Statement of Purpose
Committee for Open Debate of the Holocaust
CODOH was founded to encourage
intellectual freedom with respect to the Holocaust. CODOH is not a
membership organization and is not affiliated with any political party or
It is not the purpose of CODOH to prove "the
Holocaust never happened," or that European Jews did not suffer a
catastrophe during the Hitlerian regime. Those who try to convince you it is
want to muddy the waters. While we no longer believe the gas chamber stories
(we used to very much believe them) or the "genocide" theory, we remain open
to being convinced we are wrong.
I understand perfectly well that the Hitlerian regime was anti-Semitic and
persecuted Jews and others. I understand many peoples, European Jews among
them, experienced unfathomable tragedies in Europe during World War II.
Nevertheless, I no longer believe the German State pursued a plan to kill
all Jews or used homicidal "gassing chambers" for mass murder.
The reasons I no longer believe either story are that no physical remains of
authentic homicidal gassing chambers exist today, and there are no war-time
generated documents which prove they ever did. I believe the gas chamber
story to be a grotesque hoax.
For half a century the gas chambers have been at the heart of the holocaust
story. In the literature, the two have been absolutely inseparable.
It's tempting to say:
"No gas chambers, no Holocaust."
I have said it myself. But too often it can
be--has been--misleading, particularly to those who are just becoming
acquainted with revisionist theory. It's misleading because it suggests
that, if there were no gas chambers--and there were not--the Jews of Europe
did not suffer a tragedy at the hands of the Hitlerian regime. They did.
While it is true that the Germans were criminally responsible for the death
of a large number of their slave labor prisoners, much eyewitness testimony
about German atrocities against Jews and others is demonstrably false. It's
wrong to bear false witness against others--most of us were taught to
understand this when we were children. False testimony against anyone,
including Germans, together with those who promote it, should be exposed to
the light of public scrutiny.
The attempt to identify every call for open discussion about the gas chamber
controversy with anti-Jewish sentiment is juvenile. Those who protest that
it is more important to be sensitive to "survivors" than truthful about the
historical record represent a world view that has no place in Western
I'm willing to be convinced I'm wrong about any or all of this. I'm willing
to be convinced it is hateful to weigh the evidence for and against gas
chambers. I'm willing to consider the possibility that the press and our
intellectual elites are justified in their efforts to suppress open
discussion about the gas chambers. I'm even willing to discuss the idea that
intellectual freedom corrupts public discourse when it involves the gas
I'm not willing to go away, however. I don't know why, but I'm not willing.
Back to Contents
Controversy - The Case for Open Debate
The Contemporary Issue
NO SUBJECT ENRAGES campus Thought Police more than Holocaust Revisionism. We
debate every other great historical issue as a matter of course, but
influential pressure groups with private agendas have made the Holocaust
story an exception.
Elitist dogma manipulated by special interest
groups corrupts everything in academia. Students should be encouraged to
investigate the Holocaust story the same way they are encouraged to
investigate every other historical event. This isn't a radical point of
The premises for it were worked out centuries
ago during a little something called the Enlightenment.
The Historical Issue
REVISIONISTS AGREE with establishment historians that the German National
Socialist State singled out the Jewish people for special and cruel
treatment. In addition to viewing Jews in the framework of traditional
anti-Semitism, the Nazis also saw them as being an influential force behind
international Communism. During the Second World War, Jews were considered
to be enemies of the State and a potential danger to the war effort, much
like the Japanese were viewed in this country.
Consequently, Jews were stripped of their
rights, forced to live in ghettos, conscripted for labor, deprived of their
property, deported from the country of their birth and otherwise mistreated.
Many tragically perished in the maelstrom.
Revisionists part company with establishment historians in that Revisionists
deny that the German State had a policy to exterminate the Jewish people (or
anyone else) by putting them to death in gas chambers or by killing them
through abuse or neglect.
Revisionists also maintain that the figure of 6
million Jewish deaths is an irresponsible exaggeration, and that no
execution gas chambers existed in any camp in Europe which was under German
control. Fumigation gas chambers did exist to delouse clothing and equipment
to prevent disease at the camps. It is very likely that it was from this
life-saving procedure that the myth of extermination gas chambers emerged.
Revisionists generally hold that the Allied governments decided to carry
their wartime "black propaganda" of German monstrosity over into the postwar
period. This was done for essentially three reasons. First, they felt it
necessary to continue to justify the great sacrifices that were made in
fighting two world wars. A second reason was that they wanted to divert
attention from and to justify their own particularly brutal crimes against
humanity which, apart from Soviet atrocities, involved massive incendiary
bombings of the civilian populations of German and Japanese cities.
The third and perhaps most important reason was
that they needed justification for the postwar arrangements which, among
other things, involved the annexation of large parts of Germany into Poland.
These territories were not disputed borderlands but included huge parts of
Germany proper. The millions of Germans living in these regions were to be
dispossessed of their property and brutally expelled from their homelands.
Many hundreds of thousands were to perish in the process.
A similar fate was to befall the Sudeten
During the war, and in the postwar era as well, Zionist organizations joined
with the Allied Governments and became deeply involved in creating and
promulgating anti-German hate propaganda. There is little doubt that their
purpose was to drum up world sympathy and political and financial support
for Jewish causes, especially for the formation of the State of Israel.
Today, while the political benefits of the
Holocaust story have largely dissipated for the others, the story still
plays an important role in the ambitions of Zionists and other organizations
in the Jewish community. It is the leaders of these political and propaganda
organizations who continue to work to sustain the orthodox Holocaust legend
and the myth of German monstrosity during the Second World War.
Those who would claim that these interpretations are anti-Jewish are reading
into them something which simply is not there. Revisionists do not claim
that Jewish leaders or organizations did anything in the war and postwar era
that the Allied Governments themselves did not do.
For those who believe that the Nuremberg Trials revealed the truth about
German war crimes, it is a bracing shock to discover that the then Chief
Justice of the US Supreme Court, Harlan Fiske Stone, described the Nuremberg
court as "a high grade lynching party for Germans."
WE'VE ALL SEEN "The Photographs." Endlessly. Newsreel photos taken by US and
British photographers at the liberation of the German camps, and especially
the awful scenes at Dachau, Buchenwald and Bergen-Belsen. These films are
typically presented in a way in which it is either stated or implied that
the scenes resulted from deliberate policies on the part of the Germans.
The photographs are real. The uses to which they have been put are base.
There was no German policy at any of those camps to deliberately kill the
internees. In the last months of the war, while Soviet armies were advancing
on Germany from the east, the British and US air arms were destroying every
major city in Germany with saturation bombing. Transportation, the food
distribution system and medical and sanitation services all broke down. That
was the purpose of the Allied bombing, which has been described as the most
barbarous form of warfare in Europe since the Mongol invasions.
Millions of refugees fleeing the Soviet armies were pouring into Germany.
The camps still under German control were overwhelmed with internees from
the east. By early 1945 the inmate population was swept by malnutrition and
by epidemics of typhus, typhoid, dysentery and chronic diarrhea. Even the
mortuary systems broke down. When the press entered the camps with British
and US soldiers, they found the results of all that. They took "The
Still, at camps such as Buchenwald, Dachau and Bergen-Belsen tens of
thousands of relatively healthy internees were liberated. They were there in
the camps when "The Photographs" were taken. There are newsreels of these
internees walking through the camps streets laughing and talking. Others
picture exuberant internees throwing their caps in the air and cheering
It is only natural to ask why you haven't seen
those particular films and photos while you've seen the others scores and
even hundreds of times.
SPOKESMEN FOR THE HOLOCAUST LOBBY like to assure us that there are "tons" of
captured German documents which prove the Jewish genocide. When challenged
on this, however, they can produce only a handful of documents, the
authenticity or interpretation of which is always highly questionable.
If pressed for reliable documentation, the Lobby
will then reverse itself and claim that the Germans destroyed all the
relevant documents to hide their evil deeds, or it will make the absurd
claim that the Germans used a simplistic code language or whispered verbal
orders for mass murders into each others' ears.
With regard to the alleged genocide of the European Jews, all available
documentation indicates that there was no order for it, no plan, no budget,
no weapon (that is, no so-called execution gas chamber) and no victim (that
is, not a single autopsied body at any camp has been shown to have been
AS DOCUMENTARY "PROOFS" for the mass murder of the European Jews fall by the
wayside, Holocaust historians depend increasingly on "eyewitness"
testimonies to support their theories. Many of these testimonies are
ludicrously unreliable. History is filled with stories of masses of people
claiming to be eyewitnesses to everything from witchcraft to flying saucers.
During and after the war there were "eyewitnesses" to mass murder in gas
chambers at Buchenwald, Bergen-Belsen, Dachau and other camps in Germany
proper. Today, virtually all recognized scholars dismiss this eyewitness
testimony as false, and agree that there were no extermination gas chambers
in any camp in Germany proper.
Establishment historians, however, still claim that extermination gas
chambers existed at Auschwitz and at other camps in Poland. The eyewitness
testimony and the evidence for this claim is, in reality, qualitatively no
different (from) the false testimony and evidence for the alleged gas
chambers at the camps in Germany proper.
During the war crimes trials many "eye witnesses" testified that Germans
made soap out of human fat and lamp shades from human skin. Allied
prosecutors even produced evidence to support these charges. For decades,
highly respected scholars at the most prestigious universities in the
Western world sanctioned these stories, leading us to believe that they were
But, with time, many such stories have become
untenable, and in May 1990 Yehuda Bauer, director of Holocaust studies at
Hebrew University in Tel Aviv, admitted that: "The Nazis never made soap
from Jews. . ." (quoted in "The Jerusalem Post," International Edition, 5
May 1990, p. 6). This is only one recent example where an "irrefutable"
Holocaust "truth" has been exposed as a monstrous lie.
With regard to confessions by Germans at war crimes trials, it is now well
documented that many were obtained through coercion, intimidation and even
BRITISH HISTORIAN David Irving, perhaps the most widely read historian
writer in English, has called the Auschwitz death-camp story a "sinking
ship" and states that there were "no gas chambers at Auschwitz. . . "
The Auschwitz State Museum has recently revised its half-century old claim
that 4 million humans were murdered there. The Museum now says maybe it was
1 million. But what proof does the Museum provide to document the 1 million
figure? None. The Communist propagandists who manage the museum have put on
display piles of hair, boots and eyeglasses, etc. While such displays are
effective propaganda devices, they are worthless as historical documentation
for "gassings" or a program of "extermination."
Meanwhile, Revisionists want to know where those three million souls have
been for the last 45 years. Were they part of the fabled Six Million?
Those who promote the Holocaust story complain that "the whole world" was
indifferent to the genocide which allegedly was occurring in German-occupied
Europe. When asked why this was the case the promoters usually respond by
saying that it was due to some great moral flaw in the nature of Western
man. At other times they make the absurd claim that people did not realize
the enormity of what was happening. It is true that the world responded with
How else should people have responded to that
which they did not believe, and which for them was a non-event?
It is certain that if there had been "killing factories" in Poland murdering
millions of civilians, then the Red Cross, the Pope, humanitarian agencies,
the Allied governments, neutral governments, and prominent figures such as
Roosevelt, Truman, Churchill, Eisenhower and many others would have known
about it and would have often and unambiguously mentioned it, and condemned
The promoters admit that only a tiny group of
individuals believed the story at the timeãmany of whom were connected with
Jewish propaganda agencies. The rise of the Holocaust story reads more like
the success story of a PR campaign than anything else.
Winston Churchill wrote the six volumes of his monumental work, "The Second
World War," without mentioning a program of mass-murder and genocide. Maybe
it slipped his mind. Dwight D. Eisenhower, in his memoir "Crusade in
Europe," also failed to mention gas chambers. Was the weapon used to murder
millions of Jews unworthy of a passing reference?
Was our future President being insensitive to
Political Correctness and Holocaust Revisionism
MANY PEOPLE, when they first hear Holocaust Revisionist arguments, find
themselves bewildered. The arguments appear to make sense, but "How is it
possible?" The whole world believes the Holocaust story. It's just not
plausible that so great a conspiracy to suppress the truth could have
functioned for half a century.
To understand how it could very well have happened, one needs only to
reflect on the intellectual and political orthodoxies of medieval Europe, or
those of Nazi Germany or the Communist-bloc countries. In all of these
societies the great majority of scholars were caught up in the existing
political culture. Committed to a prevailing ideology and its interpretation
of reality, these scholars and intellectuals felt it was their right, and
even their duty, to protect every aspect of that ideology. They did so by
oppressing the evil dissidents who expressed "offensive" or "dangerous"
ideas. In every one of these societies, scholars became Thought Police.
In our own society, in the debate over the question of political
correctness, there are those who deliberately attempt to trivialize the
issue. They claim that there is no real problem with freedom of speech on
our campuses, and that all that is involved with PC (political correctness)
are a few rules which would defend minorities from those who would hurt
There is, of course, a deeper and more serious
aspect to the problem. On American campuses today there is a wide range of
ideas and viewpoints that are forbidden to be discussed openly. Even obvious
facts and realities, when they are politically unacceptable, are denied and
suppressed. One can learn much about the psychology and methodology of
Thought Police by watching how they react when just one of their taboos is
broken and Holocaust Revisionism is given a public forum.
First they express outrage that such offensive and dangerous ideas were
allowed to be expressed publicly. They avoid answering or debating these
ideas, claiming that to do so would give them a forum and legitimacy.
Then they make vicious personal attacks against
the Revisionist heretic, calling him dirty political names such as
"anti-Semite," "racist," or "Neo-Nazi," and they even suggest that he is a
potential mass murderer. They publicly accuse the Revisionist of lying, but
they don't allow the heretic to hear the specific charge against him or to
face his accusers so that he can answer this slander.
The Holocausters accuse Revisionists of being hate-filled people who are
promoting a doctrine of hatred. But Revisionism is a scholarly process, not
a doctrine or an ideology. If the Holocaust promoters really want to expose
hatred, they should take a second look at their own doctrines, and a long
look at themselves in a mirror.
Anyone on campus who invites a Revisionist to speak is himself attacked as
being insensitive. When a Revisionist does speak on campus, he is oftentimes
shouted down and threatened. Campus libraries and bookstores face
intimidation when they consider handling Holocaust revisionist materials.
All this goes on while the majority of faculty and university administrators
sit dumbly by, allowing political activists to determine what can be said
and what can be read on their campus.
Next, the Thought Police set out to destroy the transgressor professionally
and financially by "getting" him at his job or concocting a lawsuit against
him. The courts are sometimes used to attack Revisionism. The
Holocausters often deceptively claim that Revisionist scholarship has
been proven false during a trial. The fact is that Revisionist arguments
have never been evaluated or judged by the courts.
Finally, the Thought Police try to "straighten out" that segment of academia
or the media that allowed the Revisionists a forum in the first place.
It can be an instructive intellectual exercise to identify taboo subjects,
other than Holocaust Revisionism, which would evoke comparable responses
from Thought Police on our campuses.
Recently, some administrators in academia have held that university
administrations should take actions to rid the campus of ideas which are
disruptive to the university. This is a very dangerous position for
administrators to take. It is an open invitation to tyranny. It means that
any militant group with "troops at the ready" can rid the campus of ideas it
opposes and then impose its own orthodoxy.
The cowardly administrator finds it much easier
and safer to rid the campus of controversial ideas than to face down a group
of screaming and snarling militants. But it is the duty of university
administrators to insure that the university remains a free marketplace of
When ideas cause disruptions, it is the
disrupters who must be subdued, not the ideas.
THE INFLUENCE OF HOLOCAUST REVISIONISM is growing steadily both here and
abroad. In the United States, Revisionism was launched in earnest in 1977
with the publication of the book "The Hoax of the Twentieth Century" by
Arthur R. Butz. Professor Butz teaches electrical engineering and
computer sciences at Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois.
Those who take up the Revisionist cause represent a wide spectrum of
political and philosophical positions. They are certainly not the
scoundrels, liars and demons the Holocaust Lobby tries to make them out to
The fact is, there are no demons in the real world. People are at their
worst when they begin to see their opponents as an embodiment of evil, and
then begin to demonize them. You can do anything you want to a demon.
That logic will not succeed.
Back to Contents
The 'Problem of the Gas Chambers'
by Robert Faurisson
The Tribunal shall not be bound by
technical rules of evidence.
Article 19 of the Statutes of
the International Military Tribunal
(in reality: the Inter-allied Military Tribunal) at Nuremberg
The Tribunal shall not require proof of facts of common knowledge,
but shall take judicial notice thereof.
Article 21 of the Statutes
No one, not even those individuals who regard
the Third Reich with nostalgia, denies the existence of concentration camps
under Hitler. Everyone also recognizes that certain camps were equipped with
crematory ovens: instead of being buried, the corpses were reduced to ashes.
The repeated occurrence of epidemics made
cremation necessary, especially for those who had died of typhus (see the
photos of mass graves at Belsen et cetera). What is disputed by numerous
French, British, American, and German authors is the existence of
"extermination camps." This expression is used by historiographers to refer
to those camps that were supposed to have been equipped with "gas chambers."
Allegedly, these "gas chambers" were different
from American gas chambers in that they were used to kill hundreds of men,
women, and children at a time. Because the victims were chosen because of
their race or religion, this is referred to as "genocide." The poison
employed in this "genocide" is said to have been Zyklon B (a pesticide based
upon prussic or hydrocyanic acid).
Those who contest the "genocide" claim and the existence of the "gas
chambers" are called Revisionists. Their argument runs approximately as
It suffices for both of these problems ("genocide" and "gas chambers") to
apply the customary methods of historical criticism, to see that one is
confronted here by two myths that are inseparable. The criminal intentions
that are attributed to Hitler have never been proven. As far as the weapon
for this crime is concerned, no one has actually seen it. Here one is
confronted by an extraordinarily successful war and hate propaganda
History is full of frauds of this kind,
beginning with their religious fables of sorcery and witchcraft. What
distinguishes our times from earlier epochs is the frightening power of the
media and the propaganda ad nauseam which is made for what must be called
"the hoax of the twentieth century." Let him beware who, after 30 years,
gets the idea to expose this hoax.
He will learn depending upon the situation
through imprisonment, fines, assaults and insults. His career can be
shattered or endangered. He will be denounced as a Nazi. Either his thesis
will be ignored, or else it will be distorted. No country will be more
unrelentingly ruthless toward him than Germany. 1
Today however, the silence is about to be broken about those men who have
dared to write responsibly that Hitler's "gas chambers" (including those of
Auschwitz and Majdanek) are only a historical lie. That is a great advance.
But what insults and distortions an Exterminationist historian such as
Georges Wellers allowed himself when, more than ten years after Paul
Rassinier's death, he decided to expose the minutest part of the arguments
of this ex-inmate of a concentration camp who had had the courage to reveal
the lie of the "gas chambers" in his writings!
The best way in which a historian may inform himself regarding the actual
claims of the disciples of Paul Rassinier is to refer to the work of
American professor Dr. Arthur R. Butz entitled The Hoax of the Twentieth
For my part, I take the liberty of making only a few observations
specifically for serious research-oriented historians.
I call their attention to a paradox. Although the "gas chambers" are, in the
view of the official historians, absolutely central to a picture of the Nazi
concentration camp system (and furthermore, as proof for the totally
perverse and devilish character of the German concentration camps in
comparison to all previous and more recent concentration camps it ought to
be meticulously shown how the Nazis proceeded to invent, construct, and
operate these fearsome human slaughterhouses), one must be thoroughly
astonished that in the impressive bibliography of the concentration camp
literature there is not a single book, not a single brochure, not a single
article, on the "gas chambers" themselves.
One must not be misled by some very promising
titles; rather one must ascertain the contents of these writings for
oneself. I regard as "official historical writing" those publications which
are written about the concentration camps by institutions or foundations
that are partly or wholly financed from public funds, such as, for example,
in France, the Comité d'Histoire de la Deuxième Guerre Mondiale (Committee
for the History of the Second World War) and the Centre de Documentation
Juive Contemporaire (Jewish Contemporary Documentation Center), and in
Germany (Munich), the Institut für Zeitgeschichte (Institute for
One must wait until page 541 of the thesis by Olga Wormser-Migot on the
system of Nazi concentration camps, before one finds a passage about the
However, for the reader there are still three
The passage in question covers only
It carries the title: "The Problem of
the Gas Chambers."
The "problem" consists of trying to
determine whether the "gas chambers" at Ravensbrück (Germany) and
Mauthausen (Austria) really existed; the author comes to the
conclusion that they did not exist; however she does not examine
here the "problem" of the "gas chambers" of Auschwitz or any of the
other camps, probably because in her mind they do not present a
"problem." [on page 157 of her book she says that Auschwitz I had no
At this point, the reader probably wants to know
why an analysis that concludes that "gas chambers" did not exist in certain
camps is suddenly discontinued as soon as, for example, Auschwitz is
Why, on one hand, is the critical spirit
awakened, and then, on the other hand, is it allowed to collapse into
lethargy? After all, as far as the "gas chamber" of Ravensbrück is
concerned, we have many points of "evidence" and "undeniable eyewitness
accounts," beginning with repeated and extensive eyewitness accounts by
Marie-Claude Vaillant-Couturier or Germaine Tillion.
It gets even better. Several years after the war, before both British and
French tribunals, the camp officials of Ravensbrück (Suhren, Schwarzhuber
and Treite) repeatedly confessed to the existence of a "gas chamber" in
their camp. They even vaguely described its operation. Eventually, those who
did not commit suicide were executed because of this alleged "gas chamber."
The same "confessions" were given prior to their
deaths by Ziereis for Mauthausen (Austria) and by Kramer for
Today, one can see the alleged "gas chamber" of Struthof-Natzweiler and in
the same place one can also read the unbelievable "confession" of Kramer.
This "gas chamber," which is designated as an "historical monument," is a
complete fraud. The slightest amount of critical spirit will be sufficient
to convince oneself that a gassing in this small room, without any sealing
whatsoever, would have been a catastrophe for the executioner as well as for
the people in the vicinity. In order to make this "gas chamber" (which is
guaranteed to be "in its original condition") believable, someone has gone
so for as to clumsily knock a hole into the thin wall with a chisel, and
thereby break four tiles.
The hole was so arranged that Josef Kramer would
have dumped through it the mysterious "salts" (about which he could give no
further details and which, when mixed with a little water, killed within one
minute!). How could salts and water make such a gas? How could Kramer have
prevented the gas from coming back out the hole? How could he see his
victims from a hole which would have let him see no more than half the room?
How did he ventilate the room before opening the rudimentary door, made from
Perhaps one must ask the civil engineering firm
in Saint-Michel sur-Meurthe (Vosges), which after the war altered the place
which today is presented to visitors "in its original condition"?
Even long after the war, prelates, university professors, and some ordinary
citizens gave eyewitness descriptions regarding the terrible reality of the
"gas chambers" of Buchenwald and Dachau.
With regard to Buchenwald, the "gas chamber"
gradually disappeared from the minds of the people who had previously
maintained that there was one in this camp.
With regard to Dachau, the situation is different. After it had been firmly
established for example by His Eminence Bishop Piguet, the bishop of
Clermont-Ferrand that the "gas chamber" had been especially useful in
gassing Polish priests,3 eventually the following official explanation came
This gas chamber, whose construction had been started in 1942, was still not
completed in 1945 when the camp was liberated. No one could have been gassed
The little room, which visitors are told is a "gas chamber," is in reality
completely harmless and, while all sorts of construction plans are available
for "Baracke X" (the crematorium and vicinity), one cannot determine upon
what basis or technical explanation one can claim that this structure is an
"unfinished gas chamber."
No official historical institute has done more than the Institut für
Zeitgeschichte in Munich to make the myth of the "gas chambers" believable.
Since 1972 its director has been Dr. Martin Broszat.
As a member of this Institute since 1955, Dr.
Broszat became famous as a result of his (partial!) publication in 1958 of
the confessions that Rudolf Höss (former Commandant of Auschwitz) is
supposed to have written in a communist prison before he was hanged.
However, on 19 August 1960, this historian had to tell his amazed countrymen
that there had never been mass gassings in the entire Old Reich (Germany's
1937 frontiers), but rather, only in a small number of selected places,
especially in occupied Poland, including Auschwitz and Birkenau but not
Majdanek. This startling news was given in a simple letter to the editor
which was published in the weekly magazine Die Zeit (19 August 1960, page
The title was quite misleading and restrictive:
Keine Vergasung in Dachau (No Gassing at Dachau) instead of Keine
Massenvergasung im Altreich (No Mass Gassing in the Old Reich).4 In order to
support this contention, Dr. Broszat provided not the slightest piece of
evidence. Today , eighteen years after his letter, neither he nor any
of his colleagues has provided the slightest explanation for this
It would be highly interesting to learn:
How does Dr. Broszat know that "gas
chambers" in the Old Reich were frauds?
How does he know that the "gas chambers"
in Poland are genuine?
Why do the "proofs," the "certainties,"
and the "eyewitness accounts" concerning the concentration camps in
the west suddenly have no value, while the "proofs," "certainties,"
and "eyewitness accounts" concerning the camps in Poland Communist
territory still remain true?
As if by some tacit agreement, not a single
recognized historian has raised these questions. How often in the "history
of history" has one relied upon the claims of a single historian? 5
Let us now examine the "gas chambers" in Poland.
For proof that the "gas chambers" in Belzec or Treblinka really existed, one
is asked to rely essentially upon the statement of Kurt Gerstein. This
document from a member of the SS, who allegedly committed suicide in 1945 in
the prison of Cherche-Midi in Paris, abounds with so many absurdities that
in the eyes of historians it has for a long time already been thoroughly
discredited.6 Furthermore, this statement has never been made
public, not even in the documents of the Nuremberg tribunal, except in an
unusable form (with truncations, falsifications, and rewritings). The actual
document has never been available with its absurd appendices (French "draft"
or the "supplements" in German).
Regarding Majdanek, a visit to the actual site is absolutely necessary. It
is even more convincing than a visit to Struthof-Natzweiler, if that is
possible. Over this question I will publish additional information.
With regard to Auschwitz and Birkenau, one must rely essentially on the
"Memoirs" 7 of Rudolf Höss, which were prepared under the
supervision of his Polish captors. At the actual site, one can only find a
"reconstructed" room (Auschwitz I) and ruins (Auschwitz II or Birkenau).
An execution with gas has nothing to do with a suicidal or accidental
suffocation. In the case of an execution, the executioner and his team must
not be exposed to the slightest danger. For their executions, the Americans
employ hydrocyanic acid in a sophisticated way, and that only in a small,
hermetically-sealed chamber. Afterwards, the gas is exhausted from the
chamber and neutralized.
For this reason, one must ask how, for example in the case of Auschwitz II
or Birkenau, one could bring 2,000 people into a room measuring 210 square
meters in area, and then in this highly crowded situation throw in the very
strong pesticide Zyklon B, and then immediately after the deaths of the
victims let a work crew without any gas masks enter the room in order to
take out the bodies which had been thoroughly saturated with cyanide.
Two documents8 from the German industrial archives which were
registered by the Americans at Nuremberg tell us that the Zyklon B had a
strong tendency to adhere to surfaces and could not be removed from an
ordinary room with a strong ventilator, but only by natural aeration for
almost 24 hours.
Additional documents may be found only at the
site in the Auschwitz Museum archives, which were never described elsewhere,
but which show that this room of 210 square meters, which is today in a
dilapidated condition, was only a very simple mortuary, which (in order to
protect it against heat) had been located underground, and which was
provided with only a single door which served as both an entrance and an
Concerning the crematoria of Auschwitz, there is just as there is generally
for the entire camp an overabundance of documents and invoices down to the
However, concerning the "gas chambers" there is
nothing: no contract for construction, not even a study, nor an order for
materials, nor a plan, nor an invoice, nor even a photograph. In a hundred
war crimes trials, nothing of the sort was ever produced.
"I was in Auschwitz and I can assure you
that there was no 'gas chamber' there." Only seldom does one hear
defense witnesses with enough courage to pronounce this statement. They
are persecuted in the courts. 10 Still today, everyone in Germany takes
the risk that, if they give an eyewitness account in favor of Thies
Christophersen (who wrote The Auschwitz Lie), they will be punished for
'"defaming the memory of the deceased." 11
Immediately after the war, the Germans, the
International Red Cross and the Vatican (which was otherwise so expert as to
whatever happened in Poland), as well as many others, declared in an
embarrassed tone: "The 'gas chambers' we knew nothing about them!" Yes but I
would put the question this way: "Can one know about things which did not
There was not a single "gas chamber" in even one of the German concentration
camps; that is the truth. The nonexistence of "gas chambers" should be
regarded as welcome news; to hide this news in the future would be an
injustice. Just as there is no attack upon a religion if one portrays
"Fatima" as a fraud, the announcement that the "gas chambers" are an
historical lie is no attack upon concentration camp survivors.
One is merely doing one's duty being truthful.
After 30 years of research, revisionist authors have reached the following
The Hitler "gas chambers" never existed.
The "genocide" (or "attempted genocide")
of the Jews never took place. In other words: Hitler never gave an
order nor permission that anyone should be killed because of his
race or religion.
The alleged "gas chambers" and the
alleged "genocide" are one and the same lie.
This lie, which is largely of Zionist
origin, has made an enormous political and financial fraud possible,
whose principal beneficiary is the state of Israel.
The principal victims of this fraud are
the German people (but not the German rulers) and the entire
The enormous power of the official
information services has, thus far, had the effect of ensuring the
success of the lie and of censoring the freedom of expression of
those who have denounced the lie.
The participants in this lie know that
its days are numbered. They distort the purpose and nature of the
Revisionist research. They label as "resurgence of Nazism" or as
"falsification of history" what is only a thoughtful and justified
concern for historical truth.
Two publications and an official intervention by the author:
1. A letter to Historama, Paris,
November 1975, page 10, on the expression "N.N." Originally, these
initials never meant Nacht und Nebel (Night and Fog), but Nomen
nescio (Anonymous). ln practice it meant that certain inmates would
not be permitted to receive or send mail.
Segments of a letter to Historia, Paris,
August 1977, page 132: "The Imposture of Genocide."
On 29 January 1978 at the Colloque
National de Lyon sur Eglises et Chrétiens de France dans la Deuxième
Guerre Mondiale (National Convention in Lyon on Churches and
Christians of France during the Second World War) an intervention
concerning the imposture of the "gas chambers" (see Rivarol, Paris,
16 February 1978, page 5).
1. Regarding the great number of vicious and
insulting articles, there is a study by Hermann Langbein which appeared
in Le Monde Juif (The Jewish World), April/June 1975. The title is "Coup
d'oeil sur la littérature néo-nazie," ("A Glimpse at Neo-Nazi
Literature"), pages 820. Hermann Langbein was an inmate in Auschwitz.
He testified at countless trials. He holds an important position in the
circles of former concentration camp inmates. One of his most recent
works is entitled: Hommes et Femmes à Auschwitz (Men and Women of
Auschwitz), Paris, Fayard, 1975, VIII-529 pages (Translated from
Menschen in Auschwitz, Vienna, 1974.) Not one of the 30 chapters, not
one of the 268 sections of this book is devoted to the "gas chambers"!
Rather, one constantly sees expressions such as "selection for the gas
chambers" etc. There is also a study by Georges Wellers which appeared
in Le Monde Juif (op. cit.) April/June 1977. The title is "La 'Solution
finale', de la question juive et la mythomanie néo-nazie" ("The "Final
Solution" and Neo-Nazi Mythomania,"), pages 4184. There is also a study
by Ino Arndt and Wolfgang Scheffler in Viertelsjahreshefte für
Zeitgeschichte (Quarterly Review for Contemporary History), which is a
publication of the Institute for Contemporary History in Munich. The
Institute's director is currently Dr. Martin Broszat. This study was
published in the issue of April 1976. The title is: "Organisierter
Massenmord an Juden in NS-Vernichtungslagern" (Organized Mass-Murder of
Jews in Nazi Extermination Camps), pages 105135.
2. The Hoax of the Twentieth Century. Newport Beach, CA: Institute for
Historical Review, 1979.
3. Prison et Déportation (Prison and Deportation). Paris: Spes; 1947;
4. Broszat's letter is reproduced in facsimile (with its English
translation) in The Journal of Historical Review, May/June 1993, page
5. The famed Simon Wiesenthal has also admitted that "there were no
extermination camps on German soil" in a letter to the editor of Books
and Bookmen, page 5, April 1975. Although he later wrote in a letter
dated 12 May 1986 to Professor John George of Central State University
in Edmond, Oklahoma, that he "could never have said such a thing,"
Wiesenthal reconfirmed his earlier statement in a letter to the editor
published on page 14 of the European editor of Stars and Stripes dated
24 January 1993. This letter is reproduced in facsimile in The Journal
for Historical Review, May/June 1993, page 10.
6. See the opinion expressed by the forensic pathologist as it is
reported by the Exterminationist Pierre Joffroy in his book about Kurt
Gerstein: L'Espion de Dieu/La Passion de Kurt Gerstein (The Spy of
God/The Passion of Kurt Gerstein), Paris, Grasset, 1969, page 262.
7. Kommandant in Auschwitz/Autobiographische Aufzeichnungen (Commandant
of Auschwitz/Autobiographical Memoirs) by Rudolf Höss, Stuttgart,
Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt,1958,184p; introduction and commentary by Dr.
Martin Broszat. Concerning "gassing," see pages 126 and 166. The entry
of the work crew into the "gas chamber" is supposed to happen "sofort"
("immediately") as it is written on page 166.
8. These two extensive documents which are of great importance were
apparently not used at the trials of Gerhard Peters, former director of
Degesch. They were registered as documents NI-9098 and NI-9912. They
irrevocably reduce to nothing the "eyewitness testimony" of Höss
regarding the "gas chambers."
9. Photographs Neg. 6228 and following.
10. Case of Wilhelm Stäglich, for example. See Stäglich in the Index
Nominum of Butz's book (op. cit.).
11. Die Auschwitz-Lüge (The Auschwitz Lie), #23 of Kritik (2341
Kälberhagen, Post Mohrkirch, West Germany), 1974. This booklet was
followed by Der Auschwitz-Betrug/Das Echo auf die Auschwitz-Lüge (The
Auschwitz Fraud/The Echo of the Auschwitz Lie.).
Back to Contents
Auschwitz - Myths and facts
by Mark Weber
Nearly everyone has heard of Auschwitz, the German wartime concentration
camp where many prisoners -- most of them Jewish -- were reportedly
exterminated, especially in gas chambers. Auschwitz is widely regarded as
the most terrible Nazi extermination center.
The camp's horrific reputation cannot, however,
be reconciled with the facts.
Scholars challenge Holocaust story
Astonishing as it may seem, more and more historians and engineers have been
challenging the widely accepted Auschwitz story. These "revisionist"
scholars do not dispute the fact that large numbers of Jews were deported to
the camp, or that many died there, particularly of typhus and other
But the compelling evidence they present shows
that Auschwitz was not an extermination center and that the story of mass
killings in "gas chambers" is a myth.
The Auschwitz camps
The Auschwitz camp complex was set up in 1940 in what is now south-central
Poland. Large numbers of Jews were deported there between 1942 and mid-1944.
The main camp was known as Auschwitz I. Birkenau, or Auschwitz II, was
supposedly the main extermination center, and Monowitz, or Auschwitz III,
was a large industrial center where gasoline was produced from coal. In
addition there were dozens of smaller satellite camps devoted to the war
Four million victims?
At the postwar Nuremberg Tribunal, the
Allies charged that the Germans exterminated four million people at
Auschwitz. This figure, which was invented by the Soviets, was uncritically
accepted for many years. It often appeared in major American newspapers and
magazines, for example. (note 1)
Today no reputable historian, not even those who generally accept the
extermination story, believes this figure. Israeli Holocaust historian
Yehuda Bauer said in 1989 that it is time to finally acknowledge the
familiar four million figure is a deliberate myth. In July 1990 the
Auschwitz State Museum in Poland, along with Israel's Yad Vashem Holocaust
Center, suddenly announced that altogether perhaps one million people (both
Jews and non-Jews) died there.
Neither institution would say how many of these
people were killed, nor were any estimates given of the numbers of those
supposedly gassed. (note 2) One prominent Holocaust historian, Gerald
Reitlinger, has estimated that perhaps 700,000 or so Jews perished at
Auschwitz. More recently, Holocaust historian Jean-Claude Pressac has
estimated that about 800,000 persons - of whom 630,000 were Jewish -
perished at Auschwitz.
While even such lower figures are incorrect,
they show how the Auschwitz story has changed drastically over the years.
At one time it was seriously claimed
that Jews were systematically electrocuted at Auschwitz. American
newspapers, citing a Soviet eyewitness report from liberated Auschwitz, told
readers in February 1945 that the methodical Germans had killed Jews there
using an "electric conveyor belt on which hundreds of persons could be
electrocuted simultaneously [and] then moved on into furnaces.
They were burned almost instantly, producing
fertilizer for nearby cabbage fields." (note 4)
And at the Nuremberg Tribunal, chief U.S. prosecutor Robert Jackson charged
that the Germans used a "newly invented" device to instantaneously
"vaporize" 20,000 Jews near Auschwitz "in such a way that there was no trace
left of them." (note 5) No reputable historian now accepts either of these
The Höss 'confession'
A key Holocaust document is the
"confession" of former Auschwitz commandant Rudolf Höss of April 5, 1946,
which was submitted by the U.S. prosecution at the main Nuremberg trial.
Although it is still widely cited as solid proof for the Auschwitz
extermination story, it is actually a false statement that was obtained by
Many years after the war, British military intelligence sergeant Bernard
Clarke described how he and five other British soldiers tortured the former
commandant to obtain his "confession." Höss himself privately explained his
ordeal in these words: "Certainly, I signed a statement that I killed two
and half million Jews. I could just as well have said that it was five
million Jews. There are certain methods by which any confession can be
obtained, whether it is true or not." (note 7)
Even historians who generally accept the Holocaust extermination story now
acknowledge that many of the specific statements made in the Höss
"affidavit" are simply not true. For one thing, no serious scholar now
claims that anything like two and a half or three million people perished in
The Höss "affidavit" further alleges that Jews were already being
exterminated by gas in the summer of 1941 at three other camps: Belzec,
Treblinka and Wolzek. The "Wolzek" camp mentioned by Höss is a total
invention. No such camp existed, and the name is no longer mentioned in
Moreover, the story these days by those who
believe in the Holocaust legend is that gassings of Jews did not begin at
Auschwitz, Treblinka, or Belzec until sometime in 1942.
No documentary evidence
Many thousands of secret German documents dealing with Auschwitz were
confiscated after the war by the Allies. Not a single one refers to a policy
or program of extermination.
In fact, the extermination story cannot be
reconciled with the documentary evidence.
Many Jewish inmates unable to work
For example, it is often claimed that all Jews at Auschwitz who were unable
to work were immediately killed. Jews who were too old, young, sick, or weak
were supposedly gassed on arrival, and only those who could be worked to
death were temporarily kept alive.
But the evidence shows that, in fact, a very high percentage of the Jewish
inmates were not able to work, and were nevertheless not killed. For
example, an internal German telex message dated Sept. 4, 1943, from the
chief of the Labor Allocation department of the SS Economic and
Administrative Main Office (WVHA), reported that of 25,000 Jewish inmates in
Auschwitz, only 3,581 were able to work, and that all of the remaining
Jewish inmates -- some 21,500, or about 86 percent -- were unable to work.
This is also confirmed in a secret report dated April 5, 1944, on "security
measures in Auschwitz" by Oswald Pohl, head of the SS concentration camp
system, to SS chief Heinrich Himmler.
Pohl reported that there was a total of 67,000
inmates in the entire Auschwitz camp complex, of whom 18,000 were
hospitalized or disabled. In the Auschwitz II camp (Birkenau), supposedly
the main extermination center, there were 36,000 inmates, mostly female, of
whom "approximately 15,000 are unable to work." (note 9)
These two documents simply cannot be reconciled with the Auschwitz
The evidence shows that Auschwitz-Birkenau was established primarily as a
camp for Jews who were not able to work, including the sick and elderly, as
well as for those who were temporarily awaiting assignment to other camps.
That's the considered view of Dr. Arthur Butz of Northwestern University,
who also says that this was the reason for the unusually high death rate
there. (note 10)
Princeton University history professor Arno Mayer, who is Jewish,
acknowledges in a recent book about the "final solution" that more Jews
perished at Auschwitz as a result of typhus and other "natural" causes than
were executed. (note 11)
Perhaps the best known Auschwitz inmate was Anne Frank, who is known around
the world for her famous diary. But few people know that thousands of Jews,
including Anne and her father, Otto Frank, "survived" Auschwitz.
The 15-year-old girl and her father were deported from the Netherlands to
Auschwitz in September 1944. Several weeks later, in the face of the
advancing Soviet army, Anne was evacuated along with many other Jews to the
Bergen-Belsen camp, where she died of typhus in March 1945.
Her father came down with typhus in Auschwitz and was sent to the camp
hospital to recover. He was one of thousands of sick and feeble Jews who
were left behind when the Germans abandoned the camp in January 1945,
shortly before it was overrun by the Soviets. He died in Switzerland in
If the German policy had been to kill Anne Frank and her father, they would
not have survived Auschwitz.
Their fate, tragic though it was, cannot be
reconciled with the extermination story.
The Auschwitz gassing story is based in large part on the hearsay statements
of former Jewish inmates who did not personally see any evidence of
extermination. Their beliefs are understandable, because rumors about
gassings at Auschwitz were widespread.
Allied planes dropped large numbers of LEAFLETS , written in Polish and
German, on Auschwitz and the surrounding areas which claimed that people
were being gassed in the camp.
The Auschwitz gassing story, which was an
important part of the Allied wartime propaganda effort, was also broadcast
to Europe by Allied radio stations. (note 12)
Former inmates have confirmed that they saw no evidence of extermination at
An Austrian woman, Maria Vanherwaarden, testified about her camp experiences
in a Toronto District Court in March 1988. She was interned in Auschwitz-Birkenau
in 1942 for having sexual relations with a Polish forced laborer. On the
train trip to the camp, a Gypsy woman told her and the others that they
would all be gassed at Auschwitz.
Upon arrival, Maria and the other women were ordered to undress and go into
a large concrete room without windows to take a shower. The terrified women
were sure that they were about to die. But then, instead of gas, water came
out of the shower heads.
Auschwitz was no vacation center, Maria confirmed. She witnessed the death
of many fellow inmates by disease, particularly typhus, and quite a few
committed suicide. But she saw no evidence at all of mass killings,
gassings, or of any extermination program. (note 13)
A Jewish woman named Marika Frank arrived at Auschwitz-Birkenau from Hungary
in July 1944, when 25,000 Jews were supposedly gassed and cremated daily.
She likewise testified after the war that she heard and saw nothing of "gas
chambers" during the time she was interned there.
She heard the gassing stories only later. (note
Auschwitz internees who had served their sentences were released and
returned to their home countries.
If Auschwitz had actually been a top secret
extermination center, the Germans would certainly not have released inmates
who "knew" what was happening in the camp. (note 15)
Himmler orders death rate reduced
In response to the deaths of many inmates due to disease, especially typhus,
the German authorities responsible for the camps ordered firm
The head of the SS camp administration office sent a directive dated Dec.
28, 1942, to Auschwitz and the other concentration camps. It sharply
criticized the high death rate of inmates due to disease, and ordered that
"camp physicians must use all means at their disposal to significantly
reduce the death rate in the various camps."
Furthermore, it ordered:
The camp doctors must supervise more often
than in the past the nutrition of the prisoners and, in cooperation with
the administration, submit improvement recommendations to the camp
commandants . . . The camp doctors are to see to it that the working
conditions at the various labor places are improved as much as possible.
Finally, the directive stressed that "the
Reichsfhrer SS [Heinrich Himmler] has ordered that the death rate absolutely
must be reduced." (note 16)
German camp regulations
Official German camp regulations make clear that Auschwitz was not an
extermination center. They ordered: (note 17)
New arrivals in the camp are to be given a thorough medical examination, and
if there is any doubt [about their health], they must be sent to quarantine
Prisoners who report sick must be examined that same day by the camp
physician. If necessary, the physician must transfer the prisoners to a
hospital for professional treatment.
The camp physician must regularly inspect the kitchen regarding the
preparation of the food and the quality of the food supply. Any deficiencies
that may arise must be reported to the camp commandant.
Special care should be given in the treatment of accidents, in order not to
impair the full productivity of the prisoners.
Prisoners who are to be released or transfered must first be brought before
the camp physician for medical examination.
Telltale aerial photos
Detailed aerial reconnaissance photographs taken of Auschwitz-Birkenau on
several random days in 1944 (during the height of the alleged extermination
period there) were made public by the CIA in 1979.
These photos show no trace of piles of corpses,
smoking crematory chimneys or masses of Jews awaiting death, things that
have been repeatedly alleged, and all of which would have been clearly
visible if Auschwitz had been the extermination center it is said to have
been. (note 18)
Absurd cremation claims
Cremation specialists have confirmed
that thousands of corpses could not possibly have been cremated every day
throughout the spring and summer of 1944 at Auschwitz, as commonly alleged.
For example, Mr. Ivan Lagace, manager of a large crematory in Calgary,
Canada, testified in court in April 1988 that the Auschwitz cremation story
is technically impossible.
The allegation that 10,000 or even 20,000
corpses were burned every day at Auschwitz in the summer of 1944 in
crematories and open pits is simply "preposterous" and "beyond the realm of
reality," he declared under oath. (note 19)
Gassing expert refutes extermination story
America's leading gas chamber expert, Boston engineer Fred A. Leuchter,
carefully examined the supposed "gas chambers" in Poland and concluded that
the Auschwitz gassing story is absurd and technically impossible.
Leuchter is the foremost specialist on the design and installation of gas
chambers used in the United States to execute convicted criminals. For
example, he designed a gas chamber facility for the Missouri state
In February 1988 he carried out a detailed onsite examination of the "gas
chambers" at Auschwitz, Birkenau and Majdanek in Poland, which are either
still standing or only partially in ruins. In sworn testimony to a Toronto
court and in a technical report, Leuchter described every aspect of his
He concluded by emphatically declaring that the alleged gassing facilities
could not possibly have been used to kill people. Among other things, he
pointed out that the so-called "gas chambers" were not properly sealed or
vented to kill human beings without also killing German camp personnel.
Dr. William B. Lindsey, a research chemist employed for 33 years by the
Dupont Corporation, likewise testified in a 1985 court case that the
Auschwitz gassing story is technically impossible.
Based on a careful on-site examination of the
"gas chambers" at Auschwitz, Birkenau and Majdanek, and on his years of
experience, he declared:
"I have come to the conclusion that no one
was willfully or purposefully killed with Zyklon B [hydrocyanic acid
gas] in this manner. I consider it absolutely impossible." (note 21)
1. Nuremberg document 008-USSR. IMT blue
series, Vol. 39, pp. 241, 261.; NC and A red series, vol. 1, p. 35.; C.L.
Sulzberger, "Oswiecim Killings Placed at 4,000,000," New York Times, May
8, 1945, and, New York Times, Jan. 31, 1986, p. A4.
2. Y. Bauer, "Fighting the Distortions," Jerusalem Post (Israel), Sept.
22, 1989; "Auschwitz Deaths Reduced to a Million," Daily Telegraph
(London), July 17, 1990; "Poland Reduces Auschwitz Death Toll Estimate
to 1 Million," The Washington Times, July 17, 1990.
3. G. Reitlinger, The Final Solution (1971); J.-C. Pressac, Le
Cr¦matoires d'Auschwitz: La Machinerie du meurtre de mass (Paris: CNRS,
1993). On Pressac's estimates, see: L'Express (France), Sept. 30, 1993,
4. Washington (DC) Daily News, Feb. 2, 1945, pp. 2, 35. (United Press
dispatch from Moscow).
5. IMT blue series, Vol. 16, p. 529-530. (June 21, 1946).
6. Nuremberg document 3868-PS (USA-819). IMT blue series, Vol. 33, pp.
7. Rupert Butler, Legions of Death (England: 1983), pp. 235; R.
Faurisson, The Journal of Historical Review, Winter 1986-87, pp.
8. Archives of the Jewish Historical Institute of Warsaw, German
document No. 128, in: H. Eschwege, ed., Kennzeichen J (East Berlin:
1966), p. 264.
9. Nuremberg document NO-021. NMT green series, Vol. 5. pp. 384-385.
10. Arthur Butz, The Hoax of the Twentieth Century (Costa Mesa, Calif.),
11. Arno Mayer, Why Did the Heavens Not Darken?: The 'Final Solution' in
History (Pantheon, 1989), p. 365.
12. Nuremberg document NI-11696. NMT green series, Vol. 8, p. 606.
13. Testimony in Toronto District Court, March 28, 1988. Toronto Star,
March 29, 1988, p. A2.
14. Sylvia Rothchild, ed., Voices from the Holocaust (New York: 1981),
15. Walter Laqueur, The Terrible Secret (Boston: 1981), p. 169.
16. Nuremberg document PS-2171, Annex 2. NC&A red series, Vol. 4, pp.
17. "Rules and Regulations for the Concentration Camps." Anthology,
Inhuman Medicine, Vol. 1, Part 1 (Warsaw: International Auschwitz
Committee, 1970), pp. 149-151.; S. Paskuly, ed., Death Dealer: the
Memoirs of the SS Kommandant at Auschwitz (Buffalo: 1992), pp. 216-217.
18. Dino A. Brugioni and Robert C. Poirier, The Holocaust Revisited
(Washington, DC: Central Intelligence Agency, 1979).
19. Canadian Jewish News (Toronto), April 14, 1988, p. 6.
20. The Leuchter Report: An Engineering Report on the Alleged Execution
Gas Chambers at Auschwitz, Birkenau and Majdanek (Toronto: 1988).
Available for $17.00, postpaid, from the IHR.
21. The Globe and Mail (Toronto), Feb. 12, 1985, p. M3
The Auschwitz extermination story originated as
wartime propaganda. Now, more than 40 years after the end of the Second
World War, it is time to take another, more objective look at this highly
polemicized chapter of history. The Auschwitz legend is the core of the
Holocaust story. If hundreds of thousands of Jews were not systematically
killed there, as alleged, one of the great myths of our time collapses.
Artificially maintaining the hatreds and passions of the past prevents
genuine reconciliation and lasting peace. Revisionism promotes historical
awareness and international understanding. That is why the work of the
Institute for Historical Review is so important and deserves your support.
Back to Contents
The Liberation of the
Camps: Facts vs. Lies
by Theodore J. O'Keefe
Nothing has been more effective in establishing the authenticity of the
Holocaust story in the minds of Americans than the terrible scenes US troops
discovered when they entered German concentration camps at the close of
World War II.
At Dachau, Buchenwald, Dora, Mauthausen, and other work and detention camps,
horrified US infantrymen encountered heaps of dead and dying inmates,
emaciated and diseased. Survivors told them hair-raising stories of torture
and slaughter, and backed up their claims by showing the GIs crematory
ovens, alleged execution gas chambers, supposed implements of torture, and
even shrunken heads and lampshades, gloves, and handbags purportedly made
from skin flayed from dead inmates.
US government authorities, mindful that many Americans who remembered the
atrocity stories fed them during World War I still doubted the Allied
propaganda directed against the Hitler regime, resolved to "document" what
the GIs had found in the camps. Prominent newsmen and politicians were flown
in to see the harrowing evidence, while the US Army Signal Corps filmed and
photographed the scenes for posterity.
Famous journalist Edward R. Murrow
reported, in tones of horror, but no longer of disbelief, what he had been
told and shown, and Dachau and Buchenwald were branded on the hearts and
minds of the American populace as names of infamy unmatched in the sad and
bloody history of this planet.
For Americans, what was "discovered" at the camps -- the dead and the
diseased, the terrible stories of the inmates, all the props of torture and
terror -- became the basis not simply of a transitory propaganda campaign
but of the conviction that, yes, it was true: the Germans did exterminate
six million Jews, most of them in lethal gas chambers.
What the GIs found was used, by way of films that were mandatory viewing for
the vanquished populace of Germany, to "re-educate" the German people by
destroying their national pride and their will to a united, independent
national state, imposing in their place overwhelming feelings of collective
guilt and political impotence.
And when the testimony, and the verdict, of the
Nuremberg Tribunal incorporated most, if not all, of the horror stories
Americans were told about Dachau, Buchenwald, and other places captured by
the US Army, the Holocaust could pass for one of the most documented, one of
the most authenticated, one of the most proven historical episodes in the
A Different Reality
But it is known today that, very soon
after the liberation of the camps, American authorities were aware that the
real story of the camps was quite different from the one in which they were
coaching military public information officers, government spokesmen,
politicians, journalists, and other mouthpieces.
When American and British forces overran western and central Germany in the
spring of 1945, they were followed by troops charged with discovering and
securing any evidence of German war crimes.
Among them was Dr. Charles Larson, one of America's leading forensic
pathologists, who was assigned to the US Army's Judge Advocate General's
Department. As part of a US War Crimes Investigation Team, Dr. Larson
performed autopsies at Dachau and some twenty other German camps, examining
on some days more than 100 corpses. After his grim work at Dachau, he was
questioned for three days by US Army prosecutors.
Dr. Larson's findings? In an 1980 newspaper interview he said: "What we've
heard is that six million Jews were exterminated. Part of that is a hoax."
And what part was the hoax?
Dr. Larson, who told his biographer that to his
knowledge he "was the only forensic pathologist on duty in the entire
European Theater" of Allied military operations, confirmed that "never was a
case of poison gas uncovered."
Typhus, Not Poison Gas
If not by gassing, how did the
unfortunate victims at Dachau, Buchenwald and Bergen-Belsen perish? Were
they tortured to death or deliberately starved? The answers to these
questions are known as well.
As Dr. Larson and other Allied medical men discovered, the chief cause of
death at Dachau, Belsen and the other camps was disease, above all typhus,
an old and terrible scourge of mankind that until recently flourished in
places where populations were crowded together in circumstances where public
health measures were unknown or had broken down. Such was the case in the
overcrowded internment camps in Germany at war's end, where, despite such
measures as systematic delousing, quarantine of the sick and cremation of
the dead, the virtual collapse of Germany's food, transport, and public
health systems led to catastrophe.
Perhaps the most authoritative statement of the facts as to typhus and
mortality in the camps has been made by Dr. John E. Gordon, M.D., Ph.D., a
professor of preventive medicine and epidemiology at the Harvard University
School of Public Health, who was with US forces in Germany in 1945.
Dr. Gordon reported in 1948 that,
"The outbreaks in concentration camps and
prisons made up the great bulk of typhus infection encountered in
Dr. Gordon summarized the causes for the
outbreaks as follows:
Germany in the spring months of April and
May  was an astounding sight, a mixture of humanity travelling
this way and that, homeless, often hungry and carrying typhus with them
Germany was in chaos. The destruction of whole
cities and the path left by advancing armies produced a disruption of living
conditions contributing to the spread of the disease. Sanitation was low
grade, public utilities were seriously disrupted, food supply and food
distribution was poor, housing was inadequate and order and discipline were
everywhere lacking. Still more important, a shifting of populations was
occurring such as few countries and few times have experienced.
Dr. Gordon's findings are corroborated by Dr. Russell Barton, today a
psychiatrist of international repute, who entered Bergen-Belsen with British
forces as a young medical student in 1945. Barton, who volunteered to care
for the diseased survivors, testified under sworn oath in a Toronto
courtroom in 1985 that,
"Thousands of prisoners who died at the
Bergen-Belsen concentration camp during World War II weren't
deliberately starved to death but died from a rash of diseases."
Dr. Barton further testified that on entering
the camp he had credited stories of deliberate starvation but decided such
stories were untrue after inspecting the well equipped kitchens and the
meticulously maintained ledgers, dating back to 1942, of food cooked and
dispensed each day.
Despite noisily publicized claims and widespread popular notions to the
contrary, no researcher has been able to document a German policy of
extermination through starvation in the German camps.
No 'Human Skin' Lampshades
What of the ghoulish stories of
concentration camp inmates skinned for their tattoos, flayed to make
lampshades and handbags, or other artifacts? What of the innumerable
"torture racks," "meathooks," whipping posts, gallows, and other tools of
torment and death that are reported to have abounded at every German camp?
These allegations, and even more grotesque ones
proffered by Soviet prosecutors, found their way into the record at
The lampshade and tattooed-skin charges were made against Ilse Koch, dubbed
by journalists the "Bitch of Buchenwald," who was reported to have furnished
her house with objects manufactured from the tanned hides of luckless
But General Lucius Clay, military governor of the US zone of occupied
Germany, who reviewed her case in 1948, told his superiors in Washington:
"There is no convincing evidence that she [Ilse
Koch] selected inmates for extermination in order to secure tattooed
skins or that she possessed any articles made of human skin."
In an interview General Clay gave years later,
he stated about the material for the infamous lampshades:
"Well, it turned out actually that it was
goat flesh. But at the trial it was still human flesh. It was almost
impossible for her to have gotten a fair trial."
Ilse Koch hanged herself in a German jail in
It would be tedious to itemize and refute the thousands of bizarre claims as
to Nazi atrocities. That there were instances of German cruelty, however, is
clear from the testimony of Dr. Konrad Morgen, a legal investigator attached
to the Reich Criminal Police, whose statements on the witness stand at
Nuremberg have never been challenged by proponents of the Jewish Holocaust
story. Dr. Morgen informed the court that he had been given full authority
by Heinrich Himmler, commander of Hitler's SS and the dread Gestapo, to
enter any German concentration camp and investigate instances of cruelty and
corruption on the part of camp personnel.
As he explained in sworn testimony at Nuremberg, Dr. Morgen investigated 800
such cases, resulting in more than 200 convictions. Punishments included the
death penalty for the worst offenders, including Hermann Florstedt,
commandant of Lublin (Majdanek), and Karl Koch (Ilse's husband), commandant
While German camp commandants in certain cases did inflict physical
punishment, such acts had to be approved by authorities in Berlin, and it
was required that a camp physician first certify the good health of the
prisoner to be disciplined, and then be on hand at the actual beating.
After all, throughout most of the war the camps
were important centers of industrial activity. The good health and morale of
the prisoners was critical to the German war effort, as is evidenced in a
January 1943 order issued by SS General Richard Glücks, chief of the office
that supervised the concentration camps.
It held the camp commanders,
"personally responsible for exhausting every
possibility to preserve the physical strength of the detainees."
Camp Survivors: Merely Victims?
US Army investigators, working at
Buchenwald and other camps, quickly ascertained what was common knowledge
among veteran inmates: that the worst offenders, the cruelest denizens of
the camps, were not the guards but the prisoners themselves.
Common criminals of the same stripe as those who
populate US prisons today committed many villainies, particularly when they
held positions of authority, and fanatical Communists, highly organized to
combat their many political enemies among the inmates, eliminated their foes
with Stalinist ruthlessness.
Two US Army investigators at Buchenwald, Egon W. Fleck and Edward A.
Tenenbaum, carefully investigated circumstances in the camp before its
In a detailed report submitted to their
superiors, they revealed, in the words of Alfred Toombs, their
commander, who wrote a preface to the report,
"how the prisoners themselves organized a
deadly terror within the Nazi terror."
Fleck and Tenenbaum described the power
exercised by criminals and Communists as follows:
The trusties, who in time became almost
exclusively Communist Germans, had the power of life and death over all
other inmates. They could sentence a man or a group to almost certain
death ... The Communist trusties were directly responsible for a large
part of the brutalities at Buchenwald.
Colonel Donald B. Robinson, chief
historian of the American military government in Germany, summarized the
Fleck-Tenenbaum report in an article published in an American magazine
shortly after the war. Colonel Robinson wrote succinctly of the American
investigators' findings: "It appeared that the prisoners who agreed with the
Communists ate; those who didn't starved to death."
Additional corroboration of inmate brutality has been provided by Ellis
E. Spackman, who, as Chief of Counter-Intelligence Arrests and
Detentions for the US Seventh Army, was involved in the liberation of
Spackman, later a professor of history at San
Bernardino Valley College in California, wrote in 1966 that at Dachau,
"the prisoners were the actual instruments
that inflicted the barbarities on their fellow prisoners."
In December 1944 US Army officers Colonel
Paul Kirk and Lt. Colonel Edward J. Gully inspected the German concentration
camp at Struthof-Natzweiler in Alsace. They submitted their findings to
their superiors at the headquarters of the US 6th Army Group, which
subsequently forwarded their report to the US War Crimes Division.
While, significantly, the full text of their
report has never been published, it has been revealed, by a historian
supportive of Holocaust claims, that the two investigators were careful to
characterize equipment exhibited to them by French informants as a
"so-called lethal gas chamber," and to claim it was "allegedly used as a
lethal gas chamber."
Both the careful phraseology of the Natzweiler report, and its effective
suppression, stand in stark contrast to the credulity, the confusion, and
the blaring publicity that accompanied official reports of alleged gas
chambers at Dachau. At first, a US Army photo depicting a GI gazing at a
steel door marked with a skull and crossbones and the German words for:
"Caution! Gas! Mortal danger! Don't open!," was identified as showing the
Later, however, it was evidently decided that the apparatus in question was
merely a standard delousing chamber for clothing, and another alleged gas
chamber, this one cunningly disguised as a shower room, was exhibited to
American congressmen and journalists as the site where thousands breathed
While there exist numerous reports in the press
as to the operation of this second "gas chamber," no official report by
trained Army investigators has yet surfaced to reconcile such problems as
the function of the shower heads: Were they "dummies," or did lethal cyanide
gas stream through them?
(Each theory has appreciable support in
journalistic and historiographical literature.)
As with Dachau, so with Buchenwald, Bergen-Belsen, and the other camps
liberated by the Allies in western Germany. There was no end of propaganda
about "gas chambers," "gas ovens," and the like, but so far not a single
detailed description of the murder weapon and its function, not a single
report of the kind that is mandatory for the successful prosecution of any
assault or murder case in America at that time and today, has come to light.
Furthermore, a number of Holocaust authorities have now publicly decreed
that there were no gassings, no extermination camps in Germany after all.
(We are now told that "gassing" and "extermination" camps were located
exclusively in what is now Poland, in areas captured by the Soviet Red Army
and made off-limits to western investigators.)
Dr. Martin Broszat of the Munich-based Institute for Contemporary
History, which is funded by the German government, stated categorically in a
1960 letter to the German weekly Die Zeit: "Neither in Dachau nor in
Bergen-Belsen nor in Buchenwald were Jews or other prisoners gassed."
Professional "Nazi hunter" Simon Wiesenthal stated in 1975 and again in 1993
that "there were no extermination camps on German soil."
Dachau "gas chamber" No. 2, which was once presented to a stunned and
grieving world as a weapon that claimed hundreds of thousands of lives, is
now described in the brochure issued to tourists at the modern Dachau
"memorial site" in these words:
"This gas chamber, camouflaged as a shower
room, was not used."
The Propaganda Intensifies
More than 50 years after American
troops entered Dachau, Buchenwald and other German camps, and trained
American investigators established the facts as to what had gone on in them,
the government in Washington, the entertainment media in Hollywood, and the
print media in New York continue to churn out millions of words and images
annually on the horrors of the camps and the infamy of the Holocaust.
Despite the fact that, with the exception of the
defeated Confederacy, no enemy of America has ever so suffered so complete
and devastating defeat as did Germany in 1945, the mass media and the
politicians and bureaucrats behave as if Hitler, his troops, and his
concentration camps continue to exist in an eternal present, and our opinion
makers continue to distort, through ignorance or malice, the facts about the
Time for the Truth
It is time that the government and
the professional historians reveal the facts about Dachau, Buchenwald and
the other camps. It is time they let the American public know how the
inmates died, and how they didn't die.
It is time that the claims of mass murder by
gassing are clarified and investigated in the same manner as any other
claims of murder. It is time that the free ride certain groups have enjoyed
as the result of unchallenged Holocaust claims be terminated, just as it is
time to end the scapegoating of other groups, including Germans, eastern
Europeans, the Roman Catholic hierarchy, and the wartime leadership of
America and Britain, either for their alleged role in the Holocaust or their
supposed failure to stop it.
Above all, it is time that the citizens of this great Republic have the
facts about the camps, facts they have a right to know, a right that is
fundamental to the exercise of their authority and their will in the
governance of their country. As citizens and as taxpayers, Americans of all
ethnic backgrounds, of all faiths, have a basic right and an overriding
interest in determining the facts of incidents that are deemed by those in
positions of power to be significant in determining America's foreign and
educational policy, as well as its selection of past events to be
memorialized in our civic life.
Today the alleged facts of the Holocaust are at issue all over the civilized
world. The truth will be decided only by recourse to the facts, in the
public forum: not by concealing the facts, denying the truth, stonewalling
The truth will out, and it is time the
government of this country, and governments and international bodies
throughout the world, make public the evidence of what actually transpired
in the German concentration camps in the years 1933-1945, so that we may put
paid to the lies, without fear or favor, and carry out the work of
reconciliation and renewal that is and must be the granite foundation of
mutual tolerance between peoples and of a peace based on justice.
The conclusions of the early US Army
investigations as to the truth about the wartime German concentration camps
have since been corroborated by all subsequent investigators and can be
The harrowing scenes of dead and dying
inmates were not the result of a German policy of "extermination,"
but rather the result of epidemics of typhus and other disease
brought about largely by the effects of Allied aerial attacks.
Stories of Nazi super-criminals and
sadists who turned Jews and others into handbags and lampshades for
their private profit or amusement were sick lies or diseased
fantasies; indeed, the German authorities punished corruption and
cruelty on the part of camp commanders and guards.
On the other hand, portrayals of the
newly liberated inmates as saints and martyrs of Hitlerism were
quite often very far from the truth; indeed, most of the brutalities
inflicted on camp detainees were the work of their fellow prisoners,
in contravention of German policy and German orders.
The alleged homicidal showers and gas
chambers were used either for bathing camp inmates or delousing
their clothes; the claim that they were used to murder Jews or other
human beings is a contemptible fabrication. Orthodox historians and
professional "Nazi-hunters" have quietly dropped claims that inmates
were gassed at Dachau, Buchenwald and other camps in Germany. They
continue, however, to keep silent regarding the lies about Dachau
and Buchenwald, as well as to evade an open discussion of the
evidence for homicidal gassing at Auschwitz and the other camps
captured by the Soviets.
Back to Contents