Published on Jan 18, 2017
The death toll in the Yemeni conflict has surpassed 10,000 people, according to estimates from a senior UN official amidst the ongoing chaos in the country suffering a tremendous humanitarian disaster. Kristine Beckerle, a Yemen researcher at Human Rights Watch, joins RT America’s Anya Parampil for details.
- Titus 1:14 New King James Version (NKJV)
14 not giving heed to Jewish fables and commandments of men who turn from the truth.
- Ever-Diminishing Official Numbers Of Auschwitz Dead
Source: Cited by the French documentary, Night and Fog, which has been shown to millions of school students worldwide.
Source: The French War Crime Research Office, Doc. 31, 1945.
Source: Also cited by the French War Crime Research Office.
Source: Cited in the book Auschwitz Doctor by Miklos Nyiszli. It has since been proven that this book is a fraud and the “doctor” was never even at Auschwitz, even though the book is often cited by historians.
5,000,000 to 5,500,000
Source: Cited in 1945 at the trial of Auschwitz commander Rudolf Höss, based on his confession which was written in English, a language he never spoke.
Source: Cited on April 20, 1978 by the French daily, Le Monde. Also cited on January 23, 1995 by the German daily Die Welt. By September 1, 1989, Le Monde reduced the figure to 1,433,000.
Source: In 1945 this figure was cited by another witness at the aforementioned Höss trial.
Source: Cited by a Soviet document of May 6, 1945 and officially acknowledged by the Nuremberg War Crimes trial. This figure was also reported in The New York Times on April 18, 1945, although 50 years later on January 26, 1995, The New York Times and The Washington Post slashed the figure to 1,500,000 citing new findings by the Auschwitz Museum officials. In fact, the figure of 4,000,000 was later repudiated by the Auschwitz museum officials in 1990 but the figure of 1,500,000 victims was not formally announced by Polish President Lech Walesa until five years after the Auschwitz historians had first announced their discovery.
Source: Cited in the 1991 edition of the Dictionary of the French Language and by Claude Lanzmann in 1980 in his introduction to Filip Muller’s book, Three Years in an Auschwitz Gas Chamber.
Source: Cited in a forced confession by Rudolf Höss, the Auschwitz commander who said this was the number of those who had died at Auschwitz prior to Dec. 1, 1943. Later cited in the June 7, 1993 issue of Heritage, the most widely read Jewish newspaper in California, even though three years previously the authorities at the Auschwitz museum had scaled down the figure to a minimum of 1,100,000 and a maximum of 1,500,000. (see below).
Source: Cited by Rudolf Vrba (an author of various fraudulent accounts of events he claims to have witnessed at Auschwitz) when he testified on July 16, 1981 for the Israeli government’s war crimes trial of former SS official Adolf Eichmann.
Source: Cited by Leon Poliakov (1951) writing in Harvest of Hate; Georges Wellers, writing in 1973 in The Yellow Star at the Time of Vichy; and Lucy Dawidowicz, writing in 1975 in The War Against the Jews.
2,000,000 to 4,000,000
Source: Cited by Yehuda Bauer in 1982 in his book, A History of the Holocaust. However, by 1989 Bauer revised his figure to 1,600,000.
Source: This is a 1989 revision by Yehuda Bauer of his earlier figure in 1982 of 2,000,000 to 4,000,000, Bauer cited this new figure on September 22, 1989 in The Jerusalem Post, at which time he wrote “The larger figures have been dismissed for years, except that it hasn’t reached the public yet.”
Source: In 1995 this was the number of Auschwitz deaths announced by Polish President Lech Walesa as determined by those at the Auschwitz museum. This number was inscribed on the monument at the Auschwitz camp at that time, thereby “replacing” the earlier 4,000,000 figure that had been formally repudiated (and withdrawn from the monument) five years earlier in 1990. At that time, on July 17, 1990 The Washington Times reprinted a brief article from The London Daily Telegraph citing the “new” figure of 1,500,000 that had been determined by the authorities at the Auschwitz museum. This new figure was reported two years later in a UPI report published in the New York Post on March 26, 1992. On January 26, 1995 both The Washington Post and The New York Times cited this 1,500,000 figure as the new “official” figure (citing the Auschwitz Museum authorities).
Source: This is a 1983 figure cited by Georges Wellers who (as noted previously) had determined, writing in 1973, that some 2,000,000 had died.
Source: This figure was cited on September 1, 1989 by the French daily, Le Monde, which earlier, on April 20, 1978, had cited the figure at 4,000,000.
Source: In the book, The Destruction of the European Jews, by Raul Hilberg (1985).
1,100,000 to 1,500,000
Source: Sources for this estimate are Yisrael Gutman and Michael Berenbaum in their 1984 book, Anatomy of the Auschwitz Death Camp. This estimate was later also cited by Walter Reich, former director of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, writing in The Washington Post on September 8, 1998. The upper figure of 1,500,000 is (the new) “official” figure as now inscribed at Auschwitz, with the earlier figure of 4,000,000 having been removed from the memorial at the site of the former concentration camp.
Source: Jean-Claude Pressac, writing in his 1989 book Auschwitz: Technique and Operation of the Gas Chambers. This is interesting since he wrote his book to repudiate so-called “Holocaust deniers” who were called that precisely because they had questioned the numbers of those who had died at Auschwitz.
Source: Reported on August 3, 1990 11, by Aufbau, a Jewish newspaper in New York.
800,000 to 900,000
Source: Reported by Gerald Reitlinger in his book, The Final Solution.
775,000 to 800,000
Source: Jean-Claude Pressac’s revised figure, put forth in his 1993 book, The Crematoria of Auschwitz: The Mass Murder’s Machinery, scaling down his earlier claim of 1,000,000 dead.
630,000 to 710,000
Source: In 1994 Pressac scaled his figure down somewhat further; this is the figure cited in the German language translation of Pressac’s 1993 book originally published in French. Again, this is substantially less than Pressac’s 1989 figure of 1,000,000.
135,000 to 140,000
Source: This is an estimate based on documents held by the International Tracing Service of the Red Cross. It is known that International Tracing Service has a complete set of registration documents. This is thought to include a complete set of roll-call data which includes twice daily tallies of those who died. Although the International Tracing Service of the Red Cross has such records, they have never officially published an accurate count of those who died, or even an accurate report as to exactly which documents they hold. However, totals from these records have been obtained by various interested parties.
The estimate of 135,000 is roughly corroborated by the “Auschwitz death books.” The death books themselves are wartime German camp records, which were captured by the Soviets towards the end of the war, and hidden in Soviet achieves, until released to the Red Cross in 1989.
The death books consist of 46 volumes which document each death at Auschwitz (each death certificate consists of the deceased person’s full name, profession and religion, date and place of birth, pre-Auschwitz residence, parents’ names, time of death, and cause of death as determined by a camp physician). The records for the most important years, 1942 and 1943, are almost complete (there are also a few volumes for the year 1941, but none for the year 1944 or January 1945 (when Auschwitz was evacuated)).
The Auschwitz death books contain the death certificates of some 69,000 individuals, of whom about 30,000 were listed as Jews. You may view various eThe above mentioned, ever declining numbers of alleged dead at Auschwitz, are graphically illustrated by the following pictures of plaques from the camp.
Judea Declares War on Germany by Dr Fredrick Toben (Full Documentary). Exposing the Holocaust 6 Million Myth
Published on Aug 29, 2013
A journey back in time, Hosted by Dr.Fredrick Toben, this intriguing documentary shows a little-known fact of WWII in which Jews at one time declared war on Germany. In response to this, many Jews were incarcerated in concentration camps, similar to what America did to the Japanese. Some Germans even claim that prior to the war’s end when supply lines were cut and starvation and disease was rampant, Jews were treated more humanely than the Japanese in American internment camps. See what such talk is based on. Many rare photographs, and some surprising footage showing the concentration camps as they are today. Dr.Fredrick Toben: http://www.toben.biz
- “It can be stated in summary that German policy toward the Jews prior to World War II consisted mainly of legislative pressure, and of a few public occasions of violence in which, however, no Jews were actually killed. No doubt some Jewish lives were lost in German concentration camps prior to World War II, but certainly there was no deliberate policy of killing Jews as such, and the proportion of Jews affected was far smaller than that of Germans subjected to similar treatment. “ – Quote page 9/62 from pdf book, emphasis mine
- “In the early days of the launching of the extermination legend it was maintained that there were gas chambers in all of the German concentration camps and that great numbers of Jews were exterminated in all of them. But after the occupation of West Germany by the Americans, British and French -there were many honest observers in the occupation forces who visited these camps and found and reported that no gas chambers existed there. It was then contended that most of the gas ovens were concentrated at Auschwitz in southern. Poland, which was then under Russian control. The Russians refused to allow any visitors there for about ten years after the war, by which time the Russians were able to revamp Auschwitz in such a manner as to give some plausibility to the claim that large numbers of Jews had been gassed there. It is significant, however, that no living, authentic eye-witness of the gassing of Jews at Auschwitz has ever been produced and validated.” – Quote page 12/62 from pdf book
- “… there is no evidence that the Germans adopted any program of mass extermination of Jews during the war or that any German National Socialist leader ever gave any order to do so. “ – Quote page 12/62 from pdf book, emphasis mine
- The Myth of the Six Million: An Examination of the Nazi Extermination Plot
By Prof. David L. Hoggan. Since the first day of its publication, The Myth of the Six Million has generated controversy and heated debate. Prof. David L. Hoggan, the author of this work—and a history professor at Stanford University at the time it was written—at first refused to attach his name to the manuscript for fear of academic retribution.
The original text was therefore first published under “Anonymous.” Other publishers deemed the book “too hot to handle” and refused even to bring it to press. What is it that is so “dangerous” about this little book? Why has it been suppressed again and again during its short lifetime? And why is it now so important to get the information contained herein out to as many citizens as possible?
- Emphasis mine:
- The Battleship Auschwitz is Still Sinking After All !
by David Irving, http://www.fpp.co.uk/textindex.html, August 13-14, 2002
“The Battleship Auschwitz is still sinking after all — if it has not been sitting, just upright, on the sandy bottom ever since 1988, already mortally torpedoed by Fred Leuchter: just like the battleship HMS Queen Elizabeth in Alexandria, holed in 1942 by an Italian Navy one-man-torpedo team.”
In the mail is a photocopy of a learned paper tucked away in Osteuropa’s issue for May 2002, a respected German journal on eastern Euroepan history (DVA), Fritjof Meyer, a leading editor of Der Spiegel, quietly abandons Krema II at Auschwitz as a gas chamber, saying — on the basis of Pelt’s latest research finds — that it was never used, and only being prepared for possible use as one (yeah, right); until now, it was claimed that a million souls perished in that underground mortuary, with cyanide dropped through holes in the roof. We even had video, which I showed in court, of Professor Robert Jan Van Pelt sobbing on the roof of Krema II and calling this building the epicenter of the world’s genocide history.
Now Meyer writes that all the killings, such as they were, were done off site in the two “bunkers” (i.e. the converted peasant cottages of which the Auschwitz officials Aumeier and Höss both talked, and which I freely agreed at the trial may have been used on a modest scale for gassings). That is, unless I have read the paper completely wrongly. Meyer also cuts the number killed there from 4,000,000 to not much over 300,000, which is close to what the Kraków Trial found in 1947. [Video, 2.6MB, Avi]
In delicious vignettes, Meyer reveals too that:
* until the Soviet collapse in 1989 Auschwitz staff were promised instant dismissal if they publicly doubted the figures: but he himself still goes on to quote as an authority the very Auschwitz official, Franciszek Piper, a communist (and Jewish) “historian”, who issued the threats of dismissal; and that
* my old enemy and rival, the late Martin Broszat, quietly deleted from his “scientific” publication of the Rudolf Höss memoirs all the blatantly phoney figures which might otherwise have aroused scepticism.
Gradually the ducks are waddling into a row. Of course it would be nice if Pelt had admitted this in the Lipstadt trial: Mr Justice Gray could surely not have then found against me. But his paymasters would have been none too happy, I suppose.
I don’t recall seeing this May article blazoned in headlines around the world the same way that my financial devastation and eviction that month were.
I have always argued that the original Holocaust figures are probably exaggerated by a factor of ten, and Meyer’s article also supports this proposition.
Published without any fuss in May 2002, Meyer’s paper is nonetheless a noteworthy breakthrough, and a victory for revisionism and Real History (but won at what a price…)
- The Fed’s “Nuclear Option”: $4,900 Gold, $100 Silver, $200 Oil
by Chris Campbell, Jan 17, 2017, https://lfb.org/
“The final weapon in the Fed’s arsenal,” Jim Rickards, author of The Road to Ruin: The Global Elites’ Secret Plan For the Next Financial Crisis, wrote this week, “is the financial equivalent of nuclear war.”
The Fed’s “nuclear option,” Rickards warns, is… wait for it… gold.
We bring this up today because this nuclear option could have a yuge (sometimes spelled “yooge”) impact on the price of not only the midas metal (see below), but of silver ($100) and oil ($200), too. And we want you to have plenty of time to ready yourself.
7 Federal Reserve Tools and Why They’re All Flawed
In recent decades, the Fed has engaged in a series of policy interventions and market manipulations that have paradoxically left it more powerful even as those interventions left a trail of crashes, collapses and calamities.
The following is a survey of seven Federal Reserve tools in the Fed toolkit to stimulate the economy if recession or deflation gains the upper hand and why their toolkit is flawed.
The image of the Fed printing paper money, and dumping it from helicopters to consumers waiting below who scoop it up and start spending is a popular, but not very informative way to describe helicopter money. In reality, helicopter money is the coordination of fiscal policy and monetary policy in a way designed to provide stimulus to a weak economy and to fight deflation.
The Nuclear Option — Gold
The final weapon in the Fed’s arsenal is the financial equivalent of nuclear war. The Fed could instantly create inflation and achieve nominal if not real growth by massively devaluing the dollar when measured as a unit of gold.
This was last done in 1933–34 and was highly successful. Stocks rallied and commodity prices boomed in the middle of the Great Depression (1929–1940). This boom was not sustained because the Fed and Treasury prematurely tightened monetary policy and fiscal policy in 1937, which put the U.S. economy back into a severe technical recession from 1937–1938.
The Fed could use this nuclear option by coordinating with the Treasury to make a two-way market in gold using printed money. This would work exactly like quantitative easing, except the Fed would buy or sell gold instead of Treasury bonds.
The Fed would set an arbitrarily high fixed price for gold such as $5,000 per ounce. The Fed would make that price stick by offering to buy gold from any seller at $4,900 per ounce and selling gold to the market at $5,100 per ounce. This amounts to a 4% band or spread around the target price, a classic pegging technique.
Gold could be removed from or added to the U.S. hoard at West Point, NY, and money would be created by or destroyed by the Fed in order to make the target price stick.
If, for example, the price of gold was $1,300 per ounce before the operation, the effect would be to devalue the dollar from 1/1,300th of an ounce of gold to 1/5000th of an ounce of gold, a 75% devaluation of the dollar. This devaluation would not take place in isolation.
A 75% dollar devaluation in gold would signal devaluation in all other goods and services and result in $100 per ounce silver, $200 per barrel oil, etc.
This is obviously an extreme measure and would only be used in the face of strong persistent deflation. Yet, the fact that that technique exists and has been used in the past is one reason to conclude that deflation will not in fact persist beyond certain limits because the Fed and Treasury have the ability to stop it as they did in 1933.
- Nomi Prins: Financial Crash Possible in Last Quarter of 2017
by Greg Hunter’s USAWatchdog.com
Best-selling author Nomi Prins says two of the big wild cards are Donald Trump and Europe. Prins explains, “The biggest wild card is a combination. Trump is a wild card, but so is Europe. Right now, the political lens goes over to Europe. It’s caught between its old and potentially new structure and potential new political leadership. I think that is a major wild card now. That snakes through Russia, and that snakes through Eurasia relationships, and that relates back to Trump. The wild card is the linkages among those things.”
Prins, who is a former top Wall Street banker, also thinks it’s hard to define the bad guys and the good guys. Prins contends, “From an economic standpoint, everyone has side deals. So, there is no positive or negative economy. . . . All countries do good things, and all countries do bad things. What is happening right now is all of the alignments between countries have been changing. . . . The reality is there are going to be a lot of things renegotiated, and it’s not just Trump and the U.S. doing the renegotiating. All the other countries are negotiating as well. If there is enough antagonism with how Trump is going to renegotiate those agreements . . . that could limit trade into the U.S., and that could limit our bargaining power. . . . That is all in flux this year.”
Prins correctly predicted no financial crash for 2016. Prins’ upcoming book is titled “Artisans of Money.” It is all about central bank money creation. What does Prins say about this year? Prins predicts, “In 2016, I pegged the non-crash. . . . Central bankers were finding new ways to extend their money creation policies. That is what kept the markets up. There was a separate bid on the markets after Trump was elected. It was on the expectation that he would be good for growth, that he would be good for infrastructure and that he would create jobs. I do think there is a little juice in the central banks. I keep thinking there shouldn’t be, but they keep surprising all of us with their ability to boost the markets. They have artificially stimulated so many different asset bubbles, whether it’s debt, which is epic, or stock markets, many of which are at historic highs. If we have a crash, it will be in the second half of 2017. The promises, the rate hikes, the dollar being high could collapse into the realities of the stability and this artificialness. I am not sure about a crash this year, but if we see a big decline, it will be in the last quarter.”
On the U.S. dollar, Prins says, “I think with the expectation of things going well, the dollar will be keeping a bit of a bid. It will be within a range but staying fairly up. I think the dollar will turn around and weaken in the second half of the year. . . .That’s why, in the last half of the year, gold will catch more of a bid.” (Meaning prices for gold will rise according to Prins.)
- 56 Years Ago Today, Eisenhower Warned Americans Of “The Unwarranted Influence” Of The Deep State
by Tyler Durden, http://www.zerohedge.com, 17 Jan 2017
In his farewell address to the nation 56 years ago, President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned the American people for the first time to keep a careful eye on what he called the “military-industrial complex” that had developed in the post-World War II years. Fiscally conservative Eisenhower had been concerned about the growing size and cost of the American defense establishment since he became president in 1953, and as History.com notes, in his last presidential address to the American people, he expressed those concerns in terms that shocked many of his listeners.
Eisenhower began by describing the changing nature of the American defense establishment since World War II. No longer could the U.S. afford the “emergency improvisation” that characterized its preparations for war against Germany and Japan. Instead, the United States was “compelled to create a permanent armaments industry” and a huge military force. He admitted that the Cold War made clear the “imperative need for this development,” but he was gravely concerned about “the acquisition of unwarranted influence…by the military-industrial complex.” In particular, he asked the American people to guard against the “danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.”
Eisenhower’s blunt language stunned some of his supporters. They believed that the man who led the country to victory in Europe in World War II and guided the nation through some of the darkest moments of the Cold War was too negative toward the military-industrial complex that was the backbone of America’s defense. For most listeners, however, it seemed clear that Eisenhower was merely stating the obvious. World War II and the ensuing Cold War resulted in the development of a large and powerful defense establishment. Necessary though that development might be, Eisenhower warned, this new military-industrial complex could weaken or destroy the very institutions and principles it was designed to protect.
“For years we have been supplying anti-tank missiles and all sorts of weapons to the terrorists, to Al Nusra, sometimes to ISIS.. the entire array … Jaysh al-Islam …”
– Quote Senator Richard Black from 1:01 onwards
- US “Deep State” = Western Illuminati.
- Trump Takes on the US ‘Deep State’
by Michael S. McKenna, Editor / Saxo Bank, https://www.tradingfloor.com/
* Donald Trump engages in war of words with outgoing CIA head
* Trump policies on trade, foreign policy depart from longstanding norms
* Past events point to policymaking powers beyond elected officials
* Russian relations a major sticking point between Trump, much of gov’t
* Aggressive stance towards China could result in enormous market volatility
By Michael McKenna
Last Sunday, US president-elect Donald Trump launched one of his now-trademark series of broadsides against the CIA, claiming that the latest series of leaks concerning his alleged misuse of a Moscow hotel suite previously occupied by president Barack Obama was a “complete fraud”.
Trump then compared the US intelligence regime to Nazi Germany in a tweet that called the leak, which alleged various colourful activities involving prostitutes, “fake news […] one last shot at me”.
The incoming president had already been warned against taking on the CIA by no less than Democratic Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, who said on January 2 that Trump was being “really dumb” by taking on the CIA, adding that “you take on the intelligence community, they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you”.
Last Sunday, outgoing CIA director John Brennan told press that he took “great umbrage” at Trump’s words, noting that Trump, who has repeatedly stated his intention to improve ties between the US and Russia, “has to understand that absolving Russia of various actions that it’s taken in the past number of years is a road that he, I think, needs to be very, very careful about moving down”.
Given that Trump’s plans regarding Russia have been opposed by Democrats, Republicans, and the intelligence community alike, his actions have been interpreted as an assault on what some term “the deep state,” or the collection of policymakers (both elected and not) that guide US policy in certain long-term directions.
According to Saxo Bank head of forex strategy John J Hardy, “the deep state” is shorthand for a force within Washington that is able to guide the US’ ship of state over periods of time longer than presidential terms, and at times despite the stated intentions of elected officials.
If Trump has indeed embroiled himself in a conflict with this entity, then, what does that mean for his policy plans and for the post-Inauguration markets?