An Awful Revenge: The Eastern Victors’ Concentration Camps after World War II


The victims were ethnic Germans and their executioners and torturers were often Jews, like the psychopathic mass murderer Shlomo Morel (pictured) who later died in honour in Israel. 

from Inconvenient History: A Quarterly
May 14, 2019

Slightly abridged by Lasha Darkmoon,
with pictures, captions, and brief notes added

“Staffed and run by Jews, the prisons were little better than torture chambers.”
— Thomas Goodrich, author of Hellstorm

The eastern victors continued to operate many formerly German concentration camps after World War II. Additional camps to intern ethnic Germans were established in Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania and Yugoslavia. The existence and operation of these postwar camps is a matter of major historical significance. While the population of the German concentration-camp system had grown to a record peak of 700,000 by the beginning of 1945, the number of Germans incarcerated across Europe in similar camps by the end of 1945 was possibly even higher.[1]

Soviet-Run Camps

The German concentration camps at Buchenwald, Sachsenhausen, Mühlberg, Fürstenwalde, Liebe-Roze, Bautzen and other locations were taken over by the Russian Gulag Archipelago. The camp at Buchenwald, for example, was transformed into “Special Camp No. 2” and was operated by the Soviet Union until 1950.[2] Conditions at the camps under Soviet control were atrocious. The camps were labeled “special” because the Soviets insisted that the internees be cut off completely from the civilian population.[3] Even Gen. Merkulov, the Soviet official in charge of the concentration camps in Germany, acknowledged the severe lack of order and cleanliness, particularly at Buchenwald.[4]

One former inmate described his five years in the Soviet-run Buchenwald Camp:

“People were mere numbers. Their dignity was consciously trampled upon. They were starved without mercy and consumed by tuberculosis until they were skeletons. The annihilation process, which had been well tested over decades, was systematic. The cries and groans of those in pain still echo in my ears whenever the past comes back to me in sleepless nights. We had to watch helplessly as people perished according to plan—like creatures sacrificed to annihilation.

Many nameless people were caught up in the annihilation machinery of the NKVD [the Soviet Secret Police under Stalin] after the collapse of 1945. They were herded together like cattle after the so-called liberation and vegetated in the many concentration camps. Many were systematically tortured to death. A memorial was built for the dead of the Buchenwald Concentration Camp. A figure of death victims was chosen based on fantasy. Intentionally, only the dead of the 1937-1945 period were honored. Why is there no memorial honoring the dead of 1945 to 1950? Countless mass graves were dug around the camp in the postwar period.” [5]

While no one can know the exact number of inmates and deaths at Buchenwald, it is reasonably certain a higher percentage of inmates died under Soviet control than under German control. Viktor Suvorov estimates that 28,000 people were imprisoned by the Soviets at Buchenwald from 1945-1950, of whom 7,000 (25%) died. By comparison, he estimates that 250,000 people were imprisoned by the Germans at Buchenwald from 1937 to 1945. Of that number, Suvorov estimates that 50,000 (20%) died. The Soviet-run Buchenwald had a higher estimated death rate than the German-run Buchenwald.[6]

Suvorov’s estimates of deaths at Soviet-run Buchenwald are probably understated. Some sources estimate that at least 13,000 and as many as 21,000 persons died in Soviet-run Buchenwald.[7] Also, a detailed June 1945 U.S. government report on  German-run Buchenwald put the total deaths at a lower number of 33,462, of whom more than 20,000 died in the final chaotic months of the war. These total deaths include at least 400 inmates killed in British bombing raids.[8] Thus, the death-rate percentage at the Soviet-run Buchenwald versus the German-run Buchenwald is probably substantially higher than Suvorov’s estimates.

Russian estimates show a total of 122,671 Germans passed through Soviet-run camps in the Soviet Zone after the end of the war. Of this total, 42,889 Germans died, or approximately 35%. The official Soviet statistics probably underestimate the true number of dead in the Soviet-run camps. American military intelligence units and Social Democratic Party groups in the late 1940s and 1950s estimate that a much higher total of 240,000 German prisoners passed through Soviet-run camps. Of these, an estimated 95,643 died, or almost 40%.

In these revisions there were 60,000 prisoners at Sachsenhausen, where 26,143 died; 30,600 prisoners at Buchenwald, where 13,200 did not survive; and 30,000 prisoners at Bautzen, where 16,700 died. These higher death counts are supported by discoveries of numerous mass graves of Germans buried near the Soviet-run camps.[9]

No one has ever been punished for the deaths and mistreatment of German inmates in the postwar Soviet-run camps. The hundreds of thousands of visitors who visit the Buchenwald campsite each year only see museums and memorials dedicated to the “victims of fascism.” There is nothing at Buchenwald to remind visitors of the thousands of Germans who perished miserably in Buchenwald after the war when the camp was run by the Soviet Union.[10]

Polish-Run Camps

Many of the Germans in Poland were also sent to former German concentration camps. In March 1945, the Polish military command declared that the entire German people shared the blame for starting World War II. Over 105,000 Germans were sent to labor camps in Poland before their expulsion from Poland. The Polish authorities soon converted concentration camps such as Auschwitz-Birkenau, Łambinowice (called Lamsdorf by its German occupants) and others into internment and labor camps. In fact, the liberation of the last Jewish inmates at the Auschwitz main camp and the arrival of the first ethnic Germans to Auschwitz were separated by less than two weeks.

When the camps in Poland were finally closed, it is estimated that as many as 50% of the German inmates, mostly women and children, had died from ill-treatment, malnutrition and diseases.[11]

In a confidential report concerning the Polish concentration camps filed with the Foreign Office, R.W.F. Bashford wrote:

“[T]he concentration camps were not dismantled, but rather taken over by new owners. Mostly they are run by Polish militia. In Świętochłowice, prisoners who are not starved or whipped to death are made to stand, night after night, in cold water up to their necks, until they perish. In Breslau there are cellars from which, day and night, the screams of victims can be heard.” [12]

Lamsdorf in Upper Silesia was initially built by Germany to house Allied prisoners of war. This camp’s postwar population of 8,064 Germans was decimated through starvation, disease, hard labor and physical mistreatment. A surviving German doctor at Lamsdorf recorded the deaths of 6,488 German inmates in the camp after the war, including 628 children.[13]

A report submitted to the U.S. Senate dated August 28, 1945 reads: “In “Y” [code for a camp, from the original document], Upper Silesia, an evacuation camp has been prepared which holds at present 1,000 people….A great part of the people are suffering from symptoms of starvation; there are cases of tuberculosis and always new cases of typhoid….Two people seriously ill with syphilis have been dealt with in a very simple way: They were shot….Yesterday a woman from “K” [another camp] was shot and a child wounded.”[14]

Zgoda, which had been a satellite camp of Auschwitz during the war, was reopened by the Polish Security Service as a punishment and labor camp. Thousands of Germans in Poland were arrested and sent to Zgoda for labor duties. The prisoners were denied adequate food and medical care, the overcrowded barrack buildings were crawling with lice, and beatings were a common occurrence. The [Jewish] camp director, Salomon Morel [pictured here at age 26] , told the prisoners at the gate that he would show them what Auschwitz had meant. A man named Günther Wollny, who had the misfortune of being an inmate in both Auschwitz and Zgoda, later stated, “I’d rather be 10 years in a German camp than one day in a Polish one.”[15]

Sexual Assaults in Polish Camps

A notable element of the postwar Polish camp system was the prevalence of sexual assault as well as ritualized sexual humiliation and punishment suffered by the female inmates. The practice at Jaworzno, as reported by Antoni Białecki of the local Office of Public Security, was to “take ethnically German women at gunpoint home at night and rape them.” The camp functioned as a sexual supermarket for its 170-strong militia guard contingent.

The sexual humiliation of female prisoners in the Polish camp at Potulice had become an institutional practice by the end of 1945. Many of the women were sexually abused and beaten, and some of the punishments resulted in horrific injuries. The sexual exploitation of women in Polish-run camps contrasts to the experience of women in German-run concentration camps. Rape or other forms of sexual mistreatment was an extremely rare occurrence at German concentration camps, and severely punished by the authorities if detected.[16]

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) attempted to send a delegation to investigate the atrocities reported in the Polish camps. It was not until July 17, 1947, when most Germans had either died or had been expelled from the camps, that ICRC officials were finally allowed to inspect a Polish camp. Yet even at this late date there were still a few camps the ICRC was not allowed to investigate.[17]

Jewish journalist John Sack has confirmed the torture, murder and sexual assaults of German prisoners in postwar Polish camps operated by the Office of State Security. Most of the camps were staffed and run by Jews, with help from Poles, Czechs, Russians and concentration-camp survivors. Virtually all of the personnel at these camps were eager to take revenge on the defeated Germans. In three years after the war, Sack estimates that from 60,000 to 80,000 Germans died in the Office’s camps.[18]


“I’d rather be 10 years in a German camp than one day in a Polish one.” — Günther Wollny, a concentration camp inmate in Auschwitz during WW11 as well as in postwar Poland at Zgoda (quoted above)

(Picture and caption added by LD)

—   §   —

Efforts to bring perpetrators in Polish camps to justice were largely unsuccessful. Czesław Gęborski, director of the camp at Lamsdorf, was indicted by the Polish authorities in 1956 for wanton brutality against the German prisoners. Gęborski admitted at his trial that his only goal in taking the job was “to exact revenge” on the Germans. On October 4, 1945, Gęborski ordered his guards to shoot down anyone trying to escape a fire that engulfed one of the barracks buildings; a minimum of 48 prisoners were killed that day. The guards at Lamsdorf also routinely beat the German prisoners and stole from them. German prisoners in Lamsdorf died of hunger and diseases in droves; guards recalled scenes of children begging for scraps of food and crusts of bread. Gęborski was found not guilty despite strong evidence of his criminal acts.[19]

Czech-Run Camps      

The Theresienstadt concentration camp in Czechoslovakia was used by Germany during the war to intern many of Germany’s, Austria’s and Czechoslovakia’s most-famous or -talented Jews. On May 24, 1945, the Czech government decided to use the Theresienstadt Camp to imprison 600 Germans from Prague. Within the first few hours of their arrival, between 59 and 70 of these Germans were brutally beaten to death. Two hundred more Germans were reported to have died from torture and beatings within the next few days. The camp commandant, Alois Pruša, took great pleasure in the beatings, and reportedly used at least one of his daughters to assist him in killing the German inmates. Pruša and his assistant told the remaining surviving Germans that they would never leave the camp.[20]

LD: I have been unable to find out anything about the ethnic origin of Alois Pruša, whether he was a Jewish or non-Jewish Czech. However, a superficial trawl of the internet yields the information that an Alois Pruša was born in 1915 (and died in 1986 at the age of 70). So in 1945, he would have been 30 years old, and this could be his photograph.  

Torture appears to have been the rule in Czech-run Theresienstadt. Guards at Theresienstadt used a variety of instruments for beating and lashing their victims: steel rods sheathed with leather, pipes, rubber truncheons, iron bars and wooden planks.

One woman in Theresienstadt observed and still remembers the screams from a female SS member forced to sit astride an SA dagger.

Dr. E. Siegel, a Czech-speaking medical doctor working for the ICRC, was also subjected to extensive torture in Theresienstadt. Dr. Siegel thought the guards were ordered from above to commit their acts of torture, because the methods used in all Czech-run camps were broadly similar.[21]

Some of the savagery at Theresienstadt stopped when Pruša was replaced by a Maj. Kálal.[22]However, one secret Soviet report said that the German inmates at Theresienstadt repeatedly begged the Russians to stay at the camp. The report states: “We now see the manifestations of hatred for the Germans. They [the Czechs] don’t kill them, but torment them like livestock. The Czechs look at them like cattle.” The horrible treatment at the hands of the Czechs led to despair and hopelessness among Czechoslovakia’s ethnic Germans. According to Czech statistics, 5,558 ethnic Germans committed suicide in 1946 alone.[23]

Czech author Dr. Hans Guenther Adler, a Jew who was imprisoned during the war in Theresienstadt, confirmed that conditions in Czech-run Theresienstadt were deplorable for Germans. Adler wrote:

Certainly there were those among them who, during the years of occupation, were guilty of some infraction or other, but the majority, among them children and adolescents, were locked up simply because they were German. Just because they were German…? That phrase is frighteningly familiar; one could easily substitute the word “Jew” for “German.” The rags given to the Germans as clothes were smeared with swastikas. They were miserably undernourished, abused….The camp was run by Czechs, yet they did nothing to stop the Russians from going in to rape the captive women….[24]

After the war, the ICRC reported that the sexual abuse of female inmates in Czech-run camps was pervasive and systematic. A foreign observer of one Czech camp noted that the women were “treated like animals. Russian and Czech soldiers come in search of women for purposes which can be imagined. Conditions there for women are definitely more unfavorable than in the German concentration camps, where cases of rape were rare.”

In another Czech-run camp, the soldiers would “take away the prettiest girls, who would often disappear without trace.”

Jean Duchosal, secretary general of the ICRC, reported that girls were often raped at the Matejovce Camp in Slovakia, and that beatings were daily occurrences. The same was true of the Czech-run camp of Patrónka.

A Prague police report of June 1945 mentioned that Revolutionary Guards were in the habit of “exposing women’s body parts and burning them with lighted cigarettes.”[25]

(Picture and caption added by LD)

Naked Christian women were lined up for inspection by Jewish commissars when they first arrived in Stalin’s gulags. The prison guards had their pick of the most attractive women. (Picture taken from Danzig Baldaev, Drawings From the Gulag. [LD]


The German prisoners in postwar Soviet, Polish and Czech concentration camps were subject to brutal treatment resulting in the loss of many tens of thousands of lives. Their treatment was probably worse than the treatment of prisoners in German-run concentration camps during World War II.

LD: The words “probably worse” are probably meant as a discreet attempt at understatement, given this quote above by an inmate who had experienced incarceration both in Nazi Germany during the war and later on in postwar Poland in a torture camp run by Stalin’s Jews: “I’d rather be 10 years in a German camp than one day in a Polish one.” — Günther Wollny, a concentration camp inmate in Auschwitz during WW11 as well as in postwar Poland at Zgoda (quoted above)


[1] Douglas, R. M., Orderly and Humane: The Expulsion of the Germans after the Second World War, New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2012, p. 136.
[2] Suvorov, Viktor, The Chief Culprit: Stalin’s Grand Design to Start World War II, Annapolis, Md.: Naval Institute Press, 2008, p. 279.
[3] Naimark, Norman M., The Russians in Germany: A History of the Soviet Zone of Occupation, 1945-1949, Cambridge, Mass. and London: Harvard University Press, 1995, p. 377.
[4] Weber, Mark, “Extermination Camps Propaganda Myths,” in Gauss, Ernst (ed.), Dissecting the Holocaust: The Growing Critique of Truth and Memory, Capshaw, Ala.: Theses and Dissertations Press, 2000, p. 299.
[5] Ibid.
[6] Suvorov, Viktor, op. cit., p. 279.
[7] Weber, Mark op. cit., p. 299.
[8] Ibid., p. 298.
[9] Naimark, Norman M, 1995, op. cit., pp. 376, 378.
[10] Weber, Mark, op. cit., p. 299.
[11] Merten, Ulrich, Forgotten Voices: The Expulsion of the Germans from Eastern Europe after World War II, New Brunswick and London: Transaction Publishers, 2012, pp. 9, 65.
[12] Public Record Office, FO 371/46990.
[13] De Zayas, Alfred-Maurice, Nemesis at Potsdam: The Anglo-Americans and the Expulsion of the Germans, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1977, pp. 125-126.
[14] “Evacuation and Concentration Camps in Silesia” in Congressional Record, Senate, Aug. 2, 1945, Annex A-4778/79.
[15] Lowe, Keith, Savage Continent: Europe in the Aftermath of World War II, New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2012, pp. 135-137.
[16] Douglas, R. M, op. cit., pp. 141-142.
[17] International Committee of the Red Cross, Report of its Activities during the Second World War, Geneva: 1948, Vol. 1, pp. 334 et seq.
[18] Sack, John, An Eye for an Eye, 4th edition, New York: Basic Books, 2000, p. 114.
[19] Naimark, Norman M., Fires of Hatred: Ethnic Cleansing in Twentieth-Century Europe, Cambridge, Mass. and London: Harvard University Press, 2001, p. 130.
[20] MacDonogh, Giles, After the Reich: The Brutal History of the Allied Occupation, New York: Basic Books, 2007, pp. 153-154.
[21] Ibid., pp. 154, 157.
[22] Ibid., p. 156.
[23] Naimark, Norman M., , 2001, op. cit., p. 118.
[24] De Zayas, Alfred-Maurice,  A Terrible Revenge: The Ethnic Cleansing of the East European Germans, 2nd edition, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006, p. 97.
[25] Douglas, R. M., op. cit., pp. 141-142.

Original Source: Inconvenient History: A Quarterly

59 thoughts to “An Awful Revenge: The Eastern Victors’ Concentration Camps after World War II”

  1. As noted above, the article has been slightly abridged.

    By “slightly abridged” I mean the last few paragraphs of the article have been deleted because they come as an anticlimax and therefore weaken the impact of the article, which needs to end on a higher note. The rest of the article has been left intact. No changes.



      brian mitchell May 29, 2019 at 8:42 am

      Thank you so much for this.

      Adolf Hitler said no less that 80 times he did not want war, just to unite the German peoples who were all spilt apart by the allies after WW1.

      The Jews, world wide, declared war on Germany in 1933.

      Churchill was bombing Germany week after week before Germany retaliated. Germany did not start the war. But at the war’s end, the Russian jews held the Nuremberg trials and much of this was in Hebrew. The British [and Americans at the trial] therefore had no idea what was being said.

      The Germans were all sentenced to hang.

      The jews instructed that the trapdoor the men were to fall through should be unusually small. This was so they would smash their faces on the way down.

      As people wake up, many are realising now Hitler was not the evil man we are told. The evil came from another source

        May 29, 2019 at 11:52 am

        “But at the war’s end, the Russian jews held the Nuremberg trials and much of this was in Hebrew. The British [and Americans at the trial] therefore had no idea what was being said. The Germans were all sentenced to hang….”

        I must have read tens of thousands of pages of Hebrew, then, since the transcript is only 16,435 pages long in German.

        More hallucinations…

        We’re past deep Skunkie now, deepest Skunkie coming up.

        (Explanation: there used to be a dyslexic half-Jew called “Skunkie” who set up a website full of ridiculous fairy tales designed to appeal to “anti-Semites”, with the obvious aim of making us look stupid. He was pretty successful at it, too. They’re doing the same thing now with “Flat Earth” theories.

        We must be more careful about what we believe, and even more careful about what we repeat. At least, if you believe a lie and don’t repeat it, it doesn’t make you look like a fool.

  2. by decree, the term “war crime” was not allowed to apply to the “russians” in the “investigations’ that took place after ww2… in fact the jewish bolsheviks were still committing cleansing atrocities during that time… from what i’ve gathered, the nuremberg tribunals were completely fixed from the beginning, all conducted by jews… some say they were written in advance by the ‘father of public relations’ edward bernays… adolf eichmann testified in a sound-proof booth…

    1. LD
      May 29, 2019 at 1:17 pm

      Your article TESTICLE CRUSHING AT NUREMBERG is complete garbage and should be stomped into the ground. I repudiate your article and I disassociate myself from it in its entirety.

      I do not wish to imply that the post-WWII “war crimes trials” accomplished anything or proved anything, but I know of no source that alleges physical mistreatment of defendants or witnesses AT NUREMBERG, either in the first Nuremberg trial (IMT) or the 12 later Nuremberg trials (NMT).

      Please do not imply that I had anything to do with this abortion of an article. I said what I said, and my meaning is quite clear. You have distorted my statements before.

      1. @ Carlos Porter

        You are lying, sir. And you know you’re lying. I can say that with complete confidence as a long-term researcher of Holocaust revisionism.

        You agreed to everything Dr Darkmoon said in her article of October 2015, entitled “Torture and Testicle Crushing at Nuremberg.” She didn’t “distort” your meaning for the simple reason that she didn’t have to figure out what you were saying or “interpret” what you were saying. She quoted you verbatim. She simply narrated what you had written to her in an email, word for word. Exact date and time of email given.

        Here is what Dr Darkmoon wrote:

        [Carlos Porter] Holocaust revisionist author of “Not Guilty at Nuremberg” took the trouble to write to me about the Nuremberg trials in a private communication (July 28, 2015 at 9:55 pm). Porter confirmed what I had always suspected: that most of the American interrogators at Nuremberg had been Jews, and that torture had been freely practiced against the helpless Germans on trial in order to force them to confess to non-existent crimes:

        “You can be absolutely CERTAIN,” Carlos Porter wrote to me, “that nearly ALL the interrogators and interpreters in ALL the trials were Jewish, because the Americans stamped out the German language from all American schools during WWI, so German Jewish refugees were almost the only competent people they had. Of course, other “German-Americans” could not be trusted not to be “Nazis”, so they were stuck with the German Jews.

        That there was a great deal of mistreatment and torture in the minor trials is absolutely certain. I reproduced a couple of accounts of torture at the Dachau trials in “War Crimes Trials and Other Essays”. But I’m sure it’s only the tip of the iceberg. Minor personnel could be tortured with impunity, and 99% of them would be afraid even to mention it.

        There’s a lot of literature on the subject, more all the time. The Brits appear to have been surprisingly enthusiastic torturers, whether Jewish or not.”

        Changed your mind now, have you?

        As for the crushing of testicles at Nuremberg, a far more respected researcher than you, David Irving himself, has testified on his website that kicking and crushing of German prisoners’ testicles at Nuremberg was widespread, and that American Jewish interrogators were responsible. Who should we believe, sir? You or Irving?

        From the David Irving site:

        All but two of the Germans, in the 139 cases we investigated, had been kicked in the testicles beyond repair. This was Standard Operating Procedure with American investigators.>

        From official records at Nuremberg:

        25 Jan. 46

        His [the German prisoner’s] testimony concludes with a general statement of the methods of torture which were used [at Nuremberg]:

        “1) The lash.

        “2) The bath: The victim was plunged headfirst into a tub full of cold water until he was asphyxiated. Then they applied artificial respiration. If he would not talk they repeated the process several times consecutively. With his clothes soaking, he spent the night in a cold cell.

        “3) Electric current: The terminals were placed on the hands, then on the feet, in the ears, and then one in the anus and another on the end of the penis.

        “4) Crushing the testicles in a press specially made for the purpose. Twisting the testicles was frequent.

        Dr Darkmoon didn’t have to “make up” any of this “garbage”, as you call it, you pusillanimous apologist for the Jewish torturers. It’s all there in the public domain!

        Here is an oft-quoted statement by one of the famous German prisoners of war, Rudolf Höss, whose testicles were crushed in order to force him to confess to imaginary war crimes:

        “I’ll sing. I’ll say whatever you want me to say. Do you want me to say I gassed 2.5 Million people? I’ll do that. After you crushed my balls yesterday, I’ll say I gassed 50 Million people if you like that number better…”


        I am deeply disappointed, Mr Porter, by your cowardly attack on Dr Lasha Darkmoon. Bona fide Holocaust revisionist you are most certainly not. You bring shame and discredit on your colleagues by your denial that testicle crushing took place as a routine procedure against German prisoners of war at Nuremberg.

        Irving Gallager,
        Holocaust Revisionist Author and Researcher

        1. @ Carlos Porter

          “You are the one who is lying. Shall I explain?”

          Please do.

          1. BTW, I apologize for any needless offense caused by my initial response to your gratuitous attack on Lasha Darkmoon. Perhaps yo didn’t “lie” as such but you are guilty of some kind of misunderstanding nevertheless. Frankly, I thought you were trying to score points in order to put Lasha Darkmoon down in a dismisive and condescending way as an ignorant sensationalist who was making up stories about testicle crushing at Nuremberg. Which is not the case.

            We all know that injury to the testicles of German prisoners of war at the Nuremberg trials was a frequent and widespread form of torture interrogation, as reported by David Irving. And that Jews were the torturers in most cases, as you yourself admitted. So LD is not making anything up, nor is she the irresponsible researcher you imply. I condemn you for your needless aggression, for your excess of testosterone, in being unable to treat Dr Darkmoon with the respect she deserves. She is not — I repeat NOT — your intellectual inferior just because you happen to belong to the “superior sex” and have an inordinately high opinion of yourself.

            1. RE “Testicle Crushing at Nuremberg”

              We invite others to join this interesting debate, contributing with factual knowledge if possible. Please keep your comments pertinent and polite, avoiding all ad hominem attacks and defamation of character.

  3. Let’s face it Darkmooners. Most of humanity sucks. It’s that simple. Most people are opportunists. You give them an inch, they’ll take a mile. Jew or Gentile. It’s so difficult to meet truly high-quality people. And Donaldo isn’t suggesting only finances. Know lots of wealthy people who are scum-bags. Once in a while, however, ya meet a truly wonderful person. When Donaldo was a teenager, he met a Dutchman by chance. He was a shoemaker. We had a brief conversation at a coffee shop. I mentioned that I would like a nice pair of shoes and was willing to pay the price. Quanto? $100.00? $200.00? Donaldo didn’t know. The Dutchman with a little embarrassment cleared his throat and said the price range was between $2000- $10,000. Donaldos ❤️ sank. I informed the gentleman that I could never afford a pair of his shoes. We exchanged phone numbers and went our separate ways. A couple days later Donaldo got a call and was invited to the same coffee shop by the Dutchman. He opened a bag and produced a slab of clay-like material. He asked me to remove my shoes and step onto the slab to produce an imprint. Donaldo stated, “But I can’t afford your shoes.” He responded, “No worries. I just like to keep potential customers on file.” We shared ☕, conversation and departed. One month later there was a knock at Donaldos door. There was a package. Had to sign for it. Donaldo, single at the time, walked into the kitchen and slowly opened the package. Inside was a pair of navy-blue leather shoes of exceptional quality. Difficult to describe. They fit Donaldos feet perfectly. The package had no return address. Later tried calling the Dutchman to thank him. Phone number disconnected. Couldn’t contact him. Never saw him again. To this day, 30 years later, Donaldo still has the shoes……still in perfect condition. The Dutchman. Such a HUMAN of high-quality. Each fellow Darkmooner……..ask yourself……how many people such as he have you met in your life? If you ever do, recognize and treasure them please. Most of humanity…..oh well. But on rare occasions, a gem is discovered. 😉

    1. the saints asked God, rid us of the pain inflicted by those wicked evil doers.. God replied: it is repentance I am waiting for!

  4. It is a fine thing there are still venues where articles such as this are published! Historians like Thomas Goodrich and John Wear help us more fully understand and comprehend the HYPOCRISY of those who constantly praise “our heroes” of WW2. Until I first read the then-newly-published Barnes Revue, I believed the tired old lie – except I remember always feeling that much was hidden from us. (I once asked my American History professor about unspoken elements, and he said he’d be “fired” if he taught them!)
    The only thing I DON’T like about these articles is that they infuriate me, and frustrate me, because there is little I can do to correct the wrongs. Trying to enlighten the grubby and sweaty masses is impossible. Their plight is obvious with the recent popularity of multiculturalism and socialism in my country. Yet, I realize there are untruths we must endure if there is any hope of keeping this USA prominent among nations – and my own people’s well-being intact. It would be reckless, at this point, to pursue righteous vengeance against whole tribes. It is almost suicidal to condone it, and I appreciate and understand the efforts of those like Lasha who would be in danger if she revealed her true name for Joe Public’s dirty scrutiny. In any event, I have long realized the ultimate doom of a society of lies, and have chosen withdrawal from it as best I can.

  5. Interesting point for these murderers is that when coming to the USA through immigration and citizenship naturalization rules, questions pertaining to being part of any type of genocide is asked before letting people from these European countries come here. LOTS of Russians are here now who may have been part of torture teams and genocide and they are now getting Social Security here in the United States. They just lie…..

    “4. Persecution and Genocide

    An applicant who has engaged in persecution or genocide is permanently barred from naturalization because he or she is precluded from establishing good moral character. [22] Additionally, an applicant who engaged in persecution or genocide prior to admission as a lawful permanent resident (LPR) would have been inadmissible. Such an applicant would not have lawfully acquired LPR status in accordance with all applicable provisions and would be ineligible for naturalization. [23] Such persons may also be deportable. [24] “


    This orgy of death and destruction in the aftermath of WWII detailed above, has a mirror image in Western Europe, where lands were under the jurisdiction of General Eisenhower. This is well documented in the following book by James Bacque.
    “Other Losses”

    Here is a poignant, revealing documentary highlighting the pulverizing of NAZI Germany during and after WWII.

  7. The Soviet Union considered Soviet prisoners of war traitors and on their return to Russia, most were executed.
    The Soviet Communists and Jewish Bolsheviks believed inmates of Germany’s labour camps, should have committed suicide rather than work for Germany’s war effort, therefore, in those camps which came under Soviet jurisdiction, most inmates would have suffered the same fate as Russia’s returning prisoners of war.

  8. The past can not be undone. The future though can be guided into a reality that has left all illusion, treason and defeat. Only willingness of change is required and not further bloodshed of or against any other tribe.
    Antisemitism has become a new professional, regulated and enforced political religion while directing international law in the global community and manipulating the future further into fakery. Germany’s only problem: victors write and rewrite history – always. To be a German has become a nasty crime unless it is kosherized by their masters. Now a perverted modern German outlaw and unstable psychopath that never again shall be trusted to be free again. The mole and shame of a kosher world community and the complete opposite of the once proud Aryan Nazi dream that is now dreamt by the opposition of all man and their tribes. To be, or want to be a natural born, traditional German (like any other native world citizen) that is allowed to criticise ones own suppression or rights has become illegal and is a criminal activity in Germany under German law and in the rest of the gentile world.
    Here is an example of “international organised Semitism” – When a criminal is proven guilty by various courts of “justice” in all four corners of the world are all verdicts equally judged against the offender? Surely not as just one (of many) international case will prove. A certain forced pattern of “international anti-Semitism” cooperating perfectly with “political correctness” – another false reality enforced on the citizens of the world. When the wrongdoer is not only involved but runs a crime syndicate and is accused of dealing drugs, “coercing” minors into prostitution, evading taxes, and ‘harming security’ of the country (Colombia) the culprit normally can not avoid rotting in a local jail, unless (drums please……..) the antisemitism card is played in political correctness. Drawing the kosher ASC instead the native “comfortable” Colombian jail is avoided and the convict is flown in a private jet to Israel for “deportation and kosher JUSTICE in an Israeli court”.
    The Colombian victims and their parents deserve justice but then AGAIN certain kosher Jews are above all and any laws.
    This is not coincidental as any western country calling itself democratic and follows “political correctness” the native so called democratic law and freedom is overwritten instantly by just one word with a very twisted and illusory reality.
    There never will be any solution as long every word in any language can be twisted, misunderstood, stretched and is turned into every direction having lost the original meaning while opposing it.
    “Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech.”
    The balanced scale of equality in justice and “international law” is nothing but a myth.
    As long as any criminal, kosher or not is not equal before the law there is no law at all and if there is no law there is only antisemitism left for a world run by insanity, manipulation, perversion and greed.
    The “Janus” project of double faced Hippocracy has taken its toll over centuries and urgently needs to be discarded by good and caring people of all faith and origin who have enough righteousness and love left in their hearts to long for equality and justice. All face changing and hiding behind other nationalities as one of “them” abolished together by all nations and judged and punished as treason on humanity itself in an awake international democracy that has not yet been born nor ever existed in space and time before.

  9. adolf eichmann, one of adolf hitler’s right hand boys, was a full blooded ashkenazi khazar yid, who spoke yiddish…
    he was the honcho in charge of shipping the displaced jews of europe off to palestine… him and hitler did this in full cooperation with the zionist element in germany at the time, who were at odds with the nyc jews running the boycott against hitler’s german economy, and doing a killer job of it, big rallies at madison square garden…
    the official word is that eichmann ‘committed suicide’ in his cell at nuremberg by eating a tube of toothpaste, so i heard…
    would eating a tube of toothpaste really kill a grown man, even the fluoride kind?
    and how likely is it he wouldn’t have been discovered in his death throes and had his stomach pumped?
    i would guess suicides in custody are a lot easier to fake than actual executions…
    that was right around the same time that air marshall goring also ‘committed suicide’ in custody at nuremberg by biting a cyanide capsule…. where’d he get the cyanide pill? you tell me…
    and, reichsfuhrer himmler killed himself too, while in british custody…
    so that’s hitler, himmler, eichmann and goring all doing away with themselves in the final chapter…
    anybody smell anything?
    95% of the history of WW2 is a PACK OF LIES… and that’s not counting the stuff (above) they left out…

    1. Bark,

      Do check before you post. Adolf Eichmann was the one who escaped to Argentina and was caught there by Israelis and put on trial and hanged in Israel in 1962.

      But if in this case wikipedia is spreading disinformation and you know better do elaborate.

      1. Bark
        By the time 1944 rolled around, especially after the Normandy invasion, I seriously doubt Hitler was paying much attention to the problem of Jewish deportation. Besides, Eichmann was probably looking to cut a deal with the Zios to save his own skin at that point. And insofar as his Ashkenaz heritage is concerned, I got news for ya. There were PLENTY of Jews in high positions in the Reich who were, wait for it…..SUPPORTIVE of the NS cause! In varying degrees of course. Loyalty to a righteous cause meets its severest test when the going gets the toughest.
        Himmler, like Hess before him couldn’t fathom the idea that the British didn’t see what was obvious to them, which was that the Soviet UNION was the common enemy. None of them, including Hitler, who spared British soldiers at Dunkirk, could understand how duped the Allies had become in not recognizing the true face of the enemy, excluding the top echelons of course.
        When Hitler learned that Himmler attempted to make a deal with the Brits it was reported that he cried in anguish at the thought of the loyal Henrich being a traitor, which he WASN’T, but by then his paranoia had gotten the better of him, thinking he was surrounded by traitors, which in the case of Bormann he WAS, as I’ve written about many times.
        You’ve got it all wrong brother. Hitler was a trueheart.

    2. Bark
      Many lies indeed. The fundamental question as always remains, “who or what will reveal the true identities of all the liars?”

      Only the sphinx knows 😎

  10. when i was a kid the story was eichmann committed suicide at nuremberg by eating a tube of toothpaste… i could be wrong… maybe he just attempted it…
    on major events they do put out several different versions to keep the public confused…
    otherwise, you’re supposed to believe he was able to escape from a high security prison and make his way to south america… that is where a lot of the went to… those that weren’t absorbed into the us security state apparatus, OSS/CIA, FBI, the underground base network, on operation paperclip…
    the whole story stinks anyway…
    hitler was announced to have escaped from berlin too at the last of it, but stalin squelched that report and announced for the wires that hitler had committed suicide in the bunker…
    everybody knows everything on wikipedia is put through the J-Filter before it’s published…
    i know a guy who had his stuff censored by them, not because it wasn’t true…
    wikipedia has the official jew story…

    1. Bark,

      Fair enough but I would have still challenged your claim about Eichmann regardless of Wikipedia as we and the whole world were aware of his capture in Argentina and trial in Israel long before the internet and this open source encyclopedia came about. Yeah I know, we all watched the moon landings too! Still because something is eventually proven to be a lie it doesn’t mean that something else is a lie too. What are we to believe and what to do so as not to start spreading disinformation ourselves and serving causes we may not wish to serve? I know, the best is to take a vow of silence and retire to a cave.

  11. ADMIN: COMMENT FOUND IN ‘SPAM” AND APPROVED FOR PUBLICATION.(I have no idea why your comments are going automatically into our spam folder).

    And about WW1 that lead to the above.

    SHORTLY BEFORE PRESIDENT WILSON’S RE-ELECTION, he received a Jewish visitor in the White House by the name of Samuel Untermeyer.

    The Jew Untermeyer was a prominent New York City attorney of the Law Firm, Guggenheim, Untermeyer, & Marshall.

    The Firm had as one of its main clients, Kuhn Loeb Bank, of which Jacob Schiff, an agent of Walter Rothschild, was the head. Both Untermeyer and Schiff contributed generously to the National Democratic Committee that installed President Wilson in the White House in both of his elections.

    Untermeyer informed President Wilson that he had been retained to bring a Breach of Promise action against President Wilson. Untermeyer’s client was the former wife of a professor at Princeton University at the same time that Wilson was a professor at Princeton University. Untermeyer informed Wilson that his client was willing to accept $40,000 in lieu of commencing the Breach of Promise action.

    Untermeyer produced a packet of letters from his pocket written by President Wilson to his colleague’s wife when they were neighbors at Princeton University. These letters established the fact that an illicit relationship had existed between Wilson and the wife of his Princeton colleague. Wilson immediately acknowledged his authorship of the letters. Untermeyer then informed Wilson that his former sweetheart was in dire need of $40,000.

    President Wilson informed Untermeyer that he did not have the $40,000 to pay his blackmailer. Untermeyer then volunteered to give Wilson’s former sweetheart the $40,000 out of his own pocket – but on one condition: that President Wilson promise to appoint to the first vacancy on the United States Supreme Court, the Zionist and Talmudic Jew, Louis Dembitz Brandeis.

    Without further talk, President Wilson accepted Mr. Untermeyer’s generous offer. Then on June 5 1916, nearly one year before Wilson asked Congress to declare war on Germany, Wilson appointed the Zionist Jew, Louis Brandeis, to the Supreme Court.

    Many were surprised that Wilson, the son of a Christian minister, would appoint to the highest court in the land the first Jewish Supreme Court Justice in US history.


    Clare Bronfman is an American heiress and former equestrian. She is the youngest daughter of billionaire philanthropist and former Seagram liquor chairman Edgar Bronfman Sr.

    Clare Bronfman is notable for her involvement in NXIVM.

    Seagram heiress Clare Bronfman pleads guilty in alleged sex cult case

    Bronfman, 40, admits credit card fraud and immigration charges.

    The former NXIVM president, Nancy Salzman, and her daughter Lauren Salzman, pleaded guilty in March.

    Seagram’s heiress Clare Bronfman faints in federal court after judge asks if Michael Avenatti acted as her lawyer

    A judge had asked Bronfman if she had been secretly represented by embattled celebrity lawyer Michael Avenatti in the case, where she is charged with money laundering and identity theft
    while being part of the the accused sex-cult NXIVM.

    NXIVM’s supporters have said it was a self-help group that wanted to change the world for the better, but federal prosecutors claim it was actually an illegal pyramid scheme that funneled money to its leaders and offered its spiritual leader, Keith Raniere, access to sex slaves.

    NXIVM Branding Was Scripted by Sex Cult Leader

    Keith Raniere helped design the ritual, according to recordings introduced during his federal trial.

      1. Thanks for stirring the pot, Homer! 🙂

        I’ll go ahead & mention it.

        Kirsten Gillibrand’s Father And Stepmother, Second Cousins, Were Very Active In Sex Cult!

        Democrat senator and presidential candidate Kirsten Gillibrand’s family ties to the NXIVM sex cult are coming to light, raising serious questions about her relationship with the cult that she once denied knowing about.

        Gillibrand’s father and stepmother, who are second cousins, were both heavily involved in the cult in the period shortly before they got married, according to eyewitness accounts from ex-NXIVM employees who spoke on the record to Big League Politics, and according to court documents proving that Gillibrand’s father Doug Rutnik was employed by NXIVM.

        Ex-cult employee Frank Parlato — who exposed the fact that Raniere was branding women — is working with Big League Politics to uncover the deep longstanding links between Gillibrand, the Clintons, and NXIVM.

        “The very first time I ever met Gillibrand she was at an event for Hillary Clinton in the Hall of Springs in the State Park. This was in 2006. I was at a table with a Russian friend and Mike Roohan and his wife. I was on the Democratic committee at the time and was given two comp tickets. Gillibrand came up to me introduced herself and said she was running against John Sweeney. This was before all the stories of his drunken behavior came out. He was still congressman kickass at that time. I promised my support and wished her well.


    June 3, 2019 at 1:16 am

    No offense.
    Let’s start with your lies first and get to mine later, if we can find any.

    My personal favorite:
    “From OFFICIAL RECORDS AT NUREMBERG [!]: [emphasis added]
    [Note that there are no references, page numbers, sources, book titles, document numbers, nothing. They have all been amputated by Monsieur Irving Gallager, the famous “ long-term researcher of Holocaust revisionism” and “Holocaust author and researcher”, about whom I can find no information. The name appears to be a pseudonym.]

    25 Jan. 46
    His [THE GERMAN PRISONER’S] [!] testimony concludes with a general statement of the methods of torture which were used [AT NUREMBERG] [!]:…”


    According to Gallager, we are supposed to believe that the Nuremberg tribunal was kind enough to keep records describing the manner in which their Jewish interrogators tortured the German defendants and witnesses! Wasn’t that nice of them?

    The source is volume six of the Nuremberg Trial transcript, IMT VI-170-173. Most of volume six consists of French “war crimes reports” describing alleged German atrocities committed against French partisans in France.

    Given the political situation in France, we can be sure that these reports are 100% pure Communist propaganda.

    The passage begins on p. 170 of volume 6, with the following introduction:

    “We shall submit now Documents F-563 and 564 under the one number Exhibit Number RF-308. It is a report concerning the atrocities committed by the Gestapo in Bourges” (a university town in central France).

    I translated a whole book of this stuff, all lies. The book is FRENCH GESTAPO TRIALS, by Vincent Reynouard, available from Barnes Review,

    In my introduction, I wrote: “About five years ago, Vincent Reynouard – currently residing at an unknown location to avoid his second or third term of imprisonment for his scholarly historical writings – had a brain-storm, one of the smartest revisionist ideas I ever heard of: he took the trouble to compare the accusations made against the Gestapo at Nuremberg, by the French, with the post-war French trials of the same personnel, involving the same cases, the same victims, the same witnesses. What he found was that the evidence and accusations were not the same: the accusations made at Nuremberg in these same cases were practically forgotten. The French Gestapo articles in this volume constitute some of the best proof I ever saw that the Nuremberg ‘evidence’ was just lies, all lies.”


    Dixit Gallager: “Here is an oft-quoted statement by one of the famous German prisoners of war, Rudolf Höss, whose testicles were crushed in order to force him to confess to imaginary war crimes:
    “I’ll sing. I’ll say whatever you want me to say. Do you want me to say I gassed 2.5 Million people? I’ll do that. After you crushed my balls yesterday, I’ll say I gassed 50 Million people if you like that number better…”

    The site is defunct. Error message : “Server IP could not be found”.

    COMMENT: To say that something is “oft-quoted” does not prove it is authentic. Just think of “Benjamin Franklin’s Prophecy on the Jews”, or “Chief Seattle Speaks”.

    It is not a quotation. It is not by Höss. It is a sarcastic wisecrack on Höss’s “confessions” to Bernard Clark, a “British” officer of Jewish origin.

    The relevant passages are:
    “As Bernard Clarke said in the quote above:
    “…once he started talking, there was no stopping him.
    “That sounds very much as [sounds like]:
    “’I’ll sing. I’ll say whatever you want me to say. Do you want me to say I gassed 2.5 Million people? I’ll do that. After you crushed my balls yesterday, I’ll say I gassed 50 Million people if you like that number better…’”

    The quote is an unintentional fabrication and proves nothing. The entire article is available here.
    I am unable to determine who wrote the article.


    “As for the crushing of testicles at NUREMBERG [!], a far more respected researcher than you, David Irving himself, has testified on his website that kicking and crushing of German prisoners’ testicles at NUREMBERG [!] was widespread, and that American Jewish interrogators were responsible. Who should we believe, sir? You or Irving?

    “From the David Irving site:
    “’All but two of the Germans, in the 139 cases we investigated, had been kicked in the testicles beyond repair. This was Standard Operating Procedure with American investigators.’”

    COMMENT: Dachau is not in Nuremberg. No further comment.

    Other questions raised by Gallager:

    “You agreed to everything Dr Darkmoon said in her article of October 2015”

    COMMENT: That is not true. My email was dated July 28, 2015. Her article appeared in October . She quoted me correctly, but I said nothing of the kind. How devious is that? I was so astonished that I didn’t know what to say, plus I was busy. It’s like expressing your great love of Christmas and then seeing it used as “proof” that you believe in Santa Clause, or even worse, proof of Santa’s existence!

    “Changed your mind now, have you?”

    COMMENT: Not at all. I said nothing about “testicle crushing at Nuremberg”, I said nothing to support the idea, and I have nothing to repudiate, except L.D.’s distortions.

    It wouldn’t matter if you used words correctly…
    [more friendly advice later].

    1. Two more absurdities in the article “Testicle Crushing at Nuremberg”

      “Though Perl had lots of German blood on his hands, he was nevertheless allowed by the Americans to serve as a prosecutor at the Nuremberg War trials…”

      “The Presiding Judge at Nuremberg was also—coincidence?—a Jew. His name was A.H. Rosenfeld and he was a colonel in the American army…”

      How is it possible to be this sloppy and expect to be taken seriously? You can go on google and find a list of the judges and prosecutors at Nuremberg (First Trial only) in less than 5 minutes.

      This is in addition to thinking that Dachau is in Nuremberg every 5 seconds.

      There’s a very easy way to fix these problems. Will let you know what it is in a few minutes.

      So easy even a college graduate can do it!

      1. CWP –

        “So easy even a college graduate can do it!”

        Good one!! 🙂

        Awaiting, breath abated… slightly.

  14. Another oddity:

    “…almost all the German defendants at Nuremberg had had their testicles crushed…”

    You cannot prove this. If you think you can, go ahead. Let’s see it. The craziest thing is the “almost all”, as if it were a self-evident fact.

    – she then “proves” it by quoting an anonymous poster [!] on an Internet discussion group, (a forum devoted to mushrooms, pyschedelic drugs and pot) [!];

    – the short quotation forming the body of the post is not only anonymous, it is unattributed, i.e., the source is not given, neither the title or the author.

    How do you prove a theory about Nuremberg by quoting something anonymous about the French Revolution?

    After all, if you have a very specific theory about Emily Dickinson, you prove it by quoting something about Emily Dickinson; isn’t this the way academics do things?

    There are more problems. We’ll get to my recommendations later.

    Don’t worry: it’s nothing drastic.

  15. Recommendations:

    a) Think about what you mean when you write, and write what you mean:

    b )In other words, if you mean “beatings, mistreatment and torture”, say “beatings, mistreatment and torture”;

    don’t just automatically say “testicle crushing” like a parrot, because you can’t prove that; you don’t need to, and you can’t even define it.

    For example, how does a “crushed” testicle differ from a testicle which has “merely” been hit, or kicked, or struck with a stick? Why introduce a different term? You’d need a medical report.

    c) If you mean “Dachau” or “elsewhere in Germany”, or “in war crimes trials”, write “Dachau” or “elsewhere in Germany”, or “in war crimes trials”; don’t just automatically say “at Nuremberg”. You can’t even define that.

    If something happens elsewhere in Germany, but the guy appears at Nuremberg to testify, like Rudolf Höß, then the incident is included as if the torture occurred at Nuremberg. which it did not. This was not clear to me at first.

    The facts have been well-known for 70 years. Keep it a little bit vague, use the original language, and nobody will argue with you. Nobody will ask you for definitions and start arguing, i.e., oh well, he was hit in the testicles, but were they “crushed?”

    Real crushing would probably cause atrophy and require amputation. You’d need a medical report, which will never exist, because this all happened 70 years ago and the people are dead. Keep it simple.

    It wasn’t controversial until you introduced these additional terms, all of which require more clarification, more definitions, more evidence.

  16. Remember, we are talking about a trial (or so-called “trial”).

    In law, you must be very careful with your definitions, and they must be very clear from the outset.

    For example, it is an “element” of the crime of rape that the victim must be alive; she can be unconscious, but she has to be alive. If she’s dead, it’s still a crime, but it’s not the crime of rape! If you screw a cadaver and they charge you with rape, you are not guilty.

    They have to drop the rape charge and bring an indictment for the applicable crime (“sexual intercourse with a cadaver”, “interfering with a corpse”, etc.).

    Burglary, traditionally, refers to the crime of “breaking” and “entering” into a “dwelling house” in the “night-time”. All these terms are very precisely defined.

    For example, if it’s just getting dark, that’s “night-time”. If there’s no “breaking”, or no “entering”, or it’s not a “dwelling house”, it’s not “burglary”. You’ve to drop the charges and charge the guy with breaking and entering or trespassing or malicious damage or disturbing the peace or something.

    You’ve got to prove every “element” of the crime, or else he’s not guilty and you’ve got to release the bastard.

    Now just imagine you’ve invented some complicated new “element” (or two of them) that had to be defined and proven in addition to everything else! You’d get far fewer convictions. Keep it simple and get the facts straight.

  17. It seems strange to me that to people with little knowledge of criminal procedures, “torture” is the only form of illegality that makes an impression on them.

    If you told the average person that at Nuremberg and other war crimes trials, there was no rule against the introduction of prior consistent statements (i.e., the multiplication of evidence by simple repetition), or the introduction or oral or written hearsay, they’d just give you a blank look. Huh?

    If I stick up a liquor store and kill the store clerk, the prosecution have to hire a ballistics expert, who has to inspect the firearm, take it to a firing range and test it, and write a report.

    The report is not introduced into evidence at first; it is considered “written hearsay”, which is defined as an “out-of-court statement made to prove the truth of what it asserts”. The expert has to appear and testify, and be cross-examined. If he contradicts his report, the contradiction is introduced into evidence as a “prior INconsistent statement”, which is admissible.

    The witnesses must appear before the police and sign either a deposition or an affidavit. These, too, are considered inadmissible hearsay . The witnesses have to appear and be cross-examined. if they contradict their out of court statements, that is considered a “prior INconsistent statement”, which is then introduced to attack their credibility.

    It is important to remember that, in the real world, affidavits are ALWAYS written by the police, by the interrogator. ALWAYS, ALWAYS.

    I have a very great mistrust of “sworn statements” and “affidavits”, particularly when prepared by prosecutors or the police. I’ve signed “sworn statements” on at least half a dozen occasions. I was a witness, not a suspect; my interrogators were not hostile to me, and had no preconceived notion of what they wanted to hear.

    Yet I always noticed that they NEVER WRITE DOWN WHAT YOU SAY. They always write something completely different in their own crazy jargon, often completely distorting what you say, and ALWAYS leaving out something that you think is important.

    They really seem to think that they know better than you do what you saw, and what you experienced. This is the conceit of the professional who thinks that no layman can describe anything correctly.

    When they finish writing up your “statement”, THEY NEVER READ IT TO YOU. They simply summarize it and ask you to sign.

    They become visibly annoyed if you insist on reading it carefully, and if you insist on changing more than one or two things, they get mad and say they haven’t got all day to rewrite the thing. So in the end, you end up signing it, even if it is a load of rubbish.

    This is particularly stupid of them when you reflect that they know perfectly well that when you appear in court, you are going to tell your story in your own words, just the same way you told it in the first place, at which point your “pre-trial affidavit” will be introduced into evidence against you as a “prior inconsistent statement”, thus defeating its own purpose (assuming that its purpose is to discover the truth). All lawyers know this and exploit it to the full.

    The system works this way: if you say “I got out of my car and this guy with some fuzz on his face came up to me, his face was kind of hairy”, your interrogator will write “I exited my vehicle and was accosted by a bearded individual”, or some other such gibberish.

    If you say that’s not right — he had some hair on his face, but it wasn’t really a beard — you may well be told that you’ve got to describe him as bearded or clean-shaven, this is the third correction you’ve made so far, we haven’t got all day, so which is it? So you sign it.

    Later you appear in court and testify that the suspect had some facial hair but no beard. Your “sworn statement” is then introduced into evidence against you as a “prior inconsistent statement” to prove that you are mistaken in your present identification.

    YOU WILL NEVER BE ALLOWED TO EXPLAIN WHY YOU SIGNED A STATEMENT SAYING THE SUSPECT HAD A BEARD. Even if your own lawyer brings this out on “re-direct”, the damage is done: the court will think you are unreliable.

    The result of this system, if you appear in court to testify (as is the rule in ordinary criminal cases), is that a defendant with “fuzz on his face” may be acquitted of a crime which he actually committed.

    If you do NOT appear in court to testify (as is the rule in “war crimes trials”, which are not conducted according to “technical rules of evidence”), the result may well be that a “bearded individual” will be convicted of a crime he never committed.

    It is hard to conceive of a system more unreliable or more unfair than trial by “affidavit”, without the personal appearance of the witnesses, particularly where the interrogators are in a position to intimidate the witnesses.

    What is proven by a “trial” in which Soviet “copies” are accepted instead of original documents, in which “sworn statements” are introduced instead of witnesses, and in which 312,022 statements for the defence were “rebutted” by “7 or 8” “sworn statements” for the prosecution? (Note: it is obvious that the defence at Nuremberg were in no position to intimidate their witnesses, but that the prosecution was.)

      June 6, 2019 at 7:53 pm

      Note that everybody has to appear in court and testify and be cross-examined, and they have to bring the gun to court. They can’t just come to court with a “photograph” of the pistol and a few “affidavits” from the “witnesses”, who are never heard from again.

  18. Re that French Revolution quote from that pothead discussion group:

    I find it hard to believe that the entire weight of a human body could be suspended by one testicle (or rather, the skin of the scrotum). Surely the skin would tear and the body would fall to the ground?

    Has somebody been smoking something?

  19. Something else LD got wrong, but she can’t be expected to know these things:

    “Having renounced his American citizenship in 1984, and having then relocated to Belgium with his wife and children…”

    This is a trifle fanciful, since if I had done it all this way around I wouldn’t have had a passport to travel on!

    In actual fact, I married a children’s nurse in South Africa in 1973 and all our children were born outside the United States.

    By the time I renounced my citizenship, I was firmly established as a foreign resident with permanent residence and they issued an alternative passport for me less than a year later in my country of permanent residence.

  20. Incidentally I like Lasha Darkmoon and I consider her a friend. I gather that she has not been well, or has had other problems. I wish her well.

    1. Carlos ‒

      For what it’s worth, LD likes you too and thinks you are a misunderstood genius. She referred to you once in my hearing as “the salt of the earth, the last of the great American eccentrics.” 🙂

      1. “Eccentric” is probably the best word (or best polite word).
        Not too many people have been married 46 years this week and lived to tell about it.

  21. By the way, I just translated two very interesting books, THE PSYCHOANALYSIS OF JUDAISM and ESCHATOLOGICAL WARFARE, about “end time beliefs”, by Hervé Ryssen, forthcoming publication by Barnes Review.

  22. Incidentally, I’ve had the problems I foresee for you with all this “crushed testicle” business.

    About 20 years ago, some idiot contacted me and wasted about 3 days of my time arguing about the exact degree of permanent harm to exactly how many testicles?!?

    Since there are 2 for each person, that makes 274 testicles for 137 persons, what happens if one is injured and the other one isn’t? etc. etc. etc.

    1. That is section 69 (a) in

      You’ve got to avoid giving people an excuse to confuse things by quibbling and arguing about side-issues.

      Obviously, you’re not going to “crush the testicles” on somebody like Goering or Ribbentrop and then allow him to testify for 300 pages in front of camera men and reporters from all over the world, that’s silly.

      There were dozens of qualified, dedicated German lawyers hanging around, about 30 of them, patriotic men who would have raised hell. Not just a load of renegade Jews.

  23. To sum up, there is no need to discuss the Nuremberg Trial or the 22 defendants in detail at all, because the only person that ever confessed to anything in a big way was Rudolf Höß. The others all just said “I knew nothing about it until I came into this courtroom”.

    You can already prove Höß was beaten, and you have the L. Van Roden article (it’s an article, not a book), so you’re accomplishing absolutely nothing with all this talk about “testicle crushing at Nuremberg” at all, except to horrify people.

  24. Proving that Nuremberg was not a “fair trial” is not really very difficult.

    I’m trying to get this stuff back in print in book form, but I figure they will sell better if people know what I have to say. It’s not always easy reading, and a lot of people don’t like to read off a screen for hours.
    All rights reserved.

Comments are closed.