The way they are using it is a matter of intimating threatening other or
scare anyone that tares to ask questions. Anyone who dares to ask
questions
is considered a holocaust denier. Whoever does asks questions is only
doing
so because he wants to deny the holocaust . Likewise we could say they
have
something to hide. What other reason would there be for them victimizing
whole nations and force the to only believe what they are saying. A
society
like this that har***** and intimidate other can simply not be trusted.
Kurt Knoll.
"nowarforisrael.com" <zzzxtyryyetytryey@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:8ceadbab-b3e5-40ba-9e92-2c4ada9f7ca7@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
for yourself: Judea Declares War on Germany - The Real Holocaust
parts 1-9
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_bScdXLfZY
What is 'Holocaust Denial'?
By Barbara Kulaszka
In recent years, considerable attention has been devoted to the
supposed danger of "Holocaust denial." Politicians, newspapers and
television warn about the growing influence of those who reject the
Holocaust story that some six million European Jews were
systematically exterminated during the Second World War, most of them
in gas chambers.
In several countries, including Israel, France, Germany and Austria,
"Holocaust denial" is against the law, and "deniers" have been
punished with stiff fines and prison sentences. Some Jewish community
leaders have called for similar measures in North America. In Canada,
David Matas, Senior Counsel for the "League for Human Rights" of the
Zionist B'nai B'rith organization, says: [1]
"The Holocaust was the murder of six million Jews, including two
million children. Holocaust denial is a second murder of those same
six million. First their lives were extinguished; then their deaths. A
person who denies the Holocaust becomes part of the crime of the
Holocaust itself."
Often overlooked in this controversy is the crucial question: Just
what constitutes "Holocaust denial"?
Six Million?
Should someone be considered a "Holocaust denier" because he does not
believe - as Matas and many others insist - that six million Jews were
killed during World War II? This figure was cited by the International
Military Tribunal at Nuremberg in 1945-1946. It found that "the policy
pursued [by the German government] resulted in the killing of six
million Jews, of which four million were killed in the extermination
institutions." [2]
Yet if that is so, then several of the most prominent Holocaust
historians could be regarded as "deniers." Professor Raul Hilberg,
author of the standard reference work, The Destruction of the European
Jews, does not accept that six million Jews died. He puts the total of
deaths (from all causes) at 5.1 million. Gerald Reitlinger, author of
The Final Solution, likewise did not accept the six million figure. He
estimated the figure of Jewish wartime dead might be as high as 4.6
million, but admitted that this was conjectural due to a lack of
reliable information.
Human Soap?
Is someone a "Holocaust denier" if he says that the Nazis did not make
soap from the corpses of murdered Jews? After considering the evidence
- including an actual bar of soap supplied by the Soviets - the
Nuremberg Tribunal declared in its Judgment that "in some instances
attempts were made to utilize the fat from the bodies of the victims
in the commercial manufacture of soap." [3]
In 1990, though, Israel's official Yad Vashem Holocaust center
"rewrote history" by admitting that the soap story was not true.
"Historians have concluded that soap was not made from human fat. When
so many people deny the Holocaust ever happened, why give them
something to use against the truth?," said Yad Vashem official Shmuel
Krakowski. [4]
Wannsee Conference?
Is someone a "Holocaust denier" if he does not accept that the January
1942 "Wannsee conference" of German bureaucrats was held to set or
coordinate a program of systematic mass murder of Europe's Jews? If
so, Israeli Holocaust historian Yehuda Bauer must be wrong - and a
"Holocaust denier" - because he declared: "The public still repeats,
time after time, the silly story that at Wannsee the extermination of
the Jews was arrived at." In Bauer's opinion, Wannsee was a meeting
but "hardly a conference" and "little of what was said there was
executed in detail." [5]
Extermination Policy?
Is someone a "Holocaust denier" if he says that there was no order by
Hitler to exterminate Europe's Jews? There was a time when the answer
would have been yes. Holocaust historian Raul Hilberg, for example,
wrote in the 1961 edition of his study, The Destruction of the
European Jews, that there were two Hitler orders for the destruction
of Europe's Jews: the first given in the spring of 1941, and the
second shortly thereafter. But Hilberg removed mention of any such
order from the revised, three-volume edition of his book published in
1985. [6] As Holocaust historian Christopher Browning has noted: [7]
"In the new edition, all references in the text to a Hitler
decision or Hitler order for the `Final Solution' have been
systematically excised. Buried at the bottom of a single footnote
stands the solitary reference: `Chronology and cir***stances point to
a Hitler decision before the summer ended.' In the new edition,
decisions were not made and orders were not given."
A lack of hard evidence for an extermination order by Hitler has
contributed to a controversy that divides Holocaust historians into
"intentionalists" and "functionalists." The former contend that there
was a premeditated extermination policy ordered by Hitler, while the
latter hold that Germany's wartime "final solution" Jewish policy
evolved at lower levels in response to cir***stances. But the crucial
point here is this: notwithstanding the capture of literally tons of
German do***ents after the war, no one can point to do***entary
evidence of a wartime extermination order, plan or program. This was
admitted by Professor Hilberg during his testimony in the 1985 trial
in Toronto of German-Canadian publisher Ernst Zündel. [8]
Auschwitz
So just what constitutes "Holocaust denial"? Surely a claim that most
Auschwitz inmates died from disease and not systematic extermination
in gas chambers would be "denial." But perhaps not. Jewish historian
Arno J. Mayer, a Princeton University professor, wrote in his 1988
study Why Did the Heavens Not Darken?: The 'Final Solution' in
History: "...From 1942 to 1945, certainly at Auschwitz , but probably
overall, more Jews were killed by so-called 'natural' causes than by
'unnatural' ones." [9]
Even estimates of the number of people who died at Auschwitz -
allegedly the main extermination center - are no longer clear cut. At
the postwar Nuremberg Tribunal, the Allies charged that the Germans
exterminated four million people at Auschwitz. [10] Until 1990, a
memorial plaque at Auschwitz read: "Four Million People Suffered and
Died Here at the Hands of the Nazi Murderers Between the Years 1940
and 1945." [11]
Is it "Holocaust denial" to dispute these four million deaths? Not
today. In July 1990, the Polish government's Auschwitz State Museum,
along with Israel's Yad Vashem Holocaust center, conceded that the
four million figure was a gross exaggeration, and references to it
were accordingly removed from the Auschwitz monument. Israeli and
Polish officials announced a tentative revised toll of 1.1 million
Auschwitz dead. [12] In 1993, French Holocaust researcher Jean-Claude
Pressac, in a much-discussed book about Auschwitz, estimated that
altogether about 775,000 died there during the war years. [13]
Professor Mayer acknowledges that the question of how many really died
in Auschwitz remains open. In Why Did the Heavens Not Darken? he
wrote: [14}
"... Many questions remain open ... All in all, how many bodies were
cremated in Auschwitz? How many died there all told? What was the
national, religious, and ethnic breakdown in this commonwealth of
victims? How many of them were condemned to die a 'natural' death and
how many were deliberately slaughtered? And what was the pro****tion of
Jews among those murdered in cold blood among these gassed? We have
simply no answers to these questions at this time."
Gas Chambers
What about denying the existence of extermination "gas chambers"? Here
too, Mayer makes a startling statement: "Sources for the study of the
gas chambers are at once rare and unreliable." While Mayer believes
that such chambers did exist at Auschwitz, he points out that "most of
what is known is based on the depositions of Nazi officials and
executioners at postwar trials and on the memory of survivors and
bystanders. This testimony must be screened carefully, since it can be
influenced by subjective factors of great complexity." [15}
Höss Testimony
One example of this might be the testimony of Rudolf Höss, an SS
officer who served as commandant of Auschwitz. In its Judgment, the
Nuremberg International Military Tribunal quoted at length from his
testimony to sup****t its findings of extermination. [16]
It is now well established that Höss' crucial testimony, as well as
his so-called "confession" - which was also cited by the Nuremberg
Tribunal - are not only false, but were obtained by beating the former
commandant nearly to death. [17] Höss' wife and children were also
threatened with death and de****tation to Siberia. In his statement -
which would not be admissible today in any United States court of law
- Höss claimed the existence of an extermination camp called "Wolzek."
In fact, no such camp ever existed. He further claimed that during the
time that he was commandant of Auschwitz, two and a half million
people were exterminated there, and that a further half million died
of disease. [18] Today no reputable historian upholds these figures.
Höss was obviously willing to say anything, sign anything and do
anything to stop the torture, and to try to save himself and his
family.
Forensic Investigations
In his 1988 book, Professor Mayer calls for "excavations at the
killing sites and in their immediate environs" to determine more about
the gas chambers. In fact, such forensic studies have been made. The
first was conducted in 1988 by American execution equipment
consultant, Fred A. Leuchter, Jr. He carried out an on-site forensic
examination of the alleged gas chambers at Auschwitz, Birkenau and
Majdanek to determine if they could have been used to kill people as
claimed. After a careful study of the alleged killing facilities,
Leuchter concluded that the sites were not used, and could not have
been used, as homicidal gas chambers. Furthermore, an analysis of
samples taken by Leuchter from the walls and floors of the alleged gas
chambers showed either no or minuscule traces of cyanide compound,
from the active ingredient of Zyklon B, the pesticide allegedly used
to murder Jews at Auschwitz. [19]
A confidential forensic examination (and subsequent re****t)
commissioned by the Auschwitz State Museum and conducted by Institute
of Forensic Research in Krakow has confirmed Leuchter's finding that
minimal or no traces of cyanide compound can be found in the sites
alleged to have been gas chambers. [20]
The significance of this is evident when the results of the forensic
examination of the alleged homicidal gas chambers are compared with
the results of the examination of the Auschwitz disinfestation
facilities, where Zyklon B was used to delouse mattresses and
clothing. Whereas no or only trace amounts of cyanide were found in
the alleged homicidal gas chambers, massive traces of cyanide were
found in the walls and floor in the camp's disinfestation delousing
chambers.
Another forensic study was carried out by German chemist Germar
Rudolf. On the basis of his on-site examination and analysis of
samples, the certified chemist and doctoral candidate concluded: "For
chemical-technical reasons, the claimed mass gassings with hydrocyanic
acid in the alleged 'gas chambers' in Auschwitz did not take place ...
The supposed facilities for mass killing in Auschwitz and Birkenau
were not suitable for this purpose..." [21]
There is also the study of Austrian engineer Walter Lüftl, a respected
expert witness in numerous court cases, and former president of
Austria's professional association of engineers. In a 1992 re****t he
called the alleged mass extermination of Jews in gas chambers
"technically impossible." [22]
Discredited Perspective
So just what constitutes "Holocaust denial"? Those who sup****t
criminal persecution of "Holocaust deniers" seem to be still living in
the world of 1946 where the Allied officials of the Nuremberg Tribunal
have just pronounced their verdict. But the Tribunal's findings can no
longer be assumed to be valid. Because it relied so heavily on such
untrustworthy evidence as the Höss testimony, some of its most
critical findings are now discredited.
For purposes of their own, powerful special interest groups
desperately seek to keep substantive discussion of the Holocaust story
taboo. One of the ways they do this is by purposely mischaracterizing
revisionist scholars as "deniers." But the truth can't be suppressed
forever: There is a very real and growing controversy about what
actually happened to Europe's Jews during World War II.
Let this issue be settled as all great historical controversies are
resolved: through free inquiry and open debate in our journals,
newspapers and classrooms.
Notes
1. The Globe and Mail (Toronto), Jan. 22, 1992.
2. Trial of the Major War Criminals Before the International Military
Tribunal (IMT "blue series"), Vol. 22, p. 496.
3. IMT "blue series," Vol. 22, p. 496.
4. The Globe and Mail (Toronto), April 25, 1990; See also: M. Weber,
"Jewish Soap," The Journal of Historical Review, Summer 1991.
5. The Canadian Jewish News (Toronto), Jan. 30, 1992, p. 8.
6. See: Barbara Kulaszka, ed., Did Six Million Really Die: Re****t of
the Evidence in the Canadian 'False News' Trial of Ernst Zündel
(Toronto: Samisdat, 1992), pp. 192, 300, 349.
7. C. Browning, "The Revised Hilberg," Simon Wiesenthal Annual, Vol.
3, 1986, p. 294; B. Kulaszka, ed., Did Six Million Really Die (1992),
p. 117.
8. B. Kulaszka, ed., Did Six Million Really Die (1992), pp. 24-25.
9. A. Mayer, Why Did the Heavens Not Darken?: The 'Final Solution' in
History (Pantheon, 1988), p. 365.
10. Nuremberg do***ent 008-USSR, in IMT "blue series," Vol. 39, pp.
241, 261.
11. B. Kulaszka, ed., Did Six Million Really Die (1992), p. 441.
12. Y. Bauer, "Fighting the Distortions," The Jerusalem Post (Israel),
Sept. 22, 1989; "Auschwitz Deaths Reduced to a Million," The Daily
Telegraph (London), July 17, 1990; " Poland Reduces Auschwitz Death
Toll Estimate to 1 Million," The Wa****ngton Times, July 17, 1990.
13. J.-C. Pressac, Les Crémetoires d'Auschwitz: La machinerie du
meurtre de masse (Paris: CNRS, 1993), p. 148. See also: R. Faurisson,
"Jean-Claude Pressac's New Auschwitz Book," The Journal of Historical
Review, Jan.-Feb. 1994, p. 24.
14. A. Mayer, Why Did the Heavens Not Darken? (1988), p. 366.
15. A. Mayer, Why Did the Heavens Not Darken? (1988), pp. 362-363.
16. IMT "blue series," Vol. 1, pp. 251-252; Nuremberg do***ent 3868-
PS, in IMT "blue series," Vol. 33, pp. 275-279.
17. Rupert Butler, Legions of Death (England: 1983), pp. 235-237.
18. See: R. Faurisson, "How the British Obtained the Confession of
Rudolf Höss," The Journal of Historical Review, Winter 1986-87, pp.
389-403.
19. See, for example: B. Kulaszka, ed., Did Six Million Really Die
(1992), pp. 469-502. See also: M. Weber, "Fred Leuchter: Courageous
Defender of Historical Truth," The Journal of Historical Review,
Winter 1992-93, pp. 421-428
( http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v12/v12p421_Weber.html
)
20. "An Official Polish Re****t on the Auschwitz 'Gas Chambers'," The
Journal of Historical Review, Summer 1991, pp. 207-216.
21. G. Rudolf, Gutachten ueber die Bildung und Nachweisbarkeit von
Cyanidverbindungen in den 'Gaskammern' von Auschwitz (London: 1993)
( http://www.vho.org/D/rga/
); The Rudolf Re****t (in English) (
http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/trr/
)
22. "The 'Lüftl Re****t'," The Journal of Historical Review, Winter
1992-93.
This essay is adapted from a text first published in 1992 by the
Canadian Free Speech League.
About the Author
Barbara Kulaszka is a Canadian lawyer who practices law in Brighton,
Ontario. She is best known for her work in free speech cases. During
the 1988 "Holocaust trial" in Toronto, she served a co-counsel (with
Doug Christie) for defendant Ernst Zundel. In 1999 she was awarded the
"George Orwell Award" by the Canadian Free Speech League.
#2014 01/2007 (Revised)
This essay, and others in this series, are available in handy leaflet
format, ideal for wide distribution. They can be ordered, postpaid, at
these prices:
20 copies, $2.00 :: 50 copies, $4.00 :: 100 copies or more, 5
cents each.
Institute for Historical Review
P.O. Box 2739 -- New****t Beach, CA 92659 -- USA
ihr@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
