Apparently Mr. Zundel is unaware that recent research conducted by the courageous and politically incorrect truth-seekers of THE MAD REVISIONIST has revealed startling evidence that the bombing of Dresden and other German cities during the conflict known as World War II is in fact an elaborate German propaganda hoax.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that a few buildings might not have burned down, and that maybe a few people weren't singed or even killed as a result. But revisionists are scorned, and even laughed at, when we ask difficult questions about what really caused the tragedy, and how many people were really killed. Meanwhile, so many establishment lies about this alleged event have been exposed by revisionist research that its hard to take the normatively accepted version seriously.
Take the fact that there are numerous memorial sites in Germany that supposedly mark "mass graves" of civilians alleged to have been killed in these so-called "bombings". Yet not one of these sites have ever been excavated and subjected to impartial forensic examination to confirm that they contain what they are alleged to contain. Appalling, is it not? These Dresden hoaxers obviously have something to hide.
> Fifty-four years ago today, the city of Dresden, which had no strategic
> military significance at all and which had become a huge refugee
city for
> civilians fleeing the Red Terror, became a huge fireball in the fiercest
> Allied terror bombing ever.
Indeed, the city of Dresden had no military or strategic significance. Is it therefore not the least bit fishy that the Dresden hoaxers expect you to believe the ridiculous notion that the Allies, while fighting a war that they intended to win, would waste valuable military resources on it?
> David Irving has written about the Dresden Holocaust, and it is a
book well
> worth reading - and one you will never forget.
>
> It is estimated by some that as many as 350,000 - 600,000 victims
were
> incinerated beyond being identifiable or even recognizable as human
remains
> in that Holocaust. Only 35,000 could be identified.
Ah, so only 35,000 victims could be identified, and yet Zundel expects us to believe that another 350,000-600,000 people (why does the number vary so widely, hmmm?) were killed as well, simply because they are unaccounted for. How gullible does he think we are? Does he offer any proof to support this absurd number?
> Many of the pictures that people were served up as "pyres of gassed
Jews"
> from Auschwitz and elsewhere in early Allied "atrocity flicks" are,
in
> fact, photographs the Wehrmacht took of German victims of the Allied
war
> crime of Dresden.
But every revisionist knows that it is physically impossible to burn bodies in open pits. That's why the photos and eyewitness testimonies of Jews being burned outside the kremas at Auschwitz must be fakes, right? So it serves as proof, as well, that the Dresden bombing is a hoax.
> The War Department, describing another city, Hamburg, described how
people
> died in such a firestorm:
>
> "Literally hundreds of people were seen leaving shelters after the
heat
> became intense. They ran across the street and were seen to
collapse very
> slowly like people who were utterly exhausted. They could not
get up."
>
> A reporter, Melitta Maschman, wrote of what happened in the City
of Darmstadt:
Well, I suppose it is accurate to refer to Melita Maschmann (correct spelling) as a reporter at the time of the bombing. Though it would, perhaps, be more accurate to say that she was a reporter for the Bund Deutscher Madel. In fact, it would be more accurate still to say that she was the head of the BDM Press and Propaganda division in Berlin from 1943 until the end of the war. Interesting how Mr. Zundel is willing to, er, prune information that might cast doubt on the reliability and objectivity of his sources. Particulary when the source in question, in her memoir (Account Rendered: a Dossier on my Former Self) written after the war, was quite open in describing how the Nazis used to brainwash German youth.
> "There was not a house anywhere in the street which had not turned
into a
> blazing firebrand. Above the sea of flames, a glowing cyclone
raged over
> the town, and whenever it caught the bodies of people in flight,
it
> shriveled them in a second to the size of a child, and the next day
they
> lay all over the streets, hardly burnt, but like mummified children."
HBO should have saved this lie for its "Tales from the Crypt" program. Preposterous nonsense! So called "eyewitness" testimonies of these alleged bombings of German cities contain so many impossibilities and discrepancies as to make the whole story unbelievable. Sure, all of the survivors pretty much agree on the point that the city was bombed by the Allies, but how reliable are survivors who also testify to "puddles of melted human flesh" and people "glowing blue (or orange) and disintegrating" - and this, in sealed bunkers which were protected from the fire. There have been so many lies told by so-called "Dresden survivors" that all of these testimonies are wide open to reasonable doubt. After all, how much can you trust people testifying against their hated enemies?
And is there a single witness who actually saw a bomb dropped from an American plane land on the city and explode? No. Not one such witness. Who could have survived to have described such a thing? All we have are rumors. I don't want to hear what people thought they heard from inside the bomb shelter, or what they figured might be going on above. I want to know what they saw.
No, the Dresden myth relies almost entirely on hostile eyewitness testimony and questionable "confessions" by those alleged to have done the dirty deed. There is not a single survivor account of the Dresden bombing that has ever stood up to hostile cross-examination, and I challenge you to find one.
> These German victims' wartimes stories are not known. They left no
diaries.
>
> They perished in the flames of the devastating inferno of March 16,
1945 -
> among the thousands of victims of this Allied atrocity the following
women
> and children named "Anna":
<snip: list of names>
> I would like you to honor and remember these German victims of a deliberate
> Allied policy with genocidal overtones in a few moments' worth of
silence.
While I'm sure that Mr. Zundel considers it good history to tug at the heart strings in the hopes of disabling our ability to think rationally and critically, this tactic will not work any better than the diary of Anne Frank. It stands that he has yet to show us one proof... one single proof... that any one of these persons died as a result of Allied bombs.
In light of the fact that I have shown that the Dresden story has no non-biased eyewitnesses and no conclusive physical evidence, it appears that alternative explanations for the destruction are entirely plausible. It could have been caused by someone smoking in bed (smoking is more common in continental Europe than it is in, say, North America). Also, it is entirely plausible that the German Air Force bombed the city themselves by accident (as they did to Freiburg), and then tried to cover up their heinous error by blaming the disaster on their hated enemies.
Its not looking good for the Dresden hoaxers now. Where is the proof that this city was bombed by the Allies? Considering the gravity of the charges, is it really so much to ask?
New
Groundbreaking Research from Germany
Back to THE MAD REVISIONIST
THE MAD REVISIONIST:
We do not recruit; we convince. Truth has no need of coercion. We invite
your support and submissions.
|
|