The Holocaust consists of three basic elements: (1) Approximately six million Jews were deliberately killed. (2) These killings were part of a state sponsored program on the part of the Third Reich whose ultimate goal was the total eradication of the Jewish people. (3) The bulk of these murders took place in special death camps where the principal mechanism of execution was the homicidal gas chamber that utilized Zyclon B, a commercial pesticide whose active ingredient was hydrogen cyanide.
That the Third Reich possessed the technological and administrative means to carry out such a vast amount of killing there is little doubt. The Soviet Union with significantly inferior assets in these areas was able to kill far greater numbers of human beings. Furthermore, the armies of the Third Reich succeeded in killing at least ten million of its heavily armed military opponents in the course of World War II. Hence the killing of six million unarmed civilians should not have presented any unique problems to such an industrially advanced and bureaucratically efficient state as Nazi Germany, on the contrary, it would have been far easier.
My doubts about the Holocaust are not centered on whether it could have happened but whether it did happen. In fact many of the doubts that I have are a direct consequence of the fact that I have no doubt that it actually could have happened…but certainly not in the ways that have been described thus far in the ”official” literature.
It is part of the Western tradition in legal, scientific and intellectual matters that those asserting something have the burden of proof and that those who disagree are not required to provide evidence. This tradition however has been turned on its head regarding the Holocaust since the ”historical truth” of the Holocaust has been posited in advance. Furthermore, even to express doubts can result in criminal penalties in at least 11 so-called democratic countries and the ruining of lives and careers in numerous others.
Listed below are some of the ”problems ” I have with the Holocaust. Should these be cleared up it would go a long way toward my accepting it …they are in no particular order.
1) Why did Elie Wiesel and countless other Jews survive the Holocaust if it was the intention of the Third Reich to eliminate every Jew they got there hands on? Elie was a prisoner for several years; other Jews survived even longer. Most of these ”survivors” were ordinary people who did not have any unique expertise that the Germans could have exploited for their war effort. There was no logical reason for them to be kept alive. The very existence of more than a million survivors even today, some sixty years later, contradicts one of the basic components of the Holocaust i.e. that the Germans had a policy to eliminate every Jew they got their hands on.
2) Why is their no mention of the Holocaust in Churchill’s six volume History of the Second World War or the wartime memoirs of either De Gaulle or Eisenhower or any of the other lesser luminaries who wrote about the Second World War. Keep in mind all these were written years after the war ended and thus after the Holocaust had been allegedly proven by the Nuremberg Trials? With regard to the Holocaust, the silence of these ” cognoscenti ” is deafening!
3) What was an inmate infirmary (and a brothel) doing in Auschwitz if in fact it was a death camp?
4) Why would the Germans round up Jews from their far flung empire, thereby tying up large numbers of personnel and rolling stock, while fighting a world war on two fronts to deliver people to ”death camps” hundreds of miles away who were then executed upon arrival…wouldn’t a bullet on the spot have appealed to legendary German sense of efficiency?
5) Why after sixty years have historians been unable to come up with a single German document that points to a Holocaust? Should we believe the likes of Raul Hilberg that in the place of written orders there was an “incredible meeting of the minds” by the literally tens of thousands of people who would have had to coordinate their actions in order to carry out an undertaking of this magnitude.
Prof. Hilberg’s exact quote:
“But what began in 1941 was a process of destruction not planned in advance, not organized centrally by any agency. There was no blueprint and there was no budget for destructive measures. They [these measures] were taken step by step, one step at a time. Thus came about not so much a plan being carried out, but an incredible meeting of minds, a consensus – mind reading by a far-flung bureaucracy.”
Let us note again those final words: “an incredible meeting of minds, a consensus – mind reading by a far-flung bureaucracy.”
6) How come it is still insisted upon that six million Jews were killed when the official Jewish death toll at Auschwitz, the flagship of the Holocaust gulag, has been reduced from an immediate post war figure of 3 million, to a figure of somewhat less than one million? Why do many respond to this observation by saying, ” what’s the difference whether it’s six million or one million”. The answer is that the difference is five million. Another difference is that saying so can get you three years in an Austrian jail…just ask British historian David Irving!
7) All of Germany’s wartime codes were compromised including the one used to send daily reports from Auschwitz to Berlin. The transcripts of these messages make no mention of mass executions or even remotely suggest a genocidal program in progress. Furthermore it has been insisted that the Germans used a kind of euphemistic code when discussing their extermination program of the Jews e.g. final solution, special treatment, resettlement, etc. Why was it necessary for them to use such coded euphemisms when talking to one another unless they thought their codes had been cracked by the Allies?
8) The water table at Auschwitz lies a mere 18 inches below the surface which makes claims of huge burning pits for the disposal of tens of thousands of victims untenable.
9) Initially claims were made that mass executions in homicidal gas chambers had taken place in camps located within the boundaries of the old Reich e.g. Dachau, Bergen-Belsen. ”Evidence” to that effect was every bit as compelling as what was offered for other camps, located in occupied Poland, yet without explanation in the early sixties we were told that this was not the case and that all the ”death camps” were located in the East i.e. Poland outside (some would say conveniently) of the probing eyes of western scholars.
10) No one has been able to reconcile the eyewitness accounts that personnel entered the gas chambers after twenty minutes without any protective gear and the fact that Zyclon B was a “time release” fumigant that would have had a lethal capability for at least another twenty-four hours. And that even after twenty-four hours the corpses would have themselves remained sufficiently contaminated by the hydrogen cyanide gas that they would have had the capacity to kill anyone who touched them who were not wearing protective gear.
11) Why do we no longer hear claims that the Germans manufactured soap, lamp shades and riding britches from the bodies of dead Jews…could it be that in the light of modern forensics and DNA knowledge these claims are totally untenable?
12) Why do we no longer hear claims that huge numbers of Jews were exterminated in massive steam chambers or electrocuted on special grids…”evidence” of this was presented at Nuremberg…evidence that sent men to the gallows.
14) Elie Wiesel has been described as “the Apostle of Remembrance” yet in his memoir, “Night” which deals with his stay at Auschwitz he makes no mention of the now infamous homicidal gas chambers. Isn’t this a bit like one of the Gospels making no mention of the Cross?
15) Virtually every survivor who was examined at Auschwitz says that he or she was examined by the infamous Dr. Mengele.
16) According to survivor testimony, hundreds of thousands of Jews were executed at Treblinka and then buried in mass graves in the surrounding area. Why is it that extensive sonar probing of these burial grounds reveals that this alleged final resting place for Holocaust victims has remained undisturbed since at least the last ice age?
17) ”Proof” of the Holocaust rest primarily on survivor testimony; there’s little if any hard evidence. The best of this has been described by Jean Claude Pressac as merely ”criminal traces”. Even Judge Grey who presided at the Irving-Lipstadt Trial commented that he was surprised the evidence pointing to the Holocaust was “extremely thin”. To paraphrase Prof. Arthur Butz of Northwestern University, ”a crime of this magnitude would have left a mountain of evidence”…where is it? There was more hard evidence against OJ Simpson at his trial and he was FOUND INNOCENT!
18) Why has Holocaust Revisionism been criminalized in at least eleven countries…what other historic truth needs the threat of prison or the destruction of one’s career to maintain itself. Should someone be sent to prison for expressing skepticism about the official Chinese claim that they suffered thirty-five million dead in World War II.
19) Why do the court historians insist that “denying the Holocaust” is like denying slavery or saying the earth is flat when it is nothing of the sort. The leading Revisionists are first rate scholars who hold advanced degrees from the world’s leading universities. Is there anyone comparable among those who say the world is flat or that slavery never existed?
20) Promoters of the Holocaust have expressed concerns about the remembering the Holocaust once the last survivors die. Why haven’t Civil War historians expressed similar concerns since the last survivor of that conflict died in 1959?
21) Survivors of the Holocaust have testified that smoke billowed from the crematoriums as they consumed the bodies of murdered victims…some eyewitnesses even claimed they could detect national origins by the color of the smoke. How can this be reconciled with the fact that properly operating crematoriums do not produce smoke of any color?
22) According to the official version of the Holocaust hundreds of thousands of Hungarian Jews were rounded up in mid 1944 and sent to Auschwitz where most were gassed immediately upon arrival and their bodies were disposed of by burning in huge open air pits using railroad ties and gasoline. Why is that there is no evidence of these huge funerary pyres in the high resolution surveillance photos taken by Allied aircraft who were over flying the camp on a daily basis during this time period. Furthermore, why have no remains been found, since open pit burning, even when gasoline is used, generates insufficient heat to totally consume a body?
23) All of the liberated camps were littered with corpses; is there a single autopsy report or any other forensic evidence that shows that even a single one of these deaths was a consequence of poison gas?
24) The death toll for the Holocaust relies exclusively on population statistics provided by Jewish sources; has any independent demographic study been produced that shows that approximately six million Jews were “missing” at the end of the war? ANSWER: Yes and No! WHY? You can go to jail in Israel and 11 European nations if you do such research and have a different answer. I am not kidding! Ask the Max Planck scientist Germar Rudolf. (Do Google search for imprisoned THOUGHT CRIMINAL Germar Rudolf).
25) Why do the wartime inspection reports of camps made by the International Red Cross contain no references to mass executions…it strains credulity that such monumental crimes could be hidden. The only explanations are that either these crimes were not occurring or that the Red Cross was complicit in a cover up.
26) Why has there been no effort to respond to the Leuchter Report?
27) “The Holocaust was technologically possible because it happened “. Why is this intellectually bankrupt argument, which turns scholarship on its head, considered by the promoters of the Holocaust as historical truth, considered a sufficient response to the mounting Revisionist evidence to the contrary?
Note for item 27: “34 reputable historians” in 1979 paid and published an advertisement in Le Monde one of the most monumental pieces of nonsense of French academic life:
“It is not necessary to ask oneself how, technically, such a mass murder was possible. It was technically possible because it happened.”
28) What other historical truths rely to the extent that the Holocaust does on so-called “eye witness” testimony…and why have none of these witnesses ever been cross examined?
29) According to the official version of the Holocaust, the Jews remained ignorant of their fate until the very end so skillful were their Nazis murderers in deceiving their victims. How can this ignorance be reconciled with the fact that the Jews have historically been as a group, the most literate and highly informed people on the planet with legendary access to the highest echelons of government.