The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewRon Unz Archive
American Pravda: Holocaust Denial
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
EuropeanDenial

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments

Reason Magazine and Holocaust Denial

A few years ago I somehow heard about a ferocious online dispute involving a left-leaning journalist named Mark Ames and the editors of Reason magazine, the glossy flagship publication of America’s burgeoning libertarian movement. Although I was deep in my difficult programming work, curiosity got the better of me, so I decided to take a look.

During the Immigration Wars of the 1990s, I’d become quite friendly with the Reason people, frequently visiting their offices, especially during my “English” campaign of 1998, when I’d located my own political headquarters in the same small Westside LA office building they used. As my content-archiving software project began absorbing more and more of my time during the early 2000s, I’d gradually lost touch with them, but even so, the 40-odd years of their magazine archives had become the first publication I’d incorporated into my system, and I was now pleased to discover that both sides in the ongoing feud had put my system to good use in exploring those old Reason issues.

Apparently, the libertarians grouped around Reason had successfully been making political inroads into Silicon Valley’s enormously wealthy technology industry, and had now organized a major conference in San Francisco to gather together their supporters. Their left-leaning rivals decided to nip that project in the bud by highlighting some of the more unsavory ideological positions that mainstream libertarian leaders had once regularly espoused. Perhaps Ron Paul and other libertarians might oppose overseas wars and drug laws, and support cutting taxes and regulations, but they and their Republican Party allies were unspeakably vile on all sorts of other issues, and all “good thinkers” should therefore stay very far away.

The debate began in rather mundane fashion with an article by Ames entitled “Homophobia, Racism, and the Kochs” denouncing Reason for sharing a platform with a high-ranking Republican Congresswoman of Christian conservative views, as well as the magazine’s reliance upon Koch funding and its alleged support for Apartheid South Africa during the 1970s and 1980s. The response by the Reason editor seemed quite persuasive, and he rightfully dismissed the guilt-by-association attacks. He also outlined the gross errors and omissions in the charges regarding South Africa, and ridiculed Ames as a notoriously error-prone “conspiracy theorist.” Surely few outsiders would have paid any attention to such a typical exchange of mudslinging between rival ideological camps.

But then things took a very different turn, and a week later Ames returned with a 5,000 word article bearing a title sure to grab attention: “Holocaust Denial.” He claimed that in 1976 Reason had published an entire special issue devoted to that explosive topic.

Surely everyone on the Internet has encountered numerous instances of Holocaust Denial over the years, but for a respectable magazine to have allotted a full issue to promoting that doctrine was something else entirely. For decades, Hollywood has sanctified the Holocaust, and in our deeply secular society accusations of Holocaust Denial are a bit like shouting “Witch!” in Old Salem or leveling accusations of Trotskyism in the Court of the Red Czar. Progressive Sam Seder’s Majority Report radio show devoted a full half-hour segment to the charges against Reason, and Googling “Reason Magazine”+”Holocaust Denial” today yields thousands of hits. This substantial explosion of Internet controversy was what caught my own attention at the time.

My initial reaction was one of puzzlement. Reason had been the first periodical I had digitized in my system a dozen years earlier, and surely I would have noticed an entire issue promoting Holocaust Denial. However, I soon discovered that February 1976 had been excluded from the supposedly complete set the magazine had shipped me for processing, an omission that itself raises serious suspicions. But Ames had somehow located a copy in a research library and produced a full PDF, which he conveniently placed on the Internet to support his accusations.

 

Carefully reading his article and then glancing through the contents, I decided that his accusation was technically false but substantially true. Apparently the actual theme of the issue was “Historical Revisionism” and except for a couple of paragraphs buried here and there among the 76 pages, Holocaust Denial never came up, so characterizing it as a Holocaust Denial issue was obviously a grotesque exaggeration. But on the other hand, although few of the authors were familiar to me, it seemed undeniably true that they were numbered among America’s more prominent Holocaust Deniers, and most of them were deeply associated with organizations situated in that same camp. Furthermore, there were strong indications that their positions on that topic must certainly have been known to the Reason editors who commissioned their pieces.

The clearest case comes when Ames quoted the explicit statements of Dr. Gary North, a prominent libertarian thinker who had served as one of Ron Paul’s earliest Congressional aides and later became his longtime partner in politics and business:

Probably the most far-out materials on World War II revisionism have been the seemingly endless scholarly studies of the supposed execution of 6 million Jews by Hitler. The anonymous author [Hoggan] of ‘The Myth of the Six Million’ has presented a solid case against the Establishment’s favorite horror story—the supposed moral justification for our entry into the war…The untranslated books by the former Buchenwald inmate Prof. Paul Rassinier, have seriously challenged the story…A recent and very inexpensive book in magazine form, Did Six Million Really Die?, appeared in 1973, written by Richard Harwood.

A later issue carried a thousand word letter by Prof. Adam Reed of Rockefeller University, a past Reason contributor, strongly affirming the mainstream Holocaust narrative by quoting from standard works, and taking Dr. North to task for his citation of Holocaust Denial works of doubtful quality. But North firmly stood his ground:

“The second point, that about 6 million Jews really did die in the concentration camps, is one that will be open until the records of the period become fully available. I am not convinced yet, one way or the other. I am happy to have Dr. Reed’s interpretation of the data, but until the publishing companies and academic guild encourage the re-examination of the data, I shall continue to recommend that those interested in revisionist questions read The Myth of the Six Million and Did Six Million Really Die? as reasonable (though not necessarily irrefutable) pieces of historical revisionism. If a person can’t make up his mind, he should do more reading.”

Dr. James J. Martin was the lead contributor to the February Revisionism issue, and the preceding January issue had featured an extended Q&A by the editors, with one of the queries directly addressing the controversial topic:

REASON: Dr. Martin, do you believe (1) that the specific charge against the Nazis of having a mass extermination program of several million Jews is true, and (2) that the Allied atrocities were as great or greater than those of the Germans, from your study of the question?

MARTIN: Well, I never made a head count of all who lost their lives in the War-we’ve seen a wide variety of statistical materials, some of which have been pulled out of thin air. As a consequence, it’s hard to make any kind of estimate of this sort, whether ten more were killed on the one side or the other is not a particularly entrancing subject as far as I’m concerned. Whether allegations can be proven it remains to be seen. I don’t believe that the evidence of a planned extermination of the entire Jewish population of Europe is holding up. I have been influenced over the years by the works of Paul Rassinier, and he still has to be reckoned with. His works have been ignored for a long time, and sooner or later somebody’s going to have to do a decent job of coping with what he has presented. I think Rassinier’s general case is sound at the moment and I haven’t seen any strong evidence to upset his allegations or his assertions that there was no planned program for the extermination of European Jews. His other main case is that there were no gas chamber extermination programs. The fact that a great many people lost their lives is incontrovertible—that the German concentration camps weren’t health centers is well known-but they appear to have been far smaller and much less lethal than the Russian ones.

Another major contributor to the issue was Dr. Austin J. App, and just three years earlier he had published a short book bearing the lurid title The Six Million Swindle: Blackmailing the German People for Hard Marks with Fabricated Corpses.

In a follow-up column by Ames’ own editor, the stunned reactions of various journalists are listed, with one of them Tweeting out “I had no idea that Reason Magazine was once a haven for Holocaust Revisionism. Holy Moly.” Despite the angry obfuscations of present-day Reason staffers, this description seems quite correct.

Indeed, there seems considerable circumstantial evidence that around that time “Holocaust Skepticism” extended rather broadly within the entire nascent libertarian movement. Aside from the sharp critique of the aforementioned Prof. Reed, the overwhelming majority of the reader responses seemed totally favorable, with Samuel Konkin III, editor of New Libertarian Weekly and various similar publications, suggesting that the February issue was one of the best they had ever published. David Nolan, founder of America’s Libertarian Party, also praised the issue as “outstanding.”

The two editors of the issue in question even today remain quite prominent figures at Reason and within American libertarianism, while the masthead then carried names such as David Brudnoy and Alan Reynolds, who both later became influential figures in conservative and libertarian politics. There seems no evidence of any resignations or angry recriminations following the issue’s publication, which seems to have been digested with total equanimity, apparently arousing less rancor than might have been generated by a dispute over monetary policy.

I’d never paid much attention to Holocaust discussions over the years, but the name of Murray Rothbard on the 1976 Reason masthead prompted a memory. Rothbard is widely regarded as the founder of modern libertarianism, and I recalled in the 1990s reading somewhere that he had often ridiculed the Holocaust as being total nonsense, which had stuck in my mind as a typical example of libertarian eccentricity. A quick Google search seemed to confirm my recollection that Rothbard was an avowed Holocaust Denier.

 

Although the whole controversy regarding Reason’s editorial line of the mid-1970s soon died down, it remained a nagging puzzle in the back of my mind. I’d always been quite skeptical of libertarian ideology, but my Reason friends from the 1990s had certainly seemed like smart and rational people to me, hardly raving lunatics of any sort, and two of the ones I’d known best had been the co-editors of the controversial issue in question.

I could easily understand how zealous libertarian ideologues might be swept past the point of rationality on certain matters—perhaps arguing that the police and the army should be abolished as statist institutions—but the factual question of what had or had not happened to the Jews of Europe during World War II hardly fell into that sort of category. Furthermore, libertarianism had always attracted a very large Jewish contingent, especially in its upper ranks, and one of the issue editors came from that background, as did Rothbard and numerous others featured on the masthead. While deranged anti-Semitism is not impossible among Jews, I would think that it is somewhat less likely. Clearly something very odd must have been going on.

I was then too busy with my work to focus on the matter, but some months later I had more time, and began a detailed investigation. My first step was to carefully read the Reason articles produced by those controversial writers previously unknown to me. Although those pieces were not Holocaust-related, I thought they might give me a sense of their thinking.

To my surprise, the historiography seemed outstandingly good, and almost certainly accurate based on what I had picked up over the years from perfectly mainstream sources. Dr. Martin’s long article on the notorious framing of “Tokyo Rose” was probably the best and most comprehensive treatment I had ever encountered on that topic, and Dr. App’s analysis of the tragedy of the Sudeten-Germans was equally strong, raising several points I had previously not known. Percy Greaves effectively summarized many of the very suspicious aspects of the Pearl Harbor attack, and although his case for the prosecution against FDR was certainly not airtight, it accorded with the views presented by numerous scholars in other books on the subject. Moreover, his position was seconded by a young Bruce Bartlett, later a prominent Reagan and Bush official, and still later a strong Republican opponent of George W. Bush, routinely feted by the New York Times. Most of the other writings also seemed of very high quality, including Dr. North’s summary of World War II Revisionism. In general, the academic scholarship of those articles greatly surpassed anything found in opinion magazines of more recent decades, Reason itself included. Those so interested can click on the above links, read the articles in question, and decide for themselves.

Back then, Reason was a young and struggling magazine, with a shoestring staff and budget. Publishing articles of such obvious quality was surely a remarkable achievement for which the editors could feel justifiably proud, and the overwhelmingly positive letters they received seemed absolutely warranted. Meanwhile, the nasty attacks by Ames appeared to be those of a mere political hack who may not have even bothered actually reading the articles whose authors he vilified.

As a further sign of Ames’ dishonesty, he flung the epithet “Nazi” some two dozen times in his hack-job, along with numerous uses of “anti-Semitic” as well, and Greaves was certainly the subject of many of those slurs. But although Greaves and Bartlett wrote back-to-back articles on exactly the same Pearl Harbor topic, and according to Wikipedia, the former was the academic advisor to the latter on that subject, Bartlett’s name appears nowhere in Ames’s hit-piece, presumably because denouncing a prominent policy expert much beloved by the New York Times as an “anti-Semitic Neo-Nazi” might prove self-defeating. Even leaving that aside, accusing the Jewish libertarians running Reason of being Nazi propagandists must surely be the sort of charge that would strain the credulity of even the most gullible.

Deborah Lipstadt and Holocaust Denial

With Ames’ credibility totally shredded, I decided to carefully reread his article again, looking for what clues I could find to the whole bizarre situation. Academic scholars who publish very good history on certain subjects might still have totally irrational views on others, but normally one would assume otherwise.

It appeared that much of Ames’ understanding of the issue had come from a certain Deborah Lipstadt, whom he characterized as a great Holocaust expert. Her name was very vaguely familiar to me as some sort of academic activist, who years before had won a major legal victory over a rightwing British historian named David Irving, and Irving himself received further denunciations in the Ames article.

However, one name did stick out. Apparently based on Lipstadt’s information, Ames described Harry Elmer Barnes as “the godfather of American Holocaust denial literature” and Martin’s “Holocaust denial guru.”

A dozen years earlier, the name “Barnes” would have meant almost nothing to me. But as I produced my content-archiving system and digitized so many of America’s most influential publications of the last 150 years, I had soon discovered that many of our most illustrious public intellectuals—Left, Right, and Center—had been suddenly purged and “disappeared” around 1940 because of their stalwart opposition to FDR’s extremely aggressive foreign policy, and Barnes, an eminent historian and sociologist, had been among the most prominent of those. He had been one of the earliest editors at Foreign Affairs and for many years afterward his important articles had graced the pages of The New Republic and The Nation, while even after his fall, he had edited Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace, an important 1953 collection of essays by himself and other once-prominent figures. But to have a figure of such intellectual stature accused of being a Holocaust Denier, let alone the “godfather” of the entire movement, seemed rather bizarre to me.

ORDER IT NOW

Since Ames was merely an ignorant political hack transmitting the opinions of others, I moved on Lipstadt, his key source. Anyone who has spent much time on the comment-threads of relatively unfiltered websites has certainly encountered the controversial topic of Holocaust Denial, but I now decided to try to investigate the issue in much more serious fashion. A few clicks on the Amazon.com website, and her 1993 book Denying the Holocaust arrived in my mailbox a couple of days later, providing me an entrance into the mysterious world.

Reading the book was certainly a tremendous revelation to me. Lipstadt is a professor of Holocaust Studies with an appointment in Emory University’s Department of Theology, and once I read the opening paragraph of her first chapter, I decided that her academic specialty might certainly be described as “Holocaust Theology.”

The producer was incredulous. She found it hard to believe that I was turning down an opportunity to appear on her nationally televised show. “But you are writing a book on this topic. It will be great publicity.” I explained repeatedly that I would not participate in a debate with a Holocaust denier. The existence of the Holocaust was not a matter of debate. I would analyze and illustrate who they were and what they tried to do, but I would not appear with them…Unwilling to accept my no as final, she vigorously condemned Holocaust denial and all it represented. Then, in one last attempt to get me to change my mind, she asked me a question: “I certainly don’t agree with them, but don’t you think our viewers should hear the other side?”

Lipstadt’s absolute horror at having someone actually dispute the tenets of her academic doctrine could not have been more blatant. Surely no zealous theologian of the European Dark Ages would have reacted any differently.

The second chapter of her book supported that impression. Since many of the individuals she castigates as Holocaust Deniers also supported the Revisionist perspective of the underlying causes of the First and Second World Wars, she harshly attacked those schools, but in rather strange fashion. In recent years, blogger Steve Sailer and others have ridiculed what they describe as the “point-and-sputter” style of debate, in which a “politically-incorrect” narrative is merely described and then automatically treated as self-evidently false without any accompanying need for actual refutation. This seemed to be the approach that Lipstadt took throughout her rather short book.

For example, she provided a very long list of leading academic scholars, prominent political figures, and influential journalists who had championed Revisionist history, noted that their views disagree with the more mainstream perspective she had presumably imbibed from her History 101 textbooks, and thereby regarded them as fully debunked. Certainly a Christian preacher attempting to refute the evolutionary theories of Harvard’s E.O. Wilson by quoting a passage of Bible verse might take much the same approach. But few evangelical activists would be so foolish as to provide a very long list of eminent scientists who all took the same Darwinist position and then attempt to sweep them aside by citing a single verse from Genesis. Lipstadt seems to approach history much like a Bible-thumper, but a particularly dim-witted one. Moreover, many of the authors she attacked had already become familiar to me after a decade of my content-archiving work, and I had found their numerous books quite scholarly and persuasive.

Barnes, in particular, figured quite prominently in Lipstadt’s chapter and throughout her book. The index listed his name on more than two dozen pages, and he is repeatedly described as the “godfather” of Holocaust Denial, and its seminal figure. Given such heavy coverage, I eagerly examined all those references and the accompanying footnotes to uncover the shocking statements he must have made during his very long scholarly career.

I was quite disappointed. There is not a single reference I could find to his supposed Holocaust Denial views until just the year before his death at age 79, and even that item is hardly what I had been led to believe. In a 9,300 word article on Revisionism for a libertarian publication, he ridicules a leading Holocaust source for claiming that Hitler had killed 25 million Jews, noting that total was nearly twice their entire worldwide population at the time. In addition, Barnes several times applied the word “allegedly” to the stories of the Nazi extermination scheme, an sacrilegious attitude that appears to have horrified a theologian such as Lipstadt. Finally, in a short, posthumously published review of a book by French scholar Paul Rassiner, Barnes found his estimate of just 1 million to 1.5 million Jewish deaths quite convincing, but his tone suggested that he had never previously investigated the matter himself.

So although that last item technically validated Lipstadt’s accusation that Barnes was a Holocaust Denier, her evidence-free claims that he was the founder and leader of the field hardly enhances her scholarly credibility. Meanwhile, all the many tens of thousands of words I have read by Barnes has suggested that he was a careful and dispassionate historian.

A notorious incident that occurred soon after the Bolshevik Revolution came to my mind. Eminent philologist Timofei Florinsky, one of Russia’s most internationally renowned academic scholars, was hauled before a revolutionary tribunal for a public interrogation about his ideas, and one of the judges, a drunken Jewish former prostitute, found his answers so irritating that she drew her revolver and shot him dead right there and then. Given Lipstadt’s obvious emotional state, I have a strong suspicion that she might have wished she could deal in a similar fashion with Barnes and the numerous other scholars she denounced. Among other things, she noted with horror that more than two decades after his 1940 purge from public life, Barnes’ books were still required reading at both Harvard and Columbia.

 

All of us reasonably extrapolate what we already know or can easily check against what is more difficult to verify, and the remaining chapters of Lipstadt’s book left me very doubtful about the reliability of her work, all of which was written in a similar near-hysterical style. Since she had already been vaguely known to me from her well-publicized legal battle against historian David Irving more than a dozen years earlier, I was hardly surprised to discover that many pages were devoted to vilifying and insulting him in much the same manner as Barnes, so I decided to investigate that case.

I was only slightly surprised to discover that Irving had been one of the world’s most successful World War II historians, whose remarkable documentary findings had completely upended our knowledge of that conflict and its origins, with his books selling in the many millions. His entire approach to controversial historical issues was to rely as much as possible upon hard documentary evidence, and his total inability to locate any such documents relating to the Holocaust drove Lipstadt and her fellow ethnic-activists into a frenzy of outrage, so after many years of effort they finally managed to wreck his career. Out of curiosity, I read a couple of his shorter books, which seemed absolutely outstanding historiography, written in a very measured tone, quite different from that of Lipstadt, whose own 2005 account of her legal triumph over Irving, History on Trial, merely confirmed my opinion of her incompetence.

ORDER IT NOW

Lipstadt’s first book Beyond Belief, published in 1986, tells an interesting story as well, with her descriptive subtitle being “The American Press and the Coming of the Holocaust, 1933-1945.” Much of the volume consists of press clippings from the American print media of that era interspersed with her running rather hysterical commentary, but providing little analysis or judgment. Some of the journalists reported horrifying conditions for Jews in pre-war Germany while others claim that such stories were wildly exaggerated, and Lipstadt automatically praised the former and denounced the latter without providing any serious explanation.

Lenni Brenner’s remarkable book Zionism in the Age of the Dictators had been published three years earlier. Although I only discovered it very recently, surely any half-competent specialist in her own topic would have noticed it, yet Lipstadt provided no hint of its existence. Perhaps the reality of the important Nazi-Zionist economic partnership of the 1930s, with Nazi officials traveling to Palestine as honored Zionist guests and leading Nazi newspapers praising the Zionist enterprise might have complicated her simple story of fanatic German Jew-hatred under Hitler steadily rising towards an exterminationist pitch. Her faculty appointment in a Department of Theology seems very apt.

Lipstadt’s wartime coverage is just as bad, perhaps worse. She catalogs perhaps a couple of hundred print news reports, each describing the massacre of hundreds of thousands or even millions of Jews by the Nazis. But she expresses her outrage that so many of these reports were buried deep within the inside pages of newspapers, a placement suggesting that they were regarded as hysterical wartime atrocity propaganda and probably fictional, with the editors sometimes explicitly stating that opinion. Indeed, among these under-emphasized stories was the claim that the Germans had recently killed 1.5 million Jews by individually injecting each one of them in the heart with a lethal drug. And although I don’t see any mention of it, around that same time America’s top Jewish leader Rabbi Stephen Wise was peddling the absurd report that the Nazis had slaughtered millions of Jews, turning their skins into lampshades and rendering their bodies into soap. Obviously, separating truth from falsehood during a blizzard of wartime propaganda is not nearly as easy as Lipstadt seems to assume.

Ordinary Americans were apparently even more skeptical than newspaper editors. According to Lipstadt:

Writing in the Sunday New York Times Magazine, [Arthur] Koestler cited public opinion polls in the United States in which nine of ten average Americans dismissed the accusations against the Nazis as propaganda lies and flatly stated that they did not believe a word of them.

Lipstadt convincingly demonstrates that very few Americans seem to have believed in the reality of the Holocaust during the Second World War itself, despite considerable efforts by agitated Jewish activists to persuade them. Over the years, I have seen mention of numerous other books making this same basic point, and therefore harshly condemning the American political leaders of the time for having failed “to save the Jews.”

Explicit and Implicit Holocaust Denial After World War II

Yet as I began further investigating the history of Holocaust Denial in the wake of the Reason contretemps, I was very surprised to discover that this same pattern of widespread disbelief in the Holocaust seems to have continued unabated after the end of the war and throughout the 1950s, being especially strong among high-ranking American military figures, especially top generals and individuals with an Intelligence background, who seemingly would have had the best knowledge of the true events.

ORDER IT NOW

Some years ago, I came across a totally obscure 1951 book entitled Iron Curtain Over America by John Beaty, a well-regarded university professor. Beaty had spent his wartime years in Military Intelligence, being tasked with preparing the daily briefing reports distributed to all top American officials summarizing available intelligence information acquired during the previous 24 hours, which was obviously a position of considerable responsibility.

As a zealous anti-Communist, he regarded much of America’s Jewish population as deeply implicated in subversive activity, therefore constituting a serious threat to traditional American freedoms. In particular, the growing Jewish stranglehold over publishing and the media was making it increasingly difficult for discordant views to reach the American people, with this regime of censorship constituting the “Iron Curtain” described in his title. He blamed Jewish interests for the totally unnecessary war with Hitler’s Germany, which had long sought good relations with America, but instead had suffered total destruction for its strong opposition to Europe’s Jewish-backed Communist menace.

Beaty also sharply denounced American support for the new state of Israel, which was potentially costing us the goodwill of so many millions of Muslims and Arabs. And as a very minor aside, he also criticized the Israelis for continuing to claim that Hitler had killed six million Jews, a highly implausible accusation that had no apparent basis in reality and seemed to be just a fraud concocted by Jews and Communists, aimed at poisoning our relations with postwar Germany and extracting money for the Jewish State from the long-suffering German people.

He was scathing toward the Nuremberg Trials, which he described as a “major indelible blot” upon America and “a travesty of justice.” According to him, the proceedings were dominated by vengeful German Jews, many of whom engaged in falsification of testimony or even had criminal backgrounds. As a result, this “foul fiasco” merely taught Germans that “our government had no sense of justice.” Sen. Robert Taft, the Republican leader of the immediate postwar era took a very similar position, which later won him the praise of John F. Kennedy in Profiles in Courage. The fact that the chief Soviet prosecutor at Nuremberg had played the same role during the notorious Stalinist show trials of the late 1930s, during which numerous Old Bolsheviks confessed to all sorts of absurd and ridiculous things, hardly enhanced the credibility of the proceedings to many outside observers.

Then as now, a book taking such controversial positions stood little chance of finding a mainstream New York publisher, but it was soon released by a small Dallas firm, and then became enormously successful, going through some seventeen printings over the next few years. According to Scott McConnell, founding editor of The American Conservative, Beaty’s book became the second most popular conservative text of the 1950s, ranking only behind Russell Kirk’s iconic classic, The Conservative Mind.

Moreover, although Jewish groups including the ADL harshly condemned the book, especially in their private lobbying, those efforts provoked a backlash, and numerous top American generals, both serving and retired, wholeheartedly endorsed Beaty’s work, denouncing the ADL efforts at censorship and urging all Americans to read the volume. Although Beaty’s quite explicit Holocaust Denial might shock tender modern sensibilities, at the time it seems to have caused barely a ripple of concern and was almost totally ignored even by the vocal Jewish critics of the work.

ORDER IT NOW

Much of this very interesting story is told by Joseph Bendersky, an expert in Holocaust Studies, who devoted ten years of archival research to his 2000 book The “Jewish Threat.” His work chronicles the extremely widespread anti-Semitism found within the U.S. Army and Military Intelligence throughout the first half of the twentieth century, with Jews being widely regarded as posing a serious security risk. The book runs well over 500 pages, but when I consulted the index I found no mention of the Rosenbergs nor Harry Dexter White nor any of the other very numerous Jewish spies revealed by the Venona Decrypts, and the term “Venona” itself is also missing from the index. Reports of the overwhelmingly Jewish leadership of the Russian Bolsheviks are mostly treated as bigotry and paranoia, as are descriptions of the similar ethnic skew of America’s own Communist Party, let alone the heavy financial support of the Bolsheviks by Jewish international bankers. At one point, he dismisses the link between Jews and Communism in Germany by noting that “less than half” of the Communist Party leadership was Jewish; but since fewer than one in a hundred Germans came from that ethnic background, Jews were obviously over-represented among Communist leaders by as much as 5,000%. This seems to typify the sort of dishonesty and innumeracy I have regularly encountered among Jewish Holocaust experts.

Meanwhile, with the copyright having long lapsed, I’m pleased to add Beaty’s work to my Controversial HTML Books selection, so individuals interested can read it and decide for themselves:

 

Beaty’s very brief 1951 discussion has been the earliest instance of explicit Holocaust Denial I have managed to locate, but the immediate postwar years seem absolutely rife with what might be described as “implicit Holocaust Denial,” especially within the highest political circles.

Over the years, Holocaust scholars and activists have very rightfully emphasized the absolutely unprecedented nature of the historical events they have studied. They describe how some six million innocent Jewish civilians were deliberately exterminated, mostly in gas chambers, by one of Europe’s most highly cultured nations, and emphasize that monstrous project was often accorded greater priority than Germany’s own wartime military needs during the country’s desperate struggle for survival. Furthermore, the Germans also undertook enormous efforts to totally eliminate all possible traces of their horrifying deed, with huge resources expended to cremate all those millions of bodies and scatter the ashes. This same disappearance technique was even sometimes applied to the contents of their mass graves, which were dug up long after initial burial, so that the rotting corpses could then be totally incinerated and all evidence eliminated. And although Germans are notorious for their extreme bureaucratic precision, this immense wartime project was apparently implemented without benefit of a single written document, or at least no such document has ever been located.

Lipstadt entitled her first book “Beyond Belief,” and I think that all of us can agree that the historical event she and so many others in academia and Hollywood have made the centerpiece of their lives and careers is certainly one of the most very remarkable occurrences in all of human history. Indeed, perhaps only a Martian Invasion would have been more worthy of historical study, but Orson Welles’s famous War of the Worlds radio-play which terrified so many millions of Americans in 1938 turned out to be a hoax rather than real.

The six million Jews who died in the Holocaust certainly constituted a very substantial fraction of all the wartime casualties in the European Theater, outnumbering by a factor of 100 all the British who died during the Blitz, and being dozens of times more numerous than all the Americans who fell there in battle. Furthermore, the sheer monstrosity of the crime against innocent civilians would surely have provided the best possible justification for the Allied war effort. Yet for many, many years after the war, a very strange sort of amnesia seems to have gripped most of the leading political protagonists in that regard.

Robert Faurisson, a French academic who became a prominent Holocaust Denier in the 1970s, once made an extremely interesting observation regarding the memoirs of Eisenhower, Churchill, and De Gaulle:

Three of the best known works on the Second World War are General Eisenhower’s Crusade in Europe (New York: Doubleday [Country Life Press], 1948), Winston Churchill’s The Second World War (London: Cassell, 6 vols., 1948-1954), and the Mémoires de guerre of General de Gaulle (Paris: Plon, 3 vols., 1954-1959). In these three works not the least mention of Nazi gas chambers is to be found.

Eisenhower’s Crusade in Europe is a book of 559 pages; the six volumes of Churchill’s Second World War total 4,448 pages; and de Gaulle’s three-volume Mémoires de guerre is 2,054 pages. In this mass of writing, which altogether totals 7,061 pages (not including the introductory parts), published from 1948 to 1959, one will find no mention either of Nazi “gas chambers,” a “genocide” of the Jews, or of “six million” Jewish victims of the war.

Given that the Holocaust would reasonably rank as the single most remarkable episode of the Second World War, such striking omissions must almost force us to place Eisenhower, Churchill, and De Gaulle among the ranks of “implicit Holocaust Deniers.”

 

ORDER IT NOW

Many others seem to fall into that same category. In 1981, Lucy S. Dawidowicz, a leading Holocaust scholar, published a short book entitled The Holocaust and the Historians, in which she denounced so many prominent historians for having so totally ignored the reality of the Holocaust for many years following World War II. Indeed, discussion of that topic was almost entirely confined to the Jewish Studies programs which Jewish ethnic activists had newly established at numerous universities throughout the country. Although Lipstadt’s poor scholarly habits and hysterical style hardly impressed me, she appears to have been among the most successful academics who began a career in those ethnic studies departments, which suggests that their average quality was far below her own.

Meanwhile, Dawidowicz emphasizes that mainstream histories often entirely omitted the Holocaust from their presentations:

But it is plain from the most cursory review of textbooks and scholarly works by English and American historians that the awesome events of the Holocaust have not been given their historic due. For over two decades some secondary school and college texts never mentioned the subject at all, while others treated it so summarily or vaguely as to fail to convey sufficient information about the events themselves or their historical significance.

With regard to serious scholarship, she notes that when Friedrich Meinecke, universally acknowledged as Germany’s most eminent historian, published The German Catastrophe in 1946, he harshly denounced Hitler as the leader of “a band of criminals” but made absolutely no mention of the Holocaust, which surely would have represented the height of such criminality. Major British accounts of Hitler and World War II by leading historians such as A.J.P. Taylor, H.R. Trevor-Roper, and Alan Bullock were almost as silent. A similar situation occurred in America as late as 1972 when the massive 1,237 page Columbia History of the World, having a Jewish co-editor, devoted a full chapter to World War II but confined its discussion of the Holocaust to just two short and somewhat ambiguous sentences. One almost gets a sense that many of these experienced professional historians treated discussion of the Holocaust as a considerable embarrassment, a subject that they sought to avoid or at least completely minimize.

Dawidowicz even castigates Slaughterhouse-Five, the 1969 fictional masterpiece by Kurt Vonnegut, for its bald assertion that the firebombing of Dresden was “the greatest massacre in European history,” a claim that seems to reduce the Holocaust to non-existence.

I myself had noticed something similar just a couple of years before Dawidowicz’s book appeared. The English translation of German journalist Joachim Fest’s widely praised Hitler had been published in 1974 and I had read it a few years later, finding it just as excellent as the critics had indicated. But I remember being a little puzzled that the 800 page book contained no more than a couple of pages discussing the Nazi death camps and the word “Jews” never even appeared in the index.

The vast majority of Hitler’s Jewish victims came from Russia and the Eastern European nations included in the Soviet Bloc. That was also the location of all the extermination camps that are the central focus of Holocaust scholars, and therefore the Soviets were the source of most of the key evidence used at the Nuremberg Trials. Yet Dawidowicz notes that after Stalin grew increasingly suspicious of Jews and Israel a few years after the end of the war, virtually all mention of the Holocaust and German wartime atrocities against Jews vanished from the Soviet media and history books. A similar process occurred in the Warsaw Pact satellites, even while the top Communist Party leadership of many of those countries often remained very heavily Jewish for some years. Indeed, I recall reading quite a number of newspaper articles mentioning that after the Berlin Wall fell and the sundered halves of Europe were finally reunited, most Eastern Europeans had never even heard of the Holocaust.

These days, my morning newspapers seem to carry Holocaust-related stories with astonishing frequency, and probably no event of the twentieth century looms so large in our public consciousness. According to public survey data, even as far back as 1995, some 97% of Americans knew of the Holocaust, far more than were aware of the Pearl Harbor attack or America’s use of the atomic bombs against Japan, while less than half our citizenry were aware that the Soviet Union had been our wartime ally. But I’d suspect that anyone who drew his knowledge from the mainstream newspapers and history books during the first couple of decades after the end of the Second World War might never have even been aware that any Holocaust had actually occurred.

ORDER IT NOW

In 1999 Peter Novick published a book on this general theme entitled The Holocaust in American Life, citing that survey, and his introduction began by noting the very strange pattern the Holocaust exhibited in its cultural influence, which seems quite unique among all major historical events. In the case of almost all other searing historical occurrences such as the massive bloodshed of the Somme or the bitter Vietnam War, their greatest impact upon popular consciousness and media came soon afterward, with the major books and films often appearing within the first five or ten years when memories were fresh, and the influence peaking within a couple of decades, after which they were gradually forgotten.

Yet in the case of the Holocaust, this pattern was completely reversed. Hardly anyone discussed it for the first twenty years after the end of the World War II, while it gradually moved to the center of American life in the 1970s, just as wartime memories were fading and many of the most prominent and knowledgeable figures from that era had departed the scene. Novick cites numerous studies and surveys demonstrating that this lack of interest and visibility certainly included the Jewish community itself, which had seemingly suffered so greatly under those events, yet apparently had almost completely forgotten about them during the 1950s and much of the 1960s.

I can certainly confirm that impression from my personal experience. Prior to the mid- or late-1970s, I had had only the vaguest impression that virtually all the Jews and Gypsies of Europe had been exterminated during the Second World War, and although the term “Holocaust” was in widespread use, it invariably referred to a “Nuclear Holocaust,” a term long-since supplanted and scarcely used today. Then, after the Berlin Wall fell, I was quite surprised to discover that Eastern Europe was still filled with vast numbers of unexterminated Gypsies, who quickly flooded into the West and provoked all sorts of political controversies.

The Rediscovery of the Holocaust

The late scholar Raul Hilberg is universally acknowledged as the founder of modern Holocaust studies, which began with the 1961 publication of his massive volume The Destruction of the European Jews. In his very interesting 2007 Hilberg obituary, historian Norman Finkelstein emphasizes that prior to Hilberg’s work, there had been virtually no writing on the Holocaust, and discussion of the topic was considered almost “taboo.” For a recent event of such apparent enormity to have been so completely wiped away from public discussion and the consciousness of historians and political scientists can be explained in several different ways. But once I began to investigate the circumstances behind Hilberg’s ground-breaking work, I encountered all sorts of strange ironies.

According to Wikipedia, Hilberg’s family of Austrian Jews coincidentally arrived in the United States on the exact day in 1939 that war broke out, and in his early teens he was soon horrified to read all the news reports of the ongoing extermination of his fellow Jews in the continent his family had left behind, even telephoning Jewish leaders asking why they were doing so little to save their kinsmen from annihilation. He subsequently served in the U.S. military in Europe, then majored in Political Science at Brooklyn College after the end of the conflict. The inspiration for his future scholarly focus seems to have come when he was shocked by a remark made by one of his lecturers, Hans Rosenberg:

The most wicked atrocities perpetrated on a civilian population in modern times occurred during the Napoleonic occupation of Spain.

When Hilberg asked how Rosenberg, himself a German-Jewish refugee, could have so totally ignored the murder of 6 million Jews, a monstrous crime committed just a couple of years earlier, Rosenberg sought to deflect the question, saying that “it was a complicated matter” and “history doesn’t teach down into the present age.” Since Rosenberg was a student of Meinecke, whom Lipstadt has bitterly denounced as an implicit Holocaust Denier, one wonders whether Rosenberg may have shared the beliefs of his mentor but was reluctant to admit that fact to his overwhelmingly Jewish students in emotionally-charged postwar Brooklyn.

Later, Hilberg conducted his doctoral research at Columbia under Franz Neumann, another German-Jewish refugee scholar. But when Hilberg indicated he wanted his research to focus on the extermination of Europe’s Jews, Neumann strongly discouraged that topic, warning Hilberg that doing so would be professionally imprudent and might become “his academic funeral.” When he attempted to publish his research in book form, it received numerous negative reviews, with Israel’s Yad Vashem fearing it would encounter “hostile criticism,” and over a six year period, it was rejected by several major publishing houses along with Princeton University, based on the advice of the influential Jewish intellectual Hannah Arendt. One naturally wonders whether all these established scholars may have quietly known something that a naive young doctoral candidate such as Hilberg did not. His book only appeared in print because a Jewish immigrant whose business had suffered under the Nazis funded the entire publication.

 

I’d never paid much attention to Holocaust issues, but the supporters of my local Palo Alto Library operate a monthly book sale, and with serious nonfiction hardcovers often priced at just a quarter each, my personal library has grown by hundreds of volumes over the years, now including several of the thickest and most influential Holocaust texts. Aside from Hilberg’s classic volume, these include Nora Levin’s The Holocaust (1968), Lucy Dawidowicz’s The War Against the Jews, 1933-1945 (1975), Martin Gilbert’s The Holocaust (1985), and Daniel Goldhagen’s Hitler’s Willing Executioners (1996).

I claim absolutely no expertise in Holocaust issues, and analyzing the evidence and argumentation these voluminous works offer is entirely beyond my ability. But I decided to attempt to assess their overall credibility by exploring a few particular items, without actually bothering to read the thousands of pages of text they provided.

Consider the interesting case of Field Marshal Erhard Milch, Hermann Goering’s very powerful number-two in the German Luftwaffe. His father was certainly a Jew, and according to researchers Robert Wistrich and Louis Snyder, there is archival evidence that his mother was Jewish as well. Now is it certainly not impossible that a Third Reich supposedly dedicated with grim fanaticism to the extermination of each and every Jew might have spent the entire war with a full- or half-Jew near the absolute top of its military hierarchy, but surely that puzzling anomaly would warrant careful explanation, and Milch’s apparent Jewish background was certainly known during the Nuremberg Trials.

Yet when I carefully consulted the very comprehensive indexes of those five books, totaling over 3,500 pages, there is virtually no discussion of Milch, except a few very brief mentions of his name in connection with various military operations. Either the authors were unaware of Milch’s Jewish background, or perhaps they hoped to keep that fact away from their readers lest it cause “confusion.” Neither of these possibilities enhances the trust we should place in their research skills or their scholarly objectivity.

Indeed, the fascinating and widely-praised 2002 book Hitler’s Jewish Soldiers by Bryan Mark Rigg notes that aside from Milch, Hitler’s military contained over a dozen half-Jewish generals and admirals and another dozen quarter-Jews of that same high rank, plus a total of roughly 150,000 additional half- or quarter-Jewish soldiers, with a large fraction of these being officers. All of these individuals would have had some fully-Jewish parents or grand-parents, which seems decidedly odd behavior for a regime supposedly so focused on the total eradication of the Jewish race.

Another obvious matter casts further doubt upon the historical quality of those five immensely thick volumes of standard Holocaust narrative, which together occupy nearly a linear foot on my bookshelves. For prosecutors of any crime, establishing a plausible motive is certainly an important goal, and in the case of the Jewish Holocaust, these authors would seem to have an easy task at hand. Hitler and his German colleagues had always claimed that the Jews overwhelmingly dominated Bolshevik Communism, and much of their struggle against the former was in order to prevent further bloody deeds of the latter. So surely devoting an early chapter or so to describing this central Nazi doctrine would provide an airtight explanation of what drove the Nazis to their fiendish slaughters, rendering fully explicable the horrifying events that would occupy the remainder of their text.

Yet oddly enough, an examination of their indexes for “Bolsheviks,” “Communism,” and all variants reveals almost no discussion of this important issue. Goldhagen’s 1996 book provides just a couple of short sentences spread across his 600 pages, and the other works seem to contain virtually nothing at all. Since all of these Holocaust books almost totally avoid Hitler’s self-declared motive for his anti-Jewish actions, they are forced to desperately search for alternative explanations, seeking clues buried deep within the German past or turning to psychanalytical speculations or perhaps deciding that what they describe as the greatest massacre in all human history was undertaken out of sheer Nazi wickedness.

The obvious reason for this glaring omission is that the authors are constructing a morality-play in which the Jews must be portrayed as absolutely blameless victims, and even hinting at their role in the numerous Communist atrocities that long preceded the rise of the Third Reich might cause readers to consider both sides of the issue. When purported historians go to absurd lengths to hide such glaring facts, they unmask themselves as propagandists, and we must be very cautious about trusting their reliability and candor in all other matters, whether great or small.

 

Indeed, the issue of Communism raises a far larger matter, one having rather touchy implications. Sometimes two simple compounds are separately inert, but when combined together may possess tremendous explosive force. From my introductory history classes and readings in high school, certain things had always seemed glaringly obvious to me even if the conclusions remained unmentionable, and I once assumed they were just as apparent to most others as well. But over the years I have begun to wonder whether perhaps this might not be correct.

Back in those late Cold War days, the death toll of innocent civilians from the Bolshevik Revolution and the first two decades of the Soviet Regime was generally reckoned at running well into the tens of millions when we include the casualties of the Russian Civil War, the government-induced famines, the Gulag, and the executions. I’ve heard that these numbers have been substantially revised downwards to perhaps as little as twenty million or so, but no matter. Although determined Soviet apologists may dispute such very large figures, they have always been part of the standard narrative history taught within the West.

Meanwhile, all historians know perfectly well that the Bolshevik leaders were overwhelmingly Jewish, with three of the five revolutionaries Lenin named as his plausible successors coming from that background. Although only around 4% of Russia’s population was Jewish, a few years ago Vladimir Putin stated that Jews constituted perhaps 80-85% of the early Soviet government, an estimate fully consistent with the contemporaneous claims of Winston Churchill, Times of London correspondent Robert Wilton, and the officers of American Military Intelligence. Recent books by Alexander Solzhenitsyn, Yuri Slezkine, and others have all painted a very similar picture. And prior to World War II, Jews remained enormously over-represented in the Communist leadership, especially dominating the Gulag administration and the top ranks of the dreaded NKVD.

Both of these simple facts have been widely accepted in America throughout my entire lifetime. But combine them together with the relatively tiny size of worldwide Jewry, around 16 million prior to World War II, and the inescapable conclusion is that in per capita terms Jews were the greatest mass-murderers of the twentieth century, holding that unfortunate distinction by an enormous margin and with no other nationality coming even remotely close. And yet, by the astonishing alchemy of Hollywood, the greatest killers of the last one hundred years have somehow been transmuted into being seen as the greatest victims, a transformation so seemingly implausible that future generations will surely be left gasping in awe.

Today’s American Neocons are just as heavily Jewish as were the Bolsheviks of a hundred years ago, and they have greatly benefited from the political immunity provided by this totally bizarre inversion of historical reality. Partly as a consequence of their media-fabricated victimhood status, they have managed to seize control over much of our political system, especially our foreign policy, and have spent the last few years doing their utmost to foment an absolutely insane war with nuclear-armed Russia. If they do manage to achieve that unfortunate goal, they will surely outdo the very impressive human body-count racked up by their ethnic ancestors, perhaps even by an order-of-magnitude or more.

Holocaust Frauds and Confusions

Since the Holocaust only became a major public topic after wartime memories had grown dim, the story has always seemed to suffer from the problems traditionally associated with “recovered memory syndrome.” Truths and falsehoods were often mixed together in strange ways, and the door was opened wide to an astonishing number of outright frauds and liars.

For example, in the late 1970s I remember many of my high school classmates devouring The Painted Bird by Jerzy Kosinski, perhaps the first widely popular Holocaust memoir. But then a few years later, the media revealed that Kosinski’s national best-seller was simply fraudulent, and the plagiarizing author eventually committed suicide. Indeed, there have been so many fake Holocaust memoirs over the years that they nearly constitute a literary genre of their own.

Probably the most world’s most famous Holocaust survivor was Elie Wiesel, who parlayed the stories of his wartime suffering into becoming an enormous political celebrity. His career was capped with a Nobel Peace Prize in 1986, and the announcement declared him “a messenger to mankind.” Yet journalist Alexander Cockburn has persuasively argued that Wiesel was simply a fraud, and his famous autobiographical work Night just another literary hoax.

Although the iconic figure of “the Six Million” has been endlessly repeated by our media, the estimated numbers of the dead have actually been shockingly variable over the years. Although I never paid much attention to Holocaust issues, I have closely read my major newspapers and magazines for decades, and had regularly seen the statement that the Nazi death machine had brutally exterminated five million Gentiles along with the six million Jews. But just last year, I was stunned to discover that former total was simply a whole-cloth invention by prominent Holocaust-activist Simon Wiesenthal, who simply made the figure up one day with the intent of giving non-Jews more of a stake in the Holocaust story. And despite being based on absolutely no evidence or research, his casual claim was never effectively refuted by actual Holocaust scholars, who knew it to be total nonsense, and therefore it was so regularly repeated in the media that I probably read it hundreds of times over the years, always assuming it had some firm grounding in proven reality.

Similarly, for decades I had always read the undeniable fact that the Nazis had exterminated 4 million inmates at Auschwitz, with most of the victims being Jews, and Lipstadt certainly treated that number as absolutely rock-solid historical reality. But in the early 1990s after the fall of Communism, the official total was quietly revised downwards to as little as 1.1 million. The fact that a sudden reduction in the official Holocaust body-count by 3 million has had so little impact upon our public Holocaust media narrative hardly seems to inspire great confidence in either the total figures or the media reporting of them.

Over the last couple of generations, our media has engraved that figure of Six Million so deeply onto the minds of every Western citizen that the meaning of the iconic number is universally understood, and those who question it risk a prison sentence in many European countries. Yet its actual origin is somewhat obscure. According to some accounts, Jewish groups lobbied President Truman into casually inserting it into one of his speeches, and thereafter it has endlessly echoed in the media down to the present day. Some angry Internet activist has put together a graphic displaying extracts from dozens of New York Times stories between 1869 and 1941 all citing the figure of 6 million Eastern European Jews as being threatened with death, suggesting that our official Holocaust body-count actually predated World War II by as much as three generations. I really wouldn’t be surprised if that might be the original source of the number.

Sometimes the creation of a new Holocaust hoax was only narrowly averted. Throughout most of the twentieth century, Jews and blacks had been close political allies in America, with the top leadership of the NAACP almost invariably being Jewish, as were nearly all of Martin Luther King, Jr.’s top white advisors and a very large fraction of the key white activists involved in the black Civil Rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s. But by the late 1960s, a schism had erupted, with many younger black activists becoming deeply hostile to what they perceived as overwhelming Jewish influence, while more militant blacks, whether Muslim or otherwise, began siding with the Palestinians against Zionist Israel. This growing conflict became especially bitter during Jesse Jackson’s presidential campaign of 1988 and reached a flash-point in the New York City of the early 1990s.

A couple of film-makers sought to help heal this rift by producing a major 1992 PBS documentary entitled The Liberators, recounting how black American troops had been among the first units that captured the Buchenwald and Dachau concentration camps, thereby freeing the tens of thousands of Jewish inmates from Nazi captivity. A historical narrative of such deep symbolic resonance quickly attracted overwhelming support from both black leaders and Jewish ones, with Jesse Jackson sharing the stage with Holocaust survivors and numerous Jewish luminaries at the Harlem premiere, and the film received an Oscar nomination. However, in early Febuary 1993 Jeffrey Goldberg took to the pages of The New Republic to reveal that the story was merely a hoax, based on falsified history. Although the film’s Jewish co-producer angrily denounced her critics as racists and Holocaust Deniers, those charges stuck, and were eventually reported in the New York Times and other major media outlets. The leading Jewish organizations and Holocaust centers that had been heavily promoting the film soon distanced themselves, and in 2013 The Times of Israel even marked the twenty-year anniversary of what it described as a notorious hoax. But I suspect that if matters had gone a little differently, the story might soon have become so deeply embedded in the canonical Holocaust narrative that anyone questioning the facts would have been vilified as a racist.

 

A few years earlier, The New Republic had actually been in the forefront of promoting a different hoax also relating to Jewish issues, one which might have had far greater international political significance when Joan Peters, an obscure Jewish writer, published a major historical work in 1984. She claimed that her extensive archival research had revealed that the bulk of the present-day Palestinians were actually not native to Palestine, but instead were recently-arrived immigrants, drawn there by the heavy economic development produced by the Zionist settlers who had actually preceded them.

Her shocking findings received hundreds of glowing reviews and academic endorsements across the entire spectrum of the mainstream and elite American media, and her book quickly became a huge bestseller. Leading Jewish Holocaust luminaries such as Dawidowicz and Wiesel took center stage in praising her remarkable scholarship, which seemed likely to completely demolish the claims of the expelled Palestinians, thereby reshaping the nature of the Middle East conflict to Israel’s great advantage.

ORDER IT NOW

However, a young graduate student in History at Princeton named Norman Finkelstein had considerable interest in the history of Zionism, and being very much surprised by her findings, decided to investigate those claims. Once he began carefully checking her footnotes and her alleged sources, he discovered they were entirely fraudulent, and her groundbreaking research merely amounted to a hoax, which some later suggested had been concocted by an intelligence organization and merely published under her name.

Although Finkelstein widely distributed his important findings, they were totally ignored by all the American journalists, scholars, and media organizations he contacted, with the sole exception of Noam Chomsky, and the growing Joan Peters Hoax might have destroyed the legal basis of the international Palestinian claims to their own Palestine homeland. But some independent-minded British publications eventually picked up his information, and the resulting wave of media embarrassment caused the Peters claims to fade into oblivion. Meanwhile, Finkelstein himself suffered severe retaliation as a consequence, and according to Chomsky was completely blacklisted by his Princeton department and the wider academic community.

ORDER IT NOW

More than a dozen years later, Finkelstein’s work became the focus of a second major controversy. In the late 1990s, international Jewish organizations launched a major effort to extract many billions of dollars from the largest Swiss banks, arguing that such funds were the rightful property of European Jews who had died in the Holocaust. When the banks initially resisted, arguing that no solid evidence was being presented for such enormous claims, they were harshly denounced by America’s Jewish-dominated media, and Jewish lobbying led the American government to threaten them with severe financial sanctions that could have destroyed their businesses. Faced with such serious extortionate pressure, the banks finally gave way and paid out the bulk of the funds being demanded, with those billions mostly retained by the Jewish organizations leading the campaign and spent on their own projects since the purported Jewish heirs were impossible to locate.

This situation led historian Finkelstein to publish a short book in 2000 entitled The Holocaust Industry, in which he harshly critiqued what he characterized as a global Jewish money-making enterprise aimed at unfairly extracting wealth on behalf of the supposed Holocaust victims, often with little regard for truth or fairness. Although almost entirely ignored by the American media, it became a major bestseller in Europe, which eventually forced American publications to give it some attention. Among other things, Finkelstein noted that more than a half-century after the end of the Holocaust, the number of officially designated Holocaust survivors had grown so large that simple mortality considerations seemed to imply that huge numbers of European Jews must have survived the war. This obviously raised serious questions about how many might have actually died during that conflict and its accompanying Holocaust.

Over the years, I had noticed the same sorts of media reports claiming enormous totals of Holocaust survivors still alive now six or seven decades after the event. For example, even as late as 2009 an official at Israel’s Jewish Agency justified laws criminalizing Holocaust Denial by explaining that almost 65 years after the end of the war “there are still hundreds of thousands of living Holocaust survivors,” a statement which itself seems to constitute rather explicit Holocaust Denial. Indeed, a very noticeable number of all the New York Times obituaries I read these days in my morning newspapers seem to include Holocaust survivors still expiring in their eighties and nineties.

Anyone who reads serious history books knows that Jews have generally enjoyed a reputation for producing many of the world’s greatest swindlers and frauds, hardly surprising given their notorious tendency to lie and dissemble. Meanwhile, the Jewish community also seems to contain far more than its fair share of the emotionally disturbed and the mentally ill, and perhaps as a consequence has served as a launching-pad for many of the world’s religious cults and fanatic ideological movements. Any exploration of the Holocaust certainly tends to support this rather negative appraisal.

The Holocaust and Hollywood

Although the Holocaust began to enter American consciousness during the 1960s and 1970s with the publication of major books by Hilberg, Levin, Dawidowicz, and others, together with the resulting articles and reviews that these generated, the initial social impact was probably not substantial, at least outside the Jewish community. Even highly successful books selling in the many tens of thousands of copies would have little impact in a population of more than 200 million.

Our media completely shapes our perceived reality of the world, and although intellectuals and many of the highly educated are greatly influenced by books and other forms of printed content, the vast majority of the population understands the world through electronic media, especially that of popular entertainment.

Consider, for example, the 1974 publication of Time on the Cross: The Economics of American Negro Slavery, a magisterial two volume analysis by economists Robert William Fogel and Stanley L. Engerman. By applying quantitative methods, the study overturned generations of assumptions about the American social institution, demonstrating that black slaves in the South were encouraged to marry and maintain their households, while having diets and medical care comparable to that of the free white population and often superior to that of Northern industrial wage-earners. Moreover, following emancipation the life expectancy of freedmen declined by ten percent and their illnesses increased by twenty per cent. All of this is summarized in the extensive Wikipedia entry.

Although their results were controversial, the authors had the strongest possible academic credentials, with Fogel, an eminent scholar, being a leading figure in a school of economics who went on to win a Nobel Prize. And Fogel’s ideological credentials were even more robust, given that he had had a lifelong commitment to black Civil Rights starting with the eight years he had spent as a young Communist Party organizer, while his 1949 marriage to a black woman had often subjected the couple to the indignities of the anti-miscegenation laws of that era. Consequently, their findings received unprecedented coverage in the mainstream media for an academic study and surely influenced numerous historians and journalists. Yet I think the long-term impact upon popular perceptions about slavery has been almost nil.

By contrast, in 1976 the ABC television network ran the prime-time miniseries Roots, a multi-generational account of a slave family. The story closely adhered to the traditionally harsh slavery narrative, while supposedly being based upon the recorded family history of Alex Haley, the author of the best-selling book of that same title. But although his work was later found to be fraudulent and apparently plagiarized, the ratings were stellar and the social impact enormous due to the audience of 100 million Americans who watched those episodes. Thus, even the most impressive written scholarship had absolutely no chance of competing with fictionalized television drama.

All three of America’s television networks were under Jewish ownership or control, so it was hardly surprising that two years later ABC decided to repeat this process with the 1978 television miniseries Holocaust, which also achieved an audience of 100 million and generated enormous profits. It seems quite possible this may have been the first time many American families discovered that colossal but almost entirely invisible event of World War II.

The following year, William Styron published Sophie’s Choice, a heart-rending tale involving deeply buried memories of the extermination of Christian Polish children in the Auschwitz gas chambers. Although such an occurrence was absolutely contrary to the doctrines of all Jewish Holocaust scholars, the novel became a huge national best-seller anyway, and a 1982 film of the same name soon followed, with Meryl Streep winning an Oscar for Best Actress. A decade later, Steven Spielberg’s 1993 Schindler’s List won a remarkable seven Oscars, while grossing nearly $100 million.

With Hollywood so overwhelmingly Jewish, the consequences were hardly surprising, and a huge cinematic genre soon developed. According to Finkelstein, Hollywood produced some 180 Holocaust films just during the years 1989-2004. Even the very partial subset of Holocaust films listed on Wikipedia has grown enormously long, but fortunately the Movie Database has winnowed down the catalog by providing a list of the 50 Most Moving Holocaust Films.

Many billions of dollars have surely been invested over the years on the total production costs of this ongoing business enterprise. For most ordinary people, “seeing is believing,” and how could anyone seriously doubt the reality of the Holocaust after having seen all the gas chambers and mounds of murdered Jewish corpses constructed by highly-paid Hollywood set designers? Doubting the existence of Spiderman and the Incredible Hulk would be almost as absurd.

Some 2% of Americans have a Jewish background, while perhaps 95% possess Christian roots, but the Wikipedia list of Christian films seems rather scanty and rudimentary by comparison. Very few of those films were ever widely released, and the selection is stretched to even include The Chronicles of Narnia, which contains no mention of Christianity whatsoever. One of the very few prominent exceptions on the list is Mel Gibson’s 2004 The Passion of the Christ, which he was forced to personally self-fund. And despite the enormous financial success of that movie, one of the most highly profitable domestic releases of all time, the project rendered Gibson a hugely vilified pariah in the industry over which he had once reigned as its biggest star, especially after word got around that his own father was a Holocaust Denier.

 

In many respects, Hollywood and the broader entertainment media today provide the unifying spiritual basis of our deeply secular society, and the overwhelming predominance of Holocaust-themed films over Christian ones has obvious implications. Meanwhile, in our globalized world, the American entertainment-media complex totally dominates Europe and the rest of the West, so that the ideas generated here effectively shape the minds of many hundreds of millions of people living elsewhere, whether or not they fully recognize that fact.

In 2009, Pope Benedict XVI sought to heal the long-standing Vatican II rift within the Catholic Church and reconcile with the breakaway Society of St. Pius X faction. But this became a major media controversy when it was discovered that Bishop Richard Williamson, one of the leading members of that latter organization, had long been a Holocaust Denier and also believed that Jews should convert to Christianity. Although the many other differences in Catholic doctrinal faith were fully negotiable, apparently refusing to accept the reality of the Holocaust was not, and Williamson remained estranged from the Catholic Church. Soon afterward he was even prosecuted for heresy by the German government.

Internet critics have suggested that over the last couple of generations, energetic Jewish activists have successfully lobbied Western nations into replacing their traditional religion of Christianity with the new religion of Holocaustianity, and the Williamson Affair certainly seems to support that conclusion.

Consider the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo. Funded by Jewish interests, it spent years launching vicious attacks against Christianity, sometimes in crudely pornographic fashion, and also periodically vilified Islam. Such activities were hailed by French politicians as proof of the total freedom of thought allowed in the land of Voltaire. But the moment that one of its leading cartoonists made a very mild joke related to Jews, he was immediately fired, and if the publication had ever ridiculed the Holocaust, it surely would have been immediately shut down, and its entire staff possibly thrown into prison.

Western journalists and human rights advocates have often expressed support for the boldly transgressive activities of the Jewish-funded Femen activists when they desecrate Christian churches all around the world. But such pundits would certainly be in an uproar if anyone were to act in similar fashion toward the growing international network of Holocaust Museums, most of them built at public expense.

Indeed, one of the underlying sources of bitter Western conflict with Vladimir Putin’s Russia seems to be that he has restored Christianity to a favored place in a society where the early Bolsheviks had once dynamited churches and massacred many thousands of priests. Western intellectual elites held far more positive feelings toward the USSR while its leaders retained a stridently anti-Christian attitude.

The Rise and Suppression of Holocaust Denial

Since the Holocaust had been almost unknown in America until the mid-1960s, explicit Holocaust Denial was equally non-existent, but as the former grew in visibility following the publication of Hilberg’s 1961 book, the latter soon began to awaken as well.

Lipstadt’s vilification of Barnes as the “godfather” of Holocaust Denial does contain a nugget of truth. His posthumously-published 1968 review endorsing Rassinier’s denialist analysis seems to be the first such substantial statement published anywhere in America, at least if we exclude Beaty’s very casual 1951 dismissal of the Jewish claims, which seem to have attracted negligible public attention.

Near the end of the 1960s, a right-wing publisher named Willis Carto came across a short and unpolished Holocaust Denial manuscript, apparently produced some years earlier, and he ignored legal niceties by simply putting it into print. The purported author then sued for plagiarism, and although the case was eventually settled, his identity eventually leaked out as being that of David L. Hoggan, a Barnes protege with a Harvard Ph.D. in history serving as a junior faculty member at Stanford. His desire for anonymity was aimed at preventing the destruction of his career, but he failed in that effort, and further academic appointments quickly dried up.

Meanwhile, Murray Rothbard, the founding father of modern libertarianism, had always been a strong supporter of historical Revisionism, and greatly admired Barnes, who for decades had been the leading figure in that field. Barnes had also briefly hinted at his general skepticism about the Holocaust in a lengthy 1967 article appearing in the Rampart Journal, a short-lived libertarian publication, and this may have been noticed within those ideological circles. It appears that by the early 1970s, Holocaust Denial had become a topic of some discussion within America’s heavily Jewish but fiercely free-thinking libertarian community, and this was to have an important consequence.

A professor of Electrical Engineering at Northwestern named Arthur R. Butz was casually visiting some libertarian gathering during this period when he happened to notice a pamphlet denouncing the Holocaust as a fraud. He had never previously given any thought to the issue, but such a shocking claim captured his attention, and he began looking into the matter early in 1972. He soon decided that the accusation was probably correct, but found the supporting evidence, including that presented in the unfinished and anonymous Hoggan book, far too sketchy, and decided it needed to be fleshed out in much more detailed and comprehensive fashion. He proceeded to undertake this project over the next few years, working with the methodical diligence of a trained academic engineer.

His major work, The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, first appeared in print late in 1976, and immediately became the central text of the Holocaust Denial community, a position it still seems to retain down to this present day, while with all the updates and appendices, the length has grown to well over 200,000 words. Although no mention of this forthcoming book appeared in the February 1976 issue of Reason, it is possible that word of the pending publication had gotten around within libertarian circles, prompting the sudden new focus upon historical Revisionism.

Butz was a respectable tenured professor at Northwestern, and the release of his book laying out the Holocaust Denial case soon became a minor sensation, covered by the New York Times and other media outlets in January 1977. In one of her books, Lipstadt devotes a full chapter entitled “Entering the Mainstream” to Butz’s work. According to a December 1980 Commentary article by Dawidowicz, Jewish donors and Jewish activists quickly mobilized, attempting to have Butz fired for his heretical views, but back then academic tenure still held firm and Butz survived, an outcome that seems to have greatly irritated Dawidowicz.

Such a detailed and comprehensive book laying out the Holocaust Denial case naturally had a considerable impact on the national debate, especially since the author was a mainstream and apparently apolitical academic, and an American edition of Butz’s book soon appeared in 1977. I’m very pleased to have made arrangements to include the volume in my collection of Controversial HTML Books, so those interested can easily read it and decide for themselves.

 

The following year, these Holocaust Denial trends seemed to gain further momentum as Carto opened a small new publishing enterprise in California called the Institute for Historical Review (IHR), which launched a quarterly periodical entitled The Journal of Historical Review in 1980. Both the IHR and its JHR publication centered their efforts around Revisionism in general, but with Holocaust Denial being their major focus. Lipstadt devotes an entire chapter to the IHR, later noting that most of the main authors of the February 1976 Reason issue soon became affiliated with that project or with other Carto enterprises, as did Butz, while the editorial board of the JHR was soon well-stocked with numerous Ph.D.’s, often earned at highly-reputable universities. For the next quarter century or so, the IHR would hold small conferences every year or two, with David Irving eventually becoming a regular presenter, and even fully mainstream figures such as Pulitzer Prize-winning historian John Toland occasionally appearing as speakers.

As an important example of IHR efforts, in 1983 the organization published The Dissolution of Eastern Europe Jewry, a very detailed quantitative analysis of the underlying demographics and population movements around the period encompassed by World War II, apparently the first such study undertaken. The author, writing under the pen-name Walter N. Sanning, sought to revise the extremely simplistic population analysis casually assumed by Holocaust historians.

Before the war, millions of Jews had lived in Eastern Europe, and after the war, those communities had mostly vanished. This undeniable fact has long stood as an implicit central pillar of the traditional Holocaust narrative. But drawing upon entirely mainstream sources, Sanning persuasively demonstrates that the situation was actually far more complicated than it might seem. For example, it was widely reported at the time that vast numbers of Polish Jews had been transported by the Soviets to locations deep within their territory, on both voluntary and involuntary terms, with future Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin being including in those transfers. In addition, huge numbers of heavily urbanized Soviet Jews were similarly evacuated ahead of the advancing German forces in 1941. The exact size of these population movements has long been uncertain and disputed, but Sanning’s careful analysis of postwar Soviet census data and other sources suggests that the totals were likely towards the upper end of most estimates. Sanning makes no claim that his findings are definitive, but even if they are only partially correct, such results would certainly preclude the reality of traditional Holocaust numbers.

Another regular IHR participant was Robert Faurisson. As a professor of literature at the University of Lyons-2, he began expressing his public skepticism about the Holocaust during the 1970s, and the resulting media uproar led to efforts to remove him from his position, while a petition was signed on his behalf by 200 international scholars, including famed MIT professor Noam Chomsky. Faurisson stuck to his opinions, but attacks persisted, including a brutal beating by Jewish militants that hospitalized him, while a French political candidate espousing similar views was assassinated. Jewish activist organizations began lobbying for laws to broadly outlaw the activities of Faurisson and others, and in 1990, soon after the Berlin Wall fell and research at Auschwitz and other Holocaust sites suddenly became far easier, France passed a statute criminalizing Holocaust Denial, apparently the first nation after defeated Germany to do so. During the years that followed, large numbers of other Western countries did the same, setting the disturbing precedent of resolving scholarly disputes via prison sentences, a softer form of the same policy followed in Stalinist Russia.

Since Faurisson was a literary scholar, it is not entirely surprising that one of his major interests was The Diary of Anne Frank, generally regarded as the Holocaust’s iconic literary classic, telling the story of a young Jewish girl who died after being deported from Holland to Auschwitz. He argued that the text was substantially fraudulent, written by someone else after the end of the war, and for decades various determined individuals have argued the case back and forth. I cannot properly evaluate any of their complex arguments, which apparently involve questions of ballpoint pen technology and textual emendations, nor have I ever read the book itself.

But for me, the most striking aspect of the story is the girl’s actual fate under the official narrative, as recounted in the thoroughly establishmentarian Wikipedia entry. Apparently disease was raging in her camp despite the best efforts of the Germans to control it, and she soon became quite ill, mostly remaining bedridden in the infirmary, before eventually dying from typhus in Spring 1945 at a different camp about six months after her initial arrival. It seems rather odd to me that a young Jewish girl who fell severely ill at Auschwitz would have spent so much time in camp hospitals and eventually die there, given that we are told the primary purpose of Auschwitz and other such camps was the efficient extermination of its Jewish inmates.

 

By the mid-1990s the Holocaust Denial movement seemed to be gaining in public visibility, presumably aided by the doubts raised after the official 1992 announcement that the estimated deaths at Auschwitz had been reduced by around 3 million.

For example, the February 1995 issue of Marco Polo, a glossy Japanese magazine with a circulation of 250,000, carried a long article declaring that the gas chambers of the Holocaust were a propaganda hoax. Israel and Jewish-activist groups quickly responded, organizing a widespread advertising boycott of all the publications of the parent company, one of Japan’s most respected publishers, which quickly folded in the face of that serious threat. All copies of the issue were recalled from the newspapers, the staffers were dismissed, and the entire magazine was soon shut down, while the president of the parent company was forced to resign.

In exploring the history of Holocaust Denial, I have noticed this same sort of recurrent pattern, most typically involving individuals rather than institutions. Someone highly-regarded and fully mainstream decides to investigate the controversial topic, and soon comes to conclusions that sharply deviate from the official truth of the last two generations. For various reasons, those views become public, and he is immediately demonized by the Jewish-dominated media as a horrible extremist, perhaps mentally-deranged, while being relentlessly hounded by a ravenous pack of fanatic Jewish-activists. This usually brings about the destruction of his career.

In the early 1960s Stanford historian David Hoggan produced his anonymous manuscript The Myth of the Six Million, but once it got into circulation and his identity became known, his academic career was destroyed. A dozen years later, something along the same lines happened with Northwestern Electrical Engineering professor Arthur Butz, and only his academic tenure saved him from a similar fate.

Fred Leuchter was widely regarded as one of America’s leading expert specialists on the technology of executions, and a long article in The Atlantic treated him as such. During the 1980s, Ernst Zundel, a prominent Canadian Holocaust Denier, was facing trial for his disbelief in the Auschwitz gas chambers, and one of his expert witnesses was an American prison warden with some experience in such systems, who recommended involving Leuchter, one of the foremost figures in the field. Leuchter soon took a trip to Poland and closely inspected the purported Auschwitz gas chambers, then published the Leuchter Report, concluding that they were obviously a fraud and could not possibly have worked in the manner Holocaust scholars had always claimed. The ferocious attacks which followed soon cost him his entire business career and destroyed his marriage.

David Irving had ranked as the world’s most successful World War II historian, with his books selling in the millions amid glowing coverage in the top British newspapers when he agreed to appear as an expert witness at the Zundel trial. He had always previously accepted the conventional Holocaust narrative, but reading the Leuchter Report changed his mind, and he concluded that the Auschwitz gas chambers were just a myth. He was quickly subjected to unrelenting media attacks, which first severely damaged and then ultimately destroyed his very illustrious publishing career, and he later even served time in an Austrian prison for his unacceptable views.

Dr. Germar Rudolf was a successful young German chemist working at the prestigious Max Planck Institute when he heard of the controversy regarding the Leuchter Report, which he found reasonably persuasive but containing some weaknesses. Therefore, he repeated the analysis on a more thorough basis, and published the results as the Chemistry of Auschwitz, which came to the same conclusions as Leuchter. And just like Leuchter before him, Rudolf suffered the destruction of his career and his marriage, and since Germany treats these matters in harsher fashion, he eventually served five years in prison for his scientific impudence.

Most recently, Dr. Nicholas Kollerstrom, who had spent eleven years as a historian of science on the staff of University College, London, suffered this same fate in 2008. His scientific interests in the Holocaust provoked a media firestorm of vilification, and he was fired with a single day’s notice, becoming the first member of his research institution ever expelled for ideological reasons. He had previously provided the Isaac Newton entry for a massive biographical encyclopedia of astronomers, and America’s most prestigious science journal demanded that the entire work be pulped, destroying the work of over 100 writers, because it had been fatally tainted by having such a villainous contributor. He recounted this unfortunate personal history as an introduction to his 2014 book Breaking the Spell, which I highly recommend.

Kollerstrom’s text effectively summarizes much of the more recent Holocaust Denial evidence, including the official Auschwitz death books returned by Gorbachev after the end of the Cold War, which indicate that Jewish fatalities were some 99% lower than the widely-believed total. Furthermore, Jewish deaths actually showed a sharp decline once plentiful supplies of Zyklon B arrived, exactly contrary to what might have been expected under the conventional account. He also discusses the interesting new evidence contained in the British wartime decrypts of all German communications between the various concentration camps and the Berlin headquarters. Much of this material is presented in an interesting two hour interview on Red Ice Radio, conveniently available on YouTube:

The lives and careers of a very sizable number of other individuals have followed this same unfortunate sequence, which in much of Europe often ends in criminal prosecution and imprisonment. Most notably, a German lawyer who became a bit too bold in her legal arguments soon joined her client behind bars, and as a consequence, it has become increasingly difficult for accused Holocaust Deniers to secure effective legal representation. By Kollerstrom’s estimates, many thousands of individuals are currently serving time across Europe for Holocaust Denial.

EuropeanDenial

My impression is that by the late 1960s, the old Soviet Bloc countries had mostly stopped imprisoning people merely for questioning Marxist-Leninist dogma, and reserved their political prisons only for those actively organizing against the regime, while Holocaust Denial is treated today in far harsher fashion. One clear difference is that actual belief in Communist doctrine had entirely faded away to almost nothing even among the Communist leadership itself, while these days Holocaustianity is still a young and deeply held faith, at least within a small slice of the population that exerts enormously disproportionate leverage over our public institutions.

Another obvious factor is the many billions of dollars currently at stake in what Finkelstein has aptly characterized as “the Holocaust Industry.” For example, potentially enormous new claims are now being reopened against Poland for Jewish property that was lost or confiscated during the World War II era.

In America, the situation is somewhat different, and our First Amendment still protects Holocaust Deniers against imprisonment, though the efforts of the ADL and various other groups to criminalize “hate speech” are clearly aimed at eventually removing that obstacle. But in the meantime, crippling social and economic sanctions are often used to pursue the same objectives.

Furthermore, various Internet monopolies have been gradually persuaded or co-opted into preventing the easy distribution of dissenting information. There have been stories in the media over the last few years that Google has been censoring or redirecting its Holocaust search results away from those disputing the official narrative. Even more ominously, Amazon, our current near-monopolistic retailer of books, last year took the unprecedented step of banning thousands of Holocaust Denial works, presumably lest they “confuse” curious readers, so it is fortunate that I had purchased mine a couple of years earlier. These parallels with George Orwell’s 1984 are really quite striking, and the “Iron Curtain Over America” that Beaty had warned about in his 1951 book of that title seems much closer to becoming a full reality.

Various figures in the Holocaust Denial community have attempted to mitigate this informational blacklist, and Dr. Rudolf some time ago established a website HolocaustHandbooks.com, which allows a large number of the key volumes to be purchased or easily read on-line in a variety of different formats. But the growing censorship by Amazon, Google, and other Internet monopolies greatly reduces the likelihood that anyone will readily encounter the information.

 

Obviously, most supporters of the conventional Holocaust narrative would prefer to win their battles on the level playing fields of analysis rather than by utilizing economic or administrative means to incapacitate their opponents. But I have seen little evidence that they have enjoyed any serious success in this regard.

Aside from the various books by Lipstadt, which I found to be of poor quality and quite unpersuasive, one of the most energetic Holocaust supporters of the last couple of decades seems to have been Michael Shermer, the editor of Skeptic magazine, who had earned his degrees in psychology and the history of science.

ORDER IT NOW

In 1997, he published Why People Believe Weird Things, seeking to debunk all sorts of irrational beliefs popular in certain circles, with the book’s subtitle describing these as “pseudo-science” and “superstition.” His cover text focused on ESP, alien abductions, and witchcraft, but rebutting Holocaust Denial was the single largest portion of that book, encompassing three full chapters. His discussion of this latter subject was rather superficial, and he probably undercut his credibility by grouping it together with his debunking of the scientific reality of “race” as a similar right-wing fallacy, one also long since disproved by mainstream scientists. Regarding the latter issue, he went on to argue that the alleged black-white differences claimed in works such as The Bell Curve by Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray was entirely pseudo-scientific nonsense, and he emphasized that book and similar ones had been promoted by the same pro-Nazi groups who advocated Holocaust Denial, with those two pernicious doctrines being closely linked together. Shermer had recruited Harvard professor Stephen Jay Gould to write the Foreword for his book and that raises serious questions about his knowledge or his judgment since Gould is widely regarded as one of the most notorious scientific frauds of the late twentieth century.

ORDER IT NOW

In 2000, Shermer returned to the battle, publishing Denying History, entirely focused on refuting Holocaust Denial. This time he recruited Holocaust scholar Alex Grobman as his co-author and acknowledged the generous financial support he had received from various Jewish organizations. A large portion of the text seemed to focus on the psychology and sociology of Holocaust Deniers, trying to explain why people could believe in such patently absurd nonsense. Indeed, so much space was devoted to those issues that he was forced to entirely skip over the official reduction of the Auschwitz body-count by 3 million just a few years earlier, thus avoiding any need to explain why this large shift had had no impact on the canonical Holocaust figure of Six Million.

 

Although various writers such as Shermer may have been encouraged by generous financial subsidies to make fools of themselves, their more violent allies on the extreme fringe have probably had a greater impact on the Holocaust debate. Although judicial and economic sanctions may deter the vast majority of Holocaust Deniers from showing their face, extra-legal violence has also often been deployed against those hardy souls who remain undeterred.

For example, during the 1980s the offices and warehouse storage facilities of the IHR in Southern California were fire-bombed and totally destroyed by Jewish militants. And although Canada has traditionally had little political violence, in 1995 the large, ramshackle house that served as the residence and business office of Canada’s Ernst Zundel, one of the world’s leading publishers and distributers of Holocaust Denial literature, was similarly fire-bombed and burned to the ground. Zundel had already faced several criminal prosecutions on charges of spreading “false news,” and eventually served years in prison, before being deported back to his native Germany, where he served additional imprisonment. Various other prominent Holocaust Deniers have even faced threats of assassination.

Most historians and other academic scholars are quiet souls, and surely the looming threat of such serious terroristic violence must have dissuaded many of them from involving themselves in such obviously controversial issues. Meanwhile, relentless financial and social pressure may gradually wear down both individuals and organizations, causing them to eventually either abandon the field or become far less active, with their places sometimes taken by newcomers.

The year after the 9/11 attacks, the JHR ceased print publication. The growth of the Internet was probably an important contributing factor, and with the national focus shifting so sharply toward foreign policy and the Middle East, its IHR parent organization became much less active, while much of the ongoing debate in Revisionism and Holocaust Denial shifted to various other online venues. But at some point over the years, the JHR digitized many hundreds of its articles and posted them on its website, providing over three million words of generally very high-quality historical content.

Over the last couple of months, I have been repeatedly surprised to discover that the historians associated with the IHR had long ago published articles on topics quite parallel to some of my own. For example, after I published an article on the Suvorov Hypothesis that Germany’s Barbarossa attack had preempted Stalin’s planned attack and conquest of Europe, someone informed me that a reviewer had extensively discussed the same Suvorov book twenty years earlier in an issue of JHR. I also discovered several pieces by CIA defector Victor Marchetti, a important figure for JFK assassination researchers, who had received little attention in the mainstream media. There were also articles on the fate of the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty, a topic almost entirely excluded from the mainstream media.

Casually browsing some of the archives, I was quite impressed with their quality, and since the archives were freely available for anyone to republish, I went ahead and incorporated them, making the millions of words of their Revisionist and Holocaust Denial content much more conveniently available to interested readers. The material is fully searchable, and also organized by Author, Topic, and Time Period, with a few sample links included below:

The Journal of Historical Review, 1980-2002 Issues

Author Archives:

Topic Archives:

So for those particularly interested in Holocaust Denial, well over a million words of such discussion may now be conveniently available, including works by many of the authors once so highly regarded by the early editors of Reason magazine.

Secretive Holocaust Denial

The steadily growing economic and political power of organized Jewish groups, backed by Hollywood image-making, eventually won the visible war and crushed the Holocaust Denial movement in the public arena, enforcing a particular historical narrative by criminal prosecutions across most of Europe and severe social and economic sanctions in America. But a stubborn underground resistance still exists, with its size being difficult to estimate.

Although my interest in the Holocaust had always been rather minimal, once the Internet came into being and my circle of friends and acquaintances greatly expanded, the topic would very occasionally come up. Over the years, a considerable number of seemingly rational people at one time or another privately let slip their extreme skepticism about various elements of the canonical Holocaust narrative, and such doubts seemed to represent merely the tip of the iceberg.

Every now and then someone in that category spoke a little too freely or became a target for retaliation on a different matter, and our media went into a feeding frenzy of Holocaust Denial accusations and counter-accusations.

For example, during the impeachment battles of the late 1990s, Clinton partisans believed that prominent liberal pundit Christopher Hitchens had betrayed the personal confidences of presidential aide Sidney Blumenthal, and journalist Edward Jay Epstein decided to retaliate in kind, widely circulating a memo to the media accusing Hitchens of secretly being a Holocaust Denier. He alleged that at a 1995 dinner gathering following a New Yorker anniversary celebration, Hitchens had drunk a little too much wine and began expounding to his table-mates that the Holocaust was simply a hoax. Epstein backed his claim by saying he had been so shocked at such statements that he had entered them into his personal diary. That telling detail and the fact that most of the other witnesses seemed suspiciously vague in their recollections persuaded me that Epstein was probably being truthful. A bitter feud between Hitchens and Epstein soon erupted.

In 2005 Hitchens denounced various opponents of Bush’s Iraq War as anti-Semites, and in retaliation Alexander Cockburn published a couple of Counterpunch columns resurrecting that 1999 controversy, which is when I first discovered it. As a regular reader of Counterpunch, I was intrigued and Googling around a bit, quickly located media accounts of Epstein’s explicit accusations. Numerous reports of the the incident still survive on the web, including one from the NY Daily News as well as a portion of an MSNBC piece, and although some of the more extensive ones have disappeared over the last dozen years, the media text I remember reading in 2005 has been preserved on the static HTML pages of several websites:

Epstein told MSNBC that Hitchens had misspoken himself on the Holocaust on Feb. 12, 1995 – in fact, practically four years ago – as the two of them, along with some other friends, were dining in New York.

Epstein was so shocked, he says, and considered Hitchens doubts so grave, that he went home and noted them in his diary!

According to the Epstein diary: “Once seated in a booth, and freely sipping his free red wine, Hitchens advanced a theory more revealing than anything going on at the Hudson theater. His thesis, to the shock of everyone at the table, was that the Holocaust was a fiction developed by a conspiracy of interests bent on ‘criminalizing the German Nation’”

“He explained that no evidence of German mass murder had ever been found – and what gruesome artifacts had been found had been fabricated after the event,” Epstein confided to his diary.

“What of the testimony of Nazi generals at Nuremberg about the death camps,” he asked.

Hitchens, according to the Epstein diary notation, explained “. . . without missing a beat, that such admissions were obtained under Anglo-American torture.” Epstein then asked, as noted in his diary: “‘But what happened to the Jews in Europe?’ Hitch shrugged and said, ‘Many were killed by local villagers when they ran away, others died natural deaths, and the remainder made it to Israel.”

 

After reading these interesting columns, I began noticing that Cockburn himself sometimes provided hints suggesting that his own personal opinion on the Holocaust might be somewhat heretical, including his cryptical remarks that huge hoaxes were actually much easier to create and maintain than most people realized.

Just a few months after his attack on Hitchens, Cockburn published a two-part article strongly arguing that Nobel Peace Prize Winner Elie Wiesel, the most famous of all Holocaust survivors, was simply a fraud. I had always been taught that Zyklon B was the deadly agent used by the Nazis to exterminate the Jews of Auschwitz and I had vaguely become aware that Holocaust Deniers absurdly claimed the compound had instead been employed as a delousing agent in the camps, aimed at preventing the spread of Typhus; but then the following year, I was shocked to discover in one of Cockburn’s columns that for decades the U.S. government had itself used Zyklon B as the primary delousing agent for immigrants entering at its Mexican border. I recall several other columns from the mid-2000s dancing around Holocaust issues, but I now seem unable to locate them within the Counterpunch archives.

My growing realization 15-odd years ago that substantial numbers of knowledgeable people appeared to be secret adherents of Holocaust Denial certainly reshaped my own unquestioning assumptions on that subject. The occasional newspaper account of a Holocaust Denier being discovered and then flayed and destroyed by the media easily explained why the public positions on that subject remained so unanimous. Being busy with other things, I don’t think I ever had a conversation with anyone on that controversial subject or even so much as an email exchange, but I did keep my eyes and ears open, and huge doubts had certainly entered my mind many years before I ever bothered reading my first book on the subject.

Meanwhile, the concurrent collapse of my belief in our official American Pravda narrative on so many other controversial topics played a major role as well. Once I realized to my dismay that I couldn’t believe a word of what our media and political leaders said about major events in the here and now, their credibility on controversial happenings so long ago and far away entirely disappeared. For these reasons, I had grown quite suspicious and held a very open mind on Holocaust matters as I eventually began reading books on both sides of the issue in the wake of the Reason controversy.

The Future of Holocaust Denial

For many years following the end of World War II very little seems to have been written about the momentous topic now known as the Holocaust. But from the 1960s onward, interest surged so enormously that many thousands or even tens of thousands of volumes on that once-ignored event have been produced. Therefore, the fifteen or twenty books that I have personally read is merely a sliver of that total.

I have invested only a few weeks of reading and research in studying this large and complex subject, and my knowledge is obviously dwarfed by that of the considerable number of individuals who have devoted many years or decades of their lives to such activity. For these reasons, the analysis I have presented above must surely contain numerous gaping errors that others could easily correct. But sometimes a newcomer may notice things that deeply-involved professionals might normally miss, and may also better understand the perspectives of those who have likewise never paid much attention to the subject.

Any conclusions I have drawn are obviously preliminary ones, and the weight others should attach to these must absolutely reflect my strictly amateur status. However, as an outsider exploring this contentious topic I think it far more likely than not that the standard Holocaust narrative is at least substantially false, and quite possibly, almost entirely so.

Despite this situation, the powerful media focus in support of the Holocaust over the last few decades has elevated it to a central position in Western culture. I wouldn’t be surprised if it currently occupies a larger place in the minds of most ordinary folk than does the Second World War that encompassed it, and therefore possesses greater apparent reality.

However, some forms of shared beliefs may be a mile wide but an inch deep, and the casual assumptions of individuals who have never actually investigated a given subject may rapidly change. Also, the popular strength of doctrines that have long been maintained in place by severe social and economic sanctions, often coupled by criminal ones, may possibly be much weaker than anyone realizes.

Until thirty years ago, Communist rule over the USSR and its Warsaw Pact allies seemed absolutely permanent and unshakeable, but the roots of that belief had totally rotted away, leaving behind nothing more than a hollow facade. Then one day, a gust of wind came along, and the entire gigantic structure collapsed. I wouldn’t be surprised if our current Holocaust narrative eventually suffers that same fate, perhaps with unfortunate consequences for those too closely associated with having maintained it.

Related Readings:

 
The American Pravda Series
Hide 2218 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Anon[228] • Disclaimer says:
    Read More
    • Replies: @Wally
    Very old news and repeatedly debunked here:

    The Speech of Heinrich Himmler: https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1184
    exc.:

    - No human remains to back up the unfounded claims. Not a single enormous mass grave as alleged has ever been excavated, contents verified and shown. Not one. The storyline says 6M Jews & 5M others = 11M, now just think about that.
    How bizarre, claims of mass murder where there is no evidence to support it. The gas chambers are scientifically impossible as alleged and have been debunked ad nauseum by Revisionists, and the alleged 1,000,000 - 2,000,000 supposed mass shootings of thousands at a time in claimed known sites have produced no mass graves at those sites. Why is that?

    - In 1993, Robert Wolfe, supervisory archivist for captured German records at the National Archives admitted that a more precise translation of 'ausrottung' would be extirpation or tearing up by the roots. Wolfe also pointed out that in Himmler's handwritten notes for the speech, that Himmler used the term, 'judenevakuierung', or evacuation of the Jews, not 'extermination'.

    - There are missing pages, retyped pages by different hands, even pages have been re-numbered..

    - Then we have a so called "secret" speech in front of thousands. Frankly the assertions about it are laughable.

    - Yivo (Yiddish Scientific Institute) of New York was very active in the Rosenberg Ministry to process documents for submittal to the Nuremberg trials.

    - Members of the audience like SS-OGruF Gottlob Berger denied that Himmler was talking about the extermination of the Jews at all. I suggest reading: NMT, vol 13. p. 457-487

    - This alleged (recorded) speech, as German judge Staeglich has adroitly pointed out, is a hodgepodge of non-sequitors, nonsense, and re-worked text,see:
    'Auschwitz: A Judge Looks at the Evidence, by Wilhelm Stäglich': http://codoh.com/library/document/230

    - To have a speech with such alleged secret content recorded? Right. SS General Berger did not recognize Himmler’s voice listening to the tape.

    - the complete lack of orders for the desperate assumptions made about it.[/quote]more here:
    'Posen speech': http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=372
    and here:
    Heinrich Himmler's Posen Speech from 04.10.1943, , By Heinrich Himmler
    Published: 1943-10-04, Given at Posen 4 October 1943, Translation of Document No. 1919-PS, Nuremberg Trial, by Carlos Porter: http://codoh.com/library/document/891/


    www.codoh.com

    , @phil
    Himmler (Posen): "I also want to mention a very difficult subject before you here, completely openly. It should be discussed amongst us, and yet, nevertheless, we will never speak about it in public. . . . I am talking about the "Jewish evacuation": the [Ausrottung] of the Jewish people. It is one of those things that is easily said. "The Jewish people is being [ausgerottet]," every Party member will tell you, "perfectly clear, it's part of our plans, we're [ausschalten] the Jews, [ausrotten] them, ha!, a small matter." . . . Most of you will know what it means when 100 bodies lie together, when there are 500, or when there are 1000. And to have seen this through, and -- with the exception of human weaknesses -- to have remained decent, has made us hard and is a page of glory never mentioned and never to be mentioned. . . . We have taken away the riches that they had, and I have given a strict order, which Obergruppenführer Pohl has carried out, we have delivered these riches completely to the Reich, to the State. We have taken nothing from them for ourselves. A few, who have offended against this, will be [judged] in accordance with an order, that I gave at the beginning: He who takes even one Mark of this is a dead man."

    "Extermination" is an English word which can be interpreted figuratively or literally according to the context. The German referred to above can also be translated as "rooting out." So translated, it is also consistent with a policy of mass deportations or "evacuations." During WWII did the words and actions of Germans in some cases cross the line into the realm of murder that is not even justified in war? I think so, but there is a big difference between hundreds of thousands, or a million, and 6 million. More archaelogical work and archival (Russian) work would be desirable in this respect.

    , @Anon
    Himmler was a psychopath and the mass-killing of Jews happened for sure.

    But much of the Hollywood and Mass Media coverage of the tragedy is more schmolocaust than holocaust.

    I don't find it difficult to believe the holocaust happened because similar things happened all over. Turks and Greeks butchered one another. Armenians got slaughtered. Stalin killed million. US dropped two nukes on Japan and was ready to drop 1o or 12 more. Japan went on a bloody rampage in China. Khmer Rouge were psycho. Hussein killed 100,000s. Rwanda was a horror. US mass bombing of Korean and Vietnam were mostly targeted at civilians.

    There were 'death squads' used by right-wing regimes in Latin America to terrorize and wipe out entire villages that might be supportive of Marxists. The failed coup in Indonesia in 65 led to anti-communist bloodbath and many Chinese got killed.
    So, it hardly seems surprising that Germany under Hitler and psychopaths like Himmler were capable of carrying out horrors.

    Still, so much of the discussion on the Holocaust isn't history but propaganda and neo-religion.
    And because rational discussion of the Holocaust isn't allowed, the ones who tend to be daring enough to counter the narrative happen to be lunatics who are just as nutty as Lipstadt. The difference Lipstadts of the world have all the cards. Still, BS is BS and a lot of Deniers are begin from "I hate Jews" and develop their argument from there.
    , @FKA Max
    Anatoly Karlin just reacted and replied to Mr. Unz's article:

    Holocaust Exegesis


    There were 3,028,538 Jews in the USSR according to the 1939 Census, but only 2,266,334 in the 1959 one (despite the demographic catastrophe of WW2, even the ethnic Russian population expanded by 15% between these two dates); this was also before the start of Soviet Jewish emigration to the West. Where did they go?
     
    - http://www.unz.com/akarlin/holocaust/

    I commented about this here, in great detail:


    The real number of Jews in the former USSR

    https://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=233955 Archived link: http://archive.is/rx9gi
    [...]
    Here the original in Russian: http://tavrio.ru/index.php/politics/nazpol/42-skolko-evreev-pf Archived link: http://archive.is/EDYeZ
    [...]
    “All demographers are wrong. In Russia, there are significantly more Jews than there are specialists.”
    [...]
    The number of Jews in different places is two to three times greater than what is indicated in the census data. In Russia, this coefficient is from 2 to 3. And this despite the fact that Jews do not belong to groups with high birth rates. And despite the fact that many are leaving, and the community is aging.
    [...]
    So all the tragic predictions about the extinction and disappearance of the Russian Jewish community are greatly exaggerated. The official estimate of the Jewish population of Russia today is four hundred thousand. But it’s funny. Look around! Take the Russian Jewish encyclopedia and make a selection of contemporary politicians. Will you find among them someone who, being a Jew, is recorded as such in the passport? Hardly
     

    - https://www.unz.com/article/against-david-irvings-view-of-hitler/#comment-2394694

    This is the explanation, in my opinion and according to my research:


    Maybe instead of dying they just changed status, i.e. they (were made to) register(ed) as just Russians instead of (Soviet Union) Jews
    [...]
    the greater part of the decline being attributable to internal processes.
    [...]
    Data on the offspring of mixed couples in the Soviet Union show that they tended formally to affiliate with the nationality of the non-Jewish parent. Unlike passport data, which could not be changed, declarations of nationality in the census were variable and unverified.
     
    - https://www.unz.com/article/against-david-irvings-view-of-hitler/#comment-2394826

    If I understand these Soviet registration processes and practices properly, depending on whether the extra 2 million Jews that became part of the Soviet Union after those annexations had one or two Jewish parents, they would either be registered/issued a passport stating they were Jewish (two Jewish parents) or Latvian, Lithuanian, Estonian, Polish, Romanian (one Jewish parent) by Soviet authorities.

    If these Jewish populations had even higher intermarriage rates than Russian Jews, which likely could be the case, easily 40% to 50% of the “new” Soviet Jews could “disappear” due to the Soviet passport registration process. Alternatively instead of 2 million extra Jews, it was actually 4 million Jews (one or two Jewish parents) that were added to the Soviet Union through these annexations, but only 2 million (two Jewish parents) were registered as Jewish and the other 2 million (one Jewish parent) were registered as Latvian, Lithuanian, Estonian, Polish or Romanian.
     

    - https://www.unz.com/article/against-david-irvings-view-of-hitler/#comment-2394910

    The Sanning book Epilogue by Germar Rudolf makes a similar point:

    All of the following reasons why the number of Jews in a country could have been reduced were simply lumped together as German Holocaust victims:
    [...]
    Jews not statistically registered or identified as Jews today - p. 207 "Walter N. Sanning: The Dissolution of Eastern European Jewry 2nd edition" http://holocausthandbooks.com/index.php?page_id=29

    , @Holodenier
    He specifically says "Die Judenevakuierung" - "The Jew-evacuation". In other words, military lingo for deportation. The Holocaust-promoters who put up this speech have then translated the word "Ausrottung" into "extermination" to give the impression that Himmler is using an euphemism, but "Ausrottung" doesn't have to imply killing. Himmler then goes on to say that this deportation of Jews ("Judenevakuierung") has caused a lot of dead Jews, but that is not in dispute.
    , @Pelagic Predator
    The translation of ‘ausrottung’ as ‘extermination’ colors the interpretation of the speech.
    In english you might translate it as ‘rooted out’. Anyway, the term ‘exterminate’ (from the latin ex terminus) literally means ‘taken to the boundaries’. So there you have it - ‘rooted out’ and expelled.
    , @James Bowery
    First, answer this Quora question: "Where is Himmler's diary stored?".
    , @Herman
    Translation to english is the question here

    Defenders of the Holocaust Myth insist that the German words Extermination and extermination , when used in reference to people, can only mean, killing, a point which they want to demonstrate by adducing some German dictionary published after the war. This Defenders of the Faith is insist that the meaning has not changed. Both claims are disproven, through consultation of old dictionaries and through consideration of usage prior to 1945.


    T his is from A New Compendious English Dictionary by William Dwight Whitney, Henry Holt & Co., New York, 1887. (That's only two years before Hitler was born, and 13 years before Himmler.) Eradicate and the noun derived from it, eradication , historically have a range of meanings. The literal meaning of eradicating is its primary meaning, "r oot out." "Eradicate" is simply a Latin-derived word that literally means "root out." "Extirpate" is also defined as "to pull up by the roots." "Exterminate" had a meaning in 19th and early 20th century. ) the border ( terminus ); therefore "exterminate" in older usage need not mean killing.
    , @FKA Max


    RKU just doesn’t seem to do serious responses to serious criticism. David Cole at Takimag, Gregory Cochran at West Hunter…he just ignores them.
     
    - http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-holocaust-denial/#comment-2516030

    He didn't ignore Cole.

    Cole was, apparently, too much of a coward to send the following insulting email directly to Mr. Unz, after Mr. Unz had replied back to him:

    Cole to Unz (unsent, because why bother?)
     
    - http://www.countercontempt.com/archives/5908 Archived link: http://archive.is/ebHUa#selection-411.0-411.42

    Treblinka Commandant Franz says it was an extermination camp.
     
    - http://archive.is/ebHUa#selection-843.0-843.61

    This interview and "confession" with Kurt Franz https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurt_Franz is a joke. He doesn't even know what he is talking about when describing the camp setup and supposed extermination process in Treblinka:

    Interview with last Treblinka commander Kurt Franz (German)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OH8SskHB2e4

    Here some Google translated comments from underneath the video, by Germans that are also skeptical of his account/confession:


    Anderer Name
    2 months ago (edited)
    Ich habe den Eindruck er hat sich diese Geschichten so lange erzählt, das er sich seine eigene Lügen glaubt. Als ob ein SS Mann/ Kommandant nicht wusste was in seinem Lager passiert.
    [...]
    I have the impression he has told these stories for so long that he believes his own lies. As if an SS man / commander did not know what happened in his camp.
     

    BountyhunterKlepto
    1 month ago
    Für einen Kommandanten hat er allem Anschein nach gar zu wenig gewusst zu haben. Entweder deutet das auf katastrophal und beispiellos schlechte Führung hin, die man sich in der Organisation der SS nur schwer vorstellen kann, oder daraufhin, dass er schlicht gelogen hat.
    [...]
    For a commander, he seems to have known too little. Either that indicates catastrophic and unprecedentedly bad leadership, which is hard to imagine in the organization of the SS, or that he simply lied.
     


    Joe Lionheart

    2 months ago
    Er konnte ja nichts anderes sagen. Für Hafterleichterungen anstelle von Folter u Todesstrafe würde ich auch alles erzählen.Man kennt das aus den malmedy Prozessen.
    [...]
    He could not say anything else. For detention facilities instead of torture and death penalty, I would also tell everything. One knows that from the malmedy processes.
     

    Alexander Prinz
    2 months ago
    Zu dieser Zeit war er schon Freigänger. Er war die letzten Jahre seines Lebens ein freier Mann.
    [...]
    At this time he was already a free-lance. He was a free man in the last years of his life.
     

    A search of his home found a photo album of Treblinka with the title, "Beautiful Years".[15]

    At the Treblinka Trials in 1965, Franz denied having ever killed a person, having ever set his dog on a Jew, and claimed to have only beaten a prisoner once.[16] On 3 September he was found guilty of collective murder of at least 300,000 people, 35 counts of murder involving at least 139 people, and for attempted murder. He was sentenced to life imprisonment.[5] He was released in 1993 for health reasons. Kurt Franz died in Wuppertal in 1998.
     
    - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurt_Franz#Post-war_trial_and_conviction

    Dr. W. Pfannenstiel, Professor of Medicine at Marburg, had been sent to Belzec and other camps as medical adviser to improve hygiene and health care in the camps. After the war, he was repeatedly interrogated regarding his visit to Belzec with Gerstein. He was charged in two cases but never convicted. In the court-room statements, which are available to us, he never directly disputed Gerstein's account, but in a private letter he described the Gerstein Statement as "highly dubious rubbish in which 'fantasy' far outweighs fact." He also wrote that due to the persecution and slander to which he was exposed, he did not wish to comment further on the matter publicly. In other words, Pfannenstiel had clearly tried to avoid further trouble for himself. The 'whole truth' would have been too much for his prosecutors to bear. - Letter from Pfannenstiel to P. Rassinier, dated Aug. 3, 1963, published in W. Stäglich, U. Walendy, "NS-Bewältigung", Historische Tatsachen no. 5, Historical Review Press, Southam (GB) 1979, p. 20.
     
    - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerstein_Report#cite_ref-12
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Anonymous[679] • Disclaimer says:

    I had lamented the absence of an American Pravda column on the past couple Mondays, as it has become a treasured little pleasure of mine to read through a new one on my Monday commute. Yet seeing that a new one of considerable length and dealing with a very important issue has been published certainly lightens my day, even before I’ve read it. Keep up the great work, Mr. Unz!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Moi
    Nothing but respect for Mr. Unz. It would take intelligence and courage to write this.
    , @Kratoklastes

    it has become a treasured little pleasure of mine to read through a new one on my Monday commute
     
    I hope you position yourself with your back to a bulkhead - being observed reading material like this on an American public conveyance would raise even greater risk that that faced by people doing algebra on airplanes.

    It might not be as big a risk for thee, as for me. As the song goes...


    "My eyes are dim, I cannot see,
    My browser font's at 23,
    My brow-ser fo-ont's a-at twen-tee-three"
     
    Note to 5-Eyes: I fully support and endorse the practice of delaying flights in the event that a dusky, curly-haired person is caught doing sums with foreign squiggles in them. After all, right-thinkers know - or ought to suspect - that algebra is a Muzzie invention... al-jabr sounds bad enough (it might be a leader of ISIS or something) but worse still, it means 're-union of broken parts'... parts of a bomb or a terrorist cell, perhaps?

    STOP RESISTING.

    , @Ben Sampson
    yes..I have finally got to this and it is a very enlightening contribution..useful indeed.
    I knew there had to be something here which kept me coming back. UNZ is for real..a real scholar.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. ‘…Lipstadt convincingly demonstrates that very few Americans seem to have believed in the reality of the Holocaust during the Second World War itself, despite considerable efforts by agitated Jewish activists to persuade them…’

    A bit of what is now ancient history becomes relevant here. Forty-fifty years before the Second World War, Jews had started retailing what turned out to be grossly exaggerated accounts of their sufferings in Russian pogroms. Anything from one or two to perhaps a score of deaths became hundreds, and innuimerable utterly fictitious atrocity tales were reported as fact.

    Eventually, of course, the exaggeration became obvious. However, it was repeated at the time of the Russian Civil War. Once again, vast death tolls from pogroms, etc. Yet again, that the tales were a mixture of exaggeration and outright fabrication eventually became obvious.

    Hence, when reports of massive Nazi death camps started coming out of Eastern Europe a generation later, they were understandably greeted with skepticism — the more so as the First World War had also seen vast quantities of spurious German atrocity stories. For example, there was some ridiculous tale about the Germans killing Belgians and turning their bodies into soap or something — in camps, no less.

    People were skeptical about the camps for good reason. These sort of lies had been being produced — and subsequently shown to be lies — for a good sixty years preceding the Second World War. No doubt the Germans were being beastly to the Jews — but actually killing them by the million? That elicited a collective raised eyebrow.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
    Lipstadt knows how to write.
    When I had read
    Deborah Lipstadt, ‘Denying the holocaust’, 1993, New York
    now some fifteen years ago, when I still believed mainstream history, I was upset about those denying this historical truth.
    I now call Lipstadt Lyingstadt, her book is just lies and accusations, without any factual basis.
    A similar book is
    Brigitte Hammann, ‘Hitler’s Vienna, A Dictator’s Apprenticeship’, Oxford New York, 1999
    , @ploni almoni
    The story, Moishe, is not the hoax. The story is that we can tell the goyim what they are allowed and what they are not allowed to think. And they do as they are told, and make it the law.
    , @Wally
    said:
    " Forty-fifty years before the Second World War, Jews had started retailing what turned out to be grossly exaggerated accounts of their sufferings in Russian pogroms."

    "Grossly exaggerated" if at all. But that's nothing compared to:

    Since at least 1823 Jews have been pushing their fake 6,000,000:
    https://imgur.com/a/0LFFF
    and:
    http://balder.org/judea/New-York-Times-Six-Million-Jews-Since-1869.php
    http://balder.org/judea/billeder-judea/Scan-New-York-Times-Six-Million-Since-1869-Composite.jpg

    www.codoh.com
    , @Wally
    said:
    "No doubt the Germans were being beastly to the Jews — but actually killing them by the million? That elicited a collective raised eyebrow."

    Really? Please present your proof of this 'beastliness'

    The Germans did nothing that wasn't being done by the Allies and others worldwide.

    www.codoh.com
    , @annamaria
    Two heavy gravestones upon the perfidious Holocaust biz
    1. “… the reality of the important Nazi-Zionist economic partnership of the 1930s, with Nazi officials traveling to Palestine as honored Zionist guests and leading Nazi newspapers praising the Zionist enterprise…
    … aside from Field Marshal Erhard Milch, Hermann Goering’s very powerful number-two in the German Luftwaffe, Hitler’s military contained over a dozen half-Jewish generals and admirals and another dozen quarter-Jews of that same high rank, plus a total of roughly 150,000 additional half- or quarter-Jewish soldiers, with a large fraction of these being officers…”
    2. “…the death toll of innocent civilians from the Bolshevik Revolution running well into the tens of millions … the Bolshevik leaders were overwhelmingly Jewish…Although only around 4% of Russia’s population was Jewish, Jews constituted perhaps 80-85% of the early Soviet government...
    And prior to World War II, Jews remained enormously over-represented in the Communist leadership, especially dominating the Gulag [a system of the murderous concentration camps] administration and the top ranks of the dreaded NKVD…
    ...the inescapable conclusion is that in per capita terms Jews were the greatest mass-murderers of the twentieth century, holding that unfortunate distinction by an enormous margin and with no other nationality coming even remotely close."
    , @jilles dykstra
    " No doubt the Germans were being beastly to the Jews "
    Beastly ?
    Ordinary Germans not at all, as jew Klemperer describes.
    The Gestapo was nasty, but no more than that
    Victor Klemperer, ‘I will bear witness, A diary of the Nazi years, 1942-1945’, New York 1999
    , @jacques sheete

    No doubt the Germans were being beastly to the Jews
     
    Um, no.

    Study what the Commies were doing to the Germans and who the Commies were. You may not be too surprised to find that history has been turned on its head, as usual. It's quite amusing to find that the truth is the opposite of what we've long been taught.
    , @Florin
    The pogroms indeed may have been highly exaggerated:

    https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2012/05/08/revisiting-the-19th-century-russian-pogroms-part-1-russias-jewish-question/

    https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2012/05/11/myth-and-the-russian-pogroms-part-2-inventing-atrocities/

    https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2012/05/13/myth-and-the-russian-pogroms-part-3-the-jewish-role/

    More broadly this, and the myth of Exodus (perhaps an inversion of the Hyksos’ expulsion from Egypt as a hostile ruling elite) and the Kabbalistically sacred 6 million figure go to a deep Jewish tendency to make themselves the perpetual innocent sacred Victim.

    Suggesting Israelis are brutal and racist toward Palestinians is true, but ‘anti-Semitic’ because it paints Jews as other-than blameless victims. After all, when your god advises genocide to claim a new land full of people, how can one say this is not a wicked wct unless the Jews are simply to be deemed as incapable of bad acts? israel is always ‘responding to’ Hamas rockets. Notably ‘Hamas rockets’ are never themselves a ‘response’ to Israeli attacks.


    https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2009/08/01/the-culture-of-deceit/

    https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2009/08/18/the-culture-of-deceit-part-ii/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. Rational says:

    HOLOCAUST IS A FANTASY…..

    Thanks for the excellent article, Sir. You make many great points. Psychologically……

    Holocaust means to burn the whole animal alive. It is barbecuing a whole animal live.

    Holo = whole.

    Caust = burn.

    So who loves Holocaust?

    Yahweh.

    He demand quarbanot, i.e. sacrifice, as the ultimate act of love and devotion to him, like Avram tried to kill his own son as a sacrifice to Yahweh.

    The whole of Torah is about quarbanot, and Yahweh loves the smell of burning flesh—quarbanot. This phrase appears over and over in the Torah.

    That was the whole purpose of the Jewish temple—quarbanot. That is what the temple priests demanded—quarbanot. That is the biggest mitzvah–quarbanot.

    The holiest quarbanot is of the whole live animal, i.e. holocaust.

    The deepest Jewish fantasy is to become holy, to become one with Yahweh, to become his quarbanot, his holocaust and to become holy, as his chosen one.

    Read More
    • Replies: @corstopitum
    https://holocaustdeprogrammingcourse.com/
    , @caveman
    My Dear "Rational":
    I sense you misunderstand the function and purpose of the word 'quarbanot', as well as the word we translate as 'Yahweh'. These Hebrew words are totally misunderstood and twisted by those that ignorantly do not understand the words, or their meanings. As I have often shared, if those that called themselves 'Jehovah Witness' understood the Hebrew word YHVH (Yahweh, Jehovah, LORD) they would change the name of their religious denomination, as well as their conduct. All religions distort the simple purity of the Holy Spirit of Truth in Love, that which Yashua referred to as 'My Father'.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  5. Wally says:

    The fraud is coming to an end.

    There is simply no proof to sustain the holocaust’ narrative, none.

    The claims defy laws of science, logic & rational thinking. IOW, it is a hateful & destructive religion that has been very profitable for Jews in general and “that shitty little country” in particular.

    The ‘holocaust’ storyline is one of the most easily debunked narratives ever contrived. That is why those who question it are arrested and persecuted. Only lies require laws against free speech & persecution of those who speak freely.

    The ’6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers’ are scientifically impossible frauds.
    See the ‘holocaust’ scam debunked here: http://codoh.com
    No name calling, level playing field debate here: http://forum.codoh.com

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  6. Rational says:

    ADDENDUM ON KORBAN:

    Per Wikipedia article on Korban and its subtype, called Olah:

    The Hebrew noun olah (עֹלָה) occurs 289 times in the Masoretic Text of the Hebrew Bible…………..It means “that which goes up [in smoke]“.[3]. Olah’s traditional name in English is “holocaust”,[3] and the word olah has traditionally been translated as “burnt offering.”[4][5][6] The term was translated as holocauston in the Septuagint. Today, some English Bible translations render the word as holocaust, and others translate it as “burnt offering”.

    Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burnt_offering_%28Judaism%29

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    David Irving would beg to differ. He says millions were killed.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. phil says:

    Auschwitz has lost some of its luster, but the Holocaust establishment still stands by many of the longstanding narratives. Meanwhile, much attention has been shifted to Treblinka. Excavations at two of the other Reinhardt camps did not find much to substantiate claims of hundred of thousands of victims, and the early use of ground-based radar at Treblinka has not yielded very much either, BBC pronouncements notwithstanding.

    On the other hand, although Carlo Mattogno has produced several fascinating documents which point to many of the Jewish campers having been transited to destinations in Byelorussia, Ukraine, and the Baltics, there are more than 1.2 million people to be accounted for, and it is understandable that many onlookers are not persuaded by the Holocaust Revisionists. It would be helpful if Putin would do more to make Soviet-era archives available, but he is upholding the standard Holocaust narratives thus far.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wally
    - Of course, when liars lies, they must then defend those lies with more lies.
    'O, what a tangled web they weave when first they practise to deceive'.

    Sobibor ‘monument’ supposedly over the remains of 250,000 Jew, actual remains of the alleged 250,000 cannot be shown.
    https://www.scrapbookpages.com/Poland/Sobibor/SobiborMonument04.jpg

    Alleged “ash pond” for 1,100,000 Jew remains at Auschwitz, no actual remains can be shown.
    https://furtherglory.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/ashpondandsauna.jpg?w=300&h=198

    Alleged location of Treblinka mass graves / remains of 900,000 Jews according to Treblinka officials, no alleged remains can be shown
    https://www.scrapbookpages.com/Poland/Treblinka/Treblinka29.jpg

    www.codoh.com
    , @CalDre

    It would be helpful if Putin would do more to make Soviet-era archives available
     
    Putin closed the archives and he has made Holocaust Denial a very serious crime in the Russian Federation.

    Don't put your hopes in that Globalist.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. Anonymous[337] • Disclaimer says:

    If only it were just ‘denial’ that were prohibited. In many places it’s verboten even to ask impertinent questions, and in some places all questions are deemed impertinent.

    “It is clear that thought is not free if the profession of certain opinions makes it impossible to earn a living. It is clear also that thought is not free if all the arguments on one side of a controversy are perpetually presented as attractively as possible, while the arguments on the other side can only be discovered by diligent search.”

    ― Bertrand Russell, Sceptical Essays

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    If only it were just ‘denial’ that were prohibited. In many places it’s verboten even to ask impertinent questions, and in some places all questions are deemed impertinent.

    Even worse is that these speech laws even spread to arresting people for jokes and comments unrelated to the Holocaust. So, you can get in trouble for saying insulting things about homos and trannies in much of the EU. After Mandela died, some guy in UK was arrested for a joke.

    It began from silencing deniers of genocide to arresting those guilty of irreverence of the idols of PC, esp Jews, homos, and blacks .
    , @Jett Rucker
    "If only." Well, that's the problem. Once "just" "denial" is prohibited, then comes the question again and again, what is, or is not "denial."

    Once you let the camel poke his nose into the tent ... you get the whole camel.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. Here we go: Holocaust Denial.

    Don’t worry. Personally, I think the Holocaust occurred substantially as described, but if others want to argue differently, I don’t see it as heresy. I’m no more offended than if someone wants to argue the Japanese could have successfully invaded Hawaii. Not my opinion, but…

    I will point out that while he has flirted with outright Holocaust Denial in the past, David Irving has found and published on his website what he regards as irrefutable evidence that 2.5 million Jews were killed in the ‘Operation Reinhard’ camps alone. While he is skeptical about the importance of Auschwitz, I imagine he’d agree at least a million additional Jews were killed by the Einsatzgruppen in the East, died of starvation in the Warsaw Ghetto, etc, etc.

    So we’re at 3.5 million as a minimum figure — I’d go with at least 5 million myself. Obviously, the difference would have been very important to Jew #3,773,751 but as a moral matter, I don’t see the distinction. 3.5 million is substantially as awful as 5 million. Have 6 million if it’s important to you. No one will ever know with any great precision anyway. As far as I’m concerned, it’s like arguing about what proportion of Iran’s population the Mongols killed. Past a point, a definitive answer simply isn’t to be found, and it’s certainly not something that’s worth assaulting elderly men in the streets over.

    Actually, the only significant area of controversy I see is whether Hitler knew and approved. There’s no clear evidence. Irving argues he didn’t — I’d guess he did. That particular question could do with some dispassionate analysis.

    As to why not many paid attention to the Holocaust before 1961 — it’s bloody dull. Lining unresisting victims up and shooting them is objectively about as interesting and appealing a subject for study as the operations of a slaughterhouse. This actually is the worst effect of the whole Holocaust Industry phenomenon. Lately it seems that every text dealing with Germany in the Second World War feels obliged to spend half its pages recounting the tale of the Holocaust yet again, and it’s bloody dull.

    Finally, the unique horror escapes me. We are all individuals; what matters above all to us is that it is us being killed, not our precise relationship to our fellow victims. How it was somehow consolation to a Russian POW starving to death that he wasn’t being killed because he was Jewish, or solace to a four year old girl being baked alive in a cellar in Dresden that it wasn’t being done because she was Jewish totally escapes me.

    The Holocaust. It happened, it was wrong, and it’s dull.

    Read More
    • Troll: Mike P
    • Replies: @Greg Bacon

    I will point out that while he has flirted with outright Holocaust Denial in the past, David Irving has found and published on his website what he regards as irrefutable evidence that 2.5 million Jews were killed in the ‘Operation Reinhard’ camps alone.
     
    Link? None, as you won't find any to back up your assertions.

    I purchased and read Mr. Irvings/ "Hitler's War," a magnificent 838 pages of that time--with over 100 pages of notes and sources--that goes into intimate detail about WWII. There is NO mention of Operation Reinhard, or 'Aktion Reinhard' in German.

    I checked Mr. Irving's site and found "Holocaust Denial and Operation Reinhard." Did some research at that link--below--but couldn't find any definitive figures like you claim.

    http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/Belzec/Belzec%20etc.pdf

    And the 'Final Solution' phrase was warped by the holocaust junkies as the real term is TERRITORIAL Final Solution. Hitler did NOT want to mass-murder Juden, just round them up and move them to the new land conquered from Russia. Another 'Pale of the Settlement,' if you will.

    There are so many LIES told about the holocaust, how can anyone seriously believe the 6 million figure?
    Lies like the Nazi masturbation machine that literally milked Jew males to death. Or the giant electrical chair that could hold and electrocute 10,000 Juden at once?
    Or the secret Buck Rogers like invention, a space ray that vaporized 20,000 Auschwitz Jews all at once.
    Or the now disproved soap made from Jew ashes/fat. Or the human skin lamp shades. Or the giant steam chambers used to cook Jews to death. Another LIE.

    Shall I go on? I certainly can, but for brevity's sake, I'll stop with the LIES here.


    Tell me Mr. Wright, what made the Nazis help over 60,000 of German Jews move to Palestine, from 1933-42, even helping them set up industries, business and living quarters, which the Germans had to quit in 1942, since the war on the Eastern Front was going badly and the Germans needed those assets to help with the war?
    It was called "The Transfer Agreement" and it's what got former London Mayor Livingstone in trouble with the holocaust fanatics because he mentioned a bit of truth from that period.

    Since the holocaust is listed as being from 1942-45, we're supposed to believe that literally, overnight, the Germans went from helping Jews move to their nation of choice to pushing them in gas chambers?

    Sorry, but like someone already said, "Truth needs no defense; truth can stand on its own."
    Evidently not in at least 17 European nations, where it is VERBOTEN to ask questions about that time.
    Even asking a sensible question like, "Why did the Auschwitz sign declaring that four million were killed here get changed to a little over 1 million, and that included Gypsies, criminal, political dissidents, Commies etc. Ask that and risk getting arrested, tried, convicted and heavily fined while you sit in prison for five years.
    Ditto for the numbers at Majdanek, which dropped from around 600,000 to around 70,000, but don't ask why, unless you want to go to prison.

    When someone tells that many lies and then gets horrified when people don't believe their BS, it's their own fault for telling such whoppers to begin with.
    , @Bardon Kaldian

    Actually, the only significant area of controversy I see is whether Hitler knew and approved. There’s no clear evidence. Irving argues he didn’t — I’d guess he did. That particular question could do with some dispassionate analysis.
     
    Of course he did. Rebirth through ordeal & fire was the center of his world-view, Jews being considered to be something like pestilence, or rats who destroy high culture through their intrinsic & unalterable pervy rottenness.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-LMK6lyAoE

    Hitler's apologists do him disservice by portraying him as some uninformed hick. He was not a great leader comparable to Alexander, Caesar or Napoleon (these guys were almost superhuman), but he remains one of 3-4 most important 20th C political figures (Lenin, Stalin, Mao could be competitors, although I would choose Lenin over the rest).
    , @phil
    Irving's conclusion was based on the Korherr Report and the German term for "special treatment" of the Jews. The report concerned what was claimed to be an enormous reduction in the Jewish population in "Europe." It included mention of the more than 1.2 million Jews who had been sent to the Reinhardt camps in what had been Eastern Poland. Sometimes "special treatment" (in German) did indeed refer to killing.

    However, Carlo Mattogno in the Holocaust Handbooks (esp. SOBIBOR) has argued that the "special treatment" involved rounding up and sending Jews to what were actually transit camps. The camps were not outfitted with any crematoria, whereas other camps which no one regarded as "death camps" did have them--death from disease and other natural causes being very substantial. Many Jews were then deported into the western part of the USSR, which the German military had occupied.


    Korherr refers to the camps as having been "evacuation stations" and in Section X he refers to the "Eastern Territories" (east of Poland) as being counted by him as "off-going," which meant they were no longer being considered as part of "Europe." So it's possible that Irving's interpretation is wrong and that what you refer to as the minimum figure for the Holocaust may be well under 1 million. Rather than being killed, the deported Jews were no longer "Europeans."

    , @Meimou
    As to why not many paid attention to the Holocaust before 1961 — it’s bloody dull

    A weak explanation. The most likely explanation is that the OS is a lie, it doesn't help you that Eisenhower and Churchill didn't mention it in their books.

    Why the Allies didn't use it as wartime propaganda?

    How do you keep the murder of millions s secret anyway?

    If it was so "dull" why did the OS get more important over time?
    , @J. Masterson
    "David Irving has found and published on his website what he regards as irrefutable evidence that 2.5 million Jews were killed in the ‘Operation Reinhard’ camps alone."

    If I'm wrong, please link to the Irvin site explaining this, but from my understanding, his "irrefutable evidence" is a single decoded telegram that he interprets to describe fatalities at the Reinhard camps.

    Others who translated this document say it only describes arrivals at the camps, not necessarily deaths.

    I think Irving damn well knows the difference, but after 20 years of abuse, imprisonment and terrorism, he's a broken man at this point. Poor chap.
    , @Henry's Cat

    I will point out that while he has flirted with outright Holocaust Denial in the past, David Irving has found and published on his website what he regards as irrefutable evidence that 2.5 million Jews were killed in the ‘Operation Reinhard’ camps alone.
     
    You refer, no doubt, to the so-called Hoefle telegram. By 'found' you unfortunately give the wrong impression that Irving discovered it himself. But how does he extrapolate from the 1.25 million sent to the camps (that's minus the 25,000 sent to Majdanek) to the end of 1942 to 2.5 million by the end of 1943? The revisionist position, as you know, is that these were transit camps. Irving, if he wished to argue in good faith, would have to have subjected the alleged methods of mass gassings and body disposal at the camps to the same scrutiny that he'd applied to Auschwitz.
    , @Wally
    said: "So we’re at 3.5 million as a minimum figure — I’d go with at least 5 million myself. "
    Yet you have zero proof. Your engaging in garbage in, garbage out.

    Let us know where we can see the alleged human remains in allegedly known locations.

    On Irving, who BTW was released from prison early, hmm:
    Irving's 'holocaust' lite / but what '2.4 million document'?
    http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=4548
    and :
    'Irving attempts 'rehabilitation' via the Hoefle Telegram'
    http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=4558
    and:
    Grubach's Open Letter to David Irving on his recent change of mind about the Holocaust
    http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=4563

    on the Einsatzgruppen:
    Per their alleged ‘Holocaust by Bullets’ the ‘holocau$t’ Industry now claims that ca. 2,000,000 Jews were shot by the Einsatzgruppen into huge pits, so, anyone, please SHOW us the actual excavations, the enormous mass graves, & remains that are claimed to exist, their locations are allegedly known.
    Is that:
    100 graves of 20,000?
    200 graves of 10,000?
    400 graves of 5,000?
    500 graves of 4,000?
    1000 graves of 2000?
    2000 graves of 1000?

    www.codoh.com

    , @peterAUS
    Up to and including

    ...That particular question could do with some dispassionate analysis...
     
    agree.
    , @Kratoklastes

    Personally, I think the Holocaust occurred substantially as described
     
    When you say 'as described', what version are you talking about?

    Here are some things that were very specifically included in 'as described' at various stages ...

    • an electric conveyor belt that vaporised 1000 Jews at a time;
    • 1.5 million killed by lethal injection to the heart;
    • 'steaming to death' of ~10,000 Jews at Treblinka in 1942;
    • asphyxiation from carbon monoxide (from diesel engines);
    • babies being thrown alive into burn pits;
    • ethnically colour-coded smoke from crematory chimneys;
    • soap from human fat;
    • lampshades from human skin;
    • various riveting, harrowing, first-person narratives that have been shown to be completely fraudulent

    At various points in history, those things were part of the canonical narrative; in much of Europe you face criminal sanction if you point out that they are all bullshit. (That's the truly weird bit: you can be imprisoned for saying that known-false parts of the narrative, are false).

    One of the hallmarks of a false narrative, is a variant of Dunning-Kruger: the people who make things up do not possess any competence in the field, and so they make errors that are obvious to those with some training. The notion that crematoria chimneys give off columns of smoke, for example - or that the smoke changes colour depending on the ethnicity of the corpse.

    I have absolutely no doubt that very unpleasant things happened to people who were interned in camps in territory under the control of the Third Reich, particularly in the late stages of the war when logistics became highly problematic. In and of itself, that was a war crime, and there's no need to gild the lily (or over-egg the pudding) by trying to pretend there was some Rube Goldberg-esque hyper-inefficient institutional arrangement, set up based on super-secret pinkie-swears, solely (or primarily) to exterminate members of one race-cult.

    As I understand it, the current catechism has a few moving parts:

    ① there was a specific policy of extermination due to racial hatred;
    ② that the policy focused on Jews;
    ③ that the policy was implemented through relocation of victims to camps;
    ④ that (some of) those camps were specifically extermination camps;
    ⑤ that the killing happened using cyanide gas in the form of Zyklon B pellets;
    "⑥ million", and no less, even if the death toll at some camps is reduced by 3 million;
    ⑦ that the remains of most of the victims were cremated - either in purpose built infrastructure, or in 'burn pits'.

    ⑦ is easiest to deal with: the throughput of a crematorium is a known engineering quantity; it is simply not possible to have cremated the number of victims being discussed, given the crematory capacity of the camps. As for 'wood fired' burn pits: anybody who has seen the mess that's left after a wood-fired open-air cremation, knows that this is simply a non-starter. A full modern cremation leaves 3-5lb or bone (actually as much as 10lb, but let's assume they were all small people with low bone density): where are the 9-30 million pounds (4,000-13,000 tonnes) of remains? (These are not 'ashes', by and large: they are lumps of dried-out bone; to get to the 'sandy' texture people associate with 'cremains', they are put through a cremulator ).

    ⑤ is problematic, given that such trace evidence as exists, supports the idea that Zyklon B was used for de-lousing (as it was by the Allies); there is insufficient cyanide residue in the 'extermination chambers', but ample residue in the 'de-lousing' facilities. There is also the problem that War Crimes investigators appointed doctors to perform hundreds of autopsies after liberation of the camps, and found no evidence of gassings of any type. The same is true for British and French investigations.

    ③ the logistics of moving people to camps for the sole (or main) purpose of putting them to death, is the sort of thing that would be thought up by someone with absolutely no understanding of the vast logistical problems associated with moving large numbers of people long distances (especially against their will). The diversion of resources from the main aim (i.e., fighting the war) would have been immense: manpower, materiel including arms and ammunition, fuel... if that was actually part of the 'system', the German military deserved to lose the war based solely on its incompetent planning.

    ④ why bother with death camps, particularly ones where a person might be in the camp for months before they were dispatched to the gas chambers? "To keep it from public view" is a poor attempted rationale (again, the sort of thing that would be proffered by someone who was making it up). Why not just drive them a few miles out of each town, line them up alongside a trench in a forest, and shoot them in the head - like the Soviets did? If anything, that would help explain the lack of forensic evidence of hundreds of thousands (or millions) of cremations.

    Even ① is problematic. Show me a policy of a government, anywhere in the world, that is not underpinned by enormous amounts of paperwork prior to the implementation of the policy. I don't mean personal records of the individuals who later become victims: I mean the drafting of regulations; the circulation of memoranda to refine the institutional framework that will facilitate the putting-into-practice of the policy; the allocation of funds in budget papers... that sort of thing. As an example: the Enabling Act of 1933 was a scant 2 pages, but there are 200 or so pages of background bureaucratic shit that preceded it, and hundreds more pages that were promulgated as a direct result of its passage.

    As to ②: if Jewishness defined as a racial marker was such a big focus, why were there tens of thousands of Jews, half-Jews and quarter-Jews in the German military (including the officer corps at flag rank)?

    I have almost no doubt that awful things happened to people in labour camps, and that people were interned because of their Jewishness - especially since the rhetoric of global Jewish and Zionist leaders was virulently, genocidally anti-German, as far back as Jabotinsky in 1933/34.

    I also have no doubt that some of those awful things were perpetrated by sick minds - being a camp guard is the type of job that attracts sick fucks who relish the notion of having life-or-death control over others (some of the staff of Abu Ghraib are perfect examples of this).

    But this idea that the German leadership were prepared to compromise their ability to achieve strategic (and later, even tactical) objectives, simply to give vent to a genocidal urge... that's a pretty extraordinary claim.

    I don't have a dog in the specifics of the fight: I'm a voluntaryist, so the fact that a government did horrific things to people under its thrall validates my view of the world; the idea of Jewishness as a race is beyond stupid, so any policy based on Jewish-raceness is retarded, as is identifying as a Jew on racial grounds.

    So if the evidence aligned with the dominant narrative, I would change my mind. The fact that the evidence doesn't align with the narrative; that the narrative has been significantly redacted over time; and that the hammer of the State now enforces an orthodoxy... well, that just serves to make me more skeptical.

    I am always highly skeptical of any 'fact' that requires legislation to force its acceptance. That Milton quotation again, with appropriate emphasis...

    “Though all the winds of doctrine were let loose to play upon the earth, so Truth be in the field, we do injuriously by licensing and prohibiting, to misdoubt her strength. Let her and Falsehood grapple; who ever knew Truth put to the worse, in a free and open encounter?”
     
    , @Pegasus
    The following is a quote from "Why Did Heavens Not Darken" by Jewish historian and holocaust survivor Arno J. Mayer, Dayton-Stockton Professor of History, Emeritus, at Princeton University.

    There is a distinction between dying from " natural" or "normal"
    causes and being killed by shooting, hanging, phenol injectlon, or
    gassing. But quite apart from the vital importance of not allowing this
    distinction to be used to extenuate and normalize the mass murder
    at Auschwitz, it should not be pressed too far. The Nazi leaders
    decided to transport frail and sick Jews, and Gypsies, to Auschwitz
    in full awareness of the perils they would face, and they continued to
    do so once there was no ignoring and denying the deadly conditions
    there, including the endemic danger of epidemics. Besides , from 1942
    to 1945, certainly at Auschwitz, but probably overall, more Jews were
    killed by so-called " natural" causes than by "unnatural" ones
    .
     
    (Page 365)

    This is honestly puzzling. Here there is a Jewish historian from Princeton, whose grandparents died in a concentration camp, seemingly claiming more Jews died from hunger, typhus and harsh living conditions "certainly at Auschwitz, but probably overall" than by execution by the Nazis. This is what the overwhelmingly majority of "holocaust deniers" are also saying.

    What do you and other holocaust believers on this thread make of that quote? I am a bit skeptical of the whole narrative since I read the book. Maybe I misunderstood the meaning of that statement?

    Here is the book, if you buy it through the link a little comission will go to help this site.

    https://www.amazon.com/Why-Did-Heavens-Not-Darken/dp/184467777X/?tag=unco037-20
    , @Jonesz
    Is Irving telling us the truth of what he believes? He happens to be under much stress and will be under much stress until he dies. We need to keep all of this in mind when we listen to him.
    , @Genrick Yagoda
    @ Colin Wright.

    Your post begins with a lie. David Irving has not published any such evidence on his website. For years, Irving's shifting positions have been a mystery to revisionsists, and remain a mystery to this day. If he has evidence, he should bring it forward.

    As far as the rest, "the holocaust" is not merely a lie, it is a collection of preposterous whoppers. Real gut busters, like the Barber of Treblinka or Dr Leon wells, who testified he was led to his work by the Ash Commander, who wore a devil's costume complete with a hook on his hand, and forced the Jews to make up songs while they walked to work, accompanied by a 60 piece orchestra. And they actually hanged a man on the basis of such nutty drivel.

    There is ZERO evidence for "the holocaust", and "the holocaust" is merely a pile of laughable nonsense told by people who benefit either financially or socially.

    http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/e/eichmann-adolf/transcripts/Sessions/Session-022-02.html
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. They say that in war truth is the first casualty. Unfortunately, multicultural societies like ours are always at war, n the MSM are the chief weapons.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  11. A few weeks back I opined that Ron was almost there and we could anytime expect “American Pravda the Holocaust and here we are

    Kaboom, the 50 megaton Tsar Bomba has exploded.

    However, as an outsider exploring this contentious topic I think it far more likely than not that the standard Holocaust narrative is at least substantially false, and quite possibly, almost entirely so.

    Welcome to the club Ron, I suspect that you were there a long time ago and have come out. It takes tremendous moral and physical courage to take this position and I salute you. As the Americans say to their military personnel – Thank you for your service.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jett Rucker
    It is chilling to read the author's recitations of the awful things that happened to other debunkers, and consider what he doesn't mention, and that is that with this article, he has put himself in line for similar treatment, one way or another.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. Ron,

    Carlo Mattogno is probably the most distinguished of the Holocaust revisionist historians, he’s written tens of thousands of densely referenced pages spanning decades of work. He’s definitely worth archiving. It’s telling that the orthodox historians have completely ignored this brilliant hard working scholar, imagine that even the biblical authorities argued with Darwinian scholars when evolution started capturing the minds of scholars but not these Holocaust theologians.

    https://holocausthandbooks.com/index.php?author_id=5

    Read More
    • Replies: @Paw
    This author engaged in the Sudeten fascists German Chauvinism /mentioned/, and fully promote the ideology of the fascists point of view.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. Meimou says:

    Took me an hour to through but it was worth it. Wonderfully informative

    Reading about the persecutions of
    revisionist made me angry, but I take comfort in the fact the we have been winning the information war for some time; the number of dead [email protected] being reduced, the number of gas Chambers being reduced, push back in the comment sections against the official narrative…

    The holocau$t ON is on it’s last legs.

    holocaustdeprogrammingcourse.com

    OT

    The links in the article are a must read for any anti holocauster researcher . If you are using android you can save them by using clipper+.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    All debunked. http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2018/04/a-not-so-short-debunking-of-holocaust.html
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. My revisionist story,

    I was a babe in the woods whistling and strolling here when that cruel man SS-Obersturmbannführer Wally selected me for the special treatment, he shoved me into the Gas Chamber and gave me the Leuchter and Rudolf Germar Prussian Blue treatment till I was completely stained blue then he shoved me into a Carlo Mattogno designed special oven and gave me a savage roasting till my old world view of the Holocaust went up in flames. And now here I am. Over a period of 3 months from Jan-March 2018 the old me got Shoahed.

    BTW a big shoutout to Wally.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  15. For a forum discussion I once made a list of my books on the WWII persecutions of the jews, nearly forty books.
    So I just glanced through the article.

    What I do not see mentioned is that ‘holocaust denial’ already is propaganda, denial in criminal cases exists when the crime is obvious.
    The holocaust discussion exists because the crime is not obvious.

    What I’m unable to understand is why nobody takes the trouble, apparently, to read a few books on how the concentration camps functioned, I listened them often enough.
    The descriptions are the same; the camps had self management, as had the ghetto in Warsaw.
    This management fed itself very well, Rassinier estimates them of 25% of the inmates.
    Unless food came in food packets, as with Rassinier, death in about six months time.
    Poliakov describes the same for the Warsaw ghetto.

    I’m not taking the trouble to list the books again, I just mention the authors I know: Elie Wiesel, Rassinier, Poliakov, Burg, nom de plume for Ginsberg, Kogon.
    After WWII Rassinier was thrown out of the French socialist party, it of course was impossible that camp management consisting of socialists and communists had misbehaved on this scale.
    Burg describes the exclusively jewish camp E of the river Bug, near Brest Litovsk.
    As Poliakov describes for the ghettohow, Burg describeshow rich jews ate well in good restaurant, he does not mention jewish deaths through hunger, but he does mention hungry children at the door of the restaurant.

    One more thing, Stephen J Gould explains the terrible situation in Bergen Belsen by the allies blocking any transport in Germany since early 1945, fighter bombers destroying anything that moved.
    Forgot in which book camp commanders are mentioned, desperately trying to find food.
    Of course also Zyklon B for delousing was no longer available, Anne Frank died of typhoid.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JoeFour
    "...I just glanced through the article."

    Very poor form to comment without a serious reading of the article. I'd suggest you go back and do so. You might discover your confidence in the authors you have read has been significantly misplaced.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. What a momentous day, I still can’t believe that it happened, I am trembling with excitement, how I wish I could take the day off and go to my room and open up a 15 year single malt and post on this 50 megaton thread. What a singularly courageous man our host is? He’s detonated all the bridges with his community – there’s no going back after this never ever.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  17. Once again a well written and researched essay. Ron it will be hard to ever get the truth out because the Jewish Gangbanging of Society is in full force. They invented the Social Mob Government that now runs the opinions of the Main Stream Media which as you said is in total control of the Jews. What we are seeing is Tribalistic Control of Society. As soon as anyone disagrees with anything the Social Mob of Facebook, Twitter and the rest of the clowns kick into gear. This is especially appealing to Blacks and other minorities who wish to riot, take down statues, and burn things. This isn’t much different to the way things work in Africa where for instance there are over 100 different Tribes fighting for control in places like Uganda. There is no time for reason or discussion. The Jews just kick these people into action. In Ferguson Michael Brown never had his hands up and tried to take the gun of the police officer. It doesn’t matter. These actors aren’t interested in truth or facts they demand some Cosmic Justice. The MSM during these riots just kept pouring more gasoline on the fire with lies and fake reports. When the Justice Dept. investigation by Obama’s Eric Holder was released no one cared about the truth the MSM went on to their next plan of attack. You cannot have a civilization with this type of mentality and that’s why we are doomed.

    Much of the Social Mob Movement in the US is funded by Soros and friends. Of course he is never criticized in the MSM because he is Jewish and that would be antisemitic. On the other side the so called Repubs have been bought out by Sheldon Anderson, the Zionist Jew who is a big supporter of the Holocaust Hoax and Israel’s wars with the US funding most of them. It seems hopeless because they have control of everything world wide and the view of everything is first filtered through a Jewish Lens before anyone sees it.

    Here are some interesting reads in line with the history that are seldom read:

    https://www.darkmoon.me/2013/the-sexual-decadence-of-weimar-germany/

    https://www.darkmoon.me/2015/torture-and-testicle-crushing-at-nuremberg/

    https://www.darkmoon.me/2015/german-victims-how-the-allied-victors-of-wwii-tortured-and-killed-their-german-prisoners-part-1-of-2/

    https://www.darkmoon.me/2015/german-victims-how-the-allied-victors-of-wwii-tortured-and-killed-their-german-prisoners-of-war-part-2-of-2/

    https://www.darkmoon.me/2013/the-liberation-of-the-death-camps/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  18. Polymath says:

    It seems like by far the best way to go about this is to estimate the pre-and post-war Jewish populations by all the usual methods historians and economists have tried. What, in your opinion, are the best attempts to do this?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Don Chandler
    I read some time ago that the World Jewish Congress executed a census of Jews worldwide shortly before and shortly after WWII. If I recall correctly, the totals were in the range of 16 million at both points in time, with the latter census reporting a drop of about a quarter of a million. I can't seem to easily re-discover my source at this moment. You may have better luck.
    , @Occams
    "The World Almanac for 1940 gives the world's Jewish population as 15,319,359. The World Almanac for 1949 puts the number of Jews in the world at 15,713,638. "If the World Almanac figures are correct, "the world's Jewish population did not decrease in the war decade, but showed a small increase.".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. utu says:

    I always thought that the reason Raul Hilberg’s book was not too popular (I did not know he had difficulty in publishing it.) was because it showed a very ugly picture of cooperation of Judenrats and Jewish police with Germans. Hannah Arendt had access to Hilberg’s book manuscript (which she did not acknowledge) and used it in her Einstein in Jerusalem (which was initially serialized by New Yorker) highlighting Jewish cooperation and passivity. I would not be surprised if both her Einstein in Jerusalem and Hilberg’s The Destruction of the European Jews were still not translated into Hebrew.

    Kapo (2000) is an Israeli documentary film about the Jewish kapos who collaborated with the Nazis in the concentration camps during World War II.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kapo_(2000_film)

    The responses to the film were mixed, among Jewish and non-Jewish audiences alike. At a screening before a Jewish audience in Munich, Setton said that the younger members of the audience were pleased that someone had dared to broach the subject, while older audience members were outraged.[2] Only a censored version of the film was aired on German television in fear of a hostile reaction by the viewing audience. In France, opposition to the film was so severe that La 25e Heure, the show on which it was screened, was taken off the air.

    I wonder if the film was shown in Israel.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Yevardian
    Israelis are actually far more tolerant of such opinions and/or portrayals than the diaspora, or indeed probably most Western Europeans.
    , @for-the-record
    and used it in her Einstein in Jerusalem

    [Freudian?] slip?
    , @iffen
    Hannah Arendt had access to Hilberg’s book manuscript (which she did not acknowledge)

    That’s odd.

    I found something like 12 citations to Hilberg by her in my edition.

    For example:

    … and I have relied even more on Raul Hilberg’s The Destruction of the European Jews …

    Arendt, Hannah. Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil (Kindle Location 4936). Penguin Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. [In] General Eisenhower’s Crusade in Europe (New York: Doubleday [Country Life Press], 1948), Winston Churchill’s The Second World War (London: Cassell, 6 vols., 1948-1954), and the Mémoires de guerre of General de Gaulle (Paris: Plon, 3 vols., 1954-1959). …. no mention either of Nazi “gas chambers,” a “genocide” of the Jews, or of “six million” Jewish victims of the war.

    This is a blatant lie by Faurrisson. Churchill in vol 6, p 597 (appendix C):

    Prime Minister to Foreign Secretary 11 July 44

    There is no doubt that this [persecution of Jews in Hungary and
    their expulsion from enemy territory] is probably the greatest and
    most horrible crime ever committed in the whole history of the world,

    and it has been done by scientific machinery by nominally civilised
    men in the name of a great State and one of the leading races of
    Europe. It is quite clear that all concerned in this crime who may fall
    into our hands, including the people who only obeyed orders by
    carrying out the butcheries, should be put to death
    after their associa-
    tion with the murders has been proved.

    I cannot therefore feel that this is the kind of ordinary case which is
    put through the Protecting Power, as, for instance, the lack of feeding
    or sanitary conditions in some particular prisoners’ camp
    . There should
    therefore, in my opinion, be no negotiations of any kind on this
    subject. Declarations should be made in public, so that everyone
    connected with it will be hunted down and put to death.

    That is, dead Hungarian Jews in the German camps have fallen to “scientific machinery” used by “nominally civilized men in the name of a great State”, and not simply to poor “conditions in some particular prisoners’ camp”. The latter is the usual Holocaust revisionists’ explanation and Churchill is totally rejecting it in a letter written in July 1944 before the word “holocaust” had entered the lexicon. Instead, Churchill describes (and assumes as known to his Foreign Minister) the Germans as murdering the Hungarian Jews with scientific technology in what he calls the greatest crime of human history, with any involvement to be punished by death. Obviously his words also imply a massive scale to the murder by scientific machinery, of a similar order of magnitude to the Hungarian Jewish population. Which again happens to match the standard un-revised account.
    Incidentally, the camp used (according to the standard account) for scientifically murdering the Hungarian Jews was Auschwitz.

    https://archive.org/details/WinstonChurchillTheSecondWorldWarTriumphAndTragedyVolume6

    Eisenhower’s memoir barely mentions anything about Jews. You would not learn from his book, or Churchills’, or de Gaulle’s that Kristallnacht, boycotts, and Nuremberg laws had ever existed in Nazi Germany, or that Hitler had any negative thoughts about Jews. Nevertheless those things are extremely well documented and not disputed by historical revisionists (anti-historians). That a personal political memoir of the war doesn’t mention these events is more of an indicator that the author assumes that the reader is already familiar with them, than that they never occurred or are unimportant.

    Eisenhower in fact specifically anticipated Holocaust revisionism and made a point of being personally photographed at German concentration camps in front of piles of dead prisoners, to bear witness and (in his words) help pre-empt the possibility that some people would later dismiss the massacres as “mere propaganda”. He also demanded that photographs and films be made at the camps and witness testimony be taken, for the same reason. This, too, is fairly well known and documented enough to never have been a subject of any historical revisionism. Faurrison chose to be a weasel and say that Eisenhower, who made a point of documenting the Holocaust in 1945, suddenly maintained a suspicious silence on the matter in 1948. The more honest interpretation is that the army films of the camps that he himself had commissioned, and newspaper articles by reporters he had had invited into the camps, were in such wide circulation in the year or two after the German surrender that Eisenhower treated the basic facts of extermination camps as already known to the public. He was writing a memoir, not a textbook.

    Crusade in Europe http://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.208955

    de Gaulle doesn’t mention Jews at all, not because nothing happened to them, but because the Vichy collaboration made the whole subject radioactive in France for decades after the war. Those are not points in dispute by revisionists, and Faurisson knew perfectly well that the lack of Jewish references in de Gaulle’s book has no bearing on any historical questions.

    This excerpt is the first I have read anything by Faurrisson, but the level of dishonesty he packed into a few sentences is entirely consistent with the appraisal of his credibility made at the time by everyone except his lone defender, Chomsky.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hippopotamusdrome
    Unz says:


    no mention either of Nazi “gas chambers,” a “genocide” of the Jews, or of “six million” Jewish victims of the war

     

    You say:


    This is a blatant lie

     

    Churchill's letter:


    the greatest and most horrible crime ever committed in the whole history of the world

     

    Not a mention of “gas chambers”, “genocide”, or “six million”.


    it has been done by scientific machinery

     

    Not a mention of “gas chambers”, “genocide”, or “six million”.


    carrying out the butcheries

     

    Not a mention of “gas chambers”, “genocide”, or “six million”.
    , @Anon
    It’s pretty well known that Eisenhower decided to film, take photos and make a visual record of the camps as soon as he saw them.
    , @Meimou
    Eisenhower in fact specifically anticipated Holocaust revisionism and made a point of being personally photographed at German concentration camps in front of piles of dead prisoners, to bear witness and (in his words) help pre-empt the possibility that some people would later dismiss the massacres as “mere propaganda”.

    Revisionist don't refute that prisoners died in large numbers. How did the piles of dead prisoner die?

    He also demanded that photographs and films be made at the camps and witness testimony be taken, for the same reason. This, too, is fairly well known and documented enough to never have been a subject of any historical revisionism

    No one refutes the existence of camps, so you don't get a point for bringing it upWhat was the nature of this witness testimony? Does it substantiate genocide?

    Stop knocking down strawman.
    , @nglaer
    Nice little bit of research and knowledge, needed and appreciated.
    , @Ron Unz

    That is, [according to Churchill] dead Hungarian Jews in the German camps have fallen to “scientific machinery” used by “nominally civilized men in the name of a great State”
     
    Well, it all sounds kind of vague to me. Maybe he was referring to the report mentioned by Lipstadt that 1.5 million Jews had been killed by being individually injected near the heart by a lethal drug, which certainly requires science. And Rabbi Stephen Wise was claiming that millions of Jews had been killed and made into soap and human lampshades, which obviously also requires "scientific machinery." Weren't shrunken human heads exhibited at the Nuremberg Trials? And wasn't there also some claim floating around that vast numbers of Jews had been killed by electrified floors or something like that?
    , @Anonymous

    Eisenhower in fact specifically anticipated Holocaust revisionism and made a point of being personally photographed at German concentration camps in front of piles of dead prisoners
     
    Even the official version holds that there were no death camps in Germany.
    , @Anonymous

    There is no doubt that this [persecution of Jews in Hungary and
    their expulsion from enemy territory]
    is probably the greatest and
    most horrible crime ever committed in the whole history of the world
     
    How faithful is the bracketed language to the original intended referent of "this"?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. Renoman says:

    Waaaaay tooooo looong!

    Read More
    • Disagree: for-the-record
    • Replies: @anonymous
    Did you read it? If not, then how would you know?
    , @Meimou
    Waaaaay to short an attention span!
    , @Anon
    Read it when you have the time. It’s not a short read it while drinking morning coffee article.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. Brabantian says: • Website

    From the website of Ron Unz’s fellow rebel Jew, Henry Makow in Canada – The story of Josef Ginsburg aka ‘Joseph G Burg’ (1908-90), the German-speaking Jew who:

    Had his books burned (!) repeatedly over many years by post-war, modern Germany, after he dared to question the official Shoah / Holocaust narrative

    A rabbi’s son who became a fervent Communist … Ginsburg joined advancing Soviet troops as part of official Soviet teams entering into & inspecting Nazi camps in Poland such as Auschwitz, Birkenau, Majdanek, Treblinka, & Sobibor, known today as the ‘death camps’

    As Ginsburg visited Auschwitz in 1945 & spoke to hundreds of surviving inmates, anti-Nazi Jew Ginsburg “formed the opinion that there were no ‘extermination’ camps at all, that gas chambers had never existed & that there had been no plan to exterminate the Jews of Europe.” Ginsburg said he could find no gas chambers which were not de-lousing stations, nor witnesses who had seen any

    Technically himself a ‘Holocaust survivor’, Ginsburg wrote books saying the ‘Holocaust’ was a fraud … West Germany’s government continually attacked Ginsburg, confiscating & burning 7 of Ginsburg’s 13 major books — the West German regime ice-cold to the irony of burning a Jew’s books over a much longer period than Nazis themselves ever did.

    Josef Ginsburg [gave] striking testimony at a Canadian ‘Holocaust denial’ trial of his friend Ernst Zündel … the Canadian crown prosecution refused to cross-examine him:

    http://www.zundelsite.org/archive/harwood/dsmrd/dsmrd24burg.html

    Ginsburg’s story is in process of being internet-scrubbed, close to being effectively ‘erased’ … the response to this Jewish writer & WW2 survivor was to burn his books & near-erase him from media & now the internet.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
    Burg, Ginsberg, feared for his life.
    The last pages of J.G. Burg, Schuld und Schicksal, Europas Juden zwischen Henkern und Heuchlern, München, 1962 state that in case of his death a Swiss solicitor would automatically publish documents in the possession of the solicitor.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. Hilberg challenged the “4 million at Auschwitz” in his first edition. Another matter: Hannah Arendt’s motivation for blocking the publication of Hilberg’s work was not his conclusion of the German-lead destruction of European Jews, but rather his conclusion that Jews played an important role in the destruction.

    FWIW, Hilberg’s Memoirs of a Holocaust Historian discuss Dawidowicz and company in much negative detail.

    Hilberg was forced to abide by political correctness for the third (Yale) edition of his major work, where he devoted four pages of the US government’s standard version of Rwanda. Said propaganda was largely debunked by the defense at the various trials and appeals at Arusha, especially Military II. The US governmental psuedo-historical outfits e.g. Human Rights Watch continues to peddle the party line.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  24. Another matter. With regards to your lumping Hilberg with Dawidowicz and company, and lumping Finkelstein with Hilberg’s “Holocaust Denial” opponents, could you comment on Finkelstein and Birn’s A Nation On Trial?

    Read More
    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
    What nation on trial, the jewish or the German ?
    Anyone can know that GB wanted WWI, it could not compete economically with the Germany united in 1870 by the French attack.
    On top of that, GB feared German economic expansion to the SE, the Berlin Bagdad railway, that would have given Germany access to the Mosul oil fields, on top of that GB feared export from Basra of German products to India.
    The line was to be extended to Basra.
    Versailles was designed to keep Germany weak forever.
    At the time it was seen as a jewish conference, Bernard Baruch and Frankfurter for example were there.
    Wilson was an important man there, Morgenthau had financed his election.
    Alas for GB, Versailles was so stupid that Germany came into such misery and poverty that it democratically elected Hitler, who took full power.
    This full power enabled Schacht to resurrect Germany economically in just three years.
    Thus, a new war, as Churchill said 'the whole period 1914 1945 can best be seen as one long war'.
    Jews were important in the second war against Germany, the jewish declaration of war in 1933.
    As to Hitler wanting to deminish jewish influence in Germany, see the statistics in
    Ismar Schorsch, 'Jewish Reactions to German Anti-Semitism, 1870 - 1914', New York 1972
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. Yevardian says:
    @utu
    I always thought that the reason Raul Hilberg's book was not too popular (I did not know he had difficulty in publishing it.) was because it showed a very ugly picture of cooperation of Judenrats and Jewish police with Germans. Hannah Arendt had access to Hilberg's book manuscript (which she did not acknowledge) and used it in her Einstein in Jerusalem (which was initially serialized by New Yorker) highlighting Jewish cooperation and passivity. I would not be surprised if both her Einstein in Jerusalem and Hilberg's The Destruction of the European Jews were still not translated into Hebrew.

    Kapo (2000) is an Israeli documentary film about the Jewish kapos who collaborated with the Nazis in the concentration camps during World War II.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kapo_(2000_film)
    The responses to the film were mixed, among Jewish and non-Jewish audiences alike. At a screening before a Jewish audience in Munich, Setton said that the younger members of the audience were pleased that someone had dared to broach the subject, while older audience members were outraged.[2] Only a censored version of the film was aired on German television in fear of a hostile reaction by the viewing audience. In France, opposition to the film was so severe that La 25e Heure, the show on which it was screened, was taken off the air.
     
    I wonder if the film was shown in Israel.

    Israelis are actually far more tolerant of such opinions and/or portrayals than the diaspora, or indeed probably most Western Europeans.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. @academic gossip

    [In] General Eisenhower’s Crusade in Europe (New York: Doubleday [Country Life Press], 1948), Winston Churchill’s The Second World War (London: Cassell, 6 vols., 1948-1954), and the Mémoires de guerre of General de Gaulle (Paris: Plon, 3 vols., 1954-1959). .... no mention either of Nazi “gas chambers,” a “genocide” of the Jews, or of “six million” Jewish victims of the war.
     
    This is a blatant lie by Faurrisson. Churchill in vol 6, p 597 (appendix C):

    Prime Minister to Foreign Secretary 11 July 44

    There is no doubt that this [persecution of Jews in Hungary and
    their expulsion from enemy territory] is probably the greatest and
    most horrible crime ever committed in the whole history of the world,

    and it has been done by scientific machinery by nominally civilised
    men in the name of a great State and one of the leading races of
    Europe. It is quite clear that all concerned in this crime who may fall
    into our hands, including the people who only obeyed orders by
    carrying out the butcheries, should be put to death
    after their associa-
    tion with the murders has been proved.

    I cannot therefore feel that this is the kind of ordinary case which is
    put through the Protecting Power, as, for instance, the lack of feeding
    or sanitary conditions in some particular prisoners' camp
    . There should
    therefore, in my opinion, be no negotiations of any kind on this
    subject. Declarations should be made in public, so that everyone
    connected with it will be hunted down and put to death.

     
    That is, dead Hungarian Jews in the German camps have fallen to "scientific machinery" used by "nominally civilized men in the name of a great State", and not simply to poor "conditions in some particular prisoners' camp". The latter is the usual Holocaust revisionists' explanation and Churchill is totally rejecting it in a letter written in July 1944 before the word "holocaust" had entered the lexicon. Instead, Churchill describes (and assumes as known to his Foreign Minister) the Germans as murdering the Hungarian Jews with scientific technology in what he calls the greatest crime of human history, with any involvement to be punished by death. Obviously his words also imply a massive scale to the murder by scientific machinery, of a similar order of magnitude to the Hungarian Jewish population. Which again happens to match the standard un-revised account.
    Incidentally, the camp used (according to the standard account) for scientifically murdering the Hungarian Jews was Auschwitz.

    https://archive.org/details/WinstonChurchillTheSecondWorldWarTriumphAndTragedyVolume6

    Eisenhower's memoir barely mentions anything about Jews. You would not learn from his book, or Churchills', or de Gaulle's that Kristallnacht, boycotts, and Nuremberg laws had ever existed in Nazi Germany, or that Hitler had any negative thoughts about Jews. Nevertheless those things are extremely well documented and not disputed by historical revisionists (anti-historians). That a personal political memoir of the war doesn't mention these events is more of an indicator that the author assumes that the reader is already familiar with them, than that they never occurred or are unimportant.

    Eisenhower in fact specifically anticipated Holocaust revisionism and made a point of being personally photographed at German concentration camps in front of piles of dead prisoners, to bear witness and (in his words) help pre-empt the possibility that some people would later dismiss the massacres as "mere propaganda". He also demanded that photographs and films be made at the camps and witness testimony be taken, for the same reason. This, too, is fairly well known and documented enough to never have been a subject of any historical revisionism. Faurrison chose to be a weasel and say that Eisenhower, who made a point of documenting the Holocaust in 1945, suddenly maintained a suspicious silence on the matter in 1948. The more honest interpretation is that the army films of the camps that he himself had commissioned, and newspaper articles by reporters he had had invited into the camps, were in such wide circulation in the year or two after the German surrender that Eisenhower treated the basic facts of extermination camps as already known to the public. He was writing a memoir, not a textbook.

    Crusade in Europe http://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.208955

    de Gaulle doesn't mention Jews at all, not because nothing happened to them, but because the Vichy collaboration made the whole subject radioactive in France for decades after the war. Those are not points in dispute by revisionists, and Faurisson knew perfectly well that the lack of Jewish references in de Gaulle's book has no bearing on any historical questions.

    This excerpt is the first I have read anything by Faurrisson, but the level of dishonesty he packed into a few sentences is entirely consistent with the appraisal of his credibility made at the time by everyone except his lone defender, Chomsky.

    Unz says:

    no mention either of Nazi “gas chambers,” a “genocide” of the Jews, or of “six million” Jewish victims of the war

    You say:

    This is a blatant lie

    Churchill’s letter:

    the greatest and most horrible crime ever committed in the whole history of the world

    Not a mention of “gas chambers”, “genocide”, or “six million”.

    it has been done by scientific machinery

    Not a mention of “gas chambers”, “genocide”, or “six million”.

    carrying out the butcheries

    Not a mention of “gas chambers”, “genocide”, or “six million”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
    Scientific ?
    The description of the asserted gas chambers, and how they functioned, show something far from scientific, on the contrary, primitive.
    This is one of the reasons these gas chambers for humans are improbable, the highly efficiënt Germans not devising an efficiënt killing and cremation process.
    Any chicken slaughter factory is more scientific.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    And the last words of the article are "the numbers are unbelievable"!
    , @Curmudgeon

    "Nazis may have killed up to 20m..."
     
    You understand, of course, that "up to" includes zero.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. anonymous[340] • Disclaimer says:
    @Renoman
    Waaaaay tooooo looong!

    Did you read it? If not, then how would you know?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. Pointless discussion. There is level of exaggeration on both sides.
    I only want to point out one fact.
    The treatment of internees was relatively best in Germany ad was gradually worse depending on increased distance from Germany.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  30. Greg Bacon says: • Website
    @Colin Wright
    Here we go: Holocaust Denial.

    Don't worry. Personally, I think the Holocaust occurred substantially as described, but if others want to argue differently, I don't see it as heresy. I'm no more offended than if someone wants to argue the Japanese could have successfully invaded Hawaii. Not my opinion, but...

    I will point out that while he has flirted with outright Holocaust Denial in the past, David Irving has found and published on his website what he regards as irrefutable evidence that 2.5 million Jews were killed in the 'Operation Reinhard' camps alone. While he is skeptical about the importance of Auschwitz, I imagine he'd agree at least a million additional Jews were killed by the Einsatzgruppen in the East, died of starvation in the Warsaw Ghetto, etc, etc.

    So we're at 3.5 million as a minimum figure -- I'd go with at least 5 million myself. Obviously, the difference would have been very important to Jew #3,773,751 but as a moral matter, I don't see the distinction. 3.5 million is substantially as awful as 5 million. Have 6 million if it's important to you. No one will ever know with any great precision anyway. As far as I'm concerned, it's like arguing about what proportion of Iran's population the Mongols killed. Past a point, a definitive answer simply isn't to be found, and it's certainly not something that's worth assaulting elderly men in the streets over.

    Actually, the only significant area of controversy I see is whether Hitler knew and approved. There's no clear evidence. Irving argues he didn't -- I'd guess he did. That particular question could do with some dispassionate analysis.

    As to why not many paid attention to the Holocaust before 1961 -- it's bloody dull. Lining unresisting victims up and shooting them is objectively about as interesting and appealing a subject for study as the operations of a slaughterhouse. This actually is the worst effect of the whole Holocaust Industry phenomenon. Lately it seems that every text dealing with Germany in the Second World War feels obliged to spend half its pages recounting the tale of the Holocaust yet again, and it's bloody dull.

    Finally, the unique horror escapes me. We are all individuals; what matters above all to us is that it is us being killed, not our precise relationship to our fellow victims. How it was somehow consolation to a Russian POW starving to death that he wasn't being killed because he was Jewish, or solace to a four year old girl being baked alive in a cellar in Dresden that it wasn't being done because she was Jewish totally escapes me.

    The Holocaust. It happened, it was wrong, and it's dull.

    I will point out that while he has flirted with outright Holocaust Denial in the past, David Irving has found and published on his website what he regards as irrefutable evidence that 2.5 million Jews were killed in the ‘Operation Reinhard’ camps alone.

    Link? None, as you won’t find any to back up your assertions.

    I purchased and read Mr. Irvings/ “Hitler’s War,” a magnificent 838 pages of that time–with over 100 pages of notes and sources–that goes into intimate detail about WWII. There is NO mention of Operation Reinhard, or ‘Aktion Reinhard’ in German.

    I checked Mr. Irving’s site and found “Holocaust Denial and Operation Reinhard.” Did some research at that link–below–but couldn’t find any definitive figures like you claim.

    http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/Belzec/Belzec%20etc.pdf

    And the ‘Final Solution’ phrase was warped by the holocaust junkies as the real term is TERRITORIAL Final Solution. Hitler did NOT want to mass-murder Juden, just round them up and move them to the new land conquered from Russia. Another ‘Pale of the Settlement,’ if you will.

    There are so many LIES told about the holocaust, how can anyone seriously believe the 6 million figure?
    Lies like the Nazi masturbation machine that literally milked Jew males to death. Or the giant electrical chair that could hold and electrocute 10,000 Juden at once?
    Or the secret Buck Rogers like invention, a space ray that vaporized 20,000 Auschwitz Jews all at once.
    Or the now disproved soap made from Jew ashes/fat. Or the human skin lamp shades. Or the giant steam chambers used to cook Jews to death. Another LIE.

    Shall I go on? I certainly can, but for brevity’s sake, I’ll stop with the LIES here.

    Tell me Mr. Wright, what made the Nazis help over 60,000 of German Jews move to Palestine, from 1933-42, even helping them set up industries, business and living quarters, which the Germans had to quit in 1942, since the war on the Eastern Front was going badly and the Germans needed those assets to help with the war?
    It was called “The Transfer Agreement” and it’s what got former London Mayor Livingstone in trouble with the holocaust fanatics because he mentioned a bit of truth from that period.

    Since the holocaust is listed as being from 1942-45, we’re supposed to believe that literally, overnight, the Germans went from helping Jews move to their nation of choice to pushing them in gas chambers?

    Sorry, but like someone already said, “Truth needs no defense; truth can stand on its own.”
    Evidently not in at least 17 European nations, where it is VERBOTEN to ask questions about that time.
    Even asking a sensible question like, “Why did the Auschwitz sign declaring that four million were killed here get changed to a little over 1 million, and that included Gypsies, criminal, political dissidents, Commies etc. Ask that and risk getting arrested, tried, convicted and heavily fined while you sit in prison for five years.
    Ditto for the numbers at Majdanek, which dropped from around 600,000 to around 70,000, but don’t ask why, unless you want to go to prison.

    When someone tells that many lies and then gets horrified when people don’t believe their BS, it’s their own fault for telling such whoppers to begin with.

    Read More
    • Agree: Stan d Mute, Druid
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    I find it very difficult to believe that any legislation in Europe could be so illiberal and so stupid as to make it an offence, let alone one for which the penalty might be imprisonment, to draw attention to the change in numbers said to be killed at Auschwicz. Would you please back up you assertions with sources/links and quotes.
    , @Stan d Mute
    Therein lies the immense value of Ron’s exhaustive effort here. It’s not a question of “did Jews suffer during WWII” - hell, everyone suffered. It’s debunking the propaganda that Jews are the most special people and most extraordinary victims in all human existence. What difference does it make if 6 million or 6 hundred thousand really? Or killed by firing squad or gas chamber? Both are better than the typhus and starvation that likely killed most of them. And Jews surely suffered no more than many German, French, and Eastern European Yeshuans.

    The greatest benefit of Ron’s work is showing (1) the Jews had agency and (2) we’ve all been fed a nonstop diet of lies about essentially everything (holocaust included) for our entire lives.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. @Brabantian
    From the website of Ron Unz's fellow rebel Jew, Henry Makow in Canada - The story of Josef Ginsburg aka 'Joseph G Burg' (1908-90), the German-speaking Jew who:

    Had his books burned (!) repeatedly over many years by post-war, modern Germany, after he dared to question the official Shoah / Holocaust narrative

    A rabbi's son who became a fervent Communist ... Ginsburg joined advancing Soviet troops as part of official Soviet teams entering into & inspecting Nazi camps in Poland such as Auschwitz, Birkenau, Majdanek, Treblinka, & Sobibor, known today as the 'death camps'

    As Ginsburg visited Auschwitz in 1945 & spoke to hundreds of surviving inmates, anti-Nazi Jew Ginsburg "formed the opinion that there were no 'extermination' camps at all, that gas chambers had never existed & that there had been no plan to exterminate the Jews of Europe." Ginsburg said he could find no gas chambers which were not de-lousing stations, nor witnesses who had seen any

    Technically himself a 'Holocaust survivor', Ginsburg wrote books saying the 'Holocaust' was a fraud ... West Germany's government continually attacked Ginsburg, confiscating & burning 7 of Ginsburg's 13 major books -- the West German regime ice-cold to the irony of burning a Jew's books over a much longer period than Nazis themselves ever did.

    Josef Ginsburg [gave] striking testimony at a Canadian 'Holocaust denial' trial of his friend Ernst Zündel ... the Canadian crown prosecution refused to cross-examine him:
    http://www.zundelsite.org/archive/harwood/dsmrd/dsmrd24burg.html

    Ginsburg's story is in process of being internet-scrubbed, close to being effectively 'erased' ... the response to this Jewish writer & WW2 survivor was to burn his books & near-erase him from media & now the internet.
     

    Burg, Ginsberg, feared for his life.
    The last pages of J.G. Burg, Schuld und Schicksal, Europas Juden zwischen Henkern und Heuchlern, München, 1962 state that in case of his death a Swiss solicitor would automatically publish documents in the possession of the solicitor.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Thanks for the information
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. brander says:

    I would like to raise attention to David Cole, the Jewish Revisionist of http://www.takimag.com

    He has written a book about his experience as a Jewish holocaust revisionist, “Republican Party Animal”

    Read More
    • Replies: @conatus
    Yeah, he writes funny pieces over at Taki...a funny guy, really. In the Republican Party Animal book he discusses death totals in the last chapter. He says 3 to 3.5 mil, mostly by the Einsatzgruppen.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. @Hippopotamusdrome
    Unz says:


    no mention either of Nazi “gas chambers,” a “genocide” of the Jews, or of “six million” Jewish victims of the war

     

    You say:


    This is a blatant lie

     

    Churchill's letter:


    the greatest and most horrible crime ever committed in the whole history of the world

     

    Not a mention of “gas chambers”, “genocide”, or “six million”.


    it has been done by scientific machinery

     

    Not a mention of “gas chambers”, “genocide”, or “six million”.


    carrying out the butcheries

     

    Not a mention of “gas chambers”, “genocide”, or “six million”.

    Scientific ?
    The description of the asserted gas chambers, and how they functioned, show something far from scientific, on the contrary, primitive.
    This is one of the reasons these gas chambers for humans are improbable, the highly efficiënt Germans not devising an efficiënt killing and cremation process.
    Any chicken slaughter factory is more scientific.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    7I think the expression "scientific" was picked up from Churchill's communication with the Foreign Secretary. It is just the kind of expression a layman might have adopted as a shorthand way of making a distinction between using electricity or gas rather than shooting or hanging.

    In answer to your point about likely German methods you should consider how efficient it was to (allegedly) persuade people they were going to be cleansed/deloused so their resistance would not be roused, and then to drop poison on them from above. No need for higher level science or engineering.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  34. dearieme says:

    “aside from Milch, Hitler’s military contained over a dozen half-Jewish generals and admirals and another dozen quarter-Jews of that same high rank, plus a total of roughly 150,000 additional half- or quarter-Jewish soldiers”: one explanation immediately suggests itself. (Whether it is anywhere near the mark I have no idea.)

    Perhaps many Germans were not much worried about assimilated German Jews, especially if they were seen as valuable to the military and if unconnected to Bolshevism. Perhaps German hatred was directed mainly at East European Jews.

    Then again, maybe views simply differed among the Germans.

    Read More
    • Agree: Wizard of Oz
    • Replies: @syonredux

    one explanation immediately suggests itself. (Whether it is anywhere near the mark I have no idea.)

    Perhaps many Germans were not much worried about assimilated German Jews, especially if they were seen as valuable to the military and if unconnected to Bolshevism. Perhaps German hatred was directed mainly at East European Jews.
     

    I think that there is something to that notion. German Jews were commonly seen as superior to the Ostjuden . You can see something of this attitude in a letter* written by GeneralKommissar for Belorussia Wilhem Kube concerning the treatment of German Jews:

    I wish to ask you personally for an official directive for the conduct of the civilian administration toward the Jews deported from Germany to Belorussia. Among these Jews are men who fought at the front [during World War I] and have the Iron Cross, First and Second Class, war invalids, half-Aryans, even three-quarter Aryans.
     

    Up to now only 6,000 to 7,000 Jews have arrived, of the 25,000 who were expected. I am not aware what has become of the others. In the course of several official visits to the ghetto I noted that among these Jews, who differ from the Russian Jews in their personal cleanliness, there are also skilled workers capable of doing five times as much in a day as Russian Jews.
     

    On my own responsibility I will not give the SD any instructions with regard to the treatment of these people, although certain units of the Wehrmacht and the police already have an eye on the possessions of the Jews from the Reich, and has also confiscated various other things. I am certainly a hard [man] and willing to help solve the Jewish question, but people people who come from our own cultural sphere just are not the same as the brutish hordes in this place. Is the slaughter to be carried out by the Lithuanians and Letts, who are themselves rejected by the population here? I couldn't do it. I beg you to give clear directives [in this matter], with due consideration for the good name of our Reich and our Party, in order that the necessary action can be taken in the most humane manner.
     
    http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/orgs/german/einsatzgruppen/esg/trials/profiles/kubeletter.html


    *Yes, Ron, I know that you hate it when I quote anything......

    , @Wally
    fact:
    Erhard Milch was not a Jew.

    His mother re-married a Jew after Milch’s birth.

    www.codoh.com
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. Bucky says:

    While a lot of it likely is exaggerated, especially the part about Germany using scarce resources to perpetuate the killings while they were losing the war, saying that “only” 1.5 million were killed vs 3.5 million is splitting hairs.

    Given widespread scapegoating occurring before the war, and how Hitler was the leader, it only makes sense that some sort of attitude would take a hold among the bureaucracy in Germany. Though the vast majority likely were simply shot. Because if the goal is extermination of Jews, the most direct way to that goal is shooting, not constructing a camp.

    But if the real number is say, 2 million, that is still a tragedy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    You omit to notice that Germany's labor shortage was made up for by slave or otherwise forced labor. If they were Jews who were lowest on the list for survival they could just be worked and starved to death.
    , @Johnny Smoggins
    No one denies that a substantial number of Jews were killed in WW2 (along with many, many more non Jews) or that Hitler and the National Socialists singled out Jews for mistreatment (whether justified or not is an entirely different topic).

    But the real issue is the fact that so much of what we've been told about the holocaust is obviously lies and exaggeration and that Jews and Israel have both profited handsomely from these lies and exaggerations.

    This would be like me setting up a GoFundMe for my cancer treatment and then telling you that actually I just have the flu.......but I'm still sick so I should be able to keep the money.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. This should be fun. Pass the popcorn.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  37. Both of these simple facts have been widely accepted in America throughout my entire lifetime. But combine them together with the relatively tiny size of worldwide Jewry, around 16 million prior to World War II, and the inescapable conclusion is that in per capita terms Jews were the greatest mass-murderers of the twentieth century, holding that unfortunate distinction by an enormous margin and with no other nationality coming even remotely close. And yet, by the astonishing alchemy of Hollywood, the greatest killers of the last one hundred years have somehow been transmuted into being seen as the greatest victims, a transformation so seemingly implausible that future generations will surely be left gasping in awe.

    I do hope nothing happens to you.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  38. Svigor says:

    Mark Ames, Mark Ames…that name seems familiar. Ohhh, right, now I remember; Ames is one of the moral cretins who managed to run Russia’s most popular “edgy,” “independent,” English-language paper in post-Soviet Russia without mentioning the Jewishness of the Russian oligarchs. Or without much mentioning the Jewish “Russian” oligarchs at all.

    Yeah, I remember those guys.

    The idea of them calling anyone out for moral turpitude is laughable. Anyone who takes that shit seriously never read The Exile.

    Read More
    • Replies: @DFH

    Ames is one of the moral cretins who managed to run Russia’s most popular “edgy,” “independent,” English-language paper in post-Soviet Russia without mentioning the Jewishness of the Russian oligarchs. Or without much mentioning the Jewish “Russian” oligarchs at all.
     
    But they did mention their Jewishness many times, including a piece with little profiles of the oligarchs called 'The Jews; Where are they now?'. This even made its way (through plagiarism) into the Guardian.

    http://exile.ru/articles/detail.php?ARTICLE_ID=8575&IBLOCK_ID=35

    , @siberiancat
    Yep, that's the guy who was bragging about having sex with the underage Russian girls.
    , @Kratoklastes
    The eXile wasn't all bad. It had one column that was a genuine 'must read' - War Nerd, written by John Dolan under a nom de plume ("Gary Brecher").

    Interesting that an interview of 'Brecher' by Steve Sailer was one of the starting points for the revelation that 'Brecher' was, in fact, Dolan.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. Never forget: ‘One may not ask oneself whether such mass murder was technically possible. It was technically possible because it happened.’ (Le Monde, 21 February 1979, 34 French historians)

    Read More
    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
    24 French 'intellectuals'.
    Very stupid people, the assertion that it happened used as an 'argument' that thus it was technically possible.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. @Colin Wright
    Here we go: Holocaust Denial.

    Don't worry. Personally, I think the Holocaust occurred substantially as described, but if others want to argue differently, I don't see it as heresy. I'm no more offended than if someone wants to argue the Japanese could have successfully invaded Hawaii. Not my opinion, but...

    I will point out that while he has flirted with outright Holocaust Denial in the past, David Irving has found and published on his website what he regards as irrefutable evidence that 2.5 million Jews were killed in the 'Operation Reinhard' camps alone. While he is skeptical about the importance of Auschwitz, I imagine he'd agree at least a million additional Jews were killed by the Einsatzgruppen in the East, died of starvation in the Warsaw Ghetto, etc, etc.

    So we're at 3.5 million as a minimum figure -- I'd go with at least 5 million myself. Obviously, the difference would have been very important to Jew #3,773,751 but as a moral matter, I don't see the distinction. 3.5 million is substantially as awful as 5 million. Have 6 million if it's important to you. No one will ever know with any great precision anyway. As far as I'm concerned, it's like arguing about what proportion of Iran's population the Mongols killed. Past a point, a definitive answer simply isn't to be found, and it's certainly not something that's worth assaulting elderly men in the streets over.

    Actually, the only significant area of controversy I see is whether Hitler knew and approved. There's no clear evidence. Irving argues he didn't -- I'd guess he did. That particular question could do with some dispassionate analysis.

    As to why not many paid attention to the Holocaust before 1961 -- it's bloody dull. Lining unresisting victims up and shooting them is objectively about as interesting and appealing a subject for study as the operations of a slaughterhouse. This actually is the worst effect of the whole Holocaust Industry phenomenon. Lately it seems that every text dealing with Germany in the Second World War feels obliged to spend half its pages recounting the tale of the Holocaust yet again, and it's bloody dull.

    Finally, the unique horror escapes me. We are all individuals; what matters above all to us is that it is us being killed, not our precise relationship to our fellow victims. How it was somehow consolation to a Russian POW starving to death that he wasn't being killed because he was Jewish, or solace to a four year old girl being baked alive in a cellar in Dresden that it wasn't being done because she was Jewish totally escapes me.

    The Holocaust. It happened, it was wrong, and it's dull.

    Actually, the only significant area of controversy I see is whether Hitler knew and approved. There’s no clear evidence. Irving argues he didn’t — I’d guess he did. That particular question could do with some dispassionate analysis.

    Of course he did. Rebirth through ordeal & fire was the center of his world-view, Jews being considered to be something like pestilence, or rats who destroy high culture through their intrinsic & unalterable pervy rottenness.

    Hitler’s apologists do him disservice by portraying him as some uninformed hick. He was not a great leader comparable to Alexander, Caesar or Napoleon (these guys were almost superhuman), but he remains one of 3-4 most important 20th C political figures (Lenin, Stalin, Mao could be competitors, although I would choose Lenin over the rest).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wally
    said:
    "Of course he did. Rebirth through ordeal & fire was the center of his world-view, Jews being considered to be something like pestilence, or rats who destroy high culture through their intrinsic & unalterable pervy rottenness. "

    IOW, you have no proof for the '6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers' and hope to distract.

    - Kruschev said “We will bury you.” Are we buried?

    - Ayatollah Khomeini called the US the “Great Satan” Are we in hell? LOL

    Netanyahu’s Racist Incitement, Dehumanizing non-Jews, Palestinians Designated as "Wild Beasts "
    https://www.mondialisation.ca/netanyahus-racist-incitement-dehumanizing-non-israelis-palestinians-designated-as-wild-beasts/5508659

    Jews mock killing of pregnant Palestinians and children.
    https://nawaat.org/portail/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/israel_t-shirt.jpg
    and:
    Two teenage Israeli girls carrying a placard in Hebrew reading: "Hating Arabs is not racism, it's values."
    http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02962/jewish-girls_2962213c.jpg

    www.codoh.com
    , @peterAUS
    Yup.
    , @Svigor

    Jews being considered to be something like pestilence, or rats who destroy high culture through their intrinsic & unalterable pervy rottenness.
     
    Yeah but like, where's the lie tho?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. phil says:
    @Colin Wright
    Here we go: Holocaust Denial.

    Don't worry. Personally, I think the Holocaust occurred substantially as described, but if others want to argue differently, I don't see it as heresy. I'm no more offended than if someone wants to argue the Japanese could have successfully invaded Hawaii. Not my opinion, but...

    I will point out that while he has flirted with outright Holocaust Denial in the past, David Irving has found and published on his website what he regards as irrefutable evidence that 2.5 million Jews were killed in the 'Operation Reinhard' camps alone. While he is skeptical about the importance of Auschwitz, I imagine he'd agree at least a million additional Jews were killed by the Einsatzgruppen in the East, died of starvation in the Warsaw Ghetto, etc, etc.

    So we're at 3.5 million as a minimum figure -- I'd go with at least 5 million myself. Obviously, the difference would have been very important to Jew #3,773,751 but as a moral matter, I don't see the distinction. 3.5 million is substantially as awful as 5 million. Have 6 million if it's important to you. No one will ever know with any great precision anyway. As far as I'm concerned, it's like arguing about what proportion of Iran's population the Mongols killed. Past a point, a definitive answer simply isn't to be found, and it's certainly not something that's worth assaulting elderly men in the streets over.

    Actually, the only significant area of controversy I see is whether Hitler knew and approved. There's no clear evidence. Irving argues he didn't -- I'd guess he did. That particular question could do with some dispassionate analysis.

    As to why not many paid attention to the Holocaust before 1961 -- it's bloody dull. Lining unresisting victims up and shooting them is objectively about as interesting and appealing a subject for study as the operations of a slaughterhouse. This actually is the worst effect of the whole Holocaust Industry phenomenon. Lately it seems that every text dealing with Germany in the Second World War feels obliged to spend half its pages recounting the tale of the Holocaust yet again, and it's bloody dull.

    Finally, the unique horror escapes me. We are all individuals; what matters above all to us is that it is us being killed, not our precise relationship to our fellow victims. How it was somehow consolation to a Russian POW starving to death that he wasn't being killed because he was Jewish, or solace to a four year old girl being baked alive in a cellar in Dresden that it wasn't being done because she was Jewish totally escapes me.

    The Holocaust. It happened, it was wrong, and it's dull.

    Irving’s conclusion was based on the Korherr Report and the German term for “special treatment” of the Jews. The report concerned what was claimed to be an enormous reduction in the Jewish population in “Europe.” It included mention of the more than 1.2 million Jews who had been sent to the Reinhardt camps in what had been Eastern Poland. Sometimes “special treatment” (in German) did indeed refer to killing.

    However, Carlo Mattogno in the Holocaust Handbooks (esp. SOBIBOR) has argued that the “special treatment” involved rounding up and sending Jews to what were actually transit camps. The camps were not outfitted with any crematoria, whereas other camps which no one regarded as “death camps” did have them–death from disease and other natural causes being very substantial. Many Jews were then deported into the western part of the USSR, which the German military had occupied.

    Korherr refers to the camps as having been “evacuation stations” and in Section X he refers to the “Eastern Territories” (east of Poland) as being counted by him as “off-going,” which meant they were no longer being considered as part of “Europe.” So it’s possible that Irving’s interpretation is wrong and that what you refer to as the minimum figure for the Holocaust may be well under 1 million. Rather than being killed, the deported Jews were no longer “Europeans.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. Very long, but well worth the effort. Ron Unz’s writings are the marks of a highly disciplined, superb mind and his work on historical revisionism is truly remarkable for its far reach into the relevant documents, its measured, dispassionate approach, and the courage to challenge an orthodoxy of vast power and unlimited resources. This piece, perhaps, more than any of his others, reinforces his broader “American Pravda” thesis that our major cultural institutions (media, entertainment industry, schools and universities) and government flourish are ruthless instruments of propaganda.

    Also, a recent outing of yet another fake holocaust survivor, this one a Spaniard, Enric Marco, from Catalonia detailed in a recently published book, The Impostor, by Javier Cercus reviewed by the famous Peruvian novelist, Mario Vargas Llosa in El Pais (Spanish) and the Wall Street Journal. https://elpais.com/elpais/2014/12/11/opinion/1418316858_779129.html
    Marco (now in his 90s), seems to be a sort of Iberian Elie Wiesel, outed a short while ago after a decade long, high-profile career of peddling his fictitious history, including a stint in Mauthausen, in prestigious venues.

    Typically, the historian who outed him has taken abuse.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  43. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:

    Here’s a book I read from the UCLA library. I couldn’t find it on amazon. Its probably in other college libraries and since it was published in translation in the US there must be a copy in the Library of Congress. Library of Congress will make and send copies of books if requested

    Author Rabbi Chaim Michael Dov Weissmandel. Book title From the Depths in English Min haihzeitzar in Hebrew. The Hebrew word means depths of despair.

    He was the civil and religious leader of a large Jewish community in Slovakia and Hungary that was destroyed during the war. He claims the destruction was a joint effort by the Zionist communists and Germans

    He got through the war and ended up in the US. First wife and children died in Auschwitz

    His book claims that the Zionist and communist Jews worked with the Germans to kidnap children and teens to convert them to communism and Zionism and send them to Palestine to create Israel and the new Zionist socialist communist Jewish people.

    He claims the communist Zionist Jews helped the Germans to kill off the religious and socially and economically conservative Jews.

    Weissmandel succeeded in getting some of his people to Russia. The Russians placed them and other Jewish refugees on the collective farms. That was fine.

    But the Zionists were in charge of the Jews on the farms and immediately separated the kids and teens from the parents and Rabbis. The kids were indoctrinated in communism and Zionism and sent through the smuggling routes to Palestine to be the new Zionist Jews.

    Weissmandel touches a bit in the Zionist Jews the Germans put in charge of the ghettoes as well. His thesis is that the destruction of European Jews was a conspiracy between the communist Zionists and the Germans with the Zionists as enthusiastic as the Germans.

    Motive of the zionists; get rid of the religious and bourgeois capitalist nuclear family good table manners comfortable home marriage and children homemaker wife provider husband type of Jews. And create the New Jew Zionist socialist working mothers kids raised in kibbutz childcare centers women in the military in combat free love as it was called then.

    The good Rabbi was very bitter about it all.

    It’s quite a book. If it’s in the UCLA library it must be in the Stanford and other college libraries

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mike P
    I looked around for this book, but can't find it anywhere (paper or electronically). Would you be in a position to prepare a digitized copy? (I know it's work, but I have put several books online myself, so I feel entitled to ask.)
    , @Anon
    Only thing I can suggest is to check a college library. If that fails ask the Library of Congress to send you a copy and you can put it in a 3 ring binder.

    I wouldn’t be surprised if the book has disappeared from college libraries.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @academic gossip

    [In] General Eisenhower’s Crusade in Europe (New York: Doubleday [Country Life Press], 1948), Winston Churchill’s The Second World War (London: Cassell, 6 vols., 1948-1954), and the Mémoires de guerre of General de Gaulle (Paris: Plon, 3 vols., 1954-1959). .... no mention either of Nazi “gas chambers,” a “genocide” of the Jews, or of “six million” Jewish victims of the war.
     
    This is a blatant lie by Faurrisson. Churchill in vol 6, p 597 (appendix C):

    Prime Minister to Foreign Secretary 11 July 44

    There is no doubt that this [persecution of Jews in Hungary and
    their expulsion from enemy territory] is probably the greatest and
    most horrible crime ever committed in the whole history of the world,

    and it has been done by scientific machinery by nominally civilised
    men in the name of a great State and one of the leading races of
    Europe. It is quite clear that all concerned in this crime who may fall
    into our hands, including the people who only obeyed orders by
    carrying out the butcheries, should be put to death
    after their associa-
    tion with the murders has been proved.

    I cannot therefore feel that this is the kind of ordinary case which is
    put through the Protecting Power, as, for instance, the lack of feeding
    or sanitary conditions in some particular prisoners' camp
    . There should
    therefore, in my opinion, be no negotiations of any kind on this
    subject. Declarations should be made in public, so that everyone
    connected with it will be hunted down and put to death.

     
    That is, dead Hungarian Jews in the German camps have fallen to "scientific machinery" used by "nominally civilized men in the name of a great State", and not simply to poor "conditions in some particular prisoners' camp". The latter is the usual Holocaust revisionists' explanation and Churchill is totally rejecting it in a letter written in July 1944 before the word "holocaust" had entered the lexicon. Instead, Churchill describes (and assumes as known to his Foreign Minister) the Germans as murdering the Hungarian Jews with scientific technology in what he calls the greatest crime of human history, with any involvement to be punished by death. Obviously his words also imply a massive scale to the murder by scientific machinery, of a similar order of magnitude to the Hungarian Jewish population. Which again happens to match the standard un-revised account.
    Incidentally, the camp used (according to the standard account) for scientifically murdering the Hungarian Jews was Auschwitz.

    https://archive.org/details/WinstonChurchillTheSecondWorldWarTriumphAndTragedyVolume6

    Eisenhower's memoir barely mentions anything about Jews. You would not learn from his book, or Churchills', or de Gaulle's that Kristallnacht, boycotts, and Nuremberg laws had ever existed in Nazi Germany, or that Hitler had any negative thoughts about Jews. Nevertheless those things are extremely well documented and not disputed by historical revisionists (anti-historians). That a personal political memoir of the war doesn't mention these events is more of an indicator that the author assumes that the reader is already familiar with them, than that they never occurred or are unimportant.

    Eisenhower in fact specifically anticipated Holocaust revisionism and made a point of being personally photographed at German concentration camps in front of piles of dead prisoners, to bear witness and (in his words) help pre-empt the possibility that some people would later dismiss the massacres as "mere propaganda". He also demanded that photographs and films be made at the camps and witness testimony be taken, for the same reason. This, too, is fairly well known and documented enough to never have been a subject of any historical revisionism. Faurrison chose to be a weasel and say that Eisenhower, who made a point of documenting the Holocaust in 1945, suddenly maintained a suspicious silence on the matter in 1948. The more honest interpretation is that the army films of the camps that he himself had commissioned, and newspaper articles by reporters he had had invited into the camps, were in such wide circulation in the year or two after the German surrender that Eisenhower treated the basic facts of extermination camps as already known to the public. He was writing a memoir, not a textbook.

    Crusade in Europe http://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.208955

    de Gaulle doesn't mention Jews at all, not because nothing happened to them, but because the Vichy collaboration made the whole subject radioactive in France for decades after the war. Those are not points in dispute by revisionists, and Faurisson knew perfectly well that the lack of Jewish references in de Gaulle's book has no bearing on any historical questions.

    This excerpt is the first I have read anything by Faurrisson, but the level of dishonesty he packed into a few sentences is entirely consistent with the appraisal of his credibility made at the time by everyone except his lone defender, Chomsky.

    It’s pretty well known that Eisenhower decided to film, take photos and make a visual record of the camps as soon as he saw them.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
    Indeed, of the misery the allies, especially the USA, had caused: Stephen Jay Gould in:
    Wim Kayzer, ‘Een Schitterend Ongeluk, Wim Kayzer ontmoet Oliver Sacks, Stephen Jay Gould, Stephen Toulmin, Daniel C. Dennett, Rupert Sheldrake en Freeman Dyson’, 1993 Amsterdam
    , @Hippopotamusdrome

    It’s pretty well known that Eisenhower decided to film, take photos and make a visual record of the camps as soon as he saw them.

     

    Here's some...

    German civilians visit the Buchenwald concentration camp in Weimar, Germany. HD Stock Footage

    Mentioned:
    Lampshade made of human skin.
    Pieces of skin used to draw art on.
    Two shrunken heads.
    Bad case of trench foot.
    Bodies appearing possibly to have died of typhus.

    Not mentioned:
    Gas chambers.
    Jews.

    First Newsreel Pictures Of The Liberation Of The Nazi Death Camps

    Not mentioned:
    Gas chambers.
    Jews.

    , @Crew Cut Man
    And in the process documented many hundreds of deaths from various causes. Often it was ugly stuff, too, but there had been this thing called a war going on, you see.

    I believe it's fair to conclude from all available evidence that many thousands of Jews died during the war, with typhus being a leading cause. It's only fitting that we focus exclusively on Jewish deaths, as opposed to the millions of others. Though I'm not quite sure why. The "why" might tell us something about our own society, and our own time.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. Two of the best books on the subject, not mentioned here and both now banned by Amazon:

    The Great Holocaust Trial (2010 Edition) by Michael Hoffman
    Covers the 1985 trial and subsequent re-prosecution of Ernst Zündel in Canada, which pitted Faurisson, Butz, Leuchter, Irving, and Zündel himself, against the most famous eyewitness survivers, as well as defenders of holocaust orthodoxy such as Raul Hilberg.

    Despite unfair limitations imposed by pro-prosecution judges on the defense team, Zündel’s defense team destroyed the traditional narrative in two separate trials. The prosecution eyewitnesses all fell apart on cross-examination, and Hilberg was forced to admit that he not only relied on a single untrustworthy document for his account on Auschwitz, but that he concealed the problems in his source material from his audience (see the Kurt Gerstein affidavit). Zündel was convicted anyway, mostly due to the judges instructing jurors how to vote on the issue of whether the Holocaust happened. But both convictions in Canada were ultimately reversed on appeal.

    This book is critical, because it is a first hand account of the only instances in which the claims of the pro-Holocaust theorists have ever been subject to cross-examination in court. All future kangaroo court judges avoided this embarrassment in the future by taking “judicial notice” that the Holocaust happened.

    Debating the Holocaust: A New Look at Both Sides by Thomas Dalton
    A must-read intro, which summarizes the most compelling arguments for and against the Holocaust narrative. The author claims to have begun his research favorable to the orthodoxy, but ended clearly in the revisionist camp.

    Read More
    • Replies: @J. Masterson
    Regarding this statement in my previous comment:

    The prosecution eyewitnesses all fell apart on cross-examination, and Hilberg was forced to admit that he not only relied on a single untrustworthy document for his account on Auschwitz, but that he concealed the problems in his source material from his audience (see the Kurt Gerstein affidavit).
     
    I have since read Hilberg's book, and it appears that Hoffman may have overstated Hilberg's reliance on the Gerstein affidavit. Hopefully this will be corrected in a later edition.

    However, Hoffman's book is still an outstanding read.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. Meimou says:
    @Colin Wright
    Here we go: Holocaust Denial.

    Don't worry. Personally, I think the Holocaust occurred substantially as described, but if others want to argue differently, I don't see it as heresy. I'm no more offended than if someone wants to argue the Japanese could have successfully invaded Hawaii. Not my opinion, but...

    I will point out that while he has flirted with outright Holocaust Denial in the past, David Irving has found and published on his website what he regards as irrefutable evidence that 2.5 million Jews were killed in the 'Operation Reinhard' camps alone. While he is skeptical about the importance of Auschwitz, I imagine he'd agree at least a million additional Jews were killed by the Einsatzgruppen in the East, died of starvation in the Warsaw Ghetto, etc, etc.

    So we're at 3.5 million as a minimum figure -- I'd go with at least 5 million myself. Obviously, the difference would have been very important to Jew #3,773,751 but as a moral matter, I don't see the distinction. 3.5 million is substantially as awful as 5 million. Have 6 million if it's important to you. No one will ever know with any great precision anyway. As far as I'm concerned, it's like arguing about what proportion of Iran's population the Mongols killed. Past a point, a definitive answer simply isn't to be found, and it's certainly not something that's worth assaulting elderly men in the streets over.

    Actually, the only significant area of controversy I see is whether Hitler knew and approved. There's no clear evidence. Irving argues he didn't -- I'd guess he did. That particular question could do with some dispassionate analysis.

    As to why not many paid attention to the Holocaust before 1961 -- it's bloody dull. Lining unresisting victims up and shooting them is objectively about as interesting and appealing a subject for study as the operations of a slaughterhouse. This actually is the worst effect of the whole Holocaust Industry phenomenon. Lately it seems that every text dealing with Germany in the Second World War feels obliged to spend half its pages recounting the tale of the Holocaust yet again, and it's bloody dull.

    Finally, the unique horror escapes me. We are all individuals; what matters above all to us is that it is us being killed, not our precise relationship to our fellow victims. How it was somehow consolation to a Russian POW starving to death that he wasn't being killed because he was Jewish, or solace to a four year old girl being baked alive in a cellar in Dresden that it wasn't being done because she was Jewish totally escapes me.

    The Holocaust. It happened, it was wrong, and it's dull.

    As to why not many paid attention to the Holocaust before 1961 — it’s bloody dull

    A weak explanation. The most likely explanation is that the OS is a lie, it doesn’t help you that Eisenhower and Churchill didn’t mention it in their books.

    Why the Allies didn’t use it as wartime propaganda?

    How do you keep the murder of millions s secret anyway?

    If it was so “dull” why did the OS get more important over time?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Henry's Cat
    The Western Allies did use the alleged gassing of Jews as propaganda during the last couple of years of the war and through until at least the end of the Nuremberg trials. A plausible theory as to why it was largely abandoned is that the Communist threat became paramount and, besides, West Germany had been completely pacified already.

    The re-birth of the Holocaust as a cultural phenomenon didn't happen in 1961; it kicked off in the late 1960s. Novick (or is it Finkelstein?) argues that Jewish political organizations used it in the wake of the Six Day War in 1967 as a tool to garner sympathy for Israel. Once the ball and the cash got rolling it took on a momentum all of its own...
    , @Colin Wright
    'How do you keep the murder of millions s secret anyway?

    If it was so “dull” why did the OS get more important over time?'


    It wasn't a secret. My father had an enormous library of World War Two books -- most dating from the fifties. I started reading them around 1964; I can remember several books dealing with the extermination of the jews in his collection.

    Of course the Holocaust happened. It's tedious that there are so many who so monotonously insist otherwise.

    Ironically, the problem is that they're dull too.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  47. Anonymous[266] • Disclaimer says:

    I perused this article and will go back to read it more slowly. But damn, Ron Unz has totally shattered my confidence in believing any of the official narrative. My knowledge of history is wholly inadequate and I always try to rectify this. But now I hesitate to undertake any historical self-education for fear I might be doing damage (garbage in).

    When I read reviews on Amazon regarding math books, I always cringe and run away when I read a reviewer mention that a book contains many errors. I don’t have confidence in my ability to spot these errors, especially in a subject new to me, and fear I might be vitiated for life by “knowing” wrong information. And worse, being wrong with confidence.

    It’s funny, but prior to the rise of Trump and the complete and jaw-dropping exposure of the blatant lies and fabrication of news and the official narrative, I wonder if I would’ve been receptive to Unz’s American Pravda pieces. Mostly likely not. I think I’d dismiss them outright in a Lipstadtian “come on”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
    The interesting thing about truth is that it is consistent.
    It was, maybe even this is changing, impossible to control any writing.
    Thus inconsistencies show what it true and what is not.
    But it takes a lot of time an effort to see through the lies.
    A few books do not suffice.

    An maybe interesting example is the assertion that Hess had never met the Scottish count to whom he was flying in May 1941, thus making his peace mission improbable, or a lunatic act;
    Yet Hess had breakfast with this count during the 1936 Berlin Olympic games:
    Robert Rhodes James, ‘CHIPS, The Diaries of Sir Henry Channon’, London 1967
    Even
    Lynn Picknett, Clive Prince and Stephen Prior, ‘Double standards, The Rudolf Hess cover-up’, London 2002 does not mention this meeting.

    Another example is the letter attributed to our late Prince Bernhard, written to Hitler, asking him te let him, Bernard, rule the Netherlands.
    There was considerable controvery if this letter was ever written.
    However, writing the letter is completely consistent with the last mentioned book, that concludes that Hess died in an unexplained flying boat accident in Scotland, in which also a brother of the British king was killed.
    Bernard dined with the brother the day before the accident.
    The flying boat is supposed to have been on its way to Stockholm, to declare peace between Germany and GB, Hitler stepping down, Hess replacing him.

    For those seeing conspiracies anywhere, it was an accident, the pilot in ascending from a Scottish lake where Hess came on board chose the wrong, higher valley.
    There was a body to many when the wreckage was examined.
    There never was an official explanation what the, for the time, huge flying boat was doing in starting from a small lake.
    The extra body, also never explained officially.
    The Hess at Nüremberg, and in Spandau, was not the real Hess, the USA prison doctor explained this is a book.
    Who he was, w'll never know, I suppose.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  48. @utu
    I always thought that the reason Raul Hilberg's book was not too popular (I did not know he had difficulty in publishing it.) was because it showed a very ugly picture of cooperation of Judenrats and Jewish police with Germans. Hannah Arendt had access to Hilberg's book manuscript (which she did not acknowledge) and used it in her Einstein in Jerusalem (which was initially serialized by New Yorker) highlighting Jewish cooperation and passivity. I would not be surprised if both her Einstein in Jerusalem and Hilberg's The Destruction of the European Jews were still not translated into Hebrew.

    Kapo (2000) is an Israeli documentary film about the Jewish kapos who collaborated with the Nazis in the concentration camps during World War II.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kapo_(2000_film)
    The responses to the film were mixed, among Jewish and non-Jewish audiences alike. At a screening before a Jewish audience in Munich, Setton said that the younger members of the audience were pleased that someone had dared to broach the subject, while older audience members were outraged.[2] Only a censored version of the film was aired on German television in fear of a hostile reaction by the viewing audience. In France, opposition to the film was so severe that La 25e Heure, the show on which it was screened, was taken off the air.
     
    I wonder if the film was shown in Israel.

    and used it in her Einstein in Jerusalem

    [Freudian?] slip?

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    Must be but I do not know what it suppose to signify.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. Anon[436] • Disclaimer says:
    @Hippopotamusdrome

    And the last words of the article are “the numbers are unbelievable”!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  50. @Colin Wright
    Here we go: Holocaust Denial.

    Don't worry. Personally, I think the Holocaust occurred substantially as described, but if others want to argue differently, I don't see it as heresy. I'm no more offended than if someone wants to argue the Japanese could have successfully invaded Hawaii. Not my opinion, but...

    I will point out that while he has flirted with outright Holocaust Denial in the past, David Irving has found and published on his website what he regards as irrefutable evidence that 2.5 million Jews were killed in the 'Operation Reinhard' camps alone. While he is skeptical about the importance of Auschwitz, I imagine he'd agree at least a million additional Jews were killed by the Einsatzgruppen in the East, died of starvation in the Warsaw Ghetto, etc, etc.

    So we're at 3.5 million as a minimum figure -- I'd go with at least 5 million myself. Obviously, the difference would have been very important to Jew #3,773,751 but as a moral matter, I don't see the distinction. 3.5 million is substantially as awful as 5 million. Have 6 million if it's important to you. No one will ever know with any great precision anyway. As far as I'm concerned, it's like arguing about what proportion of Iran's population the Mongols killed. Past a point, a definitive answer simply isn't to be found, and it's certainly not something that's worth assaulting elderly men in the streets over.

    Actually, the only significant area of controversy I see is whether Hitler knew and approved. There's no clear evidence. Irving argues he didn't -- I'd guess he did. That particular question could do with some dispassionate analysis.

    As to why not many paid attention to the Holocaust before 1961 -- it's bloody dull. Lining unresisting victims up and shooting them is objectively about as interesting and appealing a subject for study as the operations of a slaughterhouse. This actually is the worst effect of the whole Holocaust Industry phenomenon. Lately it seems that every text dealing with Germany in the Second World War feels obliged to spend half its pages recounting the tale of the Holocaust yet again, and it's bloody dull.

    Finally, the unique horror escapes me. We are all individuals; what matters above all to us is that it is us being killed, not our precise relationship to our fellow victims. How it was somehow consolation to a Russian POW starving to death that he wasn't being killed because he was Jewish, or solace to a four year old girl being baked alive in a cellar in Dresden that it wasn't being done because she was Jewish totally escapes me.

    The Holocaust. It happened, it was wrong, and it's dull.

    “David Irving has found and published on his website what he regards as irrefutable evidence that 2.5 million Jews were killed in the ‘Operation Reinhard’ camps alone.”

    If I’m wrong, please link to the Irvin site explaining this, but from my understanding, his “irrefutable evidence” is a single decoded telegram that he interprets to describe fatalities at the Reinhard camps.

    Others who translated this document say it only describes arrivals at the camps, not necessarily deaths.

    I think Irving damn well knows the difference, but after 20 years of abuse, imprisonment and terrorism, he’s a broken man at this point. Poor chap.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. @Johan Meyer
    Another matter. With regards to your lumping Hilberg with Dawidowicz and company, and lumping Finkelstein with Hilberg's "Holocaust Denial" opponents, could you comment on Finkelstein and Birn's A Nation On Trial?

    What nation on trial, the jewish or the German ?
    Anyone can know that GB wanted WWI, it could not compete economically with the Germany united in 1870 by the French attack.
    On top of that, GB feared German economic expansion to the SE, the Berlin Bagdad railway, that would have given Germany access to the Mosul oil fields, on top of that GB feared export from Basra of German products to India.
    The line was to be extended to Basra.
    Versailles was designed to keep Germany weak forever.
    At the time it was seen as a jewish conference, Bernard Baruch and Frankfurter for example were there.
    Wilson was an important man there, Morgenthau had financed his election.
    Alas for GB, Versailles was so stupid that Germany came into such misery and poverty that it democratically elected Hitler, who took full power.
    This full power enabled Schacht to resurrect Germany economically in just three years.
    Thus, a new war, as Churchill said ‘the whole period 1914 1945 can best be seen as one long war’.
    Jews were important in the second war against Germany, the jewish declaration of war in 1933.
    As to Hitler wanting to deminish jewish influence in Germany, see the statistics in
    Ismar Schorsch, ‘Jewish Reactions to German Anti-Semitism, 1870 – 1914′, New York 1972

    Read More
    • Replies: @Johan Meyer
    He heeft dat boek niet geleest.

    A Nation on Trial defends the German Nation against the charges in Hitler's Willing Executioners, within the framework of the Holocaust.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. @Anon.Benefactor
    Never forget: 'One may not ask oneself whether such mass murder was technically possible. It was technically possible because it happened.' (Le Monde, 21 February 1979, 34 French historians)

    24 French ‘intellectuals’.
    Very stupid people, the assertion that it happened used as an ‘argument’ that thus it was technically possible.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. Meimou says:
    @academic gossip

    [In] General Eisenhower’s Crusade in Europe (New York: Doubleday [Country Life Press], 1948), Winston Churchill’s The Second World War (London: Cassell, 6 vols., 1948-1954), and the Mémoires de guerre of General de Gaulle (Paris: Plon, 3 vols., 1954-1959). .... no mention either of Nazi “gas chambers,” a “genocide” of the Jews, or of “six million” Jewish victims of the war.
     
    This is a blatant lie by Faurrisson. Churchill in vol 6, p 597 (appendix C):

    Prime Minister to Foreign Secretary 11 July 44

    There is no doubt that this [persecution of Jews in Hungary and
    their expulsion from enemy territory] is probably the greatest and
    most horrible crime ever committed in the whole history of the world,

    and it has been done by scientific machinery by nominally civilised
    men in the name of a great State and one of the leading races of
    Europe. It is quite clear that all concerned in this crime who may fall
    into our hands, including the people who only obeyed orders by
    carrying out the butcheries, should be put to death
    after their associa-
    tion with the murders has been proved.

    I cannot therefore feel that this is the kind of ordinary case which is
    put through the Protecting Power, as, for instance, the lack of feeding
    or sanitary conditions in some particular prisoners' camp
    . There should
    therefore, in my opinion, be no negotiations of any kind on this
    subject. Declarations should be made in public, so that everyone
    connected with it will be hunted down and put to death.

     
    That is, dead Hungarian Jews in the German camps have fallen to "scientific machinery" used by "nominally civilized men in the name of a great State", and not simply to poor "conditions in some particular prisoners' camp". The latter is the usual Holocaust revisionists' explanation and Churchill is totally rejecting it in a letter written in July 1944 before the word "holocaust" had entered the lexicon. Instead, Churchill describes (and assumes as known to his Foreign Minister) the Germans as murdering the Hungarian Jews with scientific technology in what he calls the greatest crime of human history, with any involvement to be punished by death. Obviously his words also imply a massive scale to the murder by scientific machinery, of a similar order of magnitude to the Hungarian Jewish population. Which again happens to match the standard un-revised account.
    Incidentally, the camp used (according to the standard account) for scientifically murdering the Hungarian Jews was Auschwitz.

    https://archive.org/details/WinstonChurchillTheSecondWorldWarTriumphAndTragedyVolume6

    Eisenhower's memoir barely mentions anything about Jews. You would not learn from his book, or Churchills', or de Gaulle's that Kristallnacht, boycotts, and Nuremberg laws had ever existed in Nazi Germany, or that Hitler had any negative thoughts about Jews. Nevertheless those things are extremely well documented and not disputed by historical revisionists (anti-historians). That a personal political memoir of the war doesn't mention these events is more of an indicator that the author assumes that the reader is already familiar with them, than that they never occurred or are unimportant.

    Eisenhower in fact specifically anticipated Holocaust revisionism and made a point of being personally photographed at German concentration camps in front of piles of dead prisoners, to bear witness and (in his words) help pre-empt the possibility that some people would later dismiss the massacres as "mere propaganda". He also demanded that photographs and films be made at the camps and witness testimony be taken, for the same reason. This, too, is fairly well known and documented enough to never have been a subject of any historical revisionism. Faurrison chose to be a weasel and say that Eisenhower, who made a point of documenting the Holocaust in 1945, suddenly maintained a suspicious silence on the matter in 1948. The more honest interpretation is that the army films of the camps that he himself had commissioned, and newspaper articles by reporters he had had invited into the camps, were in such wide circulation in the year or two after the German surrender that Eisenhower treated the basic facts of extermination camps as already known to the public. He was writing a memoir, not a textbook.

    Crusade in Europe http://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.208955

    de Gaulle doesn't mention Jews at all, not because nothing happened to them, but because the Vichy collaboration made the whole subject radioactive in France for decades after the war. Those are not points in dispute by revisionists, and Faurisson knew perfectly well that the lack of Jewish references in de Gaulle's book has no bearing on any historical questions.

    This excerpt is the first I have read anything by Faurrisson, but the level of dishonesty he packed into a few sentences is entirely consistent with the appraisal of his credibility made at the time by everyone except his lone defender, Chomsky.

    Eisenhower in fact specifically anticipated Holocaust revisionism and made a point of being personally photographed at German concentration camps in front of piles of dead prisoners, to bear witness and (in his words) help pre-empt the possibility that some people would later dismiss the massacres as “mere propaganda”.

    Revisionist don’t refute that prisoners died in large numbers. How did the piles of dead prisoner die?

    He also demanded that photographs and films be made at the camps and witness testimony be taken, for the same reason. This, too, is fairly well known and documented enough to never have been a subject of any historical revisionism

    No one refutes the existence of camps, so you don’t get a point for bringing it upWhat was the nature of this witness testimony? Does it substantiate genocide?

    Stop knocking down strawman.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. Meimou says:
    @Renoman
    Waaaaay tooooo looong!

    Waaaaay to short an attention span!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. @Anon
    It’s pretty well known that Eisenhower decided to film, take photos and make a visual record of the camps as soon as he saw them.

    Indeed, of the misery the allies, especially the USA, had caused: Stephen Jay Gould in:
    Wim Kayzer, ‘Een Schitterend Ongeluk, Wim Kayzer ontmoet Oliver Sacks, Stephen Jay Gould, Stephen Toulmin, Daniel C. Dennett, Rupert Sheldrake en Freeman Dyson’, 1993 Amsterdam

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    That’s true. You’re right He just took photos and didn’t go into the allied bombings that disrupted Germany and supplies to the camps.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. DFH says:
    @Svigor
    Mark Ames, Mark Ames...that name seems familiar. Ohhh, right, now I remember; Ames is one of the moral cretins who managed to run Russia's most popular "edgy," "independent," English-language paper in post-Soviet Russia without mentioning the Jewishness of the Russian oligarchs. Or without much mentioning the Jewish "Russian" oligarchs at all.

    Yeah, I remember those guys.

    The idea of them calling anyone out for moral turpitude is laughable. Anyone who takes that shit seriously never read The Exile.

    Ames is one of the moral cretins who managed to run Russia’s most popular “edgy,” “independent,” English-language paper in post-Soviet Russia without mentioning the Jewishness of the Russian oligarchs. Or without much mentioning the Jewish “Russian” oligarchs at all.

    But they did mention their Jewishness many times, including a piece with little profiles of the oligarchs called ‘The Jews; Where are they now?’. This even made its way (through plagiarism) into the Guardian.

    http://exile.ru/articles/detail.php?ARTICLE_ID=8575&IBLOCK_ID=35

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  57. Anonymous[142] • Disclaimer says:

    Holocaust denial is a red-herring, used by the Zios to whatever advantage it might add to any given scenario.

    World War II is over. The disposition of individuals in several concentration/detainment camps in the 1940s is entirely, dismissively irrelevant. In 2018, it makes absolutely no difference at all, and discussion of it, in any form, has one and only one effect: to aid and protect Zionist dominance of world economy and world political conditions.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    If there weren’t holocaust denial, the Jews would create it; just as they created the myth of the late 19th century E European pogroms to facilitate the mass immigration to America, S Africa and W. Europe

    I can always tell when the Israeli Bonds and AIPAC fundraisers are coming to town, there’s a rash of anti Semitic threats, mostly graffiti on the walls of Jewish buildings. It’s to spread fear of “ “ it could happen again if we don’t give money to AIPAC”

    A lot of the Jewish buildings in Los Angeles are fortified with huge 10 foot walls, security guards at the gate showing dr licenses to enter.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. @Colin Wright
    '...Lipstadt convincingly demonstrates that very few Americans seem to have believed in the reality of the Holocaust during the Second World War itself, despite considerable efforts by agitated Jewish activists to persuade them...'

    A bit of what is now ancient history becomes relevant here. Forty-fifty years before the Second World War, Jews had started retailing what turned out to be grossly exaggerated accounts of their sufferings in Russian pogroms. Anything from one or two to perhaps a score of deaths became hundreds, and innuimerable utterly fictitious atrocity tales were reported as fact.

    Eventually, of course, the exaggeration became obvious. However, it was repeated at the time of the Russian Civil War. Once again, vast death tolls from pogroms, etc. Yet again, that the tales were a mixture of exaggeration and outright fabrication eventually became obvious.

    Hence, when reports of massive Nazi death camps started coming out of Eastern Europe a generation later, they were understandably greeted with skepticism -- the more so as the First World War had also seen vast quantities of spurious German atrocity stories. For example, there was some ridiculous tale about the Germans killing Belgians and turning their bodies into soap or something -- in camps, no less.

    People were skeptical about the camps for good reason. These sort of lies had been being produced -- and subsequently shown to be lies -- for a good sixty years preceding the Second World War. No doubt the Germans were being beastly to the Jews -- but actually killing them by the million? That elicited a collective raised eyebrow.

    Lipstadt knows how to write.
    When I had read
    Deborah Lipstadt, ‘Denying the holocaust’, 1993, New York
    now some fifteen years ago, when I still believed mainstream history, I was upset about those denying this historical truth.
    I now call Lipstadt Lyingstadt, her book is just lies and accusations, without any factual basis.
    A similar book is
    Brigitte Hammann, ‘Hitler’s Vienna, A Dictator’s Apprenticeship’, Oxford New York, 1999

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. Hans says:

    Here’s a link to the Charlie Hebdo (((double standard))) firing of Sine: I’m not Charlie . . . I’m Maurice Sinet, fired by Charlie for anti-semitism – https://shareverything.com/2015/01/14/im-not-charlie-im-maurice-sine-fired-by-charlie-for-anti-semitism/

    Great and essential work Mr. Unz! Bravo!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hrw-500
    Thanks for sharing that link Hans! I founded another one who included cartoons from Brazilian cartoonist Carlos Latuff about Charlie-Hebdo double standards.
    https://anonhq.com/charlie-hebdo-fired-anti-semitic-cartoonist-ridiculing-judaism-2009/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. @Colin Wright
    Here we go: Holocaust Denial.

    Don't worry. Personally, I think the Holocaust occurred substantially as described, but if others want to argue differently, I don't see it as heresy. I'm no more offended than if someone wants to argue the Japanese could have successfully invaded Hawaii. Not my opinion, but...

    I will point out that while he has flirted with outright Holocaust Denial in the past, David Irving has found and published on his website what he regards as irrefutable evidence that 2.5 million Jews were killed in the 'Operation Reinhard' camps alone. While he is skeptical about the importance of Auschwitz, I imagine he'd agree at least a million additional Jews were killed by the Einsatzgruppen in the East, died of starvation in the Warsaw Ghetto, etc, etc.

    So we're at 3.5 million as a minimum figure -- I'd go with at least 5 million myself. Obviously, the difference would have been very important to Jew #3,773,751 but as a moral matter, I don't see the distinction. 3.5 million is substantially as awful as 5 million. Have 6 million if it's important to you. No one will ever know with any great precision anyway. As far as I'm concerned, it's like arguing about what proportion of Iran's population the Mongols killed. Past a point, a definitive answer simply isn't to be found, and it's certainly not something that's worth assaulting elderly men in the streets over.

    Actually, the only significant area of controversy I see is whether Hitler knew and approved. There's no clear evidence. Irving argues he didn't -- I'd guess he did. That particular question could do with some dispassionate analysis.

    As to why not many paid attention to the Holocaust before 1961 -- it's bloody dull. Lining unresisting victims up and shooting them is objectively about as interesting and appealing a subject for study as the operations of a slaughterhouse. This actually is the worst effect of the whole Holocaust Industry phenomenon. Lately it seems that every text dealing with Germany in the Second World War feels obliged to spend half its pages recounting the tale of the Holocaust yet again, and it's bloody dull.

    Finally, the unique horror escapes me. We are all individuals; what matters above all to us is that it is us being killed, not our precise relationship to our fellow victims. How it was somehow consolation to a Russian POW starving to death that he wasn't being killed because he was Jewish, or solace to a four year old girl being baked alive in a cellar in Dresden that it wasn't being done because she was Jewish totally escapes me.

    The Holocaust. It happened, it was wrong, and it's dull.

    I will point out that while he has flirted with outright Holocaust Denial in the past, David Irving has found and published on his website what he regards as irrefutable evidence that 2.5 million Jews were killed in the ‘Operation Reinhard’ camps alone.

    You refer, no doubt, to the so-called Hoefle telegram. By ‘found’ you unfortunately give the wrong impression that Irving discovered it himself. But how does he extrapolate from the 1.25 million sent to the camps (that’s minus the 25,000 sent to Majdanek) to the end of 1942 to 2.5 million by the end of 1943? The revisionist position, as you know, is that these were transit camps. Irving, if he wished to argue in good faith, would have to have subjected the alleged methods of mass gassings and body disposal at the camps to the same scrutiny that he’d applied to Auschwitz.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  61. A few notes to this stimulating article….
    1. My father played good golf before WW2 at a moderately overweight 210 lbs. When released from German POW camp in 1945 he weighed about 115 lb. Easy to see why the Belsen and Buchenwald corpses and survivors looked as they did. Easy to see too why Auschwicz guards wouldn’t have to kill many of the inmates they induced to leave when whatever deadly activities previously practised had been prudently abandoned.
    2. What happened at Wannsee conference? Crucial if not decisive.
    3. What were the before and after figures for Jews in the part of (western) Poland occupied by Germany from September 1939?
    4. What were the before and after figures for Hungarian Jews who seem to have been the biggest group of Jewish Auschwicz victims?
    5. Why did Jewish women and children have to be transported from France, Belgium and Holland?
    4. The big question you don’t define: what is the Holocaust story you are casting doubt on? Was there perhaps no plan with or without Hitler’s approval which covers the said transport of women and children? Granted the Einsatzgruppen *could* have been aimed mainly to kill enemies comprehensively with Jews naturally classed with Communists, and granted that the numbers of Jews actually killed were probably well under 6 million is there really a problem in believing that, if a Final Solution was agreed at Wannsee, extermination was agreed after other possible solutions had failed? After all “extermination” had been suggested for the Jews before, by anti-Dreyfusards in France and by Kaiser Wilhelm ll. And there are plenty of precedent uses in America.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wally
    So why haven't you found your answers from the "Holocaust Industry"?

    All those questions have been easily answered at: www.codoh.com
    use the search function

    No name calling, level playing field debate here: http://forum.codoh.com
    use the search function

    Revisionists are just the messengers, the absurd impossibility of the 'holocaust' storyline is the message.

    , @peterAUS
    Good post.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:

    The Diary of Anne Frank was written by Meyer Levin, a prolific early and mid 20th century American author.

    Otto Frank went to New York and contracted with Levin to write the book based on Anne’s real diary for $50,000 Levin wrote the book. Frank didn’t pay him. Levin sued Frank. Levin used the copy of Anne’s real diary as proof that the published Levin book was very different from Anne’s diary.

    Levin won his case and was awarded the money owed. Frank never did pay him.

    There are always new translations and lost pages published to great publicity and angst.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anarchyst
    Not only was the "diary" ghost-written by Otto Frank, most of it was written with a "ball-point pen", not invented until well after WW2.
    The Frank's were rounded up and arrested because of their black-market activities--nothing more...
    , @Wally
    The fake Anne Frank diary utterly exposed below.

    You'll love seeing the many different handwritings.

    Anne Frank’s Diary Gains ‘Co-Author’ / and much, much more: https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=9924

    That's the same Anne Frank that was transferred out of the alleged "pure extermination camp" Auschwitz to get medical treatment.

    www.codoh.com

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  63. utu says:
    @for-the-record
    and used it in her Einstein in Jerusalem

    [Freudian?] slip?

    Must be but I do not know what it suppose to signify.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. Ron Unz, the greatest Athenian of our time. Thank you so much.

    Readers may like to know that if the 2012 documentary Auschwitz: The Surprising Hidden Truth is blocked for them on YouTube, it can be watched on the Internet Archive, here.

    Read More
    • Replies: @geokat62

    Ron Unz, the greatest Athenian of our time.
     
    To the goyim, Ron is an Athenian. To the Jews, he’s a Hellenizer.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. @Anonymous
    I perused this article and will go back to read it more slowly. But damn, Ron Unz has totally shattered my confidence in believing any of the official narrative. My knowledge of history is wholly inadequate and I always try to rectify this. But now I hesitate to undertake any historical self-education for fear I might be doing damage (garbage in).

    When I read reviews on Amazon regarding math books, I always cringe and run away when I read a reviewer mention that a book contains many errors. I don’t have confidence in my ability to spot these errors, especially in a subject new to me, and fear I might be vitiated for life by “knowing” wrong information. And worse, being wrong with confidence.

    It’s funny, but prior to the rise of Trump and the complete and jaw-dropping exposure of the blatant lies and fabrication of news and the official narrative, I wonder if I would’ve been receptive to Unz’s American Pravda pieces. Mostly likely not. I think I’d dismiss them outright in a Lipstadtian “come on”.

    The interesting thing about truth is that it is consistent.
    It was, maybe even this is changing, impossible to control any writing.
    Thus inconsistencies show what it true and what is not.
    But it takes a lot of time an effort to see through the lies.
    A few books do not suffice.

    An maybe interesting example is the assertion that Hess had never met the Scottish count to whom he was flying in May 1941, thus making his peace mission improbable, or a lunatic act;
    Yet Hess had breakfast with this count during the 1936 Berlin Olympic games:
    Robert Rhodes James, ‘CHIPS, The Diaries of Sir Henry Channon’, London 1967
    Even
    Lynn Picknett, Clive Prince and Stephen Prior, ‘Double standards, The Rudolf Hess cover-up’, London 2002 does not mention this meeting.

    Another example is the letter attributed to our late Prince Bernhard, written to Hitler, asking him te let him, Bernard, rule the Netherlands.
    There was considerable controvery if this letter was ever written.
    However, writing the letter is completely consistent with the last mentioned book, that concludes that Hess died in an unexplained flying boat accident in Scotland, in which also a brother of the British king was killed.
    Bernard dined with the brother the day before the accident.
    The flying boat is supposed to have been on its way to Stockholm, to declare peace between Germany and GB, Hitler stepping down, Hess replacing him.

    For those seeing conspiracies anywhere, it was an accident, the pilot in ascending from a Scottish lake where Hess came on board chose the wrong, higher valley.
    There was a body to many when the wreckage was examined.
    There never was an official explanation what the, for the time, huge flying boat was doing in starting from a small lake.
    The extra body, also never explained officially.
    The Hess at Nüremberg, and in Spandau, was not the real Hess, the USA prison doctor explained this is a book.
    Who he was, w’ll never know, I suppose.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. @Greg Bacon

    I will point out that while he has flirted with outright Holocaust Denial in the past, David Irving has found and published on his website what he regards as irrefutable evidence that 2.5 million Jews were killed in the ‘Operation Reinhard’ camps alone.
     
    Link? None, as you won't find any to back up your assertions.

    I purchased and read Mr. Irvings/ "Hitler's War," a magnificent 838 pages of that time--with over 100 pages of notes and sources--that goes into intimate detail about WWII. There is NO mention of Operation Reinhard, or 'Aktion Reinhard' in German.

    I checked Mr. Irving's site and found "Holocaust Denial and Operation Reinhard." Did some research at that link--below--but couldn't find any definitive figures like you claim.

    http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/Belzec/Belzec%20etc.pdf

    And the 'Final Solution' phrase was warped by the holocaust junkies as the real term is TERRITORIAL Final Solution. Hitler did NOT want to mass-murder Juden, just round them up and move them to the new land conquered from Russia. Another 'Pale of the Settlement,' if you will.

    There are so many LIES told about the holocaust, how can anyone seriously believe the 6 million figure?
    Lies like the Nazi masturbation machine that literally milked Jew males to death. Or the giant electrical chair that could hold and electrocute 10,000 Juden at once?
    Or the secret Buck Rogers like invention, a space ray that vaporized 20,000 Auschwitz Jews all at once.
    Or the now disproved soap made from Jew ashes/fat. Or the human skin lamp shades. Or the giant steam chambers used to cook Jews to death. Another LIE.

    Shall I go on? I certainly can, but for brevity's sake, I'll stop with the LIES here.


    Tell me Mr. Wright, what made the Nazis help over 60,000 of German Jews move to Palestine, from 1933-42, even helping them set up industries, business and living quarters, which the Germans had to quit in 1942, since the war on the Eastern Front was going badly and the Germans needed those assets to help with the war?
    It was called "The Transfer Agreement" and it's what got former London Mayor Livingstone in trouble with the holocaust fanatics because he mentioned a bit of truth from that period.

    Since the holocaust is listed as being from 1942-45, we're supposed to believe that literally, overnight, the Germans went from helping Jews move to their nation of choice to pushing them in gas chambers?

    Sorry, but like someone already said, "Truth needs no defense; truth can stand on its own."
    Evidently not in at least 17 European nations, where it is VERBOTEN to ask questions about that time.
    Even asking a sensible question like, "Why did the Auschwitz sign declaring that four million were killed here get changed to a little over 1 million, and that included Gypsies, criminal, political dissidents, Commies etc. Ask that and risk getting arrested, tried, convicted and heavily fined while you sit in prison for five years.
    Ditto for the numbers at Majdanek, which dropped from around 600,000 to around 70,000, but don't ask why, unless you want to go to prison.

    When someone tells that many lies and then gets horrified when people don't believe their BS, it's their own fault for telling such whoppers to begin with.

    I find it very difficult to believe that any legislation in Europe could be so illiberal and so stupid as to make it an offence, let alone one for which the penalty might be imprisonment, to draw attention to the change in numbers said to be killed at Auschwicz. Would you please back up you assertions with sources/links and quotes.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Greg Bacon
    Since your browser is apparently broken, here's one of many links on that subject. They might call it hate speech or in Germany, " Incitement to hatred," but it's the same; deny the holocaust and risk fines and prison in 21 European nations and Russia.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_against_Holocaust_denial
    Some nations can hit you with up to 1o years for merely asking questions about the historical accuracy of the holocaust story or harass you endlessly, like they've do to Alison Chaboz in England--who got probation, fined and community service--or Monika Schaefer of Canada, who was arrested in Germany for Incitement to hatred back in January and has been sitting in a maximum security prison while awaiting trial, which finally started mid-July.

    She was visiting her brother in Germany when she got arrested for singing a song in Canada two years earlier and putting it on Youtube.

    This video is her crime, singing a song, "Sorry Mom, I was wrong about the Holocaust." Although if you're in Britain, you won't be able to view it, as it has been blocked.

    https://youtu.be/E0_BZphQ7Qo

    Or the 88 yo German Ursula Haverbeck, who got hit with a two year sentence for denying the holocaust, about the same time some idiot German judge let a pack of young illegal aliens go free who had violently raped--nearly to death--a 14 yo girl. His reasoning was that they didn't understand that NO meant NO and prison wouldn't be good for them.

    Now if that ain't a fugged up world, then we're all mad.

    https://www.dw.com/en/nazi-grandma-loses-appeal-in-top-german-court-over-holocaust-denial-sentence/a-44944546

    What are they afraid of? Methinks the truth.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. @Greg Bacon

    I will point out that while he has flirted with outright Holocaust Denial in the past, David Irving has found and published on his website what he regards as irrefutable evidence that 2.5 million Jews were killed in the ‘Operation Reinhard’ camps alone.
     
    Link? None, as you won't find any to back up your assertions.

    I purchased and read Mr. Irvings/ "Hitler's War," a magnificent 838 pages of that time--with over 100 pages of notes and sources--that goes into intimate detail about WWII. There is NO mention of Operation Reinhard, or 'Aktion Reinhard' in German.

    I checked Mr. Irving's site and found "Holocaust Denial and Operation Reinhard." Did some research at that link--below--but couldn't find any definitive figures like you claim.

    http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/Belzec/Belzec%20etc.pdf

    And the 'Final Solution' phrase was warped by the holocaust junkies as the real term is TERRITORIAL Final Solution. Hitler did NOT want to mass-murder Juden, just round them up and move them to the new land conquered from Russia. Another 'Pale of the Settlement,' if you will.

    There are so many LIES told about the holocaust, how can anyone seriously believe the 6 million figure?
    Lies like the Nazi masturbation machine that literally milked Jew males to death. Or the giant electrical chair that could hold and electrocute 10,000 Juden at once?
    Or the secret Buck Rogers like invention, a space ray that vaporized 20,000 Auschwitz Jews all at once.
    Or the now disproved soap made from Jew ashes/fat. Or the human skin lamp shades. Or the giant steam chambers used to cook Jews to death. Another LIE.

    Shall I go on? I certainly can, but for brevity's sake, I'll stop with the LIES here.


    Tell me Mr. Wright, what made the Nazis help over 60,000 of German Jews move to Palestine, from 1933-42, even helping them set up industries, business and living quarters, which the Germans had to quit in 1942, since the war on the Eastern Front was going badly and the Germans needed those assets to help with the war?
    It was called "The Transfer Agreement" and it's what got former London Mayor Livingstone in trouble with the holocaust fanatics because he mentioned a bit of truth from that period.

    Since the holocaust is listed as being from 1942-45, we're supposed to believe that literally, overnight, the Germans went from helping Jews move to their nation of choice to pushing them in gas chambers?

    Sorry, but like someone already said, "Truth needs no defense; truth can stand on its own."
    Evidently not in at least 17 European nations, where it is VERBOTEN to ask questions about that time.
    Even asking a sensible question like, "Why did the Auschwitz sign declaring that four million were killed here get changed to a little over 1 million, and that included Gypsies, criminal, political dissidents, Commies etc. Ask that and risk getting arrested, tried, convicted and heavily fined while you sit in prison for five years.
    Ditto for the numbers at Majdanek, which dropped from around 600,000 to around 70,000, but don't ask why, unless you want to go to prison.

    When someone tells that many lies and then gets horrified when people don't believe their BS, it's their own fault for telling such whoppers to begin with.

    Therein lies the immense value of Ron’s exhaustive effort here. It’s not a question of “did Jews suffer during WWII” – hell, everyone suffered. It’s debunking the propaganda that Jews are the most special people and most extraordinary victims in all human existence. What difference does it make if 6 million or 6 hundred thousand really? Or killed by firing squad or gas chamber? Both are better than the typhus and starvation that likely killed most of them. And Jews surely suffered no more than many German, French, and Eastern European Yeshuans.

    The greatest benefit of Ron’s work is showing (1) the Jews had agency and (2) we’ve all been fed a nonstop diet of lies about essentially everything (holocaust included) for our entire lives.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  68. Anon[436] • Disclaimer says:
    @jilles dykstra
    Scientific ?
    The description of the asserted gas chambers, and how they functioned, show something far from scientific, on the contrary, primitive.
    This is one of the reasons these gas chambers for humans are improbable, the highly efficiënt Germans not devising an efficiënt killing and cremation process.
    Any chicken slaughter factory is more scientific.

    7I think the expression “scientific” was picked up from Churchill’s communication with the Foreign Secretary. It is just the kind of expression a layman might have adopted as a shorthand way of making a distinction between using electricity or gas rather than shooting or hanging.

    In answer to your point about likely German methods you should consider how efficient it was to (allegedly) persuade people they were going to be cleansed/deloused so their resistance would not be roused, and then to drop poison on them from above. No need for higher level science or engineering.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
    I suppose you know how the story is what had to be done after the asserted killing by an insecticide.
    Anyone using this method would have used cyanide, it kills instantly.
    Saves a lot of time.
    Then about removing the bodies and having them cremated, one by one, as the story goes, then removing the remains.
    Did I have to design a mass killing process for humans, I suppose it is not very difficult to design an efficient installation.
    But I do not want to think about how.

    As to Churchill, in his memoirs, must admit I do not have all ten or eleven volumes in Dutch, seven or so, not a word about extermination of jews.
    Maybe you know that Churchill's mother was the daughter of a New York banker, whose name may show the banker was a jew.
    Technically then Churchill may have been a jew.
    He supported zionism until 1953, when his life long friend Moyne was killed in Egypt by zionists.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. @Bucky
    While a lot of it likely is exaggerated, especially the part about Germany using scarce resources to perpetuate the killings while they were losing the war, saying that “only” 1.5 million were killed vs 3.5 million is splitting hairs.

    Given widespread scapegoating occurring before the war, and how Hitler was the leader, it only makes sense that some sort of attitude would take a hold among the bureaucracy in Germany. Though the vast majority likely were simply shot. Because if the goal is extermination of Jews, the most direct way to that goal is shooting, not constructing a camp.

    But if the real number is say, 2 million, that is still a tragedy.

    You omit to notice that Germany’s labor shortage was made up for by slave or otherwise forced labor. If they were Jews who were lowest on the list for survival they could just be worked and starved to death.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wally
    "Slave labor"? You mean the same "slave labor" that the Allies used?

    Jews were not "worked and starved to death." there no proof.

    Using your logic, why would German starve to death their valuable "slave labor"?

    www.codoh.com

    Healthy Jews at Auschwitz 'liberation':
    http://fcit.coedu.usf.edu/holocaust/PICS31/85600.jpg
    http://fcit.coedu.usf.edu/holocaust/PICS31/66935a.jpg
    http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-J2jpuEZojE0/VONvKRjmXCI/AAAAAAAABX8/-GG_ralfWJA/s1600/Auschwitz.jpg

    , @Wally
    On the "extermination camp", "slave labor camp" Auschwitz":

    An "extermination camp" where thousands of Jews chose to stay behind when the Germans left.

    An "extermination camp" where most of the inmates, more thousands, chose to leave WITH the Germans.

    An "extermination camp" where 1,250,000 human remains are supposedly buried, but no one can show us these remains.

    An "extermination camp" where many Jews gave birth.

    An "extermination camp" where the absurdly alleged homicidal 'gas chambers' could not have worked as alleged, as proven repeatedly, scientifically impossible.

    An "extermination camp" where fake 'gas chambers' were "reconstructed" AFTER THE WAR.

    An "extermination camp" where detailed aerial photos of the period show nothing that is alleged to have been happening.

    An "extermination camp" where there are even obvious, laughable attempts to tamper with aerial photos that make a mockery of the fake storyline.
    see:
    Auschwitz Aerial photos, tampered with to fit the fake story: https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11669

    An "extermination camp" where there are countless Jew "survivors".

    An "extermination camp" where so called "survivors" say the most impossible and conflicting things that do not hold up to scrutiny, would be laughed out of a legit court of law.

    www.codoh.com
    , @bucky
    I don't disagree. the treatment of Jews in Germany is similar to what Trump is doing to Mexicans now. There is this general attitude of disdain towards a certain class of people that emanates from the leadership. those lower down continually push the envelope as to cruel behavior towards the targeted group.

    Mexicans are alleged to be undercutting American labor, just like Jews were accused of destabilizing governments and societies. Increasingly cruel behaviors were enacted on them. We have the family separations on the border going on with Mexicans, and there are even stories of ICE officers unleashing pedophilic tendencies upon Mexican children. This isn't a result of a master plan handed down by aliens. It is a result of leadership.

    Also, prison populations are used for many heavy labor activities. Many inmates are tasked with firefighting. They are the lowest population in America, are heavily minority, and while there is significant truth to the allegations made against them, their ill treatment comes from a collective attitude of disdain.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  70. “…Surely no zealous theologian of the European Dark Ages would have reacted any differently…”

    Look up “summa” and Thomas Aquinas. You may change your mind.

    Read More
    • Agree: utu
    • Replies: @Ron Unz

    “…Surely no zealous theologian of the European Dark Ages would have reacted any differently…”
     
    You nailed me! Actually, when I write my long articles I normally go through several drafts, changing a few words here and there, and an earlier version read "no zealous mid-level theologian," but I decide the excise the extra adjective, which perhaps I shouldn't have done...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. Che Guava says:

    My own sequence, and thanks to Mr. Unz for also noticing most.

    Being at a western university, where Mr. Irving (certainly far more deserving of an honorary doctorate than most holders of that empty title) was ‘no-platformed’ by a combination of the Zionist and Trotskyist students.

    I did not understand the reasons at the time, but knowing he was a military historian with a great reputation, the offense against freedom of expression really annoyed me.

    Saw a couple of TV documentaries that had info. from Leuchter and Gelmar, among others, in retrospect, think that was the main factor driving the wasp’s nest into hyperactivity, the simple fact that the narrative was being questioned on television.

    I read The Painted Bird, then later found out it was a total fake.

    Saw and later read Slaughterhouse 5, later found that Vonnegut, a direct witness of the Dresden atrocity, was essentially forced to write Mother Night as a mea culpa for it.

    Read a couple of the popular Holocaust porn novels from Israel, translated into English, thinking, oh, so sad, then noticing the small-print disclaimers ‘This is entirely a work of fiction.’

    As something of a student of military history, I was thinking ‘Why were the presumably logical military giving priority to transport for this, when they were having much more pressing needs?’ In the end, I was realising it was likely just not true.

    Am glad that you mention the magazine Marco Polo , I enjoyed it in general, though do not have a copy of the banned issue, unfortunately only saw it and briefly scanned at a book shop.

    The reaction, as you say, was crazy, that was the factor pushing me into absolute scepticism.

    Still makes me wonder what power the Holocaustians were using to close the mag., have people fired and resign.

    Perhaps the US embassy.

    Doubt that it was the Israeli, because the campaign of Israeli illegal workers for a ‘Holocaust’ museum in an outer Tokyo suburb abt. seven yrs. later collapsed when the govt. cracked down on Israeli illegal workers around that time. Nothing to do with the stupid museum project, just because they were doing illegal work and trading, including illegal drugs.

    It was nice to see the posters for their stupid museum project disappear at the time.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu

    ‘Why were the presumably logical military giving priority to transport for this, when they were having much more pressing needs?’
     
    Just the other day I was reading wiki entry on Field Marshal Erich von Manstein. In April 1944 he was dismissed by Hitler and went on medical leave. Then in October 1944 he bought an estate in East Pomerania.

    What was he thinking? How did he pay for the estate and who sold it?
    , @Antiwar7
    Mother Night was published 7 years before Slaughterhouse-Five.
    , @utu

    Saw and later read Slaughterhouse 5, later found that Vonnegut, a direct witness of the Dresden atrocity, was essentially forced to write Mother Night as a mea culpa for it.
     
    You are confabulating. Mother Night was published seven years before Slaughterhouse 5.

    Vonnegut published Slaughterhouse 5 (which imo is one of the greatest anti-war novels) during the Vietnam War. The U.S. was bombing Vietnam for over 4 years already. East Germany was permitted by Soviets to present Dresden bombing as the greatest atrocity by American and British allies against civilians. The bombings of German cities were referred to as terrorist bombings just as the American bombings of Vietnam. After Germany's reunification this stopped and building of new narrative aiming at British-German reconciliation was started. German and British historians got very busy to drive the number of dead in Dresden from over 100,000 to below 25,000 in a futile attempt to achieve parity with Coventry (178 killed) that presumably was to justify the bombing of Dresden. You see, lowering the number of German victims is OK while any attempts to lower Jewish victim is a crime.

    Vonnegut most likely was influenced by 1963 David Irving's The Destruction of Dresden. What is interesting that Poland produced a very sympathetic to German suffering film about Dresden (Tonight a City Will Die) already in 1961. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tonight_a_City_Will_Die. The film is available with Russian subtitles at Youtube:

    Сегодня ночью погибнет город / Tonight a City Will Die (1961)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hS2wZfFv94k
    , @Hamlet's Ghost
    It is worth noting that Schindler's List is classified as fiction.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  72. nglaer says:
    @academic gossip

    [In] General Eisenhower’s Crusade in Europe (New York: Doubleday [Country Life Press], 1948), Winston Churchill’s The Second World War (London: Cassell, 6 vols., 1948-1954), and the Mémoires de guerre of General de Gaulle (Paris: Plon, 3 vols., 1954-1959). .... no mention either of Nazi “gas chambers,” a “genocide” of the Jews, or of “six million” Jewish victims of the war.
     
    This is a blatant lie by Faurrisson. Churchill in vol 6, p 597 (appendix C):

    Prime Minister to Foreign Secretary 11 July 44

    There is no doubt that this [persecution of Jews in Hungary and
    their expulsion from enemy territory] is probably the greatest and
    most horrible crime ever committed in the whole history of the world,

    and it has been done by scientific machinery by nominally civilised
    men in the name of a great State and one of the leading races of
    Europe. It is quite clear that all concerned in this crime who may fall
    into our hands, including the people who only obeyed orders by
    carrying out the butcheries, should be put to death
    after their associa-
    tion with the murders has been proved.

    I cannot therefore feel that this is the kind of ordinary case which is
    put through the Protecting Power, as, for instance, the lack of feeding
    or sanitary conditions in some particular prisoners' camp
    . There should
    therefore, in my opinion, be no negotiations of any kind on this
    subject. Declarations should be made in public, so that everyone
    connected with it will be hunted down and put to death.

     
    That is, dead Hungarian Jews in the German camps have fallen to "scientific machinery" used by "nominally civilized men in the name of a great State", and not simply to poor "conditions in some particular prisoners' camp". The latter is the usual Holocaust revisionists' explanation and Churchill is totally rejecting it in a letter written in July 1944 before the word "holocaust" had entered the lexicon. Instead, Churchill describes (and assumes as known to his Foreign Minister) the Germans as murdering the Hungarian Jews with scientific technology in what he calls the greatest crime of human history, with any involvement to be punished by death. Obviously his words also imply a massive scale to the murder by scientific machinery, of a similar order of magnitude to the Hungarian Jewish population. Which again happens to match the standard un-revised account.
    Incidentally, the camp used (according to the standard account) for scientifically murdering the Hungarian Jews was Auschwitz.

    https://archive.org/details/WinstonChurchillTheSecondWorldWarTriumphAndTragedyVolume6

    Eisenhower's memoir barely mentions anything about Jews. You would not learn from his book, or Churchills', or de Gaulle's that Kristallnacht, boycotts, and Nuremberg laws had ever existed in Nazi Germany, or that Hitler had any negative thoughts about Jews. Nevertheless those things are extremely well documented and not disputed by historical revisionists (anti-historians). That a personal political memoir of the war doesn't mention these events is more of an indicator that the author assumes that the reader is already familiar with them, than that they never occurred or are unimportant.

    Eisenhower in fact specifically anticipated Holocaust revisionism and made a point of being personally photographed at German concentration camps in front of piles of dead prisoners, to bear witness and (in his words) help pre-empt the possibility that some people would later dismiss the massacres as "mere propaganda". He also demanded that photographs and films be made at the camps and witness testimony be taken, for the same reason. This, too, is fairly well known and documented enough to never have been a subject of any historical revisionism. Faurrison chose to be a weasel and say that Eisenhower, who made a point of documenting the Holocaust in 1945, suddenly maintained a suspicious silence on the matter in 1948. The more honest interpretation is that the army films of the camps that he himself had commissioned, and newspaper articles by reporters he had had invited into the camps, were in such wide circulation in the year or two after the German surrender that Eisenhower treated the basic facts of extermination camps as already known to the public. He was writing a memoir, not a textbook.

    Crusade in Europe http://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.208955

    de Gaulle doesn't mention Jews at all, not because nothing happened to them, but because the Vichy collaboration made the whole subject radioactive in France for decades after the war. Those are not points in dispute by revisionists, and Faurisson knew perfectly well that the lack of Jewish references in de Gaulle's book has no bearing on any historical questions.

    This excerpt is the first I have read anything by Faurrisson, but the level of dishonesty he packed into a few sentences is entirely consistent with the appraisal of his credibility made at the time by everyone except his lone defender, Chomsky.

    Nice little bit of research and knowledge, needed and appreciated.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  73. @Colin Wright
    '...Lipstadt convincingly demonstrates that very few Americans seem to have believed in the reality of the Holocaust during the Second World War itself, despite considerable efforts by agitated Jewish activists to persuade them...'

    A bit of what is now ancient history becomes relevant here. Forty-fifty years before the Second World War, Jews had started retailing what turned out to be grossly exaggerated accounts of their sufferings in Russian pogroms. Anything from one or two to perhaps a score of deaths became hundreds, and innuimerable utterly fictitious atrocity tales were reported as fact.

    Eventually, of course, the exaggeration became obvious. However, it was repeated at the time of the Russian Civil War. Once again, vast death tolls from pogroms, etc. Yet again, that the tales were a mixture of exaggeration and outright fabrication eventually became obvious.

    Hence, when reports of massive Nazi death camps started coming out of Eastern Europe a generation later, they were understandably greeted with skepticism -- the more so as the First World War had also seen vast quantities of spurious German atrocity stories. For example, there was some ridiculous tale about the Germans killing Belgians and turning their bodies into soap or something -- in camps, no less.

    People were skeptical about the camps for good reason. These sort of lies had been being produced -- and subsequently shown to be lies -- for a good sixty years preceding the Second World War. No doubt the Germans were being beastly to the Jews -- but actually killing them by the million? That elicited a collective raised eyebrow.

    The story, Moishe, is not the hoax. The story is that we can tell the goyim what they are allowed and what they are not allowed to think. And they do as they are told, and make it the law.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. @Meimou
    As to why not many paid attention to the Holocaust before 1961 — it’s bloody dull

    A weak explanation. The most likely explanation is that the OS is a lie, it doesn't help you that Eisenhower and Churchill didn't mention it in their books.

    Why the Allies didn't use it as wartime propaganda?

    How do you keep the murder of millions s secret anyway?

    If it was so "dull" why did the OS get more important over time?

    The Western Allies did use the alleged gassing of Jews as propaganda during the last couple of years of the war and through until at least the end of the Nuremberg trials. A plausible theory as to why it was largely abandoned is that the Communist threat became paramount and, besides, West Germany had been completely pacified already.

    The re-birth of the Holocaust as a cultural phenomenon didn’t happen in 1961; it kicked off in the late 1960s. Novick (or is it Finkelstein?) argues that Jewish political organizations used it in the wake of the Six Day War in 1967 as a tool to garner sympathy for Israel. Once the ball and the cash got rolling it took on a momentum all of its own…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  75. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @jilles dykstra
    Indeed, of the misery the allies, especially the USA, had caused: Stephen Jay Gould in:
    Wim Kayzer, ‘Een Schitterend Ongeluk, Wim Kayzer ontmoet Oliver Sacks, Stephen Jay Gould, Stephen Toulmin, Daniel C. Dennett, Rupert Sheldrake en Freeman Dyson’, 1993 Amsterdam

    That’s true. You’re right He just took photos and didn’t go into the allied bombings that disrupted Germany and supplies to the camps.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Renoman
    Waaaaay tooooo looong!

    Read it when you have the time. It’s not a short read it while drinking morning coffee article.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  77. utu says:
    @Che Guava
    My own sequence, and thanks to Mr. Unz for also noticing most.

    Being at a western university, where Mr. Irving (certainly far more deserving of an honorary doctorate than most holders of that empty title) was 'no-platformed' by a combination of the Zionist and Trotskyist students.

    I did not understand the reasons at the time, but knowing he was a military historian with a great reputation, the offense against freedom of expression really annoyed me.

    Saw a couple of TV documentaries that had info. from Leuchter and Gelmar, among others, in retrospect, think that was the main factor driving the wasp's nest into hyperactivity, the simple fact that the narrative was being questioned on television.

    I read The Painted Bird, then later found out it was a total fake.

    Saw and later read Slaughterhouse 5, later found that Vonnegut, a direct witness of the Dresden atrocity, was essentially forced to write Mother Night as a mea culpa for it.

    Read a couple of the popular Holocaust porn novels from Israel, translated into English, thinking, oh, so sad, then noticing the small-print disclaimers 'This is entirely a work of fiction.'

    As something of a student of military history, I was thinking 'Why were the presumably logical military giving priority to transport for this, when they were having much more pressing needs?' In the end, I was realising it was likely just not true.

    Am glad that you mention the magazine Marco Polo , I enjoyed it in general, though do not have a copy of the banned issue, unfortunately only saw it and briefly scanned at a book shop.

    The reaction, as you say, was crazy, that was the factor pushing me into absolute scepticism.

    Still makes me wonder what power the Holocaustians were using to close the mag., have people fired and resign.

    Perhaps the US embassy.

    Doubt that it was the Israeli, because the campaign of Israeli illegal workers for a 'Holocaust' museum in an outer Tokyo suburb abt. seven yrs. later collapsed when the govt. cracked down on Israeli illegal workers around that time. Nothing to do with the stupid museum project, just because they were doing illegal work and trading, including illegal drugs.

    It was nice to see the posters for their stupid museum project disappear at the time.

    ‘Why were the presumably logical military giving priority to transport for this, when they were having much more pressing needs?’

    Just the other day I was reading wiki entry on Field Marshal Erich von Manstein. In April 1944 he was dismissed by Hitler and went on medical leave. Then in October 1944 he bought an estate in East Pomerania.

    What was he thinking? How did he pay for the estate and who sold it?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wally
    A wiki entry? LOL

    Seriously? Laughable Zionist controlled Wikipedia?
    It’s amazing why anyone would cite Wikipedia as a reference for anything which Jews have a special interest in promoting. It's rather like asking the wolf to guard the chicken coop.

    Zionist Wikipedia Editing Course
    http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/139189

    How Israel and Its Partisans Work to Censor the Internet
    http://www.unz.com/article/how-israel-and-its-partisans-work-to-censor-the-internet/?highlight=wikipedia

    www.codoh.com
    , @lysias
    Von Manstein only got that name through adoption. He was born von Lewinski, and once said that a great great grandfather of his had been rabbi of Warsaw.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  78. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @jilles dykstra
    Burg, Ginsberg, feared for his life.
    The last pages of J.G. Burg, Schuld und Schicksal, Europas Juden zwischen Henkern und Heuchlern, München, 1962 state that in case of his death a Swiss solicitor would automatically publish documents in the possession of the solicitor.

    Thanks for the information

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  79. Anonymous[392] • Disclaimer says:

    I believe in the Holocaust, but I think the numbers were much much lower than stated and I think Jews were definately complicit thenselves.

    No matter how many Jewish bussinesses were vandalized, many Jews liked Germany and considered themselves more German than Jew. I think the extreme Zionist wing used the holocaust as a way to eliminate the undesirable Jews that opposed Isreal and were too German.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Felix Krull
    I believe in the Holocaust, but I think the numbers were much much lower than stated.

    Those two statements are mutually exclusive. You are, de jure, guilty of Holocaust denial and your post may land you in prison if you ever visit Germany, since you voice doubt about the holy six million.

    And I'm not kidding either. Furthermore, you will have problems finding legal representation, since it is illegal for lawyers to argue substantially on the issue, because doing so will amount to compounding the Holocaust denial

    , @Wally
    Why do you "believe"? You have no proof.

    You sound like a believing religious fanatic, a True Believer. Really nutty stuff.

    www.codoh.com


    To believe in the 'holocaust' one must want or need to believe in it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  80. EugeneGur says:

    Before the war, millions of Jews had lived in Eastern Europe, and after the war, those communities had mostly vanished. This undeniable fact has long stood as an implicit central pillar of the traditional Holocaust narrative. . . vast numbers of Polish Jews had been transported by the Soviets to locations deep within their territory..

    Yes, some Jews were evacuated ahead of the advancing German troops, some ran away on their own knowing what was in store for them – what does it prove? The remaining ones, however, were exterminated. For example, in Crimea alone about half of the pre-War Jews escaped before the German occupation, but the remaining half was killed – almost all of them – approximately 40,000.

    The German conducted complete clearance on the Soviet territory, and most Soviet Jews never even made it to the concentration camps. This applied to the civil population as well as to the Russian Army. Every group of POW was sorted, with Jews and communists most often killed on the spot, and there are millions of testimonies to that.

    Obviously, the number is imprecise. Perhaps, the Nazis left good records in the concentrations camps, but in most mass massacres on the Soviet territory the exact numbers are unknown, and the estimates vary pretty widely.

    However, no matter how you minimize the total number (and how do you know that at a closer look it’s going to go down, not up?), the fact remains: the Nazis targeted the Jews for extermination based on their nationality, and that the definition of holocaust.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Colin Wright
    '...The German conducted complete clearance on the Soviet territory, and most Soviet Jews never even made it to the concentration camps. This applied to the civil population as well as to the Russian Army. Every group of POW was sorted, with Jews and communists most often killed on the spot, and there are millions of testimonies to that.

    Obviously, the number is imprecise. Perhaps, the Nazis left good records in the concentrations camps, but in most mass massacres on the Soviet territory the exact numbers are unknown, and the estimates vary pretty widely...'

    Add too that many Jews must have run off into the forests and swamps and starved or frozen to death in the winter; in the accounts of the Holocaust in Christopher Browning's 'Ordinary Men' there were enormous numbers of such Jews.

    Generally, they weren't able to survive for long; the forests of Eastern Europe aren't hospitable places in the winter. Browning even recounts instances of Jews coming out of the woods and giving themselves up for certain execution; it beat slowly starving and freezing to death.

    ...but how many simply died and rotted in the forests? There's no way of coming to more than a rough approximation.

    , @Wally
    said:
    "Yes, some Jews were evacuated ahead of the advancing German troops, some ran away on their own knowing what was in store for them – what does it prove? The remaining ones, however, were exterminated. For example, in Crimea alone about half of the pre-War Jews escaped before the German occupation, but the remaining half was killed – almost all of them – approximately 40,000. The German conducted complete clearance on the Soviet territory, and most Soviet Jews never even made it to the concentration camps. This applied to the civil population as well as to the Russian Army. Every group of POW was sorted, with Jews and communists most often killed on the spot, and there are millions of testimonies to that. "

    - No they didn't, that's pure nonsense. It's really a simple matter. You have absolutely no proof that they were "exterminated". If you did you would present it here.

    - What "millions of testimonies"? Give us some. Specifics, not unfounded, bizarre Zionist propaganda.
    Who exactly said what .... specifically? Tell us what courts they 'testified' in and show us the verbatim transcripts & cross examination records of what they supposedly said.

    The Germans supposedly 'tried to kill every Jew they could get there hands on', yet there are currently ca. 1,000,000 'holocaust survivors'

    It's claimed that there are immense Jew remains in allegedly known place. Please show us those claimed remains.

    Confession & Testimonies on Auschwitz, 40 'Gas Chamber Witnesses'Scrutinized
    http://holocausthandbooks.com/img/36.jpg
    available in German, https://shop.codoh.com/book/480/494
    English edition soon

    www.codoh.com
    , @peterAUS
    Yup.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  81. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous
    Holocaust denial is a red-herring, used by the Zios to whatever advantage it might add to any given scenario.

    World War II is over. The disposition of individuals in several concentration/detainment camps in the 1940s is entirely, dismissively irrelevant. In 2018, it makes absolutely no difference at all, and discussion of it, in any form, has one and only one effect: to aid and protect Zionist dominance of world economy and world political conditions.

    If there weren’t holocaust denial, the Jews would create it; just as they created the myth of the late 19th century E European pogroms to facilitate the mass immigration to America, S Africa and W. Europe

    I can always tell when the Israeli Bonds and AIPAC fundraisers are coming to town, there’s a rash of anti Semitic threats, mostly graffiti on the walls of Jewish buildings. It’s to spread fear of “ “ it could happen again if we don’t give money to AIPAC”

    A lot of the Jewish buildings in Los Angeles are fortified with huge 10 foot walls, security guards at the gate showing dr licenses to enter.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  82. @Meimou
    As to why not many paid attention to the Holocaust before 1961 — it’s bloody dull

    A weak explanation. The most likely explanation is that the OS is a lie, it doesn't help you that Eisenhower and Churchill didn't mention it in their books.

    Why the Allies didn't use it as wartime propaganda?

    How do you keep the murder of millions s secret anyway?

    If it was so "dull" why did the OS get more important over time?

    ‘How do you keep the murder of millions s secret anyway?

    If it was so “dull” why did the OS get more important over time?’

    It wasn’t a secret. My father had an enormous library of World War Two books — most dating from the fifties. I started reading them around 1964; I can remember several books dealing with the extermination of the jews in his collection.

    Of course the Holocaust happened. It’s tedious that there are so many who so monotonously insist otherwise.

    Ironically, the problem is that they’re dull too.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wally
    said:
    "Of course the Holocaust happened. It’s tedious that there are so many who so monotonously insist otherwise."

    Yet you still have produced no proof. You're just reciting Zionist propaganda. We wonder why?

    It's so "boring" yet we hear about it 24/7/365.

    Proof, Colin, why can't you produce it?

    www.codoh.com

    , @Muh 6 Gorrillion!!!!!!!!

    Of course the Holocaust happened. It’s tedious that there are so many who so monotonously insist otherwise.
     
    No, what's beyond tedious is that there are so many apparently intelligent people who feel so compelled to monotonously bleat meaningless, thought terminating cliches like: "Of course the Holocaust happened."

    If we're going to even attempt to begin assessing whether or not "the Holocaust happened", Colin, you're going to have to stop monotonously bleating mindless mantras, and begin by defining and describing in a clear and concise manner what "the Holocaust" was and how it "happened".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  83. Antiwar7 says:
    @Che Guava
    My own sequence, and thanks to Mr. Unz for also noticing most.

    Being at a western university, where Mr. Irving (certainly far more deserving of an honorary doctorate than most holders of that empty title) was 'no-platformed' by a combination of the Zionist and Trotskyist students.

    I did not understand the reasons at the time, but knowing he was a military historian with a great reputation, the offense against freedom of expression really annoyed me.

    Saw a couple of TV documentaries that had info. from Leuchter and Gelmar, among others, in retrospect, think that was the main factor driving the wasp's nest into hyperactivity, the simple fact that the narrative was being questioned on television.

    I read The Painted Bird, then later found out it was a total fake.

    Saw and later read Slaughterhouse 5, later found that Vonnegut, a direct witness of the Dresden atrocity, was essentially forced to write Mother Night as a mea culpa for it.

    Read a couple of the popular Holocaust porn novels from Israel, translated into English, thinking, oh, so sad, then noticing the small-print disclaimers 'This is entirely a work of fiction.'

    As something of a student of military history, I was thinking 'Why were the presumably logical military giving priority to transport for this, when they were having much more pressing needs?' In the end, I was realising it was likely just not true.

    Am glad that you mention the magazine Marco Polo , I enjoyed it in general, though do not have a copy of the banned issue, unfortunately only saw it and briefly scanned at a book shop.

    The reaction, as you say, was crazy, that was the factor pushing me into absolute scepticism.

    Still makes me wonder what power the Holocaustians were using to close the mag., have people fired and resign.

    Perhaps the US embassy.

    Doubt that it was the Israeli, because the campaign of Israeli illegal workers for a 'Holocaust' museum in an outer Tokyo suburb abt. seven yrs. later collapsed when the govt. cracked down on Israeli illegal workers around that time. Nothing to do with the stupid museum project, just because they were doing illegal work and trading, including illegal drugs.

    It was nice to see the posters for their stupid museum project disappear at the time.

    Mother Night was published 7 years before Slaughterhouse-Five.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Che Guava
    Mea culpa for the error, I have never read Mother Night, only seen the film, on checking, film and book of it are very different.

    I am always trying to not make such errors, but bad assumption on my part. I read all of his novels of that time (never at the time), except that one.

    So thank you, and also to utu for the correction. Am feeling terrible for the error.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  84. utu says:
    @Che Guava
    My own sequence, and thanks to Mr. Unz for also noticing most.

    Being at a western university, where Mr. Irving (certainly far more deserving of an honorary doctorate than most holders of that empty title) was 'no-platformed' by a combination of the Zionist and Trotskyist students.

    I did not understand the reasons at the time, but knowing he was a military historian with a great reputation, the offense against freedom of expression really annoyed me.

    Saw a couple of TV documentaries that had info. from Leuchter and Gelmar, among others, in retrospect, think that was the main factor driving the wasp's nest into hyperactivity, the simple fact that the narrative was being questioned on television.

    I read The Painted Bird, then later found out it was a total fake.

    Saw and later read Slaughterhouse 5, later found that Vonnegut, a direct witness of the Dresden atrocity, was essentially forced to write Mother Night as a mea culpa for it.

    Read a couple of the popular Holocaust porn novels from Israel, translated into English, thinking, oh, so sad, then noticing the small-print disclaimers 'This is entirely a work of fiction.'

    As something of a student of military history, I was thinking 'Why were the presumably logical military giving priority to transport for this, when they were having much more pressing needs?' In the end, I was realising it was likely just not true.

    Am glad that you mention the magazine Marco Polo , I enjoyed it in general, though do not have a copy of the banned issue, unfortunately only saw it and briefly scanned at a book shop.

    The reaction, as you say, was crazy, that was the factor pushing me into absolute scepticism.

    Still makes me wonder what power the Holocaustians were using to close the mag., have people fired and resign.

    Perhaps the US embassy.

    Doubt that it was the Israeli, because the campaign of Israeli illegal workers for a 'Holocaust' museum in an outer Tokyo suburb abt. seven yrs. later collapsed when the govt. cracked down on Israeli illegal workers around that time. Nothing to do with the stupid museum project, just because they were doing illegal work and trading, including illegal drugs.

    It was nice to see the posters for their stupid museum project disappear at the time.

    Saw and later read Slaughterhouse 5, later found that Vonnegut, a direct witness of the Dresden atrocity, was essentially forced to write Mother Night as a mea culpa for it.

    You are confabulating. Mother Night was published seven years before Slaughterhouse 5.

    Vonnegut published Slaughterhouse 5 (which imo is one of the greatest anti-war novels) during the Vietnam War. The U.S. was bombing Vietnam for over 4 years already. East Germany was permitted by Soviets to present Dresden bombing as the greatest atrocity by American and British allies against civilians. The bombings of German cities were referred to as terrorist bombings just as the American bombings of Vietnam. After Germany’s reunification this stopped and building of new narrative aiming at British-German reconciliation was started. German and British historians got very busy to drive the number of dead in Dresden from over 100,000 to below 25,000 in a futile attempt to achieve parity with Coventry (178 killed) that presumably was to justify the bombing of Dresden. You see, lowering the number of German victims is OK while any attempts to lower Jewish victim is a crime.

    Vonnegut most likely was influenced by 1963 David Irving’s The Destruction of Dresden. What is interesting that Poland produced a very sympathetic to German suffering film about Dresden (Tonight a City Will Die) already in 1961. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tonight_a_City_Will_Die. The film is available with Russian subtitles at Youtube:

    Сегодня ночью погибнет город / Tonight a City Will Die (1961)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Colin Wright
    '...After Germany’s reunification this stopped and building of new narrative aiming at British-German reconciliation was started. German and British historians got very busy to drive the number of dead in Dresden from over 100,000 to below 25,000 in a futile attempt to achieve parity with Coventry (178 killed) that presumably was to justify the bombing of Dresden. You see, lowering the number of German victims is OK while any attempts to lower Jewish victim is a crime...'

    I see the motive as being to steal the thunder of the German far-right. No Dresden victim cult.

    It infuriates me on two scores. First, there's the obvious mendacity. A comparison with the statistics for the Hamburg firestorm and a consideration of the various factors that would have tended to drive the death toll up for Dresden makes it clear that the older figure of 135,000 was probably about right to begin with, and in any case, 25,000 is absurdly low.

    Secondly, there's the moral question. If it is an outrage to burn 135,000 people alive, how does it somehow become acceptable to burn 'only' 25,000 alive? It would seem that only those incinerated in the biggest bonfire get a victims' halo.

    Germany could do with a victim cult. Collective guilt is a moral travesty to begin with -- but in any case, the German people amply suffered in 1943-1948 for 'their' crimes. I'd hate to see the German people veer towards wanting 'revenge,' but there's no need for them to feel guilt. To the extent that they can collectively be held responsible for anything, they paid, that's for sure.

    , @Che Guava
    Vonnegut was a P.o.W. in Dresden you fool, sure, he didn't know exact numbers, but he was sure experiencing it. HE WAS THERE.

    That you try to conflate his work with a writer you dislike (and whose work I respect) really has convinced me that you are just a stupid propagandist.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  85. One of the curiosities about Lipstadt (and others) is that she has her academic position at the otherwise rather unnoticed Emory University.

    Emory came to a settlement concerning accusations that its school of dentistry discriminated against Jewish applicants in the past. Now it appears to have a school of Holocaust worship/Israel support (the two tend to involve the same people).

    I mention this because Lipstadt isn’t the only such character I’ve seen connected with Emory. A few years back, on another board, some self-appointed advocate of Israel showed up who evidently considered himself a great intellectual showed up and started trying to ‘reason’ with us. I remember tearing him a new one to my complete satisfaction — but the point is that he was a ‘professor’ of Holocaustry at Emory as well.

    I’d be interested to know the precise terms of the settlement Emory reached in the anti-semitism suit.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  86. anarchyst says:

    If one honestly investigates the jewish holocaust ™ and comes to the conclusion that many of the claims concerning the jewish holocaust ™ are not only false but scientifically impossible, one can still be prosecuted for “improper thoughts”.
    You see, in Canada, and in many European countries, ANY deviation from the official holocaust ™ fable is punishable by fines and imprisonment. In addition, Canadian and European courts utilize the concept of “judicial notice” in which “commonly accepted beliefs” are sacrosanct, even if they can be proven false. Defendants in these “kangaroo courts” are not permitted to enter into evidence PROOF that certain holocaust ™ claims are indeed false, EVEN IF THEY CAN BE PROVEN SO. “Judicial notice”, in itself, turns the concept of “equal justice under law” on its head, and lends credibility to the fact that these “kangaroo courts” are not interested in the TRUTH, but have a deeper, far more insidious purpose–keeping the (false) claims of the jewish holocaust ™ alive and safe from scrutiny.
    You see, TRUTH is not part of these “kangaroo courts”. The jewish holocaust ™ has been turned into a “religion” in which NO deviation from the “official story” (orthodoxy) is allowed–even when holocaust ™ claims can be proven to be false.
    It is said that the light of day is the best disinfectant–except when it comes to “all things holocaust ™”.
    Monika Schaefer…
    Ursula Haverbeck…
    Both are grandmothers who are serving hard-time in German maximum-security prisons for daring to deviate from the “official” jewish holocaust ™ story.
    Question to holocaust ™ promoters…why are you so afraid of the TRUTH?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  87. anarchyst says:

    There is NOT ONE DOCUMENT outlining any extermination plan for jews or others. In fact, prominent Zionists collaborated with the German government and formulated plans at the highest level of the German government for the “transfer” of jews to what was then known as Palestine. Absolutely nothing about extermination.

    Official International Red Cross figures for all camp “deaths” total around 731,000–NOT “6 million”. In fact, population totals pre-WW2 and post-WW2 show an INCREASE in the jewish population in post-WW2 Europe immediately after the cessation of the war…

    If a country were hell-bent on genocide, WHY WOULD IT KEEP RECORDS?? WHY would it build “camps” hundreds (if not thousands) of miles away with sanitary facilities, housing, medical, recreational and other ancillary facilities? Would it not have been easier to just “eliminate” them without going through all of this trouble? Why would they expend massive effort on logistical movement utilizing their limited energy resources if the goal was extermination? Things do not “add up”…

    Something BIG “stinks” in this whole jewish “holocaust ™” deal. It is no secret that jewish Zionists made “deals” with the German government in order to make life “uncomfortable” for jewish Germans. In fact, it was jewish Zionist leaders who first proposed that all jews wear the “yellow Star of David” armband so that they could be easily identified. German jews considered themselves Germans first and had no desire to emigrate.

    The establishment of a “homeland” along with the 6,000,000 figure was a Zionist “dream” since the 1800s. Many periodicals of the day starting with the 1800s touted the “six-million” figure.

    What better way to encourage “emigration” to a foreign land than to make things difficult for the “cream of German society” (jews)?? The TRUTH about the so-called jewish “holocaust ™” is out . . .

    As cremation of ONE human body takes hours, the amount of time claimed by holocaust ™ promoters is a physical, scientific and statistical impossibility. Their claims also do not account for the “downtime” that crematoria require for maintenance, etc. In addition, there are no mass burial sites that are commensurate with the claims of “six-million” or even “one-million”. There is also a jewish prohibition on excavation of claimed possible burial sites. WHY?? Because THEY DO NOT EXIST. There is even a prohibition on the use of ground penetrating radar to search for burial sites. WHY?? If millions were gassed and cremated, the activities would have lasted well into the 1950s.

    The so-called jewish “holocaust ™” has been turned into a de-facto “religion” in which no deviation from orthodoxy is permitted. In fact, in most European countries, independent investigation into jewish “holocaust ™” truths is strictly forbidden under pain of fines and imprisonment. In the USA, things are not quite as bad, only job loss and personal and professional destruction at the hands of those of the “tribe” that FEAR the real truth of the jewish “holocaust ™” being exposed is evident. A questionable judicial “trick” used in “holocaust ™” trials is that of “judicial notice” in which TRUTH CANNOT BE USED AS A DEFENSE OR ENTERED INTO EVIDENCE IN THE “KANGAROO COURTS” THAT PROSECUTE THOSE WHO DARE TO INVESTIGATE THIS HISTORICAL EVENT. Judicial notice, once invoked against a defendant, disallows the introduction of evidence that does not conform to “commonly accepted beliefs” about the “holocaust ™”, EVEN IF THE EVIDENCE EXPOSES THE “HOLOCAUST ™” LIES AND FABRICATIONS THAT CAN EASILY BE DEBUNKED. A question for you “holocaust ™” promoters–why are there laws that criminalize the search for truth?? What are you afraid of??

    When the truth about this historical event comes out, it will change much of the world’s perception about those that are using this event as a “cash cow” that “keeps on giving”. . . “there’s NO business like “SHOAH business”. Zionist complicity in this event is carefully “covered up”.

    A good example of present-day censorship is the fate that awaits those that dare question “official” jewish “holocaust” orthodoxy. Most European countries have criminalized ANY line of thought that deviates from the “official” jewish “holocaust” story. WHY?? In fact, TRUTH is no defense when it comes to “all things holocaust ™”. Ask noted WW2 researcher David Irving, who was forced to recant TRUTH in order to avoid punishment.

    The latest “vicitms” of “holocaustianity ™” are Ursula Haverbeck and Monika Schaefer, both grandmothers who have been prosecuted and sentenced to maximum-security prisons in Germany for “incorrect thoughts”.

    If people only knew of the planning that took place (among those of the “chosen”) to engineer the jewish “holocaust”, there would be a pogrom of massive size. You see, the jewish “holocaust” was necessary in order to force the establishment of a jewish state. In this case, the ENDS justified the MEANS. There have been many “holocausts” of much greater misery throughout human history, yet the jewish “holocaust ™” is the only one that counts . . . It is interesting to note that the term “holocaust ™” to mean “mass extermination” was never used during or immediately after WW2, only coming to vogue in the 1960s, when it was noted that “guilt” could be assigned and reparations could be procured.

    Look at the “commercialization of the so-called jewish “holocaust ™” while the much larger communist (true) holocaust is conveniently forgotten. To assure a continuing supply of jewish “holocaust ™” “survivors”, jews are tattooing their ATM (oops, I mean “camp” numbers) on their children and grandchildren. In addition, jewish psychologists have come up with a new concept, and “disease”–”holocaust ™ “transference syndrome”. You see, children and grandchildren of jewish “holocaust ™” survivors are infected with this “disease” and should also be considered “holocaust ™” survivors, eligible for “holocaust ™” reparations. According to these jewish psychiatrists, even unrelated individuals can be “infected” with this “malady”.

    Since the Zionist jews declared war on Germany in 1933 (yes, 1933), the Germans had no choice but to complete the Zionist plan of marginalizing German jews (to say the least).. This fulfilled the Zionist plan of forcing German jews to emigrate to Palestine while making the world grant jews a “homeland”–Israel. It is interesting to note that the German boycott of jewish businesses lasted for one day, whil the jewish boycott (actually the jews’ declaration of war on Germany) started in 1933 and lasted until the summation of WW2.

    Zionists have been predicting a jewish “homeland” for the last two-hundred years while predicting a “holocaust ™” of 6 million for the same amount of time. The ACTUAL number of non-combatant deaths in the European theater of operations is approximately 731,000, NOT 6 million (official International Red Cross figures). The International Red Cross had full access to all of the camps for the duration of the war, yet reported NOT ONE INSTANCE of extermination or mass murder.

    Regarding that “holocaust ™” “showplace” Auschwitz, there are engineering inconsistencies in the design of the so-called “gas chambers”. The doors are not of a gas-tight design; it would have been impossible to retrieve the bodies, and there is no means to ventilate the rooms after the so-called “gassing” took place”. There is a “gas chamber” chimney that is not connected to anything. From an engineering standpoint, these are very serious errors that would have caused the deaths of the “operators” of these supposed “gas chambers”. As Germans were excellent engineers, it is difficult to observe the glaring engineering errors that presently exist in these “camps”.

    American execution expert, Fred Leuchter travelled to Auschwitz, surreptitiously obtained samples from the purported “gas chambers”, had them tested and published his results. The absence of Prussian blue (ferricyanide) in ALL of the samples, save one, was PROOF that the “gas chambers” did not exist. The one positive sample was taken from a room used to disinfect clothing. In fact, the “chimney” for the supposed “gas chamber” does not connect to anything.

    Mr. Leuchter’s was rewarded for his search for TRUTH by his professional and personal character assassination by those of the “tribe”. He lost all of his federal and state contracts, and was prosecuted under an obscure Massachusetts “law” for “practicing engineering without a license”–a law which had never been used vindictively before or since. . .After his report was published, he was harassed by Israeli “deep state” types (mossad) who he successfully “outed”.

    It is no secret that after WW2, the Soviets attempted to “create” the “death camps” for propaganda purposes. Yes, there was extreme deprivation and suffering–many people perished. The prime cause of death was typhus. As allied bombings destroyed most of the infrastructure, typhus was at epidemic levels. THIS is what caused the massive amounts of human deaths . . .NOT gassing.

    It is interesting to note that, before the camps were “liberated” by the “allies”, the camp occupants chose to flee with the German troops, rather than be “liberated” by the Russian “allies”.

    It is said that “the light of day is the best disinfectant in the search for truth” Unfortunately this quote does not apply to “all things holocaust ™”. It appears that there are those “holocaust ™” promoters who are afraid of the TRUTH. Hence the prosecution and incarceration of those who dare question aspects of this historical event.

    I urge all “holocaust ™” believers to check these things out for yourselves–IF YOU DARE. You will not like what you find…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  88. For literature on the Holocaust in several languages go to AAARGH:

    http://aaargh.vho.org/index.html

    The works of Butz, Faurisson, Irving, etc. are available there for download.

    Below are some of the works that I have translated for AAARGH:

    Maurice Bardèche: Nuremberg or the Promised Land
    This is perhaps the first work of post-WWII revisionism.

    http://aaargh.vho.org/fran/livres7/BARDECHEnureng.pdf

    Serge Thion: A Brief History Of Revisionism

    http://aaargh.vho.org/fran/livres8/STBriefHist.pdf

    Pierre Guillaume: Law and History

    http://aaargh.vho.org/fran/livres7/PGLawhistory.pdf

    Georges Theil: Our Mission: Dismantle the Planetary Slander In Order to Help Build an Honest World

    http://aaargh.vho.org/fran/livres8/GTOurMission.pdf

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  89. @EugeneGur

    Before the war, millions of Jews had lived in Eastern Europe, and after the war, those communities had mostly vanished. This undeniable fact has long stood as an implicit central pillar of the traditional Holocaust narrative. . . vast numbers of Polish Jews had been transported by the Soviets to locations deep within their territory..
     
    Yes, some Jews were evacuated ahead of the advancing German troops, some ran away on their own knowing what was in store for them - what does it prove? The remaining ones, however, were exterminated. For example, in Crimea alone about half of the pre-War Jews escaped before the German occupation, but the remaining half was killed - almost all of them - approximately 40,000.

    The German conducted complete clearance on the Soviet territory, and most Soviet Jews never even made it to the concentration camps. This applied to the civil population as well as to the Russian Army. Every group of POW was sorted, with Jews and communists most often killed on the spot, and there are millions of testimonies to that.

    Obviously, the number is imprecise. Perhaps, the Nazis left good records in the concentrations camps, but in most mass massacres on the Soviet territory the exact numbers are unknown, and the estimates vary pretty widely.

    However, no matter how you minimize the total number (and how do you know that at a closer look it's going to go down, not up?), the fact remains: the Nazis targeted the Jews for extermination based on their nationality, and that the definition of holocaust.

    ‘…The German conducted complete clearance on the Soviet territory, and most Soviet Jews never even made it to the concentration camps. This applied to the civil population as well as to the Russian Army. Every group of POW was sorted, with Jews and communists most often killed on the spot, and there are millions of testimonies to that.

    Obviously, the number is imprecise. Perhaps, the Nazis left good records in the concentrations camps, but in most mass massacres on the Soviet territory the exact numbers are unknown, and the estimates vary pretty widely…’

    Add too that many Jews must have run off into the forests and swamps and starved or frozen to death in the winter; in the accounts of the Holocaust in Christopher Browning’s ‘Ordinary Men’ there were enormous numbers of such Jews.

    Generally, they weren’t able to survive for long; the forests of Eastern Europe aren’t hospitable places in the winter. Browning even recounts instances of Jews coming out of the woods and giving themselves up for certain execution; it beat slowly starving and freezing to death.

    …but how many simply died and rotted in the forests? There’s no way of coming to more than a rough approximation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hippopotamusdrome


    Add too that many Jews must have run off into the forests and swamps

     

    Partisans?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  90. anarchyst says:

    The facts about the Nuremberg Show Trials:

    It was accepted at Nuremberg that Jews were steamed to death at Treblinka in gas chambers,
    see: ‘All Steamed up at Treblinka and superlatively accurate / The importance of the Steam Tales’

    https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11684

    The official use of torture in extracting “confessions” from Germans has been confirmed repeatedly.

    - All but two of the Germans [on trial at Nuremberg], in the 139 cases that we investigated, had their testicles kicked in beyond repair. This was standard operating procedure with our American investigators:” 23.1.49, The Sunday Pictorial (quoted in For Those Who Cannot Speak (ref. 27), p.21.The statements which were admitted as evidence were obtained from men who had first been kept in solitary confinement for three, four and five months..The investigators would put a black hood over the accused’s head, punch him in the face with brass knuckles, kick him and beat him with rubber hoses. Observer & American judge, van Roden

    - Judge van Roden’s allegation of torture to gain “confessions” is confirmed by Texas Supreme Court Judge, Gordon Simpson. He confirmed that savage beatings, smashing of testicles, and months of solitary confinement occurred. Congressional Record, appendix v. 95, sec.12, 3/10/49

    - U.S. Congressional Representative, Lawrence H. Smith of Wisconsin said:
    ” The Nuremberg Trials are so repugnant to the Anglo-Saxon principles of justice that we must forever be ashamed of that page in our history.”
    Congressional Record, appendix, v.95, sec.14, 6/15/49

    - The admission of Bernard Clarke was corroborated by Mr. Ken Jones in ‘The Wrexham Leader’, October 17, 1986.
    Mr. Jones was then a private with the Fifth Royal Horse Artillery stationed at Heid in Schleswig-Holstein.
    “They brought him to us when he refused to cooperate over questioning about his activites during the war. He came in the winter of 1945/6 and was put in a small jail cell in the barracks,” recalls Mr. Jones. Two other soldiers were detailed with Mr. Jones to join Hoess in his cell to help break him down for interrogation.”
    “We sat in the cell with him, night and day, armed with axe handles. Our job was to prod him every time he fell asleep to help break down his resistance,” said Mr. Jones.
    When Hoess was taken out for exercise, he was made to wear only jeans and a thin cotton shirt in the bitter cold. After three days and nights without sleep, Hoess finally broke down and made a full confession to the authorities.

    -When Hoess was taken out for exercise, he was made to wear only jeans and a thin cotton shirt in the bitter cold. After three days and nights without sleep, Hoess finally broke down and made a full confession to the authorities.
    and:
    - “The London Cage was used partly as a torture centre, inside which large numbers of German officers and soldiers were subjected to systematic ill-treatment. In total 3,573 men passed through the Cage, and more than 1,000 were persuaded to give statements about war crimes. The brutality did not end with the war, moreover: a number of German civilians joined the servicemen who were interrogated there up to 1948.
    more:
    -TORTURE: verifiable, acknowledged, damning. What Does It Mean for Revisionism?’

    https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11697&p=87703

    and:
    - Nuremberg – Fair Trial or Show Trial ?’

    https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11053

    Read More
    • Replies: @red-ice

    - All but two of the Germans [on trial at Nuremberg], in the 139 cases that we investigated, had their testicles kicked in beyond repair. This was standard operating procedure with our American investigators:” 23.1.49, The Sunday Pictorial (quoted in For Those Who Cannot Speak (ref. 27), p.21.The statements which were admitted as evidence were obtained from men who had first been kept in solitary confinement for three, four and five months..The investigators would put a black hood over the accused’s head, punch him in the face with brass knuckles, kick him and beat him with rubber hoses. Observer & American judge, van Roden

    - Judge van Roden’s allegation of torture to gain “confessions” is confirmed by Texas Supreme Court Judge, Gordon Simpson. He confirmed that savage beatings, smashing of testicles, and months of solitary confinement occurred. Congressional Record, appendix v. 95, sec.12, 3/10/49
     

    Wrong!

    According to Freda Utley's book, The High Cost of Vengeance - this applies to the “Dachau trials.”, not Nuremberg.

    Chapter 7 quote:


    These were the trials conducted by the United States Army Tribunals (as distinct from the civilian and ostensibly international trials at Nuremberg) of the privates, corporals, sergeants, and junior commissioned officers involved in the Malmedy case; of civilians accused of having lynched Allied airmen shot down during the bombing raids; and of the Germans held responsible for the atrocities committed in the Nazi concentration camps.
     
    Use the link and keep reading nex few pages;
    http://www.unz.com/book/freda_utley__the-high-cost-of-vengeance/#p_8_13
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  91. Wally says:
    @Anon

    Very old news and repeatedly debunked here:

    The Speech of Heinrich Himmler: https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1184
    exc.:

    - No human remains to back up the unfounded claims. Not a single enormous mass grave as alleged has ever been excavated, contents verified and shown. Not one. The storyline says 6M Jews & 5M others = 11M, now just think about that.
    How bizarre, claims of mass murder where there is no evidence to support it. The gas chambers are scientifically impossible as alleged and have been debunked ad nauseum by Revisionists, and the alleged 1,000,000 – 2,000,000 supposed mass shootings of thousands at a time in claimed known sites have produced no mass graves at those sites. Why is that?

    - In 1993, Robert Wolfe, supervisory archivist for captured German records at the National Archives admitted that a more precise translation of ‘ausrottung’ would be extirpation or tearing up by the roots. Wolfe also pointed out that in Himmler’s handwritten notes for the speech, that Himmler used the term, ‘judenevakuierung’, or evacuation of the Jews, not ‘extermination’.

    - There are missing pages, retyped pages by different hands, even pages have been re-numbered..

    - Then we have a so called “secret” speech in front of thousands. Frankly the assertions about it are laughable.

    - Yivo (Yiddish Scientific Institute) of New York was very active in the Rosenberg Ministry to process documents for submittal to the Nuremberg trials.

    - Members of the audience like SS-OGruF Gottlob Berger denied that Himmler was talking about the extermination of the Jews at all. I suggest reading: NMT, vol 13. p. 457-487

    - This alleged (recorded) speech, as German judge Staeglich has adroitly pointed out, is a hodgepodge of non-sequitors, nonsense, and re-worked text,see:
    ‘Auschwitz: A Judge Looks at the Evidence, by Wilhelm Stäglich’: http://codoh.com/library/document/230

    - To have a speech with such alleged secret content recorded? Right. SS General Berger did not recognize Himmler’s voice listening to the tape.

    - the complete lack of orders for the desperate assumptions made about it.[/quote]more here:
    ‘Posen speech’: http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=372
    and here:
    Heinrich Himmler’s Posen Speech from 04.10.1943, , By Heinrich Himmler
    Published: 1943-10-04, Given at Posen 4 October 1943, Translation of Document No. 1919-PS, Nuremberg Trial, by Carlos Porter: http://codoh.com/library/document/891/

    http://www.codoh.com

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  92. ‘…The German conducted complete clearance on the Soviet territory, and most Soviet Jews never even made it to the concentration camps. This applied to the civil population as well as to the Russian Army. Every group of POW was sorted, with Jews and communists most often killed on the spot, and there are millions of testimonies to that…’

    This actually raises another, statistically intractable problem.

    About three-quarters of all the Russian P.O.W.’s died — most in 1941, and most as a consequence of deliberate starvation. So do we count the Jewish ones as ‘Holocaust victims’ when they probably would have been deliberately murdered anyway simply by being virtue of Soviet P.O.W.’s?

    As I recall, the first group of victims gassed at Auschwitz were Russian P.O.W.’s. If one of them was Jewish, does he count as simply a dead P.O.W. or a ‘Holocaust victim’?

    Read More
    • Replies: @EugeneGur

    So do we count the Jewish ones as ‘Holocaust victims’ when they probably would have been deliberately murdered anyway simply by being virtue of Soviet P.O.W.’s?
     
    You right that presenting the Jewish Holocaust as something uniques is incorrect. The Jews were the first group destined for extermination but so were the Russians and other nations of the Soviet Union. It is estimated that approximately 3 millions of Soviet POWs of all nationalities perished in the Nazi captivity. The number is quite comparable to the Holocaust estimate but it is politically incorrect, so it's hardly ever mentioned in the West.

    Most of those Soviet POW who dies in captivity weren't Jewish. As I said, most Soviet Jewish soldiers didn't make it to the camps unless they manages somehow to hide their Jewish identity. Some did, because many Soviet Jews were of mixed blood and did not have an obviously Jewish appearance. So, they could conceal their nationality unless someone betrayed them.
    , @Bukowski
    A lot of Russian pows did die but Stalin was happy with that. He considered anyone who surrendered to be a traitor to the USSR and deserved all they got. Hitler offered to treat Soviet prisoners according to the Geneva Convention if Stalin would do the same for captured German troops. The Soviet dictator refused.
    https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=7627
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  93. “To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize” – Voltaire

    The fate of anyone who dares question the “Holocaust” proves Voltaire to be absolutely correct.
    Great article Ron !!

    Read More
    • Replies: @unseated
    It has been pointed out here many times before that that quote is not from Voltaire but Kevin Alfred Strom. While its content may have some validity, using a quote from Strom is probably not a good idea.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Alfred_Strom
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  94. escobar says:

    Unz needs to learn German and read the documents left by the camp commanders and and guards, their testimony at the Frankfurt Auschwitz trials in the 1960s, the documents in Eastern Europe and interviews conducted there by historians like Timothy Snyder (who learned several languages spoken there)…but that would spoil his confessional. By the way, no serious historian has mentioned the “Six Million” figure for years, in Germany and the USA they’ve settled on 5.1 to 5.2 million. The fake memoirs and plagiarized accounts do not change what happened.
    Yeah, there is a “Holocaust Industry” and the Holocaust has been used and abused to make money and to excuse evil stuff done by Jews–from Wall Street to Tel Aviv. But the core of the Holocaust “narrative” stands. Expose and denounce those who did thew embellishing for fame or profit or Zionism, but claiming that the Holocaust is a “fake” or “myth” is noxious nonsense. But, stick with it and have fun making yourself look as foolish as the ninnies screaming about “white privilege” and “white supremacy” and white deviltry in general. Why not join the “dumb and dumber” parade? It’s all the rage now.

    Read More
    • Troll: L.K
    • Replies: @phil
    Where are the mass graves of bones and/or ash for 5 million people? How were they killed? Gas chambers? Where?
    , @Unstremian
    " By the way, no serious historian has mentioned the “Six Million” figure for years, in Germany and the USA they’ve settled on 5.1 to 5.2 million. The fake memoirs and plagiarized accounts do not change what happened."

    Examples? I and many others still hear of the 6 million endlessly. I'm sure a sizable number of historians (even Jewish ones) think the number is a million lower, but the 6 million, by most everything I've seen, is the widely accepted one.
    , @peterAUS

    ....Yeah, there is a “Holocaust Industry” and the Holocaust has been used and abused to make money and to excuse evil stuff done by Jews–from Wall Street to Tel Aviv. But the core of the Holocaust “narrative” stands.....
     
    That sums it all up nicely.
    Balance. So lacking everywhere.
    Makes a good "people watching" exercises. Popcorn overeating too, though.
    , @Graham
    Hear, hear. Ron Unz's views are a great pity, as are his provocative and irritating book recommendations (Mein Kampf etc.), which seem designed to suggest that unz.com is a Nazi site; because his site fills a real need inasmuch as it provides a platform for those denied platforms elsewhere. No, I don't suggest that Nazi views should be censored, just that I would prefer that they didn't appear on this site.

    Perhaps Steve should consider moving. Steve is in a small minority of rational writers on unz.com, together with John Derbyshire and James Thompson; and perhaps a couple of others.

    My views don't matter, but I'd like to say (i) that I believe the Germans murdered several million Jews in WW2; (ii) whether you call that a holocaust is immaterial; (iii) holocaust denial should not be a crime - free speech should be absolute.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  95. Wally says:
    @Colin Wright
    '...Lipstadt convincingly demonstrates that very few Americans seem to have believed in the reality of the Holocaust during the Second World War itself, despite considerable efforts by agitated Jewish activists to persuade them...'

    A bit of what is now ancient history becomes relevant here. Forty-fifty years before the Second World War, Jews had started retailing what turned out to be grossly exaggerated accounts of their sufferings in Russian pogroms. Anything from one or two to perhaps a score of deaths became hundreds, and innuimerable utterly fictitious atrocity tales were reported as fact.

    Eventually, of course, the exaggeration became obvious. However, it was repeated at the time of the Russian Civil War. Once again, vast death tolls from pogroms, etc. Yet again, that the tales were a mixture of exaggeration and outright fabrication eventually became obvious.

    Hence, when reports of massive Nazi death camps started coming out of Eastern Europe a generation later, they were understandably greeted with skepticism -- the more so as the First World War had also seen vast quantities of spurious German atrocity stories. For example, there was some ridiculous tale about the Germans killing Belgians and turning their bodies into soap or something -- in camps, no less.

    People were skeptical about the camps for good reason. These sort of lies had been being produced -- and subsequently shown to be lies -- for a good sixty years preceding the Second World War. No doubt the Germans were being beastly to the Jews -- but actually killing them by the million? That elicited a collective raised eyebrow.

    said:
    ” Forty-fifty years before the Second World War, Jews had started retailing what turned out to be grossly exaggerated accounts of their sufferings in Russian pogroms.”

    “Grossly exaggerated” if at all. But that’s nothing compared to:

    Since at least 1823 Jews have been pushing their fake 6,000,000:

    https://imgur.com/a/0LFFF

    and:
    http://balder.org/judea/New-York-Times-Six-Million-Jews-Since-1869.php

    http://www.codoh.com

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  96. Wally says:
    @Colin Wright
    '...Lipstadt convincingly demonstrates that very few Americans seem to have believed in the reality of the Holocaust during the Second World War itself, despite considerable efforts by agitated Jewish activists to persuade them...'

    A bit of what is now ancient history becomes relevant here. Forty-fifty years before the Second World War, Jews had started retailing what turned out to be grossly exaggerated accounts of their sufferings in Russian pogroms. Anything from one or two to perhaps a score of deaths became hundreds, and innuimerable utterly fictitious atrocity tales were reported as fact.

    Eventually, of course, the exaggeration became obvious. However, it was repeated at the time of the Russian Civil War. Once again, vast death tolls from pogroms, etc. Yet again, that the tales were a mixture of exaggeration and outright fabrication eventually became obvious.

    Hence, when reports of massive Nazi death camps started coming out of Eastern Europe a generation later, they were understandably greeted with skepticism -- the more so as the First World War had also seen vast quantities of spurious German atrocity stories. For example, there was some ridiculous tale about the Germans killing Belgians and turning their bodies into soap or something -- in camps, no less.

    People were skeptical about the camps for good reason. These sort of lies had been being produced -- and subsequently shown to be lies -- for a good sixty years preceding the Second World War. No doubt the Germans were being beastly to the Jews -- but actually killing them by the million? That elicited a collective raised eyebrow.

    said:
    “No doubt the Germans were being beastly to the Jews — but actually killing them by the million? That elicited a collective raised eyebrow.”

    Really? Please present your proof of this ‘beastliness’

    The Germans did nothing that wasn’t being done by the Allies and others worldwide.

    http://www.codoh.com

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  97. Wally says:
    @phil
    Auschwitz has lost some of its luster, but the Holocaust establishment still stands by many of the longstanding narratives. Meanwhile, much attention has been shifted to Treblinka. Excavations at two of the other Reinhardt camps did not find much to substantiate claims of hundred of thousands of victims, and the early use of ground-based radar at Treblinka has not yielded very much either, BBC pronouncements notwithstanding.

    On the other hand, although Carlo Mattogno has produced several fascinating documents which point to many of the Jewish campers having been transited to destinations in Byelorussia, Ukraine, and the Baltics, there are more than 1.2 million people to be accounted for, and it is understandable that many onlookers are not persuaded by the Holocaust Revisionists. It would be helpful if Putin would do more to make Soviet-era archives available, but he is upholding the standard Holocaust narratives thus far.

    - Of course, when liars lies, they must then defend those lies with more lies.
    ‘O, what a tangled web they weave when first they practise to deceive’.

    Sobibor ‘monument’ supposedly over the remains of 250,000 Jew, actual remains of the alleged 250,000 cannot be shown.

    Alleged “ash pond” for 1,100,000 Jew remains at Auschwitz, no actual remains can be shown.

    Alleged location of Treblinka mass graves / remains of 900,000 Jews according to Treblinka officials, no alleged remains can be shown

    http://www.codoh.com

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  98. @utu

    Saw and later read Slaughterhouse 5, later found that Vonnegut, a direct witness of the Dresden atrocity, was essentially forced to write Mother Night as a mea culpa for it.
     
    You are confabulating. Mother Night was published seven years before Slaughterhouse 5.

    Vonnegut published Slaughterhouse 5 (which imo is one of the greatest anti-war novels) during the Vietnam War. The U.S. was bombing Vietnam for over 4 years already. East Germany was permitted by Soviets to present Dresden bombing as the greatest atrocity by American and British allies against civilians. The bombings of German cities were referred to as terrorist bombings just as the American bombings of Vietnam. After Germany's reunification this stopped and building of new narrative aiming at British-German reconciliation was started. German and British historians got very busy to drive the number of dead in Dresden from over 100,000 to below 25,000 in a futile attempt to achieve parity with Coventry (178 killed) that presumably was to justify the bombing of Dresden. You see, lowering the number of German victims is OK while any attempts to lower Jewish victim is a crime.

    Vonnegut most likely was influenced by 1963 David Irving's The Destruction of Dresden. What is interesting that Poland produced a very sympathetic to German suffering film about Dresden (Tonight a City Will Die) already in 1961. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tonight_a_City_Will_Die. The film is available with Russian subtitles at Youtube:

    Сегодня ночью погибнет город / Tonight a City Will Die (1961)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hS2wZfFv94k

    ‘…After Germany’s reunification this stopped and building of new narrative aiming at British-German reconciliation was started. German and British historians got very busy to drive the number of dead in Dresden from over 100,000 to below 25,000 in a futile attempt to achieve parity with Coventry (178 killed) that presumably was to justify the bombing of Dresden. You see, lowering the number of German victims is OK while any attempts to lower Jewish victim is a crime…’

    I see the motive as being to steal the thunder of the German far-right. No Dresden victim cult.

    It infuriates me on two scores. First, there’s the obvious mendacity. A comparison with the statistics for the Hamburg firestorm and a consideration of the various factors that would have tended to drive the death toll up for Dresden makes it clear that the older figure of 135,000 was probably about right to begin with, and in any case, 25,000 is absurdly low.

    Secondly, there’s the moral question. If it is an outrage to burn 135,000 people alive, how does it somehow become acceptable to burn ‘only’ 25,000 alive? It would seem that only those incinerated in the biggest bonfire get a victims’ halo.

    Germany could do with a victim cult. Collective guilt is a moral travesty to begin with — but in any case, the German people amply suffered in 1943-1948 for ‘their’ crimes. I’d hate to see the German people veer towards wanting ‘revenge,’ but there’s no need for them to feel guilt. To the extent that they can collectively be held responsible for anything, they paid, that’s for sure.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  99. @Anon
    It’s pretty well known that Eisenhower decided to film, take photos and make a visual record of the camps as soon as he saw them.

    It’s pretty well known that Eisenhower decided to film, take photos and make a visual record of the camps as soon as he saw them.

    Here’s some…

    German civilians visit the Buchenwald concentration camp in Weimar, Germany. HD Stock Footage

    Mentioned:
    Lampshade made of human skin.
    Pieces of skin used to draw art on.
    Two shrunken heads.
    Bad case of trench foot.
    Bodies appearing possibly to have died of typhus.

    Not mentioned:
    Gas chambers.
    Jews.

    First Newsreel Pictures Of The Liberation Of The Nazi Death Camps

    Not mentioned:
    Gas chambers.
    Jews.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  100. “Indeed, the fascinating and widely-praised 2002 book Hitler’s Jewish Soldiers by Bryan Mark Rigg notes that aside from Milch, Hitler’s military contained over a dozen half-Jewish generals and admirals and another dozen quarter-Jews of that same high rank, plus a total of roughly 150,000 additional half- or quarter-Jewish soldiers, with a large fraction of these being officers. All of these individuals would have had some fully-Jewish parents or grand-parents, which seems decidedly odd behavior for a regime supposedly so focused on the total eradication of the Jewish race.”

    If one considers the nature of Judaism- with it’s dispositions towards amorality, nihilism, subversion, the peculiarly fluid nature of Jewish ethnicity (seeing themselves as a distinct race, yet at same time throughout history showing themselves to have gone through periods of extensive mixing with surrounding populations, considering one to be Jewish if they have a Jewish mother even if this makes no real sense from a genetic perspective etc.), the fact many of the most dedicated anti-semites have often been Jewish (and Jews being neo-nazis or involved in the “far right” not being unheard of even today) etc., it might not be unsurprising a large number of mixed Jews were Nazis. After all, in your article “American Pravda: Oddities of the Jewish Religion”, you also noted that Nazism appears to have drawn inspiration from Judaism itself, and Nazism has long struck me as a rather schizophrenic ideology (like Judaism is a schizophrenic religion), as it’s adherents run the gamut of coming off as humanitarian in a sense with wanting self-determination for all people, to bonafide, foaming at the mouth white supremacists who want most or all other races exterminated.

    That this has not been explored of course raises unsavory questions about Judaism, hence why their massive role in Bolshevism and Communism has gone unremarked/ignored.

    “But just last year, I was stunned to discover that former total was simply a whole-cloth invention by prominent Holocaust-activist Simon Wiesenthal, who simply made the figure up one day with the intent of giving non-Jews more of a stake in the Holocaust story. And despite being based on absolutely no evidence or research, his casual claim was never effectively refuted by actual Holocaust scholars, who knew it to be total nonsense, and therefore it was so regularly repeated in the media that I probably read it hundreds of times over the years, always assuming it had some firm grounding in proven reality.”

    I don’t think Wiesenthal actually made those up, atleast that he didn’t actually fabricate a 5 million that wasn’t in pre-existing death tolls. What he seems to have done is come up with this 5 million figure on the basis of accepted deaths from non-Jews, mostly Soviet POW’s, but also Roma and other minorities, or he just came up with this 5 million figure and others used accepted deaths of non-jews as comprising these 5 million.

    The article nonetheless really does reveal Jewish attitudes about the centrality of Jewish suffering while claiming that’s not their intent, particularly this passage:

    ““I have been to many Yom Hashoah observances — including those sponsored by synagogues and Jewish communities — where eleven candles were lit,” she wrote in an article in the Jewish Review of Books in which she lacerated Wiesenthal’s ethical standards. “When I tell the organizers that they are engaged in historical revisionism, their reactions range from skepticism to outrage. Strangers have taken me to task in angry letters for focusing ‘only’ on Jewish deaths and ignoring the five million others. When I explain that this number is simply inaccurate, in fact made up, they become even more convinced of my ethnocentrism and inability to feel the pain of anyone but my own people.”

    The problem, according to Bauer, who has debunked the number repeatedly in his writings over the decades, is not that non-Jews were not victims; they were. It is that Wiesenthal’s arbitrarily chosen tally of non-Jewish victims diminishes the centrality to the Nazi ideology of systematically wiping any trace of the Jewish people from the planet.

    In fact, he said, the term “genocide” could accurately be applied to the 2 million to 3 million Poles murdered and millions more enslaved by the Nazis. But the mass murder of the Poles, Roma and others should not come under the rubric “Holocaust,” a term that Holocaust historians generally dislike because of its religious connotations but nonetheless have accepted as describing only the annihilation that the Nazis hoped to visit on the Jews.

    “All Jews of the world had to be annihilated,” Bauer said. “That was the intent. There was never an idea in Nazi minds to murder all the Russians.”

    The number 5 million also adheres to no known understanding of the number of non-Jews killed by the Nazis: While as many as 35 million people were killed overall because of Nazi aggression, the number of non-Jews who died in the concentration camps is no more than half a million, Bauer said.”

    It is widely accepted that Nazi Germany had broadly exterminationist policies targeted at many non-Jews (and were apparently interested in exterminating various non-Jewish groups altogether as well), and even if these were considered a “genocide”, the label “Holocaust” must not be applied to them because of the centrality of wiping out all Jews. This really doesn’t square with his denial of ethnocentrism. And it’s even more remarkable with the last passage, that “there was never an idea in Nazi minds to murder all the Russians”- really? Despite the immeasurable casualties on the eastern front the occurred in just a few years, the brutality Nazi Germany showed towards the Soviets and other Slavic nations, the fact many Nazis did indeed regard many Slavs as sub-human, and we still these attitudes today among various Neo-Nazis? Not one Nazi back then wanted to wipe out all Russians? Get out.

    “Some angry Internet activist has put together a graphic displaying extracts from dozens of New York Times stories between 1869 and 1941 all citing the figure of 6 million Eastern European Jews as being threatened with death, suggesting that our official Holocaust body-count actually predated World War II by as much as three generations. I really wouldn’t be surprised if that might be the original source of the number.”

    I’ve lost track of a specific cite on this, but the “angry Internet activist” should tell you something about the credibility of this. That span of 71 years concerning pending mass Jewish deaths related to various eastern european catastrophes should tell you something- “6 million” is not the only claimed figure. Those estimates of pending Jewish deaths encompassed a very wide ranged of figures claimed in the NYT over a period of many decades, and “6 million” was a minority of purported estimates. This is not a very good piece of evidence in favor of the “6 million” figure being fabricated.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Unstremian
    I also forgot to mention this part:

    "The number 5 million also adheres to no known understanding of the number of non-Jews killed by the Nazis: While as many as 35 million people were killed overall because of Nazi aggression, the number of non-Jews who died in the concentration camps is no more than half a million, Bauer said.”"

    "No known understanding", yet then goes on to admit half a million non-Jews died in concentration camps. And that's still a lot of people. I have also again seen the "5 million" claimed to be comprise primarily of Soviet POW's (who often died in prison camps) and many other non-Jews- Roma, homosexuals, political prisoners, various other ethnic and religious minorities etc. are the most often mentioned. There is "known understanding" of how all those people were killed, and Bauer admits to some of it. Besides, I don't think any serious "Holocaust Scholar" or other historian who believes the standard figure and narrative would say every single Jew was killed in a concentration camp. So why fixate solely on concentration camp deaths?

    Bauer remarks on how his denial of the 5 million non-Jews dying in the Holocaust is often met with people being "more convinced of my ethnocentrism and inability to feel the pain of anyone but my own people." And he exhibits exactly that in this article. Typical.
    , @Colin Wright
    '...The problem, according to Bauer, who has debunked the number repeatedly in his writings over the decades, is not that non-Jews were not victims; they were. It is that Wiesenthal’s arbitrarily chosen tally of non-Jewish victims diminishes the centrality to the Nazi ideology of systematically wiping any trace of the Jewish people from the planet...'

    It's also almost comically obvious that the number 'five million' was chosen because it's slightly less than 'six million' -- there were other victims, but Jews were the biggest victims.

    Let's leave aside the moral absurdity of being the 'biggest' victim. First off, perfectly respectable figures have plumped for figures other than six million for the number of Jews killed; didn't Raul Hilberg settle on 5.1 million? Secondly, the number of gentiles killed is almost completely a matter of definition. Figures from German anti-partisan sweeps make it painfully clear many, many outright civilians were killed in them -- just how many can never be known. Do we count Serbians caught in partisan zones? Russian POW's who starved to death? Soldiers simply killed in combat? Only those taken to a camp and gassed? Have five million, have two million, have twenty million -- have almost any number you like. Just adjust your definition to get what you want.

    The 'Five million/six million' figures are a contemptible bit of rhetorical legerdemain. 'You were victims too -- but we're number one.' For what it's worth, in absolute numbers, Jews obviously didn't get to be the Everest of corpse mountains. That dubious honor would go either to Chinese civilians or to the Soviet soldier -- although here Hitler would have to share hangman's honors with Stalin, who did at least as much to get so many killed as Hitler did.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  101. phil says:
    @Anon

    Himmler (Posen): “I also want to mention a very difficult subject before you here, completely openly. It should be discussed amongst us, and yet, nevertheless, we will never speak about it in public. . . . I am talking about the “Jewish evacuation”: the [Ausrottung] of the Jewish people. It is one of those things that is easily said. “The Jewish people is being [ausgerottet],” every Party member will tell you, “perfectly clear, it’s part of our plans, we’re [ausschalten] the Jews, [ausrotten] them, ha!, a small matter.” . . . Most of you will know what it means when 100 bodies lie together, when there are 500, or when there are 1000. And to have seen this through, and — with the exception of human weaknesses — to have remained decent, has made us hard and is a page of glory never mentioned and never to be mentioned. . . . We have taken away the riches that they had, and I have given a strict order, which Obergruppenführer Pohl has carried out, we have delivered these riches completely to the Reich, to the State. We have taken nothing from them for ourselves. A few, who have offended against this, will be [judged] in accordance with an order, that I gave at the beginning: He who takes even one Mark of this is a dead man.”

    “Extermination” is an English word which can be interpreted figuratively or literally according to the context. The German referred to above can also be translated as “rooting out.” So translated, it is also consistent with a policy of mass deportations or “evacuations.” During WWII did the words and actions of Germans in some cases cross the line into the realm of murder that is not even justified in war? I think so, but there is a big difference between hundreds of thousands, or a million, and 6 million. More archaelogical work and archival (Russian) work would be desirable in this respect.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  102. @Anonymous
    I believe in the Holocaust, but I think the numbers were much much lower than stated and I think Jews were definately complicit thenselves.

    No matter how many Jewish bussinesses were vandalized, many Jews liked Germany and considered themselves more German than Jew. I think the extreme Zionist wing used the holocaust as a way to eliminate the undesirable Jews that opposed Isreal and were too German.

    I believe in the Holocaust, but I think the numbers were much much lower than stated.

    Those two statements are mutually exclusive. You are, de jure, guilty of Holocaust denial and your post may land you in prison if you ever visit Germany, since you voice doubt about the holy six million.

    And I’m not kidding either. Furthermore, you will have problems finding legal representation, since it is illegal for lawyers to argue substantially on the issue, because doing so will amount to compounding the Holocaust denial

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    What you say about what cannot be discussed and about the restrictions on legal argument seem so fantastic to me that I would be much obliged by chapter and verse substantiation. BTW hasn't the inability to have the truth debated in court been taken to the European Court of Human Rights? If so, with what result? If not why not?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  103. Wally says:
    @Colin Wright
    Here we go: Holocaust Denial.

    Don't worry. Personally, I think the Holocaust occurred substantially as described, but if others want to argue differently, I don't see it as heresy. I'm no more offended than if someone wants to argue the Japanese could have successfully invaded Hawaii. Not my opinion, but...

    I will point out that while he has flirted with outright Holocaust Denial in the past, David Irving has found and published on his website what he regards as irrefutable evidence that 2.5 million Jews were killed in the 'Operation Reinhard' camps alone. While he is skeptical about the importance of Auschwitz, I imagine he'd agree at least a million additional Jews were killed by the Einsatzgruppen in the East, died of starvation in the Warsaw Ghetto, etc, etc.

    So we're at 3.5 million as a minimum figure -- I'd go with at least 5 million myself. Obviously, the difference would have been very important to Jew #3,773,751 but as a moral matter, I don't see the distinction. 3.5 million is substantially as awful as 5 million. Have 6 million if it's important to you. No one will ever know with any great precision anyway. As far as I'm concerned, it's like arguing about what proportion of Iran's population the Mongols killed. Past a point, a definitive answer simply isn't to be found, and it's certainly not something that's worth assaulting elderly men in the streets over.

    Actually, the only significant area of controversy I see is whether Hitler knew and approved. There's no clear evidence. Irving argues he didn't -- I'd guess he did. That particular question could do with some dispassionate analysis.

    As to why not many paid attention to the Holocaust before 1961 -- it's bloody dull. Lining unresisting victims up and shooting them is objectively about as interesting and appealing a subject for study as the operations of a slaughterhouse. This actually is the worst effect of the whole Holocaust Industry phenomenon. Lately it seems that every text dealing with Germany in the Second World War feels obliged to spend half its pages recounting the tale of the Holocaust yet again, and it's bloody dull.

    Finally, the unique horror escapes me. We are all individuals; what matters above all to us is that it is us being killed, not our precise relationship to our fellow victims. How it was somehow consolation to a Russian POW starving to death that he wasn't being killed because he was Jewish, or solace to a four year old girl being baked alive in a cellar in Dresden that it wasn't being done because she was Jewish totally escapes me.

    The Holocaust. It happened, it was wrong, and it's dull.

    said: “So we’re at 3.5 million as a minimum figure — I’d go with at least 5 million myself. ”
    Yet you have zero proof. Your engaging in garbage in, garbage out.

    Let us know where we can see the alleged human remains in allegedly known locations.

    On Irving, who BTW was released from prison early, hmm:
    Irving’s ‘holocaust’ lite / but what ’2.4 million document’?

    http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=4548

    and :
    ‘Irving attempts ‘rehabilitation’ via the Hoefle Telegram’

    http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=4558

    and:
    Grubach’s Open Letter to David Irving on his recent change of mind about the Holocaust

    http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=4563

    on the Einsatzgruppen:
    Per their alleged ‘Holocaust by Bullets’ the ‘holocau$t’ Industry now claims that ca. 2,000,000 Jews were shot by the Einsatzgruppen into huge pits, so, anyone, please SHOW us the actual excavations, the enormous mass graves, & remains that are claimed to exist, their locations are allegedly known.
    Is that:
    100 graves of 20,000?
    200 graves of 10,000?
    400 graves of 5,000?
    500 graves of 4,000?
    1000 graves of 2000?
    2000 graves of 1000?

    http://www.codoh.com

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  104. bookish1 says:

    a few simple but true facts can demolish that holocaust story forever: https://www.stormfront.org/forum/t553062/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  105. Wally says:
    @Bardon Kaldian

    Actually, the only significant area of controversy I see is whether Hitler knew and approved. There’s no clear evidence. Irving argues he didn’t — I’d guess he did. That particular question could do with some dispassionate analysis.
     
    Of course he did. Rebirth through ordeal & fire was the center of his world-view, Jews being considered to be something like pestilence, or rats who destroy high culture through their intrinsic & unalterable pervy rottenness.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-LMK6lyAoE

    Hitler's apologists do him disservice by portraying him as some uninformed hick. He was not a great leader comparable to Alexander, Caesar or Napoleon (these guys were almost superhuman), but he remains one of 3-4 most important 20th C political figures (Lenin, Stalin, Mao could be competitors, although I would choose Lenin over the rest).

    said:
    “Of course he did. Rebirth through ordeal & fire was the center of his world-view, Jews being considered to be something like pestilence, or rats who destroy high culture through their intrinsic & unalterable pervy rottenness. ”

    IOW, you have no proof for the ’6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers’ and hope to distract.

    - Kruschev said “We will bury you.” Are we buried?

    - Ayatollah Khomeini called the US the “Great Satan” Are we in hell? LOL

    Netanyahu’s Racist Incitement, Dehumanizing non-Jews, Palestinians Designated as “Wild Beasts

    https://www.mondialisation.ca/netanyahus-racist-incitement-dehumanizing-non-israelis-palestinians-designated-as-wild-beasts/5508659

    Jews mock killing of pregnant Palestinians and children.

    and:
    Two teenage Israeli girls carrying a placard in Hebrew reading: “Hating Arabs is not racism, it’s values.”

    http://www.codoh.com

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  106. Patricus says:

    Killing with gas chambers has been debunked pretty thoroughly. I think there were systematic persecutions and slaughters of Jews and others, usually shootings or hangings. It might not be six million, maybe two million?? and most deaths came by typhus or malnutrition just as German POWs died in American and Soviet camps. It was awful but just a fraction of the tens of millions slaughtered in that war. Let’s hope we don’t see more of these mass killings anytime soon.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  107. Greg Bacon says: • Website
    @Wizard of Oz
    I find it very difficult to believe that any legislation in Europe could be so illiberal and so stupid as to make it an offence, let alone one for which the penalty might be imprisonment, to draw attention to the change in numbers said to be killed at Auschwicz. Would you please back up you assertions with sources/links and quotes.

    Since your browser is apparently broken, here’s one of many links on that subject. They might call it hate speech or in Germany, ” Incitement to hatred,” but it’s the same; deny the holocaust and risk fines and prison in 21 European nations and Russia.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_against_Holocaust_denial

    Some nations can hit you with up to 1o years for merely asking questions about the historical accuracy of the holocaust story or harass you endlessly, like they’ve do to Alison Chaboz in England–who got probation, fined and community service–or Monika Schaefer of Canada, who was arrested in Germany for Incitement to hatred back in January and has been sitting in a maximum security prison while awaiting trial, which finally started mid-July.

    She was visiting her brother in Germany when she got arrested for singing a song in Canada two years earlier and putting it on Youtube.

    This video is her crime, singing a song, “Sorry Mom, I was wrong about the Holocaust.” Although if you’re in Britain, you won’t be able to view it, as it has been blocked.

    Or the 88 yo German Ursula Haverbeck, who got hit with a two year sentence for denying the holocaust, about the same time some idiot German judge let a pack of young illegal aliens go free who had violently raped–nearly to death–a 14 yo girl. His reasoning was that they didn’t understand that NO meant NO and prison wouldn’t be good for them.

    Now if that ain’t a fugged up world, then we’re all mad.

    https://www.dw.com/en/nazi-grandma-loses-appeal-in-top-german-court-over-holocaust-denial-sentence/a-44944546

    What are they afraid of? Methinks the truth.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    Having read nearly all that Wikipedia article I can see that there is a lot of badly drafted legislation but only the Israeli law seemed - arguably - to prevent someone saying the 6 million or any other figure is an exaggeration. I don't defend the legislation but I think only some stupid, badly advised out the flaw or determined to challenge it in a pigheaded way has to fear imprisonment. An obvious line would be "I support my Jewish friends, all decent sensible people, who care for the goodwill of all and oppose exaggeration of the appalling facts of the Holocaust and closing down honest expressions of opinion for political purposes. I fear it will not help defend Israel, if that is their main objective, to insist that no one is allowed to point out or argue that the proven Nazi killings of Jews are a lot less than the 6 million figure which we have all grown up with".
    , @kiismerhe
    That video is blocked in Hungary as well.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  108. Wally says:
    @Colin Wright
    'How do you keep the murder of millions s secret anyway?

    If it was so “dull” why did the OS get more important over time?'


    It wasn't a secret. My father had an enormous library of World War Two books -- most dating from the fifties. I started reading them around 1964; I can remember several books dealing with the extermination of the jews in his collection.

    Of course the Holocaust happened. It's tedious that there are so many who so monotonously insist otherwise.

    Ironically, the problem is that they're dull too.

    said:
    “Of course the Holocaust happened. It’s tedious that there are so many who so monotonously insist otherwise.”

    Yet you still have produced no proof. You’re just reciting Zionist propaganda. We wonder why?

    It’s so “boring” yet we hear about it 24/7/365.

    Proof, Colin, why can’t you produce it?

    http://www.codoh.com

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  109. macilrae says:

    Back in the 1970s I knew a gentleman of Polish origin, now long dead, who told me he spent five years as an inmate of Dachau concentration camp. He recounted that he was given a role there which included the supervision of those who were to be killed – many of whom were ethnic Polish intellectuals and activists like him but, also included, and specially mentioned for their bravery, were the Jehovah’s Witnesses who, he said, went to their deaths with a sort of “gleam” in their eyes. According to him, around ten percent of the inmates of Dachau were Jewish.

    He explicitly stated therefore that extermination took place – and apparently this is debatable in the case of Dachau – I assumed at the time he referred to ‘gassing’ yet I don’t recall him specifying this as the means – equally the victims could have been shot.

    I wish now that I could question him further but, alas, it’s too late.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  110. Sparkon says:

    This article is a courageous and comprehensive tour de force by Ron Unz.

    Bravo!

    For me, the bludgeon that smashed the Hollow Cost piñata was the authoritative Report of the International Committee of the Red Cross on its Activities during the Second World War, Geneva, 1948, which I had stumbled upon while looking under rocks in the aftermath of 9/11.

    In 1960, I was a student at a Catholic grade school, and I recall one day when the nun seemingly out of nowhere started talking about the Nazi program to gas all the Jews, which was the first I’d heard of it, although by then everyone knew the Nazis were evil, wicked, and mean, and don’t you forget it:


    Man’s Story, November 1962, illustration by Norman Saunders

    Read More
    • Replies: @DFH
    Mr. Unz should upload the back issues of this. I want to find out what 'I cracked the Reds' Lust Capital' is all about.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  111. Che Guava says:
    @Antiwar7
    Mother Night was published 7 years before Slaughterhouse-Five.

    Mea culpa for the error, I have never read Mother Night, only seen the film, on checking, film and book of it are very different.

    I am always trying to not make such errors, but bad assumption on my part. I read all of his novels of that time (never at the time), except that one.

    So thank you, and also to utu for the correction. Am feeling terrible for the error.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Antiwar7
    Don't feel bad! We all make mistakes, including me. We should always remember that. Yours was very minor.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  112. annamaria says:
    @Colin Wright
    '...Lipstadt convincingly demonstrates that very few Americans seem to have believed in the reality of the Holocaust during the Second World War itself, despite considerable efforts by agitated Jewish activists to persuade them...'

    A bit of what is now ancient history becomes relevant here. Forty-fifty years before the Second World War, Jews had started retailing what turned out to be grossly exaggerated accounts of their sufferings in Russian pogroms. Anything from one or two to perhaps a score of deaths became hundreds, and innuimerable utterly fictitious atrocity tales were reported as fact.

    Eventually, of course, the exaggeration became obvious. However, it was repeated at the time of the Russian Civil War. Once again, vast death tolls from pogroms, etc. Yet again, that the tales were a mixture of exaggeration and outright fabrication eventually became obvious.

    Hence, when reports of massive Nazi death camps started coming out of Eastern Europe a generation later, they were understandably greeted with skepticism -- the more so as the First World War had also seen vast quantities of spurious German atrocity stories. For example, there was some ridiculous tale about the Germans killing Belgians and turning their bodies into soap or something -- in camps, no less.

    People were skeptical about the camps for good reason. These sort of lies had been being produced -- and subsequently shown to be lies -- for a good sixty years preceding the Second World War. No doubt the Germans were being beastly to the Jews -- but actually killing them by the million? That elicited a collective raised eyebrow.

    Two heavy gravestones upon the perfidious Holocaust biz
    1. “… the reality of the important Nazi-Zionist economic partnership of the 1930s, with Nazi officials traveling to Palestine as honored Zionist guests and leading Nazi newspapers praising the Zionist enterprise…
    … aside from Field Marshal Erhard Milch, Hermann Goering’s very powerful number-two in the German Luftwaffe, Hitler’s military contained over a dozen half-Jewish generals and admirals and another dozen quarter-Jews of that same high rank, plus a total of roughly 150,000 additional half- or quarter-Jewish soldiers, with a large fraction of these being officers…”
    2. “…the death toll of innocent civilians from the Bolshevik Revolution running well into the tens of millions … the Bolshevik leaders were overwhelmingly Jewish…Although only around 4% of Russia’s population was Jewish, Jews constituted perhaps 80-85% of the early Soviet government…
    And prior to World War II, Jews remained enormously over-represented in the Communist leadership, especially dominating the Gulag [a system of the murderous concentration camps] administration and the top ranks of the dreaded NKVD…
    …the inescapable conclusion is that in per capita terms Jews were the greatest mass-murderers of the twentieth century, holding that unfortunate distinction by an enormous margin and with no other nationality coming even remotely close.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Colin Wright
    'Two heavy gravestones upon the perfidious Holocaust biz...'

    You need to learn to think with greater precision. Even when true, most of your cited facts do nothing to disprove the reality of the Holocaust or even make it less probable. How does the fact that many of the Bolshevik leaders were Jewish demonstrate that the Holocaust didn't happen?

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  113. Hans says:
    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  114. sarz says:

    It’s a real relief to see you using the phrase “Holocaust denial” rather than the weasly “Holocaust revisionism. I wish people like Gilad Atzmon would follow your lead. He says the best we can do is revise away, and so, since nothing is final, he can never ever say the Holocaust story is a crock of shit — just that he’s revising away. He calls it being in time, and that’s better than Heidegger (that old Nazi). Then there’s people like Israel Shamir, who’s on record that his guru on the Holocaust is Raoul Hilberg, and he’s one of your own stable of authors. And there’s the very Norman Finkelstein you respectfully mention, who gets a few shekels more from being the son of Auschwitz survivors and never, as it happens, denies the Holocaust, just denounces the racket.

    And these are truth-telling Jews, supposedly, as unnatural as a dog walking on its hind legs. So where the hell did you come from? If it’s something in the water somewhere, let’s bottle it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  115. @Unstremian
    "Indeed, the fascinating and widely-praised 2002 book Hitler’s Jewish Soldiers by Bryan Mark Rigg notes that aside from Milch, Hitler’s military contained over a dozen half-Jewish generals and admirals and another dozen quarter-Jews of that same high rank, plus a total of roughly 150,000 additional half- or quarter-Jewish soldiers, with a large fraction of these being officers. All of these individuals would have had some fully-Jewish parents or grand-parents, which seems decidedly odd behavior for a regime supposedly so focused on the total eradication of the Jewish race."

    If one considers the nature of Judaism- with it's dispositions towards amorality, nihilism, subversion, the peculiarly fluid nature of Jewish ethnicity (seeing themselves as a distinct race, yet at same time throughout history showing themselves to have gone through periods of extensive mixing with surrounding populations, considering one to be Jewish if they have a Jewish mother even if this makes no real sense from a genetic perspective etc.), the fact many of the most dedicated anti-semites have often been Jewish (and Jews being neo-nazis or involved in the "far right" not being unheard of even today) etc., it might not be unsurprising a large number of mixed Jews were Nazis. After all, in your article "American Pravda: Oddities of the Jewish Religion", you also noted that Nazism appears to have drawn inspiration from Judaism itself, and Nazism has long struck me as a rather schizophrenic ideology (like Judaism is a schizophrenic religion), as it's adherents run the gamut of coming off as humanitarian in a sense with wanting self-determination for all people, to bonafide, foaming at the mouth white supremacists who want most or all other races exterminated.

    That this has not been explored of course raises unsavory questions about Judaism, hence why their massive role in Bolshevism and Communism has gone unremarked/ignored.

    "But just last year, I was stunned to discover that former total was simply a whole-cloth invention by prominent Holocaust-activist Simon Wiesenthal, who simply made the figure up one day with the intent of giving non-Jews more of a stake in the Holocaust story. And despite being based on absolutely no evidence or research, his casual claim was never effectively refuted by actual Holocaust scholars, who knew it to be total nonsense, and therefore it was so regularly repeated in the media that I probably read it hundreds of times over the years, always assuming it had some firm grounding in proven reality."

    I don't think Wiesenthal actually made those up, atleast that he didn't actually fabricate a 5 million that wasn't in pre-existing death tolls. What he seems to have done is come up with this 5 million figure on the basis of accepted deaths from non-Jews, mostly Soviet POW's, but also Roma and other minorities, or he just came up with this 5 million figure and others used accepted deaths of non-jews as comprising these 5 million.

    The article nonetheless really does reveal Jewish attitudes about the centrality of Jewish suffering while claiming that's not their intent, particularly this passage:

    "“I have been to many Yom Hashoah observances — including those sponsored by synagogues and Jewish communities — where eleven candles were lit,” she wrote in an article in the Jewish Review of Books in which she lacerated Wiesenthal’s ethical standards. “When I tell the organizers that they are engaged in historical revisionism, their reactions range from skepticism to outrage. Strangers have taken me to task in angry letters for focusing ‘only’ on Jewish deaths and ignoring the five million others. When I explain that this number is simply inaccurate, in fact made up, they become even more convinced of my ethnocentrism and inability to feel the pain of anyone but my own people.”

    The problem, according to Bauer, who has debunked the number repeatedly in his writings over the decades, is not that non-Jews were not victims; they were. It is that Wiesenthal’s arbitrarily chosen tally of non-Jewish victims diminishes the centrality to the Nazi ideology of systematically wiping any trace of the Jewish people from the planet.

    In fact, he said, the term “genocide” could accurately be applied to the 2 million to 3 million Poles murdered and millions more enslaved by the Nazis. But the mass murder of the Poles, Roma and others should not come under the rubric “Holocaust,” a term that Holocaust historians generally dislike because of its religious connotations but nonetheless have accepted as describing only the annihilation that the Nazis hoped to visit on the Jews.

    “All Jews of the world had to be annihilated,” Bauer said. “That was the intent. There was never an idea in Nazi minds to murder all the Russians.”

    The number 5 million also adheres to no known understanding of the number of non-Jews killed by the Nazis: While as many as 35 million people were killed overall because of Nazi aggression, the number of non-Jews who died in the concentration camps is no more than half a million, Bauer said."

    It is widely accepted that Nazi Germany had broadly exterminationist policies targeted at many non-Jews (and were apparently interested in exterminating various non-Jewish groups altogether as well), and even if these were considered a "genocide", the label "Holocaust" must not be applied to them because of the centrality of wiping out all Jews. This really doesn't square with his denial of ethnocentrism. And it's even more remarkable with the last passage, that "there was never an idea in Nazi minds to murder all the Russians"- really? Despite the immeasurable casualties on the eastern front the occurred in just a few years, the brutality Nazi Germany showed towards the Soviets and other Slavic nations, the fact many Nazis did indeed regard many Slavs as sub-human, and we still these attitudes today among various Neo-Nazis? Not one Nazi back then wanted to wipe out all Russians? Get out.

    "Some angry Internet activist has put together a graphic displaying extracts from dozens of New York Times stories between 1869 and 1941 all citing the figure of 6 million Eastern European Jews as being threatened with death, suggesting that our official Holocaust body-count actually predated World War II by as much as three generations. I really wouldn’t be surprised if that might be the original source of the number."

    I've lost track of a specific cite on this, but the "angry Internet activist" should tell you something about the credibility of this. That span of 71 years concerning pending mass Jewish deaths related to various eastern european catastrophes should tell you something- "6 million" is not the only claimed figure. Those estimates of pending Jewish deaths encompassed a very wide ranged of figures claimed in the NYT over a period of many decades, and "6 million" was a minority of purported estimates. This is not a very good piece of evidence in favor of the "6 million" figure being fabricated.

    I also forgot to mention this part:

    “The number 5 million also adheres to no known understanding of the number of non-Jews killed by the Nazis: While as many as 35 million people were killed overall because of Nazi aggression, the number of non-Jews who died in the concentration camps is no more than half a million, Bauer said.””

    “No known understanding”, yet then goes on to admit half a million non-Jews died in concentration camps. And that’s still a lot of people. I have also again seen the “5 million” claimed to be comprise primarily of Soviet POW’s (who often died in prison camps) and many other non-Jews- Roma, homosexuals, political prisoners, various other ethnic and religious minorities etc. are the most often mentioned. There is “known understanding” of how all those people were killed, and Bauer admits to some of it. Besides, I don’t think any serious “Holocaust Scholar” or other historian who believes the standard figure and narrative would say every single Jew was killed in a concentration camp. So why fixate solely on concentration camp deaths?

    Bauer remarks on how his denial of the 5 million non-Jews dying in the Holocaust is often met with people being “more convinced of my ethnocentrism and inability to feel the pain of anyone but my own people.” And he exhibits exactly that in this article. Typical.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  116. Damn! Ron. Unz. Is. My. Hero.

    Meanwhile, the Jewish community also seems to contain far more than its fair share of the emotionally disturbed and the mentally ill, and perhaps as a consequence has served as a launching-pad for many of the world’s religious cults and fanatic ideological movements. Any exploration of the Holocaust certainly tends to support this rather negative appraisal.

    If I’m not mistaken, I believe it was Sigmund Freud himself who once speculated that Abraham had been a schizophrenic hearing the ‘voice of God’ telling him to smash the pagan idols in the temple of Ur. If so, then Judaism was founded by an insane man. This same Abraham, by the way, later again heard the ‘voice of God’ commanding him to sacrifice his only son, Isaac. What a nutbag!

    I recall several other columns from the mid-2000s dancing around Holocaust issues, but I now seem unable to locate them within the Counterpunch archives.

    I doubt you ever will , since CounterPurge has now been take over by a (((gang of four))) intent on getting rid of any of Cockburn’s excellent legacy. Very sad what happened to that once fine publication. But at least we now have Unz.com, which is even better.

    Thank you for your honesty, courage, and volume-reading, Ron. It means a lot … more than you know.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hans
    Enlisting the Churches to Lie

    On Feb. 29, 1944 the British Ministry of Information sent the following note to British clergy and the BBC:

    Experience has shown that the best distraction is atrocity propaganda directed against the enemy. Unfortunately the public is no longer so susceptible as in the days of "Corpse Factory," the Mutilated Belgian Babies," and the "Crucified Canadians."

    Your cooperation is therefore earnestly sought to distract public attention from the doings of the Red Army by your wholehearted support of various charges against the Germans and Japanese which have been and will be put into circulation by the Ministry.

    Your expression of belief in such may convince others.

    I am, sir, Your obedient servant,
    (signed) H. Hewet, Assistant Secretary
    (Rozek, Edward, Allied Wartime Diplomacy: A Pattern in Poland, John Wiley & Sons, NY. pp. 209-210)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  117. Ron Unz says:
    @academic gossip

    [In] General Eisenhower’s Crusade in Europe (New York: Doubleday [Country Life Press], 1948), Winston Churchill’s The Second World War (London: Cassell, 6 vols., 1948-1954), and the Mémoires de guerre of General de Gaulle (Paris: Plon, 3 vols., 1954-1959). .... no mention either of Nazi “gas chambers,” a “genocide” of the Jews, or of “six million” Jewish victims of the war.
     
    This is a blatant lie by Faurrisson. Churchill in vol 6, p 597 (appendix C):

    Prime Minister to Foreign Secretary 11 July 44

    There is no doubt that this [persecution of Jews in Hungary and
    their expulsion from enemy territory] is probably the greatest and
    most horrible crime ever committed in the whole history of the world,

    and it has been done by scientific machinery by nominally civilised
    men in the name of a great State and one of the leading races of
    Europe. It is quite clear that all concerned in this crime who may fall
    into our hands, including the people who only obeyed orders by
    carrying out the butcheries, should be put to death
    after their associa-
    tion with the murders has been proved.

    I cannot therefore feel that this is the kind of ordinary case which is
    put through the Protecting Power, as, for instance, the lack of feeding
    or sanitary conditions in some particular prisoners' camp
    . There should
    therefore, in my opinion, be no negotiations of any kind on this
    subject. Declarations should be made in public, so that everyone
    connected with it will be hunted down and put to death.

     
    That is, dead Hungarian Jews in the German camps have fallen to "scientific machinery" used by "nominally civilized men in the name of a great State", and not simply to poor "conditions in some particular prisoners' camp". The latter is the usual Holocaust revisionists' explanation and Churchill is totally rejecting it in a letter written in July 1944 before the word "holocaust" had entered the lexicon. Instead, Churchill describes (and assumes as known to his Foreign Minister) the Germans as murdering the Hungarian Jews with scientific technology in what he calls the greatest crime of human history, with any involvement to be punished by death. Obviously his words also imply a massive scale to the murder by scientific machinery, of a similar order of magnitude to the Hungarian Jewish population. Which again happens to match the standard un-revised account.
    Incidentally, the camp used (according to the standard account) for scientifically murdering the Hungarian Jews was Auschwitz.

    https://archive.org/details/WinstonChurchillTheSecondWorldWarTriumphAndTragedyVolume6

    Eisenhower's memoir barely mentions anything about Jews. You would not learn from his book, or Churchills', or de Gaulle's that Kristallnacht, boycotts, and Nuremberg laws had ever existed in Nazi Germany, or that Hitler had any negative thoughts about Jews. Nevertheless those things are extremely well documented and not disputed by historical revisionists (anti-historians). That a personal political memoir of the war doesn't mention these events is more of an indicator that the author assumes that the reader is already familiar with them, than that they never occurred or are unimportant.

    Eisenhower in fact specifically anticipated Holocaust revisionism and made a point of being personally photographed at German concentration camps in front of piles of dead prisoners, to bear witness and (in his words) help pre-empt the possibility that some people would later dismiss the massacres as "mere propaganda". He also demanded that photographs and films be made at the camps and witness testimony be taken, for the same reason. This, too, is fairly well known and documented enough to never have been a subject of any historical revisionism. Faurrison chose to be a weasel and say that Eisenhower, who made a point of documenting the Holocaust in 1945, suddenly maintained a suspicious silence on the matter in 1948. The more honest interpretation is that the army films of the camps that he himself had commissioned, and newspaper articles by reporters he had had invited into the camps, were in such wide circulation in the year or two after the German surrender that Eisenhower treated the basic facts of extermination camps as already known to the public. He was writing a memoir, not a textbook.

    Crusade in Europe http://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.208955

    de Gaulle doesn't mention Jews at all, not because nothing happened to them, but because the Vichy collaboration made the whole subject radioactive in France for decades after the war. Those are not points in dispute by revisionists, and Faurisson knew perfectly well that the lack of Jewish references in de Gaulle's book has no bearing on any historical questions.

    This excerpt is the first I have read anything by Faurrisson, but the level of dishonesty he packed into a few sentences is entirely consistent with the appraisal of his credibility made at the time by everyone except his lone defender, Chomsky.

    That is, [according to Churchill] dead Hungarian Jews in the German camps have fallen to “scientific machinery” used by “nominally civilized men in the name of a great State”

    Well, it all sounds kind of vague to me. Maybe he was referring to the report mentioned by Lipstadt that 1.5 million Jews had been killed by being individually injected near the heart by a lethal drug, which certainly requires science. And Rabbi Stephen Wise was claiming that millions of Jews had been killed and made into soap and human lampshades, which obviously also requires “scientific machinery.” Weren’t shrunken human heads exhibited at the Nuremberg Trials? And wasn’t there also some claim floating around that vast numbers of Jews had been killed by electrified floors or something like that?

    Read More
    • Replies: @academic gossip

    Well, it all sounds kind of vague to me. Maybe [Churchill] was referring to ...
     
    Churchill's memo (11 July 11 1944) records that it was in reference to "Foreign Secretary[ Anthony Eden]'s minute of 6.7.44 replying to M 782/4 of 2.7.44 about the persecution of Jews in Hungary, and the evacuation of Jews from enemy-controlled territory".

    https://www.loc.gov/exhibits/churchill/interactive/_html/wc0213_3.html

    Note that four days earlier on July 7, and one day after Eden's referenced communication, Churchill also wrote to him to support the request by the Jewish Agency (via Chaim Weizmann) to bomb the rail lines going to Auschwitz.

    https://www.loc.gov/exhibits/churchill/interactive/_html/wc0213_2.html

    The Eden document from July 7 presumably discussed the extermination camp at Auschwitz and possibly the German extermination program more generally. By "science" Churchill is probably talking about gas chambers. But the Eden communique and Churchill memorandum 782/4 should be publicly available somewhere, so this part could be checked.

    The bottom line is still the same: Faurrison is a weasel, and Churchill's book contains a succint statement of the standard Holocaust account as uniquely exceptional, technologically specialized, state-organized murder of Jews.

    , @Anonymous

    There is no doubt that this [persecution of Jews in Hungary and
    their expulsion from enemy territory] is probably the greatest and
    most horrible crime ever committed in the whole history of the world,
    and it has been done by scientific machinery by nominally civilised
    men in the name of a great State and one of the leading races of
    Europe.
     
    What does Churchill's singling out Hungary as exceptional imply about the rest of the official version?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  118. Even as late as 2009 an official at Israel’s Jewish Agency justified laws criminalizing Holocaust Denial by explaining that almost 65 years after the end of the war “there are still hundreds of thousands of living Holocaust survivors”

    2018 update:

    By the year 2035 [!], there will only be about 26,200 Holocaust survivors living in the country [Israel], according to a report the Central Bureau of Statistics released ahead of International Holocaust Remembrance Day on January 27.

    The researchers said that according to forecasts, in 2020 there will be some 142,000 survivors living in Israel and by 2025 this number will have decreased to 92,600 survivors.

    At the end of 2016, there were an estimated 186,500 Holocaust survivors living in Israel, the report said. This compared to 202,600 survivors at the end of 2015.

    Note, however, that the definition of “Holocaust survivor” is a very broad one: “A Holocaust survivor is a person who lived in one of the countries occupied by or under the direct influence of the Nazi regime between 1933 and 1945, and/or refugees who were forced to leave their homes due to the Nazi regime”.

    Hence the breakdown of the current total of 186,500:

    about 57,500 are survivors from the ghettos, hideouts, labor camps and concentration camps, with 77% of the survivors originating in European countries, a plurality – 32% – from Romania. . .

    An additional 101,000 lived in countries under Nazi rule, of whom 55% were born in North Africa, primarily Morocco, Tunisia and Libya, and some 28,100 were refugees, of whom 76% were born in the Soviet Union, the report found.

    https://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/Only-26200-Holocaust-survivors-will-be-living-in-Israel-by-2035-539668

    Read More
    • Replies: @Colin Wright
    '...about 57,500 are survivors from the ghettos, hideouts, labor camps and concentration camps, with 77% of the survivors originating in European countries, a plurality – 32% – from Romania. . .

    An additional 101,000 lived in countries under Nazi rule, of whom 55% were born in North Africa, primarily Morocco, Tunisia and Libya, and some 28,100 were refugees, of whom 76% were born in the Soviet Union, the report found...'

    ! But few of these would be 'Holocaust survivors' in any meaningful sense. Most of the 55% born in North Africa merely experienced the temporary loss of their privileged status as French Citizens for two years, while my impression is that while the Romanians engaged in genocidal behavior in the recovered territories of Bessarabia et al, Jews in Romania proper were merely subjected to the usual regime of mildly anti-semitic discrimination. Moreover, inasmuch as Romania never fell under German occupation, unlike Hungary, there's no reason to think this changed. Finally, the Soviet refugees didn't necessarily suffer anything that the average Russian didn't suffer, and so aren't 'Holocaust survivors' in any meaningful sense at all.

    Add that the 186,000 figure would seem to include the many German Jews who got out in good time after losing their business and perhaps getting beaten up by a stormtrooper, and we've got a very questionable pool of 'Holocaust survivors.' Some of these people would be no more victims than some American white who decided it would be a good idea to move to suburbia in 1972 after a few distressing experiences.

    ...which suggests something. Can we demand reparations too?

    , @anarchyst
    The latest jewish “holocaust ™” swindle is that of the “holocaust ™ transference syndrome” where (only) jewish “holocaust™ memories are transferred to their children, grandchildren, great grandchildren and even to unrelated persons. This claim by two jewish psychiatrists is gaining traction among jewish “holocaust ™” promoters in order to “keep the dream alive” and to “keep the reparations and shekels flowing”. You see, these children, grandchildren, great grandchildren and other unrelated individuals are also seen as jewish “holocaust ™” survivors, worthy of reparations and special treatment.
    When will it end?
    NEVER...
    , @Tsigantes
    @ for-the-record

    "Note, however, that the definition of “Holocaust survivor” is a very broad one: “A Holocaust survivor is a person who lived in one of the countries occupied by or under the direct influence of the Nazi regime between 1933 and 1945,"

    That would mean that ALL Greeks born up to September 1944 are "holocaust survivors", ditto Yugoslavs, Poles, Finns etc. etc.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  119. Ron Unz says:
    @GaiusOptimus
    "...Surely no zealous theologian of the European Dark Ages would have reacted any differently..."

    Look up "summa" and Thomas Aquinas. You may change your mind.

    “…Surely no zealous theologian of the European Dark Ages would have reacted any differently…”

    You nailed me! Actually, when I write my long articles I normally go through several drafts, changing a few words here and there, and an earlier version read “no zealous mid-level theologian,” but I decide the excise the extra adjective, which perhaps I shouldn’t have done…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  120. anarchyst says:
    @Anon
    The Diary of Anne Frank was written by Meyer Levin, a prolific early and mid 20th century American author.

    Otto Frank went to New York and contracted with Levin to write the book based on Anne’s real diary for $50,000 Levin wrote the book. Frank didn’t pay him. Levin sued Frank. Levin used the copy of Anne’s real diary as proof that the published Levin book was very different from Anne’s diary.

    Levin won his case and was awarded the money owed. Frank never did pay him.

    There are always new translations and lost pages published to great publicity and angst.

    Not only was the “diary” ghost-written by Otto Frank, most of it was written with a “ball-point pen”, not invented until well after WW2.
    The Frank’s were rounded up and arrested because of their black-market activities–nothing more…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    The published diary was ghost written by American author Meyer Levin and he proved it in his breach of contract lawsuit. His attorney supeonaed Frank’s original work that purported to be Anne's diary A comparison showed that the book published as Anne’s Diary was significantly different from the diary Otto allegedly retrieved after the war.

    The courts findings were that Levin, not Anne wrote the book published as The Diary of Anne Frank. Levin was awarded the $50,000 Frank promised but it was never collected. There were many hearings

    I gather you don’t believe me. The case was

    Meyer Levin vs Otto Frank Et Al Supreme Court of New York Special Term NY County NY 41130 150 NYS

    Go to any NY legal data base to find it.

    Or don’t and go on claiming I’m lying or whatever you’re claiming.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  121. conatus says:
    @brander
    I would like to raise attention to David Cole, the Jewish Revisionist of www.takimag.com

    He has written a book about his experience as a Jewish holocaust revisionist, "Republican Party Animal"

    Yeah, he writes funny pieces over at Taki…a funny guy, really. In the Republican Party Animal book he discusses death totals in the last chapter. He says 3 to 3.5 mil, mostly by the Einsatzgruppen.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  122. Wally says:
    @EugeneGur

    Before the war, millions of Jews had lived in Eastern Europe, and after the war, those communities had mostly vanished. This undeniable fact has long stood as an implicit central pillar of the traditional Holocaust narrative. . . vast numbers of Polish Jews had been transported by the Soviets to locations deep within their territory..
     
    Yes, some Jews were evacuated ahead of the advancing German troops, some ran away on their own knowing what was in store for them - what does it prove? The remaining ones, however, were exterminated. For example, in Crimea alone about half of the pre-War Jews escaped before the German occupation, but the remaining half was killed - almost all of them - approximately 40,000.

    The German conducted complete clearance on the Soviet territory, and most Soviet Jews never even made it to the concentration camps. This applied to the civil population as well as to the Russian Army. Every group of POW was sorted, with Jews and communists most often killed on the spot, and there are millions of testimonies to that.

    Obviously, the number is imprecise. Perhaps, the Nazis left good records in the concentrations camps, but in most mass massacres on the Soviet territory the exact numbers are unknown, and the estimates vary pretty widely.

    However, no matter how you minimize the total number (and how do you know that at a closer look it's going to go down, not up?), the fact remains: the Nazis targeted the Jews for extermination based on their nationality, and that the definition of holocaust.

    said:
    “Yes, some Jews were evacuated ahead of the advancing German troops, some ran away on their own knowing what was in store for them – what does it prove? The remaining ones, however, were exterminated. For example, in Crimea alone about half of the pre-War Jews escaped before the German occupation, but the remaining half was killed – almost all of them – approximately 40,000. The German conducted complete clearance on the Soviet territory, and most Soviet Jews never even made it to the concentration camps. This applied to the civil population as well as to the Russian Army. Every group of POW was sorted, with Jews and communists most often killed on the spot, and there are millions of testimonies to that. ”

    - No they didn’t, that’s pure nonsense. It’s really a simple matter. You have absolutely no proof that they were “exterminated”. If you did you would present it here.

    - What “millions of testimonies”? Give us some. Specifics, not unfounded, bizarre Zionist propaganda.
    Who exactly said what …. specifically? Tell us what courts they ‘testified’ in and show us the verbatim transcripts & cross examination records of what they supposedly said.

    The Germans supposedly ‘tried to kill every Jew they could get there hands on’, yet there are currently ca. 1,000,000 ‘holocaust survivors’

    It’s claimed that there are immense Jew remains in allegedly known place. Please show us those claimed remains.

    Confession & Testimonies on Auschwitz, 40 ‘Gas Chamber Witnesses’Scrutinized

    available in German, https://shop.codoh.com/book/480/494
    English edition soon

    http://www.codoh.com

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  123. @Unstremian
    "Indeed, the fascinating and widely-praised 2002 book Hitler’s Jewish Soldiers by Bryan Mark Rigg notes that aside from Milch, Hitler’s military contained over a dozen half-Jewish generals and admirals and another dozen quarter-Jews of that same high rank, plus a total of roughly 150,000 additional half- or quarter-Jewish soldiers, with a large fraction of these being officers. All of these individuals would have had some fully-Jewish parents or grand-parents, which seems decidedly odd behavior for a regime supposedly so focused on the total eradication of the Jewish race."

    If one considers the nature of Judaism- with it's dispositions towards amorality, nihilism, subversion, the peculiarly fluid nature of Jewish ethnicity (seeing themselves as a distinct race, yet at same time throughout history showing themselves to have gone through periods of extensive mixing with surrounding populations, considering one to be Jewish if they have a Jewish mother even if this makes no real sense from a genetic perspective etc.), the fact many of the most dedicated anti-semites have often been Jewish (and Jews being neo-nazis or involved in the "far right" not being unheard of even today) etc., it might not be unsurprising a large number of mixed Jews were Nazis. After all, in your article "American Pravda: Oddities of the Jewish Religion", you also noted that Nazism appears to have drawn inspiration from Judaism itself, and Nazism has long struck me as a rather schizophrenic ideology (like Judaism is a schizophrenic religion), as it's adherents run the gamut of coming off as humanitarian in a sense with wanting self-determination for all people, to bonafide, foaming at the mouth white supremacists who want most or all other races exterminated.

    That this has not been explored of course raises unsavory questions about Judaism, hence why their massive role in Bolshevism and Communism has gone unremarked/ignored.

    "But just last year, I was stunned to discover that former total was simply a whole-cloth invention by prominent Holocaust-activist Simon Wiesenthal, who simply made the figure up one day with the intent of giving non-Jews more of a stake in the Holocaust story. And despite being based on absolutely no evidence or research, his casual claim was never effectively refuted by actual Holocaust scholars, who knew it to be total nonsense, and therefore it was so regularly repeated in the media that I probably read it hundreds of times over the years, always assuming it had some firm grounding in proven reality."

    I don't think Wiesenthal actually made those up, atleast that he didn't actually fabricate a 5 million that wasn't in pre-existing death tolls. What he seems to have done is come up with this 5 million figure on the basis of accepted deaths from non-Jews, mostly Soviet POW's, but also Roma and other minorities, or he just came up with this 5 million figure and others used accepted deaths of non-jews as comprising these 5 million.

    The article nonetheless really does reveal Jewish attitudes about the centrality of Jewish suffering while claiming that's not their intent, particularly this passage:

    "“I have been to many Yom Hashoah observances — including those sponsored by synagogues and Jewish communities — where eleven candles were lit,” she wrote in an article in the Jewish Review of Books in which she lacerated Wiesenthal’s ethical standards. “When I tell the organizers that they are engaged in historical revisionism, their reactions range from skepticism to outrage. Strangers have taken me to task in angry letters for focusing ‘only’ on Jewish deaths and ignoring the five million others. When I explain that this number is simply inaccurate, in fact made up, they become even more convinced of my ethnocentrism and inability to feel the pain of anyone but my own people.”

    The problem, according to Bauer, who has debunked the number repeatedly in his writings over the decades, is not that non-Jews were not victims; they were. It is that Wiesenthal’s arbitrarily chosen tally of non-Jewish victims diminishes the centrality to the Nazi ideology of systematically wiping any trace of the Jewish people from the planet.

    In fact, he said, the term “genocide” could accurately be applied to the 2 million to 3 million Poles murdered and millions more enslaved by the Nazis. But the mass murder of the Poles, Roma and others should not come under the rubric “Holocaust,” a term that Holocaust historians generally dislike because of its religious connotations but nonetheless have accepted as describing only the annihilation that the Nazis hoped to visit on the Jews.

    “All Jews of the world had to be annihilated,” Bauer said. “That was the intent. There was never an idea in Nazi minds to murder all the Russians.”

    The number 5 million also adheres to no known understanding of the number of non-Jews killed by the Nazis: While as many as 35 million people were killed overall because of Nazi aggression, the number of non-Jews who died in the concentration camps is no more than half a million, Bauer said."

    It is widely accepted that Nazi Germany had broadly exterminationist policies targeted at many non-Jews (and were apparently interested in exterminating various non-Jewish groups altogether as well), and even if these were considered a "genocide", the label "Holocaust" must not be applied to them because of the centrality of wiping out all Jews. This really doesn't square with his denial of ethnocentrism. And it's even more remarkable with the last passage, that "there was never an idea in Nazi minds to murder all the Russians"- really? Despite the immeasurable casualties on the eastern front the occurred in just a few years, the brutality Nazi Germany showed towards the Soviets and other Slavic nations, the fact many Nazis did indeed regard many Slavs as sub-human, and we still these attitudes today among various Neo-Nazis? Not one Nazi back then wanted to wipe out all Russians? Get out.

    "Some angry Internet activist has put together a graphic displaying extracts from dozens of New York Times stories between 1869 and 1941 all citing the figure of 6 million Eastern European Jews as being threatened with death, suggesting that our official Holocaust body-count actually predated World War II by as much as three generations. I really wouldn’t be surprised if that might be the original source of the number."

    I've lost track of a specific cite on this, but the "angry Internet activist" should tell you something about the credibility of this. That span of 71 years concerning pending mass Jewish deaths related to various eastern european catastrophes should tell you something- "6 million" is not the only claimed figure. Those estimates of pending Jewish deaths encompassed a very wide ranged of figures claimed in the NYT over a period of many decades, and "6 million" was a minority of purported estimates. This is not a very good piece of evidence in favor of the "6 million" figure being fabricated.

    ‘…The problem, according to Bauer, who has debunked the number repeatedly in his writings over the decades, is not that non-Jews were not victims; they were. It is that Wiesenthal’s arbitrarily chosen tally of non-Jewish victims diminishes the centrality to the Nazi ideology of systematically wiping any trace of the Jewish people from the planet…’

    It’s also almost comically obvious that the number ‘five million’ was chosen because it’s slightly less than ‘six million’ — there were other victims, but Jews were the biggest victims.

    Let’s leave aside the moral absurdity of being the ‘biggest’ victim. First off, perfectly respectable figures have plumped for figures other than six million for the number of Jews killed; didn’t Raul Hilberg settle on 5.1 million? Secondly, the number of gentiles killed is almost completely a matter of definition. Figures from German anti-partisan sweeps make it painfully clear many, many outright civilians were killed in them — just how many can never be known. Do we count Serbians caught in partisan zones? Russian POW’s who starved to death? Soldiers simply killed in combat? Only those taken to a camp and gassed? Have five million, have two million, have twenty million — have almost any number you like. Just adjust your definition to get what you want.

    The ‘Five million/six million’ figures are a contemptible bit of rhetorical legerdemain. ‘You were victims too — but we’re number one.’ For what it’s worth, in absolute numbers, Jews obviously didn’t get to be the Everest of corpse mountains. That dubious honor would go either to Chinese civilians or to the Soviet soldier — although here Hitler would have to share hangman’s honors with Stalin, who did at least as much to get so many killed as Hitler did.

    Read More
    • Replies: @EugeneGur

    although here Hitler would have to share hangman’s honors with Stalin, who did at least as much to get so many killed as Hitler did.
     
    Actually, he didn't - Stalin, I mean. Stalin was just an apprentice by comparison. According to the latest research, the number of people executed from 1924 to 1953 is slightly above 800,000. The whole number gone through the Gulag system is about 4 millions - and this number includes criminals, collaborators, traitors, not just political prisoners.

    This number was first reported to Khrushchev by the Chief of KGB in 1953. This means that Khrushchev knew the real situation full well when he put out a lie about "12 million executed" to defeat his political opponents.

    The 800,000 is a number well supported by the documents as well as numerous testimonies. Also, the "Memorial" society has been trying for more than a quarter of a century to list every prisoner of Gulag by name, but their list never exceeded 2 millions. Again, the numbers are politically incorrect, so the Western sources keep pretending they doesn't exist.

    As you see, Hitler did a better job and did it a lot faster, too.
    , @Unstremian
    "It’s also almost comically obvious that the number ‘five million’ was chosen because it’s slightly less than ‘six million’ — there were other victims, but Jews were the biggest victims."

    In other words, "although millions of others were killed in genocidal actions, the Holocaust is chiefly about Jews." What Wiesenthal did was, in contrast to "Holocaust Scholars" and such, rather arbitrarily expanded the definition of the Holocaust to include non-Jews who were killed in similar fashions (often times in the same exact camps) for political purposes, but this has never been accepted as the proper definition of the Holocaust by scholars, so it apparently became a popular definition as opposed to those who act as gatekeepers on how it's defined.

    It's a really terribly written article that easily leaves the impression Wiesenthal fabricated 5 million extra deaths out of nowhere, when he appended the "traditional" definition of the Holocaust to include other non-Jewish deaths. And the historians interviewed do a terrible job of making this out to not be the case, especially that they aren't guided by any ethnocentrism in defining the Holocaust as to include only Jews. "Yes, many non-Jews were subjected to genocide, and often in the same locations Jews were, but the Holocaust- the central atrocity of WWII- 100% concerns Jewish deaths." It's like they can't even be really pressed to admit "the Holocaust was one of various genocides in WWII" or something.

    And remember- it didn't cross a *single* Nazi mind to exterminate all Russians, a group who suffered the highest death toll (in raw numbers) after the Chinese:

    "In fact, he said, the term “genocide” could accurately be applied to the 2 million to 3 million Poles murdered and millions more enslaved by the Nazis. But the mass murder of the Poles, Roma and others should not come under the rubric “Holocaust,” a term that Holocaust historians generally dislike because of its religious connotations but nonetheless have accepted as describing only the annihilation that the Nazis hoped to visit on the Jews.

    “All Jews of the world had to be annihilated,” Bauer said. “That was the intent. There was never an idea in Nazi minds to murder all the Russians.”"
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  124. Ron Unz says:

    Thanks to everyone who had kind words for my long article…or even bothered reading through the whole thing!

    Once again, I’d like to very forcefully reemphasize that I’m *absolutely* no sort of expert on the Holocaust. I’d never really had any serious suspicions until I read Cockburn’s columns about Hitchens beliefs a dozen years ago, and only decided to seriously investigate the topic in the mid-2010s. Furthermore, I really doubt I’ve spent more than just a few weeks total in reading and researching the complex subject. So how could my knowledge possibly compare with that of so many others on both sides, who’d devoted their entire professional lives to the issue?

    When I looked into the Holocaust, I read some of the most prominent Holocaust Denial books and a considerably larger number of debunkers on the other side. As near as I could tell, the most visible writers in that latter camp were Lipstadt and Shermer, and I was very unimpressed with their quality, which certainly impacted my opinion.

    For those interested in spending a little time on the topic, I’d recommend just listening to the two hour YouTube radio interview of Nicholas Kollerstrom that I linked above.

    He came across as being quite credible to me. For those who agree, I’d recommend buying his short book, that can be read in just a long afternoon. Among other things, he seems to persuasively estimate that the total Jewish deaths at Auschwitz were something like 99% lower than the traditional figure. Maybe he’s just a lunatic—who knows? But if you find him credible, I think that would tend to support my strong suspicion that the conventional narrative of the Holocaust is at least “substantially false.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Unstremian
    Unz, what is the best way to contact you directly?
    , @Colin Wright
    '...He came across as being quite credible to me. For those who agree, I’d recommend buying his short book, that can be read in just a long afternoon. Among other things, he seems to persuasively estimate that the total Jewish deaths at Auschwitz were something like 99% lower than the traditional figure...'

    I think it may well be true that Auschwitz's prominence in the Holocaust has been exaggerated.

    There are two reasons for this. First, the Poles and Soviets started out by claiming four million had been exterminated there -- and although that figure's long since been abandoned, we're still stuck with the paradigm of Auschwitz as extermination camp no. 1.

    Secondly, Auschwitz exists. You can go see it. Want to go see Majdanek, Treblinka, Sobibor? They're level fields. There's nothing there. So Auschwitz continues to be where you go to pay your respects, so to speak. As with the MIA/POW controversy, it'd be awkward to change the story at this point. There needs to be a shrine. Auschwitz is it. 'Don't talk shit about Auschwitz!'

    However, and this is important, it doesn't follow from this that the Holocaust didn't occur. It -- or at least most of it -- just happened someplace other than at Auschwitz. That's all.

    , @FKA Max
    Thank you very much for all these great articles you have written over the last several months (and before) and your comprehensive research into all these diverse and controversial subject matters, Mr. Unz.

    I read the entire article right way last night after I saw it published. You have an incredible and rare talent to write about complex topics in great detail and at the same time keep your writing flowing and easily comprehensible.

    I'm very glad and grateful that you are dedicating more of your time and talent to writing again.

    P.s.: The formatting of the Unz Review Video homepage is off again, i.e., the side menu is moved to the bottom of the page: http://www.unz.com/video/

    P.p.s.: We had a very detailed discussion on the Holocaust, etc. in the following Unz Review comments threads for any readers and commenters who have not yet made up their mind on the Holocaust, Hitler, etc. and might be interested to get more information:

    Auschwitz: The Dwindling Death Toll

    510.000 persons according to Fritjof Meyer (2002), of whom 356.000 were gassed Jews.[35] – http://vho.org/tr/2003/1/Faurisson17-23.html Archived link: http://archive.is/huN3E

    http://vho.org/tr/2003/1/Image1103.gif

    Various numbers of victims of the Auschwitz concentration camp as claimed by official authorities and historians:
    Second column from the right: the lowest estimate so far by Fritjof Meyer. Right-most column: maximum figure according to revisionist opinion (ca. 150,000). You have the free choice! At most one of these figures can be correct, but all the rest may potentially incite to hatred, and uttering them can lead to criminal prosecution in many European countries. But most importantly, it is considered highly offensive, if not outright illegal in those countries to make such compilations in the first place![40]
    - https://www.unz.com/article/against-david-irvings-view-of-hitler/#comment-2391562

    The Wrong Family Holocaust Story: Survival of Polish Jews in Stalin’s Russia

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tohUJRLKIA

    Source: https://www.unz.com/article/against-david-irvings-view-of-hitler/#comment-2393330

    More highly interesting information from the same very knowledgeable commenter “michael mills”
    [...]
    According to the 1940 report by Karski mentioned above, there was a transit camp at Belzec in December 1939. Its purpose was to hold Jews who were trying to cross from the German Zone of Occupation into the Soviet (at least 300,000 Jews from the German Zone made that crossing in the months after the German conquest of Poland).
     
    - https://www.unz.com/article/against-david-irvings-view-of-hitler/#comment-2395448

    But similar to Dorpat, Vinnai explains the destructive potential in Hitler’s psyche not so much as a result of early childhood experiences, but rather due to trauma that Hitler had suffered as a soldier in World War I. Not only Hitler, but a substantial part of the German population was affected by such war trauma. Vinnai then leaves the psychoanalytical discourse and comments on social psychological questions, such as how Hitler’s political world view could have emerged from his trauma and how this could appeal to large numbers of people.
    [...]
    Understanding Madmen: A DSM-IV Assessment of Adolf Hitler

    https://www.uccs.edu/Documents/dsegal/DSM-Assessment-of-Hitler-IDR-2007.pdf

    It was an unexpected finding that the PTSD scale was so highly elevated. The consensus mean T score (76) was the highest of all the Axis I scales, and two of the four raters saw Hitler three standard deviations above the normative mean while two others rated him above two standard deviations. Even the rater with the lowest T score was a full standard deviation above the normative mean.
     
    - https://www.unz.com/article/against-david-irvings-view-of-hitler/#comment-2388131
    , @Twinkie
    I’ve long held Holocaust Denialism in low regard, but your long and thorough piece has given me much to read and look for myself. You are either insane or courageous... or both.

    As for this:

    Indeed, the fascinating and widely-praised 2002 book Hitler’s Jewish Soldiers by Bryan Mark Rigg notes that aside from Milch, Hitler’s military contained over a dozen half-Jewish generals and admirals and another dozen quarter-Jews of that same high rank, plus a total of roughly 150,000 additional half- or quarter-Jewish soldiers, with a large fraction of these being officers. All of these individuals would have had some fully-Jewish parents or grand-parents, which seems decidedly odd behavior for a regime supposedly so focused on the total eradication of the Jewish race.
     
    Forget military figures and read about the man who was apparently SS member no. 2 after Hitler himself: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emil_Maurice

    He managed to be an intimate of Hitler, be his driver and bodyguard, stay on as a senior SS officer, and even ”cuckholded” Hitler with his half-niece and rumored lover Geli Raubal, and still somehow survived the war and went right back to his pre-Nazi and pre-war profession... all the while being of Jewish ancestry.
    , @wesmouch
    Mr Unz
    Thanks for your outstanding article. I, like many, assumed the conventional story of the holocaust to be factual. Only recently have I started to have my doubts. I am most disturbed by the efforts of the promoters of the Holocaust to demonize and destroy any one who is a skeptic or who expresses doubt about its veracity. Now this is standard modus operandi for the left but if you would imagine anyone questioning the validity of any well known conventional wisdom such as gravity. They would be greeted with dismay and avoidance but there would be no orchestrated attempt to vilify and destroy them. They would be shunned as kooks. This alone tells me that in all likelihood the holocaust story as told is likely not what it seems. Throw in the propensity of Jews to be shysters and active users of guilt to manipulate and that makes the holocaust story perhaps even more questionable. I myself remain a skeptic and remain open to all sides. I am saddened by the response of the Holocaust promoters to not participate in open debate and declare that the debate is over. It reminds me of the climate lunatics who have declared that the debate is over. It is not in climate change. That movement is definitely a fraud.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  125. Wally says:
    @Anonymous
    I believe in the Holocaust, but I think the numbers were much much lower than stated and I think Jews were definately complicit thenselves.

    No matter how many Jewish bussinesses were vandalized, many Jews liked Germany and considered themselves more German than Jew. I think the extreme Zionist wing used the holocaust as a way to eliminate the undesirable Jews that opposed Isreal and were too German.

    Why do you “believe”? You have no proof.

    You sound like a believing religious fanatic, a True Believer. Really nutty stuff.

    http://www.codoh.com

    To believe in the ‘holocaust’ one must want or need to believe in it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  126. Wally says:
    @utu

    ‘Why were the presumably logical military giving priority to transport for this, when they were having much more pressing needs?’
     
    Just the other day I was reading wiki entry on Field Marshal Erich von Manstein. In April 1944 he was dismissed by Hitler and went on medical leave. Then in October 1944 he bought an estate in East Pomerania.

    What was he thinking? How did he pay for the estate and who sold it?

    A wiki entry? LOL

    Seriously? Laughable Zionist controlled Wikipedia?
    It’s amazing why anyone would cite Wikipedia as a reference for anything which Jews have a special interest in promoting. It’s rather like asking the wolf to guard the chicken coop.

    Zionist Wikipedia Editing Course

    http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/139189

    How Israel and Its Partisans Work to Censor the Internet

    http://www.unz.com/article/how-israel-and-its-partisans-work-to-censor-the-internet/?highlight=wikipedia

    http://www.codoh.com

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  127. utu says:

    Before the WWII over 3 million Jews lived in Poland. It is believed that approx. 85% of them were ultra Orthodox and Hasidic. After the WWII approx. 300,000 Polish Jews were found alive in Poland. But there were not many ultra-Orthodox and Hasidic Jews among them. The ones who survived were the assimilated ones, Bundists, Zionists and Communist. The deeply religious Jews did not show up in Poland after the WWII. They did not become ardent Zionist and hid in Israel. Hasidic Jews did not join Komsomol or Communist party while in the USSR and hid in the Workers’ Paradise. They can’t be accounted as DPs in Germany. They did not show up in America or Argentina or Brazil. They were gone. If the Holocaust revisionism is to be taken seriously it must come up with the story for the vanished religious Jews of Poland. But it can’t present a credible story of survival because these Jews indeed died during the WWII while in a custody of German occupying forces. Claiming that they did not die is exactly what Holocaust industry wants. The extreme Holocaust denialism serves Zionist interests. Codoh and Wally’s of this world are agent of Zionist interests as unwitting useful idiots at best. The questions why did the religious Jews die and that nobody wanted to hear about their death during the WWII is a much bigger story. The revisionists should consider looking into the stories that are being told by Neuterei Karta and Satmar Hassidic Jews. What Eichmann could have told us if he was not executed in Israel? Why the Holocaust narrative was downplayed before his death? This is a crime mystery where we want to find all the culprits and their motives while the Holocaust deniers want us to believe there was no crime, no victim and thus there was no culprit.

    Read More
    • Agree: James N. Kennett
    • Replies: @Colin Wright
    'Before the WWII over 3 million Jews lived in Poland. It is believed that approx. 85% of them were ultra Orthodox and Hasidic...'

    This is a constructive line of inquiry. I'm not sure I'm going to agree with wherever you're going to go with it, but I'm curious to hear more.

    ...and indeed and at a minimum, secular Jews would be more capable of blending in with the gentile population and/or finding gentile friends to shelter them and help them out. The religious Jews would have been visibly alien, and exactly what the Nazis had in mind when they were looking for their appointed victims.

    See also Hitler's Mein Kampf. He mentions that he had met assimilated Jews, and while he professed to regard them with some distaste, he felt no great antagonism. It was the Ostjuden -- I assume religious Jews from Galicia et al -- who filled him with revulsion and horror.

    As so often, the whole field could do with some exact and disciplined inquiry. I've little patience with outright Holocaust Denial, but stuff such as Goldhagen's Hitler's Willing Executioners is almost equally useless.

    , @Wally
    Yawn, the old 'where did they go' canard by faker utu*.

    Jews & their “Holocaust Industry” say that ’6M Jews & 5M others’ went to huge mass graves, they claim to know the exact locations of these alleged enormous mass graves, yet they cannot show us the alleged massive human remains. Hapless utu cannot show us either. LOL

    recommended:
    See here, some links about Jews being moved around, & much more.:
    ‘J. Graf and the illogical canard: ‘Where did Jews go then?’ / & more’
    viewtopic.php?f=2&t=8272

    Postwar locations of Jews? Child’s play:
    “That shitty little country” Israel, US, S. America, Australia, wherever Jews are.

    After the war, many Jews stayed in Europe and many others scattered throughout the world, settling in nearly sixty countries. So it was that in the late 1990s the teams put in charge by Steven Spielberg of gathering survivors’ testimonies had to go to nearly SIXTY different countries to record the said "testimonies" on video.

    https://robertfaurisson.blogspot.com/2009/03/alleged-holocaust-of-jews-is-proving.html

    * See the bizarre unhinged shill utu slapped own on his laughable 'gas chambers' claim: http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-post-war-france-and-post-war-germany/ comment 429

    www.codoh.com

    , @Anon
    Find my post about Rabbi Chaim Michael Dov Weissmandel’s book,
    From The Depths.

    He was there in the middle of it all. His opinion is that the communist Zionists worked with the Germans to separate children and teens from their parents. And train them to be good commie zionists and smuggle them by the standard smuggling routes to Palestine to be the work force of the kibbutzes IDF and be the strong militant New Jewish Man of Israel.

    According to Weissmandel the commie Zionist’s were happy to let the Germans do what they wished not just to the religious Jews but to the bourgeois business owners White collar non communist Jews.
    , @reiner Tor
    I largely agree with this, and I’d add that the reason they make ever-expansive laws against holocaust “denial” and “relativization” is because they specifically want all opponents of the narrative of eternal guilt to be associated with denial of the whole thing - that way they could easily claim that all opponents of the narrative are crazy.

    The narrative of eternal guilt has also been pushed to be ever more expansive, it’s not only eternal German guilt, but also eternal Hungarian guilt, eternal French guilt, even eternal Polish guilt (who really didn’t even have many collaborators even on that narrow issue), eternal American guilt and eternal British guilt (needless to say how unhinged that is), eternal guilt of the whole world (especially whites), a debt the world owes to Jews for eternity.
    , @Erebus

    If the Holocaust revisionism is to be taken seriously it must come up with the story for the vanished religious Jews of Poland. But it can’t present a credible story of survival because these Jews indeed died during the WWII while in a custody of German occupying forces.
     
    You were on a track until you got to "custody of German occupying forces".

    The Polish Jews were concentrated in the east, and so were in the "custody" of the Red Army in the early stages of the war, and not the Wehrmacht's. During that time a great many (numbers escape me atm) were evacuated east, deep into the SU. In wartime, a few million could disperse across Eurasia without raising too many eyebrows, but they were noticed.

    They did not show up in America or Argentina or Brazil.
     
    No, but in addition to the SU, there's lots of documentation of them showing up in what Timothy Snyder called the Bloodlands.
    The Ukraine, Belarus, Romania and the Baltics saw an orgy of violence as a combination of territorial/political/social vendettas and racial/tribal hatreds were unleashed in what amounted to a war of all against all. Displaced Jews migrating east were targeted by just about everyone. The violence accelerated with Barbarossa, and continued throughout the war, dying out only in the '50s, when the Soviets finally crushed the last of it in the Ukraine.

    Snyder notwithstanding, the full story of what happened there has yet to be told. We saw the tip of that underlying iceberg of latent hatred in the Mariupol & Odessa massacres, and the targeting of civilians in the Donbas in 2014. I've long held that if a Holocaust happened, it happened there.

    Interestingly, the vast majority of the so-called "evidence" of German atrocities presented at the Nuremberg Trials came from the Soviets, and specifically from the Ukraine. One would be forgiven for thinking that its production was politically motivated.
    , @James N. Kennett

    Claiming that they did not die is exactly what Holocaust industry wants. The extreme Holocaust denialism serves Zionist interests. Codoh and Wally’s of this world are agent of Zionist interests as unwitting useful idiots at best.
     
    I agree. Because so many Jews lost family members in WWII, they are likely to view Holocaust deniers as deluded or unteachable at best, insane or malicious at worst. In the minds of those whose families and friends vanished, no further evidence is required: Holocaust deniers automatically disqualify themselves from being taken seriously. You might as well try to present a new theory of the Ice Ages, and begin by explaining that the Earth is flat.

    I think it is far more productive to examine the way that Jewish victimhood has been used to excuse or cover up all kinds of bad behavior by Jews. For example, if you try to question the power of the Israel Lobby in the USA, charges of antisemitism will quickly follow, along with the suggestion that you are treading a slippery slope that leads to the gas chambers. The trump card in any such discussions is Holocaust denial by the other side - so much so that some pro-Jewish commentators will falsely assert its presence.

    , @Zumbuddi
    You vest a lot of power in Wally!
    How many people has Wally sent to jail?


    Also not inclined to give a lot of weight to "denying the holocaust plays into the hands of the zionists." I've been at too many Jewish-run talks wher criticism of Israel, zionist treatment of Palestinians, exploitation of holocaust is branded, "strengthening Bibi's agenda."

    But then, I reject the tag, Holocaust denier. It implies that Holocaust Affirmation is the obvious and ineluctible reality, and any other position is an outlier.

    Strictly speaking, Holocaust priests / priestesses are the Revisionists: what they spew is not genuine history, it is a revision , or inversion, of History -- What Really Happened.

    As for not being able to research and get to the bottom of the disappearsnce of undesireable Ostjuden -- First of all, years ago when I read Etan Bloom's work on Arthur Ruppin; and bumped it up against the fact that the vast majority of 'holocausted' were Ostjuden; then heard Michael Ledeen speak about "Jews killing Jews," then learn that Brandeis said in Feb 1933 to "get all the German Jews out of Germany, all 587 000 German Jews," at a time when there were over 2 million Jews sheltered in Germany -- the conclusion seemed obvious to me: In the eyes of Nordau to Ruppin to Brandeis, some Jews did not possess"life worthy of life" and they were sentenced to death, directly at Jewish hand or thru contract killers.

    Second, I'm not Jewish. I do not owe allegiance or approbation to any Jew, not ADL, not AIPAC, not the Presidents. I work consciously to refrain from "internalizing the demands of the Oppressor." I work hard to argue with facts and logic, giving civil resprct to the Adversary but NOT unwarranted deference. Jewish elites just don't impress me that much, because I Am convinced the facts and logic are on my side. That the only was Jewish elites / Holocoasters can "win" is by force & bullying is a weakn ess, not a strength.

    , @Uebersetzer
    A possible explanation of ultra-religious Jews being killed in especially large numbers is that it was particularly obvious they were Jews, in dress and appearance. More secular Jews were less conspicuous, less different in outward appearance from non-Jews and consequently had greater potential for survival. They had more chance of posing as non-Jews, as well.
    Kenneally's Schindler's Ark mentions Nazis in Poland forming work details of Jews on the Sabbath, and the ultra-pious regularly being shot for refusing to work. The more pragmatic concluded it was better to break the Sabbath than to be shot dead.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  128. @annamaria
    Two heavy gravestones upon the perfidious Holocaust biz
    1. “… the reality of the important Nazi-Zionist economic partnership of the 1930s, with Nazi officials traveling to Palestine as honored Zionist guests and leading Nazi newspapers praising the Zionist enterprise…
    … aside from Field Marshal Erhard Milch, Hermann Goering’s very powerful number-two in the German Luftwaffe, Hitler’s military contained over a dozen half-Jewish generals and admirals and another dozen quarter-Jews of that same high rank, plus a total of roughly 150,000 additional half- or quarter-Jewish soldiers, with a large fraction of these being officers…”
    2. “…the death toll of innocent civilians from the Bolshevik Revolution running well into the tens of millions … the Bolshevik leaders were overwhelmingly Jewish…Although only around 4% of Russia’s population was Jewish, Jews constituted perhaps 80-85% of the early Soviet government...
    And prior to World War II, Jews remained enormously over-represented in the Communist leadership, especially dominating the Gulag [a system of the murderous concentration camps] administration and the top ranks of the dreaded NKVD…
    ...the inescapable conclusion is that in per capita terms Jews were the greatest mass-murderers of the twentieth century, holding that unfortunate distinction by an enormous margin and with no other nationality coming even remotely close."

    ‘Two heavy gravestones upon the perfidious Holocaust biz…’

    You need to learn to think with greater precision. Even when true, most of your cited facts do nothing to disprove the reality of the Holocaust or even make it less probable. How does the fact that many of the Bolshevik leaders were Jewish demonstrate that the Holocaust didn’t happen?

    Read More
    • Replies: @annamaria
    "...most of your cited facts do nothing to disprove the reality of the Holocaust or even make it less probable."

    -- What is unclear about this well-documented fact? --"the Nazi-Zionist economic partnership of the 1930s, with Nazi officials traveling to Palestine as honored Zionist guests and leading Nazi newspapers praising the Zionist enterprise… -- Germans wanted the Jews to relocate to Palestine.
    --- Also, have you read the above article and comments? For instance, comment 46: "Despite unfair limitations imposed by pro-prosecution judges on the defense team, Zündel’s defense team destroyed the traditional narrative in two separate trials. The prosecution eyewitnesses all fell apart on cross-examination, and Hilberg was forced to admit that he not only relied on a single untrustworthy document for his account on Auschwitz, but that he concealed the problems in his source material from his audience." -- Or you want us to believe the "research" of the hysterical dim-wit Deborah Lipstadt?

    "How does the fact that many of the Bolshevik leaders were Jewish demonstrate that the Holocaust didn’t happen?"
    -- The same way the Jewish Lobby has sequestered the documentary "Two Hundred Years Together" to cover the enormous crimes by the Jewish Bolsheviks against Russian people, the tribal zealots have been preventing any research of the foundations of Holo-biz. This alone suggests that the Holo-biz is based on lies and more lies. Considering the persecution of the honest historians by the Jewish bandit-devotees of Holocaustianity and the blatant violation of the First Amendment under the pressure from Jewish zealots, it is now the responsibility of the Holocaustians to present the facts that would support their claims on special victimhood aka Holocaust.

    In short, "One naturally wonders whether all these established scholars [Franz Neumann and Hannah Arendt] may have quietly known something that a naive young doctoral candidate such as Hilberg did not."

    , @Anon
    Typically annamaria is all over the place. I don't know whether Russian friends set her on her blogging path but I doubt they have increased her pay after initial probation.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  129. @Ron Unz
    Thanks to everyone who had kind words for my long article...or even bothered reading through the whole thing!

    Once again, I'd like to very forcefully reemphasize that I'm *absolutely* no sort of expert on the Holocaust. I'd never really had any serious suspicions until I read Cockburn's columns about Hitchens beliefs a dozen years ago, and only decided to seriously investigate the topic in the mid-2010s. Furthermore, I really doubt I've spent more than just a few weeks total in reading and researching the complex subject. So how could my knowledge possibly compare with that of so many others on both sides, who'd devoted their entire professional lives to the issue?

    When I looked into the Holocaust, I read some of the most prominent Holocaust Denial books and a considerably larger number of debunkers on the other side. As near as I could tell, the most visible writers in that latter camp were Lipstadt and Shermer, and I was very unimpressed with their quality, which certainly impacted my opinion.

    For those interested in spending a little time on the topic, I'd recommend just listening to the two hour YouTube radio interview of Nicholas Kollerstrom that I linked above.

    https://youtu.be/j55VMPlq6Ew?t=630

    He came across as being quite credible to me. For those who agree, I'd recommend buying his short book, that can be read in just a long afternoon. Among other things, he seems to persuasively estimate that the total Jewish deaths at Auschwitz were something like 99% lower than the traditional figure. Maybe he's just a lunatic---who knows? But if you find him credible, I think that would tend to support my strong suspicion that the conventional narrative of the Holocaust is at least "substantially false."

    Unz, what is the best way to contact you directly?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  130. Wally says:
    @Wizard of Oz
    You omit to notice that Germany's labor shortage was made up for by slave or otherwise forced labor. If they were Jews who were lowest on the list for survival they could just be worked and starved to death.

    “Slave labor”? You mean the same “slave labor” that the Allies used?

    Jews were not “worked and starved to death.” there no proof.

    Using your logic, why would German starve to death their valuable “slave labor”?

    http://www.codoh.com

    Healthy Jews at Auschwitz ‘liberation’:http://fcit.coedu.usf.edu/holocaust/PICS31/66935a.jpg

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    Plenty of prisoners working as forced laborers died because of the conditions, particularly in mines and building underground factories. No doubt in a situation where American and British Pods were almost starved to death, and certainly weakened in resistance to any disease, the calculation for forced labor would be to give them just enough of whatever food was available to keep most of them alive and working balancing that against calculations about finding replacements and the means of transport to bring them to the places of work. But the logic wouldn't have been very different from that of the slave managers in the WI before 1833. The short term requirements would have meant a lot of the non volunteers compelled to labor hard would have succumbed. Obviously if there was plenty of food around the more skilled workers would be relatively well looked after as long as they were needed. And as you seem to have missed my point was that other things being equal amongst the underfed the Jews would have been in the bottom layer.
    , @cassandra

    Using your logic, why would German starve to death their valuable slave labor?
     
    Because of food shortages. While feeding slave labor might have been desirable, it was a higher priority to maintain the population's rations, and most importantly, to have able-bodied soldiers on the eastern front.

    Administrative documents about how food was being allocated, and how those responsible came to their decisions, would be informative.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  131. @Ron Unz
    Thanks to everyone who had kind words for my long article...or even bothered reading through the whole thing!

    Once again, I'd like to very forcefully reemphasize that I'm *absolutely* no sort of expert on the Holocaust. I'd never really had any serious suspicions until I read Cockburn's columns about Hitchens beliefs a dozen years ago, and only decided to seriously investigate the topic in the mid-2010s. Furthermore, I really doubt I've spent more than just a few weeks total in reading and researching the complex subject. So how could my knowledge possibly compare with that of so many others on both sides, who'd devoted their entire professional lives to the issue?

    When I looked into the Holocaust, I read some of the most prominent Holocaust Denial books and a considerably larger number of debunkers on the other side. As near as I could tell, the most visible writers in that latter camp were Lipstadt and Shermer, and I was very unimpressed with their quality, which certainly impacted my opinion.

    For those interested in spending a little time on the topic, I'd recommend just listening to the two hour YouTube radio interview of Nicholas Kollerstrom that I linked above.

    https://youtu.be/j55VMPlq6Ew?t=630

    He came across as being quite credible to me. For those who agree, I'd recommend buying his short book, that can be read in just a long afternoon. Among other things, he seems to persuasively estimate that the total Jewish deaths at Auschwitz were something like 99% lower than the traditional figure. Maybe he's just a lunatic---who knows? But if you find him credible, I think that would tend to support my strong suspicion that the conventional narrative of the Holocaust is at least "substantially false."

    ‘…He came across as being quite credible to me. For those who agree, I’d recommend buying his short book, that can be read in just a long afternoon. Among other things, he seems to persuasively estimate that the total Jewish deaths at Auschwitz were something like 99% lower than the traditional figure…’

    I think it may well be true that Auschwitz’s prominence in the Holocaust has been exaggerated.

    There are two reasons for this. First, the Poles and Soviets started out by claiming four million had been exterminated there — and although that figure’s long since been abandoned, we’re still stuck with the paradigm of Auschwitz as extermination camp no. 1.

    Secondly, Auschwitz exists. You can go see it. Want to go see Majdanek, Treblinka, Sobibor? They’re level fields. There’s nothing there. So Auschwitz continues to be where you go to pay your respects, so to speak. As with the MIA/POW controversy, it’d be awkward to change the story at this point. There needs to be a shrine. Auschwitz is it. ‘Don’t talk shit about Auschwitz!’

    However, and this is important, it doesn’t follow from this that the Holocaust didn’t occur. It — or at least most of it — just happened someplace other than at Auschwitz. That’s all.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hamlet's Ghost
    Majdanek is still standing. Furthermore, it is very close to the Lublin city center. I reached it a few years ago by taking a city transit bus that barely took 10 minutes from the center. Strange place to locate a supposed extermination center so close to a major city.
    , @Wally
    said:
    "Secondly, Auschwitz exists. You can go see it. Want to go see Majdanek, Treblinka, Sobibor? They’re level fields. There’s nothing there. So Auschwitz continues to be where you go to pay your respects, so to speak. As with the MIA/POW controversy, it’d be awkward to change the story at this point. There needs to be a shrine. Auschwitz is it. ‘Don’t talk shit about Auschwitz!’
    However, and this is important, it doesn’t follow from this that the Holocaust didn’t occur. It — or at least most of it — just happened someplace other than at Auschwitz. That’s all."

    - When cognitive dissonance sets in we often see desperate attempts at 'holocaust-lite'.
    So what other places did the alleged 'holocaust' supposedly occur? We're waiting. Proof required.

    - Treblinka & Sobibor are really not "level fields."
    They both contain alleged immense mass graves. Treblinka, an alleged 900,000 Jews, Sobibor, an alleged 250,000 Jews.

    Here are the alleged sites of such claims.

    Sobibor ‘monument’ supposedly over the remains of 250,000 Jew, actual remains of the alleged 250,000 cannot be shown.
    https://www.scrapbookpages.com/Poland/Sobibor/SobiborMonument04.jpg

    Alleged location of Treblinka mass graves / remains of 900,000 Jews according to Treblinka officials, no alleged remains can be shown
    https://www.scrapbookpages.com/Poland/Treblinka/Treblinka29.jpg

    No immense human remains that are alleged to be in known locations, no 'holocaust'.

    www.codoh.com

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  132. Wally says:
    @Wizard of Oz
    You omit to notice that Germany's labor shortage was made up for by slave or otherwise forced labor. If they were Jews who were lowest on the list for survival they could just be worked and starved to death.

    On the “extermination camp”, “slave labor camp” Auschwitz”:

    An “extermination camp” where thousands of Jews chose to stay behind when the Germans left.

    An “extermination camp” where most of the inmates, more thousands, chose to leave WITH the Germans.

    An “extermination camp” where 1,250,000 human remains are supposedly buried, but no one can show us these remains.

    An “extermination camp” where many Jews gave birth.

    An “extermination camp” where the absurdly alleged homicidal ‘gas chambers’ could not have worked as alleged, as proven repeatedly, scientifically impossible.

    An “extermination camp” where fake ‘gas chambers’ were “reconstructed” AFTER THE WAR.

    An “extermination camp” where detailed aerial photos of the period show nothing that is alleged to have been happening.

    An “extermination camp” where there are even obvious, laughable attempts to tamper with aerial photos that make a mockery of the fake storyline.
    see:
    Auschwitz Aerial photos, tampered with to fit the fake story: https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11669

    An “extermination camp” where there are countless Jew “survivors”.

    An “extermination camp” where so called “survivors” say the most impossible and conflicting things that do not hold up to scrutiny, would be laughed out of a legit court of law.

    http://www.codoh.com

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Silly stuff. Obviously Germans, including SS guards and managers, who could see the war was lost weren't going to put in special efforts to keep the killing of Jews going, especially when actual destruction of the camps had been ordered. So the sick who couldn't walk were no doubt left to (probably) die while in some, though probably not all, parts of large camp complexes prisoners would be coerced into moving West with the guards, while some prisoners would have thought at this stage e.g. "Better the devil we know" or "at least we speak/understand our guard's language" or "I don't think Comrade Stalin is going to welcome me nicely". Human reality is quite complex Wally. Have you ever thought of reasons why the guards might want to have prisoners with them? Think self preservation.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  133. EugeneGur says:
    @Colin Wright
    '...The German conducted complete clearance on the Soviet territory, and most Soviet Jews never even made it to the concentration camps. This applied to the civil population as well as to the Russian Army. Every group of POW was sorted, with Jews and communists most often killed on the spot, and there are millions of testimonies to that...'

    This actually raises another, statistically intractable problem.

    About three-quarters of all the Russian P.O.W.'s died -- most in 1941, and most as a consequence of deliberate starvation. So do we count the Jewish ones as 'Holocaust victims' when they probably would have been deliberately murdered anyway simply by being virtue of Soviet P.O.W.'s?

    As I recall, the first group of victims gassed at Auschwitz were Russian P.O.W.'s. If one of them was Jewish, does he count as simply a dead P.O.W. or a 'Holocaust victim'?

    So do we count the Jewish ones as ‘Holocaust victims’ when they probably would have been deliberately murdered anyway simply by being virtue of Soviet P.O.W.’s?

    You right that presenting the Jewish Holocaust as something uniques is incorrect. The Jews were the first group destined for extermination but so were the Russians and other nations of the Soviet Union. It is estimated that approximately 3 millions of Soviet POWs of all nationalities perished in the Nazi captivity. The number is quite comparable to the Holocaust estimate but it is politically incorrect, so it’s hardly ever mentioned in the West.

    Most of those Soviet POW who dies in captivity weren’t Jewish. As I said, most Soviet Jewish soldiers didn’t make it to the camps unless they manages somehow to hide their Jewish identity. Some did, because many Soviet Jews were of mixed blood and did not have an obviously Jewish appearance. So, they could conceal their nationality unless someone betrayed them.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  134. Wally says:
    @Anon
    The Diary of Anne Frank was written by Meyer Levin, a prolific early and mid 20th century American author.

    Otto Frank went to New York and contracted with Levin to write the book based on Anne’s real diary for $50,000 Levin wrote the book. Frank didn’t pay him. Levin sued Frank. Levin used the copy of Anne’s real diary as proof that the published Levin book was very different from Anne’s diary.

    Levin won his case and was awarded the money owed. Frank never did pay him.

    There are always new translations and lost pages published to great publicity and angst.

    The fake Anne Frank diary utterly exposed below.

    You’ll love seeing the many different handwritings.

    Anne Frank’s Diary Gains ‘Co-Author’ / and much, much more: https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=9924

    That’s the same Anne Frank that was transferred out of the alleged “pure extermination camp” Auschwitz to get medical treatment.

    http://www.codoh.com

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  135. @utu
    Before the WWII over 3 million Jews lived in Poland. It is believed that approx. 85% of them were ultra Orthodox and Hasidic. After the WWII approx. 300,000 Polish Jews were found alive in Poland. But there were not many ultra-Orthodox and Hasidic Jews among them. The ones who survived were the assimilated ones, Bundists, Zionists and Communist. The deeply religious Jews did not show up in Poland after the WWII. They did not become ardent Zionist and hid in Israel. Hasidic Jews did not join Komsomol or Communist party while in the USSR and hid in the Workers' Paradise. They can't be accounted as DPs in Germany. They did not show up in America or Argentina or Brazil. They were gone. If the Holocaust revisionism is to be taken seriously it must come up with the story for the vanished religious Jews of Poland. But it can't present a credible story of survival because these Jews indeed died during the WWII while in a custody of German occupying forces. Claiming that they did not die is exactly what Holocaust industry wants. The extreme Holocaust denialism serves Zionist interests. Codoh and Wally's of this world are agent of Zionist interests as unwitting useful idiots at best. The questions why did the religious Jews die and that nobody wanted to hear about their death during the WWII is a much bigger story. The revisionists should consider looking into the stories that are being told by Neuterei Karta and Satmar Hassidic Jews. What Eichmann could have told us if he was not executed in Israel? Why the Holocaust narrative was downplayed before his death? This is a crime mystery where we want to find all the culprits and their motives while the Holocaust deniers want us to believe there was no crime, no victim and thus there was no culprit.

    ‘Before the WWII over 3 million Jews lived in Poland. It is believed that approx. 85% of them were ultra Orthodox and Hasidic…’

    This is a constructive line of inquiry. I’m not sure I’m going to agree with wherever you’re going to go with it, but I’m curious to hear more.

    …and indeed and at a minimum, secular Jews would be more capable of blending in with the gentile population and/or finding gentile friends to shelter them and help them out. The religious Jews would have been visibly alien, and exactly what the Nazis had in mind when they were looking for their appointed victims.

    See also Hitler’s Mein Kampf. He mentions that he had met assimilated Jews, and while he professed to regard them with some distaste, he felt no great antagonism. It was the Ostjuden — I assume religious Jews from Galicia et al — who filled him with revulsion and horror.

    As so often, the whole field could do with some exact and disciplined inquiry. I’ve little patience with outright Holocaust Denial, but stuff such as Goldhagen’s Hitler’s Willing Executioners is almost equally useless.

    Read More
    • Replies: @J. Masterson

    As so often, the whole field could do with some exact and disciplined inquiry. I’ve little patience with outright Holocaust Denial, but stuff such as Goldhagen’s Hitler’s Willing Executioners is almost equally useless.
     
    Please, read the two works I cited above. They summarize the arguments from the best sources on each side. They will spring board you into the most technical aspects of the debate.

    There is no shortage of intellectual rigor on the Revisionist side.

    On the other side, it's more like rigor mortis.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  136. @Colin Wright
    '...The German conducted complete clearance on the Soviet territory, and most Soviet Jews never even made it to the concentration camps. This applied to the civil population as well as to the Russian Army. Every group of POW was sorted, with Jews and communists most often killed on the spot, and there are millions of testimonies to that.

    Obviously, the number is imprecise. Perhaps, the Nazis left good records in the concentrations camps, but in most mass massacres on the Soviet territory the exact numbers are unknown, and the estimates vary pretty widely...'

    Add too that many Jews must have run off into the forests and swamps and starved or frozen to death in the winter; in the accounts of the Holocaust in Christopher Browning's 'Ordinary Men' there were enormous numbers of such Jews.

    Generally, they weren't able to survive for long; the forests of Eastern Europe aren't hospitable places in the winter. Browning even recounts instances of Jews coming out of the woods and giving themselves up for certain execution; it beat slowly starving and freezing to death.

    ...but how many simply died and rotted in the forests? There's no way of coming to more than a rough approximation.

    Add too that many Jews must have run off into the forests and swamps

    Partisans?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wally
    said:
    "Partisans?"

    aka: terrorists in today's parlance

    Jews were very prevalent among the partisans / terrorists.
    And being illegal, per international law, these non-uniformed combatants were subject to legal executions when caught. Both the Axis & Allied powers executed them when caught.

    But the Zionist game is to claim that those who were legally executed by the Axis powers were 'holocaust' victims.

    www.codoh.com
    , @Colin Wright
    'Partisans?'

    No doubt in many cases, but as a rule, armed, trained, and organized bodies of Red Army soldiers must have been a greater threat than random groups of fugitives.

    In any case, the Jewish fugitives described being hunted down in Ordinary Men were hardly partisans. They offered about as much resistance as rabbits.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  137. Wally says:
    @Wizard of Oz
    A few notes to this stimulating article....
    1. My father played good golf before WW2 at a moderately overweight 210 lbs. When released from German POW camp in 1945 he weighed about 115 lb. Easy to see why the Belsen and Buchenwald corpses and survivors looked as they did. Easy to see too why Auschwicz guards wouldn't have to kill many of the inmates they induced to leave when whatever deadly activities previously practised had been prudently abandoned.
    2. What happened at Wannsee conference? Crucial if not decisive.
    3. What were the before and after figures for Jews in the part of (western) Poland occupied by Germany from September 1939?
    4. What were the before and after figures for Hungarian Jews who seem to have been the biggest group of Jewish Auschwicz victims?
    5. Why did Jewish women and children have to be transported from France, Belgium and Holland?
    4. The big question you don't define: what is the Holocaust story you are casting doubt on? Was there perhaps no plan with or without Hitler's approval which covers the said transport of women and children? Granted the Einsatzgruppen *could* have been aimed mainly to kill enemies comprehensively with Jews naturally classed with Communists, and granted that the numbers of Jews actually killed were probably well under 6 million is there really a problem in believing that, if a Final Solution was agreed at Wannsee, extermination was agreed after other possible solutions had failed? After all "extermination" had been suggested for the Jews before, by anti-Dreyfusards in France and by Kaiser Wilhelm ll. And there are plenty of precedent uses in America.

    So why haven’t you found your answers from the “Holocaust Industry”?

    All those questions have been easily answered at: http://www.codoh.com
    use the search function

    No name calling, level playing field debate here: http://forum.codoh.com
    use the search function

    Revisionists are just the messengers, the absurd impossibility of the ‘holocaust’ storyline is the message.

    Read More
    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
    Look, Wally, if someone questions the Holocaust, which they are entirely free to do so far as I am concerned, they need, if they wish to be convincing, to address the arguments of those who claim that the Holocaust did occur. If they fail to do that, then their argument fails. Giving their critics a URL to follow is like saying, "hey, if you don't agree with me, go do you own research and prove yourself wrong", which is an idiotic response.

    And the W of O's father's war-time weight loss argues rather strongly against your unlikely claim that the concentration camp occupants were as well fed as anyone in Germany.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  138. syonredux says:
    @dearieme
    "aside from Milch, Hitler’s military contained over a dozen half-Jewish generals and admirals and another dozen quarter-Jews of that same high rank, plus a total of roughly 150,000 additional half- or quarter-Jewish soldiers": one explanation immediately suggests itself. (Whether it is anywhere near the mark I have no idea.)

    Perhaps many Germans were not much worried about assimilated German Jews, especially if they were seen as valuable to the military and if unconnected to Bolshevism. Perhaps German hatred was directed mainly at East European Jews.

    Then again, maybe views simply differed among the Germans.

    one explanation immediately suggests itself. (Whether it is anywhere near the mark I have no idea.)

    Perhaps many Germans were not much worried about assimilated German Jews, especially if they were seen as valuable to the military and if unconnected to Bolshevism. Perhaps German hatred was directed mainly at East European Jews.

    I think that there is something to that notion. German Jews were commonly seen as superior to the Ostjuden . You can see something of this attitude in a letter* written by GeneralKommissar for Belorussia Wilhem Kube concerning the treatment of German Jews:

    I wish to ask you personally for an official directive for the conduct of the civilian administration toward the Jews deported from Germany to Belorussia. Among these Jews are men who fought at the front [during World War I] and have the Iron Cross, First and Second Class, war invalids, half-Aryans, even three-quarter Aryans.

    Up to now only 6,000 to 7,000 Jews have arrived, of the 25,000 who were expected. I am not aware what has become of the others. In the course of several official visits to the ghetto I noted that among these Jews, who differ from the Russian Jews in their personal cleanliness, there are also skilled workers capable of doing five times as much in a day as Russian Jews.

    On my own responsibility I will not give the SD any instructions with regard to the treatment of these people, although certain units of the Wehrmacht and the police already have an eye on the possessions of the Jews from the Reich, and has also confiscated various other things. I am certainly a hard [man] and willing to help solve the Jewish question, but people people who come from our own cultural sphere just are not the same as the brutish hordes in this place. Is the slaughter to be carried out by the Lithuanians and Letts, who are themselves rejected by the population here? I couldn’t do it. I beg you to give clear directives [in this matter], with due consideration for the good name of our Reich and our Party, in order that the necessary action can be taken in the most humane manner.

    http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/orgs/german/einsatzgruppen/esg/trials/profiles/kubeletter.html

    *Yes, Ron, I know that you hate it when I quote anything……

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wally
    Naturally we see no original, authentic German document, only English text by who knows who.

    Try that in a legit court of law.

    The Kube canard crushed here:
    https://codoh.com/search/?sorting=relevance&q=kube
    and:
    'Irrefutable Response' Falls Flat, book review by John Weir
    https://codoh.com/library/document/2590/

    www.codoh.com
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  139. @Anon
    It’s pretty well known that Eisenhower decided to film, take photos and make a visual record of the camps as soon as he saw them.

    And in the process documented many hundreds of deaths from various causes. Often it was ugly stuff, too, but there had been this thing called a war going on, you see.

    I believe it’s fair to conclude from all available evidence that many thousands of Jews died during the war, with typhus being a leading cause. It’s only fitting that we focus exclusively on Jewish deaths, as opposed to the millions of others. Though I’m not quite sure why. The “why” might tell us something about our own society, and our own time.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  140. @for-the-record
    Even as late as 2009 an official at Israel’s Jewish Agency justified laws criminalizing Holocaust Denial by explaining that almost 65 years after the end of the war “there are still hundreds of thousands of living Holocaust survivors"

    2018 update:

    By the year 2035 [!], there will only be about 26,200 Holocaust survivors living in the country [Israel], according to a report the Central Bureau of Statistics released ahead of International Holocaust Remembrance Day on January 27.

    The researchers said that according to forecasts, in 2020 there will be some 142,000 survivors living in Israel and by 2025 this number will have decreased to 92,600 survivors.

    At the end of 2016, there were an estimated 186,500 Holocaust survivors living in Israel, the report said. This compared to 202,600 survivors at the end of 2015.
     
    Note, however, that the definition of "Holocaust survivor" is a very broad one: "A Holocaust survivor is a person who lived in one of the countries occupied by or under the direct influence of the Nazi regime between 1933 and 1945, and/or refugees who were forced to leave their homes due to the Nazi regime".

    Hence the breakdown of the current total of 186,500:

    about 57,500 are survivors from the ghettos, hideouts, labor camps and concentration camps, with 77% of the survivors originating in European countries, a plurality – 32% – from Romania. . .

    An additional 101,000 lived in countries under Nazi rule, of whom 55% were born in North Africa, primarily Morocco, Tunisia and Libya, and some 28,100 were refugees, of whom 76% were born in the Soviet Union, the report found.
     
    https://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/Only-26200-Holocaust-survivors-will-be-living-in-Israel-by-2035-539668

    ‘…about 57,500 are survivors from the ghettos, hideouts, labor camps and concentration camps, with 77% of the survivors originating in European countries, a plurality – 32% – from Romania. . .

    An additional 101,000 lived in countries under Nazi rule, of whom 55% were born in North Africa, primarily Morocco, Tunisia and Libya, and some 28,100 were refugees, of whom 76% were born in the Soviet Union, the report found…’

    ! But few of these would be ‘Holocaust survivors’ in any meaningful sense. Most of the 55% born in North Africa merely experienced the temporary loss of their privileged status as French Citizens for two years, while my impression is that while the Romanians engaged in genocidal behavior in the recovered territories of Bessarabia et al, Jews in Romania proper were merely subjected to the usual regime of mildly anti-semitic discrimination. Moreover, inasmuch as Romania never fell under German occupation, unlike Hungary, there’s no reason to think this changed. Finally, the Soviet refugees didn’t necessarily suffer anything that the average Russian didn’t suffer, and so aren’t ‘Holocaust survivors’ in any meaningful sense at all.

    Add that the 186,000 figure would seem to include the many German Jews who got out in good time after losing their business and perhaps getting beaten up by a stormtrooper, and we’ve got a very questionable pool of ‘Holocaust survivors.’ Some of these people would be no more victims than some American white who decided it would be a good idea to move to suburbia in 1972 after a few distressing experiences.

    …which suggests something. Can we demand reparations too?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Colin Wright
    'Holocaust survivor' conjures up images of someone who managed to survive the Warsaw ghetto, or looked into the ovens of Auschwitz.

    As the figures make clear, there were very few of those. Ironically, the very reality of the Holocaust implies that there weren't many genuine 'Holocaust survivors' to begin with, and now, after seventy three years, they must be genuinely few and far between.
    , @Nog
    Read ARMENIAN GOLGOTHA or read a book about SMYRNA back about 1922. The world is a tough neighborhood. Human nature is generally nasty. We have built a little paradise here in the US but it can't last.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  141. @Colin Wright
    '...about 57,500 are survivors from the ghettos, hideouts, labor camps and concentration camps, with 77% of the survivors originating in European countries, a plurality – 32% – from Romania. . .

    An additional 101,000 lived in countries under Nazi rule, of whom 55% were born in North Africa, primarily Morocco, Tunisia and Libya, and some 28,100 were refugees, of whom 76% were born in the Soviet Union, the report found...'

    ! But few of these would be 'Holocaust survivors' in any meaningful sense. Most of the 55% born in North Africa merely experienced the temporary loss of their privileged status as French Citizens for two years, while my impression is that while the Romanians engaged in genocidal behavior in the recovered territories of Bessarabia et al, Jews in Romania proper were merely subjected to the usual regime of mildly anti-semitic discrimination. Moreover, inasmuch as Romania never fell under German occupation, unlike Hungary, there's no reason to think this changed. Finally, the Soviet refugees didn't necessarily suffer anything that the average Russian didn't suffer, and so aren't 'Holocaust survivors' in any meaningful sense at all.

    Add that the 186,000 figure would seem to include the many German Jews who got out in good time after losing their business and perhaps getting beaten up by a stormtrooper, and we've got a very questionable pool of 'Holocaust survivors.' Some of these people would be no more victims than some American white who decided it would be a good idea to move to suburbia in 1972 after a few distressing experiences.

    ...which suggests something. Can we demand reparations too?

    ‘Holocaust survivor’ conjures up images of someone who managed to survive the Warsaw ghetto, or looked into the ovens of Auschwitz.

    As the figures make clear, there were very few of those. Ironically, the very reality of the Holocaust implies that there weren’t many genuine ‘Holocaust survivors’ to begin with, and now, after seventy three years, they must be genuinely few and far between.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wally
    Nope, there are claims of upward to 1,000,000 "survivor$".
    Many claimed to have 'witnessed' the impossible gas chambers'.

    Former inmate, Moshe Peer, recalled a miraculous escape from death as an eleven-year-old in the camp. In a 1993 interview with a Canadian newspaper, the French-born Peer claimed that he "was sent to the camp gas chamber at least six times...maybe children resist better, I don't know."

    - Gazette, Montreal, Canada, August 5, 1993
     

    The '6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers' are scientifically impossible frauds.
    See the 'holocaust' scam debunked here: http://codoh.com
    No name calling, level playing field debate here: http://forum.codoh.com
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  142. bucky says:
    @Wizard of Oz
    You omit to notice that Germany's labor shortage was made up for by slave or otherwise forced labor. If they were Jews who were lowest on the list for survival they could just be worked and starved to death.

    I don’t disagree. the treatment of Jews in Germany is similar to what Trump is doing to Mexicans now. There is this general attitude of disdain towards a certain class of people that emanates from the leadership. those lower down continually push the envelope as to cruel behavior towards the targeted group.

    Mexicans are alleged to be undercutting American labor, just like Jews were accused of destabilizing governments and societies. Increasingly cruel behaviors were enacted on them. We have the family separations on the border going on with Mexicans, and there are even stories of ICE officers unleashing pedophilic tendencies upon Mexican children. This isn’t a result of a master plan handed down by aliens. It is a result of leadership.

    Also, prison populations are used for many heavy labor activities. Many inmates are tasked with firefighting. They are the lowest population in America, are heavily minority, and while there is significant truth to the allegations made against them, their ill treatment comes from a collective attitude of disdain.

    Read More
    • LOL: JMcG
    • Troll: utu, Beefcake the Mighty
    • Replies: @Anon
    I used to be a Probation Officer. I knew guys who’d lived in the fire fighting camps. When they got sentenced again they hoped to be sent to a firefighting camp. They have to speak and understand English to fight fires so they’re mostly black.

    California inmates love the fire fighting camps. They live in nice outdoor camps in the mountains. They have pets although they aren’t supposed too.

    They don’t fight fires as a regular job, just when there are fires. They do most of the work in the camps. They have classes in all sorts of trades and occupations. Unfortunately, they can’t get jobs when they get out because evil American liberal capitalists only went illegal Hispanics for most jobs

    Getting accepted into the camps is difficult. They need a record of good behavior and ability to follow instruction and cooperate with fellow fire workers.

    The camps are open. They can walk away easily. But they don’t
    California convicts like those camps and they like the machoness and adrenaline rush of fire fighting.

    They aren’t in much danger because they are’nt skilled and experienced. They live life in the firefighting camps and are proud of being firefighters.

    The cause of American crime is that too many criminals are out committing crimes and too few are in prison.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  143. One thing, among propaganda left & right, seems to be neglected: sheer number of prominent Jews (or people of Jewish extraction) who perished during WWII. If we can say, with certainty that:

    1. great mathematician Felix Hausdorff was a victim of “racial” persecution: http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/Biographies/Hausdorff.html

    Bonn University requested that the Hausdorffs be allowed to remain in their home and this was granted. By October 1941 they were forced to wear the “yellow star” and around the end of the year they were informed that they would be sent to Cologne. Bessel-Hagen wrote that he knew this was (see [24] and [6]):-

    … a preliminary to deportation to Poland. And what one hears concerning the accommodation and treatment of Jews there is completely unimaginable.

    They were not sent to Cologne but in January 1942 they were informed that they were to be interned in Endenich. Together with his wife and his wife’s sister, he committed suicide on 26 January. He wrote to a friend on Sunday 25 January (see [24] and [6]):-

    Dear Friend Wollstein
    By the time you receive these lines, we three will have solved the problem in another way – in the way which you have continually attempted to dissuade us. …
    What has been done against the Jews in recent months arouses well-founded anxiety that we will no longer be allowed to experience a bearable situation. …
    Forgive us, that we still cause you trouble beyond death; I am convinced that you will do what you are able to do (and which perhaps is not very much). Forgive us also our desertion! We wish you and all our friends will experience better times
    Yours faithfully
    Felix Hausdorff

    On the night of Sunday 25 January all three took barbiturates. Both Hausdorff and his wife Charlotte were dead by the morning of the 26 January. Edith, Charlotte’s sister, survived for a few days in a coma before dying.

    2. Chekhov’s fiance Dunya Efros was gassed in Nazi CC, after being handed over by Vichy government. She was in her 80s. See, for instance, Rayfiled’s celebrated bio: http://gen.lib.rus.ec/book/index.php?md5=490A9DAACAF1878F0798ACB15CA67D4D

    3. Kafka’s sisters all perished.

    https://www.butterfliesintheghetto.com/?tag=franz-kafkas-family

    Another fact that is seldom mentioned about Franz Kafka is that his closest sister ended up in Terezin. Franz’s three younger siblings, his sisters Ellie, Valli, and Ottilie all died in the Holocaust.

    4.Freud’s sisters

    http://www.holocaustresearchproject.org/ghettos/freud.html

    Freud’s Sisters and the Holocaust

    Freud’s sisters

    Three of Freud’s sisters Marie, Pauline Winternitz, and Rosa Graf-Freud were deported to Treblinka, on Transport Number BQ on the 23 September 1942 and murdered, in the gas chambers.

    An eyewitness has recorded that one of Freud’s sisters, possibly Rosa, approached SS- Untersturmfuhrer Kurt Franz on the ramp and asked “to be given lighter walk on account of her poor health.”

    Franz “assured her that her arrival in Treblinka was a mistake, in view of her poor health and that as soon as she had had her bath, she would be put on the first available train back to Vienna. “

    Freud lost another sister Adolfine who was born in 1862 in Vienna. Deported to Theresienstadt she died on the 5 February 1943 from internal haemorrhaging.

    So-if those “famous” (or relatives & acquaintances of the “famous”..) simply vanished into the night, and we know about them- what about vastly numerous “others” ?

    I am against all brainwashing & taboos, but hard-core holo-deniers, whichever their motives, seem to me a bunch of lunatics not worthy to be bothered about.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wally
    We see no proof they were murdered. I can cite claims of and "eyewitnesses" to witchcraft & sea monsters too. That hardly makes them true. Science over propaganda & religion,

    Did the occasional Jew commit suicide? Maybe & so what? Mental illness has always been a problem.

    But then "Holocau$t Industry" Jews say that they all went to immense mass graves and that that the human remain exist in known locations, but those remains do not exist. Therefore what you claim are necessarily lies. Pretty basic stuff, really.

    We note that you do not name the alleged "eyewitnesses", nor do you tell us exactly what they said, where & when. Telling.

    You mentioned Treblinka:
    Alleged location of Treblinka mass graves / remains of 900,000 Jews according to Treblinka officials, no alleged remains can be shown
    https://www.scrapbookpages.com/Poland/Treblinka/Treblinka29.jpg

    photo from ‘Surviving Treblinka’, by Samuel Willenberg.
    http://207.232.26.141/D2/Albums/196-210/200_43.JPG
    It is captioned: “crane lifting corpses destined for cremation”.
    Does anyone see any “corpses”? LOL

    www.codoh.com

    , @Colin Wright
    '...I am against all brainwashing & taboos, but hard-core holo-deniers, whichever their motives, seem to me a bunch of lunatics not worthy to be bothered about.'

    Hear hear. I certainly don't think they should be silenced, but to my mind, they rank with the 'there were no planes on 9/11' and Israel supporters and 'blacks are just victims of racism' and global warming denialists and all the rest.

    As a rule, I don't even bother to argue with them, and they clog up the forums, but they're part of the cross to be borne if we're to have a free society. Those who would silence them worry me more.
    , @Sean
    Well it is possible that older people weakened by lack of food would have almost all died off when forced into overcrowded and dirty conditions, but by the same token they were useless mouths to feed and would not have died fast enough. It would make economic sense to immediately gas them. Every story is some kind of image or lie.
    , @bj
    Fifty-five million died in WWII,

    What makes a few Jews so special?

    Have you no shame?
    , @peterAUS

    ...I am against all brainwashing & taboos, but hard-core holo-deniers, whichever their motives, seem to me a bunch of lunatics not worthy to be bothered about.
     
    Don't say....
    , @Muh 6 Gorrillion!!!!!!!!

    hard-core holo-deniers
     
    What, precisely, is a "holo-denier"? And what constitutes a "hard-core" one?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  144. Wally says:
    @utu
    Before the WWII over 3 million Jews lived in Poland. It is believed that approx. 85% of them were ultra Orthodox and Hasidic. After the WWII approx. 300,000 Polish Jews were found alive in Poland. But there were not many ultra-Orthodox and Hasidic Jews among them. The ones who survived were the assimilated ones, Bundists, Zionists and Communist. The deeply religious Jews did not show up in Poland after the WWII. They did not become ardent Zionist and hid in Israel. Hasidic Jews did not join Komsomol or Communist party while in the USSR and hid in the Workers' Paradise. They can't be accounted as DPs in Germany. They did not show up in America or Argentina or Brazil. They were gone. If the Holocaust revisionism is to be taken seriously it must come up with the story for the vanished religious Jews of Poland. But it can't present a credible story of survival because these Jews indeed died during the WWII while in a custody of German occupying forces. Claiming that they did not die is exactly what Holocaust industry wants. The extreme Holocaust denialism serves Zionist interests. Codoh and Wally's of this world are agent of Zionist interests as unwitting useful idiots at best. The questions why did the religious Jews die and that nobody wanted to hear about their death during the WWII is a much bigger story. The revisionists should consider looking into the stories that are being told by Neuterei Karta and Satmar Hassidic Jews. What Eichmann could have told us if he was not executed in Israel? Why the Holocaust narrative was downplayed before his death? This is a crime mystery where we want to find all the culprits and their motives while the Holocaust deniers want us to believe there was no crime, no victim and thus there was no culprit.

    Yawn, the old ‘where did they go’ canard by faker utu*.

    Jews & their “Holocaust Industry” say that ’6M Jews & 5M others’ went to huge mass graves, they claim to know the exact locations of these alleged enormous mass graves, yet they cannot show us the alleged massive human remains. Hapless utu cannot show us either. LOL

    recommended:
    See here, some links about Jews being moved around, & much more.:
    ‘J. Graf and the illogical canard: ‘Where did Jews go then?’ / & more’
    viewtopic.php?f=2&t=8272

    Postwar locations of Jews? Child’s play:
    “That shitty little country” Israel, US, S. America, Australia, wherever Jews are.

    After the war, many Jews stayed in Europe and many others scattered throughout the world, settling in nearly sixty countries. So it was that in the late 1990s the teams put in charge by Steven Spielberg of gathering survivors’ testimonies had to go to nearly SIXTY different countries to record the said “testimonies” on video.

    https://robertfaurisson.blogspot.com/2009/03/alleged-holocaust-of-jews-is-proving.html

    * See the bizarre unhinged shill utu slapped own on his laughable ‘gas chambers’ claim: http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-post-war-france-and-post-war-germany/ comment 429

    http://www.codoh.com

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  145. @Che Guava
    My own sequence, and thanks to Mr. Unz for also noticing most.

    Being at a western university, where Mr. Irving (certainly far more deserving of an honorary doctorate than most holders of that empty title) was 'no-platformed' by a combination of the Zionist and Trotskyist students.

    I did not understand the reasons at the time, but knowing he was a military historian with a great reputation, the offense against freedom of expression really annoyed me.

    Saw a couple of TV documentaries that had info. from Leuchter and Gelmar, among others, in retrospect, think that was the main factor driving the wasp's nest into hyperactivity, the simple fact that the narrative was being questioned on television.

    I read The Painted Bird, then later found out it was a total fake.

    Saw and later read Slaughterhouse 5, later found that Vonnegut, a direct witness of the Dresden atrocity, was essentially forced to write Mother Night as a mea culpa for it.

    Read a couple of the popular Holocaust porn novels from Israel, translated into English, thinking, oh, so sad, then noticing the small-print disclaimers 'This is entirely a work of fiction.'

    As something of a student of military history, I was thinking 'Why were the presumably logical military giving priority to transport for this, when they were having much more pressing needs?' In the end, I was realising it was likely just not true.

    Am glad that you mention the magazine Marco Polo , I enjoyed it in general, though do not have a copy of the banned issue, unfortunately only saw it and briefly scanned at a book shop.

    The reaction, as you say, was crazy, that was the factor pushing me into absolute scepticism.

    Still makes me wonder what power the Holocaustians were using to close the mag., have people fired and resign.

    Perhaps the US embassy.

    Doubt that it was the Israeli, because the campaign of Israeli illegal workers for a 'Holocaust' museum in an outer Tokyo suburb abt. seven yrs. later collapsed when the govt. cracked down on Israeli illegal workers around that time. Nothing to do with the stupid museum project, just because they were doing illegal work and trading, including illegal drugs.

    It was nice to see the posters for their stupid museum project disappear at the time.

    It is worth noting that Schindler’s List is classified as fiction.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Che Guava
    Ghost of Hamlet,

    Do you think I am such a fool as not to already knowing that?

    It is full of lies. I have not and will never be watching it. Reading synopsis is enough.

    Although he pushes the same line in AI, the robots express his fantasies of persecution.

    All of Spielerg's films to pretend any connection with history are low propaganda and debase the source material.

    Who do you think is at the centre of the swirling rumours about top Hollywood having a paedophiliac layer?

    Personally, I have no idea, but the rumours have been around for over thirty years.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  146. @Bucky
    While a lot of it likely is exaggerated, especially the part about Germany using scarce resources to perpetuate the killings while they were losing the war, saying that “only” 1.5 million were killed vs 3.5 million is splitting hairs.

    Given widespread scapegoating occurring before the war, and how Hitler was the leader, it only makes sense that some sort of attitude would take a hold among the bureaucracy in Germany. Though the vast majority likely were simply shot. Because if the goal is extermination of Jews, the most direct way to that goal is shooting, not constructing a camp.

    But if the real number is say, 2 million, that is still a tragedy.

    No one denies that a substantial number of Jews were killed in WW2 (along with many, many more non Jews) or that Hitler and the National Socialists singled out Jews for mistreatment (whether justified or not is an entirely different topic).

    But the real issue is the fact that so much of what we’ve been told about the holocaust is obviously lies and exaggeration and that Jews and Israel have both profited handsomely from these lies and exaggerations.

    This would be like me setting up a GoFundMe for my cancer treatment and then telling you that actually I just have the flu…….but I’m still sick so I should be able to keep the money.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu

    This would be like me setting up a GoFundMe for my cancer treatment and then telling you that actually I just have the flu…….but I’m still sick so I should be able to keep the money.
     
    Excellent analogy.
    , @bucky
    How many people really still care about it? I can't remember the last holocaust movie that came out.

    You know, Hitler's approach and the Nazi party approach was completely the wrong way to go about it. Dualities require an opposing force. To this day, Jews practically worship Hitler, and will deploy his image for local election ads.

    Disputing the reality of the event is kind of a petty thing to do. The approach shouldn't be to dispute the reality, it is to dispute the significance. And amends have been made, and you know what? Many of those amends were legitimate. But they've been made.

    Acknowledge the error. Move on. That is how to go about it.

    Sure, several million were killed in the context of a war. The lesson should be to not to go war so that such deprivations happen. That actually is Pat Buchanan's take on it, and he's got it right. He doesn't dispute that some sort of mass killing occurred. His take is that if the United States hadn't entered WWII, the deprivation which led to the killing of Jews and other minorities would not have occurred.
    , @Wally
    said:
    "No one denies that a substantial number of Jews were killed in WW2"

    Really?
    How were they supposedly "killed"?
    How many are considered "substantial"?
    Where is your proof they were "killed"?

    We're talking about an alleged massive crime, physical proof, forensics required

    www.codoh.com

    , @Amber Dekstris
    "This would be like me setting up a GoFundMe for my cancer treatment and then telling you that actually I just have the flu…….but I’m still sick so I should be able to keep the money."

    ... and we go to jail if we say you have merely the flu rather than cancer.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  147. EugeneGur says:
    @Colin Wright
    '...The problem, according to Bauer, who has debunked the number repeatedly in his writings over the decades, is not that non-Jews were not victims; they were. It is that Wiesenthal’s arbitrarily chosen tally of non-Jewish victims diminishes the centrality to the Nazi ideology of systematically wiping any trace of the Jewish people from the planet...'

    It's also almost comically obvious that the number 'five million' was chosen because it's slightly less than 'six million' -- there were other victims, but Jews were the biggest victims.

    Let's leave aside the moral absurdity of being the 'biggest' victim. First off, perfectly respectable figures have plumped for figures other than six million for the number of Jews killed; didn't Raul Hilberg settle on 5.1 million? Secondly, the number of gentiles killed is almost completely a matter of definition. Figures from German anti-partisan sweeps make it painfully clear many, many outright civilians were killed in them -- just how many can never be known. Do we count Serbians caught in partisan zones? Russian POW's who starved to death? Soldiers simply killed in combat? Only those taken to a camp and gassed? Have five million, have two million, have twenty million -- have almost any number you like. Just adjust your definition to get what you want.

    The 'Five million/six million' figures are a contemptible bit of rhetorical legerdemain. 'You were victims too -- but we're number one.' For what it's worth, in absolute numbers, Jews obviously didn't get to be the Everest of corpse mountains. That dubious honor would go either to Chinese civilians or to the Soviet soldier -- although here Hitler would have to share hangman's honors with Stalin, who did at least as much to get so many killed as Hitler did.

    although here Hitler would have to share hangman’s honors with Stalin, who did at least as much to get so many killed as Hitler did.

    Actually, he didn’t – Stalin, I mean. Stalin was just an apprentice by comparison. According to the latest research, the number of people executed from 1924 to 1953 is slightly above 800,000. The whole number gone through the Gulag system is about 4 millions – and this number includes criminals, collaborators, traitors, not just political prisoners.

    This number was first reported to Khrushchev by the Chief of KGB in 1953. This means that Khrushchev knew the real situation full well when he put out a lie about “12 million executed” to defeat his political opponents.

    The 800,000 is a number well supported by the documents as well as numerous testimonies. Also, the “Memorial” society has been trying for more than a quarter of a century to list every prisoner of Gulag by name, but their list never exceeded 2 millions. Again, the numbers are politically incorrect, so the Western sources keep pretending they doesn’t exist.

    As you see, Hitler did a better job and did it a lot faster, too.

    Read More
    • Agree: Cyrano
    • Replies: @Wally
    said:
    "As you see, Hitler did a better job and did it a lot faster, too."

    So, that's why you cannot present proof? LOL

    This is your big chance. Why do you dodge challenges to your claims?

    We know why.

    It's amazing how simple it is to slap down lies, just ask for proof.

    www.codoh.com
    , @Colin Wright
    'Actually, he didn’t – Stalin, I mean. Stalin was just an apprentice by comparison...'

    I was referring to their cooperative efforts that resulted in the deaths of about sixteen million Russian soldiers from 1941 to 1945. Obviously, Hitler actually killed most of them, but without stunningly profligate and often outright idiotic Russian tactics, he never could have bagged so many.

    In any case, the point is that either that or Chinese civilian deaths represents the greatest single category of human loss of life in World War Two, not the Holocaust.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  148. anarchyst says:
    @for-the-record
    Even as late as 2009 an official at Israel’s Jewish Agency justified laws criminalizing Holocaust Denial by explaining that almost 65 years after the end of the war “there are still hundreds of thousands of living Holocaust survivors"

    2018 update:

    By the year 2035 [!], there will only be about 26,200 Holocaust survivors living in the country [Israel], according to a report the Central Bureau of Statistics released ahead of International Holocaust Remembrance Day on January 27.

    The researchers said that according to forecasts, in 2020 there will be some 142,000 survivors living in Israel and by 2025 this number will have decreased to 92,600 survivors.

    At the end of 2016, there were an estimated 186,500 Holocaust survivors living in Israel, the report said. This compared to 202,600 survivors at the end of 2015.
     
    Note, however, that the definition of "Holocaust survivor" is a very broad one: "A Holocaust survivor is a person who lived in one of the countries occupied by or under the direct influence of the Nazi regime between 1933 and 1945, and/or refugees who were forced to leave their homes due to the Nazi regime".

    Hence the breakdown of the current total of 186,500:

    about 57,500 are survivors from the ghettos, hideouts, labor camps and concentration camps, with 77% of the survivors originating in European countries, a plurality – 32% – from Romania. . .

    An additional 101,000 lived in countries under Nazi rule, of whom 55% were born in North Africa, primarily Morocco, Tunisia and Libya, and some 28,100 were refugees, of whom 76% were born in the Soviet Union, the report found.
     
    https://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/Only-26200-Holocaust-survivors-will-be-living-in-Israel-by-2035-539668

    The latest jewish “holocaust ™” swindle is that of the “holocaust ™ transference syndrome” where (only) jewish “holocaust™ memories are transferred to their children, grandchildren, great grandchildren and even to unrelated persons. This claim by two jewish psychiatrists is gaining traction among jewish “holocaust ™” promoters in order to “keep the dream alive” and to “keep the reparations and shekels flowing”. You see, these children, grandchildren, great grandchildren and other unrelated individuals are also seen as jewish “holocaust ™” survivors, worthy of reparations and special treatment.
    When will it end?
    NEVER…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Colin Wright
    '...You see, these children, grandchildren, great grandchildren and other unrelated individuals are also seen as jewish “holocaust ™” survivors, worthy of reparations and special treatment...'

    As he himself has pointed out, Norm Finkelstein would emphatically qualify to be included in that group.

    He admittedly hasn't received reparations, but he's inarguably been subjected to 'special treatment.'
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  149. Wally says:
    @Colin Wright
    'Holocaust survivor' conjures up images of someone who managed to survive the Warsaw ghetto, or looked into the ovens of Auschwitz.

    As the figures make clear, there were very few of those. Ironically, the very reality of the Holocaust implies that there weren't many genuine 'Holocaust survivors' to begin with, and now, after seventy three years, they must be genuinely few and far between.

    Nope, there are claims of upward to 1,000,000 “survivor$”.
    Many claimed to have ‘witnessed’ the impossible gas chambers’.

    Former inmate, Moshe Peer, recalled a miraculous escape from death as an eleven-year-old in the camp. In a 1993 interview with a Canadian newspaper, the French-born Peer claimed that he “was sent to the camp gas chamber at least six times…maybe children resist better, I don’t know.

    - Gazette, Montreal, Canada, August 5, 1993

    The ’6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers’ are scientifically impossible frauds.
    See the ‘holocaust’ scam debunked here: http://codoh.com
    No name calling, level playing field debate here: http://forum.codoh.com

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  150. bucky says:

    I think you’re going at it all wrong.

    As Greg Johnson has put it, the lesson to be gleaned from the Holocaust is that forced multiculturalism leads to strife which on the extreme end results in atrocities like the Holocaust, and WWII in general, which did ultimately lead to a genocide of ethnic Germans, a tarnishing of the German culture, and a divided country for fifty years. This was their own agency, not anyone else’s.

    The way towards peace is to recognize group differences which exist in people, and live and let live. Good fences make good neighbors Let people make their own choices as to who to associate with, who to do business with. You can’t ever “eliminate racism” rather the goal of a ruler should be to not inflame racism by enacting policies which will lead to backlash.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wally
    Except that until those like Greg Johnson realize that the '6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers' are fake & impossible scams, there will never be peace.

    The impossible 'holocaust' is used by Jews & their leftist shills for just about everything to their advantage.
    And that advantage is why it was conjured up in the first place.

    Thanks.

    www.codoh.com
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  151. FKA Max says: • Website
    @Ron Unz
    Thanks to everyone who had kind words for my long article...or even bothered reading through the whole thing!

    Once again, I'd like to very forcefully reemphasize that I'm *absolutely* no sort of expert on the Holocaust. I'd never really had any serious suspicions until I read Cockburn's columns about Hitchens beliefs a dozen years ago, and only decided to seriously investigate the topic in the mid-2010s. Furthermore, I really doubt I've spent more than just a few weeks total in reading and researching the complex subject. So how could my knowledge possibly compare with that of so many others on both sides, who'd devoted their entire professional lives to the issue?

    When I looked into the Holocaust, I read some of the most prominent Holocaust Denial books and a considerably larger number of debunkers on the other side. As near as I could tell, the most visible writers in that latter camp were Lipstadt and Shermer, and I was very unimpressed with their quality, which certainly impacted my opinion.

    For those interested in spending a little time on the topic, I'd recommend just listening to the two hour YouTube radio interview of Nicholas Kollerstrom that I linked above.

    https://youtu.be/j55VMPlq6Ew?t=630

    He came across as being quite credible to me. For those who agree, I'd recommend buying his short book, that can be read in just a long afternoon. Among other things, he seems to persuasively estimate that the total Jewish deaths at Auschwitz were something like 99% lower than the traditional figure. Maybe he's just a lunatic---who knows? But if you find him credible, I think that would tend to support my strong suspicion that the conventional narrative of the Holocaust is at least "substantially false."

    Thank you very much for all these great articles you have written over the last several months (and before) and your comprehensive research into all these diverse and controversial subject matters, Mr. Unz.

    I read the entire article right way last night after I saw it published. You have an incredible and rare talent to write about complex topics in great detail and at the same time keep your writing flowing and easily comprehensible.

    I’m very glad and grateful that you are dedicating more of your time and talent to writing again.

    P.s.: The formatting of the Unz Review Video homepage is off again, i.e., the side menu is moved to the bottom of the page: http://www.unz.com/video/

    P.p.s.: We had a very detailed discussion on the Holocaust, etc. in the following Unz Review comments threads for any readers and commenters who have not yet made up their mind on the Holocaust, Hitler, etc. and might be interested to get more information:

    Auschwitz: The Dwindling Death Toll

    510.000 persons according to Fritjof Meyer (2002), of whom 356.000 were gassed Jews.[35] – http://vho.org/tr/2003/1/Faurisson17-23.html Archived link: http://archive.is/huN3E

    Various numbers of victims of the Auschwitz concentration camp as claimed by official authorities and historians:
    Second column from the right: the lowest estimate so far by Fritjof Meyer. Right-most column: maximum figure according to revisionist opinion (ca. 150,000). You have the free choice! At most one of these figures can be correct, but all the rest may potentially incite to hatred, and uttering them can lead to criminal prosecution in many European countries. But most importantly, it is considered highly offensive, if not outright illegal in those countries to make such compilations in the first place![40]
    https://www.unz.com/article/against-david-irvings-view-of-hitler/#comment-2391562

    The Wrong Family Holocaust Story: Survival of Polish Jews in Stalin’s Russia

    Source: https://www.unz.com/article/against-david-irvings-view-of-hitler/#comment-2393330

    [MORE]

    More highly interesting information from the same very knowledgeable commenter “michael mills”
    [...]
    According to the 1940 report by Karski mentioned above, there was a transit camp at Belzec in December 1939. Its purpose was to hold Jews who were trying to cross from the German Zone of Occupation into the Soviet (at least 300,000 Jews from the German Zone made that crossing in the months after the German conquest of Poland).

    https://www.unz.com/article/against-david-irvings-view-of-hitler/#comment-2395448

    But similar to Dorpat, Vinnai explains the destructive potential in Hitler’s psyche not so much as a result of early childhood experiences, but rather due to trauma that Hitler had suffered as a soldier in World War I. Not only Hitler, but a substantial part of the German population was affected by such war trauma. Vinnai then leaves the psychoanalytical discourse and comments on social psychological questions, such as how Hitler’s political world view could have emerged from his trauma and how this could appeal to large numbers of people.
    [...]
    Understanding Madmen: A DSM-IV Assessment of Adolf Hitler

    https://www.uccs.edu/Documents/dsegal/DSM-Assessment-of-Hitler-IDR-2007.pdf

    It was an unexpected finding that the PTSD scale was so highly elevated. The consensus mean T score (76) was the highest of all the Axis I scales, and two of the four raters saw Hitler three standard deviations above the normative mean while two others rated him above two standard deviations. Even the rater with the lowest T score was a full standard deviation above the normative mean.

    https://www.unz.com/article/against-david-irvings-view-of-hitler/#comment-2388131

    Read More
    • Replies: @FKA Max
    Typo: I read the entire article right *away* last night after I saw it published.

    This is a very good talk on historical revisionism by Jonathan Bowden:

    Revisionism:
    Left & Right, Hard & Soft

    November 3, 2007


    Now this talk which I’m going to give on Revisionism, Left and Right, hard and soft, could be construed in the future as a dangerous talk, because the Chancellor of contemporary Federal Germany would like to extend, as a particular remit of the constitution/treaty which is being negotiated at the present time, the idea that revisionist laws—or more accurately, anti-revisionist laws—that exist in certain Continental societies which have allegedly “known Fascism” at a particular period, be extended to this society and to all other EU access states, including a great wave of Eastern European countries who of course have acceded to the Union in recent years.
     
    - https://www.counter-currents.com/2012/05/revisionism/ Archived link: http://archive.is/1DNvO
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  152. iuztrg says:

    According to public survey data, even as far back as 1995, some 97% of Americans knew of the Holo.caust, far more than were aware of the Pearl Harbor attack or America’s use of the atomic bombs against Japan, while less than half our citizenry were aware that the Soviet Union had been our wartime ally.

    Yes, well, contrary to ‘The Holöcaust’ they didn’t ‘kill’ ’6 Million of The J€ws’ (who later mysteriously reappeared in Isräel).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  153. DFH says:
    @Sparkon
    This article is a courageous and comprehensive tour de force by Ron Unz.

    Bravo!

    For me, the bludgeon that smashed the Hollow Cost piñata was the authoritative Report of the International Committee of the Red Cross on its Activities during the Second World War, Geneva, 1948, which I had stumbled upon while looking under rocks in the aftermath of 9/11.

    In 1960, I was a student at a Catholic grade school, and I recall one day when the nun seemingly out of nowhere started talking about the Nazi program to gas all the Jews, which was the first I'd heard of it, although by then everyone knew the Nazis were evil, wicked, and mean, and don't you forget it:

    http://images.huffingtonpost.com/2015-08-14-1439521266-2285262-MansWorld5.jpg
    Man’s Story, November 1962, illustration by Norman Saunders

    Mr. Unz should upload the back issues of this. I want to find out what ‘I cracked the Reds’ Lust Capital’ is all about.

    Read More
    • LOL: Dr. Krieger
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  154. annamaria says:
    @Colin Wright
    'Two heavy gravestones upon the perfidious Holocaust biz...'

    You need to learn to think with greater precision. Even when true, most of your cited facts do nothing to disprove the reality of the Holocaust or even make it less probable. How does the fact that many of the Bolshevik leaders were Jewish demonstrate that the Holocaust didn't happen?

    “…most of your cited facts do nothing to disprove the reality of the Holocaust or even make it less probable.”

    – What is unclear about this well-documented fact? –”the Nazi-Zionist economic partnership of the 1930s, with Nazi officials traveling to Palestine as honored Zionist guests and leading Nazi newspapers praising the Zionist enterprise… — Germans wanted the Jews to relocate to Palestine.
    — Also, have you read the above article and comments? For instance, comment 46: “Despite unfair limitations imposed by pro-prosecution judges on the defense team, Zündel’s defense team destroyed the traditional narrative in two separate trials. The prosecution eyewitnesses all fell apart on cross-examination, and Hilberg was forced to admit that he not only relied on a single untrustworthy document for his account on Auschwitz, but that he concealed the problems in his source material from his audience.” — Or you want us to believe the “research” of the hysterical dim-wit Deborah Lipstadt?

    “How does the fact that many of the Bolshevik leaders were Jewish demonstrate that the Holocaust didn’t happen?”
    – The same way the Jewish Lobby has sequestered the documentary “Two Hundred Years Together” to cover the enormous crimes by the Jewish Bolsheviks against Russian people, the tribal zealots have been preventing any research of the foundations of Holo-biz. This alone suggests that the Holo-biz is based on lies and more lies. Considering the persecution of the honest historians by the Jewish bandit-devotees of Holocaustianity and the blatant violation of the First Amendment under the pressure from Jewish zealots, it is now the responsibility of the Holocaustians to present the facts that would support their claims on special victimhood aka Holocaust.

    In short, “One naturally wonders whether all these established scholars [Franz Neumann and Hannah Arendt] may have quietly known something that a naive young doctoral candidate such as Hilberg did not.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  155. @Colin Wright
    '...He came across as being quite credible to me. For those who agree, I’d recommend buying his short book, that can be read in just a long afternoon. Among other things, he seems to persuasively estimate that the total Jewish deaths at Auschwitz were something like 99% lower than the traditional figure...'

    I think it may well be true that Auschwitz's prominence in the Holocaust has been exaggerated.

    There are two reasons for this. First, the Poles and Soviets started out by claiming four million had been exterminated there -- and although that figure's long since been abandoned, we're still stuck with the paradigm of Auschwitz as extermination camp no. 1.

    Secondly, Auschwitz exists. You can go see it. Want to go see Majdanek, Treblinka, Sobibor? They're level fields. There's nothing there. So Auschwitz continues to be where you go to pay your respects, so to speak. As with the MIA/POW controversy, it'd be awkward to change the story at this point. There needs to be a shrine. Auschwitz is it. 'Don't talk shit about Auschwitz!'

    However, and this is important, it doesn't follow from this that the Holocaust didn't occur. It -- or at least most of it -- just happened someplace other than at Auschwitz. That's all.

    Majdanek is still standing. Furthermore, it is very close to the Lublin city center. I reached it a few years ago by taking a city transit bus that barely took 10 minutes from the center. Strange place to locate a supposed extermination center so close to a major city.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  156. Wally says:
    @Bardon Kaldian
    One thing, among propaganda left & right, seems to be neglected: sheer number of prominent Jews (or people of Jewish extraction) who perished during WWII. If we can say, with certainty that:

    1. great mathematician Felix Hausdorff was a victim of "racial" persecution: http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/Biographies/Hausdorff.html

    Bonn University requested that the Hausdorffs be allowed to remain in their home and this was granted. By October 1941 they were forced to wear the "yellow star" and around the end of the year they were informed that they would be sent to Cologne. Bessel-Hagen wrote that he knew this was (see [24] and [6]):-

    ... a preliminary to deportation to Poland. And what one hears concerning the accommodation and treatment of Jews there is completely unimaginable.


    They were not sent to Cologne but in January 1942 they were informed that they were to be interned in Endenich. Together with his wife and his wife's sister, he committed suicide on 26 January. He wrote to a friend on Sunday 25 January (see [24] and [6]):-

    Dear Friend Wollstein
    By the time you receive these lines, we three will have solved the problem in another way - in the way which you have continually attempted to dissuade us. ...
    What has been done against the Jews in recent months arouses well-founded anxiety that we will no longer be allowed to experience a bearable situation. ...
    Forgive us, that we still cause you trouble beyond death; I am convinced that you will do what you are able to do (and which perhaps is not very much). Forgive us also our desertion! We wish you and all our friends will experience better times
    Yours faithfully
    Felix Hausdorff


    On the night of Sunday 25 January all three took barbiturates. Both Hausdorff and his wife Charlotte were dead by the morning of the 26 January. Edith, Charlotte's sister, survived for a few days in a coma before dying.
     
    2. Chekhov's fiance Dunya Efros was gassed in Nazi CC, after being handed over by Vichy government. She was in her 80s. See, for instance, Rayfiled's celebrated bio: http://gen.lib.rus.ec/book/index.php?md5=490A9DAACAF1878F0798ACB15CA67D4D

    3. Kafka's sisters all perished.

    https://www.butterfliesintheghetto.com/?tag=franz-kafkas-family

    Another fact that is seldom mentioned about Franz Kafka is that his closest sister ended up in Terezin. Franz’s three younger siblings, his sisters Ellie, Valli, and Ottilie all died in the Holocaust.
     
    4.Freud's sisters

    http://www.holocaustresearchproject.org/ghettos/freud.html

    Freud’s Sisters and the Holocaust



    Freud's sisters

    Three of Freud’s sisters Marie, Pauline Winternitz, and Rosa Graf-Freud were deported to Treblinka, on Transport Number BQ on the 23 September 1942 and murdered, in the gas chambers.

    An eyewitness has recorded that one of Freud’s sisters, possibly Rosa, approached SS- Untersturmfuhrer Kurt Franz on the ramp and asked “to be given lighter walk on account of her poor health.”

    Franz “assured her that her arrival in Treblinka was a mistake, in view of her poor health and that as soon as she had had her bath, she would be put on the first available train back to Vienna. “

    Freud lost another sister Adolfine who was born in 1862 in Vienna. Deported to Theresienstadt she died on the 5 February 1943 from internal haemorrhaging.
     
    ...

    So-if those "famous" (or relatives & acquaintances of the "famous"..) simply vanished into the night, and we know about them- what about vastly numerous "others" ?

    I am against all brainwashing & taboos, but hard-core holo-deniers, whichever their motives, seem to me a bunch of lunatics not worthy to be bothered about.

    We see no proof they were murdered. I can cite claims of and “eyewitnesses” to witchcraft & sea monsters too. That hardly makes them true. Science over propaganda & religion,

    Did the occasional Jew commit suicide? Maybe & so what? Mental illness has always been a problem.

    But then “Holocau$t Industry” Jews say that they all went to immense mass graves and that that the human remain exist in known locations, but those remains do not exist. Therefore what you claim are necessarily lies. Pretty basic stuff, really.

    We note that you do not name the alleged “eyewitnesses”, nor do you tell us exactly what they said, where & when. Telling.

    You mentioned Treblinka:
    Alleged location of Treblinka mass graves / remains of 900,000 Jews according to Treblinka officials, no alleged remains can be shown
    photo from ‘Surviving Treblinka’, by Samuel Willenberg.It is captioned: “crane lifting corpses destined for cremation”.
    Does anyone see any “corpses”? LOL

    http://www.codoh.com

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    It’s not lifting anything. It’s dumping a load
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  157. Truth says:

    The ridiculous Holocaust myth was not a war on Khazars by the Germans, but a war on Germans by the Khazars.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  158. Antiwar7 says:
    @Che Guava
    Mea culpa for the error, I have never read Mother Night, only seen the film, on checking, film and book of it are very different.

    I am always trying to not make such errors, but bad assumption on my part. I read all of his novels of that time (never at the time), except that one.

    So thank you, and also to utu for the correction. Am feeling terrible for the error.

    Don’t feel bad! We all make mistakes, including me. We should always remember that. Yours was very minor.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  159. utu says:
    @Johnny Smoggins
    No one denies that a substantial number of Jews were killed in WW2 (along with many, many more non Jews) or that Hitler and the National Socialists singled out Jews for mistreatment (whether justified or not is an entirely different topic).

    But the real issue is the fact that so much of what we've been told about the holocaust is obviously lies and exaggeration and that Jews and Israel have both profited handsomely from these lies and exaggerations.

    This would be like me setting up a GoFundMe for my cancer treatment and then telling you that actually I just have the flu.......but I'm still sick so I should be able to keep the money.

    This would be like me setting up a GoFundMe for my cancer treatment and then telling you that actually I just have the flu…….but I’m still sick so I should be able to keep the money.

    Excellent analogy.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  160. Wally says:
    @syonredux

    one explanation immediately suggests itself. (Whether it is anywhere near the mark I have no idea.)

    Perhaps many Germans were not much worried about assimilated German Jews, especially if they were seen as valuable to the military and if unconnected to Bolshevism. Perhaps German hatred was directed mainly at East European Jews.
     

    I think that there is something to that notion. German Jews were commonly seen as superior to the Ostjuden . You can see something of this attitude in a letter* written by GeneralKommissar for Belorussia Wilhem Kube concerning the treatment of German Jews:

    I wish to ask you personally for an official directive for the conduct of the civilian administration toward the Jews deported from Germany to Belorussia. Among these Jews are men who fought at the front [during World War I] and have the Iron Cross, First and Second Class, war invalids, half-Aryans, even three-quarter Aryans.
     

    Up to now only 6,000 to 7,000 Jews have arrived, of the 25,000 who were expected. I am not aware what has become of the others. In the course of several official visits to the ghetto I noted that among these Jews, who differ from the Russian Jews in their personal cleanliness, there are also skilled workers capable of doing five times as much in a day as Russian Jews.
     

    On my own responsibility I will not give the SD any instructions with regard to the treatment of these people, although certain units of the Wehrmacht and the police already have an eye on the possessions of the Jews from the Reich, and has also confiscated various other things. I am certainly a hard [man] and willing to help solve the Jewish question, but people people who come from our own cultural sphere just are not the same as the brutish hordes in this place. Is the slaughter to be carried out by the Lithuanians and Letts, who are themselves rejected by the population here? I couldn't do it. I beg you to give clear directives [in this matter], with due consideration for the good name of our Reich and our Party, in order that the necessary action can be taken in the most humane manner.
     
    http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/orgs/german/einsatzgruppen/esg/trials/profiles/kubeletter.html


    *Yes, Ron, I know that you hate it when I quote anything......

    Naturally we see no original, authentic German document, only English text by who knows who.

    Try that in a legit court of law.

    The Kube canard crushed here:

    https://codoh.com/search/?sorting=relevance&q=kube

    and:
    ‘Irrefutable Response’ Falls Flat, book review by John Weir

    https://codoh.com/library/document/2590/

    http://www.codoh.com

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    The Kube canard crushed here:
     
    What exactly is the "Kube canard"? And how exactly has it been crushed?

    Naturally we see no original, authentic German document, only English text by who knows who.

    Try that in a legit court of law.
     
    Have people questioned the authenticity of the letter?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  161. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Wally
    We see no proof they were murdered. I can cite claims of and "eyewitnesses" to witchcraft & sea monsters too. That hardly makes them true. Science over propaganda & religion,

    Did the occasional Jew commit suicide? Maybe & so what? Mental illness has always been a problem.

    But then "Holocau$t Industry" Jews say that they all went to immense mass graves and that that the human remain exist in known locations, but those remains do not exist. Therefore what you claim are necessarily lies. Pretty basic stuff, really.

    We note that you do not name the alleged "eyewitnesses", nor do you tell us exactly what they said, where & when. Telling.

    You mentioned Treblinka:
    Alleged location of Treblinka mass graves / remains of 900,000 Jews according to Treblinka officials, no alleged remains can be shown
    https://www.scrapbookpages.com/Poland/Treblinka/Treblinka29.jpg

    photo from ‘Surviving Treblinka’, by Samuel Willenberg.
    http://207.232.26.141/D2/Albums/196-210/200_43.JPG
    It is captioned: “crane lifting corpses destined for cremation”.
    Does anyone see any “corpses”? LOL

    www.codoh.com

    It’s not lifting anything. It’s dumping a load

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  162. Wally says:
    @bucky
    I think you're going at it all wrong.

    As Greg Johnson has put it, the lesson to be gleaned from the Holocaust is that forced multiculturalism leads to strife which on the extreme end results in atrocities like the Holocaust, and WWII in general, which did ultimately lead to a genocide of ethnic Germans, a tarnishing of the German culture, and a divided country for fifty years. This was their own agency, not anyone else's.

    The way towards peace is to recognize group differences which exist in people, and live and let live. Good fences make good neighbors Let people make their own choices as to who to associate with, who to do business with. You can't ever "eliminate racism" rather the goal of a ruler should be to not inflame racism by enacting policies which will lead to backlash.

    Except that until those like Greg Johnson realize that the ’6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers’ are fake & impossible scams, there will never be peace.

    The impossible ‘holocaust’ is used by Jews & their leftist shills for just about everything to their advantage.
    And that advantage is why it was conjured up in the first place.

    Thanks.

    http://www.codoh.com

    Read More
    • Replies: @bucky
    No, Greg Johnson simply is looking beyond Nazism.

    Trying to minimize the crimes and missteps of the Nazi regime is what this is all about.

    The history of the European peoples is not defined by Nazism. Nazism is one extreme outlier, that was caused by an extreme confluence of events. It is not some alien infestation or whatever, which is how it is depicted in so much of popular culture today.

    But the extreme of "Martian Nazis" is also met with the extreme of "innocent Nazis" which is what is going on here too much.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  163. syonredux says:
    @Wally
    Naturally we see no original, authentic German document, only English text by who knows who.

    Try that in a legit court of law.

    The Kube canard crushed here:
    https://codoh.com/search/?sorting=relevance&q=kube
    and:
    'Irrefutable Response' Falls Flat, book review by John Weir
    https://codoh.com/library/document/2590/

    www.codoh.com

    The Kube canard crushed here:

    What exactly is the “Kube canard”? And how exactly has it been crushed?

    Naturally we see no original, authentic German document, only English text by who knows who.

    Try that in a legit court of law.

    Have people questioned the authenticity of the letter?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Henry's Cat
    I believe he refers to existence of a communication between Kube and Himmler: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilhelm_Kube#SS_career

    Hardcore revisionists like Hannover won't accept any evidence for the mass killings of civilians by German forces (outside, perhaps, reprisal shootings), and so must dispute all the documentary evidence for the Einsatzgruppen, police battalions, etc. on the Eastern front.

    Wiser revisionists concentrate on the gas chamber stories.
    , @Wally
    Read what I posted.

    Yes, people have questioned the authenticity of this 'letter'.

    There is no real German document for this, and that is the case with so much of the claimed 'documentation' that simply hasn't been falsely 'translated' into English.
    Crap was just brazenly forged, there's ton of examples.

    Bring real docs. if you got em.

    www.codoh.com
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  164. Wally says:
    @EugeneGur

    although here Hitler would have to share hangman’s honors with Stalin, who did at least as much to get so many killed as Hitler did.
     
    Actually, he didn't - Stalin, I mean. Stalin was just an apprentice by comparison. According to the latest research, the number of people executed from 1924 to 1953 is slightly above 800,000. The whole number gone through the Gulag system is about 4 millions - and this number includes criminals, collaborators, traitors, not just political prisoners.

    This number was first reported to Khrushchev by the Chief of KGB in 1953. This means that Khrushchev knew the real situation full well when he put out a lie about "12 million executed" to defeat his political opponents.

    The 800,000 is a number well supported by the documents as well as numerous testimonies. Also, the "Memorial" society has been trying for more than a quarter of a century to list every prisoner of Gulag by name, but their list never exceeded 2 millions. Again, the numbers are politically incorrect, so the Western sources keep pretending they doesn't exist.

    As you see, Hitler did a better job and did it a lot faster, too.

    said:
    “As you see, Hitler did a better job and did it a lot faster, too.”

    So, that’s why you cannot present proof? LOL

    This is your big chance. Why do you dodge challenges to your claims?

    We know why.

    It’s amazing how simple it is to slap down lies, just ask for proof.

    http://www.codoh.com

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  165. bucky says:
    @Johnny Smoggins
    No one denies that a substantial number of Jews were killed in WW2 (along with many, many more non Jews) or that Hitler and the National Socialists singled out Jews for mistreatment (whether justified or not is an entirely different topic).

    But the real issue is the fact that so much of what we've been told about the holocaust is obviously lies and exaggeration and that Jews and Israel have both profited handsomely from these lies and exaggerations.

    This would be like me setting up a GoFundMe for my cancer treatment and then telling you that actually I just have the flu.......but I'm still sick so I should be able to keep the money.

    How many people really still care about it? I can’t remember the last holocaust movie that came out.

    You know, Hitler’s approach and the Nazi party approach was completely the wrong way to go about it. Dualities require an opposing force. To this day, Jews practically worship Hitler, and will deploy his image for local election ads.

    Disputing the reality of the event is kind of a petty thing to do. The approach shouldn’t be to dispute the reality, it is to dispute the significance. And amends have been made, and you know what? Many of those amends were legitimate. But they’ve been made.

    Acknowledge the error. Move on. That is how to go about it.

    Sure, several million were killed in the context of a war. The lesson should be to not to go war so that such deprivations happen. That actually is Pat Buchanan’s take on it, and he’s got it right. He doesn’t dispute that some sort of mass killing occurred. His take is that if the United States hadn’t entered WWII, the deprivation which led to the killing of Jews and other minorities would not have occurred.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    There’s a new movie. Operation Finale about the kidnapping and trial of Euchmann.
    , @Wally
    said:
    "Sure, several million were killed in the context of a war. The lesson should be to not to go war so that such deprivations happen. That actually is Pat Buchanan’s take on it, and he’s got it right. He doesn’t dispute that some sort of mass killing occurred. His take is that if the United States hadn’t entered WWII, the deprivation which led to the killing of Jews and other minorities would not have occurred."

    'Several million killed'? LOL

    Where's the proof for that? Simple question.

    The "Holocau$t Industry" in court:
    'Please your honor, there really are remains of millions buried in huge mass graves, we know where the mass graves are to this day, ... but, but, well, umm, we can't show the court the human remains. You must trust us, we're Zionists.'

    www.codoh.com

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments