reSee.it - Related Video Feed

It is shameful that the democratic world expresses sympathy for the Jewish people while refusing to help them. The democracies claim they cannot take in Jews, despite having much more space than Germany. They also insist that Germany must allow Jewish immigrants to bring capital, ignoring the fact that Germany has historically received them without such conditions. The German nation has suffered greatly due to the actions of Jews and foreign powers, and we refuse to let foreign interests dictate our policies. We are committed to educating our own citizens for leadership roles, as German culture should be managed by Germans. The Jewish people must adapt to constructive roles or face dire consequences. If international Jewish financiers provoke another world war, it will lead to their annihilation in Europe, as nations will no longer sacrifice themselves for their benefit.

American Jews and Jews throughout Europe called for a boycott of German exports, while a group of Zionists secretly negotiated with the Nazis to allow German Jews to immigrate to Palestine. This agreement, known as the transfer agreement, led to an influx of German Jews settling in Palestine and bringing new professions and progress to the country. The settlement of German Jews in Palestine was even promoted by Nazi propaganda minister Josef Goebbels. The Zionists agreed to reject the boycott of Germany, and while Nazis and Jews were marching, diplomacy was quietly working towards the establishment of a Jewish nation state. This story may be difficult for some to accept.

Speaker 0 expresses a view that the government is full of liars, accusing both sides of the political spectrum of dishonesty. The conversation then shifts to a provocative claim: "They insisted Hitler was bad and he was not. You don't think Hitler was bad? No. Not at all. There was no holocaust." This remark represents a stark reversal of widely accepted historical consensus, asserting that there was no Holocaust. The speaker describes a surprising personal justification for this belief, saying, "I've I've seen evidence. I my aunt Georgie was in a prison camp and she told me about it and there was no torture, there was no killing." The claim places emphasis on the anecdote of the speaker’s aunt, Georgie, who allegedly was "in a prison camp" and told the speaker about it, specifically asserting that "there was no torture" and "there was no murder." The speaker then elaborates that the aunt was "a Jew in in Germany," which adds a personal and ethnic dimension to the claim, suggesting that a Jewish person in Germany would have firsthand experience of the camp. In continuing, the speaker reiterates the assertion: "There was no torture. There was no murder." The description of the alleged camp life offered by the aunt includes contrasting details such as "films," "an orchestra," "movies," and "a soccer team," painting a picture of a benign environment within the context of a Nazi-prison setting. A further provocative assertion is included: "A Jew started the SS." This statement is presented as part of the aunt’s account or the speaker’s interpretation of the camp’s history, introducing a controversial claim about the origins of the Schutzstaffel. Overall, the speaker challenges the widely accepted historical record by claiming that Hitler was not bad, that there was no Holocaust, and that the aunt’s testimony describes a benign camp life with cultural and recreational elements, culminating in the assertion that a Jew started the SS. The dialogue thus presents a sequence of controversial statements grounded in the speaker’s belief based on an account from their aunt Georgie.

Speaker 0 describes the mechanism and aftermath of the Nazi gas chambers: after about fifteen minutes of hell, all the people inside would be dead, suffocated. The Nazis then forced other Jews to extract the bodies from the gas chambers and, as a final indignity, examine the dead Jews' mouths to pull out gold teeth. They would examine hands as well. When rings were too tight, they would simply cut off fingers. The account states that they would also cut off the victim's hair, which German businesses use for mattress stuffing. The text emphasizes that nothing was wasted. The speaker then asks what explains the Nazis' murderous obsession with the Jews. The passage centers on three linked practices: the method of killing via gas, the coercive task of post-mortem body handling by other Jews, and the extraction of valuables and body parts. It specifies the sequence: gas chamber suffocation, body removal by others, extraction of gold teeth from mouths, examination of hands, removal of rings by cutting off fingers if necessary, and cutting of hair for use in mattress stuffing. The diction highlights the perceived systematic nature and dehumanization involved, noting that “after about fifteen minutes of hell” the victims were dead and that “nothing was wasted,” referring to the use of gold teeth, fingers for rings, and hair in manufacturing. The questions at the end draw attention to the broader concern about motive, asking, “What explains the Nazis' murderous obsession with the Jews?” This framing underscores the speaker’s intent to probe the underlying drivers behind these acts, while the descriptive details focus on the specific methods and consequences of the extermination process. In summary, the speaker details the sequence of killing and post-mortem exploitation: gas chamber death after about fifteen minutes, forced Jews removing the bodies, extraction of gold teeth from mouths, examination of hands, removal of rings by finger amputation if needed, and cutting of hair for mattress stuffing, with the overarching claim that nothing was wasted. The passage concludes by posing a question about the underlying explanation for the Nazis’ obsession with the Jews.

The speaker suggests that the entire Gaza Strip should be planted with Jewish settlers and that the Arabs currently living there will eventually leave and go to other countries. They mention organizing meetings with various organizations focused on resettling Gaza. When asked about how to make the Arabs leave, the speaker hesitates but emphasizes that their main concern is the future of the Jewish nation and Israel. They also mention that creating a humanitarian problem in Gaza would force other countries to absorb the Arab refugees, similar to how they absorbed refugees from Syria.

Olga, born in Hungary in Uyferto (translated as a new white lake), was deported at 18. She spent four weeks in a barn, traveled in a cattle cart, then three weeks later three days in a section from Shimabukusta to Nirachaza; at the border her father said, 'This is the end.' Altogether ten siblings; seven came back. In Auschwitz she saw the hairless prisoners, wore uniform shoes, and endured the 'selection' on the left side. She then passed through Kaufering—underground bunkers—and later moved to a farm, where a raid bombing occurred; the bunker with Russians was hit. Liberation came when a British soldier opened the door. She was taken to Sweden for a year and a half, then to America by finding family via newspaper, telegram, and finally moved to Israel in 1959 at age 59 to Natanya. She notes Holocaust denial and says Hamas war mirrors the Nazis: 'Same'—'Holocaust.'

Speaker 0: Uprooted. Therefore, God tells us we should erase their memory, and we should eradicate them from the face of the earth. So when a Jew enters into Edith, into the land of Israel, what should he do? The first thing appoint a king. Step two, destroy Amalek. Speaker 1: Asaf, who in modern day terms is really basically, you know, certainly one of them is is is America. Asaf became Edoim, which is a nation. Edoim became Rome. Instead of it being Rome, it became Christianity. Christianity, of course, ultimately became Western civilization. So Ace of today is really Western civilization. But the new Rome, United States. But the new realm. Esau is Europe. The United States. Speaker 0: The throne of God is incomplete until we destroy Amalek. Speaker 1: Any nation that has that religion can be considered Esau. Speaker 0: The audacity, the chutzpah to destroy Amalek and to cut off the offsprings of the nation of Amalek. Mister Frie goes on to say, how do how do we do this today? What would be the most Jewish thing for the last Jew to do, the most appropriate fitting thing? One said that the last thing that a Jew should do when he or she leaves Europe is

In 1919, after the war ended and the Germans went to Paris for the Paris Peace Conference, there was a delegation of 117 Jews, headed by Bernard, representing the Jews.

Camps in Poland were set up to help Jews immigrate. The Nazis called it the "final solution" to move Jews from Europe to the East, Palestine, or Madagascar.

The European hospital is being evacuated, causing chaos. Only myself and 4 other doctors remain, committed to staying until the end. We are prepared to handle whatever comes next. Good luck to me. Translation: The European hospital is being evacuated, causing chaos. Only myself and 4 other doctors remain, committed to staying until the end. We are prepared to handle whatever comes next. Good luck to me.

Hitler didn't want to exterminate the Jews at the time. He wanted to expel the Jews.

Speaker 0 expresses a preference for deportations over death camps: "I don't want Hitler death camps. I just want deportations. You know? I don't want them all dead. Anybody." He adds, "I do want them all the fuck out of my country at the use of force, but, you know, that's it." He continues, "Other than that, you know, I I I I'm, like, one step below, you know, the third Reich. No death camps, but go the fuck home. Pretty much. Right? And we want our national identity back. But go the fuck home." Speaker 1 interjects with uncertainty: "I don't think they" Speaker 0 repeats, clarifying his stance: "I I'm, like, one step below, you know, the third Reich. No death camps, but go the fuck home. Pretty much." He adds again, "That's What do I care? I'm married. I'm the one. Yeah. Yeah." He emphasizes the personal boundary of his stance: "He's a Jew. He's a a a He's Alright. Let's go. Alright. We're off. Come on, guys. Follow-up." The dialogue centers on a vehement stance against certain individuals or groups remaining in the country, insisting on deportation by force while rejecting the notion of death camps. The speaker repeatedly rejects the idea of preserving national identity without expelling those targeted, using aggressive language to demand they "go the fuck home." There is an abrupt, fragmented back-and-forth between Speaker 0 and Speaker 1, with Speaker 0 asserting a position that falls just short of endorsing genocide, explicitly denying death camps but advocating removal, and tying this stance to the notion of reclaiming national identity. The exchange includes a personal aside about marriage and a claim about someone being Jewish but acceptable, followed by a call to continue the discussion with a "Follow-up."

National Socialists in Germany wanted Jews to leave, while Zionists wanted them to go to Palestine to establish a Jewish state.

Speaker 0 discusses a hostage situation involving 50 people, specifying that among the hostages are Holocaust survivors as well as grandmothers and their grandchildren. The speaker then asks, “Who takes hostage grandmothers?” highlighting the unusual image of grandmothers being taken hostage and incidentally noting that, “they always for some odd reason, like, no matter what year it is, there's always Holocaust survivors.” The speaker comments on the longevity of these individuals, remarking, “You guys notice that, bro? Like, every Jewish grandma is a fucking Holocaust survivor, bro. I'm still trying to figure out how these niggas live so long.” The statement continues with the assertion, “Like, goddamn. Niggas knew Hitler personally.”

In connection with the Jewish question, it is shameful that democratic nations sympathize with Jews but refuse to help. They claim they have no space, yet Germany has room. They say Jews need capital to immigrate, but Germany helped them before. Germany has suffered due to Jews' actions. Germans have endured hardships and do not want foreign control. They aim to educate their own people for leadership roles.

Speaker 0: In time, Europe has not yet learned how to be multicultural. And I think we're gonna be part of the throes of that transformation, which must take place. Europe is not gonna be the monolithic societies that they once were in the last century. Speaker 1: Now, I think we have a moral and political and social and economic obligation to look after refugees. You can't you have three alternatives. Leave them on the beaches. Send them back to have their throats slit in Syria, or let them walk up to the Balkans into razor wire borders, or welcome them. Those are the only alternatives. Speaker 0: Jews are gonna be at the center of that. It's a huge transformation for Europe to make. They are now going into a multicultural mode and Jews will be resented because of our leading role. But without that leading role and without that transformation, Europe will not survive. Speaker 2: There are 65,000,000 displaced people in the world right now. Matthew, that number is larger than the population of The United Kingdom, and it's not getting any smaller. What we've seen here is that governments are absolutely feckless in attempting to broker peace agreements, be it Syria or anywhere else, which has created this. Speaker 3: Billionaire George Soros says he's investing $500,000,000 to start ups founded by refugees. Soros is responding to president Barack Obama's call to action initiative. That's a request for companies to help refugees and migrants. Speaker 4: And Norwegian society has a very a very short history with ethnic minorities at a scale. So there is a job to be done. So we do have rising antisemitism, and we have rising antisignism, and we have Islamophobia, and we have racism. So we have a lot to do. So we still have have a need of NGOs like the center against racism. Speaker 5: But then he dismissed out of hand what the Prime Minister is doing in relation to migration. Now, I happen to believe that people in this country don't want to pull the drawbridges up, actually. But they do want a fair system. They don't want a free fall. They don't like this sense that people can come here and take us for a ride. And the point, Evan, is this. That in other member states, they have a contributory system of social insurance. I've seen it and discussed it in different contexts. So that people are sort of working and paying their taxes and putting in before they have the right to take out. Speaker 6: The European Union was intentionally set up to give minority organizations influence on the management of Europe. Harry Truman read an article about Kalergi in 1945. He was so impressed that he adopted the Kalergi plan as US official policy as well. After 1965, the real demographic changes of European countries would be seen. Brock Schisholm, former director of the World Health Organization said, what people in all places have to do is to limit a birth rate and promote mixed marriages between different races. This aims to create a single race in the world which will be directed by a central authority. Speaker 7: Very clear that the Jews want to exterminate the European race and that the means to weakening the European race would be to dissolve all the European nations, destroy all their cultural heritage and their national traditions and replace that with the European Union and then to invite in Africans, Middle Easterners and Asians to dilute the blood of Europeans through miscegenation to the point where they became a degenerate mixed race.

I survived Auschwitz at 13, the sole survivor in my family. We were close to the gas chambers, smelling the burning bodies. The Holocaust is profitable, with Germany paying over $200 billion to Jews. Some receive $1,000 monthly. Few know Jewish ships brought slaves to America.

Speaker 0: In the best documented cases, the Auschwitz Camp, vast documentation shows how these order of save everyone's life is being implemented with huge efforts of improving sanitary hygienic conditions, building massive hospital complex complexes that treat inmates, and then you see the records of how they were treated, how all these people, these inmates unable to work. Mhmm. That's the cliche. If you're unfit for work and more than two weeks you get killed. You see the records of all these inmates, tens of thousands of them, being unable to work, being kept in hospitals, being fed, being cured, and until they are fit again and they get released. It's lot of work. Massive amount of investment in most modern medicine of the time with x-ray investigations and surgeries and lab tests all over the place. Tens of hundreds of thousands of document proving that. And you look even in the financial side in today's dollars, almost a quarter billion dollars of money invested in order to get a medical facility going that is On Auschwitz? In Auschwitz. In order for for the entire region, for every inmate that in the the greater part of of Poland and what is East Germany, all inmates who get sick and can't be treated in in the other camps get sent to Auschwitz into this massive hospital camp facility to get proper treatment. Mhmm. You look at the the technology they use. We don't know about Zyklon b saying it's being used to save Yeah. Their They're using Zyklon b to do To kill lives. So Zyklon B is sent there to save lives, but what I'm getting at is to what 1944, Zyklon B kind of phases out because we have new technologies. DDT from today's perspective, unfortunately, but it worked better, and microwave delousing facilities.

Hitler initially aimed to expel the Jews rather than exterminate them. Khad Amin al Husseini advised Hitler that if they were expelled, they would likely migrate to his region.

"I almost don't know these Jews." "Yeah. I saw what happened in Palestine." "In nineteen o five, the Jews went to Russia to try to kill the czar." "When the Russians found out what happened, they stopped them and put them out." "The Germans let them in in nineteen o five in mass numbers fleeing Russia." "They weren't fleeing persecution. They were fearing justice." "They tried to kill the czar." "The Germans let them get into banking." "Everything is made in Germany now." "The Jews took over." "Germans won World War one." "It's the Balfour Declaration." "America stepping into World War one made zero sense." "We want them at war with each other." "They told them, just give us Palestine as our homeland, and we get it." "Yeah. And it wasn't theirs to give."

It is disheartening to see the democratic world express sympathy for the Jewish people while refusing to help them. The democracies claim they cannot accept Jewish immigrants, yet Germany, with its dense population, is expected to accommodate them. Historically, Germany has welcomed these individuals, despite the harm caused by their actions during crises. The German nation is determined to prioritize its own people for leadership roles and maintain its cultural integrity. The notion that the Jewish race exists solely to benefit from others must change; they must engage in constructive activities. If international Jewish financiers instigate another world war, it could lead to dire consequences for the Jewish community in Europe. The nations are unwilling to sacrifice for their gain any longer.

Hitler initially wanted to expel the Jews, not exterminate them. Khadz Amin al Husseini told Hitler that if he expelled the Jews, they would all come to his location. When Hitler asked what he should do with them, al-Husseini allegedly told him to burn them.

The speaker discusses the persistence of claims that Adolf Hitler was Jewish, Zionist, or connected to Jewish heritage, and argues that these claims are unfounded and perpetuated by rumor rather than solid evidence. He notes how the Internet has changed information dissemination, making it easy for unvetted claims to spread globally. Key points: - Two prevalent themes in the Patriot movement are (1) that the Nazis took over America, with claims like Jim Mars promoting this fraud, and (2) the claim that Adolf Hitler was Jewish, used by some to distance themselves from antisemitism. - Adolf Hitler was not Jewish. The speaker cites Martin Kerr’s 1982 essay, The Myth of Hitler’s Jewish Grandfather, to outline why the Jewish-grandfather claim is unsubstantiated. - Kerr explains several versions of the myth: - The notion that Alois Hitler’s fatherhood came from a Jewish grandfather named Frankenberger or a Rothschild figure, which Kerr states are unsupported by evidence. The speaker notes that Alois Hitler’s paternity can’t be linked to such figures, and a photo does not support those genealogies. - The claim that a Polish Jew named Hitler (a name shared by a Jewish newspaper figure) was Hitler’s grandfather is invalid because that Jew was born in 1832, only five years older than Hitler’s father, making him impossible as the sire. - Claims from an anti-Hitler German who was part Jewish are dismissed as unfounded. - Hans Frank’s memoirs (In the Face of the Gallows) are discussed, where Frank claimed he investigated threats to expose Hitler’s alleged Jewish ancestor, but the speaker notes it’s impossible to document a Jewish grandfather for Hitler. Werner Maeser, a German historian, is cited: no Frankenberger family lived in Graz in the 1830s, a Jewish presence there was absent, and Maria Schickelgruber (Hitler’s mother) could not have been impregnated by a Jew in Graz prior to Alois’s birth. - Ian Kershaw is cited as noting there was no evidence of a Jewish Frankenberger in Graz; Frankenreiter existed but was not Jewish. - The speaker emphasizes that Hitler’s alleged Jewish ancestry is unsupported by credible scholarship. He mentions that some narratives arise from a book sometimes titled Hitler, Founder of Germany or Hitler, founder of Israel, which he criticizes as poorly translated and unconvincing evidence. He mentions Colonel Don DeGrand Prix referenced this questionable book, but the speaker asserts the book’s content is weak. - He distinguishes that while there were Jews in Hitler’s military due to Nuremberg Laws’ definitions, and some individuals of Jewish descent fought in German forces, this does not prove Hitler was Jewish or Zionist. - He asserts: Hitler was not Jewish, not Zionist, and not Rothschild-connected. He warns against repeating rumors and urges reliance on solid research. - He reiterates that the idea of Hitler being Jewish, a Zionist, or connected to the Rothschilds is a myth, and insists listeners should abandon it and seek verifiable evidence. He ends by stating there were elements in Hitler’s government that supported Jewish immigration to Palestine for strategic reasons, but that does not equate to Hitler being Zionist or Jewish.

Jewish immigrants in Haifa harbor, seeking homes in Palestine, are searched for arms and sprayed for typhus. They are being sent to Cyprus while awaiting decisions on Palestine.

The transcript presents an extensive compilation of claims from a group of speakers arguing that the established Holocaust narrative is false or exaggerated and that many historical incidents have been misrepresented or fabricated by Allied propaganda, Soviet influence, and Jewish-led organizations. The speakers frame Holocaust revisionism as a legitimate scholarly effort rather than denial, asserting that revisionists do not dispute that Jews and others suffered and died in the war, but dispute the scale, methods, and specifics of extermination. Key asserted points and claims - Holocaust definition and revisionism - The Holocaust is described as a belief that 6,000,000 Jews were murdered primarily by gassing in “shower rooms,” a narrative the speakers say is amplified by Hollywood, media, and schools. A growing movement of scientists, historians, engineers, journalists, and free-speech activists is portrayed as revisionist, though often branded as “Holocaust deniers” to discourage discourse. Revisionists are said not to deny persecution, deprivation of civil rights, deportation, internment, forced labor, or deaths in camps and ghettos, including deaths from disease; they also say that many victims died in ways other than genocide and that many victims’ dignity is not denied. - Internment and civilian camps in the United States - After Pearl Harbor, over 100,000 people of Japanese descent on the Pacific Coast were interned by Executive Order 9066; the text claims this restricted freedoms, required identity cards, and denied compensation or war reparations. The narrative includes accounts of interned individuals describing camp life, guard presence, and harsh conditions. - General wartime devastation and context - The war is described as a conflict that would not have occurred if “international jury” had not declared war on Germany in 1933, with emphasis on typhus, subversion, and crowded camps as drivers of disease and death. The speakers stress that millions died across battlefields, ships, and cities, and that propaganda surrounding German crimes obscures Allied or Soviet misdeeds. - Claims about typhus, gas chambers, and cremation - Typhus epidemics are said to explain many deaths in camps; Cyclone B (hydrogen cyanide) is claimed to have been used for delousing and pest control rather than execution, with several speakers arguing that gas chambers as homicidal devices did not exist or were technically infeasible. They assert there is no scientific proof of gassing, no German documents proving extermination plans, and that cremation and delousing procedures served health purposes rather than execution purposes. - Expert testimonies and forensics are cited (e.g., Leuchter, Rudolf, Lift, Lindsay) to support the claim that the gas chambers could not have functioned as execution facilities, noting technical impossibilities such as lack of explosion-proof features, gasketed doors, or proper gas delivery systems. - Specific camp narratives and testimonies - The camps are described as having been centers of labor, medical care, and even cultural activity, with accounts of weddings, births, nurseries, orchestras, libraries, theater performances, and recreational activities. Some testimonies describe attempts to maintain humanity and morale under harsh conditions, including a piano in Block 1, children’s art, and soccer games. - Several testimonies challenge the image of mass exterminations, claiming instead that most deaths resulted from disease, starvation, and Allied bombing, and that Red Cross and Vatican inquiries found no evidence of homicidal gas chambers. - A number of survivor testimonials are presented as quotations or paraphrases challenging the notion of mass murder in gas chambers, with some individuals denying personal knowledge of gas chambers or mass killings. - Documentary, legal, and scholarly disputes - The Institute for Historical Review (IHR) and other revisionist scholars are described as measuring and challenging the established narrative, sometimes facing legal or financial pressure. The transcript cites various researchers and forensics teams (e.g., Leuchter, Krakov, Farison, Groff, Farison, Larsson) as having concluded that homicidal gassings were not technically feasible in the cited facilities. - It is claimed that many postwar figures and witnesses provided testimonies or stories later recognized as unreliable or fabricated, including famous Holocaust survivors whose accounts are presented as inconsistent or false. Names and cases (e.g., Herman Rosenblatt, Anne Frank, Elie Wiesel) are invoked to illustrate alleged fraud or manipulation, though these claims contradict well-established historical records. - Propaganda, media, and the so-called “Holocaust industry” - The text asserts that the Holocaust narrative is used as a tool to enforce globalist policy, promote multiculturalism, and suppress nationalist sentiments among white Europeans. It claims that ongoing denazification efforts, legal penalties for questioning the Holocaust, and control over media and online platforms are designed to suppress dissent and promote a one-sided portrayal. - There is a claim that “atrocity propaganda” and black propaganda have been used to shape public perception, with references to Sefton Delmer and Allied psychological warfare, and accusations that postwar trials and media representations were heavily biased or manipulated. - Population counts, mortality figures, and documentary evidence - Several sections contest the veracity of the commonly cited death tolls, the reliability of Red Cross and other international communications, and the authenticity of diaries and eyewitness testimonies. The transcript asserts that the Nuremberg trials did not use physical or technical evidence to establish gas chamber existence and that some documents used as proof were mistranslated or contextualized wrongly. - The piece repeatedly emphasizes that millions of Jews did not die in the camps, that the “6,000,000” figure is a symbolic or religious number, and that high-profile Holocaust narratives are part of a constructed orthodoxy. - Final framing - The speakers position Holocaust revisionism as a defense of free speech and historical inquiry, arguing that questioning the official narrative is essential to truth. They claim laws against denial suppress inquiry and that truth should stand on its own merits without legal protection. They also suggest that conflicting accounts, forged documents, and political agendas have shaped the popular memory of World War II. Note on structure and tone - The transcript interweaves personal testimonials, expert opinions, documentary references, and polemical assertions. It repeatedly contrasts “revisionists” with conventional accounts, often asserting that mainstream portrayals are driven by propaganda, financial interests, or political goals. The overall thrust is to challenge the conventional understanding of the Holocaust, question the evidentiary basis for extermination claims, and highlight alleged inconsistencies in survivor narratives and official records.