Joseph Hirt’s Letter of Apology tells more lies to “explain” his previous ones, Part 1

Written on June 26, 2016 at 6:05 pm, by Carolyn

BY CAROLYN YEAGER

The mainstream accounts of Joseph Hirt’s “confession” are showing up everywhere, but they mistakenly report it as Hirt “coming clean” about his lies. Not true. Hirt didn’t just lie about being in Auschwitz, he lied about many of his experiences during the “Holocaust” in general, and continues to do so. And really, how can you expect a man who claimed he saw Adolf Hitler turn his back on Jesse Owens at the 1936 Olympics (when he was 6 years old and living in Poland) to be a man you would ever trust to tell the truth? Particularly on this subject. This is only common sense – a universal human trait that has been made illegal in almost all of Europe, and socially condemned everywhere else  because it is a threat to the “holy holocost” religion. But common sense is what I will be using in this article to show the pure hatefulness and falsity of the stories  Joseph Hirt has been telling Pennsylvania school children for 15 years already.

As I wrote earlier, New York history teacher Andrew Reid did a knock-down, bang-up job in scaring the daylights out of old Joseph Hirt, threatening him with investigations of forgery, fraud and identity theft if he didn’t come clean and admit his Holocost survivor claims were false. After some initial resistance, the cunning 86-year-old realized his game was up and he needed Reid as a friend, not an enemy. Hirt composed a long letter and made it public by sending it to a newspaper. It is now posted at Scribd. for all to read. It’s clear from this letter that he is not sorry for what he did, he is only sorry he was caught and couldn’t wiggle his way out of it with a man of principles like Reid, who did a commendably thorough job. The letter is a combination treatise about the horrors of the Holocost, his personal life story, and a few paragraphs stating he was wrong to “insert himself into the picture” at Auschwitz, but he only had the best of intentions. He asks for forgiveness.

Hirt appears to me as an intelligent, educated man whose self-absorption developed into an obsession with “The Holocaust,” reading many books and surlievor stories about it. His counsel to the 6th through 12th grade students he’s spoken to for so long is to “keep the truth and the memory of the Holocost always in your heart and mind.” Is that good advice? The kind you’d like your children to receive in school? Hirt is convinced he’s turned many into lifetime believers and upholders of the holocost myth, and says that is his goal.

He begins the letter with an overview of what the ‘Holocaust’ was — his own condensed version of the official Jewish narrative — intended to bolster his claim to having the “best of intentions.” His intentions are to prevent it ever happening again … but did it happen the first time? He begins:

The Nazi Holocaust refers to the W.W. II concentration camp system used for the extermination of about six million Jews and about five million non-Jews by Nazi Germany.

False. The camps were not for extermination at all but for separating the perceived disloyal, harmful and or criminal elements from society, just as prisons everywhere. How does he explain that over half a million European Jews received lifetime payments from Germany if the plan was to kill them all? There were the same number of Jews in the world after the war as before – just in different places. Why were Jews still living in Berlin at the end of the war? Did the murderous Nazis forget about them? Why were there millions of displaced persons in Europe after the war? And why was his hero Primo Levi put in the camp hospital at an alleged ‘death camp’, Birkenau, and left there to await the arrival of the Soviets? He could easily have been put to death. There were also 600 or so children in that camp when the Soviets arrived, being well taken care of by Polish women. There is no proof of extermination at all, only assumptions based on a desire to punish Germany and exculpate the Allies.

The killings took place in specially constructed camps, most located in Poland, The victims were herded into cattle cars and transported to the camps. After days on end en route or standing unattended along the way without food, water, or medical care, many died.

Not at all. He can’t just generalize “camps” and make vague references to “days on end”. Transports to Auschwitz-Birkenau were at most two days in length, there was water in the rail cars, they brought their own food, and no one died en route. Many Jews were taken to their destination in passenger cars. Later on, in 1944, available trains were scarce.

On arrival at certain camps the victims were told to undress for showers, but were led instead to rooms where they were gassed to death. Bodies of men, women, and children were removed by specially assigned prisoners whose working units burned them—first in open fires, and later in crematoria built for that purpose.

Really, where is he talking about?! “Certain camps?” He’s afraid to name them lest he can then be proven wrong. “Were gassed to death in rooms” on the pretext of taking a shower? This has been convincingly debunked as atrocity propaganda. Then “burned in open fires.” Did he ever see such a thing? Of course not. No one has. And it doesn’t work either, humans don’t burn that easily. Hirt takes all this from books he has read, books by Jews, every one of them the result of rumors and motives of tribal revenge.

Sometimes inmates were deliberately starved. Those who became weak or ill were sent directly to be gassed. Some were killed in camp hospitals by injection directly into the heart. Others were hanged, beaten, or suffocated in tiny airless cells. Both planned and spontaneous brutality played a role in the treatment of inmates. They were ruled by other inmates, often former criminals imported from actual prisons, who imposed their rule by degradation, mutilation, and torture.

I categorically deny that any inmates were deliberately starved in any German/SS-run camp at any time. There is zero evidence of that except for tales told by surLIEvors, always based on what someone else said, never anything they saw or experienced first hand. Because victims of typhus (and some other diseases ) rapidly lose weight and body tissue, and become “skin and bones,” photographs of these victims have been used to accuse the camp authorities of deliberately starving them. The idea that inmates were kept on a starvation diet is completely false. The same goes for importing criminals from civilian prisons to boss over the camp inmates. The fact is, there were actual lawbreakers in some of the camps because they had been assigned to serve out their prison term there. But  partisans and communists were pretty nasty dudes too.  Any of the rare hangings that did take place were for cause, after the accused was found guilty of a serious offense. Injections through the heart is a rumor that has never been proven. Other camps were solely industrial labor camps for producing war munitions and other wartime needs, like the Auschwitz complex. I have yet to see any evidence that anyone suffocated in tiny airless cells, and I have studied it and written about it.

Certain camps combined labor and extermination, selecting incoming prisoners for one category or the other; the selections at Auschwitz were infamous. Those deemed capable of work or considered useful in (cruel) experiments were assigned to quarters in the camp. Others were immediately taken to the gas chambers. Families were separated forever in this process.

By describing the Holocost in such amorphous terms and dislocating it from the war, by using photographs doctored in the intelligence laboratories, by having the help of the major media outlets and Hollywood—that is how they succeed in keeping the public believing. (Not to mention indoctrination in schools to unprotected, inexperienced children, with fakers like Joseph Hirt coming to visit regularly.) And sorry, there were no cruel experiments being carried out – not even by Dr. Mengele! It is the writers of the surlievor books who have made “the selections at Auschwitz infamous.” In reality, at that place, those who could not work—all those women with children and elderly people—went to Birkenau with it’s numerous barracks where classes and programs, music and theater productions were available to help them pass the time. Some worked in the kitchens and the medical facilities. There were family sections for gypsies and other groups who were not desirable as workers. No one was exterminated. There were no homicidal gas chambers anywhere in the camp, only buildings for gassing clothing and mattresses.

Information about concentration camp behavior exists because of the sharing of details by a relatively small number of inmates who managed to survive. Soon Holocaust memories will be held entirely by those who were not there!

This is painful for him, the fear that “the Holocaust” will lose its power and influence without real surlievors to talk about it as eye-witnesses. But he admits it’s a small number who have given us these details. Not because the rest were killed but because not every camp inmate wants to lie about it, and the true story cannot be published. Jews own all the publishing companies. Plus, anyone who writes a different story is attacked and ostracized, Jew and non-Jew alike. We know now that Joseph Hirt was not there, but he added his voice anyway by copying what the others wrote. Who did they copy from?

“But whoever closes his eyes to the past becomes blind to the present. Whoever does not wish to remember inhumanity becomes susceptible to the dangers of new infection.”

This is said all the time, but it is false; it is sophistry. Plenty of humans, billions of them, have lived perfectly well in the present without knowledge of the past. Most humans make the same mistakes over and over again, and knowledge that we did it before doesn’t stop us from doing it again. Real learning comes only from an individual’s own personal experience, not from being lectured to. The world would be much better off if the holocost went down the memory hole.

I am seeking help from my pastor, who knows my heart and my intent. I am also consulting with a mental health professional to try to understand how I swerved off in my presentations in a direction that should not have been taken.

The pastor and the mental health professional is something Andrew Reid insisted on, but in fact, before his retirement, Hirt was employed as a school mental health professional himself, so he knows how the human psychology, especially in young people, works. I don’t see any change, in this letter, in his attitude that he is an expert on Holocost and should be listened to as an expert.

Primo Levi

Hirt writes that he admired and was very influenced by Primo Levi; he read all Levi’s books and writings that were Holocaust-related. He modeled his own fabricated story on Primo Levi’s. It was Levi’s Auschwitz number, 174517, that Hirt had tattooed on his own arm – “as a symbol and way of remembering him” he says, except he got one number wrong. However, in the schools he passed the number off as his own! Of course, he was never questioned — that would be unthinkable!

Levi was an Italian Jew with a chemistry degree who spent 11 months in Monowitz where he worked as an assistant in IG Farben’s Buna Werke laboratory. Though he had a cushy indoor job, he complained about everything he could think to complain about in his book If this Is a Man (shown right) which he wrote in 1946. A German translation was published in 1961 in which he addressed the German people in a special preface written out of his need to remind them what they had done! (From his book of essays The Drowned and the Saved, Einaudi publishers, 1986, 170 pages)

In If This Is a Man, Levi alludes to “the gas chambers of which all speak” (p.49) but evidently he has neither seen nor met anyone who has seen these things. Then he asks “Is it true what one hears of selections, of gas, of cremation?” and he is answered only with a rumor that persons in the Infirmary who were in decline, who were not going to recover, would be sent to the ‘gas chamber.’ (p.46)  That is the extent of Primo Levi’s knowledge of ‘gas chambers’ after one year at Monowitz.

Shortly before the Soviets arrived, Levi came down with scarlet fever and was hospitalized. Not being recovered enough to go on the march to the West, he was still there in the hospital attended by a Jewish doctor when the Soviets “liberated” the abandoned Auschwitz-Birkenau camp.

To be continued in Part 2

Busted: Joshua Kaufman’s claimed Auschwitz number belongs to someone else

Written on June 19, 2016 at 11:14 am, by Carolyn

BY CAROLYN YEAGER

Like Joseph Hirt, who is a complete fraud, Joshua Kaufman has now been proven to be at least half a fraud. The number he claimed to be his when he told NBC News, “I am not Joshua Kaufman, I am number 109023” belongs to Mateusz Judasz, born September 12, 1901 in Łaznów, Poland. [Note: It has been discovered, on 7-5-16, that the number Kaufman gave to NBC when speaking about Auschwitz was his Dachau prisoner number. Keep that in mind as you read this article.]

A search in the Auschwitz-Birkenau State Museum online records revealed that Judasz arrived at Auschwitz on March 18, 1943 (over a year before Kaufman allegedly did) and was assigned the number 109023. His profession is listed as “farmer.” He was transferred to Mauthausen (in the Ostmark) in that same year and was eventually liberated from Mauthausen.

For those who demand more in the way of proof, here it is copied from http://www.auschwitz.org/en/museum/auschwitz-prisoners/  (type in name)

Main page > Museum > Auschwitz prisoners

Auschwitz prisoners

Judasz, Mateusz

(prisoner number: 109023)

born: 1901-09-12, place of birth: Łaznów, profession: farmer

Fate:
1. 1943-03-18, Auschwitz, arrived to camp
2. transferred in 1943 to KL Mauthausen, liberated,

Sources:
1. Memorial Book Radom

Consider that the above information on Mateusz Judasz was carefully recorded and kept by the SS who ran the camp. Consider too, that he is probably one whom Jews claim to have been “gassed” shortly after he arrived at Auschwitz. I can just hear them: Von day our friend Matty disappeared. Ve learned from de talk around de camp dat evil Dr. Mengele sent him to da gazz chamber. Oy vey. Ve recited a Kaddish.

Looks like Kaufman should have checked with Auschwitz about the number he selected, but he was sooo confident after the staged reunion went so well and he was featured on a double-page spread in the Daily Mail [*more on that below]. He followed up a year later by crashing the Reinhold Hanning murder trial in Detmold, Germany – and that is where his hubris may have done him in. He made rash claims about his experiences in Auschwitz and Dachau, including announcing his Auschwitz prisoner number as 109023.

I can also tell you that the name Joshua Kaufman was not found in the Auschwitz-Birkenau database, however the Museum reminds us that “the Nazis destroyed most of the documents they created” and that a list with the names of all Auschwitz victims does not exist. Okay, so maybe he was there but his records were destroyed. If so, he would have been given a number. Since we now know the number 109023 belonged to someone else, logic tells us he wouldn’t have used that number if he had one of his own. If he lied about this, then he lied about working in a gas chamber, removing dead bodies and taking them to the crematorium. (Of course, we knew that but it’s good to have it confirmed.)

So here is what has now been definitely determined regarding Kaufman’s story:

1) He lied about his prisoner number

2) He lied about working in a gas chamber in Auschwitz (he was never asked which one) and about being 15 years old at the time.

3) He lied about throwing fellow prisoners in a cement mixer at Dachau.

4) He lied about having to carry 50-kilo bags of cement for more than 12 hours a day.

At this point, we can only wonder what else he lied about. Maybe saying he was a “living corpse” when Dachau was liberated? I somehow don’t believe that.

*The Kaufman-Gillespie “reunion” was arranged by a TV crew

It turns out the Daily Mail received the story and photos from The History Channel Germany, the outfit that dreamed up and arranged the “reunion.”

I had already made the connection that the double page spread in the Daily Mail was published on Jan. 21 to coincide with the Jan. 27, 2015 Day of Commemoration for Holocaust victims, recognized annually at Auschwitz-Birkenau and at the United Nations. Every year, these institutions and the greater media look for (or create) holocaust-related stories to coincide with this commemoration. Because 2015 was the 70th anniversary of the so-called Auschwitz liberation, it was more important than usual to create as much fanfare as possible.

And that is how it came about that Joshua Kaufman, who no one had ever heard of, had such a well-publicized reunion with one of the U.S. Army “liberators” of Dachau, Daniel Gillespie, just prior to the 70th anniversary. I have learned that The History Channel Germany discovered (how is not explained) that these two “survivors” from Dachau lived close to one another in Orange County, CA. Do they have access to concentration camp archives in order to discover these things? I suppose so. The History Channel is one of the prime outlets for WWII and ‘Holocost’ indoctrination for the Holocaust Industry.

So The History Channel peddled the story to the Daily Mail and other news outlets in exchange for the promotion of their then-upcoming TV documentary. You can see the photos at the Daily Mail are credited to “History Channel Germany.” On another site, the same photos are credited to “Dirk Heuer, HISTORY Germany.” The photos in the Bild newspaper layout of Kaufman at home are credited to Nancy Pastor/Polaris Images, who was probably hired locally. Quite a bit of preparation is behind a feature story like this, and this reunion was surely not a spontaneous happening.

I first noticed that the reunion was arranged by The History Channel Germany in this CBS-LA news story. All I could find in a search for THCG was this story. What I didn’t ever see is any mention of the U.S. Army or any official historical associations being involved with this ‘reunion.’ It was purely a commercial enterprise.

The CBS-LA reporter wrote this:

The History Channel Germany arranged the reunion for a documentary that aired last year

[…]

in January 2015, a German documentary team discovered the two were living within an hours’ drive. When they met on a Southern California beach, they talked about the war, and survival.

CBS and other major media were invited to cover the reunion. It was not a private affair, it was a staged event. The Huffington Post also picked it up and ran a story on Jan. 26, 2015:

The meeting was arranged by director Emanuel Rotstein, and will be featured in a documentary, “Liberators of Dachau,” according to a press release from the History Channel.

Emanuel Rotstein – that name tells us a lot about the purpose of the project and the reliability of the research backing it. Another report puts it this way:

The two men were reunited by a television crew for a documentary they were making called Dachau Concentration Camp – The Hour Of The Liberators. It first aired on the History Channel on May 31st, 2015.

Another question that arises is: did the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum (USHMM) play a role in this? I bring them up because it turns out that both Kaufman and Gillespie were special guests at the USHMM 2015 Los Angeles Dinner just two months later, on March 16th. That had to be because of The History Channel documentary, for which heart-warming story they were feted at the Dinner. Two months after that, Gillespie died.

The following spring, Joshua Kaufman created another splash when he traveled to the Reinhold Hanning trial in Detmold, Germany with two of his daughters. This time there was a big write-up in Bild, Germany’s popular tabloid newspaper, and scores of U.S. news outlets. Kaufman was denied his request to testify at the trial and, since then, I haven’t found more about him.

I write this to clue you in that it’s all Shoah Business. Whether Kaufman is the exact frightened prisoner Gillespie said he helped out of the latrine (this contradicts Kaufman’s statements that he “became an animal” in the camps, a violent animal who could throw other prisoners into the cement mixer), neither of them offers any material evidence to prove that. We only have their word for it. We also now have a biased television documentary directed by a Jewish-German named Rotstein (Redstone). None of this inspires confidence that it is anything more than another “heart-warming” holocaust tale to satisfy the voracious appetite of the Holocaust Industry and Holocaust public. Why be concerned about the truth of it when it’s such an inspiring human interest story.

A septuagenarian’s “Holocaust” memories are dangerous to youth and wrong as history

Written on June 15, 2016 at 1:56 pm, by Carolyn

 

BY CAROLYN YEAGER

I’m afraid the ability to accurately remember events from childhood is impaired in every adult, but more so as the years go by. In my previous article, I wrote about Andrew Reid’s investigation into the fraudulent claims presented for 15 years in public schools by Mr. Joseph Hirt. No one had thought to question Mr. Hirt’s claims, even though some were quite bizarre. Not until history teacher Reid showed up for one of Hirt’s talks, that is. Reid was so troubled by what he heard and saw that he began searching on the Internet for information about Hirt’s claims. He even contacted a number of people, including Hirt family members, and the Auschwitz-Birkenau Museum archive department.

On the very first page of his report, Reid thought it was important to affirm he was not a Holocaust denier and mentioned (seemingly as proof) his long friendship with a certain Richard Stashevsky. He wrote:

“I was first hired as a teacher by a Polish-American administrator who had survived the Holocaust camp at Bergen-Belsen, who had the scars both physically and emotionally, and who I admired.”

He linked to an article about a talk Richard Stashevsky gave to students at a Christian school in December 2007. I read the article and, in the same way Andrew Reid reacted to Joseph Hirt’s talk, I knew some things Richard Stashevsky said “just weren’t right.” In spite of my positive impression of Reid’s good intentions, I feel compelled to deconstruct this talk by his friend and mentor, R. Stashevsky.

First, let me say I don’t question that this is how Mr. Stashevsky remembers his early years, or thinks he remembers them (except for a couple of details where I believe he is knowingly inventing atrocity propaganda that he never witnessed). It’s known that as the memory of life events fades, we fill in with things we have heard, thought, read, and watched in the intervening years. And this is even more true if we lived through a period of historical importance of which much has been written and spoken, including Hollywood movies and history books on all levels of competence and motivation.

Thus, a man who was only 3 years old in 1939 when dramatic changes occurred in the society around him is not a first-hand source of what actually happened, but someone who was told about it later. We all have flashes of memory of certain moments that made a deeper impression on us, certain scenes, but they are more to do  with how we felt about what was happening. Richard Stashevsky was between the age of 3 and 9 when he underwent these experiences. Born in 1936 in Warsaw, he certainly lived through war and destructive times, but his knowledge of the larger picture and “why” things happened as they did was non-existent. He filled it in later in life and, as we are all prone, not necessarily correctly or without prejudice.

So let’s look at Stashevsky’s words as recorded by Jan Holst.

“You can’t find many people around who went through what I went through,” he told the Algoma Christian School students in Kent City. He has prepared a slide presentation with a collection of photos from the difficult era.

A collection of historical photos. Naturally they are selected to show what he wants to show, not to accurately reflect solely what he himself experienced, or his family experienced. It’s a combination amateur history lesson plus personal testimony. The two get blurred because if you believe his testimony, you will believe his history too. You see the disparity in that he combines “what he went through” and “photos from the period” … not photos restricted to his immediate environment.

And he shared with them how amazing his mere survival is.

“Seven different times, I should have been killed, but God had purpose for my life,” he said.

This is so typical of bible-believers and holocaust survivors, who want to turn their personal story into something miraculous. When you hear this, be warned that you’re about to hear a “story,” a bit of fiction, not an honest “just the facts, ma’am” telling . What does “I should have been killed” mean? Is it a way of signally that survival was the exception, not the norm? Which is not true, by the way. Is it to to make his experience during this time seem more dangerous than it was? It is subjective and the listener has no way to judge it.

Stashevsky was only three years of age, when the Blitzkrieg, or lighting war, hit Warsaw, where the young family lived. “In our life before we were a middle class family,” he said. “My father worked in finance department in the Polish government. But the bombing of Warsaw changed everything.”

He calls it a Blitzkrieg but we need to remember that it was the Poles who wanted a war with Germany; Poland had instigated it. It just didn’t turn out the way they had fantasized about it. This is a good time to remind you of the British War-Guarantee to Poland, dated March 31, 1939, which promised that in any war with Germany, even if Poland starts it, Britain would come in.

“Britain gave Poland carte blanche in its dealings with Germany. Poland intensified its persecutions of the German minority. Abductions became common, speaking German in public was proscribed, German associations and newspapers were suppressed, the German consul in Krakow was murdered. This guarantee from Britain nullified the Munich agreement of Sept. 1938 for Britain and Germany to work closely together to avoid war; also the 1934 German-Polish Declaration of non-aggression.” [How Britain initiated Both World Wars, Nicholas Kollerstrom, 2016, p 75]

In addition, Poland was full of war talk. Its President Edward Rydz-Smigly was quoted in the Daily Mail for August 6, 1939, when in Britain, “Poland wants war with Germany and Germany will not be able to avoid it even if she wants to.” This exactly described the situation at the time.

Poland was the first to mobilize. So Warsaw was not victimized, not at all. If Stashevsky’s father was employed by the government in Warsaw, he knew all this and was probably on board with it.

Injured during the onslaught of German bombs, Stashevsky’s mother carried him to the hospital across a bridge, which seconds later blew apart. Eventually the young mother and son, with no knowledge of what happened to the man of the house, found a home in a small apartment.

His father was probably commandeered by the Polish military (or joined up) as a officer immediately or within the first few days. The invasion began on Sept. 1^st but the Germans didn’t reach Warsaw until Sept. 8. However, the Poles successfully repelled the attack, the city was put under a siege that lasted until Sept. 28 when the Polish garrison capitulated. … so we’re talking about a month before Warsaw was fully occupied. He doesn’t say what happened to his father.

For the next five years Warsaw, Poland remained under German occupation, requiring what Stashevsky told ACS students was “forced allegiance.” He showed pictures of people saluting Hitler, with tears running down their cheeks. “They had no choice, if they didn’t raise their arm, they would be shot,” he said.

For 5 years he and his mother lived safely in Warsaw. What does a child of 3 up to 8 years know about “forced allegiance?” This is something he read about much later in Polish history books, I suppose. I would like to see the pictures he showed the students of “people (doesn’t specify Poles) saluting Hitler with tears running down their cheeks.” Could it have been this famous photograph of a German woman in the Sudetenland who was overcome with happiness and broke down in tears as German troops marched into her city? I feel sure it was this picture. See this page. This photo has been mislabeled on many WWII sites to say the woman is crying in misery ’cause Hitler is coming to town – but it’s just the opposite.

There is also film of German women crying with happiness while saluting German troops as they enter Austria or the Sudentenland. Maybe he showed them stills from these films.

I’m not sure if the Nazi salute was even supposed to be used by Poles; I can’t find anything on it. But Stashevsky is very wrong when he says “if they didn’t raise their arms they would be shot.” Hardly. No one was ever shot for this reason, nor were Poles just shot down in the street as he implies. This tells me that Stashevsky is not above spicing up his story with contemptible lies.

Children listened intently as he relayed stories from an eight year old boy’s perspective about the Polish uprising, which after six weeks was squelched by the Germans.

This brings us to 1944 and the Warsaw uprising, which began on August 1st. Richard and his mother were living and surviving in Warsaw for five years and would have continued except for their own Polish Resistance Army that, against the advice of just about everybody, brought the peace to an end. In the next two months , the Germans lost 8000 soldiers killed and 9000 wounded putting down the uprising, so they understandably felt no love toward the Poles when they finally did so on Oct. 2nd, 1944.

When the Polish people were rounded up at gunpoint and marched to the boxcars for transportation to concentration camps, Stashevsky choked out his words about what he called the “separation gate.”

Nowhere have I found anyone else mention a “separation gate.” This must be something Stashevsky coined himself to make his story more dramatic. Here is what Wikipedia says about the fate of the Warsaw Poles after the uprising:

“The entire civilian population of Warsaw was expelled from the city and sent to a transit camp Durchgangslager 121 in Pruszków. Out of 350,000–550,000 civilians who passed through the camp, 90,000 were sent to labour camps in the Third Reich, 60,000 were shipped to concentration camps (including Ravensbrück, Auschwitz, and Mauthausen, among others), while the rest [by far the most -cy] were transported to various locations in the General Government [former Polish territory -cy] and released.”

Not really so bad after what they had cost Germany. No one ever thinks of that. The Germans treated the Poles much better than the Poles will ever admit. And that is why Stashevsky needed to embellish his story even more with another little piece of fiction.

“When the family before us was called up, the German soldiers pointed the mother to one car, the father to another…”

He then told how the fussy youngest child clung to her father’s leg, crying and how the soldiers “wasted her.”

This is unconscionable to accuse a German soldier of shooting dead a child like that. Things like that did NOT happen. Naturally he has no evidence, not even a witness, but impressionable young kids will take his word for it. Shame, shame, shame on this retired teacher and school administrator. In the first place, families were not normally separated, and German guards were forbidden to harm prisoners. To prevent it, the death penalty was enforced if they did. Again, why was it always others who were treated so badly, never him or his mother? This is true of most surlievors, by the way, who almost always tell us what they observed done to others because they cannot offer the details necessary to prove it happened to them.

Perhaps the soldiers were still distracted by the commotion, but “somehow when it was our turn, she grabbed my hand and no one stopped us. To my knowledge we were the only ones, who weren’t separated,” he said.

Sure, they were the only ones … to his knowledge at the age of 8 years. The reason stories like this are fabricated is because the first rule for most Poles, just like most Jews, is to make the “Nazis” out to be monsters. They think they have to, but  more and more people are knowing they are not and were not.

Richard and his mother must have been among the 90,000 Poles sent to camps in the Reich, for they ended up at Bergen-Belsen in northern Germany which had been a hospital-and-health-recovery camp as well as an exchange camp for VIP prisoners whom the Reich wanted to use for swapping. But now it was receiving the overflow from the east.

Pictures and stories about conditions at Belsen were and are graphic, but Stashevsky spared nothing sharing the horrors with the school children.

Of course he didn’t — that’s the whole point, isn’t it. The graphic pictures he showed to 6th graders would have illustrated the extreme conditions in the camp due to the heavy Allied bombing that destroyed the fresh water system and incoming food and medical supplies in the final months. There are no terrible pictures of him though, are there? Obviously, his own time there was relatively uneventful. Not everyone living at Belsen contacted typhus or dysentery and underwent such horrific suffering at the end. Even at Belsen, many prisoners remained fit and healthy until the camp was voluntarily turned over to the British. These healthy prisoners can be seen in films that were made at the time.

The liberation came only months later, but the mother and son spent another two years waiting for their chance to leave the camp, where the thousands of prisoners were kept.

The British entered Belsen on April 15, 1945 at the request of the SS because of the above-mentioned conditions. Richard Stashevsky had been there only a few months, and after he and his mother were freed, they remained there because they wanted to go to the United States. They were not forced to stay in the camp, but they would not have wanted to return to Poland which was now under Soviet-communist control. They were being much better cared for by the British and West Germans.

I would never say that Richard Stashevsky was not a victim of the war and that his early life was very negatively impacted, but so it was equally for hundreds of millions of others on both sides. His story really comes down to being born at a time and place where war broke out, and of early-on being a member of the losing side. While life was tough, it was not impossible, and that is why he never spoke about it until he was retired and close to 70 years old. Like so many others.

 

History teacher who outed holocaust fraudster Joseph Hirt calls for apology or criminal prosecution

Written on June 12, 2016 at 11:12 pm, by Carolyn

 

BY CAROLYN YEAGER

Andrew Reid, the New York public school history teacher who says he “believes in truth” has posted his own account of his very thorough investigation into the tales of holocaust survlievor Joseph Hirt on Scribd. online and it is a bombshell. Reid has done in this instance what the media and the schools continually fail to do before they publish a story or allow someone to speak to their students – scrutinize and vet the extravagant claims of holocaust survivors.  Of course, the media doesn’t do that because they know the claims won’t hold up; thus one can only conclude the media is helping to defraud the public on the subject of Holocaust. The schools are doing the same out of laziness and mental incompetence.

On pages 27-29 of his document, Reid lays out his idea that Mr. Hirt should have an opportunity to publicly retract his claims and admit his fraud, ask for forgiveness and cease his involvement in any further public presentations. If Hirt refuses to publicly recant, Reid recommends that law enforcement in both Lancaster County, PA and Lewis County, NY should pursue a criminal investigation. Right on, Mr. Reid! It has been the case ever since 1945 that only one side was punished; it’s about time these surlievors are held to legal account too. If they were, there would be a lot fewer of them.

Also at Scribd. Mr. Reid posted a letter he wrote to Joseph Hirt informing him of the above expectations. In it, he said,:

“If I do not see evidence of such a public repentant response in the near future, I will petition the District Attorneys in Lewis and Lancaster Counties to proceed with a criminal investigation, as much of your activity fits the legal definitions (in both the states of New York and Pennsylvania) of felonies and misdemeanors such as fraud, identity theft, and forgery.”

Well, I think Hirt should be prosecuted whether he recants or not. A crime is a crime, and saying you’re sorry doesn’t get a criminal off the hook in any other field.  Why should Holocaust hoaxers get special treatment – or continue to, I should say. I also think his family members should be cited for aiding and abetting his fraud by not speaking up. They’ve known for fifteen years that he was lying in schools and public forums, but said nothing until they were asked by Reid.

Interestingly, Reid wrote at Scribd. that “I am not a Holocaust denier – I believe in truth, and if someone is not telling the truth, I wonder what the lie is covering (the”real” truth.)” We have a lot in common! I believe in truth too, and this site Elie Wiesel Cons The World is “A blog dedicated to finding out the truth about Elie Wiesel’s tattoo,” and other aspects of Wiesel’s testimony. Truth is what we’re after. So I am hopeful Mr. Andrew Reid will continue along this path of investigating holocaust survivors. If he does, he might be in for some unpleasant surprises.

We must get as many people as possible to read the several items that he has posted at Scribd. His main report contains photographs and background material that is not included in the regular news reports which, however, are very scanty – in fact, I do not see any major media outlets reporting on it yet. That says a lot, doesn’t it. It looks like we’ll have to push it into the news.

According to an early local news story, Joseph Hirt has been an active holocaust surliever since at least 2001 when he conducted a 10-week adult night school class about his experiences during the “holocaust.” That led to other speaking engagements and “paved the way for a more intense catharsis: putting pen to paper.” This is a reference to a memoir that he has said he was writing, but obviously with no intention of ever finishing or publishing it. He is smart enough to know it would give him away.

He gave as a flimsy reason for remaining silent so long (until 2001) that no one would or could comprehend the horror he had to tell.

“Even today . . . the mere mention of Auschwitz – the name, the word, conjures up images of whippings, of beating, of hunger, of cruelty, of horrible odors and smells, of burnings, of hanging and shootings, of death and destruction,” Hirt writes (in 2006).

Even a friend who became a county court judge continued to believe him. Hirt said that his family is what inspired him to finally speak out. “With two daughters, a son, and six grandchildren, Hirt realized that future generations needed to hear his story.” It’s a fitting irony that today Joseph Hirt has been ostracized by his immediate family and none of his three children will have anything to do with him, according to his nephew. His brother, a retired clinical Psychologist, thinks that Joseph may be delusional and that he actually believes his own stories now.

But no … because his nephew Michael says: “When I confronted him (a couple years ago) he basically claimed that the stories were taken out of context, or that the authors fabricated the stories,” which Michael didn’t believe. However very recently, when reached by phone and asked about Reid’s accusations, Hirt, who lives in the Adamstown area now, stood by his story.

“There’s nothing to defend. I was there and I don’t need to defend it. This is like being forced to defend being raped.”

Hirt has also said he is not Jewish, but is a Polish Christian. However, it is known that he was born to a Jewish family in Poland in 1930, making him 86 years old today, not 90 as he claims. (Another one who can’t tell the truth about his age.)

When it comes to the number Hirt had tattooed on his own arm, 194517, he not only put it in the wrong location on his arm but Reid discovered from Auschwitz-Birkenau records that this number belonged to a man named Kazimierz Sikorski, and it was not assigned until 1944, long after Hirt had “escaped.”

On April 10, 2014, more than 200 students participated in Wilson Southern Middle School’s third annual “Holocaust Hall of Memories.” Joseph Hirt was there, pictured here poisoning the minds of 6th grade girls Samantha Godal, 11, and Jaylinn Maurer, 12.  The students do research on a holocaust victim (I guess it was him) and read the story of the victim to family and members of the community. It’s pretty disgusting to see this sick old liar hanging out with tender young girls, filling their minds with horrible stories that have nothing at all to do with their lives. Yuk. The schools are responsible for pushing this unhealthy agenda.

On Tuesday, April 20, 2016, Joseph Hirt, who claims to be 90 though he’s only 86, now a resident of Lancaster County, told his emotional story of surviving the Holocaust to students at the Boyertown High School. He holds a photo that he claims is himself as a teenager, weighing only 60 pounds, sleeping on a stretcher in the Auschwitz concentration camp. And he tells the students that while in that condition he crawled under a fence, talked a German guard into letting him run away very fast before the guard could shoot him, then traveled to Yugoslavia to find his family. Yikes. Just how stupid are we supposed to be? What does this do to the minds of America’s youth who are told to respect and believe what he says?

Another picture of Hirt with that photo of a typhus victim at Dachau taken after the liberation, that Hirt tells his young audience is himself in Auschwitz in 1942, a victim of starvation! Why should young people be subjected to such gruesome images that will give them nightmares.

Holocaust “experts” like Deborah Lipstatdt, who took over from Ken Waltzer as the go-to person when frauds pop up (as I wrote about here), are only concerned about how it affects their precious and increasingly fragile Jewish myth. To them it’s sad only because it gives food for argument to “deniers.” They don’t care that schoolchildren are being lied to in their classrooms by speakers they’re told to view with reverence and awe. No, it’s not looked at that way. They believe that everything Hirt says did happen … just not to him. And this is what Hirt believes too, and how he justifies his lies. But I say it did not happen at all since most every surlievor is testifying to things that s/he may have heard about, but did not ever personally experience.

What does Deborah Lipstadt have to say about the outing of Joseph Hirt as a liar?

“The saddest thing is that it causes doubt about other survivors’ stories, which we know are true. The guy is a fake, is a fraud. Had people stopped to check the historical references he made it would have been clear that he was making it all up.”

Why then was it never clear to Lipstadt? As a “holocaust historian,” she has never questioned a single surliever story. Not a single one! She is only concerned with holocaust deniers.

Neither did Aaron Breitbart, a senior researcher at the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles, ever look into Hirt’s story that he’s been telling for 15 years. Breitbart said:

“…you’re always going to find someone out there that makes up a story or embellishes a story.”

So what, huh? He added:

“Holocaust deniers, when they find a story that proves not to be true, they use it to deny the entire Holocaust,” he said. “Because you find one thing wrong, everything else is wrong, too.”

But wait. In Hirt’s story, a few things were discovered to be wrong, and it is agreed by all concerned that those crucial errors discredit his entire story. Why then does Aaron Breitbart say it doesn’t work the same with the official Holocaust narrative? Certain crucial errors should bring about the questioning of the entire narrative. The narrative has to withstand scrutiny in every part if it deserves to be believed. And it is the responsibility of those who claim themselves experts, like the Wiesenthal Center, Aaron Breitbart and Deborah Lipstadt, to police their own “industry,” yet they are absolute failures in this regard. The reason why is clear — they know the whole she-bang is a fraud that it is their job to keep propping up. They approve of people like Joseph Hirt and never question them unless they are forced to.

So kudos to Mr. Andrew Reid, a man who cares about the truth. I really hope that, along with following up on Hirt, Reid gets interested in some other surlievors and continues bringing the true facts to light. Be sure to read his report here.

Another childish comment from an outraged Wiesel defender

Written on June 8, 2016 at 10:00 pm, by Carolyn

BY CAROLYN YEAGER

Why is it that no one can mount a sustained argument against the contents of this website? Or even a single good argument. There have been a few who thought they had done so, but after my reply, they disappeared. All I get nowadays are really pathetic, 6th grade-level comments (I wish they really were in the 6th grade; then I might get somewhere with them) like this one from “Leelee” that came a couple of days ago. Rather than post it as a comment (to an article from 2011!), I decided to make an article out of it, as I did with Tiffany Yep. Now Tiffany is a genius compared to Leelee, as you will see. But I’m going to respond to what Leelee says anyway because it’s so typical of the kind of complaints that are sent to this site.

Leelee wrote:

You know what is even more disgusting? That you people think he is a fraud because he won’t show you his numbers. This guy went through something horrific and you won’t give him respect because he won’t show you something that dehumanizes him. Have you actually thought about the truths out weighing the lies? Instead you manipulate people with your little side comments that don’t even give Elie’s true thoughts. If you were only called by numbers and not your God given name (for lets say two years?), would you feel proud of showing people something that made you feel below human, like an animal essentially? Then add starvation,abuse,illness,and disgusting living conditions to that equation. Just use empathy before you accuse somebody, and keep you little side comments to yourself, because it’s not worth dehumanizing someone (again) because you don’t believe that his answers are everything you want to hear or because he won’t show you numbers etched into his skin that he had to hide behind for so long. The human mind is only capable of so much, and Elie is so brave for even telling his story. Please reconsider what you are doing, and base your accusations on a little more proof.

She says Elie’s tattoo “dehumanizes him” and that’s why he won’t show it. Nonsense! He has never said that. If that were his reason he would say so. In fact, he has talked about his tattoo a lot, and used it in his writing and speeches, so if he can talk about it he can show it.

If you were only called by numbers and not your God given name (for lets say two years?), would you feel proud of showing people something that made you feel below human, like an animal essentially?

I never thought that God gave me my name; my mother always said she did. Did God give you the name of Leelee? He wouldn’t be so cruel. It was not two years – you were right to question that – but just under one year. Nor does having a small number tattooed on your arm make you feel like an animal. If you got a number tattooed on your arm, would you feel like an animal? All prison systems give everyone a number and that number is attached to their name because people can have very similar, even identical names — same as in Auschwitz. Why don’t you start a campaign against that practice in today’s prisons? See how far you get.

You are trying to make your thoughts Elie Wiesel’s thoughts but you have no idea what his thoughts are. Nor do I, so I go by his words, not by some imaginary ideas I dream up. You may even be the same person who has written many comments here, saying basically the same thing, using different names. None of these comments have a sincere feeling about them – mainly because they’re so darn silly.

All the suffering you want us to believe Wiesel endured comes out of the fictional book Night. There is no objective proof that he was starved, abused or even ill. There are no witnesses to any of it – it all comes from Elie Wiesel himself. If you think that famous Buchenwald liberation photo shows an image of poor, suffering Elie, you are wrong. I can prove he’s lying about it, anyone can prove it. There is not a single image in existence of him at either Buchenwald or Auschwitz, or in a ghetto.

… because it’s not worth dehumanizing someone (again) because you don’t believe that his answers are everything you want to hear or because he won’t show you numbers etched into his skin that he had to hide behind for so long.

He hid behind the number on his skin? How does that work?  You’ve gotten carried away with your own dramatic language. Why not show the number? The only possible reason is because he doesn’t have one. You go on and on about his feeling dehumanized and mentally fragile, when in fact there is no evidence of that. He feels just fine about the power he and his fellow Jews have by using the weapon of the “Holocaust.” He’s very happy about that, and life has been great for him. You are painting a picture of someone who doesn’t exist. Perhaps because you’ve been assigned to this website and you can’t refute what is here so you rely on this kind of righteous indignation.

Please reconsider what you are doing, and base your accusations on a little more proof.

A little more proof? Unreal! I’ve got tons of proof here and you don’t challenge any of it. Instead, you’ve got righteous indignation and you turn things around:  accuse your opponent of what are really your failings and vices. You have no proof for the “poor suffering young Elie” myth. If anyone sincerely looks into it, they won’t find real evidence of it; therefore to distract from that lack of evidence you’re taught to resort to emotional charges. What makes me suspect you’re not a girl named Leelee? Because I’ve received so many comments just like yours with girls names attached. Well, it’s possible a lot of high school girls reading Night search Wiesel’s name on the Internet and end up here. It’s possible they get upset about it and send off a comment. But, except for Tiffany’s, they’re all so much the same.

This brings me back to my original thesis that no one can defend Elie Wiesel’s story with solid evidence. No one ever has. Try to give me an example where you think that has been done. We’re always confronted with sentimentalism and emotional manipulation to cover than lack, which has gotten pretty tired by now. The Elie Wiesel drama is a story, a  fiction, make-believe from start to finish. Wiesel only allows himself to be interviewed by friendly Jews, but even at that, he says a lot of things that give him away. He always tells his story just a little differently. But one has to want to see reality in order to notice it. Elie Wiesel’s fans don’t want to notice it. And the mainstream media doesn’t either. When he dies, will we see his life story presented in a major Hollywood movie? You can bet on it … or gag on it. He may have already made known his preference for who should play him.