Diary of Anne Frank or the falsification of history
Diary of Anne Frank Tuesday, May 17, 2011
Getting Pregnant On Dianette
De Metapedia
(Redirected from Diary of Anne Frank)
Jump to: navigation, search
The Diary of Anne Frank Diary of Anne Frankel is the diary that was supposedly written by the girl Ana Frank (Annelies Marie "Anne" Frank) between June 12, 1942 and August 1, 1944, but was rigged by her father Otto Frank in an attempt to falsify history.
Contents [hide] literary forgery
1 2 3 Tests and Trial Basis enlightening
4 Richard Harwood
5 References 6 Sources
7 Related articles 8 External links
8.1
Videos literary forgery
The Diary of Anne Frank referred to is considered by many historians as a literary forgery that revolves around the myth of the Holocaust. The contrast of the innocent and child of the protagonist in front of their intrinsically evil captors, has made this work not only in a global best-seller (with countless editions, translations, dramatizations and film adaptations), but also in other wall of laments, where all refutation about the veracity of the "Holocaust" is answered with a well-considered campaign of hysteria and sentimentality.
The world-renowned British historian, David Irving, the former professor at the University of Lyon (France), Robert Faurisson, and the nationalized Austrian scholar Swedish Ditlieb Felderer, have been shown publicly until exhaustion of the alleged falsity Manuscripts attributed to a Jewish girl named Anne Frank, died in a typhus epidemic in 1944 in the Bergen Belsen.
Reportedly, the Jewish businessman Otto Frank in the city of Frankfurt (Germany), fled with his family in 1933 to the Dutch city of Amsterdam, due to Hitler's rise to power. When, during World War II the Germans occupied Holland, Frank decides to take refuge in hiding to escape the "Nazi Persecution." In 1944, the whole family is arrested and deported by the Gestapo, the only "survivor" Otto Frank, who was sent to Auschwitz, where instead of being "gassed", is hospitalized because of an illness. After the war, Frank returned to Amsterdam where he delivered the originals of the Journal and published his first Dutch edition in 1947.
In this note, we will make the reader consider the main arguments and doubts exist about the authenticity and veracity of what is contained in the Journal. Importantly, it has always been used as the most effective blow to the Zionist propaganda against National Socialism German. Hence its value as a political tool and the need to promote and protect by law, promoting political trials against anyone who dares to question it, which does not guarantee basic rights of the accused, then use the statements as "proof" of authenticity the Journal. Testing and fundamentals
In a research article Enrique Aynat Eknes, published in the English magazine review, we found the main arguments that cite here. We emphasize that this work is based Eknes the Felderer Ditlieb excellent book entitled "Anne Frank's Diary, a Hoax" ("The Diary of Anne Frank, a lie.") We stop first in external reviews of the manuscript, and then introduce in the text itself.
Above all, know that the study does a historian of a document, such as a personal journal, is done very carefully, with a detailed description of their external characteristics such as size, paper type, number of leaves, number of pages written in the blanks, writing element, binding and many other details. This allows to verify, among other things, if it really was with the time and place assigned to it, and not fall naively fraud. This painstaking work, truly scientific, is anyone up the arrival of the revisionists, had made the documents linked to the events of the Second World War. Concerning
called Diary of Anne Frank is necessary to know that:
1. With significant obstinacy, Otto Frank (died 1980), always denied that the manuscript was submitted to a thorough analysis in order to verify its authenticity.
2. In 1980, following a lawsuit against Ernst Roemer, a retired seventy-six who dared to deny the authenticity of the diary, the Legal Defense Fund did German at the request of Dr. Rieger that the Federal Criminal Department (Bundes Kriminal Amt or BKA, for its acronym in German) submitted to text analysis and found that some of them were written in ballpoint pen, invented in 1951 introduced, ie, at least seven years after the death of Anne Frank. This was justified by the defenders of the authenticity of the newspaper, arguing that it is only a few notes added by an investigator, which no influence on the development of history. However, the BKA concluded that portions of "important" or "significant" in the Journal, especially in the fourth volume, were written with pen and concluded that these sections should have been added later [1].
3. However, twenty years before, in 1960, the expert calligrapher Minna Becker court had ruled that all manuscripts, the Journal came from a single calligraphy. So who did the script laid the aggregates with pen ... which in plain terms means that ANA FRANK WAS NOT THE AUTHOR'S DIARY.
"The spelling of the journal is identical in all three volumes, including all attached notes and additions on the passages, as well as the 338 passages of loose material, including corrections and insertions [2] Becker
Minna
the news was widely publicized by the media [3], leading to demonstrations in Germany, to which the BKA issued a statement disclaims any liability and requesting that their findings are not used to prove Journal fraud, but retract at all of its opinion.
A letter included in the Diary of Anne Frank, which is inconsistent with the writing style of a girl like the rest of the Journal. Letter of Anne Frank
some friends, a date subsequent to the first and provided by the Center Wiesenthal.4 Simon. To squander this issue has only been necessary to access the authentic letters that Anne Frank wrote to some friends, published in the United States. The lyrics of these cards do have the normal appearance of a 10 or 12 years, which is not the case of the original manuscript, which reveal an author of older. The letters were purchased by the Simon Wiesenthal Centre and, again according to David Irving, they are real, but not daily. Joaquin Bochaca also confirms that the scripture says Anne Frank is reproduced in the book "Spur eines Kindes" by Ernst Schnabel, totally different from the writing of Anne Frank in the original manuscript. Professor Robert Faurisson of the University of Lyon, whose specialty is the criticism of texts and documents, and had several personal conversations with the father of Anne Frank, insists on this issue pointing out two examples of the handwriting attributed to Anne Frank both written when it had about 13 years, but strangely the first (Dated June 12, 1942) seems much more mature and similar to that of an adult who supposedly written just four months later.
5. A pamphlet of "Anne Frank Foundation in Amsterdam," Dutch said that friends of the family found an exercise book with cardboard covers and small size. The Swedish daily Expressen on 10 October 1976, published a photograph of Otto Frank holding a considerable volume that looks nothing like the book referred to.
Regarding the text itself, this is a sea of \u200b\u200bcontradictions. The historian Ditileb Felderer last few careful observations that allow to point out:
6. Not credible in a narrow shelter, where they remained for nearly two years, none of the eight people who were in it know that Anne Frank was writing a diary during that period (June 1942 - August 1944). So says in his foreword George Stevens, who argues not only that the paper was small, but "that the small diary Anne only knew." The father says he learns after returning from Auschwitz. At this point we frequently find that proponents claim that the Journal just read it to understand that this was not a secret to those who lived with the child. The problem with this argument is that it assumes as true all reported in the Journal and try to use it as proof that this is true, which is absurd from the logical point of view, assuming as true what you want to show. According to the declarations and external sources to the Journal, no one knew anything about this while writing.
7. The need for silence in the shelter, not to attract attention and avoid being captured (03/23/1943), it contrasts with descriptions of the "terrifying fights" (02/09/1942), "outrageous fights," " screams and shouts, blows and insults that would not imagine "(29/10/1943) and dance practices every night Ana (1/12/1944).
8. Curiously, according to the Journal, that Frank to escape the persecution they have chosen the same offices and warehouse of Otto Frank himself to hide (07/09/1942).
9. It is also contradictory when he says Lewin, "a small Jewish chemist and pharmacist, working for Mr. Kraler in the kitchen" (10/01/1942). How?, "A Jew is to work peacefully when the Jews suffer a brutal persecution by the authorities? ...
10. Are revealing, says E. Aynat, the sexual proclivities of this girl of thirteen years!: "I remember when I stayed with a friend, I felt a strong desire to kiss her ... I could not help being terribly inquiring about your body ... I asked him if, as proof of our friendship, we could pat each other's breasts, but he refused. I get to ecstasy every time I see the naked figure of a woman, as Venus, for example. It affects me so that I can hardly keep my tears from falling. If only I had a friend "(05/01/1944)
In short, a little porn for a better sale? ... Is this the language and concerns of a girl of thirteen years? ... Is this a healthy girl? ...
11. According to an interview with Otto Frank in 1956, the blinds were always low and the windows never opened, but Ana says watch the sky "is better than pills Valeria and bromine (15/06/1944) for anxiety and depression.
12. Finally, it is clear the purpose of this Paper: the germanofobia states: "shall be allowed all civilized languages \u200b\u200bother than German" (17/11/1942). "The Germans are the most cruel beasts that have walked the face of the earth" (11/19/1942).
This has not prevented the authorities "German" postwar Journal as having introduced the book required reading in schools, self-denigration of the new generations.
The Institute for Historical Review of the United States (IHR), again offered U $ S 25,000 .- reward those who prove that the Diary of Anne Frank was written by her. Neither the foundation itself constituted on this literary fraud encouraged claim generous offer. Judgement
enlightening
A sad story indeed. A man becomes a millionaire thanks to a tearful story, which claims to have written his dead daughter. After paying the real author of the story has to be taken to court. And please do not say that this is an anti-Semitic machinations. If the defendant, and ordered to pay, Otto Frank, a Jew, so was the plaintiff, the author Meyer Levin, as well as the Judge, Samuel L. Coleman.. [4] The trial took place between 1956 and 1958 before the County Court House in the city of New York, the plaintiff obtained a ruling Meyer Levin in his favor that Otto Frank condemned to pay compensation of $ 50,000 at the time by "fraud, violation of contract and unlawful use of ideas" . The lawsuit, which was arranged privately after the sentence for obvious mutual interest, dealt with both on the "scenic dramatization" as on the sale of the diary itself. It is therefore wrong to say that Levin only helped to film the Diary of Anne Frank. The judge, likewise a Jew, was Samuel L. Coleman, who ruled in the sense that Otto Frank Meyer Levin was to pay "for his work in the newspaper Anne Frank [5]. For anyone interested, everything about the Levin-Frank case is filed in the Office of the County of New York (NY Country Clerk's Office) under the number 2241-1956 and in the New York Supplement II , 170 Series and 5 Series II 181 (26). Thus, the judge's ruling (and Jewish judge) in the sense that the author of the Journal is Meyer Levin and the girl did not exist.
Richard Harwood would like
close this note, which only has illustrated the main details of this huge lie ad-with the accurate words of the British revisionist Richard Harwood, who by the way the newspaper said:
"It is fair considerations that we present are somewhat lazy. In fact, does not matter that the Journal is false or true. Any suffering of a Jewish girl of twelve years are more significant by the fact that he kept a journal, that much or most terrible sufferings of other Jewish children, or the misfortunes of the infinitely more numerous children German, Italian, Japanese, Polish or other nationalities who have suffered horribly, mangled or burned, maimed or disabled for life because of the allied bombing of open cities, abandoned in the chaos by the death or disappearance of their fathers, raped or corrupted by savagery of enemy troops.
But who remember these horrors?. Who weeps for the German boy screaming running surrounded by the unquenchable fire of liquid phosphorus?. Who by the German girl raped to death by a succession of beasts?. Or by Japanese children of Hiroshima and Nagasaki? "
" Because of all these countless heinous cases nobody speaks. There is no best-sellers, no drama, no 40 editions, there is no cinema, no theater, no radio or television. The falsity of the myth of Anne Frank goes far beyond, is far deeper than any falsification of the text. Lies in the unilateral and recurrent infinite topic. A kind of Ravel's Bolero of propaganda, a perfect political application of the old theme of the innocent girl trapped by evil, but who triumphs even after death: White persecuted by the wicked stepmother, the weak maiden imprisoned in the medieval tower or the innocent heroine in the films of the Far West the cowboy riding good save in the final. And so the myth of Anne Frank, by force of its impact on the collective sensibility, becomes not only a symbol of the persecuted innocent nation, but even more so and against all rules of logic, indisputable proof of evil intrinsic, irredeemable, the pursuers ... " Richard Harwood
References 1. ↑ Brian Harring: The Anne Frank Diary Fraud
2. ↑ The Hoax Exposed
Anne Frank 3. ↑ New York Post, October 9, 1980
4. ↑ New York Supplement, Series II 170, and 5, II Series 181
5. ↑ Bochaca, J.: The Myth of Anne Frank. Cedade magazine. Pp. 18 to 20
Note: To view the references you need to register and log in Metapedia. Sources
Freedom of opinion, Year II - No. 10, July 1998, Buenos Aires.
Varela, Pedro: "Fraud The Diary of Anne Frank"
Related Articles
Holocaust Historical Review Holocaust Revisionism
Ditlieb Felderer
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 comments:
Post a Comment