The Holocaust: Facts versus Fiction

“These [Holocaust] crimes are and remain a part of German history, and this history has to be told, over and over again.”

German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Dec. 6, 2019;[1]
https://youtu.be/K_PpXikL6Go

Introduction

In the Year 9 after Christ’s birth, Rome rules almost all of Europe. So far, the Romans have only been able to conquer the southwestern part of Germania, and that only with brute force. At this point, Rome sets about to subjugate the rebellious Teutons with brutal force, just as they had done a few decades earlier with the Celts in Gaul and Hispania. However, the Roman losses in this multi-year war are so huge that it is ultimately decided to give up the campaign and instead erect a protective wall, the so-called Limes. Most of Germania remains free, and unlike most other European peoples, the Germanic peoples retain their culture and language, which later develops into what we now call “German.”

1600 years later, Germany was threatened once more when it was systematically raped and looted by various armies from all over Europe during the first Thirty-Year War. In this war from 1618 to 1648, a considerable part of the German population died, mostly of hunger and epidemics. Partly depopulated, dismembered and reduced to insignificance, it took over 200 years for Germany to regain its strength and take control of its own fate. However, the new unification of the German Empire in 1871 led to envy and resentment among those European powers that did not want to accept political and economic competition from central Europe. The result was a second Thirty-Year War, in which this time the whole world pummeled Germany – from August 1914 to May 1945. In contrast to the peace treaty concluding the first Thirty-Year War, there was no peace treaty after the second Thirty-Year War. The victors continued this war with the weapons of law and propaganda. For the European theater of war, only alleged German war crimes were prosecuted in countless trials, and an effective defense was practically impossible. The Allied chief prosecutor put it this way during the Nuremberg Military Tribunal:

“As a military tribunal, this Tribunal is a continuation of the war effort of the Allied nations.” (IMT, Vol. 19, p. 398)

As a result, Germany was dismembered, a fifth of its population expelled from their homeland in the east, millions of them murdered or starved to death, the German industry was dismantled, patents were plundered, and the whole country deliberately left in a long-term state of starvation, resulting in several million more victims.[2]

In addition, a sophisticated re-education program was set in motion which, among other things, was designed to destroy the national pride and wish for independence of the German people once and for all. A member of the U.S. propaganda machine expressed it to a German expert in international law as follows:[3]

“No, atrocity propaganda is how we won the total war. […] And we are only getting started! We will intensify it, until the last spark of sympathy for the Germans has been eradicated and the German people themselves will be so confused that they will no longer know who they are and what they are doing.”

But that was right after the war. When the Cold War broke out in 1948 and the Germans were needed as potential cannon fodder against the Soviets, this program of genocide against the German people, originally concocted by U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Morgenthau and implemented under President Truman, was finally abandoned.

Change of scene. – The year is 1960. The birth-control pill is approved for the first time in the USA. A few years later, it is also available in Germany. As a result, the birth rate in Germany falls, first slowly, then faster and ever faster. If the German indigenous population had a birth surplus between the late 1950s and 1966, this is now changing. In 2014, the birth rate of native Germans was only enough to replace a third of the existing population. If this birth rate persists, ethnic Germans will practically be extinct within four generations, i.e. in around 100 years. The huge birth deficit is now being filled by immigrants. The German indigenous population will be completely replaced by immigrants within 100 years. What the Romans did not achieve 2000 years ago and the catastrophes of the two Thirty-Year Wars, is now happening: Finis Germaniae, the end of Germany. The situation is pretty much identical in almost all other European countries: England, Sweden, Poland, Greece, Spain, Italy, France, you name them; even in Russia. Birth rates of the indigenous populations have collapsed, mass immigration from Muslim countries and sub-Saharan Africa fills the void.

And why? Other similarly industrialized, non-European countries such as South Korea or Taiwan also have access to the pill, but without experiencing a population collapse. Nowhere is the indigenous population disappearing as quickly as in Europe. – Why?

In the face of Auschwitz, it is impossible particularly in Germany, but basically everywhere in Europe, to pursue a population policy that maintains the indigenous European population or even allows it to grow. In Germany, the situation is extreme and outright absurd. Every politician there who proposes such a policy is accused of wanting to “give the Führer a child.” Anyone who suggests that native European women or families should receive incentives to have children is confronted with stupid slogans such as “Girls, spread your legs, the Führer needs soldiers!” After Auschwitz, the German indigenous population and culture are unable to survive, and in extension all of Europe’s. This is not a coincidence. In fact, the Allied victors of World War II had a long-term strategy to deliberately reduce the German indigenous population and replace it with immigrants.[4] However, the victor’s propaganda against Germany, their re-education campaign to turn the Germans into selfish materialists with no interest in the well-being of their people, has infected all of Europe. It has not just destroyed the heart of Europe; it is in the process of wiping out all of Europe’s indigenous populations. It’s an example of a propaganda campaign that has backfired badly on the nations whose governments initiated it. And it is also slowly but surely wiping out European Americans. They may not know it yet, as they are several decades behind, but they, too, will be replaced within a century or two with immigrants (although lucky for them, in their case mainly from Latin America, hence with Christian people speaking a European language and having strongly Europeanized cultural backgrounds.)

If you don’t care about any of this, then maybe you care about free speech; about the right to criticize a government. Putin’s Russia demonstrates where curtailing these rights leads: a government brutally suppressing any dissent has gone on a war path that could potentially escalate to a world-wide nuclear Armageddon. In this case we all recognize clearly: It’s either freedom of speech, or the end of the world. It is that important!

Taboos Are Bad

A society that cordons off certain topics from public scrutiny and open debate is in trouble. Such taboos lead to problems remaining undiscussed, unaddressed and unresolved; they are like open wounds that don’t heal, but rather fester, metastasize and eventually poison an entire society, endangering its very existence.

The Holocaust has been repeatedly called Western societies’ mother of all taboos. You can have a controversial opinion about just about anything without getting in real big trouble. But having a controversial opinion on the Holocaust is like touching the “third rail” (the one that has the high voltage driving electric trains). It’s lethal – if not literally, but certainly for your social and professional life. In many countries, it’s even against the law – the Western world’s only specific topic regulated by law! It’s the West’s festering wound that poisons its entire body, preventing the discussion of many satellite taboos that have metastasized from it. It needs to be addressed, or else there will be no healing.

Majdanek

It all started in Majdanek. Majdanek is the name of a German concentration camp on the outskirts of the Polish city of Lublin. It was the first of the large German camps to be occupied by Allied troops – in the summer of 1944. It was the first camp that was widely reported in the Allied press.

During a press conference on August 25, 1944, the Soviets claimed around two million victims for this camp. About a year later, during the Nuremberg Military Tribunal, the Soviets were still claiming a death toll of up to 1.5 million. Many of these victims are said to have been killed in seven different gas chambers.

Three years after the war, a Polish “Commission to Investigate German Crimes in Poland” reduced this number to “only” 360,000. The next drop came after the collapse of the communist Eastern bloc; at that point, it was said to have been “only” 235,000 victims. The most-recent reduction to 78,000 victims took place in 2005 by the director of the Majdanek Museum. In addition, five of the seven originally claimed gas chambers were no longer mentioned, without explaining their silent scrubbing from history.[5]

Of the initially claimed 2,000,000 victims, less than 4% are now left. Critical historians have always pointed out that the number of victims was overestimated. They assume around 42,000 documentable victims. Their research also shows that there were no homicidal gas chambers at all in that camp. What was presented as such in the past were simply misunderstood or mislabeled disinfestation systems.

Corrections of Original Claims

Majdanek is not an isolated case. Here is a list of former concentration or “extermination camps” of the Third Reich. The second column gives the number of victims claimed immediately after the war, the third an approximation of the numbers claimed by the orthodoxy today, and the last column the post-war-exaggeration multiple:

Unintentionally generated, “random” differences from a set of real numbers (also called “errors”) are characterized by the fact that overestimates and underestimates are roughly equal in total. In the case of the official casualty figures published first, however, the values were always well above the official figures accepted today. This reveals that the original estimates were deliberately and systematically given far too high.

The situation is similar with the murder methods alleged for these camps. The next table contains, in the second column, murder weapons that were claimed during the war or shortly thereafter but are now abandoned as invented. The last column contains the murder weapon claimed today.[6]

6 Million Died. Petty Haggling Is Therefore Immoral!

Some things may have been exaggerated and invented in the heat of the war, but that would not prove that all claims are false, and above all that does not change the fact that 6 million Jews perished. But is this 6-million figure really a fact or just a mystical number? Since when does the world know that 6 million Jews died? And how do we know?

The fact is that this number was already mentioned by some Zionist leaders in June 1945, i.e. immediately after the end of the war, although in the chaos prevailing in Europe at the time, it was impossible to carry out population censuses. The Soviets had published this number in their propaganda press by the end of 1944, and a number of American newspapers and magazines had already prophesied during the war that the 6 million Jews living in Hitler’s sphere of influence would be systematically exterminated. The earliest such predictions were published right after Germany’s victory over France in June 1940. However, the Zionist leader Chaim Weizmann had already mentioned in 1936 that 6 million were in mortal danger.

In the 1920s, advertisements and reports in the US press raised huge sums of money to “save the 6 million Jews” who were supposed to be in mortal danger in Poland and the Soviet Union. The same number of Jews threatened with death can even be found in press reports during the First (!) World War. In fact, reports in US newspapers, especially in the New York Times, have been appearing since the late 19th Century claiming that 6 million Jews would be systematically exterminated by the anti-Semitic tsarist empire. Even the word “Holocaust” appeared for the first time in this context.

The propaganda carried out since 1880 with the 6-million number should be reason enough to be skeptical of this obviously highly symbolic number.[7]

The establishment’s only monograph on the subject – whose German title translates to The Scale of the Genocide – determined the number of Jewish victims of the Holocaust – 6 million of course! – by subtracting the numbers of Jews who lived in the countries previously ruled or occupied by Hitler a few years after the war from the numbers who lived there according to the last pre-war censuses. What is completely ignored in this method is the fact that in the meantime there had been a massive emigration of Jews to Palestine (= Israel) and above all to the USA, but also to many other countries around the globe – and this emigration was definitely encouraged and intensively promoted by the Third Reich.[8] Huge droves of emigrants who never faced any mortal danger were thus magically turned into Hitler’s victims. A factual comparison of the worldwide Jewish population – not just the European part of it – before and after the Holocaust shows completely different, significantly lower numbers of victims.[9]

One thing has to be made clear right away: Hopefully we all agree that the first victim of every persecuting state – including the Third Reich – is one too many. Whether there were thousands or millions of victims, injustice remains injustice. But unjustified accusations are wrong as well. Therefore, it must be allowed to express doubts and present opposing arguments. Those who prevent this are putting themselves in the wrong. In addition, every single one of as, whether an expert in this field or not, must always be permitted to examine facts and figures. Those who prevent this are violating our constitutionally protected freedom of conscience.

Auschwitz – Weighed and Found Wanting

“Auschwitz is the ultimate symbol of evil,” said Austrian President Heinz Fischer on the occasion of the 60th anniversary of the occupation of the Auschwitz Camp by the Red Army. Auschwitz has meanwhile become a menacing portent for everything that is, wants to be or wants to stay German, and by extension anything that is, wants to be or wants to remain European in ethnic and cultural origin.

Auschwitz is the German concentration, labor and alleged extermination camp that is the most widely reported, talked about, researched and published of all the Third-Reich camps. Auschwitz is considered to be the best researched of all the crime scenes of the Third Reich. And yet it is neglected by mainstream research, because when we look at what the historians of the Auschwitz Museum – the world’s leading orthodox Auschwitz researchers – have written on the issue of the mass extermination of Jews at Auschwitz, we are bitterly disappointed: only one 300-page book from a five-volume set that was published around the turn of the millennium deals with this topic, and that only very superficially. To counteract this embarrassing situation, the Auschwitz Museum published a small study ten years later in which 74 documents were reproduced and provided with misleading captions in order to superimpose on these evidentially innocuous or even exculpatory documents some malicious import that they do not have. Critical historians have been able to expose these defamatory falsehoods through detailed archival studies.[10]

Although the Auschwitz Museum published an 855-page Auschwitz Chronicle in 1990, claiming to chronicle the events of that camp, this book was based on a series of magazine articles from the late 1950s and early 1960s. These had been published by the Ausch­witz Museum in German in communist Poland with the transparent but unfortunately successful aim of manipulating the back-then fledgling Frankfurt Auschwitz Trial with atrocity propaganda. An in-depth analysis of this work based on today’s knowledge shows that it is full of misrepresentations, lies and deceptions.[11] Our two-volume work The Real Auschwitz Chronicle rectifies these deficiencies by showing the world what Czech tried to hide from her readers: real history based on real documents, not witness fairy tales.[12]

The orthodoxy’s Auschwitz study (left) compared to the output by revisionists (right): 20-fold overpowered.

The scholarly failure of the Auschwitz orthodoxy contrasts with critical historical research, which has presented extensive and detailed individual studies on each chapter of the topic “Mass Extermination in Auschwitz”, which together exceed 5,000 pages.[13]

1. The alleged first gassing of Auschwitz – the claimed starting point of the mass extermination – has been refuted by Mattogno as a myth of war propaganda on the basis of many documents stored in the Auschwitz Museum’s archives. The Auschwitz Museum, on the other hand, did not get beyond a few meager pages of threadbare, uncritical repetition of unfounded propaganda claims.
2. Phase two of the mass murder is said to have taken place in the crematorium of the Ausch­witz Main Camp. Its morgue is said to have temporarily served as an execution gas chamber. The Ausch­witz Museum dedicated only a few pages to this topic, based on uncritically cited “witness” testimony mostly from Stalinist show trials. Mattogno, on the other hand, wrote an entire book about it, based on archive documents, critical analysis of witness statements and forensic investigations. It proves that this crime scene, visited by millions to this day, could never have been a homicidal gas chamber for numerous reasons. It also shows that the “witnesses” saying otherwise contradicted one another and made technically impossible and at times even absurd claims.
3. The same applies to the next steps in the Ausch­witz extermination chronology: During the first half of 1942, the gassings are said to have been moved to two small peasant cottages near the Ausch­witz-Birkenau sub-camp then under construction. Again, orthodox scholars only wrote a few pages on this matter, whereas Mattogno presented two studies on this: one on the peasant cottages themselves and the mass-extermination process claimed to have occurred in them, and one on the huge outdoor pyres on which the victims of these gassing cottages are said to have been incinerated. There are no documental traces for these cottages. The allegations by witnesses are extremely conflicting, and many claims are technically absurd or impossible. The alleged outdoor mass cremations are ultimately exposed as war-time legends by Allied aerial photographs taken in 1944.
4. Finally, there are the four crematoria of the Auschwitz-Birkenau sub-camp, one after the other of which went into operation during the first half of 1943, and all of which are said to have had homicidal gas chambers and ultra-modern cremation furnaces. Once again, the Auschwitz Museum could do no better than to provide a few meager pages about this topic, whereas Mattogno contributed two massive tomes on this complex issue, which are supported by literally thousands of sources, totaling over 2,000 pages, including a three-volume technical study on the history, construction and operation as well as the efficiency of the crematoria. These studies clearly show that these facilities did not operate and could not have functioned as mass-murder devices, but rather served as instruments to bring the epidemics under control that repeatedly ravaged the camp’s inmate population. The Holocaust orthodoxy has absolutely nothing of the kind to offer.

The orthodox version of history also proves to be less than convincing when it comes to the forensic examination of the actual murder weapon involved, meaning the poison gas called Zyklon B (hydrogen cyanide absorbed on gypsum pellets) that was allegedly used in the alleged gas chambers at Auschwitz. The Auschwitz Museum merely published a superficial article on this in a Polish journal, while critical historians contributed a 460-page detailed study dealing in depth with this topic.[14] The conclusion of this is that the mass-murder scenarios alleged by witnesses were technically impossible. They should also have left chemical traces in the masonry of the alleged gassing rooms (long-term-stable compounds of hydrogen cyanide known as Iron Blue). However, no such traces can be detected.

The Witnesses

What remains are the witnesses. Here, too, Ausch­witz is a prime example, because in addition to the many SS men employed there who testified after the war, there were around 200,000 Auschwitz survivors among the former inmates. Only a tiny fraction of these survivors has testified about mass extermination, but we are still talking about many witnesses. However, if we reduce these statements to those who had first-hand experiences or who testified in sufficient detail to be taken seriously, then we are dealing with not much more than about 30 witnesses – out of 200,000 survivors!

No serious historian should take any testimony at face value which was made about events claimed to have occurred during a war in which both sides used atrocity propaganda to whip up their people and to morally wear down their enemies. Anyone who wants to be taken seriously has to critically examine statements. Is the witness trustworthy? Is his statement credible? Is it coherent or full of internal contradictions? Is it technically possible? Is it supported or refuted by more-reliable types of evidence such as documents and material evidence?[15]

Orthodox historians rarely ask such questions, and they are certainly not examined in detail by them. Critical historians again are different. Each of their books on the topic subjects testimonies to detailed source criticism. A summary of the source criticism of the 30 most-important statements about Auschwitz has found that there are insurmountable discrepancies between these statements, and that all of them, to some degree or another, either make claims that are technically impossible, and/or they contradict what is considered reliable historical knowledge based on more-reliable evidence. Hence, if lacking better evidence to support these claims, such statements must be discarded as unreliable.[16]

In the eyes of many people, the most-impressive witness statements about Auschwitz are contained in the autobiographical notes of the former commandant of Auschwitz, Rudolf Höss, which he wrote down while in Polish custody after the war. The Holocaust orthodoxy has so far essentially limited themselves to publishing these records without any criticism. Only a small journal article deals with some chronological peculiarities of Höss’s statements. In contrast to this, critical historians have devoted an entire 466-page book to this key witness.[17] It documents how Höss was continuously tortured by the British for three days after the war in order to extract a “confession” from him. It then analyzes the innumerable internal contradictions, the technical impossibilities and absurdities as well as the anachronisms in Höss’s various statements. In addition, the statements made by Höss about mass extermination are refuted by a large number of documents and other independent studies. The Allies made it clear to Höss that he would only be allowed to live as long as he would make statements considered “useful” for their purposes of legally and historically indicting the German war-time authorities responsible for “the Holocaust” and in extension the entire German nation. And so the lies gushed out of Höss for more than a year in his desperate attempt to postpone his execution as long as possible. He was hanged on April 2, 1947 in the former Auschwitz Camp, which he once commanded.

One of the most-influential witnesses among former Auschwitz inmates was the Jewish doctor Dr. Miklós Nyiszli from Hungary. His statement has also been analyzed in detail by critical historians.[18] Nyiszli claimed in his book, first published in 1946, to have worked in one of the crematoria at Auschwitz-Birkenau as an assistant to Dr. Josef Mengele, and in this position, he claimed to have witnessed the mass murder of Auschwitz in detail. His grotesquely exaggerated statements contradict the statements of other inmates. The most-aggravating circumstance damaging his trustworthiness, however, is that he reported in detail about his appearance as a witness during the Nuremberg trial – although he never appeared there as a witness. Nyiszli’s statements are therefore not usable, as it is an incontrovertible fact that he completely invented major parts of his testimony. Many orthodox historians now consider Nyiszli to be an unreliable witness. Unfortunately, many later witnesses used Nyiszli’s widely published writings as sources for plagiarism. Another doctor who claims to have been in the same place at the same time as Nyiszli – the former Auschwitz prisoner Charles S. Bendel – told a different, but equally unbelievable, version of events after the war. Both witnesses, however, knew nothing of each other, although they must have worked side by side. Both witnesses therefore made up their stories, at least in part.

The SS officer Kurt Gerstein and the former prisoner Rudolf Reder are the only witnesses who have ever testified in detail about the Belzec Camp. Here, too, only critical historians have submitted a comparative, source-critical study.[19] It shows very clearly what established historians have so far only noted incidentally: Both witnesses contradict themselves, each other, that which was technically possible, and many established historical facts. Hence, they pretty much have no credibility at all.

Another very influential witness was Elie Wiesel, whose book Night is now required reading in schools in many countries. Interestingly, Wiesel doesn’t even have anything to say about gas chambers in his book. (In the German translation, however – one must speak of forgery here – every occurrence of the word “crematorium” was translated to “gas chamber”!) According to Wiesel’s story, the people who were deported with him from Hungary to Auschwitz in May 1944 were burned in huge fire pits right next to the railway ramp, yet Allied air photos of that time prove that no burning pits ever existed there. Wiesel claimed, as did many other witnesses, that huge flames came out of the crematorium chimneys, although this was technically impossible. (The smoke flues and chimneys of these facilities were together about 30 meters long (33 yards), and the coke fires in the cremation furnaces produce practically no flames…).

Here, too, it was critical historians who presented a critical biography of Elie Wiesel and revealed his numerous misrepresentations.[20]

Three detailed studies of the testimonies of former Auschwitz inmates who claim to have removed corpses from the gas chambers and burned them come to a similarly devastating verdict. These statements are full of exaggerations, absurdities and technical impossibilities. They are also refuted by a large number of documents.[21] As already mentioned, wartime aerial photographs in particular clearly show that the gigantic outdoor pyres, on which hundreds of thousands of murdered Jews are said to have been cremated from mid-May to early July 1944, could not have existed.[22] This story of gigantic pit burnings outdoors, also rumored by Elie Wiesel, therefore clearly has to be classified as a made-up story!

In conclusion, it can be said that Auschwitz is indeed the best-researched camp of the Third Reich. However, this is not the result of orthodox research, but the result of the tireless efforts of a small group of independent researchers, who are not deterred from their search for the truth, not even by threats and persecution. The orthodox version of history of Auschwitz has been examined in detail by them and has been found wanting – mene, mene, tekel, upharsin (Old Testament, Daniel 5:25–31).

Why Are They Spreading Untruths?

After the communist Eastern Bloc collapsed in 1989/90, the excessively exaggerated claim of a total death toll of 4 million victims for the Auschwitz camp collapsed as well. Very soon, that figure was officially reduced to around one million. The Auschwitz Museum had known for many decades that the old figure was massively exaggerated, but it was only possible to change it in 1990. The Auschwitz Museum’s research curator at the time, Wáclaw Dlugoborski, explained in 1998 by what methods the myth of the four-million Auschwitz victims was sustained in the Eastern Bloc:[23]

“Up until 1989 in eastern Europe, a prohibition against casting doubt upon the figure of 4 million killed was in force; at the memorial site of Auschwitz, employees who doubted the correctness of the estimate were threatened with disciplinary proceedings.”

The freedom to say iconoclastic things on the subject of the Holocaust did not last long in Poland, however, because under Western pressure Poland introduced a criminal law in 1998 that threatens anyone who denies “Nazi crimes” with up to three years in prison. Thus, the Auschwitz Museum itself helped create those legends that make it a crime for the museum’s staff to revise them even today, although the overwhelming and self-evident weight of the evidence compel them to do so. Therefore, basically nothing has changed since Joseph Stalin.

The situation is similar in many European countries, because there, too, it is outlawed to question or even refute the orthodox dogma under threat of imprisonment. But even in countries where publicly expressed opposition to the prevailing dogma is not prosecuted, such as in the USA or Great Britain, anyone who touches this “third rail” loses their job, has their career destroyed, and is expelled from “decent society.” Anyone who as a historian wants to write honest, critical history without risking their career is therefore well advised to stay away from this topic as much as possible. What remains are mostly dogmatists who are fanatically deluded and who quickly become unobjective and emotional in the face of dissenting opinions – a reaction that is evidently expected, if not demanded, of them by the mainstream media. Independent scholars committed to objective truth, on the other hand, adhere to recognized scientific principles, such as free research in any direction which the evidence (not the media) demands, and coming to conclusions on the basis of generally verifiable facts rather than political expectations. It goes without saying that these independent, critical minds also discuss well-founded, divergent views published by their opponents without prejudice and without personal attacks on those opponents.

Critical historians have committed themselves without exception to working as scholars on the basis of generally accepted scientific standards. They see any different kind of approach as unethical, and such an approach would also render their work worthless, into which they invest so much under such extremely difficult circumstances. Those standards include a detailed, sober and factual discussion and evaluation of all relevant publications by authors with different views. Some of their studies are even devoted exclusively to the criticism of publications by conventional schools of thought on the Holocaust.[24]

Studies that do not even mention, let alone discuss, publications containing opposing views, and which tacitly ignore opposing arguments, must be adjudged unscientific. This applies consistently to the entire range of orthodox publications on the Holocaust. However, it is not these that are described by politics, the judiciary and the media as unscientific or “pseudoscientific”, but, turning reality upside down, it is the publications of critical historians that are thusly disparaged. This false diametric mislabeling is often used to justify and initiate censorship and bans.

Censorship

As a result of this egregious misrepresentation of the studies created by critical historians, these studies are confiscated and burned under police supervision in many European countries, Germany foremost among them. These countries’ book wholesalers and retailers are not allowed to offer such books for sale under threat of punishment. These countries’ media are not allowed to advertise such books under threat of punishment. But even in countries where no such laws exist, censorship prevails in many regards. YouTube, for instance, deletes all videos and associated accounts that contain critical statements about orthodox Holocaust claims, no matter how well-founded and justified. Amazon and other international bookstores are deleting all book offers from critical historians from their websites – everywhere in the world!

The reason for this is as follows: towards the end of 2016/beginning of 2017, there was a trend reversal on Amazon. For the first time in history, Amazon sold more books by critical historians on the Holocaust than equivalent books published by the orthodoxy. After years of steady growth, the tipping point was reached where the audience realized that there are two sides to this debate. More and more people were interested in hearing the other side as well. A paradigm shift loomed.

But then the emergency brake was pulled in Israel. Two Jewish cemeteries in the US were desecrated (by a storm, as it later turned out). Together with other Jewish organizations, the Jerusalem Holocaust Center Yad Vashem used this as an opportunity to put Amazon under pressure to censor all books by critical historians. At the same time, an Israeli, who was later arrested for this, made hundreds of bomb threats against Jewish community centers in the United States via fake phone calls. The result of this false-flag operation was that Amazon stopped selling critical books on the Holocaust.[25]

When critical research into the Holocaust achieved great success in the early 1990s, countermeasures were taken in Germany. Who knows that verbal minutes have never been kept in German criminal trials so that the judges can write whatever suits them in their judgments? In addition, the defense was deprived of the right to introduce exonerating evidence in the 1970s. Since then, the defense has had to ask the judges to do that! In view of the success of critical historians, it was enforced in the 1990s that the judges in trials against history dissidents can – in principle, must – reject all requests for evidence from the defense. If they do not, they will face criminal prosecution themselves. The next step was to ensure that defense lawyers and defendants who still submit evidence to support dissident views can be punished for this. Then a law was passed that allows judges to gag the defense attorney altogether!

All of this shows that the U.S.’s founding fathers were ingenious when adding the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, but that the peoples in many other countries were less fortunate. It also shows that having a constitutionally guaranteed right isn’t enough. Corporate censorship by companies that have quasi-monopoly status can be quite as effective as laws enforced at the point of a gun. A democracy depends on citizens being able to access information unimpededly. Hence, where there is censorship, democracy is a mere joke. And a state that dictates at the point of a gun what we can and cannot say is a dictatorship.

Lies have to rely on bayonets to survive. – The truth stands by itself!

Mass Shootings by Task Forces

The Holocaust allegedly did not start with the extermination Camps Auschwitz, Treblinka, etc., which later became notorious, but rather in a rather rampant way by means of uncontrolled mass shootings of Jews by German task forces (Einsatzgruppen) on the territory of the Soviet Union after the outbreak of the German-Soviet war.

The orthodoxy has presented quite a large number of studies on this subject, all of which are characterized by the fact that testimonies are accepted uncritically, Soviet war propaganda is believed unseen, and the contents of documents are adopted without being examined.

In view of the escalation that Stalin began right at the beginning of this war, there is no question that massacres also occurred on the German side, and since Jews were regarded as the ultimate enemy by the Third Reich, it can be assumed that Jews, who were vastly overrepresented in partisan activities against German units, were the primary victims in such incidents. The question is, however, to what extent this happened and whether there was an intention and a system of genocide behind it.

Again, a detailed study by a critical historian was required to make it clear that here as well, orthodox scholars produced misleading, incorrect and incomplete representations.[26] First of all, not only is there a lack of documentary evidence of a genocide plan, but on the contrary, the documents indicate that such a policy did not exist.

Orthodox researchers have already established that the so-called task-force reports, which show the number of civilians murdered by these units, are often contradictory of themselves. In his study, Mattogno meticulously reveals all the numerical inconsistencies and contradictions of the various task-force reports. In order to clarify whether, and if so, to what extent the numbers of victims listed therein, sometimes implausible from the start, correspond to reality, one would have to locate at least a representative number of mass graves, exhume them and carefully examine their contents forensically. Unfortunately, however, this is prevented mainly by Jewish organizations who assert that their religion forbids disturbing the graves. Hence, scholars instead continue to rely on obviously unreliable documents as well as on testimonies mainly collected by Stalinist post-war commissions which are often peppered with absurdities, especially when it comes to claims about exhumations with subsequent cremation of the murder victims on huge pyres, as allegedly carried out by German forces since early 1943.

Gas Vans

The alleged plan to annihilate the European Jews, although undocumented, is said to have been given a material structure for the first time in the form of the claimed extermination camp near the town Kulmhof/Chełmno in German-occupied Poland. Three so-called gas vans are said to have been used in this camp, meaning trucks with a cargo box into which the exhaust gases from the truck’s engine were discharged in order to kill victims locked up inside. It was again critical historians who for the first time ever presented detailed studies on both the subject of Chełmno and the gas vans.[27]

A whole series of 30 Diesel trucks of the Saurer make is said to have been converted into gas vans and then used in the Soviet Union by the task forces for gas murders. The problem with this is that Diesel exhaust contains too little toxic carbon monoxide to be effective in killing anyone. Experiments with small mammals, which are much more sensitive than humans, have shown that it takes up to five hours to kill them with Diesel exhaust under the most lethal circumstances.

The origin of the myth of Diesel gas vans can be found in Soviet propaganda starting in 1943, when show trials were conducted against Ukrainian collaborators and German prisoners of war in Kharkov and Krasnodar. Use of a Diesel engine was touted as a diabolical German invention.

A very thorough overview of the testimony presented in support of the gas-van hypothesis clearly shows that the witnesses testified everything imaginable and even the unthinkable on this subject. No fantasy was bizarre enough not to be testified to and accepted in this regard. This is the inevitable result if “Holocaust survivors” are glorified as living saints beyond critique, and anything they say is blindly accepted as unquestionable truth. Such arbitrary testimonies are of no use. As expected, there are no documentary or material traces of these gas vans. None of these gas vans has ever been found, no photo has ever been presented, and no document indicates that such vehicles have ever been built or converted for murder purposes. It’s all “smoke and mirrors.”

Mass Graves, Mass Incineration, Exhumations

Of the five camps called “extermination camps” by the orthodoxy, only Auschwitz had regular crematoria. Chełmno is said to have had a primitive field furnace set into the ground, while at Bełżec, Sobibór and Treblinka, the corpses are said to have been burned on rail grates within a short period of time.

The few works that orthodox researchers have published on these camps so far are characterized by a complete lack of consideration for the logistical challenges that the construction and maintenance of the number and size of pyres would have posed which would have been required for the quantity of corpses claimed to have been burned on them. (Compare Dalton’s book on Debating the Holocaust, presented below, in which the arguments of both sides are compared.) Thousands of corpses are said to have been dug up from mass graves in these camps every day and then burned on pyres. However, if you look at the testimonies of so-called camp survivors, you get the impression that these pyres built themselves, that no fuel was needed to keep them aflame, and that the unburned remains of more than a million incompletely combusted human corpses dissolved into thin air all by themselves.

More-or-less-detailed forensic investigations on the grounds of these former camps, which have been carried out by orthodox researchers especially in the last two decades, have led to great disappointments, especially with regard to Bełżec and Treblinka. Due to the high number of victims claimed for these camps, massive traces of huge mass graves and cremation pits were to be expected, but this could not be confirmed.[28] Therefore, Dr. Thomas Dalton wrote the following on the Treblinka Camp in his previously mentioned book:

“I think it’s safe to say that, after 75 long years, the orthodox story of the Treblinka death camp is all but dead.”

Not the least reason for this is the fact that for 70 years it was claimed that at the Bełżec and Treblinka Camps the Jews were murdered with Diesel-exhaust gases. In the meantime, however, orthodoxy has had to admit that this would not have been possible because Diesel-exhaust gases are simply not toxic enough. After all other alleged murder methods for the Treblinka and Bełżec camps had previously been dropped (see the table on page 135), there are no supporting facts for the thesis that they were “extermination camps.”[29]

Don’t Lose Your Firm Footing!

After absorbing information such as that presented in this brochure, the following reactions can be expected from many people who have previously only known the officially approved version of this irksome and charged complex of topics:

1. Spontaneous and outraged rejection, maybe even calls to the police. People with such intense, emotional reactions often quit reading after just a few lines, or they cannot comprehend the facts presented due to their prejudices.
2. Moral confusion, disbelief, horror, maybe even anger: “If all this is true, then we all have been lied to and have been betrayed in the most serious way. How can you still believe anything at all?”

Believe French historian Paul Rassinier. Because he obtained false passports for Jews during World War Two so they could flee from France, the Germans arrested and deported him to the Buchenwald Camp and later to the Dora-Mittelbau Forced-Labor Camp. After the war, Rassinier wrote a book about his experiences. In it you can read how the prisoners in the German camps suffered from privation and abuse, but also how his fellow inmates often enough spread bizarre exaggerations about the concentration camps after the war, for various reasons.[30]

Rassinier reminds us that the Third Reich was a dictatorship that trampled civil rights underfoot. Nobody should wish for something like that to happen again. You don’t need gas chambers or a plan of mass murder to commit such crass violations of civil rights. A relativistic attitude towards civil rights is enough to turn a community into hell for certain minorities. This is no different in Germany and many other European countries today, where many people seriously believe that it is necessary to burn books and persecute dissidents in order to prevent another system to rise that burns books and persecutes dissidents. They don’t realize that they are the new tyrants.

By showing that today’s historiography of the Third Reich is inaccurate in many areas,[31] we are not justifying the crimes actually committed at the time, which are plenty, but rather we are exposing the hypocrisy of many of today’s Western societies that pay lip service to civil rights (particularly when violated by China or North Korea), but that react no differently from the Third Reich to dissident voices they violently reject: with censorship, bans, persecution and prosecution.

Today we do not need less rule of law and democracy, on the contrary, we need much more rule of law and democracy!

Here You Can Find More Information

We encourage you to critically question what has been set out here. The subject is far too important and the consequences of deviating from the official version too serious to be taken lightly. In addition, we are not infallible. We make mistakes, and we have to revise our opinion on occasion, just as you hopefully will revise yours as needed. Therefore, inform yourself in detail before you form an opinion, which must also be continuously updated to reflect new information.

The best way to get concise up-to-date information on critical research on the Holocaust is by visiting the revisionist Holocaust Encyclopedia at www.NukeBook.org. It is continually updated and expanded. This encyclopedia can also be obtained as a reference book (ebook, audio book, soft- and hardcover).[32]

If you are looking for introductory books on the subject, we suggest the following titles:

The best brief introduction into the topic of the Holocaust is Thomas Dalton’s very affordably priced 115-page booklet The Holocaust: An Introduction (Castle Hill Publishers, Uckfield, 2016).

For some more detailed information, we recommend Breaking the Spell: The Holocaust, Myth & Reality (center right). In this work, English science historian Dr. Nicholas Kollerstrom explains the Holocaust issue in readily accessible terms from both a scientific and a societal point of view. With around 260 pages of text, this book has become our best-seller in the Holocaust category (7th ed., Armreg, London, 2024).

The 310-page book Debating the Holocaust goes a little deeper into the subject. Professor of philosophy Dr. Dalton probes the subject by contrasting and comparing the main arguments of both sides in this dispute, which officially does not even exist (4th ed., Castle Hill Publishers, Uckfield, 2020).

For an even more comprehensive book of almost encyclopedic scope, we recommend the 530-pages Lectures on the Holocaust (4th ed., Castle Hill Publishers, Bargoed, 2023), which has been called a reference work due to its extensive coverage of the topic. Due to its unusual style of dialogue, the book is at the same time a gripping read, because these dialogues draw the reader straight into the debate. Despite its size, the book is very reasonably priced, and can be downloaded as a free e-book at Holocaust​Handbooks.com.

For those who really want to learn all the details, we recommend the individual volumes of our Holocaust Handbooks series. Most of them can be downloaded free of charge from www.HolocaustHandbooks.com as e-books (PDF, ePub). Hence, it doesn’t cost you anything to get the information these books contain, and you can even redistribute them free of charge.

Finally, find free video documentaries at Holocaust​Handbooks.com.

Endnotes