My Epitaph

If you don't question everything, you will know nothing and believe anything!

Warning: Thoughts of a Heretic

If you don't question everything, you will know nothing and believe anything.

See Here, and Here as prerequisites for examples of the unbiased critical thinking to follow.  In this context, only those least capable of controlling conditioned responses will accuse me of questioning what they believe should never be questioned.  I have found it difficult to not use my cognitive faculties consistently, and the following is but another example of my primary way of thinking.  Emotional reactions have little to do with the logical processes of such a critical thinking.  The following topic will exemplify why I don't allow comments because I will breach topics many hold too taboo.  I will post a link at the conclusion to my summarization of original research that defines the "reality tunnel" (I love that website, read the links from that page, especially to discover the 8 Circuit Model of Consciousness that will eventually be discussed by me in a page I will compose concerning Timothy Leary, a fellow heretical dissenting philosopher) from which the following will be expressing.  The logical skepticism that will follow below will begin with predictions concerning the "reality tunnels" of the authors, especially how their conditioned confirmation biases deduces a story from the objective facts radically different from the "reality tunnel" that will be linked at the end of this page from which I perceive "reality".  

If you fear what might come from questioning everything we have been "taught" (or was it really conditioned into us with both Pavlovian/classical and Skinnerian/behavior modification as a "magick spell"?  I should define magick here as primarily being the usage of psychology against those that don't know the same theories of the mind.  Think of reverse psychology as a "spell" on children.  Eventually, they will figure out how they can be manipulated with reverse psychology and the "spell" no longer works, or a more complicated and subtle "incantation" must be used than the child can recognize.  In this line of thought, "marketing" is primarily modern "wizardry" casting spells over the minds of the masses ... I say that with having my B.S. in Marketing from the #3 Undergraduate Marketing Program in the USA at the time, so go reread about "reality tunnels" and make sure you have more direct knowledge about marketing if you don't like that assessment.), then you should probably go ahead and close this window, now, and never return.  If you finish my criticisms expressed below, you may want to kill me, or you may click on the provided link to spend the requisite hours digging into my reality tunnel and the sources used to "build" such heresy.

by Yehuda Koren and Eilat Negev

Since it should be fairly obvious I would rather admit being agnostic about things I don't know than to believe in things that lack evidence, I should begin with stating something I know:

Not all Jews are Zionists, and not all Zionists are Jews.

Although there seems to be some truth to every stereotype, only a fool thinks and/or believes (most likely it would be a belief and not an original thought based upon personal experiences) that any stereotyping would apply to all of said category being stereotyped.  I am not a fool.



Not all Jews are Zionists, and not all Zionists are Jews.

Some of the most rabid anti-Zionists are Jews, and the influence upon the USA's governmental bureaucracies of the Zionist lobbies (and most pernicious and nefarious may be the Christian Zionists because "Not all Zionists are Jews") does not reflect the views of a seemingly overwhelming majority of those claiming to be Jewish in the USA, today.  (The above linked article on Zionism is such a critical read, considering the source that I have repeatedly linked to that article above.  If you prefer, you can save the time and read my notes from that article at the final link below and then try to prove the article doesn't contain what I claim it does.)  Some of the Jews I personally know are as ignorant about what happens in, and to Israel as they are Madagascar ... they are Americans and are most are mostly concerned about America's interests.  One of them took my first full rucksack/backpack with her for two years in the Peace Corps.  I would have had taken the same pack had I decided to pursue the Peace Corps after my second interview just before I returned to Europe for a winter excursion through central/eastern Europe, but that's a different story and a digression I refuse to indulge at the moment.

However, as the link to Yehuda Koren seems to clearly indicate, these authors are likely Israeli citizens (possibly dual citizens with another nation) with a Zionist agenda.  So, what types of confirmation biases would Zionist Jews have in composing an article, let alone the book the article seems to be an advert to sell about any family surviving Auschwitz?  Let alone, as we will see, unless you have already clicked on the link to read the article about The Dwarfs of Auschwitz, the story of this dwarf family might reveal the weaknesses inherent in a conditioned belief system of propaganda that remains mostly false-to-facts.  Before we even get to the byline revealing the authors names, we read what seems to defy the standard horrific depictions:

The story of a family of dwarves snatched from the gas chamber by Josef Mengele himself sounded incredible. But how to verify the testimony of Holocaust survivors? And should you even try?

I may offend many here by claiming that the system of Jurisprudence originating in the Magna Carta and evolved into the Constitutions that are supposed to be law in the states so united under another constitution establishing rights of the accused, cross-examination of eyewitnesses under oath remains a pillar to any true system of sane legal jurisprudence.  The fallibility of eyewitnesses in such court systems deems the eyewitness as inferior evidence to, say, hard scientific evidence that can be reduced to mathematics, or DNA sequencing.  As DNA sequencing technology has advanced, more and more convicts have been exonerated from the jury convictions based largely upon the testimony of eyewitnesses.  I trust anyone caring to dispute this would be able to commence an internet search and discover I am reporting facts: the eyewitness is not the most credible of witnesses in a court of law, and for their testimony to be admitted as evidence in the first place they have to endure the stress of cross-examination.  The fictional Perry Mason excelled at cross-examination that unravelled the actual culprit on the witness stand.  I can honestly claim to witness Unidentified Flying Objects daily.  I might be able to classify the flying object as a bird, insect, airplane or helicopter, but I do not know enough about any of them to be able to identify the flying object.  So, I could swear on a Bible in court that I see UFOs all the time and not commit perjury, even if upon cross-examination it was revealed that I could classify the flying object as being an insect but couldn't identify it any further.  Or, I can recognize the difference between a jet and a prop plane, but that doesn't mean I could tell from the ground what specific make and model of any airplane was ... they remain unidentifiable to me unless I invest the effort to discern and identify them.  Technically, whatever puts out "chemtrails" are unidentified; I have yet to hear anyone claim to know the make and model, let alone the "N" number of the vehicles so no one, to the best of my knowledge has ever identified those flying objects.

These examples are to demonstrate how an honest claim can be discredited via the process of cross-examination - a critical pillar supporting any attempt of a society and culture trying to respect individual liberty and rights of self attributed to all.  So, should "Holocaust survivors" and their stories be exempt? Should the eyewitness testimony to what has been indoctrinated into generations as being the greatest crime against humanity thus committed be exempted from courtroomesque cross-examination with the threat of perjury and imprisonment hanging over every word said by said eyewitnesses?  Even in today's newspaper was revealed another "nonfiction" autobiographical account of the Holocaust owed their publisher millions for perpetuating their fraud.  If you don't question everything, you will know nothing and believe anything.  The closest thing we have to a serious cross-examination of "Holocaust survivors" seems to be a documentary concerning Steven Speilberg's oral stories collection at USC.  For the open-minded critical thinker, the links provided in this page may begin an episode of neuroplasticity, for others, though, these words might inspire irrational emotions and cognitive dissonance.  I cannot adhere to a policy of not questioning what any eyewitness claims, no matter what they think and believe they witnessed.  I fear for the liberty of the individual in any culture and state that holds any eyewitness testimony as unquestionable and sacrosanct.  But, maybe this legal precedence of cross-examination under the threat of perjury isn't part of Israeli/Zionist culture?  It's not like even the secular Zionists think/believe themselves to still be superior and "chosen" over the rest of humanity ... (sarcasm is just one of my many talents) so, they might have a reality tunnel that cares not for the legal precedence of cross-examining one's accusers.

That said, let's examine what these Zionist Israeli Jewish authors claim and see how well their article stands up to scrutiny and logic.

Again and again, she recounted in detail how she and her family were taken to the gas chamber and ordered to strip naked. A heavy door opened and they were pushed inside. "It was almost dark and we stood in what looked like a large washing room, waiting for something to happen. We looked up to the ceiling to see why the water was not coming. Suddenly we smelled gas. We gasped heavily, some of us fainting on the floor. With our last breath we cried out. Minutes passed, or maybe just seconds, then we heard an angry voice from outside – 'Where is my dwarf family?' The door opened, and we saw Dr Mengele standing there. He ordered us to be carried out and had cold water poured on us to revive us."

In the very first paragraph we find the foundation of the confirmation bias of the authors.  This story can also be used in the defense that murder was not the intent of the gassings, but delousing to save lives from typhus.  Since the dwarfs would have had smaller lungs, any good doctor would be concerned they wouldn't be exposed to as much delousing agent as normal sized inmates ... if the doctor's concern was in stopping the potential killers like typhus from pandemic proportions.  Additionally, this gassing seems to be only of the dwarf family, and not the sardine-like packed masses like the official story has been presented.  Not only Mengele's saving of these dwarf Jews from being exposed to a normal sized person/family's delousing gaseous exposure can be used as eyewitness testimony that any good defense lawyer could present a case of how there exists a shadow of a doubt in the accuser's evidence by presenting the facts in a different theory than the prosecution's, but the story being only about the gassing of a single family instead of several hundred or thousand people being shoved into a genocidal gas chamber also could be used in the said same theory of the defense against the claims of millions of eyewitnesses that never faced cross-examination.  Also, if cold water poured on gas victims were able to revive them, wouldn't that be indicative of the non-lethal usage of the disinfectants being used?  Finally, I wonder exactly what the "Again and again" means?  Was "she" repeating the exact same story, like a record player getting stuck in a groove repeating itself, or could her family, since they were dwarfs, also be susceptible to getting pubic lice on their scalps - being head high to an average person's pubic region - in addition to the head lice known to ruthlessly kill with spreading typhus, and the "Again and again" was recollecting being subjected to delousing showers on more than one occasion?

In some countries, let alone borders placed on some people's minds, the final question immediately above would probably be enough for me to face criminal charges.  So, in my rebellious attitude against "the system" let me repeat the final two questions above.

Finally, I wonder exactly what the "Again and again" means?  Was "she" repeating the exact same story, like a record player getting stuck in a groove repeating itself, or could her family, since they were dwarfs, also be susceptible to getting pubic lice on their scalps - being head high to an average person's pubic region - in addition to the head lice known to ruthlessly kill with spreading typhus, and the "Again and again" was recollecting being subjected to delousing showers on more than one occasion?

Should those words, forming the line of questioning they convey, be criminal where I could face imprisonment just for asking them in the wrong geographical (and mental) regions?

I would rather burn at the stake for my heresies than inhabit a world where asking serious, and logical questions are legislated as criminal.  Is there any "racism" in my questions thus raised?  If all the objective evidence concerning what happened in internment camps behind enemy lines during World War Two also defends the Germans as living to higher moral ground concerning the enemies of their state than Ike displayed to the vanquished Germans in the immediate aftermath, especially in the Rhineland camps under Ike's command, why would intelligent, rational people believe a story that requires a belief in thousands of people acting on an implied euphemism for genocide.  Talk about believing in conspiracy theories!!!  One of the most meticulously literal, triplicate-form cultures on earth: the Germans, would never assume any of the so called "orders" for extermination were calling on extermination.  This would have taken tens of thousands actively conspiring while leaving an allegorical paper trail (of a very literal culture) hinting at genocide.  If you invest the time in the links provided on this page before clicking on the link to my original research into the subject at the very bottom, you may find yourself concurring that the actual conspiracy has been to further the interests of Zionism, in particular the Zionism of those believing in British Israelism, most importantly the influences by the branch of the Rothschilds that went to London.  (The entry on the Rothschild family from the Jewish Encyclopedia is as important to read and comprehend as the excessively linked article on Zionism I have linked to above.)  But, back to the story of these dwarfs.

Throughout history, dwarves had been entertainers, often part of a circus or vaudeville show. But the Ovitzs wanted the stage all to themselves. They appropriately named their musical ensemble the Lilliput Troupe, and for 15 years had a flourishing career in central Europe. Their two-hour show consisted of popular hits of the day, skits and music. Perla had a tiny, four-string pink guitar that looked like a toy, her sisters Rozika and Franziska played on quarter-sized violins, Frieda struck on the cimbalom, Micki played both a half-sized cello and accordion, while the energetic Elizabeth took on the drums. Their elder brother Avram was the scriptwriter, actor and general manager.

When the Nazis came to power, the Ovitzs were doubly doomed: under the Aktion T-4 euthanasia programme, the Germans set out to kill people who were physically or mentally disabled, whose lives were considered "unworthy of living", "a burden on society"; and, as Jews, the Ovitzs were the target of the Final Solution.

So, not only were these dwarfs "scheduled for extermination" for being dwarfs, but doubly so for being Jews ... if we inhabit the reality tunnel full of confirmation biases like the authors - we all have, quite literally, been conditioned to believe without questioning.  However, most people remain ignorant of how places like Auschwitz had its own inmate orchestras and live plays put on by inmates (and some written by inmates).  Never mind how implausible it would be for artists to just luckily happen to "pass inspection" by Menegele upon disembarking from the transit trains as the official story goes, and not be gassed to death.  Now, if the first stop in any camp was delousing/sanitizing the new inmates with the intent of saving lives by stopping pandemics like typhus, and then the registration process revealed skilled workers and artisans (this will be discussed in the final link to my Google Drive file) as to how they can best be put to what would be considered "constructive" work for the greater Reich we have even more evidence from this story that could be presented as evidence contrary to conditioned history.


On 19 May 1944, they were brought to the Auschwitz-Birkenau death camp because they were Jews. But, by a twist of fate, their disability played for them. It was rare that one person from an entire family survived the camp, let alone two, but all 12 members of the Ovitz family – the youngest a baby boy just 18 months old, the oldest his 58-year-old dwarf aunt – emerged alive.

Of course, this very same data can be used to establish a survival rate that clearly logically questions any motive of intent to commit genocide.  This family should have been among the first to be killed for being Jewish dwarfs, yet they don't even arrive at Auschwitz until mid-May 1944.  This is supposed to be in the time frame when the Holocaust was in its fullest swing at Auschwitz, especially with the Hungarian Jews.  Maybe this story reveals a different story about alleged history than the authors believe, if viewed as objectively as possible?  Maybe their story is another attempt to repeat the "magick spell" in another, more subtle way, like trying to still use reverse psychology on a child that finally "got" how you were manipulating them with reverse psychology by sorcerers intent on keeping the spell cast over the minds of the masses?


Listening to the unimaginable horrors of Holocaust survivors, you shrink, stunned. But historians are reserved about oral testimonies. The witness may get the timeline wrong, forget facts or infuse memories of others into his or her own. Close to the event, the witness often finds it difficult to convey details of the trauma they endured. Crucial events can be forgotten, and trivial ones take centre stage. Consciously or unconsciously, shame and guilt can obliterate vital facts.

It is not just "historians" that have rational, logical and reasonable skepticism towards the testimony of eyewitnesses, hard evidence, like DNA from blood with an impeccable evidence trail preventing contamination will always be of infinitely superior merits than any eyewitness.  No sincere court dedicated to defending the individual's rights of life and liberty and presumption of innocence would convict solely upon eyewitness testimony in a criminal case, today.  If we examine the stories of the survivors as an example of Skinnerian behavior modification, we can clearly see the "positive reinforcement" of the horrid stories that garner media attention and book sales while the "negative reinforcement" would be the seemingly Pavlovian responses to the "bells and whistles" of asking questions and demanding hard evidence that would defend the eyewitness testimony, with the most Pavlovian-reaction to be the hurling of the conditioned and conditioning negative reinforcement of "Anti-Semite!!!"  Those upholding the official narrative get the positive reinforcements, like positive media time, while those violating the taboo receive the negative reinforcements of less media time and repetitive accusations of anti-Semitism for simply asking questions.

We embarked on the trail of the seven dwarves of Auschwitz with the notion that we would subject their story to the same rigorous examination that would be applied to any other historical source. So we not only collected their testimonies, but crosschecked them with those of dozens of other survivors, inmates and doctors, either first-hand or in archives and libraries. We unearthed medical documents in Poland and Germany. Still, we followed the advice of Professor Yehuda Bauer, a Holocaust historian and himself a survivor, that "one must never argue with a survivor".

I will concur that one must never "argue with a survivor" because they are just like any other believer.  Mark Twain said “Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference.”  One can rarely convince any believer of anything outside their belief system.  The history of belief indicates that the believers have a tendency to be incited into stampeding because the human believer seems no different than any other mammalian herd when confronted with cognitive dissonance.  However, would asking rational, logical questions be considered arguing by any objective observer?

Dr Josef Mengele was a medical doctor.  According to legend, it was his instantaneous medical examination that separated those arriving from the ones that would live from the others that were, according to the survivors' testimony, gassed to death upon arrival.  Also, according to the standard folklore, these gas chambers were very close to the terminus for the trains.  If Dr Mengele were not on shift, maybe he was permanently "on call" because he would probably awaken to the sound of a train arriving, or, it would seem plausible that other doctors stationed there would greet the arriving trains to quickly examine every arriving inmate to determine who immediately dies and who can be worked to death when Dr Mengele was off his shift(s).

While the SS were brutal towards the newly arrived,

If memory serves, Viktor Frankl discussed how the Jewish capos were the quickest to beat an inmate, with a vicious veracity that even made some of the SS officers turn their heads or intervene in his autobiographical account of Auschwitz: "Man's Search for Meaning".  Nor is there only one source from survivors telling how the Jews that "sold out" for better rations as "capos" were the true culprits of the most offending brutalities in the concentration camps, but Frankl sticks out as the first time I read that "eyewitness testimony" that rarely gets focused on by those writing or visually depicting that historical period.

A black army truck took them to a building at the edge of the camp. They were pushed in, stripped naked and smelled the fumes. The event indelibly etched the imminence of death not only on Perla's memory; three other members of the group, whom we interviewed, as well as Elizabeth, Perla's sister, who wrote her memoir, all attested that they were beginning to be gassed and would have died if Mengele had not suddenly reappeared.

This is the first eyewitness account that doesn't place the gas chambers as the first buildings at the train terminus that I am aware of, but required a truck to drive them to a building at the "edge of the camp".  Was this because they were dwarfs that the SS would rather waste petrol on driving them to a building on the edge of the camp than walking slow enough to "keep up" with the dwarfs' smaller gaits?  Why wasn't it one of the supposed diesel trucks that are also claimed were used for mass murder ... I know those stories aren't claimed to be about Auschwitz, but the efficiency of the Germans would find the most effective and efficient method and that would be the standard for all "exterminations".  Being stripped naked and put into a delousing chamber seems more likely to be evidence of an intent to preserve human life, not eradicate it.  From the way this article is written, are we to believe that Dr Josef Mengele himself opened up the gas chamber door?  What is exactly meant by "if Mengele had not suddenly reappeared"?  And, for another criminal thought in some nations, can't this story be taken as evidence that Mengele was a good doctor dedicated to the Hippocratic Oath and was concerned that the dwarfs might have a fatal reaction with a level of disinfectant a normal person can survive?  Remember, there are two sides to every story, but when history is written by the victors, the vanquished rarely get their story told.

Though we had five first-hand eyewitness accounts, we wanted to verify the story. The only way to do so was to study the procedures and manuals of operating a gas chamber. These were designed to kill between 500 and 2,000 people at once, depending on the size of the hall. Cyclone B was effective only at a room temperature of 27C, which was achieved by cramping a mass of people together. Gas chambers were simply not operated for merely 22 people; small groups were shot.

27 C = 80.6 F

What if the story of these dwarfs is far closer to the objective interpretation of what really happened?  Even Jewish "Revisionist" David Cole seems to clearly disprove the "gas chambers" as presented officially in situ in southern Poland, by showing where walls had been standing before the Soviets remodeled/built what is on display, today.  The above paragraph from the article being scrutinized is based upon the confirmation biases of genocide; however, what we may be seeing is the spinning of an honest recollection by Zionist "gatekeepers".  If we remain objective, as a detective searching for clues and evaluating the merits of every piece of evidence, including the credibility of witnesses, we should begin to see the above citation as being evidence to the German intent to preserve life.  

From years of experience waiting tables, I have spent many a night freezing out the first customers in the air conditioning and have no problem telling them that the temperature they feel at 5 is the only way I can not be dripping sweat when there are even 30 guests in a small, fine dining establishment, let alone a few hundred in a larger establishment.  "... was effective only at a room temperature of 27C, which was achieved by cramping a mass of people together."  Would it fail to rise high enough to be breathed when the top of the room is warmer than the bottom (the Zyklon B was supposed to be dropped from the openings on the roof to the floor, but how could it be guaranteed to get to the floor in a room packed like a tin of sardines - wouldn't those drops fall on someone?)?  If we lived in a world where the scientific method was truly "king", we would be able to replicate this claim, if it weren't illegal to do so in Poland.  We could pack between 500 and 2000 naked humans into the Auschwitz "gas chambers" in both summer and winter, and see how well we can control the temperature to being precisely 27C without ventilation.  2000 people packed in like sardines would make 80.6F a quick passing as the room strived for equilibrium.  Especially in winter, the SS would have to have some form of a thermometer to make sure the floor wouldn't be too cold for the Zyklon B to activate.  We can scientifically validate how reasonable the claim of genocidal gas chambers truly is by replicating the experiment of trying to maintain 80.6F in a room packed with humans like sardines in a can, with taking temperature readings from at least three places: the floor, the ceiling and midway between during all four seasons in Poland.  Just like we could take the records of how much Zykon B was used at a time, and how big the volume the gas would expand into and mathematically confirm or disprove the intent of murdering lice or humans.  I am more than willing to accept the claims of genocidal gassings when the mathematical proofs defend such a belief to be objectively factual.  But, I doubt any proponents of official history will be logical and mathematical because they might discover that the mathematics, known by a variety of documents like purchase orders, shipping manifestos, patents, volume of gas equations, etc ..., might not concur with the millions of eyewitness testimonies concerning genocide (which deserve the courtroom objection of being both "hearsay" and "speculation" to be refused admission into evidence).

What actually happened was that the Ovitzs and their neighbours were taken to the camp sauna for disinfection, where the water poured over heated stones produced much steam and fumes, as well as temperatures intense enough to cause someone to faint. The sauna had a particularly traumatic effect on both small children and fragile dwarves that might easily have created the impression of being gassed.

Again, if we objectively study the available data from all sides, we should begin recognizing wartime, and immediate post-war propaganda that doesn't seem scientifically verifiable, let alone a logical congruency with what can be objectively, and replicably verifiable.  In composing this, and linking to David Cole, I found a new interview with him that is recommended listening before linking to my own research on the subject below.  If this family of dwarfs were being deloused, Mengele would know he could open the door and remove them before permanent damage could be done to them.  This above citation also can be taken as evidence that counters the "kosher" confirmation biases of the authors and, instead, defends the notions that we need to take a serious, and scholarly scientific examination of available facts - to the standards of US legal jurisprudence including the cross-examination of supposed witnesses and the dismissal of hearsay and speculation of the witnesses.  If we consider each claim as being a scientific postulation, there are ways we can subject it to the falsifiability procedures.  Maybe the actual data will confirm the official history?  But, we should never fear repercussions for asking for better proof - that seems to define the scientific method.  Jesus never rebuked "Doubting" Thomas, but gave him the proof he sought.  If we honestly and objectively investigate the paper trail of a very meticulous culture with a very literal language that was vanquished, we should all begin to see false-to-fact propaganda of the winning factions and agendas.  These authors even admit that these Jewish dwarfs considered Mengele to be their savior, which one would expect from a doctor taking the Hippocratic Oath seriously.


Members of the Ovitz group described to us in detail the painful blood-taking that they underwent. Often they fainted and water was poured over them to revive them, only for siphoning their blood to resume. Medical science of the time was obsessed with blood and its constituents, and it was generally believed that plasma contained all genetic traits. But only the medical records, all bearing Mengele's flamboyant signature, clarified what he was looking for: signs of kidney problems, liver function, typhus and syphilis.

"But only the medical records, all bearing Mengele's flamboyant signature, clarified what he was looking for: signs of kidney problems, liver function, typhus and syphilis."  Again, the paper trail of the SS physicians indicates a concern for deadly diseases that get easily spread in any internment center.  Although the authors clearly believe the general myth we know as the Holocaust, they made sure to investigate claims.  Then, they had to find a way to present the actual evidence as best as can support their confirmation biases.  Everything I have learned so far ... the actual facts of this story, it seems to defend the reasons why we need to seriously scrutinize what we take, without question, to be true.  I don't care about the emotional stories of eyewitnesses, I care about objective scientific evidence.  If their stories are true, the evidence should clearly demonstrate such ... I have nothing to fear either way, but I'm not one prone to belief, either.

If you don't question everything, you will know nothing and believe anything.


Inmates in Auschwitz-Birkenau tried to improve their lot with whatever talents they had. A barber would hope to shave a kapo (prisoner supervisor) for a piece of bread or two cigarettes; a seamstress might mend the block elder's clothing; a painter would get a piece of sausage for making portraits for the SS guards; and one champion chess player was kept alive to play with Mengele.

Professor Israel Gutman, an Auschwitz survivor and prominent historian, recalls that "feasts and saturnalias were celebrated at kapos' and block elders' quarters. The artistic programme consisted of obscenities and dirty jokes. Sometimes a prisoner with a sweet voice would sing prewar hits in various languages. The kapos especially favoured melancholy tunes. The famous stars were very popular among the kapos and enjoyed a special income, thanks to their art."

It defies logic, then, that there were any genocidal gassings immediately after the fabled "sorting" on the train platform.  It would make far more sense to delouse and disinfect the fresh arrivals before processing them, which could easily include questions about special aptitudes, like artists and artisans.  A doctor on the platform deciding who needed to go further down the line to Auschwitz II/Birkenau, which, according to German records was an infirmary/hospital/hospice for the elderly, young and sick, just like all survivors claim were selected for the gas chambers on the platform upon arrival via train.  It would make sense to shave and delouse those going to the hospital camp immediately, as well as to why they were never seen again because an infirmary would have those most susceptible to death from communicable diseases.  That would also explain the higher death percentages at Auschwitz II/Birkenau, too - it was for those that would have probably died during those years, and conditions, anyway - the old, weak and sick.

However, Perla Ovitz insisted that she and her family never took part in the "nightlife" of the death camp: they never performed in these drunken revelries, never sang in public nor entertained parties of kapos and SS men. She did remember one event. Sunday 30 July 1944 was the fast of Tishah Be'av, commemorating the destruction of the Holy Temple in Jerusalem. Being familiar with the Jewish calendar, Mengele perversely ordered the leader of the women's orchestra to prepare a special concert to desecrate the holy day. Perla remembered that the programme consisted of romantic, melancholy German songs that moved her and her sisters to tears as they watched the performance from their tiny stools in the audience.

Or, the fact that a performer was brought to tears with romantic, melancholy songs in a performance for the inmates concerning a holy day of somber remembrance might indicate that the International Red Cross reports seem of far greater merits than all the eyewitnesses, that obviously are still suffering from PTSD.  And, how many of you knew there was any form of "nightlife" in Auschwitz, let alone an orchestra, live plays and athletic events, like soccer matches and a swimming pool.  Did you know there were female inmates turning tricks in Auschwitz?



Against the bleak backdrop of the death camp, the concert was so vivid that it became deeply etched in the memory of the survivors whom we interviewed.

Although there was a segue into Auschwitz II/Birkenau in the story, there is no indication that the dwarfs were ever sent there from their arrival at Auschwitz I (the main camp where the orchestra and theatre were located).  Auschwitz II/Birkenau is considered a "death camp" but not Auschwitz I.  Therefore, logic deduces that this concert did not occur in Birkenau, but in Auschwitz I.  However, logic rarely defeats confirmation biases and emotive language.

Death was the master of Auschwitz and its toll was piled outside for all to see, like so much garbage waiting to be collected.

Since "death" was piled outside for all to see, why does it remain a criminal activity to send into Poland the world's top forensic scientists to determine exactly what the evidence is and indicates?  According to the 1979 English translation of the 1973 3rd Edition of the Great Soviet Encyclopedia, and remember the Soviet Union is the "credible source" informing the world about the "death camps" they liberated and whose "word" on which we must take the story, although 4.5 million are claimed to have perished in the three Auschwitz camps, it only listed nationalities and not religious affiliation.  So, we "know" about the "death camps" from the former USSR, and in its official propaganda encyclopedia, it seems to claim that there is no reason to believe that Jews constituted any, let alone a majority of the lives supposedly lost because it fails to mention any Jewish deaths in any of the concentration camps in Poland in the reported 4.5 million killed.

One plausible explanation for the discrepancy between fact and remembrance is that the survivors, who regarded their own deliverance as miraculous, found the chances slim that someone as helpless as a dwarf could escape death. The fact that the Ovitzs were transferred several times from one side of the camp to the other caused their fellow inmates to lose touch with them, and in Auschwitz, when you stopped seeing someone, it could mean only one thing.

The seven dwarves, as well as their entourage, all survived the war, and emigrated to Israel in May 1949.

Another plausible explanation would be that the reason a family of Jewish dwarfs could survive Auschwitz would be that most of the lost family members can be summed up in stories like this reuniting of Holocaust survivors that believed, when they were told by authorities, that their family members had been killed by the Germans.  The Soviets told all they got to "keep" their families were killed, just as it appears the Western Allies stated to the ones that headed west with the retreating SS instead of waiting for the advancing communists that their families were killed by the Germans.  Had the world had the computing power we have today in 1945, how many millions would have been reunited instead of believing everyone else had been killed?  Could the brothers, separated by Cold War superpowers, reunited by the one that came west claiming he saw his whole family killed in contrast to David Cole's logical points on Montel Williams, represent a closer explanation to what really happened?

I trust those that have been reading the things I have posted realize I have not exercised any greater scrutiny upon the Israeli authors in their article, and I can't see how any rational person could claim my questions above are based upon some sort of racism.  It should be obvious that I don't believe the official narrative of intentional genocide, by now, but that has nothing to do with any race or religious affiliation.  I comprehend the "reality tunnel" that drives the authors' confirmation biases, but I honor this "V-E" day with publishing the research notes that defend the lyrics to "A Modern Day Heretic."

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...