Just recently I spent a couple of weeks exploring Europe. The first city I spent some time in was Amsterdam. This is a city best known for its Red Light District, drugs, prostitutes, coffee shops, windmills, water canals and the extensive use of bicycles as a means of transport. I was actually quite surprised at how much of the city is designed around the use of bikes. You’ll often see cute chicks in their 20s riding around on mopeds. This is something that you’d rarely see in America where the motorcycle culture is dominated by wannabe tough guys and middle aged men.
While in Amsterdam, I knew I had to visit the Anne Frank House. This is the place where Anne Frank the Jewish teenager allegedly hid from evil German Nazis during World War II. That’s at least the fairy tale that the Jews have sold us. The diary that she supposedly wrote during her time there has been a key tool used by Jews to promote their stupid Holocaust hoax.
There are many reasons to believe that the Anne Frank diary is a fraud. A significant number of them are described in an article published by the Institute of Historical Review. It is highly probable that much of the diary was written by Anne’s father Otto Frank or perhaps even the Jewish novelist Meyer Levin. The content of the diary appears to have been written by someone well beyond the life experience of a 12 or 13 year-old. The diary even contains passages with detailed references to homosexuality and masturbation. They sound more like some type of deranged sex fantasy from the mind of a perverted old man versus something that was written by a young girl.
Despite all of that, my visit to the Anne Frank House reconfirmed my suspicions that the diary is a fraud.
The Anne Frank House has been transformed into a museum and is a major Amsterdam tourist attraction. I literally had to wait an hour to get into the museum. What’s interesting is that before you even get inside, there are all sorts of signs saying that photography is not allowed. The signs claim that photography is banned because taking photos may somehow damage the displayed material. I found this to be a little odd since the museum’s contents should mostly be less than a century old. It isn’t like they are displaying Egyptian mummies or other fragile material that could damage easily.
They also claim that photography is not allowed because often times a visit to the Anne Frank House is an emotional experience for people. Taking photos they say would be disruptive to people having this so-called emotional experience during their visit.
The rationale for not being allowed to take photos inside the building is ridiculous. It sounds as if the real reason photography is banned is because they want to prevent people from documenting what’s inside the building. If photos were allowed, independent researchers would be able to scrutinize the diary’s contents much more thoroughly. Obviously they do not want this happening otherwise one would think that they would be much more accommodating to the general public.
After finally getting inside the museum I figured at some point the actual diary would be on display somewhere. What’s interesting is that they do not display the diary in the museum. Instead they display what they say are facsimile versions of the diary. They justify this by saying that the real diary is stored in a special place to preserve it from environmental exposure.
Once again this raises even more questions. Why can’t the real diary be displayed?
The Russians have displayed Vladimir Lenin’s dead body for public view since 1924. If a dead body can be displayed for 90 straight years, why can’t a 70 year old book be shown? It makes no sense unless of course there are ulterior motives at play.
These types of policies indicate clearly that the people at the Anne Frank House are hiding something. If the public were to know the many questions that surround the authenticity of the diary itself, the Anne Frank House would no longer exist as a tourist attraction. Not allowing pictures in the house and not showing the actual diary is problematic for obvious reasons. The lack of transparency does not inspire confidence that the diary itself is legitimate as is claimed.
It is also worth noting that much of the material inside the museum is designed to illicit an emotional response from the visitors. They are not interested in a visitor logically analyzing the lies they are presenting. Lots of photos and personal items are shown, but there is no information proving that the diary was in fact entirely written by Anne Frank. For instance, they show several interviews with people who knew Anne in real life. The museum has uploaded some of them to their YouTube channel. If you watch them you will see that the clips they selected contain emotionally driven material . Visitors are supposed to suspend all logic while they are bombarded with emotional tales of suffering and tragedy at the hands of evil German Nazis.
Based on my visit, I am more convinced than ever that Anne Frank’s diary and the story surrounding it are based off of lies. The diary is nothing more than a propaganda tool used by the Jews to push their stupid Holocaust hoax. If you confront a Jew about any of this it is pretty much guaranteed they will defend the diary by yelling “evil Nazi”, “anti-Semite”, “6 million” and “muh Holocaust.”