90% or 95% or whatever it is of the population.
	You have the power if you want to, if you just agree and come to a consensus, They wouldn't get away with anything.
	So, the first blame doesn't line with a minority abusing their power, but with us not stopping them.
	And holding them accountable.
	But you are stopping.
	You are, and I appreciate you're brave.
	Because the thing is, what you're doing is, you're using facts the way I'm using humor.
	We have to be able to laugh.
	I will not want to live in a world where just because a Jew tells me that that joke, that Auschwitz joke that you said was funny.
	What's the shortest joke in Germany?
	Auschwitz.
	I mean, that's hilarious, you know?
	But you're not allowed to laugh.
	You've got to go to jail for something like that.
	Who wants to live in a society where you can't laugh at your own faults?
	That's why I'm not in that society.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	But now you're living in the United States where it's becoming like that society.
	I don't know if you're noticing that.
	Like, what...
	What did you first think when you found out that men could get pregnant and that the Supreme Court Justice, Ketanjay Brown Jackson, when asked to define what a woman is, she said she couldn't.
	What goes through your mind as a scientist when somebody who is making the laws in the country that you now live does not even know that she could just grab herself here and say, well...
	Women have nice tits, you know?
	Well, not necessarily.
	Some are pretty flat-chested.
	Anyway, there's the kindergarten cop, Schwarzenegger.
	There's this scene repeatedly in that movie, in the kindergarten, where this one boy stands up, raises his hand, and he always says, boys have penises and girls have vaginas.
	And that's repeated over and over again.
	So there you have it.
	I mean, there are extreme cases where you have some developments where things go a little bit haywire and it looks a little different.
	You know, these shemales that have a penis and a vagina or an extremely large clitoris.
	So that looks like a penis, I should say.
	But they're rare.
	For the norm, A kindergarten kid knows what is a boy and what is a girl.
	So why can't we?
	What you do in the bedroom, what preferences you have in the bedroom is completely up to you.
	I don't want it advertised.
	I'm not advertising my preferences there.
	Nobody else is allowed to do it.
	You know, if you go, oh, it's not society acceptable if a heterosexual person's displays of what I'm doing in my bedroom with my bad girl, girlfriend.
	But once you have a not normal sexual habit, then it's fashionable to display it.
	This is not normal either.
	Don't rain into people's bedrooms, but also don't make it a public parade, please.
	Well, that's what happened in the Weimar Republic.
	And that's one of the reasons, from my understanding of history, That the whole situation happened with the rise of Hitler because people were noticing that things were getting out of hand.
	I understand that there were mother and daughter teams.
	There were snuff films being made.
	There's also a classic case of where the people were having sex with the goose.
	And then after they finished having sex with the goose, they did...
	Then they have stuffed goose for dinner.
	Yeah.
	I mean, it's like...
	It's just incredible.
	This was most certainly not why people voted for Hitler.
	It was primarily economic in nature because of the economic catastrophe and patriotic in nature, secondly, to get over the Versailles disaster and the disunity in the country in general.
	When it comes to moral corruption, moral decay, That was probably on the radar of some more intellectual people who were interested in that field, but there would have been a minority.
	So this is not what led to Hitler's success in elections.
	I don't think it was that widespread back then anyway as it is sometimes today.
	Let's get back to you because we've got a little bit of time left.
	I know you said the first entry in the encyclopedia was absurd claims.
	Could you go into a couple of more absurd claims now that we've moved into a kind of a satirical part?
	We have to make this a little bit lighthearted.
	If you can go through some of your favorite absurd claims, please.
	Yeah, before I actually added this one, the one before that my favorite was that for the Dachau camp, which is not supposed to have been an extermination camp, but there is the claim that extermination through labor, people were treated so badly in most of the camps that they died like flies.
	There's a separate story which we have covered now in the latest entry of volumes, volume 53 as well, which to a large degree is untrue, is exaggerated and distorted.
	Anyway, Dachau camp.
	A witness claimed that They put Jews into a big concrete mixer until they are ground down to a pulp.
	And then they would use that pulp, together evidently with some concrete or whatever, to plaster the main road of the camp.
	And that's why they then would call the main road of the camp Jew Road.
	You know, one of the strangest places I've ever been to...
	You can't even laugh!
	Come on, laugh!
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	Well, it's because I've been to Dachau, and it was one of the strangest, eeriest places I've been to in my life.
	I was there with my sister, taking her around because we wanted to see the concentration camps.
	Again, like you, I'm curious.
	I don't just take what people say.
	I go to these places.
	And I don't speak German, so I would ask the locals, how do I get to Dachau?
	I would just say, Dachau, Dachau.
	And everybody would just kind of look away in embarrassment.
	They didn't want to talk about it.
	So my sister and I were walking around.
	We're looking for this place.
	We couldn't find it.
	It turns out, if you've ever been to Dachau, it's in a residential neighborhood.
	Across the street were houses where you could see the people from the balconies could sit there having their tea, and supposedly they would watch the Jews die of, this is what I was told, that the Jews would be lined up outside in the German winters.
	And left to freeze to death and just to die out there in the cold.
	And that the people from the balconies and the house across the way, like I said, the thing that was most shocking to me was that it was in a residential neighborhood.
	That's why we couldn't find it.
	We thought it was in a museum or something like that.
	No, but it was amongst houses.
	And the people would just sit there having their morning tea and biscuits and watching the Jews die of freezing.
	But I don't think that really happened.
	Is that true?
	Did that really happen?
	I mean, I'm not saying people didn't die.
	Right.
	I wasn't there, so I can't tell exactly what happened.
	What I do know is I published many years ago, and it's on the Kodo website, two times Dachau, I think it's called, a former inmate of the Dachau concentration camp during the war, shortly after the war, I think he published...
	The diary entries and his post-war narration of what he experienced during the war in that camp.
	And then, what most people don't know, after the war, the camp was used as an incarceration camp by the Americans for Germans of all kinds of So the concentration camp was used by the Americans as a concentration camp for Germans who were then on the wrong side
	of things.
	And one guy who experienced the American incarceration after the war, and I don't know how long the Americans still used it.
	It may have been half a year, a year or two.
	I don't know.
	But it was functioning as a concentration camp by the Americans.
	And this German who experienced that camp was describing it after the war.
	And then you can make a comparison between these two experiences.
	And you find out that the experience under the American's wars is way worse than what the I also learned about that when I was there.
	And another thing that surprised me, and again, this is the history that's not taught, and you have to go to these places, you have to speak to the locals, because then I started asking questions.
	And it turns out that, like you said earlier, it wasn't just the Jews that were put into these concentration camps.
	You and I would have been put in there, because I wouldn't have tolerated it either.
	I would have also been one of those people saying, hey, listen, this isn't right.
	And if you were a non-Jew, A lot of artists were put in there, a lot of priests, Christians were put in there.
	Anybody who stood up and said, this is not right, they were shoved into Dachau as well.
	Dachau was not a camp for Jews, it was a camp for dissidents and political, yeah, political and religious dissidents, basically.
	A lot of Catholics, Protestants, priests and political opponents of the Nazi regime, former communists, socialists and so forth, they were incarcerated there.
	I have a rabbi on the show soon, and I'm going to ask him this question.
	Why do the Jews, when it comes to the Holocaust, only consider the death of the Jews that happened there?
	And nobody ever mentions all the dissidents and the non-Jews that died because they were actually brave enough to stand up and speak out against this.
	This is another thing that concerns me, is that the Jews only seem to think of themselves, and everybody else who's a non-Jew...
	They consider cattle, beasts, that they should be shown no mercy and that they should all be killed.
	That's a problem, and you see it in the narrative of the Holocaust.
	Because everybody thinks Holocaust Jews, Holocaust Jews.
	No!
	Holocaust people like you.
	Yeah, to put a number on it, I mentioned 135,500 for Auschwitz, and we pretty much know their names.
	Now, the death certificates, the volumes are not complete, but with some extra relations we can get at those figures.
	But the volumes we have, we know who died, when they died, and what their religious background was.
	And if you take those documents and analyze it by a religious association, then you'll find out that 55% of the documented identifiable death cases in Auschwitz were Christian, and 45% were Jews.
	Wow, do you see that?
	I mean, that's amazing.
	Nobody knows that.
	So it was actually more of a Christian Holocaust.
	If you're going by actual numbers, then you can find evidence.
	This is based on roughly 70,000 of the 135,000 cases.
	So if you take all of it in account, this scale may tip toward the Jewish side.
	But either way, it shows very clearly, and most of the Christians were actually Poles, because it was a camp that Auschwitz used to be part of Poland, the Germans annexed it, considered it Germany, now it's Poland again.
	And it was a concentration camp mainly for Polish resistance fighters, dissidents and so forth, like Dachau was for the Germans.
	And that's where the Christian death toll comes from, mainly post, but at the end of the day, people, dissidents from all over the area, including germs, also ended up in Auschwitz.
	So yes, it is not a copyrighted trademarked event that only Jews have a right to.
	Yeah, wow.
	So see, you're Both of us together, using a little bit of humor and a little bit of science, we're opening people's eyes to a lot of truths that need to be told.
	Is there anything that you would like to say in closing before we leave?
	Or if I have more time, if you want, if you have more stuff that you want to share?
	There's always more, but it can go on endlessly.
	Now, what I would perhaps like to say, if people want to contact me personally, I mentioned that I have my personal website, gammarudolph.com.
	G-E-R-M-A-R-R-U-D-O-L-F dot com.
	You'll find more about me there and also contact information so in case anyone has a question or wants to do something similar as we have done now, I'm always open to that and reach out to me.
	Let me ask you, before we part, as an American who misses my homeland, especially my home state, what do you see in the immediate future for the United States and also for New York, where you are?
	Now that the transition is coming with Trump, do you think he will Make America great again?
	Do you think the United States will have a nuclear attack?
	Do you think there will be riots?
	Do you think the president will be assassinated?
	What's your on the ground feeling?
	Because I'm not there.
	I haven't been there for almost seven years now.
	The last time I was back in New York.
	I first came into the country in late 1999 and I have experienced quite a few presidential elections and I must have said that I have been hopeful with every new president Hoping for a new start, hoping for some profound change to the better, and I've always been disappointed.
	So I've come to the point where I have not really many expectations anymore.
	I sit back and watch the show.
	I'm not a U.S. citizen.
	I can't vote, so I don't even have a stake in it from a voter's point of view.
	I'm not sanguine.
	That anything dramatically changes.
	I think the deep state, the system itself, no matter who is the galleon figure head up in the White House, it's not going to change much.
	That requires a paradigm shift, a revolutionary act to make any profound changes that could be seen On the ground in any noticeable way.
	So, I don't think much is going to happen.
	When it comes to a nuclear attack is, of course, the conflict with Russia over Ukraine.
	It's anyone's bet.
	I don't think Russia will ever do that because the worst thing that can happen is that Putin goes down the drain.
	He may pull the Samsung option.
	I don't think he will.
	So, there's a lot of Hot speech, but not much following through.
	For me, I think conditions will remain fairly stable.
	Economically speaking, they have been on decline for the past 20, 30 years.
	It's a slow slide, and I don't think this will come to an end anytime soon unless the world manages to wrench Manufacturing back from China, which for many reasons is necessary.
	There is a long, drawn-out process.
	It can be done overnight, and most certainly not with 100% of Of import.
	How do you call it?
	That Trump is threatening when BRICS is trying to replace the tariffs.
	So it's a screw you have to tighten slowly because manufacturing has to rebuild here in the United States slowly.
	It's a slow process.
	You can't just slap 100% on everything.
	And then complaining about the inflation we had over Biden, which was a worldwide phenomenon that came from the COVID crisis.
	It has nothing to do with Biden.
	If we have 100% tariffs on things coming from China, you go to your store, whatever you're buying for hardware store, whatever it is made in China is on everything.
	That means everything doubles suddenly in price.
	We're going to have an inflation of 100% suddenly, boom!
	How is that going to go down?
	No, you have to rebuild manufacturing slowly by slowly tightening.
	That needs to be a long-term plan.
	And this is a problem with any democracy, where any administration has just four, five, six, depending on the country, years of time, and then you don't know what's coming next.
	The next administration will completely overthrow what you've done.
	Long-term planning, as you need for this kind of thing, thinking in decades, is very difficult in a democracy.
	If both parties could agree on a strategy to get manufacturing back and slowly but surely with tariffs and all kinds of other measures getting that done so that we're geopolitically not so dependent on China and look at the deficit we have.
	That has to be addressed.
	It's been going on for 30 years.
	It's putting all of us in a dumpster in the long run.
	It can't go on eternally.
	That's the elephant in the closet.
	And I don't know.
	I'm just sitting back and watching whether it happens or not.
	We'll see.
	Final personal question.
	You're a dashing, well-spoken, handsome man.
	And I understand that you are in a relationship.
	I don't know if it's married or with a girlfriend.
	How did that work out?
	Like, you know, you meet a girl, she looks at you, she's like, wow, this guy's, he's dashing, he's debonair.
	And then you start throwing out, or people, somehow she finds out that some people think that you're a Nazi and a Holocaust denier.
	How do you manage to keep a good woman like that by your side?
	Have you had difficulty in relationships because of your scientific mind going to such places?
	I just went through my second divorce.
	So, so much about managing to keep her by my side.
	Does that do with your choice to speak out about the truth?
	My first divorce definitely did because my first wife...
	At that time I was being hunted by Germany and I had to kind of live underground and assumed identity and my wife was stressed out by it and eventually decided she can't take it anymore.
	So that was definitely a victim of persecution right there, the relationship.
	With my second, I was married to her for one and a half years and I then got suddenly deported.
	No, a little bit over one year actually.
	You got deported.
	Right, I got deported.
	I was married to US citizens, had no criminal record in the United States or abroad that was recognized as criminal.
	I had, of course, convictions in Germany, but they are free speech, First Amendment issue.
	They are not recognized by the United States as criminal.
	So I was legitimately and recognized by the United States government, married to US citizens.
	I should have been allowed to get a green card and stay permanently.
	And I got the certificate and the invitation to go in that immigration center downstairs to get my green card and at that moment they arrested me and deported me.
	So just before I crossed the finish line to get my green card, I was against the law because I was eligible to that.
	They did it anyway.
	That's a matter of lack of accountability for governments.
	You know, if a private person abducts any person and locks them away for many years, you go to jail for a long time.
	If a government official does that, there's no repercussion.
	I litigated.
	I won at the end.
	That's why I'm back in this country.
	But it cost me a quarter million dollar in legal fees.
	You can get right in this country.
	You can get justice in this country if you have the money.
	Now, that put me very close to poverty level.
	And my then back wife, she set out this ordeal for six years being separated.
	We married.
	We had a little baby together.
	And then her husband was suddenly gone, deported abroad and to Germany.
	And Germany put me in the bunker for what I had done.
	For 44 months.
	And then after that, I had to still fight it out with the US government in courts until I could finally come back home.
	That put a massive stress on my wife.
	And the relationship has been struggling since, as you can imagine, if a wife and husband are separated for five, six years, this is putting the relationship under a lot of strain.
	So she was a single mother for the first six years of our daughter.
	And then we finally reunited and were struggling.
	Then we adopted two children, two troubled children that exacerbated the situation.
	We probably was a little bit too much at that situation.
	I don't...
	I'm not sorry for having done it.
	For the sake of the children, any child that Every child comes into foster care and doesn't have a home and needs foster or adopted parents.
	Every child needs to be loved and needs to find a home.
	And I don't regret having taken in those children for the sake of the children.
	Had I known that it would put additional and ultimately fatal stress on my marriage, I would have thought twice and probably would have maybe at least limited to one of the children or two.
	But it's difficult to say that.
	At some point I need to expect my two adopted children to hear that.
	And then they feel blind for themselves.
	We contributed it.
	So I don't want this to come across like the children were the reason.
	The children are not.
	The children are never to be blind in that situation.
	If the parents can't get their act together, it's the parents who are the problem.
	And we just couldn't get on the same page how to handle This situation.
	I was the stay-at-home dad.
	My ex-wife had the career.
	So she was gone all day and I handled the children and I was stressed out over years and years.
	But I thought I handled that quite well.
	She did not.
	So on many occasions she did not.
	But I don't want to do any blame game here.
	It's done.
	It's over with.
	And what part of it was The Holocaust, I don't think so much she had a problem with my views.
	I had an agreement with her to not be public.
	The kind of interview we're doing now, I'm doing because I am divorced.
	I'm by myself.
	I don't have to be a recluse, so to say, for the sake of family safety, which my wife and their side of the family asked me to.
	For the most part, I did in those years between 2011 and 2023, just a year ago.
	No, I don't do that anymore.
	But still, six years of separation because of it damaged the relationship, traumatized my wife more than me.
	Because first of all, it was my battle.
	I know why I'm doing it.
	And I can live through it and have limited damage.
	This is a traumatic experience being thrown in jail for books you've written.
	I'm being treated like a criminal and you're just a scientist.
	And it turns you a little bit paranoid against any government authority, inevitably.
	But it did not damage my relationship to her because she was my beacon of hope out there.
	However, for her it was It's a very traumatizing event because you believe in justice and the First Amendment and the good of the US government and then you have a lesson taught that all hell can break loose because the government doesn't like your husband even though he doesn't do anything.
	On the inside you see he's not a Nazi, he's not an extremist, he's not an inter-Semite, he's actually less a racist than she was.
	Initially she was living in a Hispanic neighborhood in a Chicago suburb and she didn't like the mariacho And I was defending all these things, not because I'm multicultural and this and that, but I like music and I have high tolerance and I like dancing and I like children.
	And that's when she realized, she mentioned, oh, you're less racist than I am.
	She was surprised.
	I didn't have racism in this context, it was not at all on my radar, so I wasn't thinking about it.
	But maybe that is the less of a racist when you don't even think in these categories, which I don't.
	I'm always surprised in this country how many people think in these categories and I'm just not on the same page.
	It's not to say that I deny that there are racists and that there are maybe racial tensions and issues, but it's completely on an intellectual level for me and not as visceral as it was for my wife.
	So on a personal level she bears no grudge and has no second thoughts.
	She was actually helping me proofread some of my books and she listened while I was reading them to her and then she got a deep understanding of where I'm coming from and what I'm saying and what I'm not saying.
	So for her it's clear I'm not an evil guy, quite to the contrary.
	And anyone who actually reads what I've written will realize that really quickly, that things that are being said about me by the mainstream have just no foundation in reality.
	That doesn't change the fact that six years of separation damage your psyche, damage your subconscious approach to any of it.
	The fear you have from there, your husband keeps doing it and it can come again.
	And so this is something, even if you're not aware of it, that subverts a relationship, want it or not.
	So all these things combined led to the breakdown eventually.
	And I can't put a percentage on what percentage is incompatibility, what percentage is the Holocaust and the controversy, what percentage is the stress the children put on it.
	There's no need to put a percentage on it.
	It's over.
	Just move forward.
	Well, you're a good man and I will leave all your information in the comments section.
	And I'm sure there's a lot of lovely women out there who are looking for a good man.
	So who knows?
	Maybe you'll end up getting an email from a fan out there.
	You need to be careful.
	I have been traumatized myself in the second Time, a marriage fails when you were really intending on making it work, if not, and at least for the children's sake, until they are out of the house.
	It leaves me a little bit traumatized.
	I try to get back into the dating pool.
	I have not been able to because I have a little bit of panic reaction right now.
	I dream of romance and affection.
	So I want it and I need it as every person needs love.
	But having been burned twice, trust is an issue now.
	Absolutely, but third time is a charm.
	My first wife walked out on me and my second wife, that relationship has broken down over many years, but at the time it eventually did fall apart.
	It had already officially died.
	There hadn't been anything going on on any chapter of affection, romance, erotic, nothing for a number of years before it actually fell apart.
	I am a little bit wary of getting involved in anything because if you've been hurt a number of times, you don't want to get hurt again.
	Well, beware of chicks with purple hair and chicks with dicks.
	I'm not much of a marriage counselor, but I can tell you that.
	I don't care about the hair color.
	I don't care about the hair color.
	You know, once you have gray hair, that's my age bracket right now, you might as well put polka dots in them.
	Who cares?
	But nowadays you have to ask a girl, first thing, do you have a penis?
	You know, at least if you're a heterosexual, because you can't be too sure nowadays.
	Well, I don't know how we ended up going from the encyclopedia of the Holocaust to asking girls if they have a penis, but you never know what's going to happen on this show.
	I want to thank you for being such a good sport.
	And for the bravery that you've shown throughout your life in daring to speak truth to power and to question authority.
	And that's the takeaway that I hope that anybody watching this show realizes that you're being fed sweets and told lies and that's how they control you and manipulate you.
	Don't let it happen.
	You have the power.
	We have the power to just say no.
	You were going to say something.
	Yes.
	As an eight-year-old child, I finally had enough of myself not wanting to bring the garbage out.
	Because mommy wants a chore done and none of the kids say, I want to do it, he do it, he do it.
	We were three kids back, two siblings.
	And I was so sick of it that at some point, at some day I decided, Somebody has to bring the trash out, might just as well be me and I stopped fighting it and I did it and without asking anymore.
	And I'm still in the same situation.
	Somebody has to bring the historic trash out and it might as well be me.
	Yeah.
	So you're not getting rewarded for it, at least not yet.
	I mean, maybe that may change, but right now I'm having nothing but trouble from being kind of Poor of trying to make ends meet.
	It's a real struggle because they try to destroy everything that I start economically.
	But I'm not a materialistic guy, so as long as I don't have to start and I have a roof over my head, I'm fine.
	But it's not coming with rewards.
	You bring out the garbage, mommy pets you on your back for a good job done.
	If you bring out the historical garbage, society won't yet pet you on your back.
	So it's the opposite.
	It's a little bit sad, but hopefully that'll change sometime.
	You're living a purpose-driven life and what's most fascinating and my takeaway from this was that I will have to tell the last Dutchman he was wrong.
	Not all Germans don't have a sense of humor.
	You came out right out of the gate with a The shortest joke I've ever heard, and it was hilarious, and you're a really good sport, and you're leaving with a smile on your face, and that's great.
	Thank you so much, Germer.
	I'd love to have you back on whenever you wish.
	I wish you a Happy New Year and a Merry Christmas, if that's your thing.
	And I just want to remind everybody that united we stand, divided we fall.
	Never give up.
	Never surrender.
	Keep shining.

▲