'Jewish' surnames (& German, Polish, Russian etc surnames)

Ramifications of nuclear issues are everywhere: subjects loosely or remotely linked to the nuclear bomb myth

'Jewish' surnames (& German, Polish, Russian etc surnames)

Postby Exorcist » 16 Jan 2012 18:14

Moved from the thread "Believing Is Seeing": Truth, lies and photographs which deals with photographs, captions, and perceptions.

rerevisionist wrote: Morris made a film about Fred Leuchter, clearly intended to make him out as a bit of a clown....


Leuchter is Jewish. He acted the part of a gentile "expert" with no credible qualifications in order to make it easy for the Jewish media machine to discredit him and his research and thus tag Holocaust doubters and history revisionists with the crank smear. I'm sure he was well paid for his role and his subsequent protestations of hounding and victimisation are fabrications. The analysis results are true but the object of the exercise was to discourage further investigations by others using the threat of ridicule and the ruination of one's career.

We see a variation of the same propaganda brainwashing technique with the supposed "good gentile" Schindler from the fabricated Holocaust story of Schindler's List. Schindler was Jewish.

Go to the Avotaynu Jewish Surname site and input the surnames Leuchter and Schindler.

http://www.avotaynu.com/csi/csi-home.htm
User avatar
Exorcist
 
Posts: 73
Joined: 08 Jan 2012 14:21
Location: UK

Re: "Believing Is Seeing: Truth, Lies and Photographs" book

Postby rerevisionist » 16 Jan 2012 19:48

Exorcist, thanks. Are you sure Leuchter isn't of German extraction? There are large numbers of Americans with German ancestry; I've seen a figure of 1/3, though this predates vast immigration. And local groups such as Pennsylvania Dutch (i.e. Deutsch), if these still exist - I don't know.

As I understand it, Jewish surnames were manufactured in Germany and thrust upon 'Jews' - hence the artificial-sounding names - Blumenfeld (Flowerfield), Goldstein (Gold stone), Pflaum (Plum), Lipschutz (lips closed - maybe he/she didn't want to reply!), Perlman, Silverstein, Unterhalter, etc in addition to the supposed Jewish tribes - Cohen etc.

So there's a possible confusion with German surnames which resemble Jewish ones. Maybe Leuchter has German ancestors?

[Search engine note --- that site is www.avotaynu.com NOT avotanyu or avotanya or avatoynu or avotarnu or avatarnu or avatarynu !]
User avatar
rerevisionist
Site Admin
 
Posts: 1056
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 11:40

Re: "Believing Is Seeing": Truth, lies and photographs

Postby voerioc » 16 Jan 2012 21:01

Exorcist wrote:Leuchter is Jewish. He acted the part of a gentile "expert" with no credible qualifications in order to make it easy for the Jewish media machine to discredit him and his research and thus tag Holocaust doubters and history revisionists with the crank smear. I'm sure he was well paid for his role and his subsequent protestations of hounding and victimisation are fabrications. The analysis results are true but the object of the exercise was to discourage further investigations by others using the threat of ridicule and the ruination of one's career.

We see a variation of the same propaganda brainwashing technique with the supposed "good gentile" Schindler from the fabricated Holocaust story of Schindler's List. Schindler was Jewish.


It's true that Leuchter's face seemed very Jewish to me. And it's true that there are jews in the revisionist movement which seems to be there to only to discredit it. However, I didn't suspect Leuchter very much because his work seemed to be one of the pillars of the revisionist movement. It also seemed to be of a quite good quality. But you may be right.

Didn't know Schindler was a jew (wasn't interested too much about this affair although). It doesn't surprise me at all.
User avatar
voerioc
 
Posts: 86
Joined: 30 Mar 2011 08:29

Re: "Believing Is Seeing: Truth, Lies and Photographs" book

Postby Exorcist » 16 Jan 2012 23:47

rerevisionist wrote:Exorcist, thanks. Are you sure Leuchter isn't of German extraction?


Point taken and I will redact my assertion that Leuchter and Schindler were Jewish as being my opinion. Nevertheless my hypothesis is entirely plausible based on the seeming reluctance of academics to risk their careers to carry out further scientific studies to verify Leuchter's findings.

rerevisionist wrote:As I understand it, Jewish surnames were manufactured in Germany and thrust upon 'Jews'


I've never heard it stated in those terms before. My understanding is they assumed these names of their own volition to disguise their "Jewish" (Kazar) origins. In what sense were the names "thrust" upon them and by whome?
User avatar
Exorcist
 
Posts: 73
Joined: 08 Jan 2012 14:21
Location: UK

Re: "Believing Is Seeing: Truth, Lies and Photographs" book

Postby rerevisionist » 17 Jan 2012 00:02

Exorcist - Jewish surnames: I read that years ago, in Hilaire Belloc's 1920s book The Jews; the following is taken verbatim from an online version, which seems correct, though I haven't checked. I include more material on Jewish names, with the remark on manufactued surnames in bold:-
Take the particular trick of false names. It seems to us particularly odious. We think when we show our contempt for those who use this subterfuge that we are giving them no more than they deserve. It is a meanness which we associate with criminals and vagabonds; a piece of crawling and sneaking. We suspect its practisers of desiring to hide something which would bring them into disgrace if it were known, or of desiring to over-reach their fellows in commerce by a form of falsehood.

But the Jew has other and better motives. As one of their community said to me with great force, when I discussed the matter with him many years ago at a City dinner, "When we work under our own names you abuse us as Jews. When we work under your names you abuse us as forgers." The Jew has often felt himself so handicapped [101] if he declared himself, that he was half forced, or at any rate grievously tempted, to a piece of baseness which was never a temptation for us. Surely all this carefully arranged code of assumed patronymics (Stanley for Solomon, Curzon for Cohen, Sinclair for Slezinger, Montague for Moses, Benson for Benjamin, etc., etc.) had its root in that.

The Jew can plead something further in extenuation of this practice. Family names did not grow up naturally with them, as with us, in the course of the Middle Ages. The Jew retained, as we long retained in the middle and lower ranks of European society, the simple habit of possessing one personal name and differentiating a man from his fellows by introducing the name of his father. Thus a Jew in the sixteenth century was Moses ben Solomon, just as the Cromwells' ancestor of the same generation was Williams ap Williams. He had not what we call a surname or family name. In the same way until varying dates, early in France and England and other Western countries, much later in Wales, Brittany, Poland and the Slav countries of the East, a man was known only by his personal name, distinguished, if that were necessary, by mentioning also the name of his father, or, in some cases, of his tribe.

Properly speaking the Jews have no surnames, and they may say with justice: "Since we were compelled to take surnames arbitrarily (which was the case in the Germanies and sometimes elsewhere as well), you cannot blame us if we attach no particular sanctity to the custom." If a Jew of plain Jewish name was compelled by alien force to take the fancy name of Flowerfield, he is surely free to change that fancy name, for which he is [102] not responsible, to any other he chooses. There was a good reason for the Government to force a name upon him. Only thus could he be registered and his actions traced. But forced it was, and therefore, on him, not morally binding.


All this is true, but there remains an element not to be accounted for on any such pleas. There are in the experience of all of us, an experience repeated indefinitely, men who have no excuse whatsoever for a false name save that advantage of deceit. Men whose race is universally known will unblushingly adopt a false name as a mask, and after a year or two pretend to treat it as an insult if their original and true name be used in its place. This is particularly the case with the great financial families. Some, indeed, have the pride to maintain the original patronymic and refuse to change it in any of their descendants. But the great mass of them concealed their relations one with another by adopting all manner of fantastic titles, and there can be no object in such a proceeding save the object of deception. I admit it is a form of protection, and especially do I admit that in its origin it may have mainly derived from a necessity for self-protection. But I maintain that to-day the practice does nothing but harm to the Jew. There are other races which have suffered persecution, many of them, up and down the world, and we do not find in them a universal habit of this kind.

Again, who can say that the bearing of a Jewish name to-day, or at any rate in the immediate past, is or was a handicap in commerce where Occidental nations were concerned? And as for the Eastern nations, the Jews there are so sharply differentiated [103] that a false name can be of no service merely to hide the racial character of its bearer. There must be another motive present.

The same arguments apply for and against other forms of secrecy. A man may plead that if secrecy in relationship were not maintained the dislike of Jews would lead to false accusations. The Jew is highly individual, especially in intellectual affairs. He takes his own line. He expresses his opinions with singular courage. And such individual opinions will often differ violently from those of men with whom he is most closely connected.

"Why," I can understand some distinguished Jewish publicist in England saying, "should I be compromised by people knowing that such-and-such a Bolshevist in Moscow or in New York is my cousin or nephew? I am conservative in temperament; I have always served faithfully the state in which I live; I heartily disapprove of these people's views and actions. If their relationship with me were known I should fall under the common ban. That would be unjust. Therefore I keep the relationship secret."

The plea is sound, but it does not cover the ground. It is not sufficient to explain, for instance, the habit of hiding relationships between men equally distinguished and equally approved in the different societies in which they move. It does not explain why we must be left in ignorance of the fact that a man whom we are treating as the best of fellow-citizens should hide his connection with another man who is treated with equal honour in another country. There are occasions where national conflicts make the thing explicable. A Jew in England with a brother in Germany ....
User avatar
rerevisionist
Site Admin
 
Posts: 1056
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 11:40

Return to Other Revisionisms, Hyper-Revisionisms & Off-Topic Debates


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest