Watch videos with subtitles in your language, upload your videos, create your own subtitles! Click here to learn more on "how to Dotsub"

Why is it a crime to have an opinion in France?

0 (0 Likes / 0 Dislikes)
VINCENT REYNOUARD EDITORIALS Is having an opinion in France a crime? Good morning everyone. The picture on the screen was taken upon my arrival to the Fleury-Merogis's prison, given the prisoner number 353 296. Had I killed, raped or seriously injured anyone? No. I had said publicly that the "gas chambers" in which the Germans would have killed hundreds of thousands of Jews, did not exist. In France, saying this is associated with anti-Semitism, it is punishable with imprisonment. However, I do not say it because of anti-Semitism It is because I am deeply convinced. For purely historical reasons. The center of the alleged extermination of the Jews is Auschwitz. The commander was Rudolf Höss. Captured and beaten after the war, in April 1946, in the Nuremberg trials, he did "confess" the gassing of millions of people. However, his testimony contains so many errors and impossibilities, that a camp historian did declare that "he (Höss) was present without seeing." For someone who is considered the number one witness, that's very disturbing. One of the most grotesque moments of his testimony occurs when he claims that in order to kill millions of people, he would have proposed to Himmler, to tinker and old Polish farmhouse, and to bury people in the nearby field. And, Himmler would have agreed. But, that's not all. When one takes the time to study the two crematoriums in Auschwitz, what one discovers is staggering. According to the official story, the "gas chamber" was underground, the Germans would have poured the deadly product through four small chimneys in the roof. I went to see by myself. The conclusion is clear. On the collapsed roof, but always there and perfectly visible of the alleged "gas chambers", we do not detect any traces of any chimney hole, nothing like it. Always according to the official story, four columns would have been installed under the chimneys, which would have allowed the deadly crystals' containers to slide down. Here again, taking a chance during the absence of the guards, I went to see under the collapsed roof. Not only did I not see any remains of a chimney hole, but even if I tried hard, I have not seen any remains of any column fixation, nothing, not even the beginning of a material proof of the existence of any column. Therefore, it is the entire official story that collapses all at once. Another element comes to reinforce this conclusion: in the Auschwitz's disinfection gas chambers, on the left, which no one denies the existence, the gas used has formed lots of blue spots on the walls, but, in the alleged homicidal "gas chambers" in Auschwitz, on the right, where the same gas would have been used, we can not see any blue traces. These are insurmountable contradictions to the official story. Let's see the crematoriums. Could they have handled hundreds of thousands of victims? To answer this I went to a modern crematorium. There, I have observed cremations to experience how the process takes place and I have asked questions to the oven's operator. He said that the Auschwitz ovens in the way they were build, could never have cremated so many corpses, far from it! Could the Germans have burned the rest of the corpses in cremation pits as some witnesses say, by recovering the fat of the victims to carry on the fire? I conducted an experiment with two rabbits which I have placed in a pit that I had dug, the attempt ended in a fiasco, it is impossible to burn a body this way, overcrowding prevents efficient combustion. But, then if there were no "gas chambers", why were the crematoriums build? I recall that a room build underground stays cooler. A morgue would then be build underground and sure enough the original plans mention a "Leichenkeller" i.e.: "cellar for corpses", which is normal for a crematorium. Finally, what is presented today as "gas chambers" were only simple mortuaries. As for the crematoria, they had been built to burn the inevitable dead: accidents, suicides, diseases and also to respond to an event of an epidemic. Such as the one in August 1942, which had caused over a hundred deaths daily, that's all. Now, about the Allies' leaders. Since the second half of 1942, persistent rumors that appeared in the Allied press which were speaking about an industrial slaughter of the Jews. In August 1943, therefore, the Allies' leaders refused to talk about the "gas chambers", because there were no sufficient evidence they themselves said. From 1944, the Allies had multiplied their reconnaissance missions over Auschwitz, they were taking pictures of everything, including Birkenau and its crematoria. So, they had all they needed to verify the accuracy or inaccuracy of the ongoing rumors but, until the end they had refused to bomb Birkenau, when they had bombed several times a nearby camp, the one in Monowitz. I see here the proof that, the pictures' analysts had not detected any mass killing. Simply because there was none. One more thing: According to a statistician, who has examined the matter very carefully the figure of six million is false. Two million Jews would have died during this war and dead doesn't mean assassinated much less gassed. In Europe, the Second World War with its bombings, its restrictions and blockades caused the death of many of the innocents. That's it. I summarized some of the key arguments developed by the revisionists And now, I will ask four questions: Do these arguments constitute anti-Semitism? Are they ludicrous arguments and unrelated to history? Why, do accredited historians refuse any debate with the revisionists? And most of all, why do they send to prison those who publicly expose their opinions on this subject? Does not such an attitude seem to you, not only unfair, but also suspect? Why, do they want imperatively to silence dissonant voices? Good evening. You like our videos? Please help us to continue. Give for the cause:

Video Details

Duration: 7 minutes and 18 seconds
Year: 2015
Country: Andorra
Language: English
License: Dotsub - Standard License
Producer: Vincent Reynouard
Views: 57
Posted by: didi18 on Sep 17, 2015

In this ultimate video synthesis (which targets the general public), I present briefly the main revisionist's arguments, to show that it is not anti-Semitism, but exclusively history. Then, I ask the question: why this debat denial and why this judicial harassment against the revisionists?

Caption and Translate

    Sign In/Register for Dotsub to translate this video.