Response to Simon Wiesenthal Center's Not So Breitbart Report

Published: 1998-01-01

In the Point-Counterpoint format that follows, comments from SWC are shown in bold type. Roger Bartlett's replies are shown in plain text. For further commentary, check out this link to z Notes, which discusses the Center's attempts to censor Net content and also discusses their finances.

Responses to Revisionist Arguments

The following questions are routinely posed by "Historical Revisionists" in their efforts to deny the existence of the Holocaust. The responses to these arguments were prepared by Center Researcher Aaron Breitbart

  1. The Holocaust was merely Allied propaganda.
  2. There is no proof that the Holocaust occurred.
  3. The estimates of Jewish losses during the Holocaust are greatly exaggerated. There were never even 6 million Jews in Germany.
  4. Didn't the International Committee for the Red Cross report that only 300,000 people had perished in the German concentration camps, not all of them Jews?
  5. Nazi policy towards the Jews was emigration, not extermination.
  6. Not a single document has been found with Hitler's signature ordering the extermination of the Jews.
  7. Zyklon B was a fumigant. It wasn't a practical agent for mass murder.
  8. If Zyklon B is so highly toxic, how could bodies have been removed from gas chambers only minutes after execution?
  9. Zyklon B is so highly flammable that a single spark from the ventilation system or the immense heat created by the nearby furnaces would have resulted in an explosion.
  10. There is no proof whatsoever that the Nazis ever murdered anyone in gas chambers.
  11. American engineer and execution 'expert', Fred Leuchter, proved that the 'so-called' gas chambers at Auschwitz could not have been used for their 'alleged' purpose.
  12. Didn't Simon Wiesenthal himself state that there were no extermination camps in Germany?
  13. For years, the death statistics at Auschwitz-Birkenau had been put at well over 3 million. Recently, however, a memorial plaque at the former death camp estimates Jewish losses closer to 1 million. Shouldn't the new figures imply that Jewish losses for the Holocaust are much lower than previously thought?

1. The Holocaust was merely Allied propaganda.

The Allies actually ignored reports filtering out of Europe about the mass murder of Jews by the Nazis and their collaborators. Even when convinced of their veracity, they tried to withhold the information from the public. On August 8, 1942, Dr. Gerhart Riegner, the representative of the World Jewish Congress in Geneva, Switzerland, asked the U.S. legation in Switzerland to relay information about Germany's plan to exterminate all European Jews under its control to American Jewish leader, Rabbi Stephen S. Wise. The information had been given to Riegner by a highly-placed German official. Instead of relaying the message, the U.S. State Department actually withheld it and ordered its Swiss legation not to relay any such reports in the future.

In the same year, a member of the Polish underground Jan Karski, had secretly been smuggled into a German concentration camp in Poland. Making his way out, he was sent to London by the Underground to deliver his report on the horrors he witnessed. Karski spoke with both Roosevelt and Churchill. History records, however, that Karski's pleas were largely dismissed.

One need only check the major newspapers of the period to realize how little attention was paid to Nazi atrocities. If the Holocaust were merely "propaganda," why did the Allies go to such lengths to downplay it?

1. Contrary to what Mr. Breitbart writes, there was indeed a proliferation of Allied propaganda during the Second World War concerning Nazi atrocities, real and alleged.

Fully detailed reports were issued in the Jewish publication, Contemporary Jewish Record, throughout the course of the war, as well as in others. One may research these reports in such books as the "Black Book of Polish Jewry" and similar publications endorsed by the Polish Government in Exile. In fact, scores of atrocity reports surfaced and filtered throughout the world due to the efforts of this same agency, which received valuable support from the British government. For Mr. Breitbart to contend that these and similar reports were ignored or disbelieved is surely naive. These reports were issued with the express intention of inflaming other nations against Germany and as such received wide public distribution.

For those interested enough to enquire, a visit to a public library may prove useful. Check the issues of Time magazine for the years 1944-1945. One of these issues has a cover portrait of SS Reichsfuehrer Heinrich Himmler which displays a mound of emaciated corpses piled up like cordwood in the background. It makes one wonder if maybe the Allies had something in mind by splashing such horrors on the cover page of a prestigious magazine early on. The specific issue I refer the reader to is dated October 11, 1943, volume XLII. Others would follow. To imply that Allied propaganda played little or no part in the creation of the holocaust myth is a myth in itself.

2. There is no proof that the Holocaust occurred.

No crime in history has been as well-documented as the Holocaust. Proof of the Holocaust is multi-faceted. It is demonstrated by a myriad of documents, the majority of them Nazi-authored, captured by Allied troops before the Germans had a chance to destroy them. Included are detailed reports of mass shootings and gassings. Some 3,000 documents on the destruction of Europe's Jewish community by the Nazis were, in fact, presented by the prosection before war crimes tribunals at Nuremberg.

The first-hand testimony of survivors who lived through the horrors of the death camps as well as the reports and confessions by the perpetrators leave little doubt as to the nature of Hitler's "Final Solution." Horrifying films and photos of killing operations and their aftermath can only begin to give us a picture of the extent of Nazi bestiality; as do the reports of Allied Generals and troops who were sickened by what they saw at sites of slaughter they had just liberated.

Interestingly enough, Nazi war crimes suspects who stood trial in the post war years for their misdeeds never claimed that the crimes of which they were accused were fictional. They instead argued that they were "only following orders."

The evidence is, in fact, so overwhelming that on October 9, 1981, Judge Thomas T. Johnson of the California Superior Court, took judicial notice of the Holocaust ruling that, "The Holocaust is not reasonably subject to dispute. It is capable of immediate and accurate determination by resort to resources of reasonable indisputable accuracy. It is simply a fact."

2. My first response is, how does one define "The Holocaust"? Is my definition the same as his, and does he even have one? Exterminationists have been playing volley-ball with this definition business for years. Revisionists are branded as "deniers", rather than honest questioners without agenda when their questions become either too numerous or difficult to answer. Yet there is no map or even description for this verbal mine-field. At what specific point does questioning of any given item elevate the questioner to the nebulous realm of "Holocaust denial"? Is there a politically correct or incorrect definition for this term, which only came into use decades after the formal end of WWII? Is there any one definition for it at all?

If by "The Holocaust" one means to aver that the National Socialist Government embarked upon a cold blooded mass murder program utilizing gas chambers to kill people simply because they were Jews—then I must emphatically disagree with that particular point. To date I have found absolutely no evidence that this was the case—and I have researched this subject extensively for over twenty years. Not ONE "gas chamber" has ever been produced to support this accusation. An accusation, however shocking, does not indicate guilt, and in examining the so-called evidence for The Holocaust, we should apply the same criteria as would be acceptable in a court of law. The trials at Nuremberg were not conducted within this framework, consequently the documents produced there are virtually useless from a legal standpoint. However, they do have value as a research tool to indicate the degree of bias on the part of those conducting this sham proceeding. One need not argue that confessions obtained by threats, physical beatings, torture, blackmail, and other such methods used by the Nuremberg inquisitors completely sidestepped the parameters of legality. It would also be worthwhile to establish the identities of these inquisitors.

Mr. Breitbart refers to "myriads" of documents, mostly "Nazi" authored, in an attempt to prove his case. I simply ask him to produce just ONE document that will prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Jews were done to death in gas chambers. Revisionists have been asking for this proof for decades, yet not a shred of evidence has ever been offered aside from conflicting "eyewitness" testimony and "documents" widely open to a variety of interpretations. Invariably, Mr. Breitbart refers to "thousands" of documents presented at Nuremberg, as well as refering to "first hand testimony of eyewitnesses" and "horrifying films and photos" of killing operations. Where are these photos today, so the public may examine them, and what is their original source? In fact, thousands of "documents" were indeed introduced at Nuremberg, the bulk of them prepared by the four nations conducting the show trial, with requirements for verification specifically excluded by the charter authorizing the proceedings. They were accepted as facts of law simply on the basis of their being presented by the victorious governments. When confronted with a document, researchers should always obtain satisfactory answers to the following questions before accepting them as valid pieces of evidence:

  1. What is the origin of the document?
  2. Is it an original or a facsimile?
  3. By whom is the document signed, and is the signature legible?
  4. Is the document signed in full or just initialed?
  5. Under what circumstances was the document found?
  6. Who found the document?
  7. How did it come to be where it is today?
  8. Are there other documents in existence to support its validity?
  9. Was the author of the document available for cross-examination in court?

I ask again: How can we determine that Mr. Breitbart's photos and reports are all genuine? For those interested enough to question, simply visit your nearest library and peruse a few photographic volumes on The Holocaust. Does every picture tell a story - a COMPLETE story, or just a fraction of a second thereof? Ask yourself, "Who took this photograph"?, and "How did this photo come into existence?" One will usually read as a source, "Bettman Archives", "Imperial War Museum" or some other such source, but where is the ORIGINAL and under what circumstances was it taken? A half-dozen erudite books have been written about this very subject, but Mr. Breitbart does not quote from them because they contradict his opinion. If one should become too inquisitive and attempt to research this problem on one's own, then be forewarned, for you will inevitably run into the old brick wall of non-verification. Try it for yourself. The proof of the pudding is in the tasting.

The proofs offered by Mr. Breitbart are not proofs at all, only accusations. The real discoverable facts re historical research during this period are quite scanty. In fact, during no other era of modern history has there been an event of this significance so POORLY documented and legitimately researched. Research has been confined to avenues, incidents and interpretations that offer damning evidence against Germans, and all material to the contrary is ignored, falsely debunked, or misinterpreted. The advocates of extermination have been resting their laurels for years on old train schedules, forged documents, mistranslated documents, phrases quoted out of context, confessions extorted by torture, perjured testimonies, mistaken identities, exonerating circumstances ignored or distorted, outright mendacity, treachery and trickery, photographs of indeterminate value or authenticity, conflicting testimonies by "eyewitnesses" all hell bent on revenge and leading people to false conclusions. In short, anyone who had an axe to grind ground it to bits. Never in all history, has there been such an outpouring of so much disinformation and dissimulation. Of course, many of these people suffered during the war. Many of them lost loved ones under tragic circumstances. Some of their accusations may even be valid, but all such testimonies coming from victims should be firmly established beyond a reasonable doubt. Millions of Germans, Italians, Japanese, and others also suffered, yet none of them ever received any justice or compensation for the crimes committed against them and a major reason for this is the emphasis of the supposed enormity of the wrong committed against European Jews. It is unjust to cling to a double standard and ignore contradictory and inconvenient facts. The Nazis encouraged Jews to emigrate from Europe for years. Many Jews availed themselves of this opportunity, but often lost all their property and valuables. It is only natural that they harbored resentment. However, a time should come to set aside grievances and adopt a spirit of reconciliation. Even God can't change the past. By appearances, it would seem that the only thing keeping the Holocaust legend alive today is more money than you or I could count in two lifetimes.

3. The estimates of Jewish losses during the Holocaust are greatly exaggerated. There were never even 6 million Jews in Germany.

It is true that Germany had fewer than 600,000 Jews when Hitler came to power in 1933. The majority of Jews murdered by the Nazis, however, did not live in Germany. They resided in the countries which Germany invaded during the war, especially Poland and areas of the former Soviet Union, where millions of Jews once made their homes. In fact, the Protocol of the Wannsee Conference (Jan. 20, 1942) a German document outlining the Nazi plan to annihilate European Jewry, lists over 11 million Jews throughout the continent.

The 6 million figure can be demonstrated by comparing Europe's Jewish population before and after the war. Even after making allowances for those who fled Europe and others who could be expected to die due to natural causes, there are nearly 6,000,000 people who cannot be accounted for.

Authentic German documents confirm the slaughter of Jews in the millions. The famous "Korherr Report,"(named after Richard Korherr, chief statistician for the SS) puts the number of Jewish losses at more than 2,454,000 by the end of 1942 alone. The war in Europe would not end until May, 1945.

The Anglo-American Commission of Enquiry, meeting in April 1946, put the total Jewish Holocaust losses at 5,721,500. On the basis of wartime statistical reports on ghettos, concentration camps and mass murder operations carried out by the Nazis, historian and international jurist, Jacob Robinson, arrived at a figure of 5,820,960. German historian, Helmut Krausnick, put the number of Jewish losses nearer to seven million. While the exact figure will never be known, scholars of the Holocaust find the rounded-off figure of six million to be in line with all the evidence.

3. "The estimates of Jewish losses during the Holocaust are greatly exaggerated. There were never even 6 million Jews in Germany."

In replying to this particular statement, Mr. Breitbart was most accurate when he stated, "While the exact figure will never be known",...Of course there were never 6 million Jews in Germany - who in heaven's name ever said THAT? Indeed, the exact figures for total Jewish deaths in Europe during 1939-1945 will probably never be authenticated for a number of reasons. One of the most significant is that the Jewish people have consistently refused to participate in any official census. Consequently, the figures may only be guessed.

We know that approximately 400,000 Jews were living in Germany prior to the outbreak of world war two. Tens of thousands of Jews emigrated from Germany, among them Albert Einstein, Max Reinhardt and Erich von Stroheim. Indeed, even when the war was at its peak and Germany was clearly losing the struggle, many Jews were not deported at all. Some of them even served in the German Armed Forces. (See the book: Special Treatment, which is available in most libraries.) Exceptions were often made for people of half-Jewish parentage. One of the most notable being German Air Force General and Aide to Hermann Göring, Erhard Milch. Tens of thousands of German Jews survived the war. In fact, although it is estimated that approximately 11 million Jews lived in Europe during those years, at least 1/2 of them were out of the Nazi sphere of influence. It is a known fact that Fascist Italy refused to hand over its Jews to the Nazis for deportation.

Although complaints are frequently voiced that the Vatican assisted ex-Nazis in escaping the clutches of the Allies, the Vatican also assisted the Jews in escaping the clutches of the Nazis. Of particular embarassment to the Jews of the world was the fact that the Chief Rabbi of Rome converted to Roman Catholicism at the end of the second world war. It is also a fact that the Nazis were unsuccessful in their efforts to deport the majority of Hungary's Jews even though they were demanded by Hitler himself to augment Germany's labor force. A more compelling fact worthy of note is that the overwhelming majority of alleged Jewish casualties during the second world war emanated from three countries, namely, Poland, Russia, and Hungary. It is also curious that within these three countries, it has been and probably will forever be impossible to track the movements of the Jewish population. For instance, only an extremely naive person would believe that the majority of Poland's Jews elected to remain in Poland directly prior or subsequent to the German invasion of 1939. How many Jews slipped away into the Soviet Union or other neighboring countries shall never be known, but it is only logical to conclude that hundreds of thousands fled. The figures may even be higher. Figures for the Soviet Union are likewise impossible to ascertain, and it is logical to assume that when Germany invaded the Soviet Union in 1941, the majority of Jews fled deeper into the Russian heart-land. Current research seems to indicate that most of these Jews were either drafted into the Soviet Army or else worked in Soviet munitions factories. Countless thousands of Jews comprised the core and essence of the partisan movement which carried on a ruthless war with the German armed forces, giving no quarter nor expecting any. Undoubtedly many of the mass shooting photographs which surfaced during and after the war probably concerned the execution of partisans, who were considered to be terrorists by the Nazis, who answered terror with terror. This is a common facet of any war, now being evidenced in the ongoing confrontation between Israelis and Palestinians/Arabs.

As previously stated, the Jews of Hungary provided the last link to the mass extermination allegation. However, one should really consider why the Hungarian Jews were arrested and deported to camps. German Foreign Minister Joachim von Ribbentrop remarked to the Hungarian Regent that the Jews were a "fifth column" behind Germany's lines, and to permit them to roam freely would be to invite insurrection and chaos as the Russian Army approached Hungary's borders. In fact, the Jews of Hungary did elect (understandably) to ally themselves with the Soviet "liberators" and many of them were later rewarded by Stalin for their loyalty when the war finally ended. The Nazis also had another reason for wanting the Hungarian Jews deported: they desperately needed laborers to build fortifications and work in their munitions factories. The third reason was their totally unrealistic and unfounded belief that they could barter with the Allies using Jews for hostages. What finally happened was that approximately 300,000 to 400,000 Hungarian Jews were deported, but to date it has been impossible to trace their movements at the end of the war. The onus is on the exterminationists to prove that these people were murdered, not for revisionists to prove that they weren't.

In reference to the Korherr Report, various sources now indicate that Korherr himself became angry and exasperated when years after his report was printed, exterminationists claimed that his statistics referred to Jews who were murdered. Korherr denied this allegation vehemently. Indeed, the assumption that "2,454,000" Jews had been murdered by 1942 is ridiculous, if one takes the time to examine all the available facts. It also had been maintained for decades at the Auschwitz Museum in Poland that "4,000,000" Jews had been murdered there. Recently, the Curators of the Museum had this figure publicly chiseled out of the large stone monument adorning the entrance to the former camp. The death figure has been "officially" lowered from 4,000,000 to 800,000 and is expected to plunge even lower as revisionist research continues. Mr. Breitbart quotes Helmut Krausnick's unrealistic figure of 7,000,000 casualties, which is no more supported by the facts than is the figure of 6,000,000, 5,000,000, 4,000,000, 3,000,000, etc.

4. Didn't the International Committee for the Red Cross report that only 300,000 people had perished in the German concentration camps, not all of them Jews?

The Red Cross never issued such a statistic, nor has it offered any estimate of the number of victims who perished in the camps. In its bulletin of February 1, 1978, the Red Cross declared that it had never compiled, much less published such statistics.

The 300,000 figure was actually taken from the Swiss paper, "Die Tat," in 1955. This estimate, however, was only a figure for the number of Germans who perished in the concentration camps. No mention of any Red Cross figures, however, was ever made by the paper.

Despite the obvious deception, Holocaust deniers continue to peddle it, hoping that few people will actually check the sources.

4. It is true that the Red Cross has never released any accurate statistics in regard to Jewish fatalities. However, revisionists have ample reason to believe that such figures DO exist, but are being deliberately withheld from researchers. In fact, revisionist historians are frequently denied access to research facilities all over the world, which prompts me to ask, "What do these people have to fear from revisionists?"

As to the Swiss Publication, "Die Tat", I am unfamiliar with this publication and not having the text of the original article in front of me, I will not speculate as to its veracity. Perhaps Mr. Breitbart will post it for us on the Internet? I would be interested in ascertaining the sources quoted for the alleged figures printed in this Swiss newspaper. So, for Mr. Breitbart's edification, although I am a revisionist, I do not make use of this particular source. The deception, as Mr. Breitbart calls it, may simply be a misunderstanding. I personally am not acquainted with any "Holocaust deniers" who are "peddling" this reference. And contrary to what Mr. Breitbart states, we WELCOME people to investigate facts for themselves and encourage people to investigate ALL sources, including Mr. Breitbart's. Finally, I DO object to being called a "Holocaust denier." What I am is an "exterminationist denier."

5. Nazi policy towards the Jews was emigration, not extermination.

From the beginning, the Nazis made no secret of their goal of creating a "Jew-free" Germany and Europe. One of the earliest methods was, indeed, forced emigration. But on November 10, 1941, precise instructions from Berlin to kill the Jews in his area were received by Higher SS and police leader, Friedrich Jeckeln from Berlin, stating, that pursuant to the Fuehrer's order, Jews would no longer be allowed "to emigrate", instead they would be "evacuated." In his October 4, 1943 speech to SS generals in Poznan, SS Chief, Heinrich Himmler, left no doubt as to the meaning of evacuation. "I am now referring to the evacuation of the Jews, the extermination of the Jewish people", he declared.

"Evacuation" had been a Nazi codeword for murder even earlier. In the Spring of 1940, 1,558 mental patients had been transferred from sanitoriums in Eastern Prussia for "evacuation" near the Soldau concentration camp. They were never heard from again. The Nazis attempted to hide their intentions by the use of codewords. "Resettlement" was commonly used to describe the deportation of Jews to the gas chambers, hence SS Major, Francke-Gricksch's 1943 report on Auschwitz in which he remarks that the camp's "resettlement furnaces" were capable of burning 10,000 bodies a day.

Despite the attempts at deception, Victor Brack, one of the chief architects of Hitler's "euthanasia" experiments testified to the war crimes tribunal at Nuremberg, that it was no secret among the Nazi hierarchy that "the Jews were to be exterminated."

5. It is refreshing to read that Mr. Breitbart concedes that the goal of the Nazis was emigration, but then he has to spoil things by referring to the communication of November 10, 1941....November 10, 1941. Now, WHY would the Nazis abort their plans for Jewish emigration on November 10, 1941? The answer is simple. The Nazis were by then involved in the most monumental struggle of WWII: the grim showdown with their ideological enemy, the Soviet Union. Now fighting on two fronts, it is extremely unlikely that the Nazis would wish to supply their adversaries with an additional source of manpower by encouraging further Jewish emigration. As noted previously, the Nazis regarded the Jews, rightly or wrongly, as a potential fifth column. Indeed, the recent flurry of books detailing the activities of the Jewish resistance seem to confirm this apprehension voiced so frequently by Nazi leaders. As a consequence of the war situation and Nazi apprehensions, emigration was replaced by evacuation and concentration. Mr. Breitbart chooses to attach a sinister connotation to the word "evacuation" without any convincing proof that evacuation meant anything but that. His reference to Himmler's alleged Posen speech is a quote out of context from a speech which may or may not have been accurately reported.

It is simply unbelieveable that Himmler would choose to incriminate himself as a participant in mass murder at this late date, when Germany was clearly losing the war. It was alleged, without proof, that Himmler even had a phonographic recording made of this alleged speech! "All the easier to incriminate you, my dear", said the Wolf. This tale truly belongs to the kindergarten genre. Talk about peddling obvious deceptions! Mr. Breitbart attempts to revive the old exterminationist trick of recognizing secret Nazi "code" words in various alleged documents, despite the fact that written mass execution orders exist which put forth their incriminating instructions in plain language (the order to execute commissars, and all male inhabitants of Stalingrad are two examples). It's curious that when questioned about such alleged "code" words, the Nazis usually had no idea what the prosecutors were talking about. It's very puzzling to me today when I read Mr. Breitbart's statements about recognizing "secret code words". Exterminationists seem to be particularly adept at locating and identifying these expressions. Thus, "evacuation" REALLY means "extermination", "resettlement" means "annihilation", "total solution" means "final solution", and "final solution" really means "extermination". And it should logically follow that Mr. Breitbart had no trouble believing Rosa Lopez when she testified that "No" meant "Yes" and "Yes" meant "No". And of course only the exterminationists regard themselves as eminently qualified to identify and properly interpret these secret "code words". I am also adept at recognizing "code words" used by exterminationists today. For example, the phrase that the "Holocaust is not worthy of debate" really means "This story cannot stand up to strong and impartial scrutiny, so let us avoid discussing it by any and all means."

The distorted version of SS Major Francke-Gricksch's alleged 1943 report where he purportedly remarks that the camp's "resettlement furnaces" were CAPABLE of burning 10,000 bodies a day, obviously does not mean that they actually WERE burning 10,000 corpses a day. It merely indicates, if this document is genuine, that in his opinion, they were CAPABLE of cremating this number—which in itself is extremely unlikely. It is possible that some of the camp personnel, as well as the inmates themselves, referred to the cremation ovens used during epidemics as "resettlement furnaces". Black humor of this type is not uncommon among undertakers, coroners, etc., and I do not doubt that such expressions existed in the camps as well. But this should not be taken to mean that human beings were being murdered by the thousands and then dispatched through the chimneys.

Mr. Breitbart's final reference to Victor Brack's alleged comments hardly merits a response, but briefly, it should be noted that according to many other alleged "confessions" of former Nazis accused of crimes (Rudolf Höss, former commandant of Auschwitz, for one) the alleged "extermination" program was highly secret and only divulged to a few trusted officers. Mr. Brack's name never appeared in Höss's alleged memoirs, nor was he mentioned by Höss at Nuremberg. Finally, there is no way of ascertaining what methods were used by interrogators to "induce" Mr. Brack to make this ridiculous statement. In any case, it is hearsay and thus not worthy of crediblility.

6. Not a single document has been found with Hitler's signature ordering the extermination of the Jews.

This is true. Hitler was not about to repeat the mistake he had made earlier when he initialed his "euthanasia order," condemning over 70,000 German mental patients to death at so-called "charitable care facilities" such as Hadamar and Grafineck. (Ironically, the first victims of Nazi gassings were actually non-Jewish Germans). Popular protest which threatened his popularity, eventually forced Hitler to abandon his euthanasia experiment, or at least take it underground. Never again would Hitler initial any document connecting himself to mass killings.

Nevertheless, historians have been able to establish with convincing certainty that the order to exterminate millions of Jews came directly from Hitler. On November 10, 1941, Higher SS and police leader, Friedrich Jeckeln, received orders to liquidate the Jewish population of Riga. He was informed by his superior, Hinrich Lohse, that it was "the Fuehrer's wish."

A few months earlier, Gestapo Chief, Heinrich Mueller, sent a message to the commanders of the 4 Einsatzgruppen (mobile killing squads active in Eastern Europe) advising them that "the Fuehrer was to be informed about the work of the Einsatzgruppen on a continual basis."

Discussing the liquidation of Jews in Eastern Europe, SS Chief, Heinrich Himmler, told SS Gruppenfuehrer, Gottlob Berger, "the occupied East will be freed of Jews. The Fuehrer has placed the execution of this difficult order on my shoulders."

Hitler's involvement in the "Final Solution" extended to gassing operations. On October 25, 1941 a directive addressed to Hinrich Lohse regarding the use of special "gassing vans," came by way of German judge, Dr. Erhard Wetzel. Wetzel had been summoned to the Chancellory and informed that the directive he was to prepare was, in fact, a "Fuehrer order."

On February 4, 1943, Hitler equated the extermination of the Jews with having "exterminated a bacterium." In his January 30 speech to the Reichstag 4 years earlier, Hitler warned that in the event of war, "the result will be...the annihilation of the Jewish race in Europe!"

Those who argue that Hitler did not order, approve, or even know about the wanton murder of millions of Jews and others during the Holocaust, do so in direct contradiction of all the evidence.

6. Not a single document has been found with Hitler's signature ordering the extermination of the Jews.

Indeed. Mr. Breitbart admits this is true, then spins an elaborate web of explanations as to why it isn't true in spite of his acknowledgement of fact. He would like the reader to believe that Hitler erred in signing his Euthanasia Order and was not about to repeat the same mistake when allegedly ordering the extermination of the Jews. (He did in fact repeat the same mistake twice with the aforementioned written and surviving orders for the summary exection of captured commissars and the adult male population of Stalingrad.) Hopefully I shall now lay this matter to rest once and for all.

It is true that in 1938 Hitler signed an order for "mercy killing" after considering the anguished pleas of two parents begging him to allow euthansia for their son, who was born severely deformed. The family's name was Knauer. The grandmother of the child also pleaded with the German Fuehrer to permit euthanasia. Hitler reluctantly gave his permission only after the case was thoroughly investigated and upon the recommendation of physicians. Hitler received many other pleas of this nature, another being submitted by a man who had been blinded and severely disfigured after falling into a cement mixer.

The Nazi Euthanasia program was never designed for indiscriminate application. If abuses occurred in the administration of this program, such abuses were clearly outside the scope of the decree. Popular protest did indeed result in abandoning the euthanasia program entirely, by direct order of Hitler himself. What remains to be considered is the fact that the German program, when in operation, rested upon a solid legal foundation, Hitler sought the advice of Hans Lammers, who was the government's legal advisor. Mr. Lammer's office was located in the Reich Chancellery in Berlin, thus being in constant and close communication with Hitler himself. Mr. Lammers shall be referred to later, as his testimony concerning the alleged extermination of the Jews may end up being a thorn in the side of exterminationist theories.

The most significant point to be established in this regard is the fact that Hitler acted within the parameters of the law, in a situation not too different from the sterilization and medical experimentation programs in place in the United States at the same time. Even when ordering the execution of Ernst Roehm and his confederates for plotting treason, Hitler publicly assumed full responsibility for the order in the Reichstag. The overwhelming majority of his fellow countrymen as well as German legal and military officials applauded his decision. It is well worth noting that Hitler's nickname in many circles was "Adolf Legalite." It is extremely improbable that this man would act outside the scope of the law, and the insinuation that he did so is contrary to all the people who were closest to him. In the final days of his regime, when Soviet tanks were in the streets of Berlin, Hitler flatly refused a request from his desperate defenders to allow them to place Soviet flags on their remaining tanks in order to gain advantage. His comment was that it was against International law, and it mattered not that the Soviets had done the same thing—Germans would not stoop to this unworthy tactic. Why must we be expected to believe today that all these facts and all those people were wrong simply because Mr. Breitbart says so?

Moving on to Mr. Breitbart's next contention, namely the reference to an alleged communication sent by Hinrich Lohse to Higher SS and Police leader Friedrich Jeckeln, informing him that it was the "Fuehrer's wish" that the Jews of Riga be liquidated: Here again we are confronted with a brief statement which is prima facie patently absurd. Does Mr. Breitbart himself believe, or expect intelligent people to believe that the Jews of Riga were liquidated simply because someone told someone else that it was the "Fuehrer's wish", and that this "wish" be carried out by Jeckeln like the genie from Aladdin's lamp? There is a storm of controversy among historians concerning these alleged communications sent to and from Hinrich Lohse.

Lohse himself escaped prosecution by the Allies after the second world war, a fact which is suspicious in itself. He was prosecuted by the German government decades later for "participating in an undemocratic regime". Alfred Rosenberg, one of the major defendants at Nuremberg and Lohse's nominal superior, consistently rejected documents without verifiable signatures, or "documents" which were purported to be facsimiles. The Lohse "documents" have a curious history: In 1945, a Jewish-American Sergeant attached to the U.S. 82nd Airborne Division claimed to have found these documents among Alfred Rosenberg's files. The Sergeant's name was Szajko Frydman. These "documents" are unique in that they were "processed" at the Yiddish Scientific Institute (In New York City!), before they were sent on to Nuremberg, Germany. Mr. Frydman also has the distinction of serving as a staff member at the Yivo Institute both BEFORE and AFTER his service in the U.S. Army. There are a number of facts I find to be extremely disturbing when broaching the question of authenticity regarding these documents. In the first place, they are facsimiles and do not bear the signature of the author. Only a large, printed "L" is scribbled at the bottom of the page. A second concern is what Alfred Rosenberg himself had to say about the Lohse "document" at Nuremberg. When asked by Prosecutor Dodd whether the "L" at the bottom of the page was Lohse's signature, Rosenberg replied, "That could hardly be Lohse. I do not know Lohse's initial...It could also be Leibrandt." One thing is certain - whether this document is authentic or not, it certainly does not prove that it was the policy of the German government to exterminate the Jewish race in Europe.

Perhaps Alfred Rosenberg correctly assessed the actual situation when he stated, "As time went by I received much information regarding instances of violence committed in the East. Upon investigating, it was found very often that these reports did not conform with the facts...I might perhaps give the following general answer about the many files and reports from my office: In the course of 12 years of my Party office and 3 years in the Eastern Ministry, many reports, memoranda, carbon copies from all sorts of divisions were delivered to my office...As far as these documents are concerned...without heading, without signature, and without any other details - which I never received personally, but which I assume was probably delivered by police circles to my office. Thus, with the best of intentions, I cannot state my position as to the contents of this document." (All quotes taken from International Military Tribunal Proceedings, Volume XI)

One final observation in regard to such documents generally is this: Taken as a whole, they form a puzzling non sequitur. One cannot have it both ways. Either we accept the premise that the alleged Jewish extermination was highly secret and made known only to a few highly trusted conspirators, or it was not. Testimony and statements from Rudolf Höss, former Commandant of Auschwitz, and other Nazi officials allegedly involved in the implementation of the so-called "Final Solution" all point to the fact that the undertaking was strictly confidential and highly secret. Yet, if we accept the "documents" offered by exterminationists, this argument becomes absurd - as practically EVERYONE was a participant in this gory atrocity. We have letters and communications allegedly sent by one government agency to another, or underlings transmitting "secret codes" and queries as to how many Jews should be "liquidated", etc., so that ultimately we are confronted with a huge jumble of distorted contradictions. And perhaps this is the ultimate intention of certain "exterminationist" historians. They parsimoniously quote selected portions of Himmler's alleged Posen speech to lead the reader to conclude that the murder of Jews was systematically planned and executed. However, I may quote from the SAME alleged speech and reach a totally different conclusion. For instance, Himmler allegedly says, "I also want to talk to you, quite frankly, on a very grave matter...and yet we will NEVER speak of it publicly...This is a page of glory in our history which has never been written and is NEVER to be written..."

Yet, not only is it written by every Tom, Dieter, and Herrn in Germany, but Himmler supposedly recorded himself making the above statements! This sort of nonsense may be fine for a poorly scripted Hollywood B-movie, but it hardly qualifies as accurate historical documentation.

7. Zyklon B was a fumigant. It wasn't a practical agent for mass murder.

Ordinarily, Zyklon B (a hydrogen cyanide preparation) was used as an insecticide. Hydrogen cyanide, however, is actually more dangerous to humans than insects. When the level of HCN reaches only 300 parts per million, it will kill a person within a few minutes. The amount of hydrogen cyanide required to kill a person of average weight is only 60 mg.

Because Zyklon was, in fact, so toxic, its manufacturers warned personnel not to reenter a room fumigated with the gas for 20 hours after airing. In addition, a compound was added to the preparation emitting a powerful, intolerable odor - a warning agent that the gas was present. When purchasing Zyklon B for the death camps, the SS ordered the manufacturer to remove the warning compound, a clear indication of its intended use.

7. Zyklon B was indeed a fumigant.

It is true that the substance is highly toxic to human beings. So toxic, in fact, that an incident was mentioned at the Auschwitz Trials in Germany regarding the use of this gas at the camp itself. The incident centers around the testimony of an accused ex-SS man once stationed at Auschwitz. His name was Artur Breitweiser. He was drafted into the SS in 1939. In May, 1940, he was sent to Auschwitz. He was basically a quartermaster, distributing clothing to prisoners as well as being responsible for the maintenance of barracks. In 1941 he was assigned the task of disinfecting clothing and barracks with Zyklon B. At the end of the war, he was sentenced to death by the "People's Court" in Cracow on charges of mistreating prisoners and allegedly writing malicious reports on their behavior which resulted in further mistreatment. However, the sentence was commuted to life imprisonment only one month after sentencing. In 1959, he was released from prison and sent to Germany, where he was soon re-arrested and charged in the "Auschwitz Trial" for supposedly taking an active part in the alleged first large gassing action at the camp.

Breitweiser emphatically denied that any gassings of human beings had ever taken place at Auschwitz. He steadfastly maintained that only clothing and barracks were disinfected with the gas. He stated at his trial that in the summer of 1941 two civilians representing a firm in Hamburg arrived at Auschwitz, bringing with them gasmsks with special attachments and instructions for the safe handling of gas. The gas, of course, was Zyklon B, which was intended for use in delousing clothing and fumigating barracks. According to Mr. Breitweiser's testimony, 10 - 15 men were selected to perform these disinfestation duties.

When asked by the presiding Judge to describe the Zyklon, Breitweiser replied: "The Zyklon B was in small, Kilogram weight tins. Upon opening, they were similar in appearance to a crystal substance...always light and gray...later they appeared bluish white. The barracks to be disinfected were first sealed up, windows tightly sealed as well, and then we prepared the room for fumigation with the gas. The tins were opened with a flat chisel and hammer. Then a rubber cap ws placed over the can, because otherwise the gas escaped and then one had to open more tins. Then we went into the room and scattered the material around." When queried by the judge whether the gas was mixed with a pungent smelling additive to prevent accidental inhalation by staff, Breitweiser responded: "No, nothing was mixed in. The gas worked terribly fast. I can remember that Unterscharfuehrer Theurer once entered a house which had already been fumigated. (The day before) In the evening it had been ventilated, below in the ground floor, and the next morning Theurer wanted to open the windows on the second floor. He must have breathed in some lingering fumes because he immediately fell over unconcious and tumbled down the stairs, (To the bottom level) where there was fresh air. Had he fallen differently, he would never have come out alive."

This incident definitely proves the fraudulent nature of many "eyewitness" testimonies which are liberally quoted over and over again, claiming that the Jewish "Sonderkommandos" would enter the gas chamber only MINUTES after the gas had allegedly done its work. It is even claimed that they were eating and smoking cigrettes! In my opinion, after a careful consideration of the available facts, the "Sonderkommandos" were a selected group of men who worked in the crematoriums, assisting in the disposal of bodies of inmates who had died of diseases or natural causes.

The incident described by Mr. Breitweiser led to the issuance of a special order by the camp Commandant to the crews assigned to delousing and working with Zyklon. The order apparently was in response to a series of incidents and accidents similar to the one described above. The order itself was reprinted in the Journal of Historical Review, Volume 11, Number 1, pages 69, 70. Dated August 12, 1942, forty copies were distributed to officials throughout the camp. The Commandant warns them to be particularly cautious when entering rooms which have been fumigated with Zyklon B. He also reminds them that "the gas now being used contains less (protective) odor additive, and is therefore especially dangerous."

Returning back to the trial of Mr. Breitweiser, the judge asked him to describe how clothing was disinfested. Mr. Breitweiser replied: "The prisoners had to hang up their clothing, then I and another man threw the gas (pellets) in. After TWENTY - FOUR hours, we retrieved the clothing and did the next batch, and so on."

When questioned about his participation in the alleged first attempt to gas human beings with Zyklon B, Breitweiser vigorously denied it. He maintained that the accusation sprang from an ex-prisoner, a Capo, who claimed he had had a "foreboding" about the arrival of Russian prisoners. The Capo later claimed he saw Breitweiser "hanging around" the alleged gassing bunker holding gasmasks. Mr. Breitweiser pointed out to the court that the Capo could never have seen him in the area because of the great distance between his barracks and the bunker, coupled with the fact that visibility was near zero at that time of the year due to layers of mist and fog which covered the camp grounds.

When the judge pressed him to comment on whether he knew Russian prisoners were gassed, he replied: "Yes, that was rumored." But when asked whether he personally knew for certain that the Russians were gassed, he said: "I didn't know about that." Though they tried valiantly, the judges and prosecutor were unable to shake this man's testimony. In fact, they were even gracious enough to point out to him that since he was the supervisor for disinfection, he should have knowledge of or participated in this alleged first attempt at gassing. But Mr. Breitweiser held firmly to his emphatic denial. He was almost at a loss to explain why the ex-Capo had accused him. "But," explained Mr. Breitweiser, "he had always seen me in the area carrying gas masks and fumigating clothing."

What is especially important to the revisionist when examining this testimony is that it completely demolishes Mr. Breitbart's main argument that the SS had deliberately requested the manufacturers of Zyklon B to remove the warning compound for sinister, homicidal motives. Their own men almost died of inhaling it accidentally! The testimony and the facts clearly show that two representatives had arrived at the camp to give instructions to a limited number of personnel on how to safely handle Zyklon B, which was clearly intended for fumigation purposes. The very fact that they arrived in the summer of 1941, BEFORE Höss was ever aware of the alleged lethal potential of Zyklon, also proves its real intended use: fumigation and disinfestation. Mr. Breitweiser's testimony, coupled with the admonitions issued by the camp Commander, effectively slams the door shut on the accusation that the gas was ordered without a warning compound in order to kill people without alerting them, because it is now clear that the Zyklon arrived well before it was ever allegedly used to kill the aforementioned Russian prisoners of war. In fact, it arrived before the idea was ever allegedly discussed.

For the edification of those who do not know, exterminationist historians contend that the gas was first used to kill Russian prisoners by Höss's assistant, Fritzsch, on his own initiative, in the absence of his superior! (Note: we shall presently examine whether it was a simple process for camp officials to arbitrarily execute inmates.) Thus, Breitweiser's testimony proves that the Zyklon delivered to the camp had always been minus the warning agent. (See: The Auschwitz Chronicle, pgs. 84, 85)

8. If Zyklon B is so highly toxic, how could bodies have been removed from gas chambers only minutes after execution?

The death chambers were outfitted with special ventilation systems to remove any remaining gas. In addition, those prisoners charged with removing the bodies (the sonderkommando) wore gas masks.

8. Apparently Mr. Breitbart and his magicians think they can dismiss this pivotal point with two sentences and a wave of magic wands, hoping that no one will notice the sleight of hand. Their response centers around two alleged points:

  1. That the "death" chambers were equipped with "special" ventilation systems to remove any remaining gas.
  2. The "Sonderkommandos" wore gasmasks.

Point one is easily addressed by noting that the ventilation systems they refer to were wholly inadequate for ventilating an area saturated with Zyklon B, but perfectly satisfactory for ventilating a MORGUE or DISINFESTATION chamber. Professor Robert Faurisson has, I think, already laid this issue to rest in an article published by the Institute for Historical Review. Mr. Faurisson explains: "Zyklon B is essentially hydrocyanic acid, a gas lighter than air. Therefore ventilation would have had to proceed from the bottom to the top, with air blowing in at ground level. But it was done from top to bottom a morgue...Air pockets between the bodies which were supposedly heaped one on top of the other would have been filled with the gas....The mucous membranes would have been impregnated also. What kind of superpowerful fan is able to instantly disperse so much gas drifting through the air and hidden in air pockets? Even if such a fan existed, it would have been necessary to perform a test for the detection of any remaining hydrocyanic acid and to develop a procedure for informing the crew that the room was safe. Now, it is abundantly clear from Hoess's description that the fan in question must have been endowed with magical powers in order to be able to disperse all of the gas with such flawless performance so that there was no cause for concern or need for verification of the absence of the gas!" Needless to say, whether the ventilators were on for 15 minutes after the alleged gassings or whether the Sonderkommando were wearing gasmasks or not, it still would have been hazardous to life to open the doors so quickly. It has since been proven that Zyklon B is extremely difficult to ventilate and strongly adheres to surfaces. (See Reply #7 - the testimony of Mr. Breitweiser). I for one would be delighted if Mr. Breitbat might provide a demonstration of how one can eat and wear a gasmask at the same time. But then again, magic gives the impression of miracles.....

Reader Note: For an extremely interesting modern description of how an insecticide similar to Zyklon B performs, please refer to the book: The Hot Zone.

9. Zyklon B is so highly flammable that a single spark from the ventilation system or the immense heat created by the nearby furnaces would have resulted in an explosion.

Zyklon B will explode - at 60,000 parts per million. It only takes a concentration of 300 parts per million to kill a person in just a few minutes. (Less than half that amount will kill in less than an hour.) Clearly, the concentration of Zyklon used in the gas chambers was far below flammability or explosion levels.

9. Mr. Breitbart admits that Zyklon B is inflammable, then qualifies his concession by stating that it will explode at 60,000 parts per million. Then he goes on to inform us that it only takes a concentration of 300 parts per million to kill a human being in a few minutes, while half of that amount would kill in about an hour. There has never been any claim or physical evidence to indicate that the alleged gassing chambers were equipped with forced air circulation to minimize gas dispersion times. To the contrary, testimony indicated that the Zyklon was allegedly introduced in localized piles. Gas produced in this manner would be at concentrations well into the explosive region in the vicinity of such piles, particularly those said to have been contained inside hollow pillars. Precautions to guard against exposure to ignition sources appear in technical literature about the use of Zyklon, despite the fact that final intended concentrations even in delousing applications were in all cases below explosive levels. The precautions were needed to deal with the physical fact of localized high concentrations and the possibility of operator error in quantity applied to a given volume.

If one reflects on the enormous size of Auschwitz and its satellite camps, with the constant battle against lice, disease, typhus, rats, mosquitoes and flies, it should become apparent even to the most skeptical that massive amounts of Zyklon B applied on a continuing basis were necessary for maintaining safe living conditions. Continuous applications of Zyklon B were also needed to disinfest clothing, a preventive measure necessary to safeguard against the spread of new and more devastating epidemics spread by body lice. Typhus is no respecter of persons, even the Germans were struck down by this plague. It was only in their best interests to implement every procedure to protect the inmates, themselves and their families. In spite of these measures, the Germans were fighting a losing battle with disease as their infrastructures broke down under continued Allied assault. The very idea that the Germans would create additional health hazards by killing thousands of human beings daily, storing their decomposing bodies for days on end in underground bunkers until they could be cremated while Armageddon swirled around them is insulting to one's intelligence

10. There is no proof whatsoever that the Nazis ever murdered anyone in gas chambers.

The use of gas chambers by the Nazis is proven by a wide array of evidence. Testimony by the perpetrators themselves as well as the first-hand accounts of prisoners, especially members of the "Sonderkommando" (groups of inmates forced to remove the dead from the gas chambers and dispose of their bodies) constitute only a part of the evidence.

Documents including blueprints of the killing installations as well as orders for construction materials and Zyklon B (the deadly hydrogen cyanide preparation used for gassings at Auschwitz and Majdanek...carbon monoxide exhaust was used at other camps) survived the war as did some of the actual gassing facilities themselves. Photos clandestinely taken by prisoners of Auschwitz-Birkenau even show the disposal of corpses removed from the gas chamber. The manufacture, distribution and use of the deadly gas was clearly demonstrated at the "Zyklon B Trial" in March 1946, Hamburg, Germany. Two of the defendants, Bruno Tesch and Karl Weinbacher, the owner and a major executive of a company that manufactured the gas were sentenced to death after notes of their trips to Auschwitz disproved their contention that they were unaware that the poison was used to kill inmates.

Jean-Claude Pressac, a one-time skeptic of the gas chambers, had undertaken a careful study of Auschwitz in which he analyzed a wide variety of camp documents, photos, reports and blueprints. Pressac, who had at one time been intrigued by the Holocaust-denying theories of Robert Faurisson, concluded that his original skepticism could no longer be supported in the face of the evidence. In 1989, the Klarsfeld Foundation published his study, Auschwitz: Technique and Operation of the Gas Chambers, in which Pressac demonstrates the use of the gas chambers of Auschwitz-Birkenau in the murders of hundreds of thousands of people.

Incidentally, Jews were not the first people gassed by the Nazis. The first victims of Nazi gassings were German mental patients condemned by Hitler's "Euthanasia" order of 1939.

10. There is no proof whatsoever that the Nazis ever murdered anyone in gas chambers.

The Wiesenthal Center has devoted considerable time toward refuting the above statement. Their response, in spite of all their efforts, is disappointing. For "evidence" of mass gassings they first turn to "eyewitness" testimony, referring to statements by alleged "perpetrators" and members of the Sonderkommandos. It is this author's opinion, for reasons previously outlined, that there were no reliable testimonies offered into evidence. All were obtained from highly suspect sources or under extreme coercion. What, then, is left? The answer is, of course, material proof.

Rarely will one find a first-hand account written by an alleged member of a Sonderkommando. They have either collaborated with or plagiarized each other, or else were conveniently unavailable for cross-examination in reference to their allegations. At many trials of accused "war criminals" a simple affidavit would suffice to incriminate or possibly condemn a defendant, and most if not all of these were affidavits of hearsay, sometimes more than once removed! (Yankel said that the block Capo said that he talked to a Russian who said....) Now, what sort of court would accept affidavits in lieu of sworn testimony? The answer is: the kangaroo court at Nuremberg, and other obviously biased courts since that time. The fact is, practically ANY accusation could be made against the Germans in the years following the war. The bigger and more scandalous the story, the better. And the charter which authorized Nuremberg dictated that these were to be accepted as fact, not open to review or appeal! Particularly shocking or sensationalistic stories were a real favorite and sure to receive wide distribution.

Mr. Breitbart also mentions "documents" and "blueprints" allegedly detailing "killing" installations. However, the documents, should one be interested enough in examining them, offer no proof of this whatsoever. The blueprints that I have seen merely show rooms which are designated as reception areas, as well as crematoria, morgues, autopsy rooms, etc. There is not one scrap of evidence that these documents can be justifiably represented as showing plans for a gas chamber or killing facility. Mr. Breitbart, however, sees sinister interpretations everywhere. A simple order for construction materials, a receipt for deliveries of Zyklon B, the installation of ventilators, all appear of ominous import to Mr. Breitbart, as they apparently did to some former inmates of the camp. In fact, the importance of rumor mongering in the camps should not be neglected, as it is a most valuable resource for the historian.

It is only natural that people accustomed to living in unrestricted freedom most of their lives, suddenly snatched from the bosom of their mother country and dispatched with vigor to a God-forsaken hell hole like Auschwitz felt helpless, abandoned, and naturally imagined the worst possible scenarios both for their captors and their unknown futures. Thrown like innocent lambs into a pack of ravenous wolves, frequently preyed upon by brutal, intimidating older inmates who spoke languages different from their own, the new arrivals at Auschwitz must have been overwhelmed by feelings of terror and apprehension. Forced to endure various humiliations and compelled to toil at hard labor, all the while never knowing what their fate would be, nor the fate of the relatives who accompanied them there, these people were prime agents for the spreading of fearful rumors. The brutal environment of the camp was the perfect method of transmission for the most virulently infectious spreading of rumors, coupled with terror.

The sight of crematoria soon after arrival must have frightened the wits out of the unfortunates being admitted to the camp. The bored guards and brutal kapos often found it amusing to torment the new arrivals with statements like: "The only way you leave here is through the chimneys", and then cryptically pointing to the crematoria. Very Dante-esque. Abandon all hope, ye who enter here. Of course, this is another reason why I cannot accept the statements of persons who say that the Jews merely walked into the gas chambers without offering any resistance. This claim is not only contrary to human nature, but to logic as well, but then, the whole gas chamber story is also contrary to logic.

Mr. Breitbart mentions gassing facilities which supposedly survived the war. If so, revisionists would love to examine them. Please tell us where they may be located. He also mentions clandestine photos. We would like to examine them if he would be kind enough to place them at our disposal. The one photo he is apparently referring to does not show a gas chamber at all, but was taken from inside the morgue or crematorium during the height of one of the typhus epidemics, when the cremation ovens broke down and bodies had to be burned in the open to try to stem the spread of contamination.

Mr. Breitbart really need not have troubled us with his reference to the Zyklon B "trial" which took place in 1946, resulting in the lynching of two unfortunate businessmen by the Allies. Indeed, a Soviet General plotting against Stalin in the mid-thirties would have received a fairer trial than those two unfortunates in 1946. He avoids mentioning the 1972 trial in Austria of two engineers who designed the crematoria at Auschwitz. They were both acquitted.

In spite of the enthusiastic endorsement of Jean Claude Pressac, it is presently unclear whether Pressac himself is still convinced of the reality of the gas chambers. We will have to be patient and wait for the final word on that issue.

The mention of the Klarsfeld Foundation comes as no surprise to revisionists. They were eager to publish Pressac's opus, "Auschwitz: Technique and Operation of the Gas Chambers." Trumpeting this work as a final answer to revisionist arguments, the book is virtually inaccessible to the general public due to its prohibitively high price and the reluctance of the Klarsfeld Foundation to issue a reprinting. In any event, the book fails in its premise of setting out to prove the existence of the gas chambers. Ultimately, the failure is not due to Mr. Pressac, who is an irrepressible researcher, but to the actual lack of convincing documentation.

Two examples should suffice: Mr. Pressac was ecstatic when he examined a document signed by the Commandant of Auschwitz ordering 14 shower heads and one gas tight door for Krema III. Now, what is so unusual about requesting 14 shower heads? It reveals the bias of an observer exposed for years to the now debunked claims of shower rooms at Dachau that sinister significance is attached to this minor item. One can find more shower heads in a public school. I suggest that it is rather obvious that a mere 14 shower heads would never suffice in tricking 3,000 people herded into a room that these were the shower outlets intended for their use. An order for 100 or 200 shower heads would have given this argument a bit more credence, but not much. The larger orders would have been consistent with showering large numbers of people. I would like to suggest further that these 14 shower heads were most likely intended for the use of those people who were working in the morgue and crematorium, for sanitary reasons. The ridiculous claims I have heard from exterminationists that the shower heads were dummies with no water outlets, is absurd, for no one would be fooled into thinking that 14 dummy shower heads without water spraying from the nozzles were intended for their immediate use. This is like placing an empty dish before a person and telling them to eat.

And the gas tight door? I would venture that a gas tight door in a bunker is not uncommon during wartime. Curiously, during the "Cold War", many Americans constructed "Nuclear Fallout Shelters" and "Bunkers" in their basements. These structures often possessed gas tight doors as well.

Mr. Pressac also had difficulty explaining the lack of characteristic blue staining on the walls of the alleged gas chambers, the indelible imprint of a facility treated frequently with Zyklon B. The absence of this blue staining in the alleged gas chambers serves as incontrovertible proof that these rooms did not undergo heavy or frequent exposure to Zyklon and all the eyewitness and perpetrator testimonies in the world will never change that fact. Maintaining such accusations in the face of all the evidence merely discredits the alleged witnesses.

Surprisingly, when confronted by these glaring inconsistencies, Serge Klarsfeld remarked, "It is evident that in the years following 1945 the technical aspects of the gas chambers have been a neglected topic because back then no one imagined that their existence would have to be proved."! And yet precisely because of this negligence, the children of two families had to struggle through life without the love and support of their father because they were lynched by an American kangaroo court for a crime that never happened. The medieval legends describing the Jews as poisoners of wells pales today before the grotesque slander which the German people have endured for the last five decades.

11. American engineer and execution 'expert', Fred Leuchter, proved that the 'so-called' gas chambers at Auschwitz could not have been used for their 'alleged' purpose.

In 1988, Fred Leuchter of Malden, Massachusetts was contacted by Holocaust denier, Robert Faurisson and hired to prepare a report on the gas chambers of Auschwitz on behalf of Canadian neo-Nazi, Ernst Zundel. Zundel was on trial on charges stemming from the distribution of Holocaust revisionist literature. With his client footing the bill, Leuchter visited the site of the Auschwitz-Birkenau and Majdanek death camps. Upon returning to the United States, he published a lengthy report which concluded that the facilities he examined "could not have then been...utilized or seriously considered to function as execution gas chambers."

During the Zundel trial, however, it became increasingly clear that something was terribly wrong with the "Leuchter Report." As it turned out, Mr. Leuchter had no credentials as an engineer, and in fact, held only a Bachelors Degree in history. Leuchter's bizarre explanation that anyone who went to college knew enough Mathematics and Science to be an engineer, raised even more eyebrows. Judge Ronald Thomas listened to excerpts from the "Leuchter Report," then castigated the author for his methodology which he labeled "preposterous," before ruling that "Leuchter has no expertise."

Leuchter's lack of credentials resulted in more than embarrassment at the Zundel trial. Leuchter, who had represented himself as an engineer and execution expert to various government agencies for years, was indicted by the state of Massachusetts for the imposture.

Faced with the possibility of jail time if convicted, Leuchter reached a pre-trial agreement with the Court in which he admitted that he "was not and had never been registered as a professional engineer," although he had represented himself as "an engineer able to consult in areas of engineering concerning execution technology." As part of the humbling agreement Leuchter also agreed to cease and desist from the distribution of anymore engineering reports during his probationary period.

An analysis of the "Leuchter Report" by Professor George Wellers in Paris concluded Leuchter's "calculations to be an absurdity... One can see in many ways to what degree this expert chemist (Wellers was unaware that Leuchter had no degree in any science) is operating outside the realities of the problem." Concluding the analysis, Wellers characterized Leuchter's interpretation as "false and absurd from start to end."

Despite his embarrassment from both academic as well as legal circles, Leuchter took his show to Germany. Arrested in October 1993 on charges of inciting racial hatred, he was released on bail and allowed to return to the U.S. pending trial. Leuchter, however, refused to return to Germany for trial. A warrant for his arrest is still outstanding.

Despite the exposure of the self-styled engineer and his report as fraudulent, both are still held in high esteem among Holocaust "revisionists."

11. The Wiesenthal Center utilized more space in responding to this argument than any of the others, so it is a question of obvious concern to them. Mr. Leuchter was and is an expert on the construction of execution equipment. Mr. Breitbart criticizes Mr. Leuchter because he was paid for his services, ignoring the fact that expert witnesses called to testify in court are routinely paid for their valuable service. Even if Mr. Leuchter had no credentials as an engineer, the fact remains that he was still a paid consultant here in the United States for his knowledge and services concerning the installation of execution equipment using hydrocyanic acid, the killing component of Zyklon-B.

The references Mr. Breitbart makes to the Zundel trial are in some respects amusing. Selected transcripts are available through Mr. Zundel himself should anyone care to read them. Judge Thomas's ruling was based only upon his own embarrassment in being placed in the uncomfortable position of legally affirming the correctness of the Leuchter report. The fact is that no one expected Mr. Zundel to hire a private investigator to prove what the revisionists had maintained for years: that the alleged gas chambers were a fraud and could be proven so by chemical analysis and on-site investigation. How did Geraldo miss that one?

Mr. Leuchter had no ax to grind. In fact, he had been a believer in the gas chamber story until he investigated the alleged site of the crimes. If he was simply an incompetent buffoon, why were he and his family remorselessly persecuted by Jewish pressure groups in this country, a process that deprived him of his occupation, prompted his wife to seek a divorce and eventually drove him into hiding?

Mr. Leuchter's primary function was the taking of samples from facilities where it is alleged that mass gassings took place. That the results of the testing, conducted by independent and qualified laboratories in the United States, proved to be an embarrassment for exterminationists is something they will simply have to learn to live with in a certain amount of frustration if they cannot accept the obvious. The business of Mr. Leuchter's "indictment" by the State of Massachusetts can only be described as the results of intensive lobbying by Jewish pressure groups. The indictment itself was preposterous. Isn't it curious how the findings of these researchers is never discussed? Never replied to? The response is simply to blackmail and sling mud, and more mud.

If the evidence was so convincing against Mr. Leuchter, why did the State bother to plea bargain with him? This incident only serves to prove how far the State and Jewish lobbyists will go in order to suppress the truth about the holocaust. The "analysis" of the Leuchter report by Mr. Wellers in Paris is also without special significance, due to the fact that an expert and qualified chemist, German Rudolf, also conducted independent on site tests at Auschwitz and the results obtained were identical with those undertaken by independent labs here in the United States. And how did the German government respond to the findings of Germar Rudolf? They issued a warrant for his arrest! The man has since had to flee the persecution from his own country. What a sorry state of affairs it is when a qualified expert's opinion, backed by incontrovertible evidence, is punished as a crime. Mr. Breitbart and his colleagues evidently think that, like Moses, they will be able to hold back the tide. As Abraham Lincoln once said,"You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can't fool all the people all of the time."

The real "embarrassment" at the Zundel trial turned out to be Raul Hilberg, who was so disturbed by the probing questions of Mr. Zundel's attorney that he declined to return to testify at Zundel's second trial. Mr. Breitbart would like the public to think that Mr. Leuchter was arrested for "inciting racial hatred". I, for one, fail to see the connection. It is time for Mr. Breitbart and crew to either face the music and dance or else go quietly into that good night......

12. Didn't Simon Wiesenthal himself state that there were no extermination camps in Germany?

The Nazis classified their many hundreds of concentration camps on their basis of their primary function. In a very real sense, all were death camps because the death of the inmates, whether through overwork, starvation/disease, or outright murder, was ultimately expected.

Those sites, however, which functioned as extermination centers (Auschwitz-Birkenau, Treblinka, Majdanek, Sobibor, Belzec, and Chelmno), were specially equipped for the gassing of hundreds of thousands of victims each (millions altogether). All of these camps were located in Poland, and for good reason. Poland had far more Jews than Germany and the rest of Western Europe combined. The Nazis also felt that the relative remoteness of Poland's rural areas would also minimize reports of mass murder taking place there.

12. My initial response to number 12 was: "Who should care what Simon Wiesenthal has to say anyway?" What qualifications does he possess, other than being an inmate in various camps during World War Two? What makes him more credible than Paul Rassinier, who was also an inmate and whose opinions differ drastically from his? Throughout his entire career as an alleged "Nazi hunter" (ferreting geriatric cases out of old-age homes), he's done little more than make a public nuisance of himself, a fact underscored when Jewish groups in Germany recently denounced him as a self-serving fraud.

Mr. Wiesenthal can really offer no more information than any other semi-qualified researcher interested in this subject. When confronted with overwhelming evidence that no gas chambers ever existed in Germany proper, he still resisted giving up that make-believe ghost. The sad fact is, neither Mr. Wiesenthal nor any other Jewish agency ever acknowledged publicly that the story of gas chambers in Germany proper was a fraud, until the overwhelming evidence, publicity and controversy compelled them to do so in 1960. If it were not for this evidence, they would most likely never have admitted this fact, being perfectly contented with letting sleeping dogs lie, whether on the floor or through their mouths. They seemed content to allow the Auschwitz curators to uphold a complete imposture for years by alleging that 4,000,000 Jews were killed at the facility. Today, the Wiesenthal Center admits this was a false statement manufactured by the Soviets. Why, then, didn't they protest against this lie in the past? The reason, of course, is that they were happy with the status quo. Their motto seems to have been: "Never admit anything unless you are compelled to do so." This sort of behavior is expected from the likes of imposters and criminals, but it does no credit to the Simon Wiesenthal Center. People really want to believe them, so they do, regardless of the inconsistencies. It is true that individual Jewish historians voiced their skepticism over this vastly inflated figure, but Jewish organizations remained silent on the issue.

Furthermore, huge sums of money are now involved in perpetuating the holocaust myth. For well over 50 years, alleged Jewish victims have been receiving "reparations" payments from the German government. East Germans were intelligent enough to refuse "restitution" payments for the simple reason that they weren't responsible for any alleged National Socialist crimes (which their masters, the Russians, knew full well).

Jews all over the world applied for and received these reparations payments. Cases of outright fraud have been reported. I remember reading about one case in the L.A. Times detailing how a local Jewish man had been collecting "reparations" payments for years under various assumed names, until he was finally apprehended and rightfully convicted and sent to prison. How many more fraudulent claims have gone undetected? And yet the claims keep INCREASING instead of DECREASING over the years! How strange!

A pertinent question to ask here is: What is keeping the Wiesenthal Center and similar organizations in business? Surely not just the criminally foolish antics of a few drunken skinheads, magnified out of all proportion and represented by the Wiesenthal Center to its supporters as a "dangerous" resurgence of "Nazism". Nor can it be the hounding of crippled old men in wheel chairs accused of heinous crimes, nor the persecution of innocent men like John Demjanjuk, although these opprobrious tactics all have their place in the money funneling system.

With so much money at stake, it has become almost impossible to publicly question the holocaust story, and only the bravest of the brave or the most foolhardy do so. Anyone who attempts to discuss this issue is immediately branded as an "anti-Semite" or "hate-monger". This tactic has been so successful that even Jews who question the so-called holocaust, and there are many of them, were long labeled "self-hating Jews" but lately are being lumped in as anti-Semites as well. That goes to show that you just can't compete with Hollywood. Ask Oskar Schindler or Gerald Green.

Anyone who has ever been to the Wiesenthal Center will immediately notice how much money had to have been invested in the construction and maintenance of this huge facility, in spite of its somewhat morbid carnival-like ambiance. In certain respects, many of the exhibits there are well-suited for Disneyland or Fantasy Island or the X Files, rather than a Museum of "Tolerance", which seems to tolerate everything but revisionists. Six million thanks to Simon Wiesenthal. The millions of dollars pouring into the Center's coffers are a fitting tribute to Mr. Wiesenthal's keen business sense and clever marketing techniques. There are millions of reasons to justify the Wiesenthal Center's existence, all of them expressed in dollars. As of last year, $5,000,000 is coming from the pockets of California taxpayers. The granting of these funds from the Public Education budget stipulated that the facility was to refrain from religious promotion. This has done nothing to slow the profitable activities of their Judaica mementos boutique.

13. For years, the death statistics at Auschwitz-Birkenau had been put at well over 3 million. Recently, however, a memorial plaque at the former death camp estimates Jewish losses closer to 1 million. Shouldn't the new figures imply that Jewish losses for the Holocaust are much lower than previously thought?

The figure of 3-4 million murdered at Auschwitz-Birkenau was an invention of communist officials in Poland (and the former U.S.S.R.) which sought to blur the uniqueness of Jewish suffering at Auschwitz. To do this, they purposely overstated the number of non-Jewish casualties at Auschwitz-Birkenau by many times their true numbers. In a clever attempt to disguise the subterfuge, the figures for Jewish losses were inflated by nearly double, so that their losses would still be larger than those of non-Jewish victims, though now by a much smaller ratio. With the end of communism in Poland and the former Soviet Union, officials at the Auschwitz museum finally lowered the casualty figures in line with the estimates of historians who, for years, have insisted that between one and 1 1/2 million people perished at Auschwitz-Birkenau, 80 - 90% of them Jews.

The figure of 6 million Jewish losses during the Holocaust has always been in line with the lower Auschwitz figures.

13. The Wiesenthal Center answers this question by stating that the 6,000,000 figure was an invention of communist officials in Poland, who sought to blur the uniqueness of Jewish suffering. The fact is, however, that the only item to be "blurred" was the simple old truth. I have already dealt with part of this statement in my answer to the previous question, asking why the Jews had remained silent on this issue for decades when they always knew that the figures were falsified. Even the figure of one million dead is now considered to be over-inflated. The new figures for estimated Jewish deaths is now approaching the all time low of 300,000-600,000 according to researchers. The question as to how many Jews did perish at Auschwitz will probably never be completely resolved, but it is fair to conclude that whatever the figure, it ought to correspond with the number of inmates who perished as a result of the many typhus epidemics, along with those who died from natural causes, illness, and other factors. Eventually deaths in "gas chambers" will be shown to have no place in the final calculation of these figures for the simple reason that it doesn't add up. History, forensics, physics, logistics and common sense have all been abused to the point of blatant distortion to support this myth, but simple arithmetic is familiar to enough people to put it beyond the reach of the guardians of the myth. The figure of 6,000,000 Jewish losses during WWII was and is a myth.

For further commentary regarding this article and the Simon Wiesenthal Center, take this link to a z Notes article.

Additional information about this document
Property Value
Author(s): Roger Bartlett
Title: Response to Simon Wiesenthal Center's Not So Breitbart Report
Published: 1998-01-01
First posted on CODOH: June 29, 1998, 7 p.m.
Last revision:
Appears In: