US Indymedia Global Indymedia Publish About us
Printed from Boston IMC :
IVAW Winter Soldier

Winter Soldier
Brad Presente

Other Local News

Spare Change News
Open Media Boston
Somerville Voices
Cradle of Liberty
The Sword and Shield

Local Radio Shows

WMBR 88.1 FM
What's Left
WEDS at 8:00 pm
Local Edition
FRI (alt) at 5:30 pm

WMFO 91.5 FM
Socialist Alternative
SUN 11:00 am

WZBC 90.3 FM
Sounds of Dissent
SAT at 11:00 am
Truth and Justice Radio
SUN at 6:00 am

Create account Log in
Parent Article: Video/Photos-Boston Protests Israel War On Gaza
Hidden with code "Duplicate post"
Re: Video/Photos-Boston Protests Israel War On Gaza
21 Jul 2014
Modified: 05:53:12 PM
back in the 70ies robert faurisson

discovered inconsistencies in anne frank´s diary that didn´t meld with a hiding framework:
for instance, on day 1 of moving into the famous backhouse at prinsengracht 263 in amsterdam, on july 6,1942, anne and her father otto, says a diary entry, hammer away all day long.this is obvoiusly not quite what u´d expect of hiders from the gestapo, who are supposed to keep as still as possible in order not to attract unwanted attention.

the diary attests to many more instances of loud noisemaking that do not mesh at all with a hiding framework, but only with living somewhere openly,legally and without any fear: for instance there are shouting matches at the table; or cohider peter van pels, who joins the backhouse on july 13,1942 with his parents,brings with him his woodworking gear and his cat mouschi, as we learn from alleged helper miep gies´s autobiography. the carrying out of woodwork in the backhouse is also attested to by the diary itself, as is the presence of the cat. but woodworking is fucking noisy; and cats are known to be prone to sudden outbursts of ear-piercing meowing day and night: how does all this mesh with a hiding situation?

and then there´s the burning of waste in the oven, producing visible smoke thru the chimney; and the turning on of lights at night, electric lights, which is obviously something that sticks out in terms of visibility. because of all this and more, fench revisionist godfather robert faurisson in his late-70ies book Is anne frank´s diary authentic?, jumped to the conclusion that the diary had been fabricated out of whole cloth by anne´s father otto frank after the war, as he allegedly was the only survivor of the 8 hiding jews - the other 7 including his family having perished in the camps. but faurisson was right in his analysis and wrong in his conclusion...

it is hard and uncommon to invent anything at all from scratch - it is much easier and more common to manipulate something that exists into saying the opposite of what was originally intended. the franks most likely did move out of their previous amsterdam address at merwedeplein 37 and into prinsengracht 263 on that july 6, monday, 1942: but they were not running from anyone, they did not go into hiding, they had no deportation to fear or anything at all. otto frank,anne´s father, was a german-jewish WW1 vet with the highest german millitary decoration: the iron cross. hitler had a soft spot for such jews, having himself fought in WW1, and so he exempted them from deportation and other antijewish measures almost throughout the entire nazi period, 1933-1944, almost until the end of the war. no iron crosses were deported or persecuted in 1942, and thus otto felt absolutely safe because the exemption covered close family members as well: his wife edith and daughters anne and margot were also exempt from deportation.

otto frank knew all too well that he was privileged because of his iron cross, as in 1938, in the course of the antijewish pogrom called crystal night in germany, his 2 brothers-in-law walter and julius holländer, brothers of his wife edith and themselves german-jewish war vets with iron cross, were first rounded up in the mass arrests and taken to a concentration camp, but soon released when it turned out they were iron crosses.
the diary would have you believe that instead the franks had to rush into hiding on that july 6,1942 because on the day before otto´s daughter margot had received via post a nazi summons to forced labor in germany: this is a lie, that document has never surfaced in any nazi archive, and margot again as the daughter of an iron cross was exempt from antijewish measures!
anne frank´s diary was massively tampered with after the war in order to turn a privileged situation into a false framework of poor persecuted jews hiding from the nazis. anne probably had indeed written some stupid girlieish diary notes - his father doctored all that with a little help from his zionazi friends and other helpers.

no somos nazis: somos antifascistas- y entonces antisionistas!

miep gies, otto frank´s secretary at his firm opekta, and one of the alleged helpers of the hiding jews, stated in her autobio with astonishing ingenuity that during the war opekta collaborated with the nazi occupiers by selling its products to the wehrmacht! feeding the nazi army! and thus extending the war and the holocaust!

sure enough the wehrmacht could use opekta´s foodstuffs: synthetic products that sped up the preparation of jellies, plus synthetic spices for that staple of the german diet: the sausage, or wurst...

and there was an even more importatnt collateral effect of working with opekta amsterdam: that since it was the dutch outlet of german firm opekta cologne, and also had close ties with another german supplier firm, pomosin frankfurt, the jews employed in it like in all private german firms were exempted from deportation: until march 1943 in germany proper, and at least until july 1943 in the netherlands.
therefore otto and his family and cohiders or alleged such, also enjoyed a second layer of protection from deportation: their status as opekta employees!

therefore when otto frank allegedly went into hiding july 6, 1942, he had absolutely no reason whatsoever to do so, because both his iron cross and his status as opekta employee exempted both himself and his close family members, that is wife edith and daughters margot and anne, from deportation as well as other antijewish measures.

allegedly, otto frank´s amsterdam firm opekta had been aryanized in december 1941, but the paperwork for such an event has never turned up...indeed there was no need whatsoever to aryanize opekta because its mother see opekta cologne, the headquarters, had enjoyed certificated aryan status since the late 30ies!
otto remained therefore opekta´s legal director and franchisee in amsterdam throughout the war.
and his daughters he had employed there officially too, starting july 1942: because, as the diary attests too in its january 13,1943 entry, they were " cheaper than outside workers" - implying that they were getting payed while working there in an official position!

if you read anne frank´s diary today in its latest pocket edition in germany, edited by fischer publishing house, translated by a fellow mjriam pressler from the dutch, the first page of text you´ll be fed is anne´s alleged key to the cover names used. that is, allegedly anne had originally intended to use false names, such as calling herself anne aulis robin, the van pelses van daans etc., which would make some sense in case the diary would fall in gestapo hands. but: what´s the sense of prefaceing the diary with a key to the real names, where anne aulis robin is revealed to be anne frank etc., blowing the whole cover? such a device doesn´t make any sense whatsoever in a hiding situation.

having a teenage daughter, 13 years old, going into hiding with her, risking arrest every day, and...allowing her to keep a diary providing gestapo in case of arrest with the easiest way imaginable to find evidence of what for the nazis was the crime of hiding, and of hiding jews on the part of christians such as miep gies, otto´s secretary, kleiman, his right-hand man, etc., all of them duly described and cited in the diary! if this had been a hiding situation for real, the last thing in the world otto would have allowed anne - and his other daughter margot who was also keeping a diary we are informed by anne - would have been the keeping of a self-incriminating diary, which could have resulted in arrest and death for all the alleged helpers!
nothing couold prove more glaringly that this was never a hiding situation, except in the retrospective creative enhancement by fraudster otto frank!
anne was NOT hiding, that´s why in the original version of her diary she felt so free of prefacing it with a key to all the false names used in it.
and that´s why margot too, anne´s sister, was also fearlessly keeping her own diary...

Por on all - Saturday, Jul. 05, 2014 at 8:14 PM

so again: anne frank most likely did exist. she most likely did write some stupid fuckin´teen diary notes of the spoiled little bitch she was. but whatever she wrote, was heavily doctored and altered by her father otto frank between 1944 and 1947 - actually continuing with his heirs to the present day - in order to transmogrify a situation of privilege of VIP jews who were exempt from deportation and other antijewish measures due to otto´s WW1 iron cross and to their status as employees of a private sector, "war-relevant" german business, into a false reference frame of poor persecuted jews fleeing arrest deportation gas chambers and what-have-u.

Por what arrest - Sunday, Jul. 06, 2014 at 7:39 PM

well so: what about the alleged arrest of the franks by the gestapo on august 4,1944? did it really happen? on the face of it, such an event may be plausible in the given historical context, because at the end of the deportation era - summer 1944 - iron crosses were deported too, with their families - but to VIP city-camp terezin, not to auschwitz as the official story would have u believe.
but the franks as we saw were also "war-relevant" jews, working for a war-relevant german firm, which covered them with a second layer of exemption from deportation throughout the war. therefore it is to be assumed that the story of the arrest deportation and death in the camps of 7 out of 8 hiding jews is yet another lie.

one may wonder
Por wand - Monday, Jul. 07, 2014 at 7:38 PM

if the franks did not go into hiding, why then did they leave their former address at merwedeplein 37 for prinsengracht 263? if the story of the nazi summons to margot for compulsive labor in germany is a lie, then what prompted the franks´move?
1. all jewish schools in the third reich and occupied territories were closed for good at the end of the 1941/42 schoolyear. therefore anne and margot could not attend school any longer, and daddy otto as we saw above decided to exploit them by making them work for low pay at his firm opekta amsterdam; hence it would be more comfortable and productive to live in the backhouse of the firm...
2.merwedeplein 37 lay in the midst of a new neighborhood heavily inhabited by german-jewish expats, and thus likely to be subjected to raids and roundups by the nazis; now as we saw above, otto frank and his family were exempt from deportation because of his iron cross and because of his status as franchisee of a german private business which in february 1943 would be certified as war-relevant. but still, the prospect of risking to find oneself in the midst of gestapo raids and shutting off of the entire neighborhood for mass arrests and the like wasn´t appealing for VIP jew otto.
3. the only real danger to the lives of the franks at the time of the alleged hiding july 6,1942, was from possible allied bombings, which otto correctly must have esteemed more likely in new and ugly neighborhoods than in pretty historical downtown amsterdam where opekta was located.
4. otto wanted to get away from his jewish neighbors at merwedeplein, many of whom he knew well, in order to avoid embarassing questions as to why they were being deported but not him and his family, or why he didn´t find them deportation-exempting employement at opekta...

Por war-relevant - Thursday, Jul. 10, 2014 at 7:53 PM

here´s a key german word for u all to learn if u wanna grasp the truth beneath the anne frank myth: kriegswichtig, war-relevant, important-for-war. this was an official nazi rubric during WW2, a certification given to private sector german businesses deemed by the nazi government indispensable to the war effort. the jews employed in such firms were EXEMPT from deportation.
for instance the famous oskar schindler of hollywood fame was able to save all his jewish workers because his factory, which produced components of ammo for the wehrmacht, had been certified kriegswichtig.
and opekta cologne too, whose dutch branch was directed by anne´s father otto frank throughout the war, was certified kriegswichtig on february 13, 1943. therefore from that moment on the franks, who were already exempted from deportation anyhow because of otto´s WW1 iron cross decoration, became covered by a second, very powerful layer of protection from deportation, which covered jewish employees of kriegswichtig businesses throughout WW2.
thus we are to assume that the tale of the franks´arrest on august 4, 1944, and subsequent deportation to auschwitz and bergen belsen where anne is alleged to have died of typhus, is yet another lie.

Por learner - Friday, Jul. 11, 2014 at 7:55 PM

the german word kriegswichtig means war-relevant, important for war. thus did the nazis designate certain private factories during WW2 considered indispensable to the war effort. now, jewish employees of german factories certified as kriegswichtig were not repeat not deported throughout WW2. that´s how for instance oskar schindler managed to save his 1200 jewish workers: because his factory, which produced ammunition components, had been certified kriegswichtig by the nazis.
now opekta too, whose dutch branch anne frank´s father otto managed throughout the war, was certified kriegswichtig on february 13, 1943. this added a second layer of immunity from deportation for otto and his family, because the kriegswichtig exemption covered close family members as well, just like the iron cross.
therefore we may reasonably assume that the story of the franks´arrest on august 4,1944, and their subsequent deportation and death in the camps is another zionazi lie.

otto frank, nazi pig
Por collab - Saturday, Jul. 12, 2014 at 8:00 PM

otto frank was a pig, a war profiteer who throughout WW2 collaborated with the wehrmacht by selling them opekta´s foodstuffs.
this is attested to also by alleged helper miep gies in her autobiography. otto frank ought to have been shot over collaborationism after the war! and even aside from trading with the wehrmacht in occupied holland, the very fact that frank managed a german firm in those days, a firm that is such as opekta cologne, that had been certified as war relevant by the nazis and received awards by same for its outstanding support to the war effort, this very fact makes him a nazi jew, the filthiest moral leper u could possibly come up with! it´s unbelievable that people still consider this rotten asshole a saint of sorts and a victim of persecution!

Por historicus - Wednesday, Jul. 16, 2014 at 7:54 PM

during the nazi era there were privileged jews exempt from deportation and other antisemitic measures. one of the legal grounds for a jew not to be deported was work in a so-called kriegswichtig business, that is a factory certified by the nazis as essential to the war effort. such jews wen exempt from deportation throughout WW2, a foremost example being schindler´s jewish workers. well, otto frank´s firm opekta amsterdam was a branch of german firm opekta cologne, which was certified as kriegswichtig on february 13, 1943. therefore why on earth, on what legal grounds could the franks have been arrested and deported? otto had 2 layers of exemption from deportation: his own iron cross and his status as kriegswichtig. both rubrics covered close family members too. therefore the mainstream myth of the franks´arrest on august 4, 1944, and subsequent deportation and death of most of them in the camps is exposed as yet another zionazi prop lie.