Year: 1995

Allied Atrocities: We boiled the flesh off enemy skulls

Kenneth V. Iserson “Japanese skulls were much-envied trophies among U.S. Marines in the Pacific theater during World War II. The practice of collecting them apparently began after the bloody conflict on Guadalcanal, when the troops set up the skulls as ornaments or totems atop poles as a type of warning. The Marines boiled the skulls…

Allies: Don't Let Our Soldiers Die!

Yes, says Victor Ostrovsky, a former Israeli secret agent. In a new book, By Way of Deception: A Devastating Insider's Portrait of the Mossad, Mr. Ostrovsky says the Israelis had advance notice of the suicide attack that killed 241 Marines in Beirut in October 1983 but withheld the information from the United States in the…

American Atrocities in Germany

I American investigators at the U. S. Court in Dachau, Germany, used the following methods to obtain confessions: Beatings and brutal kickings. Knocking out teeth and breaking jaws. Mock trials. Solitary confinement. Posturing as priests. Very limited rations. Spiritual deprivation. Promises of acquittal. Complaints concerning these third degree methods were received by Secretary of the…

Auschwitz: A Re-evaluation (1996)

Official Estimates of the Number of Victims Auschwitz was both the largest and most notorious of the Nazi concentration camps. Auschwitz is central to the literature on the Holocaust and Nazi crimes. At one time, it was claimed that as many as four million people were killed in the gas chambers at Auschwitz. Through the…

Auschwitz: myths and facts

Summary The Auschwitz extermination story originated as wartime propaganda. Now, more than 40 years after the end of the Second World War, it is time to take another, more objective look at this highly polemicized chapter of history. The Auschwitz legend is the core of the Holocaust story. If hundreds of thousands of Jews were…

Context and Perspective in the “Holocaust” Controversy

Deutsch | FrançaisPresented at the IHR's 1982 Revisionist Conference Introduction When in the discussion of some subject we criticize somebody because “he can't see the forest for the trees,” we refer to a special sort of intellectual failing. We do not mean that the object of our criticism is incompetent or that his views on…

End of content

End of content