The Anne Frank Diary Fraud
|
The Anne Frank Diary Fraud [Editor's Note: The movie, The Diary of Anne Frank (1959), was promoted to the hilt and was probably seen by most Americans old enough to go to movies because it was so highly publicized as one of the greatest movies every made. It was a gripping, heart wrenching story that left a deep impression upon you, especially at that time. It was well acted with a top director, top cast and top screen writers. Of course, everyone assumed that the diary and the Anne Frank story were 100% true as portrayed in the movie because we had no reason to believe otherwise; since every media outlet in America from magazines, to newspapers, to TV, radio, etc. hailed it as a true story. The same could be said of the heavily promoted 1960 movie, Exodus: Top stars, top director (Otto Preminger) and promoted to the hilt. And then there was Spielberg's Schindler's List in 1993 that shook up my wife and myself so deeply that we could only sit in the car in the parking lot speechless for 30 minutes before even starting the engine because we were so emotionally devastated by what we had just seen on that giant theater screen. Today, we know that all of these movies were works of fiction, but passed off to the gullible, trusting, and believing American public as real. Most younger Americans don't know that following World War II, at the Nuremberg trails, there was no mention or accusation of Nazis gassing people to death at Auschwitz or at any other Nazi concentration camp during World War II. Nor was there any mention of shower gas chamber "extermination" camps throughout the 50s and most of the 60s. The "Holocaust" propaganda campaign only began to take root in the late 1960s and early1970s; and not before (as anyone who grew up in that period will attest). Had the homicidal "shower gas chamber" story been real, it would have been the biggest, and most explosive revelation at the Nuremberg trails and there would have been countless books, newspaper and magazine articles, and movies devoted to telling and re-telling the "Holocaust" genocide story ad nauseam from 1945 onwards. But we didn't hear a single word about the Nazis gassing "millions" in Auschwitz until more than 20 years after the war. Doesn't that strike you as completely unreasonable, and therefore untenable? The Holocaust myth, in turn, created the pretext for "death camp" suvivors (or more accurately, people who claim they are survivors of Nazi camps) to receive BILLIONS in yearly compensation from German taxpayers, first and foremost, but also from American taxpayers and from taxpayers in many other countries in Europe who, for some unexplained reason, are resposnible to pay reparations to people claiming to be survivors of Nazi concentration camps.
The Holocaust, for those who don't know, exclusively refers to the accusation that Nazis were intentionally gassing "millions" of Jews in converted shower rooms and then cremating their bodies in gas ovens running day and night. The Holocaust does NOT refer to people taken from their homes in Germany or Poland or other occupied countries in Europe, and then placed into Nazi concentration camps (where they were used as a source of labor). Towards the end of the war, allied bombing had destroyed most of the rail lines and transportation infrastructure that previously had supplied food and medicine to work camps. The lack of food and medicine, along with desperate camp conditions, allowed outbreaks of typhus to run rampant and take the lives of many people, including those of Anne Frank, her mother and her sister. The films seen of bulldozing of piles of skeletal bodies into open trenches were people who had died as a result of typhus and/or starvation, but not from being "gassed" to death in converted shower rooms.] by Brian Harring https://educate-yourself.org/cn/The-Anne-Frank-Diary-Fraud-14feb06.shtml#top Pub. February 14, 2006 The Anne Frank Diary Fraud by Brian Harring (Feb. 24, 2006)
Facebook Censorship The Anne Frank Diary Fraud https://web.archive.org/web/20060504005326/http://www.tbrnews.org/Archives/a2153.htm Archived When Harriet Beecher Stowe wrote Uncle Tom’s Cabin, she did so prompted by the highest of motives. Yet she, herself, relates the incident that when she first met Abraham Lincoln in 1863, he commented “So you are the little woman who wrote the book that made this great war!” Few will deny that the printed word in this instance fanned the flames of passion which brought about one of the bloodiest and saddest wars of American history, with brother sometimes pitted against brother, father against son. Perhaps if there had been less appeal to the emotions, the problems might have resolved themselves through peaceful means. However, almost universally read at the time, few people then recognized the potency of one small book or the injustice done the South through its wide acceptance as a fair picture of slavery in the South. Propaganda, as a weapon of psychological warfare is in even wider use today. Communists were masters of the art. Often they used the direct approach; just as often they employed diversion tactics to focus the eyes and ears of the world in directions other than where the real conflict was being waged. For many years, through propaganda alone, the dead threat of Hitler and Nazism had been constantly held before the public in a diversion maneuver to keep attention from being directed against the live threat of Stalin, Khrushchev and Communism. Such has been the effect, if not the deliberate intention, of many who have promoted its distribution, of a book of popular appeal – The Diary Of Anne Frank. It has been sold to the public as the actual diary of a young Jewish girl who died in a Nazi concentration camp after two years of abuse and horror. Many Americans have read the book or seen the movie version, and have been deeply moved by the real life drama it claims to present. But have we been misled in the belief that Anne Frank actually wrote this diary? And if so. should an author be permitted to produce a work of fiction and sell it to the world as fact, particularly one of such tremendous emotional appeal? The Swedish journal Frio Ord published two articles commenting on The Diary of Anne Frank. A condensation of these articles appeared in the April 15, 1959 issue of Economic Council Letter, as follows:
Mr. Otto Frank [L], in Switzerland, had promised to pay to prominent Jewish author, Meyer Levin. not less than $50,000 because he had used the literary creation of author Levin in toto, and represented it to his publisher and the public as his late daughter’s original work. Inquiry of the County Clerk. New York County. as to the facts of the case referred to in the Swedish press, brought a reply on April 23, 1962, giving the name of a New York firm of lawyers as “attorneys .far the respondent.” Reference was to ”The Dairy of Anne Frank 2203-58.” A letter to this firm brought a response on May 4, 1962 that “Although we represent Mr. Levin in other matters, we had nothing to do with the Anne Frank case.” On May 7, 1962, came the following reply from a member of a firm of New York lawyers to whom the original inquiry had been forwarded:
The Diary Of Anne Frank was first published in 1952 and immediately became a bestseller. It has been republished in paperback, 40 printings. It is impossible to estimate how many people have been touched and aroused by the movie production. Why has the trial involving the father of Anne Frank, bearing directly on the authenticity of this book, never been “officially reported”? In royalties alone, Otto Frank has profited richly from the sale of this book, purporting to depict the tragic life of his daughter. But is it fact, or is it fiction? Is it truth or is it propaganda? Or is it a combination of all of these? And to what degree does it wrongfully appeal to the emotions through a misrepresentation as to its origin? School publications for years have recommended this book for young people, presenting it as the work of Anne Frank. Advertising in advance of the movie showing has played up the “factual” nature of the drama being presented. Do not writers of such editorials and promoters of such advertising, “fan the flames of hate” they rightly profess to deplore? Many American Jews were shocked at the handling of the Eichmann case, the distortions contained in the book Exodus and its movie counterpart, but their protests have had little publicity outside of their own organ, Issues, by the American Council for Judaism. Others who have expressed the same convictions have been charged with anti-Semitism. Yet it is to be noted that both Otto Frank and his accuser Meyer Levin, were Jewish, so a similar charge would hardly be applicable in pursuing this subject to an honest conclusion.. File number 2241-1956 in the New York County Clerk’s office should be opened to the public view and its content thoroughly publicized. Misrepresentation, exaggeration, and falsification has too often colored the judgment of good citizens. If Mr. Frank used the work of Meyer Levin to present to the world what we have been led to believe is the literary work of his daughter, wholly or in part, then the truth should be exposed. To label fiction as fact is never justified, nor should it be condoned. Since actual period documentation does not exist to support the Holocaust myth, it has always been incumbent on its supporters to create it. Not only is the “Anne Frank” diary now considered to be a fake, so also is “The Painted Bird” by Jerzy Kosinski. This book, which is a mass of pornographic and sadistic imagery which, had it not been taken so seriously by the Jewish community, would be merely the pathetic manifestation of a self-serving and very sick person. This was duly exposed as a shabby, though much revered (by the Jewish community) and quoted, fraud. When this was exposed, Kosinski committed suicide. Later, in Kosinski’s footsteps we find the next fiction entitled “Fragments, ” by a Swiss Protestant named Bruno Dosseker who spent the war in Switzerland as a young child. Dosseker posed as a very young Baltic Jewish concentration camp inmate named Binjamin Wilkomerski. This work consists of allegedly fragmented “memories” and is very difficult to read Dosseker became the poster boy for the Holocaust supporters and was lionized by the international Jewish community, reaping considerable profit and many in-house awards for his wonderful and moving portrayal of German brutality and sexual sadism. Another book, allegedly by a Hungarian doctor, concerning his deportation from Budapest in 1944 and subsequent journey by “Death Train” to Auschwitz is another fraud. There was never such a doctor in Hungary during the period involved and the alleged route of the train from Budapest to Auschwitz did not exist. These sort of pathetic refugees from the back wards seem to be drawn to the Holocausters…and they to them. There are now “Holocaust Survivors” as young as thirty years old which is an interesting anomaly because the last concentration camp was closed in 1945. Perhaps they consider the last frenzied spring sale at Bloomingdale’s department store to be what they survived. Next we can expect to see a book based on twenty-seven volumes of secret diaries prepared on a modern word processor within the current year by an alleged inhabitant of the Warsaw ghetto, describing the Nazi slaughter of tens of millions of weeping Jews by means that would shame a modern African state. And, predictably, the publication of these howlers would be greeted with joy on the part of the fund raisers and fanatics, praised in the columns of the New York Times and scripted by Steven Spielberg for a heart-wrenching and guaranteed Oscar-winning film. Hundreds of thousands of DVD copies will be donated to American schools and the Jewish community will demand that subservient executive and legislative bodies in America create a ‘Day of Atonement‘ as a National Holiday to balance the terrible Christian Christmas and the wickedly Satanic Halloween. Conservationists must hate these books because so many otherwise beautiful and useful trees are slaughtered for their preparation Insofar as the Anne Frank diary is concerned, herewith is some background on Anne Frank, her family and her alleged Diary. The Franks were upper class German Jews, both coming from wealthy families. Otto and his siblings lived on the exclusive Meronstrasse in Frankfurt .Otto attended a private prep school, and also attended the Lessing Gymnasium, the most expensive school in Frankfurt. Otto attended Heidelberg University. After graduation he left for a long vacation in England. In 1909, the 20 year old Otto went to New York City where he stayed with his relatives, the Oppenheimers. In 1925, Anne’s parents married and settled in Frankfurt, Germany. Anne was born in 1929. The Frank’s family business included banking, management of the springs at Bad Soden and the manufacture of cough drops. Anne’s mother, the former Edith Holländer, was the daughter of a manufacturer. In 1934, Otto and his family moved to Amsterdam where he bought a spice business, Opekta, which manufactures Pectin used in making household jellies. On May 1940, after the Germans occupied Amsterdam Otto remained in that city while his mother and brother moved to Switzerland. Otto remained in Amsterdam where his firm did business with the German Wehrmacht. From 1939 to 1944, Otto sold Opeka, and Pectin, to the German army. Pectin was a food preservative, and a anti infectant balm for wounds and as a thickener for raising blood volume in blood transfusions. Pectin was used as an emulsifier for petroleum, gelatized gasoline for fire bombing. By supplying the Wehrmacht, Otto Frank became, in the eyes of the Dutch, a Nazi collaborator. On July 6, 1942 Otto moved the Frank family into the so-called ‘Secret Annex’. The annex is a three story, mostly glass townhouse that shares a garden park with fifty other apartments. While he was allegedly in hiding, Otto Frank still managed his business, going downstairs to his office at night and on weekends. Anne and the others would go to Otto’s office and listen to radio broadcasts from England. The purported diary begins on June 12, 1942, and runs to December 5,1942 . It consists of a book that is six by four by a quarter inches . In addition to this first diary, Anne supplemented it with personal letters. Otto said Anne heard Gerrit Bolkestein in a broadcast say: ~ “Keep a diary, and he would publish after the war”, and that’s why Anne’s father claimed she rewrote her diaries second time in 1944. In this second edition, the new writer changed, rearranged and occasionally combined entries of various dates. When Anne allegedly rewrote the diaries, she used a ball point pen, which did not exist in 1945, and the book took on an extremely high literary standard, and read more like a professional documentary than a child’s diary. In Anne’s second edition her writing style, and handwriting, suddenly matured The actual diary of Anne Frank contained only about 150 notes, according to The New York Times, of October 2 ,1955. In 1944, German authorities in occupied Holland determined that Otto Frank had been swindling them via his extensive and very lucrative Wehrmacht contracts. The German police then raided his apartment attic, and the eight Jews were sent to Westerbork work camp and forced to perform manual labor .Otto himself was sent to Auschwitz.. Anne, her sister Margot, and her mother, subsequently died of typhus in another camp [Bergen-Belsen]. In 1945, after being liberated from German custody, Otto returned to Amsterdam, where he claimed he found Anne’s diary cleverly hidden in the Annex’s rafters. However, another version has a Dutch friend, Meip Geis finding Anne’s diary of fictional events, which she then gave to Otto Frank. Otto took what he claimed were Anne’s letters and notes, edited them into a book, which he then gave to his secretary, Isa Cauvern, to review. Isa Cauvern and her husband Albert Cauvern , a writer, authored the first diary. Questions were raised by some publishers as to whether Isa and Albert Cauvern, who assisted Otto in typing out the work, used the original diaries or whether they took it directly from Mr. Frank’s personal transcription. American author, Meyer Levin wrote the third and final edition Meyer Levin was an author, and journalist, who lived for many years in France, where he met Otto Frank around 1949. Born in 1905, Meyer Levin was raised in the section of Chicago notoriously known in the days of gangster warfare as the “Bloody Nineteen Ward.” At the age of eighteen he worked as a reporter for the Chicago Daily News and during the next four years became an increasingly frequent contributor to the national literary magazine, The Menorah Journal. In 1929 he published THE REPORTER, which was the first of his sixteen novels. In 1933 Levin became an assistant editor and film critic at the newly-created Esquire Magazine where he remained until 1939 Perhaps his best-known work is COMPULSION (1956), chronicling the Leopold and Loeb case and hailed by critics as one of the greatest books of the decade. The compelling work was the first “documentary novel” or “non-fiction novel.” After the enormous success of COMPULSION, Levin embarked on a trilogy of novels dealing with the Holocaust. The first, EVA (1959) was the story of a Jewish girl’s experiences throughout the war and her adjustment to life after the concentration camps. This was followed by THE FANATIC (1963), which told the hypnotic story of a Jewish poet dealing with the moral questions that arose from his ordeal at the hands of the Nazis. The last in the triptych, THE STRONGHOLD (1965), is a thriller set in a concentration camp during the last days of the war. At the outset of World War II Levin made documentary films for the US Office of War Information and later worked in France as a civilian expert in the Psychological Warfare Division. He eventually became a war correspondent for the Jewish Telegraphic Agency [JTA], with the special mission of uncovering the fate of Jewish concentration camp prisoners. Levin took his role very seriously, sometimes entering concentration camps ahead of the tanks of the liberating forces in order to compile lists of the survivors. After the war Levin went to Palestine and turned his attention again to the motion picture camera. His film MY FATHER’S HOUSE told the story of a child survivor searching for his family in Palestine. He wrote this story as a novel as well and the book was published in 1947. Levin also joined the Hagana underground and helped smuggle Jews from the interior of Poland to Palestine, then basically an Arab country under the control of the British.. In 1951 Levin came upon a copy of the French edition of the Anne Frank diary He made a number of attempts to have the work published in English, and conceived it as a play and film. When the diary finally found an American publisher, his play was accepted for production but then suddenly barred, ostensibly for being “unstageworthy,” and another writer’s version was commissioned. Levin fought for the rights to perform his version of the play, claiming that the real reason the producers refused to stage his work was because they thought it “too Jewish.” He saw the suppression of the play as an extension of the Stalinist attack on Jewish culture and, outraged that even Anne Frank could be censored, he took the producers to court and began an agonizing, prolonged struggle that dragged on for years. Levin eventually won a jury award against the producers for appropriation of ideas, but the bitterness of the trial made him many enemies in the Jewish and literary communities. Although Levin’s version of the play is still banned by the owners of the dramatic rights, underground productions of the work are frequently staged throughout the world. Meyer Levin died in 1981 Levin rewrote the various post-war treatments of the Anne Frank diary with an eye toward a Broadway production, but Otto decided to cut him out, refusing to honor his contract or pay him for his work. Meyer Levin sued Otto Frank for his writings, and the New York Supreme court awarded Meyer Levin $50,000, for his ‘intellectual work’. In 1980, Otto sued two Germans, Ernst Romer and Edgar Geiss, for distributing literature denouncing the diary as a forgery. The trial produced a study by official German handwriting experts that determined everything in the diary was written by the same person. The person that wrote the diaries had used a ballpoint pen throughout. Unfortunately for Herr Frank, the ballpoint pen was not available until 1951 whereas Anne was known to have died of typhus in 1944. Because of the lawsuit in a German court, the German state forensic bureau, the Bundes Kriminal Amt [BKA] forensically examined the manuscript, which at that point in time consisted of three hardbound notebooks and 324 loose pages bound in a fourth notebook, with special forensic equipment. The results of tests, performed at the BKA laboratories, showed that “significant” portions of the work, especially the fourth volume, were written with a ballpoint pen. Since ballpoint pens were not available before 1951, the BKA concluded those sections must have been added subsequently. In the end, BKA clearly determined that none of the diary handwriting matched known examples of Anne’s handwriting. The German magazine, Der Spiegel, published an account of this report alleging that
The BKA information, at the urgent request of the Jewish community, was redacted at the time, but later inadvertently released to researchers in the United States. Brian Harring [The Anne Frank supplement linked below contains an enormous amount of relevant information and photos to butress and expand the information presented above. Anne Frank Hoax Exposedhttps://williamlutherpierce.blogspot.com/2015/01/anne-frank-hoax-exposed.html Clever Jew Made Millions from Dead Daughter (Pub. 1980) by Dr. William L. Pierce TUCKED AWAY ON pages 119 and 122 of the October 6 issue of Der Spiegel, a weekly German news magazine comparable to Time or Newsweek, was a news item of considerable significance: A scientific analysis of the manuscript purported to be the original diary of Anne Frank, a Jewish girl who died in a German concentration camp during the Second World War, has revealed that the manuscript could not have been written before 1951, six years after the end of the war. The significance of Der Spiegel’s revelation of this fraud is twofold. First, the printing of the story in a mass-circulation publication constitutes a major break with past treatments of similar news. The German news media, though not under the Jewish monopoly control which blights the media in this country, generally follow a pro-Jewish line, a heritage from the immediate postwar years when the Allied occupation forces gave publishing licenses only to those Germans who had proved their disloyalty to their country during the war. Consequently, most news tending to cast doubt on Jewish stories about gas chambers and the like from the World War II era has either been blacked out altogether or downplayed and given very unsympathetic treatment. The present article, though accompanied by copious apologies and held back for six months after it became news, would not have been printed at all a year or two ago. Beyond this, the exposure of the Anne Frank forgery is important because of the sheer magnitude of the fraud and the key role it has played in underpinning the entire Jewish scenario of the war. What is known as a fact is that one Otto Frank, a Jewish merchant, formerly of Frankfurt, who had been arrested in the Netherlands and interned in the Auschwitz concentration camp during the war, began visiting publishers in 1946 with what he claimed was a diary written by his young daughter during the time the Frank family was hiding from the German police in occupied Holland. The girl later perished at Auschwitz, Frank said. The diary, filled with touching adolescent reveries and homely little anecdotes, was exactly what the Jewish “Holocaust” propagandists were looking for: a highly effective piece of ammunition to generate a maudlin, emotion-laden sympathy for the poor, persecuted Jews — as typified by Anne Frank — and generate hatred against the wicked Germans, who had killed her and six million other Jews. Otto Frank cashed in on the diary in a big way. Not only did he find a publisher, but he found people hot to buy stage and film rights as well. Shortly after its appearance in book form, the diary had been translated into a score of languages and printed in millions of copies, from all of which Frank received royalties. The English version alone, under the title Anne Frank: The Diary of a Young Girl, has sold more than 4,000,000 copies to date. A television dramatization based on the diary was aired in this country last month, accompanied by the usual ballyhoo. Almost from the beginning there were charges that the diary was a hoax. Some of these charges were based on the gross inconsistencies between various translations and editions of the diary in book form; it was clear that the text had been heavily edited to help it sell well in different markets. Other charges were based on internal inconsistencies and credulity-straining elements in the diary itself. And then there was the matter of the script for the film version of the diary: Otto Frank was sued by a New York scriptwriter, Meyer Levin, who claimed that Frank had taken large portions of a script he, Levin, had written and had not paid Levin for his work. The court ordered Frank to pay Levin $50,000. One can easily understand why some observers began to wonder how much, if any, of the content of the various Anne Frank books, films, and plays in circulation was actually written by a little Jewish girl named Anne Frank. Otto Frank, father of Anne, displays what he says is his daughter’s diary, written in 1942–1944 while hiding from the Gestapo. Recent scientific tests have proved the alleged diary could not have been written before 1951. Frank made millions from his forgery before his death this year. In Germany, however, it was not wise to speculate about such matters publicly. The line laid down by the government and the media is that Anne Frank is gospel, and anyone who suggests otherwise leaves himself open to criminal charges (“defaming the victims of Nazi persecution”) as well as to civil suits. Otto Frank himself made a regular habit of hauling Anne Frank detractors into German courts, which invariably decided in his favor — until recently, that is. When Hamburg pensioner Ernst Roemer, 76, began spreading the accusation that Otto Frank had himself written what he was passing off as his dead daughter’s diary, Frank sued him. As usual, the court upheld the authenticity of the diary. Handwriting experts testified that the entire diary, including loose notes and insertions, had been written by the same hand, and that hand was Anne Frank’s. Roemer appealed the court’s decision against him, and more handwriting experts were called in. Their conclusion was the same: Everything in the diary was in the same handwriting; there was no forgery. Roemer appealed again, and this time the court asked for the technical services of the Federal Criminal Office (Bundeskriminalamt, similar to our FBI), which carried out a careful analysis of the original manuscript of the diary with microscope and ultraviolet illumination in order to confirm its authenticity — in particular, to determine when it was written. The report of the technical experts was given to the court in April of this year, and it contained a bombshell: large portions of the alleged “diary” were written in ballpoint pen ink — which was not manufactured prior to 1951! Were it not for the previous testimony of the handwriting experts that the entire diary, including the portions written with ballpoint pen, is in the same hand, the father might have claimed that he only “edited” his daughter’s work, “clarifying” passages here and there. But the evidence was quite unambiguous. For example, the testimony of Hamburg graphologist Minna Bekker in an earlier trial was: “The handwriting of the diary in the three bound volumes — including all notes and additions on the glued-in pages as well as the 338 pages of loose material — including all corrections and insertions is identical . . .” Otto should have been more careful in his choice of writing instruments. It is now quite clear that he finished hoking up the “original” of the diary after he had found a publisher for what, in 1946, was nothing more than some rough notes and an idea in his head which seemed to have prospects for making him a lot of money with little effort. First a typescript for the publisher, and then, as sales of the book began to mount, a completed handwritten “original” to show to doubters. Just after the report of the Federal Criminal Office was given to the court, Otto Frank conveniently died — before he could be asked a number of very interesting questions. Meanwhile, the worldwide Jewish propaganda apparatus has continued its promotion of the Anne Frank myth as if nothing had happened. Der Spiegel seems to be the only mass-circulation news periodical to have exposed the fraud to date. Related‘ The Holocaust Deception and The Railroading of Ernst Zündel (May 14, 2016) http://educate-yourself.org/cn/The-Railroading-of-Ernst-Zundel14may16.shtml#top The Zündel Trials (1985 and 1988) By Dr. Robert Faurisson (May 18, 2016) http://educate-yourself.org/cn/The-Zundel-Trials-1985-and-1988.shtml#top https://educate-yourself.org/cn/Examining-the-Holocaust-Deception-Historical-Revisionist-Jim-Rizolis-Two-Hour-Interview-with-Red-Ice-Radio-23jan18.shtml#top The Leuchter Reports, 2nd corrected edition, 2005, 234 pages http://educate-yourself.org/cn/The-Leuchter-Reports-2nd-corrected-edition-2005-234pages.pdf Auschwitz Plain Facts, A Response to Jean-Claude Pressac from Germar Rudolf (2005) https://educate-yourself.org/cn/Auschwitz-Plain-Facts-A-Response-to-Jean-Claude-Pressac-2005-Ed-by-Germar-Rudolf.pdf A Brief History of Jewish Communism (May 3, 2006) http://educate-yourself.org/cn/jewishcommunismhistory03may06.shtml#top Audio Articles from American Revisionist David Cole (aka David Stein)
Man who claimed to have escaped Auschwitz admits he lied for years (June 24, 2016) http://educate-yourself.org/cn/Ursula-Haverbeck-Is-Sentenced-to-10-Months-in-Prison-for-Doubting-the-Facts-of-the-Holocaust-Myth15nov15.shtml#top Jewish Historian Describes Holocaust as Improvised (April 9, 2016) http://henrymakow.com/2016/04/Jewish-Historian-Says-Holocaust-Improvised.html http://educate-yourself.org/cn/sylviastolzpersecution13may13.shtml Pounding the Holocaust Drum by Henry Makow (April 7, 2013) http://educate-yourself.org/cn/makowholocaustdrum07apr13.shtml Holocaust as Mental Paradigm by Henry Makow (January 27, 2003 )
|
|
|
|
Anyone can join.
Anyone can contribute.
Anyone can become informed about their world.
"United We Stand" Click Here To Create Your Personal Citizen Journalist Account Today, Be Sure To Invite Your Friends.
Before It’s News® is a community of individuals who report on what’s going on around them, from all around the world. Anyone can join. Anyone can contribute. Anyone can become informed about their world. "United We Stand" Click Here To Create Your Personal Citizen Journalist Account Today, Be Sure To Invite Your Friends.
LION'S MANE PRODUCT
Try Our Lion’s Mane WHOLE MIND Nootropic Blend 60 Capsules
Mushrooms are having a moment. One fabulous fungus in particular, lion’s mane, may help improve memory, depression and anxiety symptoms. They are also an excellent source of nutrients that show promise as a therapy for dementia, and other neurodegenerative diseases. If you’re living with anxiety or depression, you may be curious about all the therapy options out there — including the natural ones.Our Lion’s Mane WHOLE MIND Nootropic Blend has been formulated to utilize the potency of Lion’s mane but also include the benefits of four other Highly Beneficial Mushrooms. Synergistically, they work together to Build your health through improving cognitive function and immunity regardless of your age. Our Nootropic not only improves your Cognitive Function and Activates your Immune System, but it benefits growth of Essential Gut Flora, further enhancing your Vitality.
Our Formula includes: Lion’s Mane Mushrooms which Increase Brain Power through nerve growth, lessen anxiety, reduce depression, and improve concentration. Its an excellent adaptogen, promotes sleep and improves immunity. Shiitake Mushrooms which Fight cancer cells and infectious disease, boost the immune system, promotes brain function, and serves as a source of B vitamins. Maitake Mushrooms which regulate blood sugar levels of diabetics, reduce hypertension and boosts the immune system. Reishi Mushrooms which Fight inflammation, liver disease, fatigue, tumor growth and cancer. They Improve skin disorders and soothes digestive problems, stomach ulcers and leaky gut syndrome. Chaga Mushrooms which have anti-aging effects, boost immune function, improve stamina and athletic performance, even act as a natural aphrodisiac, fighting diabetes and improving liver function. Try Our Lion’s Mane WHOLE MIND Nootropic Blend 60 Capsules Today. Be 100% Satisfied or Receive a Full Money Back Guarantee. Order Yours Today by Following This Link.
| Online: | |
| Visits: | 1,657,318,109 |
| Stories: | 8,298,705 |
Whistler Blowers, Insiders
