Antisemitism is Wicked Ungodly
John R. Houk
© March 18, 2016
VIDEO: The Nazi Gas Chambers
Posted by lizardboy347
Uploaded on Mar 23, 2008
This is an animation of the three
methods of gasing the nazi's used during WWII. I created this to go with my
presentation for a class project- sorry about the text going so fast. I had to
do it to fit most of the info in. A lot of the info was left out though because
i couldn't fit it all into the animation.
-And no I'm not a nazi, no I'm not trying to insult anyone, and no I do not think its funny. Its serious and I can easily understand why some people would find this very offensive and harmful. I'm terribly sorry about that....Feel free to leave your comments of emotion... Simply.... "Pass the knowledge"
-A lot of the walking parts of the animation are pretty messed up, I know. I was rushing to finish because I was behind schedule..
-And no I'm not a nazi, no I'm not trying to insult anyone, and no I do not think its funny. Its serious and I can easily understand why some people would find this very offensive and harmful. I'm terribly sorry about that....Feel free to leave your comments of emotion... Simply.... "Pass the knowledge"
-A lot of the walking parts of the animation are pretty messed up, I know. I was rushing to finish because I was behind schedule..
Jyrki Soini wants me to examine Germar Rudolf a convicted
Holocaust denier. It is my opinion that if Germar Rudolf denies the existence of the Holocaust or denies that Adolf Hitler was evil is a dangerous
proposition. The Holocaust was an evil agenda of Nazism that cannot be
dismissed. So let’s profile Germar Rudolf,
So let’s look at Holocaust deniers deny. I will show a
series of excerpts of actual science and eye-witness collected testimony (which includes Nazi guards not just
survivors).
While Auschwitz is the best known
of the death camps, this is because it was also a large slave labour camp, so
there are more survivors from it. The dedicated death camps of Aktion
Reinhard represented the most deadly part of the Nazi's mass murder
operations and are far less known largely because virtually everyone who
entered these camps - Belzec, Chemlno, Sobibor and Treblinka - were gassed or
shot. Holocaust deniers try to pretend these camps were simply
"transit camps", but testimony from guards, Nazis, a few surviving
prisoners and locals all prove that this is nonsense.
Between 2010 and 2012 a British archaeological team uncovered extensive evidence that the Treblinka camp was indeed a mass murder centre. Ground penetrating radar detected three huge mass graves on the site, one of which is 26m long, 17m wide and at least 4m deep. Using aerial photos from the 1940s, GPS technology and modern remote sensing equipment, the archaeologists were also able to detect the brick remains of the gas chambers, which the Nazis had dismantled when they abandoned the site. Bone fragments and ash deposits on the site also clearly indicate the disposal of thousands of corpses at Treblinka, as attested by all witnesses.
Between 2010 and 2012 a British archaeological team uncovered extensive evidence that the Treblinka camp was indeed a mass murder centre. Ground penetrating radar detected three huge mass graves on the site, one of which is 26m long, 17m wide and at least 4m deep. Using aerial photos from the 1940s, GPS technology and modern remote sensing equipment, the archaeologists were also able to detect the brick remains of the gas chambers, which the Nazis had dismantled when they abandoned the site. Bone fragments and ash deposits on the site also clearly indicate the disposal of thousands of corpses at Treblinka, as attested by all witnesses.
Treblinka: The Hidden
Graves of the Holocaust
Secondly, we have forensic evidence that clearly demonstrates that cynide gas was used in the gas chambers at Auschwitz-Birkenau. Following claims by amateur hobbyist Fred Leuchter, which were touted by Holocaust deniers David Irving and Ernst Zundel as "proof" no Zyklon B was used to gas people at Auschwitz, the Institute for Forensic Research (IFRC) in Kraków undertook forensic examinations of the relevant areas of the five crematoria. After factoring in elements that Leuchter had not calculated for, the IFRC concluded that, in fact, there were expected traces of cyanide gas in all relevant areas and that this was not due to them having been fumigated against a typhus outbreak. (Is there physical scientific proof that Jews were gassed to death in Nazi concentration camps? By Tim O'Neill; Quora)
Secondly, we have forensic evidence that clearly demonstrates that cynide gas was used in the gas chambers at Auschwitz-Birkenau. Following claims by amateur hobbyist Fred Leuchter, which were touted by Holocaust deniers David Irving and Ernst Zundel as "proof" no Zyklon B was used to gas people at Auschwitz, the Institute for Forensic Research (IFRC) in Kraków undertook forensic examinations of the relevant areas of the five crematoria. After factoring in elements that Leuchter had not calculated for, the IFRC concluded that, in fact, there were expected traces of cyanide gas in all relevant areas and that this was not due to them having been fumigated against a typhus outbreak. (Is there physical scientific proof that Jews were gassed to death in Nazi concentration camps? By Tim O'Neill; Quora)
Here's a Birkenau (aka Auschwitz II) eyewitness account:
Regarding the liquidation of the
Czech family camp in section BIIb, the following quote is from Don Moore's
article in the Sun-Herald:
"They told everyone in
Camp B2B we were going to be sent to Germany as slave laborers, but we had to
clean up and shower first and we'd be issued new uniforms," he said.
"When we reached what the guards said were the 'showers' there was a
commotion going on. I could speak a little German and I heard the guards say
something was 'kaput.'"
He learned later the apparatus
that filled the showers with poison gas was 'kaput.' The prisoners from B2B had
escaped death. They were marched back to their barracks. Three days later they
were marched back to the gas chambers to die.
"We were just about to go
into the gas chambers once more and there was another commotion out front.
"A train with 10,000 Jews
from Hungry had just arrived. They had no place to put them. We were sent back
to our barracks once again. They marched all 10,000 Hungarian Jews into the
three gas chambers at Auschwitz and killed them all in 24 hours." (Auschwitz II – Birkenau: History of a
man-made Hell; ScrapBookPages.com; last updated 2/10/10)
Millions killed at
Auschwitz-Birkenau:
On May 14, 1946, the former Commandant of Auschwitz-Birkenau, Rudolf
Höß, also known as Rudolf Hoess, signed a sworn affidavit in which he stated
that two million Jews had been gassed at Auschwitz-Birkenau between 1941 and
1943 while he was the Commandant. This did not include the period, during which
Hoess was not the Commandant, when over 300,000 Hungarian Jews were gassed
during a period of 10 weeks in the Summer of 1944, according to the Auschwitz
Museum.
The English translation of the German text in the affidavit reads:
"I declare herewith under oath that in the years 1941 to 1943 during my
tenure in office as commandant of Auschwitz Concentration Camp 2 million Jews
were put to death by gassing and a 1/2 million by other means. Rudolf Hoess.
May 14, 1946." The confession was signed by Hoess and by Josef Maier of
the US Chief of Counsel's office.
…
In the last days of World War II, shortly before Berlin was surrounded
by Soviet troops, Eichmann told Hoess that 2.5 million Jews had been murdered
at Auschwitz Birkenau. Eichmann was an SS Lt. Col. who was the head of
Department IV, B-4, the section of the Reich Central Security Office (RSHA) in
Berlin, which was responsible for deporting the Jews. It was Adolf Eichmann who
was in charge of deporting the Jews on the trains to the death camps.
…
On April 12, 1947, just before his execution, Rudolf Hoess signed the
following Final Statement, in which he admitted his shame for committing Crimes
Against Humanity and for participating in the genocide perpetrated by the Third
Reich:
My conscience is forcing me to
make also the following assertion: In the isolation prison I have reached the
bitter understanding of the terrible crimes I have committed against humanity.
As a Kommandant of the extermination camp at Auschwitz, I have realized my part
in the monstrous genocide plans of the Third Reich. By this means I caused
humanity and mankind the greatest harm, and brought unspeakable suffering,
particularly to the Polish nation. For my responsibility, I am now paying with
my life. Oh, that God would forgive me my deeds! People of Poland, I beg you to
forgive me! Just now in the Polish prisons have I recognized what humanity
really is. In spite of everything that happened I have been treated humanely,
which I had never expected, and this has made me feel deeply ashamed. Would to
God...that the fact of disclosing and confirming those monstrous crimes against
mankind and humanity may prevent for all future ages even the premises leading
to such horrible events. (Auschwitz-Birkenau:
History of a man-made Hell; ScrapBookPages.com;
last updated 1/10/10)
Next let’s look at
what Holocaust Deniers might consider a work of holiness exposing the Holocaust
as a hoax. Pamphlet was published by the Institute for Historical Review
(IHR) entitled “66 Questions & Answers About the Holocaust”. The
pamphlet is simply a bunch of pseudo-science disinformation derived from
idiotic speculation or simple downright lies. The Jewish Virtual Library has a
quite excellent refutation to this work of Antisemitism by Ben S. Swanson
entitled “Holocaust
Denial: How to Refute Holocaust Denial”. The refutation is quite lengthy because it refutes each of the 66
points of the IHR pamphlet. Here I am posting the point one refutation with the
links to the other 65 points or you can simply go to the Jewish Virtual Library
to read the entire refutation at your leisure. Do not be fooled by Neo-Nazi
Antisemitic propaganda. There is no Jewish New World Order to dominate the
globe. Even Israel exists as a homeland where the world’s practicing Jews and
non-practicing Jews can live in the land of their heritage in which they KNOW
their government will never persecute them for their faith or their ancestral heritage.
This post is going to end up to be quite lengthy because I am including
excerpts of the links that Yurki1000 sent to me to examine the Holocaust denial
Germar Rudolf. I have to be honest I was a bit surprised Yurki1000 wanted me to
examine Rudolf thoughts because I’ve known him to be a staunch Christian in
principle with only some minor disagreements on theology. In the fairness of
the open mind request I am posting Rudolf musings after my expression of
displeasure with Holocaust Deniers which I frankly consider to be a bit
low-brow even though many of these guys try to place a flavor intellectualism
in their Antisemitic delusions. That which is sad is these fellows for the most
part truly believe the Antisemitic ideology about Jewish extermination and Nazi
principles.
********************
Holocaust Denial: How to Refute Holocaust Denial
By Ben S. Austin
This page contains a
point-by-point refutation of the half-truths and outright lies published in a
pamphlet entitled "66 Questions & Answers About the Holocaust"
published as a bible for Holocaust denial by the Institute for Historical
Review (IHR).
The IHR's questions
and answers have been reproduced unaltered. Nizkor, a website devoted to
combatting Holocaust denial, follows their answers by refuting the 66 claims.
Click on Any Question to Reveal the Answer:
General
IHR Says:
None. The only
evidence is the postwar testimony of individual "survivors." This
testimony is contradictory, and no "survivor" claims to have actually
witnessed any gassing. There are no contemporaneous documents and no hard
evidence whatsoever: no mounds of ashes, no crematoria capable of disposing of
millions of corpses, no piles of clothes, no human soap, no lamp shades made of
human skin, no records, no credible demographic statistics.
Nizkor Replies:
Lie piled upon lie,
with not a shred of proof.
This is as good a
place as any to present some detailed evidence which is consistently ignored,
as a sort of primer on Holocaust denial. It will make this reply much longer
than the other sixty-five, but perhaps the reader will understand the necessity
for this.
Let's look at their
claims one at a time:
Supposedly the only
evidence, "the postwar testimony of individual survivors."
First of all,
consider the implicit conspiracy theory. Notice how the testimony of every
single inmate of every Nazi camp is automatically dismissed as unconvincing.
This total dismissal of inmates' testimony, along with the equally-total
dismissal of the Nazis' own testimony (!), is the largest unspoken assumption
of Holocaust-denial.
This assumption,
which is not often spelled out, is that the attempted Jewish genocide never
took place, but rather that a secret conspiracy of Jews, starting around 1941,
planted and forged myriad documents to prove that it did; then, after the war,
they rounded up all the camp survivors and told them what to say.
The conspirators
also supposedly managed to torture hundreds of key Nazis into confessing to
crimes which they never committed, or into framing their fellow Nazis for those
crimes, and to plant hundreds of documents in Nazi files which were never
discovered until after the war, and only then, in many cases, by sheer luck.
Goebbels' diary, for example, was barely rescued from being sold as 7,000 pages
of scrap paper, but buried in the scattered manuscript were several telling
entries (as translated in Lochner, The Goebbels Diaries, 1948, pp. 86,
147-148):
February 14, 1942: The
Führer once again expressed his determination to clean up the Jews in Europe
pitilessly. There must be no squeamish sentimentalism about it. The Jews have
deserved the catastrophe that has now overtaken them. Their destruction will go
hand in hand with the destruction of our enemies. We must hasten this process
with cold ruthlessness.
March 27, 1942: The
procedure is a pretty barbaric one and not to be described here more
definitely. Not much will remain of the Jews. On the whole it can be said that
about 60 per cent of them will have to be liquidated whereas only 40 per cent
can be used for forced labor.
Michael Shermer has
pointed out that the Nazis' own estimate of the number of European Jews was
eleven million, and sixty percent of eleven million is 6.6 million. This is
fairly close to the actual figure. (Actually, forty percent was a serious
overestimate of the survival rate of Jews who were captured, but there were
many Jews who escaped.)
In any case, most of
the diary is quite mundane, and interesting only to historians. Did the supposed
Jewish conspiracy forge seven thousand pages to insert just a few lines? How
did they manage to know Goebbels' affairs intimately enough to avoid
contradictions, e.g. putting him or his associates in the wrong city at the
wrong date?
As even the revisionist
David Cole has admitted, revisionists have yet to provide a satisfactory
explanation of this document.
Regarding postwar
testimony from Nazis, were they all tortured into confessing to heinous crimes
which they supposedly did not commit? This might be believable if only a few
Nazis were captured after the war, or maybe if some had courageously stood up
in court and shouted to the world about the supposed attempt to silence them.
But hundreds testified regarding the Holocaust, in trials dating from late 1945
until the 1960s.
Many of these Nazis
testified as witnesses and were not accused of crimes. What was the basis for
their supposed coercion?
Many of these trials
were in German courts. Did the Germans torture their own countrymen? Well,
Holocaust-deniers sometimes claim that the Jews have secretly infiltrated the
German government and control everything about it. They prefer not to talk too
much about this theory, however, because it is clearly on the lunatic fringe.
The main point is
that not one of these supposed torture victims -- in fifty years, not one --
has come forth to support the claim that testimony was coerced.
On the contrary,
confirmation and reconfirmation of their testimony has continued across the
years. What coercion could have convinced Judge Konrad Morgen to testify to the
crimes he witnessed at the International Nuremberg Trial in 1946, where he was
not accused of any crime? And to later testify at the Auschwitz trial at
Frankfurt, Germany, in 1963-65? What coercion was applied to SS Doctor Johann
Kremer to make him testify in his own defense in 1947, and then, after having
been convicted in both Poland and Germany, emerge after his release to testify
again as a witness at the Frankfurt trial? What coercion was applied to Böck,
Gerhard Hess, Hölblinger, Storch, and Wiebeck, all former SS men, all witnesses
at Frankfurt, none accused of any crime there?
Holocaust-deniers
point to small discrepancies in testimonies to try to discredit them. The
assumption, unstated, is that the reader will accept minor discrepancies as
evidence of a vast, over-reaching Jewish conspiracy. This is clearly ludicrous.
In fact, the
discrepancies and minor errors in detail argue against, not for, the conspiracy
theory. Why would the conspirators have given different information to
different Nazis? In fact, if all the testimonies, from the Nazis' to the
inmates', sounded too similar, it is certain that the Holocaust-deniers would
cite that as evidence of a conspiracy.
What supposed
coercion could reach across four decades, to force former SS-Untersturmführer
Dr. Hans Münch to give an interview, against the will of his family, on Swedish
television? In the 1981 interview, he talked about Auschwitz:
Interviewer: Isn't the ideology of extermination contrary
to a doctor's ethical values?
Münch: Yes, absolutely. There is no discussion. But I lived in that environment, and I tried in every possible way to avoid accepting it, but I had to live with it. What else could I have done? And I wasn't confronted with it directly until the order came that I and my superior and another one had to take part in the exterminations since the camp's doctors were overloaded and couldn't cope with it.
Interviewer: I must ask something. Doubters claim that "special treatment" could mean anything. It didn't have to be extermination.
Münch: "Special treatment" in the terminology of the concentration camp means physical extermination. If it was a question of more than a few people, where nothing else than gassing them was worthwhile, they were gassed.
Interviewer: "Special treatment" was gassing?
Münch: Yes, absolutely.
And what supposed
coercion could reach across four decades, to force former SS-Unterscharführer
Franz Suchomel into giving an interview for the film Shoah? Speaking under
(false) promises of anonymity, he told of the crimes committed at the Treblinka
death camp (from the book Shoah, Claude Lanzmann, 1985, p. 54):
Interviewer: You are a
very important eyewitness, and you can explain what Treblinka was.
Suchomel: But don't use my name.
Interviewer: No, I promised. All right, you've arrived at Treblinka.
Suchomel: So Stadie, the sarge, showed us the camps from end to end. Just as we went by, they were opening the gas-chamber doors, and people fell out like potatoes. Naturally, that horrified and appalled us. We went back and sat down on our suitcases and cried like old women. Each day one hundred Jews were chosen to drag the corpses to the mass graves. In the evening the Ukrainians drove those Jews into the gas chambers or shot them. Every day!
Ask the deniers why
they shrug off the testimony of Franz Suchomel. Greg Raven will tell you that
"it is not evidence...bring me some evidence, please." Others will
tell you that Suchomel and Münch were crazy, or hallucinating, or fantasizing.
But the fantasy is
obviously in the minds of those who choose to ignore the mass of evidence and
believe instead in a hypothetical conspiracy, supported by nothing but their
imaginations.
That total lack of
evidence is why the "conspiracy assumption" almost always remains an
unspoken assumption. To our knowledge, there has not been one single solitary
"revisionist" paper, article, speech, pamphlet, book, audiotape,
videotape, or newsletter which provides any details about this supposed
Jewish/Zionist conspiracy which did all the dirty work. Not one.
At best, the denial
literature makes veiled references to the World Jewish Congress perpetuating a
"hoax" (in Butz 1976) -- no details are provided. Yet the entire case
of Holocaust-denial rests on this supposed conspiracy.
As for the testimony
of the survivors, which the "revisionists" claim is the only
evidence, there are indeed numerous testimonies to gassings and other forms of
atrocities, from Jewish inmates who survived the camps, and also from other
inmates like POWs. Many of the prisoners that testified about the gassing are
not Jewish, of course. Look for instance at the testimony of Polish officer
Zenon Rozansky about the first homicidal gassing in Auschwitz, in which 850
Russian POWs were gassed to death, in Reitlinger, The Final Solution, p. 154:
Those who were propped against the door leant with a curious stiffness
and then fell right at our feet, striking their faces hard against the concrete
floor. Corpses! Corpses standing bolt upright and filling the entire corridor
of the bunker, till they were packed so tight that it was impossible for more
to fall.
Which of the
"revisionists" will deny this? Which of them was there? Which of them
has the authority to tell Rozansky what he did or did not see?
The statement that
"no 'survivor' claims to have actually witnessed any gassing" is
clearly false; this was changed to "few survivors" in later versions,
which is close to the truth.
But we do not need
to rely solely on testimony, from the survivors, Nazis, or otherwise. Many
wartime documents, not postwar descriptions, specifically regarding gassings
and other atrocities, were seized by the U.S. armed forces. Most are in the
National Archives in Washington, D.C.; some are in Germany.
Regarding the
gassing vans, precursors to the gas chambers, we find, for example, a top
secret document from SS Untersturmführer Becker to SS Obersturmbannführer Rauff
(from Nazi Conspiracy and Aggression, 1946, Vol. I, pp. 999-1001):
If it has rained for instance for only one half hour, the van cannot be
used because it simply skids away. It can only be used in absolutely dry
weather. It is only a question now whether the van can only be used standing at
the place of execution. First the van has to be brought to that place, which is
possible only in good weather. ...
The application of gas usually is not undertaken correctly. In order to
come to an end as fast as possible, the driver presses the accelerator to the
fullest extent. By doing that the persons to be executed suffer death from
suffocation and not death by dozing off as was planned. My directions now have
proved that by correct adjustment of the levers death comes faster and the
prisoners fall asleep peacefully.
And Just wrote of
the gas vans to Rauff, on June 5, 1942, in a letter marked both "top
secret" and "only copy". This is a horrific masterpiece of Nazi
double-talk, referring to killing as "processing" and the victims as
"subjects" and "the load." (See Kogon, Nazi Mass Murder,
1993, pp. 228-235.)
Since December 1941, for example, 97,000 were processed using three vans,
without any faults occurring in the vehicles. ...
The normal capacity of the vans is nine to ten per square meter. The
capacity of the larger special Saurer vans is not so great. The problem is not
one of overloading but of off-road maneuverability on all terrains, which is
severely diminished in this van. It would appear that a reduction in the cargo
area is necessary. This can be achieved by shortening the compartment by about
one meter. The problem cannot be solved by merely reducing the number of
subject treated, as has been done so far. For in this case a longer running
time is required, as the empty space also needs to be filled with CO [the
poison exhaust gas]. ...
Greater protection is needed for the lighting system. The grille should
cover the lamps high enough up to make it impossible to break the bulbs. It
seems that these lamps are hardly ever turned on, so the users have suggested
that they could be done away with. Experience shows, however, that when the
back door is closed and it gets dark inside, the load pushes hard against the
door. The reason for this is that when it becomes dark inside, the load rushes
toward what little light remains. This hampers the locking of the door. It has
also been noticed that the noise provoked by the locking of the door is linked
to the fear aroused by the darkness.
Slip-ups occurred in
written correspondence regarding the gas chambers themselves, some of which,
fortunately, escaped destruction and were found after the war. A memo written
to SS man Karl Bischoff on November 27, 1942 describes the gas chamber in Krema
II not with the usual mundane name of "Leichenkeller," but rather as
the "Sonderkeller" "special cellar."
And two months
later, on January 29, 1943, Bischoff wrote a memo to Kammler, referring to that
same chamber as the "Vergasungskeller." (See Gutman, Anatomy of the
Auschwitz Death Camp, 1994, pp. 223, 227.) "Vergasungskeller" means
exactly what it sounds like: "gassing cellar," an underground gas
chamber.
Holocaust-deniers
turn to Arthur Butz, who provides a specious explanation for the
Vergasungskeller: "Vergasung," he says, cannot refer to killing
people with gas, but only to the process of converting a solid or liquid into
gas. Therefore, he says the "Vergasungskeller," must have been a
special room where the fuel for the Auschwitz ovens was converted into gas -- a
"gasification cellar."
There are three
problems with this explanation. First, "Vergasung" certainly can
refer to killing people with gas; Butz does not speak German and he should not
try to lecture about the language. Second, there is no room that could possibly
serve this function which Butz describes -- years after writing his book, he
admitted this, and helplessly suggested that there might be another building
somewhere in the camp that might house a gasification cellar. Third, the type
of oven used at Auschwitz did not require any gasification process! The ovens
burned solid fuel. (See Gutman, op. cit., pp. 184-193.)
So what does the
term "gassing cellar" refer to? Holocaust-deniers have yet to offer
any believable explanation.
An inventory, again
captured after the war, revealed fourteen showerheads and one gas-tight door
listed for the gas chamber in Krema III. Holocaust-deniers claim that room was
a morgue; they do not offer to explain what use a morgue has for showerheads
and a gas-tight door. (See a photograph of the document, or Pressac, Auschwitz:
Technique and Operation, 1989, pp. 231, 438.)
A memo from the
Auschwitz construction office, dated March 31, 1943, says Hilberg, Documents of
Destruction, 1971, pp. 207-208):
We take this occasion to refer to another order of March 6, 1943, for the
delivery of a gas door 100/192 for Leichenkeller 1 of Krema III, Bw 30a, which
is to be built in the manner and according to the same measure as the cellar
door of the opposite Krema II, with peep hole of double 8 millimeter glass
encased in rubber. This order is to be viewed as especially urgent....
Why would morgues
have urgently needed peepholes made out of a double layer of
third-of-an-inch-thick glass?
The question of
whether it can be proved that the cyanide gas was used in the Auschwitz gas
chambers has intruiged the deniers. Their much-heralded Leuchter Report, for
example, expends a great deal of effort on the question of whether traces of
cyanide residue remain there today. But we do not need to look for chemical
traces to confirm cyanide use (Gutman, op. cit., p. 229):
Letters and telegrams exchanged on February 11 and 12 [1943] between the
Zentralbauleitung and Topf mention a wooden blower for Leichenkeller 1. This
reference confirms the use of the morgue as a gas chamber: Bischoff and Prüfer
thought that the extraction of air mixed with concentrated prussic acid
[cyanide] (20 g per cu m) required a noncorroding ventilator.
Bischoff and Prüfer
turned out to be wrong, and a metal fan ended up working acceptably well. But
the fact that they thought it necessary demonstrates that cyanide was to be
routinely used in the rooms which deniers call morgues. (Cyanide is useless for
disinfecting morgues, as it does not kill bacteria.)
Other captured
documents, even if they don't refer directly to some part of the extermination
process, refer to it by implication. A captured memo to SS-Brigadeführer
Kammler reveals that the expected incineration capacity of the Auschwitz ovens
was a combined total of 4,756 corpses per day (see a photograph of the document
or Kogon, op. cit., p. 157).
Deniers often claim
that this total could not be achieved in practice (see question 45). That's not
the point. These crematoria were carefully designed, in 1942, to have
sufficient capacity to dispose of 140,000 corpses per month -- in a camp that
housed only 125,000. We can conclude that massive deaths were predicted, indeed
planned-for, as early as mid-1942. A camp designed to incinerate its full
capacity of inmates every four weeks is not merely a detention center.
Finally, apart from
the abundant testimonies, confessions, and physical evidence of the
extermination process, there is certainly no want of evidence of the Nazis'
intentions and plans.
Here are just a few
examples. Hans Frank’s diary (from Nazi Conspiracy and Aggression, 1946, Vol.
I, pp. 992, 994):
But what should be done with the Jews? Do you think they will be settled
down in the 'Ostland' [eastern territories], in [resettlement] villages? This
is what we were told in Berlin: Why all this bother? We can do nothing with
them either in the 'Ostland' nor in the 'Reichkommissariat.' So liquidate them
yourself.
Gentlemen, I must ask you to rid yourself of all feeling of pity. We must
annihilate the Jews, wherever we find them and wherever it is possible, in
order to maintain the structure of the Reich as a whole. ...
We cannot shoot or poison these 3,500,000 Jews, but we shall nevertheless
be able to take measures, which will lead, somehow, to their annihilation....
That we sentence 1,200,000 Jews to die of hunger should be noted only
marginally.
Himmler's speech at
Posen on October 4, 1943 was captured on audiotape (Trial of the Major War
Criminals, 1948, Vol. XXIX, p. 145, trans. by current author):
I refer now to the evacuation of the Jews, the extermination of the
Jewish people. This is one of those things that is easily said: "the
Jewish people are being exterminated," says every Party member,
"quite true, it's part of our plans, the elimination of the Jews,
extermination, we're doing it."
The extermination
effort was even mentioned in at least one official Nazi court verdict. In May
1943, a Munich court wrote in its decision against SS-Untersturmführer Max
Taubner that:
The accused shall not be punished because of the actions against the Jews
as such. The Jews have to be exterminated and none of the Jews that were killed
is any great loss. Although the accused should have recognized that the
extermination of the Jews was the duty of Kommandos which were set up
especially for this purpose, he should be excused for considering himself to
have the authority to take part in the extermination of Jewry himself.
And Hitler spoke
quite clearly in public on no fewer than three occasions. On January 30, 1939,
seven months before Germany invaded Poland, he spoke publicly to the Reichstag
(transcribed from Skeptic magazine, Vol. 2, No. 4, p. 50):
Today I want to be a prophet once more: if international finance Jewry
inside and outside of Europe should succeed once more in plunging nations into
another world war, the consequence will not be the Bolshevation of the earth
and thereby the victory of Jewry, but the annihilation of the Jewish race in
Europe.
By the way, this
last phrase is, in German, "die Vernichtung der jüdischen Rasse in
Europa," which German-speakers will realize is quite unambiguous.
In September, 1942:
...if Jewry should plot another world war in order to exterminate the
Aryan peoples in Europe, it would not be the Aryan people which would be
exterminated but Jewry...
On November 8, 1942:
You will recall the session of the Reichstag during which I declared: if
Jewry should imagine that it could bring about an international world war to
exterminate the European races, the result will not be the extermination of the
European races, but the extermination of Jewry in Europe. People always laughed
about me as a prophet. Of those who laughed then, countless numbers no longer
laugh today, and those who still laugh now will perhaps no longer laugh a short
time from now.
There are many other
examples of documents and testimonies that could be presented.
Keep in mind that
the IHR#&146;s answer to "what proof exists?" is
"none." It has certainly been demonstrated already that this pat
answer is totally dishonest. And this is the main point we wish to communicate:
that Holocaust-denial is dishonest.
We continue by
analyzing the remaining, more-specific, claims about what evidence supposedly
does not exist.
"No mounds of
ashes" is an internal contradiction. In an article in the journal
published by the same IHR that publishes these Q&A, the Journal's editor
reported that a Polish commission in 1946 found human ash at the Treblinka
death camp to a depth of over twenty feet. This article is available on Greg
Raven's web site.
(Apparently some
survivors claimed that the corpses were always thoroughly cremated. Because
uncremated human remains were mixed with the ash, the editor suggested that the
testimonies were false. Amazingly, he had no comment on how a twenty-foot layer
of human ashes came to be there in the first place. Perhaps he felt that to be
unworthy of mention.)
There are also piles
of ashes at Maidanek. At Auschwitz-Birkenau, ashes from cremated corpses were
dumped into the rivers and swamps surrounding the camp, and used as fertilizer
for nearby farmers' fields.
"No
crematoria" capable of disposing of millions of corpses? Absolutely false,
the crematoria were more than capable of the job, according to both the Nazis'
own internal memos and the testimony of survivors. Holocaust-deniers
deliberately confuse civilian, funeral-home crematoria with the huge industrial
ovens of the death camps. This is discussed in much detail in the replies to
questions 42 and 45.
"No piles of
clothes"? Apparently, the IHR considers piles of clothes to be "hard
evidence"! This is strange, because they do not deny the other sorts of
piles found at Nazi camps: piles of eyeglasses, piles of shoes (at Auschwitz,
Belzec, and Maidanek), piles of gold teeth, piles of burned corpses, piles of
unburned corpses, piles of artificial limbs (see Swiebocka, Auschwitz: A
History in Photographs, 1993, p. 210), piles of human hair (ibid, p. 211),
piles of ransacked luggage (ibid, p. 213), piles of shaving-brushes (ibid, p.
215), piles of combs (ibid), piles of pots and pans (ibid), and yes, even the
piles of clothes (ibid, p. 214) that the IHR claims do not exist.
Perhaps the authors
of the 66 Q&A realized that it was dangerous for them to admit that these
piles were hard evidence, because then they would also be forced to admit a
number of other things as "hard evidence." Perhaps this is why they
removed this phrase from the revised 66 Q&A.
If items were not
generally found in mass quantities, it is only because the Nazis distributed
them to the German population. A memo on this was captured, revealing that they
even redistributed women's underwear.
"No human
soap"? This is true, but misleading. Though there is some evidence that
soap was made from corpses on a very limited experimental scale, the rumored
"mass production" was never done, and no soap made from human corpses
is known to exist. However, there is sworn testimony, never refuted, from
British POWs and a German army official, stating that soap experiments were
performed, and the recipe for the soap was captured by the Allies. To state
flatly that the Nazis did not make soap from human beings is incorrect.
"No lamp shades
made of human skin?" False -- lampshades and other human-skin
"ornaments" were introduced as evidence in both trials of Ilse Koch,
and were shown to a U.S. Senate investigation committee in the late 40s. We know
they were made of human skin because they bore tattoos, and because a
microscopic forensic analysis of the items was performed. (A detailed page on
this is being prepared.)
"No
records"? This is nonsense (which may explain why this claim was removed
from the "revised" versions of the 66 Q&A). True, extermination
by gassing was always referred to with code-words, and those victims who
arrived at death camps only to be immediately gassed were not recorded in any
books. But there are slip-ups in the code-word usage that reveal the true
meanings, as already described. There are inventories and requisitions for the
Krema which reveal items anomalous with ordinary use but perfect for mass
homicidal gassing. There are deportation train records which, pieced together,
speak clearly. And so on. Several examples have been given above.
"No credible
demographic statistics"? This is the second internal contradiction -- see
question 2 and question 15. The Anglo-American committee who studied the issue
estimated the number of Jewish victims at 5.7 million. This was based on
population statistics. Here is the exact breakdown, country by country:
Germany - 195,000
Austria - 53,000
Czechoslovakia - 255,000
Denmark - 1,500
France - 140,000
Belgium - 57,000
Luxemburg - 3,000
Norway - 1,000
Holland - 120,000
Italy - 20,000
Yugoslavia - 64,000
Greece - 64,000
Bulgaria - 5,000
Romania - 530,000
Hungary - 200,000
Poland - 3,271,000
USSR - 1,050,000
Austria - 53,000
Czechoslovakia - 255,000
Denmark - 1,500
France - 140,000
Belgium - 57,000
Luxemburg - 3,000
Norway - 1,000
Holland - 120,000
Italy - 20,000
Yugoslavia - 64,000
Greece - 64,000
Bulgaria - 5,000
Romania - 530,000
Hungary - 200,000
Poland - 3,271,000
USSR - 1,050,000
Total Number Jews Killed - 5,721,500
(This estimate was
arrived at using population statistics, and not by adding the number of
casualties at each camp. These are also available -- for instance, a separate
file with the ruling of a German court regarding the number of victims in
Treblinka is available. The SS kept rather accurate records, and many of the
documents survived, reinforced by eyewitness accounts).
Some estimates are
lower, some are higher, but this is the magnitude in question. In an article in
CMU's student newspaper, the head of CMU's History Department, Peter Stearns, is
quoted as saying that newly discovered documents -- especially in the former
USSR -- indicate that the number of victims is higher than six million. Other
historians claim not much over five million. The Encyclopedia of the Holocaust
uses 5,596,000 as a minimum and 5,860,000 as a maximum (Gutman, 1990, p. 1799).
In summary:
"Revisionists"
often claim, correctly, that the burden of proof is on historians. The proof,
of course, has been a matter of public record since late 1945, and is available
in libraries around the world. The burden has been met, many, many times over.
You've just seen a brief presentation of some of the highlights of that immense
body of proof; much more is readily available.
To even argue that
the Holocaust never happened is ludicrous. To claim straight-faced that none of
this proof even exists is beyond ludicrous, and it is a clear example of
"revisionist" dishonesty.
3. Did
Simon Wiesenthal once state in writing that "there were no extermination
camps on German soil?"
Trivializing the Holocaust; Blaming the Jews
The Fate of the Jews
Conspiracies
Zyklon-B
General
34. How
could such a mass program have been kept secret from Jews who were scheduled
for extermination?
38. What
is typhus?
Cremation
Trivializing Anti-Jewish Laws
General
About "Revisionism"
++++++++++++++++++++
Revisionist Germar
Rudolf
Sent by yurki1000
3/15/2016 6:29 PM
As I understand Germar Rudolf was captured because he needed
answers.
"Germar Rudolf is a
scientist dissident who was recently torn from his young wife and baby in the
United States and extradited to his native Germany to stand trial for a
scientific investigation of Auschwitz, the best-selling Rudolf
Report. "
+++
Over My Dead Body
March 22, 2012
The following is a letter I wrote on August 27, 2006, as a response to
a question asked by Israel Shamir. I had received Shamir’s inquiry via a third
person while sitting in a German prison for my peaceful historical views. If I
remember correctly, Shamir had asked me, why I am so interested in WWII history
and what compelled me to voice my opinions in spite of the government
persecution which it triggered.
It is astounding that this my letter, which Shamir received and
published online, made its way out of the German prison in the first place.
Usually, letters from political prisoners with such highly charged, political
content get confiscated by the prison censors, but since it was written in
English, and because the German authorities are notoriously short of staff capable
of reading foreign languages, my foreign language correspondence (English,
French, Spanish) seems to have never been censored by anyone. So here we go:
_________________
I can not only understand Mr. Shamir’s disinterest in WWII as such, I
actually share it. For some reason people think that WWII is a main focus of my
intellectual interest because I got my life entangled in Holocaust studies.
The truth is that I never cared for the history of any war as such. I
do have an interest in understanding how and why wars get to be, the intrigues,
schemes, lies, and propaganda used by all sides to justify it, and of course
how this propaganda is afterwards maintained by the victorious side. People
keep sending me books on WWII history into prison, and after reading just one
of them – a study of Patton’s campaigns, which was also the first book I ever
read on battle history – I decided that this is quite enough. I didn’t touch
any of the others that were sent my way and put the general message out to put
a stop to that. I must admit that I do have a friend whose entire life centers
around WWII, as he is a book dealer with the sole focus on WWII. Although he
has thousands of titles on the topic and is quite an expert, we never talk
about WWII when we meet, and I also never looked into – or received – a book of
his collection, nor did I ever ask.
Holocaust propaganda is an ideological issue, not a historical one. I
never focused on the actual aspects of persecution of minorities, Jewish or
not, during WWII. It’s not a pleasant topic, nor is there a need to deal with
it, as there are plenty of scholars worldwide who make a profitable business
out of doing nothing else but this.
No, it’s propaganda – prewar, wartime, and postwar propaganda – I am
interested in, and how to distinguish it from reality.
I could very briefly answer to the question what makes me tick by
pointing to my respective essay I wrote back in 1995/96 and which I have added
as an appendix to my expert report, which can be read online at (www.vho.org/GB/b/trr)
in HTML format or as pdf at (www.vho.org/dl/ENG/trr.pdf)
…
That is, at age 18 (!), where my newly awakened interest in history
started: The expulsion of 12 million Germans from East Germany and Eastern
Europe. At age 18-23 I was a very patriotic German, still within the mainstream
– I thought – yet at the right edge of it. This started to fade slowly later,
for one thing due to stress during my university studies, but also because it
became boring.
I never touched upon the Holocaust topic in any of those years. The
usual claims about it seemed indubitable, undeniable to me, truth chiseled in
stone, self-evident.
This changed in 1989 by pure accident, as I was handed a book written
by Paul Rassinier, a former communist, partisan fighter against the German
occupation in France during WWII, and eventually inmate in Buchenwald and Dora
concentration camps. I probably would never have allowed any German to raise
doubts within me about the prevailing view on the Holocaust, because I would
have suspected him of bias and self-interest, but a Communist,
Partisan-fighter, former inmate? He opened my eyes and allowed doubts.
Not more, just doubts. But that was enough to trigger a chain reaction,
because I obviously had been raised in my German society to feel guilty if I
doubt the truth in this regard. I actually did feel guilty for doubting, and
that made me mad, because it contradicted everything I was taught: question
authorities, don’t take paradigms at face value, criticism is noble, and all
the other ideals of the enlightenment.
…
Now that they have destroyed my life, I’ll have no other way but to
prove that I’m right, and the fact that more and more historians change sides –
for now behind the scenes only, but that’ll change – and that these powers that
be get increasingly frantic is proof enough for me that it’s working.
The postwar and the New World Order were erected on the Holocaust, and
together with it, they’ll come down. But that’s not important, because it’ll
come down anyway, if only because they ruin the planet and drive world
economics against the wall.
For me it’s simple: I am sure I’m right, and unless one convinces me
with rational, scientific arguments that I am wrong, I am not going to give in.
If you like the comparison, I am kind of a human intellectual pit-bull terrier,
and they made the mistake to provoke the blood out of me by persecuting me.
That’s it. No negotiations any more. It’s me or them now.
My father didn’t manage to break me with stick, whip, fists or by using
me as a missile, and so they won’t break my will with violence either. It only
gets stronger with every beating.
That’s my personality: a contrarian with enormous will power,
stubbornness, if need be, when not reason is used to talk to me but brute
force. Pressure causes counter pressure. In this way I am a simple physical
principle. Here is my human right to doubt, research, scrutinize, disagree,
dispute, refute, challenge, question. The only way to take this away from me is
by killing me. Period.
And that is the strongest motivation: Anybody who punishes me for
merely exercising my human right of being a human = a creature able to doubt
and explore, will meet my utmost unbreakable resistance. I won’t allow
anybody to reduce me to a submissive slave. Nobody.
___
Israel Shamir commented my letter as follows:
“In my view, Holocaust approval
is an approval of Jewish superiority and exclusivity, while Holocaust denial is
a rejection of this exclusivity claim, and thus a duty of non-racist and/or a
Christian. Germar Rudolf is a scientist dissident who was recently torn from
his young wife and baby in the United States and extradited to his native
Germany to stand trial for a scientific investigation of Auschwitz, the
best-selling Rudolf Report. Born in 1964, he is one of the youngest
high-profile Revisionists who came out of the post-war generation – young folks
as a rule brutally brain-washed with conventional Holocaust lore. Germar, as we
know, is different.”
++++
104: An Introduction to
Historical Revisionism
In the following text you will find the questions which are most
frequently asked about Holocaust Revisionism. You will find my answers by
simply clicking on the question. I also have a leaflet for free download which summarizes Holocaust Revisionism in a
nutshell. This is the good flyer for a brief introduction and as a handout to
others. I wish you a lot of worthwhile discoveries while browsing through the
following page.
_____________
6. Why should I take Holocaust
revisionism any more seriously than the claim that the earth is flat?
If you have further questions, please do not hesitate to ask.
_________
1. What is revisionism?
The word “Revisionism” is derived from the Latin word “revidere,” which
means to view again. The revision of long held theories is entirely normal. It
occurs in the natural sciences as well as the social sciences, to which the
discipline of history belongs. Science is not a static condition. It is a
process, specifically the creating of knowledge by searching for evidence. When
ongoing research finds new evidence, or when critical researchers discover
mistakes in old explanations, it often happens that old theories have to be changed
or even abandoned.
By “Revisionism” we mean critically examining established theories and
hypotheses in order to test their validity. Scientists need to know when new
evidence modifies or contradicts old theories; indeed, one of their main
obligations is to test time-honored conceptions and attempt to refute them.
Only in an open society in which individuals are free to challenge prevailing
theories can we ascertain the validity of these theories, and be confident that
we are approaching the truth. For a fuller discussion of this, the reader
should acquaint himself with the essay by Dr. C. Nordbruch in the Neuer
Zürcher Zeitung of 12 June 1999.
_____________________
2. Why is Historical revisionism
important?
Like other scientific concepts, our historical concepts are subject to
critical consideration. This is especially true when new evidence is
discovered. We must constantly re-examine historical theories, particularly in
case:
1. We
are dealing with events which occurred in the far distant past. In this case
our problem is that we have very little evidence on which to base our theories.
2. We
are dealing with events which occurred in the recent past. In this case, our
problem is that we must contend with political influence, which derives from
these events.
When we are dealing with the distant past, even a small piece of new
evidence can profoundly change our views. As for the recent past, the truism
“the victor writes the history of the war” still holds; and victor is hardly
ever objective. Revision of victor-history is usually not possible until the
confrontation between victor and vanquished has ceased to exist; and sometimes
these confrontations last for centuries. Since historiography has negligible
monetary significance, almost all historical institutes are financed by their
respective governments. Free and independent historical institutes are
practically nonexistent. In contemporary history, in which individual
governments have huge political interests, we must be skeptical toward the
official historiography. Another truism reminds us that “he who pays the piper,
calls the tune.” These reasons explain why Historical Revisionism is important
and why the rulers of the world tend to oppose it.
... READ
THE REST
+++
Holocaust Deprogramming (It
Just Never Happened)
Posted by Joseph Pede
March 14, 2016 10:10 pm
Joseph Pede Poetry
“Care must be taken not to
give a platform for deniers… or seek to disprove the deniers’ position through
normal historical debate and rational argument.”
— ‘Guidelines for Teaching about the Holocaust’ at the Stockholm
International Forum, 2000
“One should not ask, how
this mass murder was made possible. It was technically possible, because it
happened. This has to be the obligatory starting-point for any historical
research regarding this topic. We would just like to remind you: There is no debate
regarding the existence of the gas chambers, and there can never be one.”
— “34 reputable historians” published in the prominent French daily Le
Monde on February 21, 1979
Free yourself from a lifetime of
Holo-brainwashing about “Six Million” Jews “gassed” in “Gas Chambers Disguised
as Shower Rooms” —
An Introduction to Holocaust Revisionism
“The Holocaust is a deeply
anchored belief even in people who know very little about it. We can see that
not only does disbelief in the Holocaust myth threaten modern Jewish identity
as shaped by political Zionism, but for others it brings into question the
credibility of those in authority who told everyone it was true: the state, the
churches, the schools, and media of every kind. These sources are the same ones
people trust and depend on every day for information. If these trusted
authorities are wrong about the Holocaust, what else are they wrong about? What
other dishonesties are they promoting?”
– John Weir, The
Holocaust as Myth: Betraying the Public Trust
VIDEOS & DOCUMENTARIES
The ‘Gas Chambers’ not demonstrated at the Nuremberg Tribunal This is a bi-lingual video from Vincent
Reynouard. The narration is in French, with English sub-titles. At Nuremberg,
the existence of the “gas chambers” was never demonstrated.
In seventy years, no forensic study proving the … READ THE REST of the pseudo-science drivel if you can endure it
+++
HOLOCAUST Handbook Series,
Vol. 2
The Rudolf Report
Expert Report on Chemical and
Technical Aspects
of the ‘Gas Chambers’ of
Auschwitz
This Expert
Report--online version-- is dedicated to Ernst Zündel who, at the time when
this document was released, was held in jail as a result of his dissenting
historical views.
+++
+++
+++
Still. I'm no specialist.
Simply I try be an open-minded person.
Blessings
Jyrki
______________________
Holocaust Denial is Antisemitic
John R. Houk
© March 18, 2016
_________________
Holocaust Denial: How to
Refute Holocaust Denial
_________________
Revisionist Germar Rudolf
Edited by John R. Houk
Links sent by Yurki1000
No comments:
Post a Comment