The Holocaust

From Metapedia

The Holocaust is according to politically correct history a deliberate genocide by National Socialist Germany in which approximately six million Jews were killed. In addition some non-Jewish groups claimed to have been killed by similar methods are sometimes included. Holocaust revisionists dispute that this deliberate genocide occurred.

Related issues include argued exploitation, argued uniqueness, and the status of the Holocaust in an increasing number of Western countries as an official "Truth" that is by law forbidden to be discussed and researched freely and with powerful lobby groups demanding that this censorship must be enforced worldwide.

The politically correct view on the Holocaust can be found in numerous easily available sources. This article will mainly describe some of the less often mentioned arguments regarding the Holocaust.

Terminology

Map depicting the now "standardized" politically correct view on the Holocaust as a deliberate genocide: Jews and some other groups are claimed to have been transported from different parts of Europe to extermination camps in Poland which used gas (the delousing agent Zyklon B or diesel exhaust) to kill groups packed into gas chambers. Some are claimed to have been temporarily spared in order to be used as forced laborers but many of these died quickly due to deliberately harsh conditions intended to kill. In addition it is claimed that many were killed by the mobile Einsatzgruppen in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union by methods such as mass shootings and gas vans.

Notably, as discussed in the main text, it is no longer claimed that there were mass extermination camps using gas chambers in Germany itself despite this being "proven" during the Nuremberg trials and "documented" with even today often shown photographs and films of heaps of corpses (who had died of causes such as typhus). Also many other early descriptions of the Holocaust differ widely and contradictorily from the particular version which is now the "standardized" politically correct view.

In the aftermath of the war, within their own circles Jews originally used the biblical Hebrew term Shoah meaning "calamity" to refer to their experiences during the war. This is generally the word which Jews continue to use amongst themselves, especially in the Israel. The term Holocaust is often disliked due to referring to a Greek religious custom.

The term Holocaust (Greek: Holókauston) is an ancient term referring to an animal sacrifice offered to a god in which the whole (olos) animal is completely burnt (kaustos). It has been used in Western history to describe large scale killings and in particular those associated with burning.

In 1960s the word holocaust has been argued to most often refer to the during the Cold War greatly feared nuclear war and consequent destruction (by "fire" from nuclear weapons). Jewish writers in the United States have been argued to have gradually switched from other words to holocaust in order to associate with this widespread fear. Later other usages were gradually forgotten and the word became capitalized ("The Holocaust").^[1]

The revisionist Robert Faurisson has argued that another reason for the early usage of the word holocaust as a term for the argued mass murder of Jews was that in early times when propaganda and claimed witnesses did not yet agree on how Germans killed Jews it was sometimes argued that a method used consisted of killing Jews by throwing them alive into flaming ditches (see the article on Elie Wiesel).^[2]

Holocaustianity

Various aspects related to the Holocaust has sometimes been compared with a religion. The term Holocaustianity has been used for phenomenon.

The Holocaust vs. other claimed large scale killings

The Holocaust is often described as a unique event as implied by the term "The Holocaust". The book The Holocaust Industry stated that one reason that this is seen as very important is because "unique suffering confers unique entitlement."

Even if accepting the politically correct description as correct, then this uniqueness claim is still dubious. There are many large scale killings throughout human history.

A prominent example is World War II itself with the non-Jewish casualties outnumbering the Jewish casualties by around ten times even if accepting the politically correct numbers regarding the Holocaust.

More controversially, the book Crimes and Mercies: The Fate of German Civilians Under Allied Occupation 1944-1950 argued that Allied policies such as of expulsion and starvation in the post-war period caused the premature deaths of 5.7 million German civilians, 2.5 million ethnic German refugees from Eastern Europe and 1.1 million German POWs.

These numbers have been criticized but also other books have stated very high numbers such as the book After the Reich: The Brutal History of the Allied Occupation. "A nation in tatters, in many places literally flattened by bombs, was suddenly subjected to brutal occupation by vengeful victors. Rape was rampant. Hundreds of thousands of Germans and German-speakers died in the course of brutal deportations from Eastern Europe. By the end of the year, Germany was literally starving to death. Over a million German prisoners of war died in captivity, where they were subjected to inadequate rations and often tortured. All told, an astounding 2.25 million German civilians died violent deaths in the period between the liberation of Vienna and the Berlin airlift.... brutality which has been largely ignored by historians or, worse, justified as legitimate retaliation for the horror of the Holocaus."

More generally, even if ignoring all military casualties, and all civilian causalities in military conflicts, there are still many large scale killings or unnatural deaths of civilians. Some more well known genocides against specific peoples include the Armenian genocide and the Rwandan genocide. Many tens of millions died during the mass killings under Communist regimes which also included targeted genocides of specific peoples suspected of being potential enemies such as the Volga Germans.

There are also numerous other argued large scale killings of civilians (including many after WWII). See the following links for examples.^[3][4][5][6] Most are likely completely unknown to most people.

The book Genocide: A Comprehensive Introduction accepts the politically correct version of the Holocaust but states regarding the supposed uniqueness of the Holocaust that "On no major analytical dimension – speed, scale, scope, intensity, efficiency, cruelty, ideology – does it stand alone and apart. If it is unique in its mix of these ingredients, so too are most of the other major instances of mass killing in their own way. I also believe that uniqueness proponents, like the rest of us, were severely shaken by the holocaust in Rwanda in 1994 (see Chapter 9). The killing there proceeded much faster than the slaughter of the Jews; destroyed a higher proportion of the designated victim group (some 80 percent of Rwandan Tutsis versus two-thirds of European Jews); was carried out by “a chillingly effective organizational structure that would implement the political plan of genocide more efficiently than was achieved by the industrialized death camps in Nazi Germany”; and – unlike the Jewish catastrophe – featured active participation by a substantial portion of the general population."^[7]

Many of the large scale killings are completely or to a large degree unknown to general public and have received no or little media attention unlike the enormous amount of Holocaust media productions.

Claimed large scale killings by Jews

The Jewish Bible has been argued to have sanctioned ethnic cleansing of non-Jews. The "Promised Land" when the Jews arrived out of the desert (according to the Bible’s account) was owned by non-Jews who were killed, ethnically cleansed, expelled, or forcibly converted in order to create a Jewish state. The Hasmonean dynasty for a period gained Jewish independence (140 BC–63 BC). The Jewish Bible again describes large scale killing, ethnic cleansing, expulsion, or forced conversion of non-Jews. More generally Jewish religious writings have been argued to in some cases approvingly describe or condone genocides or other mass killings of various non-Jewish groups. Important Jewish holidays have been criticized for containing elements which have been argued to be celebrations of mass killings of non-Jewish enemies. This has been argued to have negative influences (such as on the views of some Israelis on Palestinians) but is argued to be seldom mentioned or criticized in the mainstream discourse.^{[8][9][10][11]}

Jews revolted several times against Roman rule. Dio Cassius claims regarding the Kitos War (115–117 AD) that Jews massacred almost half a million people in Africa and Cyprus alone.^[12] The Romans in turn killed and enslaved large numbers of Jews.

Some Jews have been seen as having a responsibility for the mass killings under Communist regimes. Many of the important ideologues of Marxism which advocates a revolution and a consequent "dictatorship of the proletariat" were Jews, Jews often had influential positions in the states and organizations responsible for the killings/unnatural deaths (such as in the Soviet secret police organizations), and some communist atrocities have been argued to be motivated by some Jews seeking revenge against the anti-Jewish Tsarist regime and National Socialist Germany (for example, anti-German propaganda by Ilya Ehrenburg contributing to large scale atrocities against German civilians).

The Morgenthau Plan by the Jewish Secretary of the Treasury Henry Morgenthau, Jr. and his Jewish Assistant Secretary of the Treasury Harry Dexter White as well as the book Germany Must Perish! have been argued to have amounted to planned genocides of Germans. The Morgenthau Plan was formally rejected after public protests after it was leaked. However, very harsh measures were despite this implemented on occupied Germany during the first postwar years which have been argued to have caused effects such as mass starvation and mass deaths as stated in the previous section and the article on the Morgenthau Plan.

During the postwar period groups such as the Nakam and Tilhas Tizig Gesheften are alleged to have killed at least hundreds of individuals they suspected may have been involved in the Holocaust. The Nakam group is furthermore alleged to more generally have intended to kill six million Germans.

The book An Eye for an Eye: The Story of Jews Who Sought Revenge for the Holocaust argued that after the Second World War many concentration camps were established for purposes of the indiscriminate internment of mostly German victims, many of whom were to die an agonizing death there. The book argued that mostly Jewish concentration camp guards in Polish camps took gruesome revenge on innocent Germans who had been rounded up more or less at random.^[13]

Israel and the Israel lobby has been argued to be in part or wholly responsible for many massacres and unnatural deaths during the creation of Israel, later Israeli wars, and later proxy wars by others against Israel's enemies.

The Samson Option is the name given to an alleged Israeli threat of massive use of nuclear weapons if Israel's existence should be seriously threatened and often justified by referring to the Holocaust, allegedly including threats not just against Islamic countries but also against Europe, or even against the entire world.

Argued exploitation

Various groups are argued to have exploited the politically correct Holocaust version. Some of these arguments accept the politically correct version as correct but still argue that it has been used for exploitation.

Other exploitation arguments rely on the revisionist version of what happened. Revisionists also argue that such exploitation by various groups is the main explanation for why the politically correct version appeared and continues to be influential.^[14]

By the Allies

Revisionists argue that the German propaganda after the discovery of Soviet atrocities in the German occupied Soviet Union was extremely successful and among other things caused one million foreign volunteers to join Germany's struggle against the Soviet Union, the biggest volunteer army in the history of mankind to ever fight for a foreign nation.^[14]

In response the Allies, the revisionists argue, went to extreme lengths to to invent or back similar stories of mass murder and blame them on the Germans. This included British propaganda spreading stories originating from the communist influenced Auschwitz resistance regarding very large scale killings which the British knew were false since they had cracked the German radio codes the camp commanders used to send encoded messages to Berlin about the numbers of prisoners in each camp. Top Allied intelligence officers stated that they did not believe the propaganda that was spread was true. Thus, the Chairman of the Allied Joint Intelligence Committee in 1943 stated that the accounts about gassings which originated from Polish and Jewish sources were invented and were like the propaganda about the German enemy forces of the First World War.^[14]

During the First World War the British newspaper The Daily Telegraph published an article falsely claiming that the Germans had murdered 700,000 Serbs in gas chambers. During the Second World War the same newspaper in 1944 claimed that the Germans had murdered 700,000 Jews in Poland in gas chambers. As this time the British Government has asked the British media and churches to help spread more anti-German propaganda in order to distract from the atrocities it expected to be committed by the Soviets as soon as they invaded Germany. In its circular, the British government expressed its regret that, after the exposure of the First World War propaganda lies, greater efforts would be necessary to succeed this time.^[15]

Stories of mass murders spread also as rumors among the camp populations and may have caused many in the camps to believe that mass killings were taking place.^[14] The communist influenced resistance groups in camps likely gained from this such as by being able to recruit more members.

"Revisionists generally hold that the Allied governments, and in particular the Soviets, decided to carry their wartime "black propaganda" of German monstrosities over into the postwar period. This was done for essentially three reasons. 1. The Allies felt it necessary to continue to justify the great sacrifices that were made in fighting two world wars. 2. The Allies wanted to divert attention from, and to justify, their own particularly brutal crimes against humanity. Soviet atrocities alone caused the death of uncounted millions of civilians in the Soviet Union and in all countries of eastern and central Europe. American and British saturation bombings of German and Japanese cities causing over a million civilians to be burned or buried alive. 3. The Allies needed justification for postwar arrangements involving the total dismantling of German industry, a policy of starvation causing the deaths of many millions of German civilians, the robbing of German patents worth trillions of dollars, and the annexation of large parts of Germany into Poland and the USSR. These territories were not disputed borderlands but consisted of 20% of the entire German territory. The twelve million Germans living in these regions were robbed of their property and brutally expelled. More than two millions perished during this most heinous ethnic cleansing of world history."^[15]

Furthermore, the Western Allies, faced with the accusation of having given up half of Europe to Stalin and Stalinist terrors, could counter this with the argument that this was the lesser of two evils.^[16]

Another aspect is the widespread resentment in Germany and the other defeated countries against the treatment by the Allies and the peace treaties after World War I. Avoiding such resentment after World War II may have been seen as desirable and very important.

The Soviet Union before WWII already had a long tradition of and extensive experience on rewriting and falsifying history by methods such as show trials, "confessions" and "testimonies" obtained by using a variety of methods, and editing and forgery of photographs and documents. In some cases, such as the Katyn Massacre, when the victims were non-Jews and the massacres were useful as propaganda by the West against the Soviets, it has been admitted that the Soviets falsely accused National Socialist Germany of war crimes and submitted large amounts of fabricated evidence including faked forensic evidence and false witness "testimonies" at the Nuremberg trials.

See also Allied psychological warfare.

By Zionists

"During the war, and in the postwar era as well, Zionist organizations became deeply involved in creating and spreading Holocaust stories. Their purpose was to drum up world sympathy and support for Jewish causes, especially for the creation of the State of Israel."^[15]

As an excuse for starting wars and as a general moral justification - "Never again"

The threat of a possible new Hitler and a new possible Holocaust, sometimes involving alleged weapons of mass destruction to be used for this Holocaust, has frequently been used as an justification for wars, and gaining support for these wars, in particular wars against the enemies of Israel. More generally phrases such as "Never again" with reference to the Holocaust are used as moral excuses for various actions (such as Israel having weapons of mass destruction). Currently a popular target is Iran.

For other pro-Jewish propaganda purposes

The Holocaust has also been argued to be used for other propaganda purposes by Jews and others.

One argued example is the Holocaust being used to increase solidarity among Jews and to increase wariness and mistrust of non-Jews.^[17]

A 2013 survey of Jews in the United States asked what was an essential part of being Jewish. "Remembering the Holocaust" was the most common answer.^[18]

A 1989 book by an Israeli author stated that "Israelis and American Jews fully agree that the memory of the Holocaust is an indispensable weapon — one that must be used relentlessly against their common enemy … Jewish organisations and individuals thus labor continuously to remind the world of it. In America, the perpetuation of the Holocaust memory is now a $100-million-a-year enterprise, part of which is government funded."^[19]

A 1966 critical book stated that "Ever since the Jews invented the libel charge of “anti- Semitism” in the 1880s. It was first published in the Jewish Encyclopedia (1901 Vol. 1, p. 641), and has been built up with Jewish money, organizations, propaganda and lies (such as the Holocaust — Holohoax), so that now the word is like a snake venom which paralyses one’s nervous system. Even the mention of the word “Jew” is shunned unless used in a most favorable and positive context."^[20]

The elsewhere mentioned book The Holocaust Industry stated that "Invoking The Holocaust was therefore a ploy to delegitimize all criticism of Jews: such criticism could only spring from pathological hatred" and "Deploring the ‘Holocaust lesson’ of eternal Gentile hatred, Boas Evron observes that it ‘is really tantamount to a deliberate breeding of paranoia… This mentality… condones in advance any inhuman treatment of non-Jews, for the prevailing mythology is that ‘all people collaborated with the Nazis in the destruction of Jewry,’ hence everything is permissible to Jews in their relationship to other peoples."^[14]

For financial and status gain

For example the book The Holocaust Industry by the Jewish professor Norman Finkelstein has described enormous financial and other forms of gains from the Holocaust.

Thus, Israel and "Holocaust survivors" have received and receive large reparations and other forms of economic benefits from Germany, other countries, and various banks and other companies somehow claimed to be associated with the Holocaust. Many "Holocaust survivors" have furthermore gained economically through books, lectures, or simply through having the always mentioned "Holocaust survivor" distinction. There are an increasing number of Holocaust museums, memorials, educational programs, and so on, making a living on memorializing the Holocaust. An enormous amount of films and television programs involving the Holocaust has been produced. Many scholars are paid to promote the politically correct view of the Holocaust. Organizations such as anti-racist and pro-Jewish lobby organizations usually prominently promote the Holocaust in order to scare Jews and other into giving large donations.

Former Israeli Foreign Affairs Minister Abba Eban stated "There’s no business like Shoa business".^[21]

Other forms of argued gains include respect and status as a "Holocaust survivor".^[14]

By non-Jewish groups

Various non-Jewish groups who gained from the results of the Second World War have been argued to have a vested interest in the politically correct version of the Holocaust. Such groups have been argued to include groups in Germany, Great Britain, Poland, Russia, and the United States. This has been argued to contribute to the persistence of the politically correct version.^[22]

By opponents of eugenics

The rise of the "Holocaust Memorial Movement" has been linked to opposition to and decline of eugenics in Western countries (but not in Israel). Thus, the movement has been argued to be an important contributor to large scale genetic deterioration harmful for both individuals and societies.^[23] Also regarding the relationship to eugenics, see the Eugenics article and in particular the sections "History", "National Socialist Germany", and "Jewish and Israeli eugenics".

By race denialists, genetic denialists, advocates of White guilt, non-Whites, and leftists

Race denialists, genetics denialists, advocates of White guilt, non-Whites, and leftists have been argued to use the Holocaust for purposes such as discrediting their opponents. Again, this has been argued to contribute to the persistence of the politically correct version.^[22]

The Holocaust as an official "Truth" and argued non-scientific attacks on Holocaust revisionism

Censorship, persecution, and prohibition of Holocaust revisionism

The historian David Irving was arrested in Austria and sent to prison in 2006. It should be noted that (contrary to presentations of him in the politically correct media) Irving's stated views on the Holocaust are quite different in many aspects from those of most Holocaust revisionists.

The Holocaust is in many Western countries an official "Truth" that is illegal to discuss and research freely. Some Western countries such as Canada and Australia do not have formal laws but have used other methods causing the same effect. Continued attempts are made to extend such mechanisms to the remaining Western countries that still allow free debate and research on the issue. In 2014 Russia and Greece implemented "Holocaust denial" laws. Italy was in 2015 moving towards a "Holocaust denial" law. Romania the same year implemented such a law ("with help of the D.C.-based" United States Holocaust Memorial Museum‎).^[24]). Lobbying efforts are ongoing in order to make the EU pass legislation prohibiting free discussion and research in all EU countries.

In 2013 the World Jewish Congress passed a resolution demanding that all the countries of the world must forbid the Holocaust from being discussed and researched freely.^[25]

Some notable convictions for "Holocaust denial" include against David Irving, Ernst Zündel, Fredrick Töben, Gaston-Armand Amaudruz, Germar Rudolf, Horst Mahler, Jean-Marie Le Pen, Jean Plantin, Jürgen Graf, Richard Williamson, Robert Faurisson, Roger Garaudy, Sylvia Stolz, and Vincent Reynouard.

Persecution and/or censorship have occurred not just for historians but also for groups such as defense witnesses and defense lawyers who dispute the politically correct version of the Holocaust or are perceived of doing so.

"Holocaust denial" laws may or may not also include more general prohibitions of free discussion and research on many other aspects of the history of National Socialist Germany.

In some countries there may be laws against "genocide denials" more generally but the Holocaust arguably have a special position in regards to the amount of criticisms against the official version and in regards to the degree of repression of such criticisms.

Holocaust revisionism and "hate speech"

Official reasons for "Holocaust denial" laws have included that the revisionist arguments are "hate speech" against Jews. One supposed reason for this is that revisionists argue that some Jewish "witnesses" have deliberately lied for various forms of gain. However, this does not mean that all Jews are responsible for these argued lies (in the same way that not all citizens of warring states are responsible for argued war crimes committed by some individuals during a war). Also, as stated elsewhere revisionists argue that many non-Jewish individuals and groups have deliberately lied about and gained from the politically correct version.

Revisionists also argue that the political correct version in practice cause collective guilt and hatred against Germans in general and has contributed to large scale crimes against German civilians (see the section "The Holocaust vs. other claimed large scale killings"). Thus, it is possible to see the politically correct version of the Holocaust as "hate speech".

A Jewish journalist who visited a Holocaust revisionist conference wrote regarding hate that "I would see none of it, certainly less than I would see when Jews were speaking of Germans. No one had ever said anything remotely like Elie Wiesel, ‘Every Jew, somewhere in his being, should set aside a zone of hate–healthy, virile hate – for what persists in the Germans,’ and no one had said anything like Edgar Bronfman, the president of the World Jewish Congress. A shocked professor told Bronfman once, ‘You are teaching a whole generation to hate thousands of Germans,’ and Bronfman replied, ‘No, I am teaching a whole generation to hate millions of Germans.’"^[14]

Also, if the politically correct version is false, then numerous people (including researchers not advocating any form of violence) have been falsely punished in various trials and sometimes executed.

Another official reason is that "Holocaust denial" may increase support for "racism" generally. A counter-argument is that the political correct version and propaganda using it cause hatred against Whites and anti-White policies generally. Furthermore, the politically correct version is used to attempt to suppress/dismiss scientific research on race and even genetics in general which causes ill-informed and therefore often harmful decisions for society in general.

Another argued reason for "Holocaust denial" laws consists of ad hominem by arguing that the researchers are far right. However, Germar Rudolf have argued that "the extreme right wing" are only a small minority among revisionists researchers who span the political spectrum including the far left.^[26]

There may also be illogical circular reasoning, such as Holocaust denialism being dangerous, since if it is proven that the National Socialists did not commit a genocide then this may revive National Socialism which is dangerous, since National Socialism committed a genocide.

More generally revisionists argue that historical research in general and science more broadly often may cause perceived offense for some individuals or groups. This is in other cases not seen as a reason for censoring science.

More unofficial reasons for laws against "Holocaust denial" may be that the evidence supporting the politically correct version is weak and cannot stand open debate, that many groups have gained from and have vested interests in the politically correct version, pathological altruism, and white guilt and exploitation of such guilt. Comparisons have also been made with blasphemy laws. See the Holocaustianity article.

The term "Holocaust denial" and straw man revisionism

The term "Holocaust denial" instead of "Holocaust revisionism" is disfavored by revisionists since "denialism" is sometimes interpreted as meaning denying reality. Also, only some aspects are denied while other are accepted. In addition revisionists do not deny some events but argue that the politically correct version of what happened is incorrect. Furthermore, non-revisionists are argued to incorrectly deny, minimize, and/or ignore many events as described elsewhere in this article. The term "Holocaust denial" can be seen as a form of ad hominem.

This usage can also be seen as only one part of a more general straw man revisionism where what revisionists argue is misrepresented or anti-revisionists only replying to old arguments while ignoring newer research (such as only replying to the first Leuchter Report while ignoring later reports and arguments on Zyklon B derivatives measurements).

"Conspiracy theories"

Joseph Stalin pictured with the "Vanishing Commissar" (Nikolai Yezhov) in 1937 before Soviet retouching.

The photo after Soviet retouching, with Yezhov entirely removed. Also non-revisionist historians admit that the Soviets had long "conspired" to mislead the public by using such fabrications and false propaganda in order to rewrite history before the war but revisionists argue that such fabrications and false propaganda did not cease with the start of WWII but continued during and after WWII.

The revisionist version is often argued to involve a "conspiracy theory" to mislead the public which is implied to be dubious in itself. However, the Allies made false claims of Germans atrocities for propaganda purposes already during the First World War and the Soviets had long routinely falsified history using a variety of sophisticated methods.

See the article Allied psychological warfare on topics such as secret Allied organizations engaged in "psychological warfare" and spreading propaganda (including black propaganda).

Furthermore, also the non-revisionist version involves a "conspiracy theory". Germans are argued to already in 1941 while they were victorious to have started to massively falsify and ignore their official communications and written orders and instead rely on secret "code words" and verbal orders. The Germans involved in the argued conspiracy also almost totally destroyed all traces of the millions of corpses from the mass murders ("Aktion 1005") and almost all incriminatory documents (but supposedly instead confessed the mass murders in recorded public speeches, did not kill the massive numbers of potential witnesses alive in the camps at the end of the war, and did not destroy the other evidence argued to support the non-revisionist version).

In the summer of 1944 the Soviets reached the the first concentration camp, Majdanek. There they found, according to revisionists, crematories, delousing chambers, and cans of Zyklon B, which had been used to save lives but which were turned by Soviet propaganda into their opposite. The Soviets also released photos of skeletons laying next to cremation furnaces (which must have been staged according to revisionists since cremation would not have produced such a result). Germans (not part of the alleged Aktion 1005) did destroy crematories after this but this is argued to be due to a likely desire to avoid similar future false propaganda. Also, at Auschwitz neither the alleged gas chambers or a massive amount of camp documents were destroyed and the remaining prison population (potential witnesses) was not killed (in particular, the Sonderkommando members allegedly working in the gas chambers were not killed). This is argued to demonstrate that the purpose was to prevent Soviet crematoria propaganda but not to conceal the existence of the alleged mass gassings.^[14][27]

Regarding individuals who, for example, may have used coercive methods on National Socialists in order to obtain confessions, this must not necessarily be due to being part of a secret conspiracy but may have been due to a sincere belief that the Holocaust did occur according to the politically correct version and that coercion was needed to obtain confessions from lying perpetrators. Similarly, even individuals who may have have fabricated/edited Nationalist Socialist documents must not necessarily have been part of a conspiracy but may have done so, for example, in order to ensure convictions of accused that were viewed as guilty even if clear evidence for this was lacking. Furthermore, possibly deliberately false witness testimonies need not have been due to the witnesses being part of a secret conspiracy but may have been due to coercion, personal gain, group gain, and/or a variety of other factors as discussed elsewhere.

Revisionists have differed regarding to what degree they see the politically correct Holocaust version as being deliberately fabricated. For example, some have viewed documents often cited as evidence for the Holocaust as fabricated/edited, others have viewed them as authentic but misinterpreted. Many would likely argue that much of the initial wartime propaganda was (like the WWI wartime propaganda) at first deliberately fabricated by various parties but that many others started to sincerely believe that the claims were true. Such views were immensely strengthened and seen as verified at the end of the war by the discovery of camps which did contain many corpses. Regarding the continuation of the wartime propaganda into the postwar period, some have seen this as deliberately organized falsehoods (especially by the Soviets), others as akin to the European witch hunts and witch trials which self-propagated into a massive movement in which many of the participants sincerely believed (based numerous "witnesses", "confessors", and other forms of "evidence") that witches existed and needed to be severely persecuted for the good of society.^[14][28]

Revisionist views: Overview and general arguments

The Auschwitz commander Rudolf Höss at the Nuremberg trials. Revisionists argue that he and others were tortured (sometimes by Jewish torturers) into making confessions that also non-revisionists now agree are false (such as three million being killed at Auschwitz) and that sometimes are absurd (such as using dynamite to blow up the bodies in order to dispose of them).^{[29][30][14][13]} See the article on Höss for more details.

What revisionists do not argue

Germar Rudolf has stated that "Most people have misconceptions about what Holocaust revisionists (frequently pejoratively labeled as “Holocaust deniers” or “negationists”) claim and what they do not claim. This is caused by disinformation spread by the mass media, some of it due to journalists innocently yet irresponsibly copying from others, some of it spread with malicious intend. The brief list below is meant to give you a brief overview as to what we revisionists say and what we do not say... Not all revisionist scholars might agree with all the points listed, but in general the broad consensus among us does probably look like this:"^[26]

Many earlier Holocaust claims have been admitted to be incorrect

Revisionists argue that many early Holocaust claims which were presented as definite truths have later been admitted to be incorrect. For example, during war crimes trials claims were made that that Germany produced human soap out of human fat and artifacts made from human skin. Allied prosecutors produced evidence to support these charges. Similarly, claims were made of large scale mass gassings in western Holocaust camps in Germany itself. Today, many of these allegations have been abandoned or modified. It is still argued that large scale mass gassings occurred in camps in Poland (and sometimes comparatively small scale gassings in western camps) but revisionists argue that the evidence for these claims is not qualitatively different from those claims that have now been abandoned. There were also earlier false propaganda claims of Germany committing atrocities during the First World War.^[14][26]

A 2014 revisionist articles stated that in 1986, experts estimated 1.38 million Jewish deaths at the Majdanek camp. Today the curator of the camp museum claims just 59,000 fatalities—a reduction of 96%. Prior to 1990, 4 million were argued to have died at Auschwitz. On July 17 of that year, the Washington Times announced: “Poland reduces Auschwitz death toll estimate to 1 million." The estimated number of homosexuals who died in the camps have seen a drop from 500,000 to perhaps 5,000.^[31]

See also the Nuremberg trials article regarding problems such as now admitted use of torture in order to get confessions and admitted document forgeries.

Argued admitted weak mainstream evidence

Revisionists have argued that some mainstream historians have in effect admitted that the evidence supporting the politically correct version is very weak.^[22]

Argued reasons for the camps and deportations

Interment camps were built soon after Hitler’s assumption of power in 1933 and were used for argued militant political opponents: most of the inmates were Communists.^[13] Communists had considerable support among the population (14% in the July 1932 election) and part of the reason for Hitler gaining power was due to general fear of Communist violence against opponents and a possible Communist revolution followed by persecutions similar to those in the Soviet Union.

The number of internees was 27,000 in October 1933 but fell as the political situation stabilized to around 7,000 by February 1934. The internees included in addition to political prisoners also hardened criminals and “Asocials” (tramps, beggars etc.). The death rate was very low. Before 1938 Jews were not interned only for being Jews. The Kristallnacht was followed by internment of 30,000 Jews but most were soon released. After the start of WWII the camp system expanded rapidly. One reason was the resistance movement(s) in the occupied territories.^[13]

The term "concentration camp" was created during the second Boer War (1899-1902) when the Boer civilian population were interned in camps in order to prevent help to the Boer forces. The term was after this used in reference to argued similar policies by US, Spain, and the Soviet Union long before the Second World War. It was also applied to National Socialist Germany long before the war. Prison camps had existed before the Boer Wars, such as during the American Civil War, when both the North and South maintained camps for POWs and suspected enemy sympathizers; considerable percentages of these inmates died, mostly from epidemics. At the Southern prison camp of Andersonville as well as in the camps for Boer civilians the mortality rate was around 25%.^[32][13]

Argued reasons for National Socialist mistrust of Jewish influence included the German Revolution of 1918–19, the Stab in the back theory, argued Jewish communism, and the then already well-known atrocities of Communism.^[33][34] After the creation National Socialist Germany a number of hostile declarations were made by Jews and Jewish organizations which included threats of "war" and "destruction". Boycotts were organized and threats were also made of sabotage.^{[35][36][37][38]} Jews are argued to have constituted a disproportionately large proportion of resistance members and partisans in all German-occupied territories.^[13]

This has been argued to have contributed to Jews being deported and placed in camps. Groups seen as having potentially hostile members in the Allied nations were also placed in camps such as many people of Japanese heritage (and in some cases people of German and Italian heritage) in the United States. Several ethnicities in the Soviet Union suspected of being potentially disloyal were to various degrees persecuted, killed, and deported. For instance, the Soviet Union brutally deported to Siberia and caused the death of many Volga Germans.

The increased demands for laborers by the war industries, conscription of many men, war casualties, and evacuations/deportations of able workers by Soviets before the German advance is argued to have created constant labor shortages in Germany and many occupied areas. Therefore, another argued reason for the deportations and the camps was to use Jews as forced laborers.^[13][39]

Also during the war there were various non-Jewish groups in the camps such as members of resistance groups, gypsies, homosexuals, ordinary criminals, and political prisoners such as Communists (not all members of such groups were sent to the camps but typically those seen as having committed more severe offenses). There were also many releases of certain groups from the camps. An important difference between camps is argued to have been whether the ordinary criminals or the political prisoners (in particular the Communists) were in control among the prisoners themselves. Both groups are argued to have practiced widespread terror against and stolen food from other prisoners (in effect often meaning a death sentence).^[39]

"The Final Solution"

Revisionists argue that the "Final Solution of the Jewish Question" meant voluntary emigration by or forced deportations of Jews from Europe. They further argue measures taking the during war such as the camps and deportations to Eastern Europe/Western Russia were seen as temporary solutions with the "Final Solution" to the "Jewish Question" to be fully implemented only after the war. See the "Orders, plans, organizations, and budgets" section for more details.^[14]

Hierarchy of evidence

Revisionists argue that in courts there is a generally agreed on hierarchy regarding how valuable different forms of evidence are (the most valuable mentioned first):^[14]

• Material evidence (for example, gas chambers, corpses)
• Documentary evidence (for example, National Socialist documents)
• Neutral witness testimony (for example, by Red Cross inspectors of camps)
• Party testimony (for example, "Holocaust survivor" statements, trial "confessions", political speeches by National Socialists, and so on)

The evidence argued to support the non-revisionist version is argued to mostly consist of the weakest form of evidence (party testimony).

The following sections will roughly follow this hierarchy.

Revisionist views: Material evidence and alleged killing methods

Camps

Zyklon B and crematoria

Revisionists argue that while the pesticide Zyklon B which produces a poisonous gas was used in some Holocaust camps in "gas chambers" this was for delousing items such as clothing in order to prevent epidemics of diseases such as typhus. Thus, the argued purpose was to save lives and not mass murder. Similarly, revisionists argue that there were crematoria in the camps but that the purpose of these was not to hide the evidence of mass murder but to improve camp hygiene and safely dispose of corpses from deaths due to a variety of non-genocidal causes (such as typhus).^[14]

Zyklon B derivatives in claimed gas chamber walls

Prussian blue.

Investigations of the camps are argued to show that there were no homicidal gas chambers or sophisticated methods for mass murder. One famous example is by measuring the amount of Zyklon B derivatives in the walls of delousing gas chambers and alleged homicidal gas chambers which is argued to show that no mass killings using Zyklon B took place. A color pigment ("Prussian blue") originating from repeated Zyklon B use is even argued to be visible as a blue discoloration in delousing gas chambers in the camps but not in the alleged homicidal gas chambers in the camps. These arguments were first presented in the first Leuchter Report. Several later studies have also been conducted (such as the Rudolf Report) and are argued to provide further evidence.^[14]

Revisionists further argue that they have answered various criticisms such as regarding the different concentrations of poison gas needed to kill lice and humans (briefly, very high poison gas concentrations would have been needed to very quickly kill humans as alleged, the alleged homicidal gas chambers had no or only very limited ventilation systems unlike the delousing gas chambers meaning prolonged exposure, and some of the alleged homicidal gas chambers were very damp unlike the delousing chambers which would have increased Zyklon B derivatives in the walls).^[14]

Another criticism is that sometimes very small trace amounts of Zyklon B derivatives appear to be found in the alleged gas chambers. Revisionists argue that such very small traces are found also in structures never argued to be exposed to Zyklon B, are not replicable, and even when found are impossibly small compared to the homicidal gas chamber allegations (possible explanations for such traces include measurement errors, general camp delousing activities, and/or generally found traces of the very stable Prussian blue).^[14][40][41]

Yet another example of a criticisms is an often cited Polish investigation which revisionists argue was openly politically biased and used a flawed technical procedure. Revisionists have further argued the same group had earlier instead found results supporting the revisionists, did not publish these results, but that they were released to the public through an indiscretion.^[14]

Other argued problems with the claimed killing and corpse disposal process

Other examinations of gas chambers and other structures are argued to contradict to the politically correct descriptions regarding aspects such as the holes allegedly used to insert Zyklon B into the claimed homicidal gas chambers.^[14]

The entire files of the Central Construction Office of Auschwitz has been found. This and other evidence is argued to show that the claimed homicidal gas chambers, the camp crematories, and other structures such ventilation systems were not constructed for and completely unsuitable for mass killings/mass disposal of bodies and that later constructions did not change this.^[14]

The gas chamber doors found in Auschwitz are argued to be made of wooden boards, ordinary hinges and flimsy latches, opening outwards and thus unable to withstand heavy pressure from within the room, appropriate for a gas chamber for delousing items, but inappropriate for a gas chamber with hundreds of people desperately trying to escape.^[14]

In addition, it is argued that for several different reasons (such as the physical/chemical properties of Zyklon B, the time required for ventilation of the gas from the chambers, and the logistics involved in moving thousands of people/corpses each day through the claimed chain of structures) it is simply physically/chemically highly implausible or impossible for mass killings or mass disposal of corpses to have occurred as described in politically corrects descriptions. See also the "Corpses" section.^[14]

See Auschwitz: Example of revisionist criticism of eyewitness claims on an example of revisionist arguments from the Rudolf Report which is often related to the physical/chemical properties of Zyklon B and the alleged homicidal gas chambers/crematories.

Jean-Claude Pressac

Non-revisionists have sometimes cited books by Jean-Claude Pressac as having refuted some technical revisionist arguments regarding Auschwitz. Revisionists argue that this is incorrect and that the writings presented unsubstantiated ramblings and unfounded speculations. This is argued to in effect be admitted also by some non-revisionists who started criticizing the arguments as counterproductive. Thus one critic wrote that "Far from signifying the defeat of the revisionists, Mr. Pressac’s book ‘The Crematories of Auschwitz: The Technique of Mass Murder’ signifies its paradoxical triumph: The apparent victors (those who affirm the crime in its whole horrible extent) are the defeated, and the apparent losers (the revisionists and with them the deniers) come out on top. Their victory is invisible, but incontestable". In addition Pressac in his later years became increasingly critical of mainstream historiography which he described as "rotten" and stated that "The current view of the world of the [National Socialist] camps, though triumphant, is doomed. What of it can be salvaged? Only little." This is argued to have caused him to eventually be shunned by the mainstream and his death in 2003 to be ignored by the media.^[14]

Technical arguments made by other prominent revisionists and at the Irving v. Lipstadt trial have often consisted of reusing Pressac's arguments, sometimes without naming the source, and have been extensively criticized by revisionists.^[42]

General conditions of the camps and the fate of those unable to work

The camps are not argued to have been holiday resorts and in particular in some camps and during some time periods there were problem such as poor sanitation, epidemics, insufficient rations, hard forced labor, and abuses. There were also argued large scale efforts to improve conditions as well as investigations and convictions for abuses.^[14]

Revisionists also argue that Auschwitz contained a hospital for prisoners and with records showing that the camp spent enormous amounts of money caring for sick prisoners. Between 10 September 1942 and 23 February 1944 alone 11,246 inmates underwent surgery at Auschwitz. Some of the first microwave devices were sent to Auschwitz for delousing and disinfecting purposes (instead of to German soldiers on the Eastern Front). In part such measure (and the Zyklon B delousing and crematoria) are argued to be responses to early epidemics in the camp and demonstrate that the camps were not extermination camp and that those unable to work were not killed.^[14][39]

A prominent part of the politically correct version is that those not fit for work such as the young and the elderly were gassed on arrival to the camps. It is furthermore argued that these individuals were never registered which would explain why the number of registered deaths in the camps is so small compared to the politically correct number of deaths. Revisionists have argued that there do were various sorting processes for reasons such as work allocation. However, those unfit for work were not killed which is argued to be proven for reasons such as those registered including many young and old individuals, German reports stating that large shares of camp inmates were unable to work, and "Holocaust survivors" who were children in the camps.^[14]

Operation Reinhard

The politically correct view is that "Operation Reinhard" (after Reinhard Heydrich) is a code word for the systematic extermination of Jews in pure extermination camps in eastern Poland (Treblinka, Belzec, and Sobibor). Revisionists argue that various documents clearly show that the tern refers to an operation which was about the collection and recycling of the property of Jews deported to the east. It is argued to had nothing to do with extermination. The term is argued to have been applied also to collection and recycling activities in camps like Auschwitz and Majdanek (which in the politically correct view were not pure extermination camps but which were also used for forced labor activities). Also the spelling is argued to be incorrect with correct name being "Operation Reinhardt" after the Ministry of Finance official Fritz Reinhardt.^[14][43]

Revisionists argue that the three camps mentioned were transit camps located where people transported further east had to change trains since the Soviet Union used different railways tracks (broad gauge) than the rest of Europe. Hygienic and sorting measures done at the same time are argued to be the possible origin of various Holocaust horror stories.^[14]

Allegedly all Jews, able to work or not, were gassed immediately on arrival. This has been argued to be an absurd claim considering that numerous documents state that the German industry was in constant and desperate need of manpower during the war and that many measures were taken in the labor camps in order to maintain the work force and keep it in a condition fit for work (more generally, claims that able workers anywhere were deliberately killed is argued to be absurd claims for similar reasons).^[39]

The Auschwitz Museum

Photo of shoes displayed at the Auschwitz museum. Revisionists have argued that witnesses have stated that it is not a pile of shoes but a wooden board set at an angle with only a single layer of shoes mounted on it and that after the war the Germans in the surrounding area were forced to collect shoes and hand them to the camp authorities. In the Majdanek camp similar photos of many shoes have been revealed to originate from a place in the camp where old shoes were repaired. These shoes were discovered by the Soviets when they captured the camp and used for propaganda purposes.^[14]

The Auschwitz Museum is notorious for in 1990 suddenly changing the claimed 4 million murdered to 1.5 million. While the reduction was mostly due to reducing the number of alleged non-Jewish killings, revisionists argue that this demonstrates the unreliability of Holocaust claims. The Auschwitz Museum has put on display piles of hair, boots, and eyeglasses, and so on, but there is neither evidence for the origin of these items nor for the fate of their former owners. In a videotaped interview, the Auschwitz Museum authorities admitted that the gas chamber shown to tourists is a "reconstruction," again not based on facts, but only on unverified eyewitness claims. The Museum’s tourist guides, however, tell visitors that all they see is genuine.^[26]

Non-revisionists have dismissed the 4 million revision for reasons such as this (mostly) only involving non-Jews being killed or not and not necessarily affecting the important Six million Jews number and there having been earlier criticisms of the 4 million number. Revisionists have argued that this ignores that the 4 million killed at Auschwitz allegation was a central allegation during the Nuremberg trials, was later repeated by major non-revisionist historians such as Eugen Kogon, and was an important part of the allegations made by several of the absolutely most important "confessors" and "witnesses" on Auschwitz (such as Rudolf Höss).^[44][45]

Ghettos

Essentially during 1941-43 period there was a ghetto system for Jews in Poland and elsewhere. The average duration of a ghetto was roughly two years. Ghettos were generally small sections of cities that were designated as Jewish-only areas. Contrary to popular belief, many were completely open and allowed free entry and exit and were only marked by a sign. Jews were only confined to living and operating businesses there. Large numbers of Jews are claimed to have died in the ghettos due to a variety of causes before being moved to the camps. Revisionists have argued that claims vary widely and often lack any evidence.^[31]

See also Einsatzgruppen: Ghettos

Einsatzgruppen

See the Einsatzgruppen article.

Gas vans and gas chambers using diesel exhaust

Revisionists argue that research shows that the infamous gas vans never existed and provide a miniature example of Holocaust propaganda in general.^[14]

The gas vans are argued to be a product of Soviet wartime propaganda. The propaganda may have been inspired by Soviet vans that had long been used to kill dissidents in limited numbers by using gasoline exhaust with high carbon monoxide content. Revisionists argue that the Soviet propagandists switched the killing method to the diesel engines invented in and commonly used in Germany in order to make the story appear more authentic. They did not realize, revisionists argue, that diesel exhaust is relatively nontoxic and that for various technical reasons it is highly implausible that large scale murders would have been committed using diesel exhaust (even if not theoretically physically impossible the practical difficulties are argued to be enormous). Diesel engines were as early as 1928 used in mines because diesel exhaust can be released underground without danger and there is argued to be no confirmed case of a healthy person dying due to diesel exhaust. Also, there are other argued problems such as the killing time being too long for the claimed large scale killings and "witnesses" not reporting the victims being covered in soot.^[14]

Another argued problem with the politically correct descriptions is that the claimed witnesses did not report the cherry red skin discoloration associated with carbon monoxide poisoning.^[46]

The evidence in support for the gas vans is argued to consist of show trial "confessions" and "testimonies" (argued to be inconsistent and at times nonsensical), photos of normal German wartime vans, and documents containing alleged "code words" which revisionists argue were normal terms used for German military vehicles. The most important documentary evidence is argued to be two documents which revisionists argue have been demonstrated to be clear forgeries.^[14]

Diesel exhaust was supposedly also used instead of Zyklon B in gas chambers in some camps. The problems with this are argued to be similar to those argued for gas vans using diesel exhaust.^[14]

Argued implausibly poor choices of alleged killing methods

Revisionists have criticized the supposed use of the delousing agent Zyklon B and carbon monoxide from diesel exhaust in the Holocaust since they have various argued problems as methods for mass murder of humans. See the section "Gas vans and gas chambers using diesel exhaust" regarding diesel exhaust. The delousing agent Zyklon B (consisting of canisters containing adorbent granules containing hydrogen cyanide which was slowly released as a poisonous gas when opening the canisters) has properties that are desirable or acceptable if delousing buildings/clothing but highly undesirable or unacceptable if intending to quickly kill millions. Zyklon B is argued to have been expensive to make, in short supply, desperately needed for non-homicidal delousing purposes by German military and civilian agencies, releasing gas slowly, possibly requiring heating (especially in the winter), difficult to ventilate, requiring careful disposal of residues, adhering to surfaces (including those of corpses), complicated to use, dangerous for the alleged killers and those allegedly disposing of the corpses, and requiring the use of gas masks and likely additional protective clothing. Germany is argued to have had access to much more efficient alternatives even if ignoring methods such as shooting and demanding that a gas must be used.^[14][31]

For example, instead of carbon monoxide from diesel exhaust a far more efficient method would have been, it is argued, to use some of the hundreds of thousands vehicles which at this time did not use valuable diesel or gasoline fuel (strictly prohibited for non-military vehicles in 1943) but instead solid fuels such as wood, coke, or coal and producing a much more toxic gas (therefore also widely used for purposes such killing rats and other pests). All the political and military heads of the Third Reich, including those involved with Jewish deportations, are argued too have been well aware of these toxic non-diesel gas generators. Such very toxic gas was also produced on an industrial scale right next to Auschwitz but allegedly only the delousing agent Zyklon B was used.^[14]

Another argued much more efficient alternative would have been to use the extremely toxic nerve gases Tabun and Sarin which had been developed in the years before the war and which were manufactured on a large scale.^[47]

Another implausibly poor choice is argued to be to make difficult transports from all over Europe to Poland instead of killing more locally.^[48]

Yet another argued implausibly poor choice by the supposedly very secretive German conspirators (using secret "code words" even in already secret documents and so on) was to conduct "secret" mass killings in relatively open camps such as Auschwitz which had many kinds of contacts and information exchanges with the outside world. Thus, Allied air photos of Auschwitz show "that the Polish peasants worked their fields right up to the fences. This means that it would have been impossible to keep secret what went on there (cf. Ball 1992, pp. 51-53). The heavy passenger and freight traffic passing through the busy railroad hub at Auschwitz would likewise have made secrecy difficult or impossible, as would the fact that many of the prisoners were employed as workers in German plants and factories, both civilian and military. These internees had frequent contact with prisoners of war from other nations, as well as German and foreign civilians. In addition, a large number of civilian construction companies with all their employees were involved in erecting many buildings in the concentration and prisoner of war camps. Furthermore there were constant releases and furloughs from the concentration camp... According to a publication by the Auschwitz museum, for example, over a thousand of 26,200 registered inmates were released from imprisonment while around 3,000 were transferred to other camps." In addition, allegedly, the large scale open-air burning of corpses of mass murder victims (when crematories were unavailable) were openly visible and attracted attention.^[14][49]

Air photos of other camps are argued to show that they could been seen right into from surrounding areas including roads. This also allegedly included buildings with alleged homicidal gas chambers and areas allegedly used for mass graves without cremation.^[50]

At Chelmno, the supposedly secret "operation of the camp was in no way concealed from the inhabitants of the town. Initially the villa grounds were surrounded merely by wire. Only after killing operations had been underway for at least a month was a broad fence put up to block the view". Thus, "the ultra-cautious German conspirators build an extermination camp in the middle of a town, where the entire populace gets a birds-eye view of the extermination process!"^[49]

Corpses

Shrunken human heads (one with war painting) and alleged human skin artifacts allegedly made from the corpses of Buchenwald camp prisoners. Used as evidence at the Nuremberg trials. Such alleged items have disappeared without a trace or have been shown to not be made from humans. See the article on the Western Holocaust camps for more details.

Revisionists argue that there are no material traces of the alleged mass murders and no autopsies of bodies showing death by gassing.^[26]

Furthermore, revisionists argue that there were neither adequate industrial facilities nor sufficient fuel to cremate the huge number of claimed corpses. The capacity of the crematories are argued to be barely sufficient to cremate the bodies of those who died from starvation and epidemics.^[26]

The deliveries of coke to Auschwitz camp are fully documented for a 1942 to 1943 period. They match almost exactly the amount needed to cremate the number of prisoners who died during this period according to the official the camp records and which according to non-revisionists do not include those allegedly gassed. This has been argued to prove that no such alleged mass gassings occurred.^[39]

"Normal" concentration camps such as Buchenwald for which no genocidal mass killings are alleged today, were equipped with crematoria for the disposal of the bodies. Revisionists have argued that it is absurd that there were no crematoria in the alleged "Operation Reinhard" extermination camps where crematoria would have been far more urgently needed if mass killings took place. Consequently, one and a half million corpses allegedly had to be burned with primitive manual means in the open air, nearly half a million of them in winter. The detainees charged with gathering wood are argued to have required more than 26 years to gather the necessary amount.^[39]

In some cases the method for disposal of bodies claimed in the politically correct version (such as for the Belzec, Sobibor, and Treblinka camps and the Einsatzgruppen) would leave massive remains (such as if burning the corpses on pyres). Revisionists argued that many investigations have without success searched for these massive remains using a variety of methods including digging up sites where some witnesses claimed the remains where buried. Some such investigations do have found small amounts of human remains which revisionists argue is compatible with the limited numbers who did die due to non-homicidal causes according to revisionists, but not with the massive numbers claimed by non-revisionists to have been killed. Such limited findings are argued to often be greatly misrepresented by non-revisionists.^[14] See also the article on the Belzec, Sobibor, and Treblinka camps regarding more details on this.

There are also other argued problems with pyres such as the areas reported by witnesses being to small contain the claimed amount of remains, that claimed burning and cleaning time is too short to be realistic, absence of expected findings on reconnaissance photos, nonsense statements about corpses being burned without any kind of fuel, and that for various reasons it being physically impossible to have had pyres of the size and description claimed.^[14]

Burning in deep "incineration trenches" at Auschwitz has been claimed. Revisionists argue that this is impossible due a high ground water level. A drainage systems was later built but allegedly "incineration trenches" existed before this, allegedly existed a long way from the drained area, and the drainage is anyhow argued to only have lowered the water level slightly.^[14]

Allegedly "Aktion 1005" was the code name for a large-scale operation that aimed to obliterate the traces of the Holocaust and in particular the corpses in mass graves from early massacres in camps and by the Einsatzgruppen. See the article on "Aktion 1005" and the external links there regarding revisionist criticisms. See Einsatzgruppen: Alleged destruction of the corpses regarding this topic.

What happened to the corpses of those who died in the ghettos (supposedly around a million corpses according to some politically correct claims) is completely unexplained even by politically correct sources.^[31]

Revisionist views: Documentary evidence

Photographs of heaps of corpses and emaciation

Photograph claimed to be of corpses waiting to be burned in an outdoor fire pit at Auschwitz and supposedly photographed by the communist influenced Auschwitz resistance. Revisionists have argued that the photograph is likely a forgery or edited as demonstrated by the individual in the center (who appears to be throwing something into the "pit") having a too long left arm with two elbows, argued impossible shadows such as the very dark ones on the individual to the left (who appears to be looking into the "pit"), and the type of fence posts shown in background are argued to not have existed at Auschwitz. Much of what is on the ground is argued to be unclear and the allegedly visible corpses on the ground are argued to sometimes have impossible, non-human anatomies, particularly the corpse at the feet of the man with the argued two left elbows. Also, the photograph shows no pit or pyre but only smoke in the background.^[14]

The politically correct explanation is that the quality of the picture has been reduced through multiple copying which as been criticized as implausible (this applies more generally, often the important claimed documents supporting the politically correct version are argued to be copies, sometimes copies of copies, or second-hand accounts of original documents, while the claimed original documents are supposedly lost, making it difficult to do forensic analyses or to know if the original documents were altered during the "copying").^[14]

Finally, revisionists have argued that even if the photograph does depict burning of corpses at Auschwitz (or somewhere else), then this may be burning of corpses due to non-gas causes (such as deaths due to a typhus epidemic).^[14]

Other examples of revisionist criticisms of photographs: External link.

Revisionists argue that at the end of WWII, largely due to the general destruction of German society, there was large scale malnutrition and epidemics of typhus and other diseases in the camps causing many deaths. Also contributing was overcrowding in the remaining camps under German control due to compliance with an Allied request that prisoners should be moved from the front lines where fighting occurred. When the western Allied forces reached some of the western Holocaust camps they found and photographed heaps of dead bodies and emaciation. The emaciation seen in the photographs was partially caused by typhus and other diseases which caused uncontrollable defecation and diarrhea. At the same time there are photographs of many relatively healthy individuals in the camps that are much less often being shown and the suffering and the many deaths among the German civilian population during the time period is often not mentioned. Some claimed photos are also argued to have been manipulated for greater effect or be forgeries.^[14]

The heaps of corpses discovered and photographed at the end of the war in the western camps convinced many that genocidal mass murder had occurred and were not just wartime propaganda. Also non-revisionists now agree that no genocidal mass murder occurred in these western camps. The eastern camps where genocidal mass murder is still claimed to have occurred were all in areas which came under Soviet control at war’s end. The Soviets released no pictures of mass graves or heaps of corpses and allowed no journalists, medical professionals, or other experts to examine the camps. Groups such as the communist influenced Auschwitz resistance are argued to have provided a few such pictures from the eastern camps but these been criticized by revisionists (see the photograph to the right).^[14][26]

Movies

Also very influential were several "documentary" movies made by the Allies. One example was the American movie Death Mills ("Todesmühlen") which was shown to the German civilian population as "reeducation" as well as to the many hundreds of thousands of German POWs. It allegedly shows camp atrocities but revisionists argue that it instead depicts the conditions in the western camps at the end of the war as described above in the section "Photographs of heaps of corpses and emaciation". In addition, the movie makers are stated to have had trouble finding enough material to put the movie together which may be related to disturbances during screening caused by individuals in the public claiming that they recognized some scenes as actually showing the mountains of dead Germans in bombed German cities as well emaciated German prisoners in Allied camps.^[51]

Similar movies were also shown at the Nuremberg trials and are reported to have had a large psychological impact. In addition to showing heaps of corpses and falsely claiming that prisoners were gassed in western camps they also showed various now discredited atrocities such as claimed artifacts made from human skin and shrunken human heads. Another movie allegedly showed the discovery of gold teeth from murdered Jews in the Reichsbank in Frankfurt. "During the trial and in the course of the later investigations, however, it turned out that the Americans had staged this scene from beginning to end."^[51][14]

See also the section "Revisionist views: Fictional descriptions".

Air photos

Air photos taken by the Allies of the camps during the time of the alleged mass murders are argued to support the revisionists due to factors such as the absence of thick clouds of smoke and cremation trenches. Similarly, air photos from this time of the alleged sites of Einsatzgruppen mass killings/mass burials are argued to support the revisionists.^[14][50] See also the section "Argued implausibly poor choices of alleged killing methods".

Non-revisionists have instead cited certain small marks on a set of photos of Auschwitz as evidence for mass killings. Revisionists have argued that for a variety of reasons it is impossible that these marks represent something present on the ground and that these marks were added to this set of photos after they had been exposed.^[14][50]

"Code words", ambiguous words, and unambiguous German words in National Socialist documents

See Meanings and translations of German words and Holocaust revisionism.

Forgeries and famous documents at the Nuremberg trials

In addition to false Katyn massacre and western extermination camp evidence, revisionists argue that several previously important documents introduced at the Nuremberg Trials are now generally admitted to be fraudulent. Revisionists argue that forgers had access to genuine German typewriters, stationary, stamps, and so on, making it no great achievement to fabricate “original” documents looking similar to genuine documents based on only these aspects.^{[52][53][48][54]}

Famous Nuremberg documents that are still cited as evidence include the October 4, 1943 Posen Speech, the Wannsee protocol, the Gerstein Report, the Hossbach Memorandum, Generalplan Ost, and the Einsatzgruppen reports. They have been criticized by revisionists who have argued that they are incorrectly interpreted, are partly edited, and/or are complete fabrications.

Orders, plans, organizations, and budgets

Revisionists argue that there is no documentation of National Socialist orders, plans, organizations, and budgets for the physical extermination of Jews and this in contrast to abundant documentation of deportations, use of Jews for labor, extensive health care and hygiene measures in the camps, deaths of registered Jews in the camps, and so on. Sometimes this is represented as that what is argued to be missing is just a central order signed by Hitler (which do is missing) but the absences are argued to involve all aspects and levels of the hierarchy of National Socialist Germany. Critics of this counter that the Germans used secret "code words" (such as the word "deportation" after mid-1941 not anymore meaning deportation but now suddenly being a secret "code word" for mass murder), used only verbal orders, and/or destroyed almost all of the relevant documents and other forms of evidence. However, there are a few documents which are argued to do provide relatively "uncoded" evidence. Revisionists argue that the authenticity and/or conventional interpretation of these are highly questionable and have written detailed responses regarding these documents (see the section "Forgeries and famous documents at the Nuremberg trials").^[14]

The supposed massive use of verbal order or "code words" contradicting what was actually written is argued to be implausible for reasons such as implying that numerous people supposedly ignored what their written orders stated and instead committed mass murders based only on hearsay despite that the punishment for unauthorized killings or sabotaging the war effort included the death penalty.^[14]

See also Alleged statements by Hitler on the Holocaust: The missing Holocaust documents.

"an incredible meeting of minds, a consensus mind reading"

The absence of evidence for orders, plans, organizations, and budgets despite the need for inform and organize countless authorities, decision makers, executors, and helpers have troubled also mainstream historians. Raul Hilberg, possibly the most respected mainstream historian, once explained this absence with what critics argue is in effect telepathy: "But what began in 1941 was a process of destruction [of the Jews] not planned in advance, not organized centrally by any agency. There was no blueprint and there was no budget for destructive measures. They [these measures] were taken step by step, one step at a time. Thus came about not so much a plan being carried out, but an incredible meeting of minds, a consensus mind reading by a far-flung [German] bureaucracy."^[14]

"Sonderbehandlung"

The most famous "code word" may be "special treatment" ("sonderbehandlung") which does in some cases refer to killing. Revisionists argue that non-revisionists have wrongly concluded that "special treatment" therefore always meant killing but that the term instead had many different meanings depending on context. For example, in Auschwitz documents the term was used to describe treatment for improving camp hygiene in order to reduce the death rate and in compliance with the very highest directives such as Himmler in 1943 ordering that the death rate in the camps must be unconditionally decrease.^[14]

The "Final Solution of the Jewish Question"

Revisionists argue that the "Final Solution of the Jewish Question" meant voluntary emigration by or forced deportations of Jews. They further argue that documents show that measures taking the during war such as the camps and deportations to Eastern Europe/Western Russia were seen as temporary solutions with the "Final Solution" to the "Jewish question" to be fully implemented only after the war. Those deported are argued to have became an important part of the wartime industry. In contrast to the lack of documents regarding extermination it is argued that there are many documents related to this such as documents ordering better treatment in order to increase productivity.^[14]

See World War II statements argued to support Holocaust revisionism regarding this subject.

Death records/reports

Another kind of documents are death records/reports or claimed death records/reports. One example is the official Auschwitz death records which however state a much lower death count than the politically correct one and do not mention gassings. See the section "General conditions of the camps and the fate of those unable to work". Another example is the alleged reports by the Einsatzgruppen and which are discussed in the Einsatzgruppen article.

Spies, cracking of all German message codes, and other intelligence gathering activities

Revisionists argue that despite massive observation by spies, resistance groups, and others in areas in the near vicinity of the camps, as well as the cracking of all German radio codes, all of Germany’s wartime enemies and others in practice conducted themselves as if no exterminations of Jews were taking place, thus in effect demonstrating that they did not take seriously the atrocity allegations. If the mass murders had actually occurred, then it is argued that the Red Cross, the Catholic church (with in principle the whole Catholic Church in Poland being part of the opposition against Germany), humanitarian agencies, the Allied governments, neutral governments, and many others would have known about it and would have often and unambiguously mentioned it, and condemned it. Even promoters admit that only a tiny group of individuals believed the story at that time—many of whom were connected either with Jewish or with Communist propaganda agencies. The rise of the Holocaust story is argued to read more like the success story of a PR campaign than anything else.^[14][26]

Top-secret radio messages from, for example, Auschwitz and deciphered by the British during the war are argued to mention illness as the main cause of death. There were no references in the decrypts to gassings.^[13]

A particularly large mistranslation of German is of the Höfle Telegram which is sometimes incorrectly described as stating that large numbers of Jews were exterminated/eliminated/killed in four camps. The telegram only lists arrivals to the camps.

Other forms of documentary evidence

One example of another form of documentary evidence is the Auschwitz construction documents as described in the "Camps" section.

Revisionist views: Testimonies and confessions

Witnesses

Argued reasons for incorrect testimonies

Revisionists argue that the "Holocaust survivors'" and other "eyewitnesses'" accounts vary very widely, sometimes are contradictory (in particular the early testimonies), sometimes are demonstrably false, sometimes are absurd, and are widely acknowledged to be unreliable. Proposed reasons for the argued false testimonies have included false rumors in the camps, false propaganda spread by resistance groups and Allies during the war as psychological warfare, misunderstandings (such as regarding the use of gas for delousing purposes, the camp crematoria, and the deaths caused by typhus), horrible scenes due to epidemics and malnutrition (especially at the end of the war), hallucinations and mass psychosis (caused by factors such as typhus and malnutrition), economic compensation and other forms of personal gain, wanting "to be part of history", hatred of National Socialism, religious significance (such as regarding the 6 million Jews number), support for Israel and Jews more generally, support for the Allies, diverting attention from/excusing possible Allied war crimes, Jewish group pressure, conformism, fear of reprisals, self-deception, memory manipulations, and cognitive dissonance and other psychological effects.^[14]

Wartime atrocity propaganda from the Allies regarding atrocities in the camps is argued to have affected even the camps themselves. Thus atrocity propaganda radio broadcasts and atrocity propaganda leaflets dropped from the air into the camps have been argued to have contributed to beliefs among inmates that exterminations were occurring.^[55]

One example of misunderstandings and rumors is that transfers from the camp (often involving going to separate area for delousing before permanently leaving the camp) were misinterpreted as killings. Even non-revisionist descriptions state that many inmates wrongly believed that such transfers were killings.^[14]

Research on the human memory is argued to have shown that it is very unreliable and easily forms false memories under circumstances such as group pressure, rumor mills, suggestions, and only mild manipulations such as leading questions.^[14]

"Holocaust survivors" are argued to have become almost modern day saints, which is argued to have caused an absence of critical questioning, and is argued to have contributed to exaggerations since an individual's status is argued to increase in proportion to the amount of horrors and atrocities reported.^[14]

Communists and witnesses

In Auschwitz often communist influenced resistance groups, beginning in 1941, spread an endless stream of horror stories and reports of mass killings of inmates. Revisionists argue that the alleged gas poison, the pesticide Zyklon B, was never even mentioned; instead, in a constantly changing manner, the killings were said to being committed by means of “electrical baths”, combat gases and a “pneumatic hammer.” Even after the liberation of the camp by the Red Army, a Soviet-Jewish war correspondent published a report on an “electric conveyor belt” in Auschwitz upon which inmates were killed with “electrical current.” The version in which Zyklon B became the murder weapon only became current during the following months.^[13]

Revisionists also argue that prominent communist and Auschwitz intern Bruno Baum after the war stated that "All the propaganda that now began to circulate about Auschwitz in foreign countries originated with us, assisted by our Polish comrades" and "I believe it is no exaggeration if I say that the biggest part of Auschwitz propaganda, which was spread in the world around that time, has been written by us in the camp.... We spread this propaganda to the public at large until the very last day of our stay in Auschwitz."^[14]

Communists are argued to have influenced witnesses also in trials in Western Europe. Thus, during trials in West Germany "witnesses" from the communist block are argued to have been checked for political loyalty before being allowed to leave, drilled on what story to tell during the trials, and watched at every step during their stay in the West by officials of communist secret services and government agencies in order to control that the witnesses did not deviate from the official story.^[14]

Argued dubious methods used to obtain witness testimonies

Witnesses at trials are argued to have in some cases been paid or have been criminals being in the camps for severe crimes and who were promised impunity in exchange for incriminating statements. Such witnesses are argued to have been conspicuous by their frequent appearances at various trials, sometimes in groups.^[14]

Former camp inmates are argued to have been threatened by former fellow inmates with violence or reprisals against their families or even told that statements and indictments would be prepared against them should they refuse to make the desired accusations or statements against the targeted defendants in trials. The German “Association of Those Persecuted by the Nazi Regime” – later prohibited as an unconstitutional communist association – was in the post-war period (when Germany was devastated and starving) allowed to decide which former inmates would receive food rations or be placed on a housing list and is argued to have used this to force witness statements.^[14]

An argued way to obtain witness statements for trials consisted of the prosecuting authorities using so-called “stage shows” or “reviews”: The prosecuting authorities assembled former concentration camp inmates and placed them in an auditorium of a theater or cinema. The defendants were placed on an illuminated stage, while the former concentration camp inmates sat in a dark room and were allowed to make any kind of wild accusation, often in complete pandemonium. If – contrary to expectations – no accusations were made, or if the accusations weren’t damaging enough, the prosecution is argued to have “lent a helping hand,” persuading the inmates to make accusations, often accompanied by the grossest intimidation and threats.^[14]

See also the "Trial confessions" section below regarding more coercive methods argued to have been applied also to witnesses.^[14]

Admitted frauds and false testimonies

In a large number of cases claimed witnesses have been admitted to be frauds even by non-revisionists when it has been proven, for example, that a "witness" spent the entire war in another country. In some cases some non-revisionist Holocaust authorities have expressed regret that such frauds were exposed and that the deception attempts were not more subtle for reasons such as the frauds being seen as damaging the credibility of the politically correct Holocaust version.^[14]

Even if fraud is proven, this is argued to be handled gently by the media, and not prosecuted, even if "witnesses" have lied under oath. This has been argued to encourage false statements.^[14]

More generally, Shumel Krakowski, the director of the Yad Vashem Holocaust institution in Jerusalem, in a 1986 interview in the The Jerusalem Post: "Krakowski says that many survivors, wanting ‘to be part of history’ may have let their imaginations run away with them. ‘Many were never in the place where they claim to have witnessed atrocities, while others relied on second-hand information given them by friends or passing strangers’ according to Krakowski. A large number of testimonies on file were later proved inaccurate when locations and dates could not pass an expert historian’s appraisal." The Jewish scholar Samuel Gringauz has stated that "most of the memoirs and reports are full of preposterous verbosity, graphomanic exaggeration, dramatic effects, overestimated self-inflation, dilettante philosophizing, would-be lyricism, unchecked rumors, bias, partisan attacks and apologies." One of the most prestigious Holocaust scholars, Raul Hilberg, expressively supported this statement.^[14]

The revisionist Germar Rudolf has stated on John Demjanjuk who was wrongly accused by "witnesses" and wrongly convicted, that this was "not different from other similar trials which ended in sentences of death or incarceration, since the type and content of the witness testimonies, including internal and external contradictions and technical impossibilities, had not, of course, made their first appearance at the Demjanjuk proceedings, as we will discover later. It was only that during this trial they were successfully challenged for the first time. But if it was determined that all witnesses gave false testimony, which led to a misjudgment, then would not complaints have to be lodged against the false witnesses? And would not other trials, in which the same witnesses appeared or in which testimonies of similar questionable content were given – be it in Israel, in Germany, or in Poland – have to be reopened and retried? But nothing of the sort occurred. The cloak of silence was simply spread over this embarrassing matter."^[14]

Sonderkommando

According to politically correct terminology "Sonderkommando" (special unit) was a term used for prisoners who worked in the homicidal gas chambers and with related tasks. As such they are a very important groups of witnesses. See the Sonderkommando article regarding Holocaust revisionist criticisms.

Witnesses in the Zündel trials, the movie Shoah, and the Vrba-Wetzler report

Revisionists argue that the only two "witnesses" to the alleged homicidal gas chambers who were ever cross-examined in a court had to admit in 1985 in one of the Ernst Zundel's Holocaust trials that their accounts were based on hearsay. One of them, Rudolf Vrba, also admitted that he had used "poetic license". (Arnold Friedman was the other cross-examined "witness".) Vrba is one of the most famous Auschwitz witnesses who together with Alfréd Wetzler wrote the very influential Vrba-Wetzler report on Auschwitz. It was the first to be officially sanctioned by the U.S. government in the form of a 1944 report by the War Refugee Board which had been created Jewish U.S. Secretary of the Treasury Henry Morgenthau.^[14]

Vrba was also one of the "witnesses" in the "documentary" movie Shoah. Revisionists argue that when later asked if statements he made in the film were really true, Vrba’s answer was to the effect that: “I do not know. I was just an actor and I recited my text”. The movie also contained interviews with several SS men who supposedly were not aware of being recorded with a "hidden" camera. An critical analysis of one of these "witnesses" is argued to show that the statements made cannot be true and that he was aware of the being recorded. The director of the movie is argued to have admitted to paying his German "witnesses".^[14]

The Vrba-Wetzler report has been criticized for a number of argued errors, impossibilities, and implausibilities. In addition, some of the claims are argued to contradict the now politically correct Holocaust version.^[14]

Paul Rassinier

Paul Rassinier was a French professor of history and geography, a communist, a member of the French resistance, and a forced laborer in German concentration camps. After the war he became "the father" of Holocaust revisionism in part due to the non-revisionist descriptions of the camps not corresponding to his own experiences. He started out believing that mass murders in gas chambers had existed somewhere but gradually changed this view. In 1964 he wrote that "Each time when I was told during the last fifteen years that there was a witness in the part of Europe not occupied by the Soviets who claimed to have experienced a gassing himself, I immediately traveled to him in order to listen to his testimony. But in every case it ended the same way: With my folder in my hands, I asked the witness a series of precise questions, to which he could respond only with quite obvious lies, so that he finally had to admit that he had not experienced this himself, but that he had related only the story of a good friend, who had died during his internment and whose honesty he could not question. This way I traveled thousands upon thousands of miles throughout all of Europe."^[14]

Not politically correct statements on Auschwitz

Witnesses are argued to have mentioned various aspects of Auschwitz which are argued to be in extreme contrast to the notion of Auschwitz as an extermination camp. It is not argued that such descriptions (which are often mentioned only in passing) dominate the narratives but such descriptions are argued to indicate that the image of Auschwitz is paradoxical.^[14]

• Theater: cinema, cabaret, orchestra of all nationalities, members most Jews; Alma Rose, niece of composer Gustav Mahler, was conductor of the women’s orchestras; Ignaz Speiser as famous violinist, Szymon Laks, composer, violinist, conductor of the camp orchestra; choirs; Russian ballet, Italian orchestra.^[14]

• Sport and Fitness: sport field; soccer games between SS soldiers and inmate functionaries; children playground, table tennis; kindergarten, school for Jews from Theresienstadt; green areas for inmates to rest, flower beds; swimming pool, water polo; sauna; brothel.^[14]

• Contact from and to the Outside World: Sending and receiving letters; parcel reception for Jews; 50,000 parcels to Jews; one parcel per month and Jew; releases; inmates worked together with Polish civilians and British POW, smuggling mail and documents; inmates with special ID leave camp without guards; good escape chances, 90% successful; visit by commission of the International Red Cross in September 1944; listening to Allied radio stations.^[14]

• Bureaucracy: Welfare department replies to inquiries from outside, gives advice in legal affairs, inheritances, births, weddings, deaths, and release of property of deceased inmates to relatives; camp administration reports any unnatural death to public prosecutor; 30 signatures necessary for death certificate; urn depot, remainders of deceased inmates sent to relatives; death notification for relatives in Czechia.^[14]

• Work and Family: Harmony between Aryan and Jewish colleagues and colleagues in higher positions; women labor camp with sewing room and weaving mill; only a fraction of all inmates works, in May 1944 11,331 are not capable to work; family camp for gypsies; inmates wear civil clothes and long hair, many births within the camp; children block for orphans; family camp for Jews from Theresienstadt.^[14]

• Food and Health: Inmate canteen; inmate hospital with several hundred beds; sick books; recovery for future labor; double food rations, surgery rooms, X-ray equipment; dentist office; woman confined to bed due to nerve disease well taken care of, testifying after war; typhus epidemic in summer 1942: more than 200 casualties each day, also under civilians and SS men; SS physician Dr. Schwela succumbs; proper food for inmates; 1,800 calories per day; foreign workers for hard labor get up to 4,000, more than a German engineer; 4,800 sick and immobile inmates remain in Auschwitz under supervision of physicians; inmates oppose relocation to other camp.^[14]

Fleeing with the National Socialists from Auschwitz

Several very prominent "Holocaust survivors" have stated that when the Soviet Red Army approached Auschwitz inmates were given the choice of leaving with the National Socialists or staying behind and wait for liberation at the hand of the Communists. Many chose to join the National Socialist evacuation. This has been argued to indicate that something is wrong with the politically correct view on Auschwitz.^[14]

See also Holocaust death marches.

Witnesses denying atrocities

Revisionists have argued that there are Auschwitz inmates who despite the argued massive pressure to conform to the politically correct version have denied having knowledge of an ongoing genocide or other often alleged atrocities despite being in positions where they should have had such knowledge if such atrocities had occurred.^[14][56]

Witnesses who were not inmates and who were not accused of crimes have denied the politically correct version such as a senior engineer responsible for constructions in Auschwitz including several alleged homicidal gas chambers. He asked his testimony to be published only after his death since "knowledge about these facts is dangerous".^[57]

Also German officials accused of crimes (such as the last Auschwitz commandant Richard Baer) have completely denied the politically correct Holocaust version (or have been reported to have denied this before their mysterious deaths), despite this being argued to be inadmissible or having had a high risk of causing legal or extralegal punishments (see the section "Trial confessions").

Trial confessions

Various trials that have included "confessions" by the accused are part of the politically correct evidence for the Holocaust. They include the Nuremberg trials, various other trials conducted in the immediate post-war period (in particular the many trials in the Stalinist Eastern Europe/Soviet Union with a long Stalinist tradition of political show trials and "confessions"), various later trials in Western Europe, and trials in Israel such as the Eichmann trial.

Revisionists have argued that these "confessions" are of little value and that the trials often were show trials. The accused may have been affected by factors similar to those mentioned above in the "Witnesses" section. In addition, the confessions may have been cause by factors such as fears of reprisals, threats, brainwashing, nervous breakdowns due to pressure, and torture.^[14]

Furthermore, revisionists argue that the "confessions" are often demonstrably false, absurd, and contradictory.^[14]

Violent methods

In some cases outright physical torture is argued to be documented or now to have been admitted. A number of prisons run by the western Allies are argued to have had the reputation of having been “torture centers” and in late 2005 the British finally admitted that they had run torture centers in Germany by releasing the respective documents.^[14]

Argued violent methods including torture during the Nuremberg and related trials are described in the articles on the Nuremberg trials, Rudolf Höss, Josef Kramer, Posen speeches: Comments by argued audience members on the October 4 speech, and Einsatzgruppen: Trial confessions.

Richard Baer was the last commandant of Auschwitz. He avoided capture until 1960 and died in custody in 1963 under argued mysterious circumstance after having refused to support the politically correct Holocaust version during the upcoming trial. His mysterious death is argued to possibly have influenced other trials "confessors". See the article on Baer for more details.

Several other prominent National Socialists have also been argued to have "died in a fashion which could be described as “convenient” to the upholders and propagators of the officially sanctioned Holocaust narrative. They are all individuals who must have had insight into the truth regarding the “Final Solution” and the alleged gas chambers. A number of them are also known to have denied the existence of such killing facilities."^[58]

Non-violent methods

It is also argued to be well-known that it is very often possible to get false confessions by using psychological manipulations and harsh but non-violent interrogation methods and that such methods were used.^[14]

Other argued problems include prosecutors stitched together "affidavits” in which exonerating passages were deleted and content often distorted by rewording, prisoners buying their freedom by serving as prosecution witnesses against others, court-appointed attorneys with poor command of German and little interest in defending the defendants and who sometimes threatened the defendants and advised them to make false confessions, hearsay being admissible as proof, and many other.^[14]

Threats, such as of being deported to the Soviet Union, or of family members being deported, are also argued to be documented. Documented threats or bribes are argued to have been applied to those testifying in favor or against the accused or their families.^[14]

The legal strategy of acknowledging the Holocaust while attempting to shift blame

The Allies after the war disallowed in regards to culpability the defense of having acted on superior orders (despite Allied legal documents during the war stating that this was a valid defense) but still allowed this to be taken into consideration during sentencing.^[59] This thus created an incentive for an defendant to not try to deny accusations the defendant would likely be convicted of but to instead "confess" and state that the defendant had been forced to act due to superior orders.

In many cases, revisionists have argued, individuals supporting the politically correct view on the Holocaust (and in particular those testifying against others) were in fact often rewarded with lenient sentences compared to the crimes the individuals were accused of (or initial harsh sentences were quietly later greatly reduced in severity), demonstrating that the trials were primarily instruments for establishing the politically correct Holocaust version as the Truth.^[60][61]

In addition, after the initial trials (which are argued to have used to most coercive methods), the existence of the Holocaust had became a judicial fact that was not open for debate. Thus, the later Nuremberg trials after the IMT were explicitly forbidden to question the fundamental existence of the Holocaust (and other alleged German crimes) as established at the IMT. Furthermore, the basic treaty establishing the partial sovereignty of the West Germany decreed that the verdicts of the IMT were final and binding for all official and judicial authorities of the Federal Republic. The Allies thus effectively placed the view of history resulting from their post-war judicial conclusions and verdicts beyond revision even for German courts. Even in the Unites States the Holocaust was proclaimed to be "simply a fact" in one of the Mel Mermelstein trials. In addition, "Holocaust denial" has became a crime in itself in many European countries.^{[14][13][60][62]}

Thus, denying the Holocaust in trials is argued to have been a hopeless legal strategy, damaging to perceived credibility, likely causing increased negative feelings against the accused as being unrepentant and defending "Nazism", and very often simply inadmissible or a crime in itself, which may have contributed to legal strategies such as "acknowledging" the Holocaust while attempting to minimize personal responsibility (including claiming lack of personal knowledge of or having attempted to oppose the Holocaust) and instead blaming dead/absent others.^[14]

Furthermore, as for non-Germans, some Germans may have started to believe that the politically correct Holocaust version was correct, despite their personal lack of knowledge (which could be seen explained by the extreme secrecy allegedly concealing the Holocaust), and therefore saw little harm in inventing and adding further support for and acknowledgment of this version, especially if this could cause leniency during sentencing.

If denying the existence of the Holocaust, then the defendant could no longer even attempt to shift blame from himself, which has been argued to explain why the Auschwitz sub-commandant Josef Kramer changed his initial interrogation statement that there were no gas chambers killings at Auschwitz to a trial confession supporting that such killings occurred had but were not under his control. See Josef Kramer: Two different statements.

Such defense claims in some cases did not work at all (even in gaining a more lenient sentencing) and the court declared the individual to have been lying regarding personal responsibility and/or motivation. Despite thus having been declared to be lying during the confession, confession statements by the same individual supporting the existence of the politically correct Holocaust version may be widely and often uncritically accepted as truths (Adolf Eichmann being a notable example).

Also non-revisionists historians such as "Kershaw concedes that some post-war court testimony of German military officers about the existence of an order from Hitler to exterminate the Jews is bogus: "The early post-war testimony of Einsatzkommando leaders about the prior existence of a Führer order has been shown to be demonstrably false, concocted to provide a unified defense of the leader of Einsatzgruppe D, Otto Ohlendorf, at his trial in 1947.... The tribunals that these German military men and National Socialist officials faced were committed, a priori, to the dictum that there was a Nazi plan to exterminate the Jews, and Adolf Hitler personally ordered this. It was not possible for them to contest this in court, so they simply built their defense strategies accordingly. By so doing, they placed the responsibility on Hitler and his National Socialist government in order to support their courtroom defense that they were only obeying the Führer’s commands–thus falsifying the historical record along the way."^[49] Similarly, "Alfred Streim, Director of the Ludwigsburg Central Office for the Resolution of NS Crimes, wrote regarding this: "Ohlendorf 's testimony and submissions concerning the inauguration of the 'Führer Order' [...] are false. In the Einsatzgruppen Trial the former Head of Einsatzgruppe D was able to get his co-defendants to submit to a line of defense put forward by him with the suggestion that if one had, from the very beginning, carried out the extermination operations against the Jews on 'order of the Führer,' one could count upon a more lenient sentence."^[43] Such deliberate lying by trial confessors regarding central aspects, and even a conspiracy involving several trial confessors to deliberately lie in a unified way, arguably casts doubts on the trial confessions in general.

"The Banality of Evil"

The expression "Banality of Evil" originally refers to an argued absence of displayed hatred or guilt by Adolf Eichmann in his trial in Israel, claiming he bore no responsibility because he was simply "doing his job", and thus attempting to shift responsibility to others. The lack of hatred or guilt despite the horrible crimes he confessed to has been considered puzzling by politically correct observers. A not politically correct interpretation is that many of the crimes Eichmann were accused of had not occurred and that attempting to shift blame was in practice the only legal option available to him.

More generally, the Holocaust literature is argued to agree that the alleged Holocaust perpetrators generally returned to a perfectly normal civil life after the war, as if they had never experienced anything unusually cruel, or at least not more than that of others returning from the war. It has also been argued that there appears to be few cases of post-traumatic stress disorders among alleged Holocaust perpetrators which is different from this being a common psychological disorder among soldiers involved in non-Holocaust atrocities. If there were those calloused enough to have been indifferent to what happened or even perverted enough to have enjoyed these acts, as is claimed by many witnesses, it argued they would displayed similar behavioral patterns after the war, which is argued to not be the case.^[14]

Speeches, diaries, and private conversations by the National Socialist leaders

Revisionists argue that an often mentioned argument is that the National Socialist leaders supposedly confessed the Holocaust in, for example, public speeches. This has been argued to be a surprising claim considering that National Socialist Germany is argued to have made enormous efforts to hide and destroy all evidence of the Holocaust. Revisionists have argued that such statements are cherry picked, sometimes are misleading English translations of German, ignore that the possible meanings of a German word today are not necessarily the possible meanings of the same German word in the 1930s and 1940s, exclude contradictory statements (sometimes in the very same source), that a more comprehensive survey shows that the National Socialist leaders generally used very strong language for rhetoric effect (not just regarding the Jews), that this language should not be interpreted literally, and that what was referred to was an extinction/extirpation/annihilation of the very large Jewish influence and/or deportation of Jews from Europe. Non-cherry picked examinations of, for example, diaries and private conversations by the National Socialist leaders are argued to further support this.^[14]

See Meanings and translations of German words and Holocaust revisionism regarding translations and meanings of words such as "Ausrottung" and "Vernichtung" which are often translated as "extermination" by non-revisionists.

See World War II statements argued to support Holocaust revisionism regarding this subject.

Argued absurd Holocaust claims

A large number of "witness" statements and "confessions" have been argued to be absurd and contradictory as in these external links:

• Examples of Absurd Claims Regarding the Alleged National Socialist Genocide
• Made in Russia: The Holocaust
• Exposing the Holocaust™ Hoax Archive - A HolyHoax Museum: Tales of the Holohoax
• Most Outrageous Tales of the Holocaust

Such argued absurd and contradictory statements are not limited to claims by some minor "witnesses" and "confessors" but are argued to often be present also in the claims by the most important and frequently cited "witnesses" and "confessors".^[14]

"Convergence of evidence"

Despite the many argued absurd and contradictory testimonies and confessions, non-revisionists have instead pointed to similarities between selected testimonies and confessions (or between selected parts of selected testimonies and confessions) as being a "convergence of evidence" supporting the existence of the standardized politically correct version.

See the article Holocaust convergence of evidence on this and revisionist criticisms.

Arguments on specific individuals

See List of alleged Holocaust confessors and witnesses and the articles linked there regarding arguments on individuals alleged to be Holocaust confessors and witnesses.

Memoirs of the Allied leaders

The three Allied leaders Eisenhower, Churchill, and de Gaulle wrote very extensive works describing their memories of World War II. "In this mass of writing, which altogether totals 7,061 pages (not including the introductory parts), published from 1948 to 1959, one will find no mention either of Nazi "gas chambers," a "genocide" of the Jews, or of "six million" Jewish victims of the war."^[63]

Revisionist views: Demographics

Early history of the number six million Jews

Revisionists argue that a claimed six million Jews who have suffered is a claim that has been stated long before the Second World War (claimed repeatedly since at least 1889). It was also a stated claim regarding the number of Jews killed during Second World War before the was over and long before any demographic information was available. Revisionists have argued that this may be related to an ancient Jewish prophecy promising the Jews the return to the Promised Land after the loss of six million of their people. Zionists are argued to have promoted this number in order to increase Jewish support for and emigration to Israel.^[14][31]

Six million Jews at the Nuremberg trials

Six million Jewish deaths as a more "official" number is argued to first originate from the Nuremberg trials and then based on the hearsay statement of Wilhelm Höttl‎ who likely was promised more lenient treatment in exchange for "confessions". He claimed to have heard this number from Adolf Eichmann. Dieter Wisliceny made a similar claim but stated four to five millions. Eichmann later denied both of these allegations. Later non-revisionist books are argued to give widely different numbers on how many Jews were killed in the different camps (and from other causes) but despite this in the end all agree on a total number of approximately six million deaths.^[64][14]

The World Almanac

Revisionists argue that demographic investigations clearly shows that Jewish deaths during WWII were nowhere near six million. In its simplest form this consists of comparing the numbers stated by, for example, The World Almanac, regarding the number of Jews before and after WWII and noting that they did not change greatly. Critics have dismissed this as the estimates simply not yet being updated.

The Dissolution of Eastern European Jewry

However, scholarly revisionists do not rely on on this comparison but on extensive and detailed research such as in the book The Dissolution of Eastern European Jewry by Walter N. Sanning. Revisionists argue that this research and related arguments have not been answered.^[14][13]

Revisionists thus argue that the main non-revisionist demographic calculation regarding the number of Jews killed in the Holocaust uses a method which can be summarized as starting with the last pre-war census number of Jews in a country and and subtracting the first post-war census number of Jews. Revisionists argued that this grossly overstates the number of civilian Jews killed by Germans. Jews are often depicted only as civilians killed by Germans but many Jews were killed as military personal or as partisans. Others were killed by factors such as Allied bombings or diseases/starvation/cold exposure (in part due to extensive Allied bombing of infrastructure). In particular the Soviet Union where many Jews lived or fled to from Poland killed many of its own citizens through mismanagement and persecutions before, during, and after the war. (Jews in the Soviet Union are argued to have lost much of their former influence in the years before the war during the alliance with the National Socialists and the Great Purge which reduced to number of Jews in the upper echelons of the NKVD secret police from 40% to 4%). Many Jews in the Soviet Union are argued to have been deported to eastern areas such as Siberian labor camps after the German invasion. After the war others may have been taken to the Gulag camp system. Others may have been unable to leave the Soviet Union after the war and assimilated. Some Jews died of natural causes also during the war (assuming official population numbers, around half a million would have died of natural causes during the course of the war even if ignored by the National Socialist). In many cases the estimated pre/post-war numbers of Jews in a country are argued to be incorrect due to factors such as the censuses used for these estimates occurring long before/after the war and ignoring large scale Jewish emigrations between these dates. Other problems are argued double counting and unrealistically high birth rates in order to inflate the pre-war numbers. The post-war numbers are argued to be too low due to causes such as Jews preferring to not reveal themselves as Jews in various censuses and registrations after the war as well as the census numbers in the Communist countries being unreliable for political reasons.^[14][13][31]

In short, explanations for the difference between Sanning's estimates and non-revisionist estimates based on censuses include Sanning adjusting for Jewish emigrations, in particular the post-war Communist censuses understating the number of Jews, many Jewish deaths being due to other causes than Germans killing civilian Jews (and many of these in the non-occupied Soviet Union), double counting, and unrealistic birth rates.^[13]

Furthermore, regarding the official worldwide Jewish population estimates, they are now updated and state the argued loss from the Holocaust during the WWII years. However, Sanning argued that the Jewish populations outside the Soviet Union after this are stated to have increased rapidly in the first few decades after the war at a rate normally seen only in developing countries or in rural population. Since nearly everywhere in the world the Jews are almost completely urbanized and belong mostly to the middle and even the upper classes, both of which factors would lead one to expect at most only a low rate of population increase, this has been argued to indicate that something is very wrong.^[13]

Other methods

Revisionists have further argued that the Korherr Reports on Jewish populations trends in 1943, made by the reputedly best statistician in Germany, confirms Sanning's statistics. The politically correct view is that Korherr used code words to hide the Holocaust but revisionists have criticized this since the writings were intended for Hitler’s and Himmler’s eyes only and this was also rejected by Korherr who stated he had no knowledge of a supposed ongoing extermination of Jews.^[13]

Another check is by examining statistics regarding the fate of Jewish notable persons during the war. Revisionists argue that the results are very similar to those found by Sanning.^[13]

Still another method is by looking at the official data regarding the very large number of "Holocaust survivors". This has several difficulties making more exact calculations difficult but revisionists argue that these statistics support that the 6 million number is by far too high.^[13]

Yad Vashem in Israel collects names of claimed Holocaust victims. Revisionists have argued that anyone can send in claimed names or large groups of claimed names and that examinations have shown that many of the claimed killed individuals have been found to be alive after the war, counted multiple times, or simply missed by, for example, persons once inhabiting the same general area but with no proof of death and those missing may simply have emigrated elsewhere. Even a close relative may often wrongly have believed that their relative(s) were killed for reasons such at the relative(s) becoming dispersed during the war and camp transfers, having emigrated, changed name in order to not be recognized as a Jew or other reasons, and/or no extensive search for the relative(s) being made due to the belief that almost all Jews in camps were killed (an argued negative consequence of the argued Holocaust propaganda).^[14]

Revisionist views on how many died

Sanning argued that the Jewish world population decreased by less than 2 million during the time period of the Second World War and of this around one million died while fighting in the Red Army or in Siberian labor camps. After accounting for deaths from various causes that did not include Germans killing Jewish civilians, there remained 200,000-300,000 deaths that were unaccounted for (with uncertainties regarding this in the hundreds of thousands). Also this figure includes deaths from various causes other than Germans killing Jewish civilians. The book Richard Korherr and his Reports calculated on the basis of Korherr’s data that the Jews lost approximately 1.2 million of their number during World War Two, some 750,000 of them in Germany’s sphere of influence. German Rudolf stated in Lecture on the Holocaust that he holds to be probable that something like half a million Jews died in areas under German control.^[14][13]

Recent revisionist views on the fate of the Jews argued to be deported to the occupied Soviet Union

The revisionists Carlo Mattogno, Jürgen Graf, and Thomas Kues have in recent books described various sources supporting the deportation of large number of Jews to the occupied Soviet Union. This contradicts the politically correct version of the Holocaust according to which these Jews were killed or remained in camps in Poland but also raises the question of what happened to these Jews after the war. "It must be pointed out that of the less than 2 million Jews – some 423,000 of them non-Polish – who were deported to the Occupied Eastern Territories, a considerable percentage no doubt perished during the period 1942–1945 due to starvation, epidemics and various other causes. We remind our readers here of the staggering mortality ratios among the POWs in the east (on both the German and the Soviet side).... War-related hardships moreover did not end in 1945, as many people died in the immediate post-war era, especially in underdeveloped Eastern Europe, from epidemics, hunger and cold that was the result of collapsed infrastructure, destroyed agriculture and inadequate housing."^[16][39]

Regarding the fate of those who survived this: "While a number of the surviving deported Polish Jews may have been assimilated into the local Russian, Belorussian or Ukrainian Jewish communities, with which they shared much in common, or even managed to return to Poland and from there on to other countries in the west or to Israel, a large portion of them, together with the surviving deported Western Jews, were kept as prisoners behind the Iron Curtain and most likely deported to and hidden away in northern Russia or Siberia, so that Stalin could consolidate the myth of the extermination of Jews in "gas chambers."" These Jews are argued to likely have been taken to camps they were never intended to leave (and likely to camps outside the normal Gulag camp system from which some people returned and therefore not included in the ordinary Gulag documentation). The authors also stated evidence in support for and replied to various objections to this theory such as large scale deportations of whole peoples and large scale deaths in labor camps being common under Stalin's regime. It is further suggested that Zionist leaders likely were aware of this occurring but were silent because the Holocaust story and Soviet support were needed for the creation of Israel.^[16][39]

Revisionist views: Holocaust awareness

One debate among non-revisionists and some revisionists have been regarding how many Germans were aware of the alleged genocidal mass killings.

David Irving has proposed the unusual theory that Hitler was unaware of the Holocaust which instead implemented in some forms by underlings (in particular Heinrich Himmler and his deputy Reinhard Heydrich).

As noted in earlier sections extreme secrecy, "code words", verbal only orders, and "need to know only" policies are argued to have been practiced in regards to the Holocaust. This would have limited awareness. However, the Posen speeches and the allegedly relatively widely circulated Einsatzgruppen reports are often cited as evidence for knowledge of the Holocaust among many top German leaders.

A common assumption is that everyone (Germans, Jews, and others) at the alleged extermination camps saw genocidal killings. Therefore, a very large number of potential witnesses/confessors are sometimes assumed to exist. However, even according to the standardized politically correct version the number of individuals who saw the alleged gas chamber killings was very limited (and even more so since allegedly the Jewish Sonderkommandos working in the gas chambers were regularly killed). Thus, even at the camps most individuals would only have been aware of the alleged genocidal killings through hearsay and rumors.

Some non-revisionists have despite this argued that even ordinary Germans were aware of a planned Holocaust and/or an ongoing Holocaust. Also many other non-revisionists have criticized such claims.^[65][66] One problem for any claim of an early intention (and awareness of such an intention) of exterminating all the Jews in the future is that before 1941 (when the genocide allegedly started) the German Jewish policy was to openly and strongly promote Jewish emigration (and many Jews did emigrate). See also World War II statements argued to support Holocaust revisionism.

Revisionist views: Fictional descriptions

Revisionists argue that the general public's view of the Holocaust is often influenced by how the Holocaust is depicted in fictional movies and TV series. These make no official claims to be factually correct regarding the Holocaust (even regarding the politically correct version) but the general public is often given the impression that the depictions of the Holocaust and German cruelty are factually true.

One example is the movie Schindler's List which depicts a German camp commandant as standing on the balcony of his house on a hill and taking random potshots down at the inmates of the camp. Revisionists argue that this is false since the house was located in a valley while the camp was located on a hill and and shooting was physically impossible since there was no line of sigh between the camp and the house. A counterargument is that the commander may have shot inmates from another house that had a better location (but then not from a balcony) but also this argued to be lacking evidence. Furthermore, argued psychological tricks to incite against Germans includes that the movie switches to German whenever German soldiers or SS-men give orders, yell and scream and engage in any kind of violence. The film makes not mention of the camp commander being prosecuted by the SS. The movie was deliberately filmed in black-and-white and with unsteady camera work in order to convey to the audience the impression that the film is a documentary and has been shown to school classes and even entire schools in many countries.^[14][67]

Another example is the diary of Anne Frank and an industry of movies, television series, stage adaptions, exhibitions, and books based on and about the diary. Revisionists have argued that at the very least forensic evidence has shown that someone made "corrections" to the diary after the end of the war. Also, Anne Frank herself did write that she intended to publish her writings as a novel. Hence, even those pieces that she actually wrote are to be understood as a novel, naturally based on her experiences, but not as a truthful diary. Furthermore, none of the thirteen persons associated with Anne Frank and Anne Frank herself and who were sent to Auschwitz were gassed which has been argued to support the revisionists.^[14][68]

See also Hollywood Nazism.

Revisionist claims regarding other claimed mass killings by National Socialist Germany

Revisionists have also made claims regarding other claimed mass killings by National Socialist Germany:

• "Action T4". Germar Rudolf has stated that "To the best of my knowledge there have been no doubts advanced by the revisionist side regarding the factuality of those killings".^[69] See the article on this subject. The theory that Action T4 transmogrified into the Jewish Holocaust is argued to have numerous inconsistencies and to be contradicted by a host of documents.^[14]

• Deliberate mass murder of homosexuals and Gypsies. Revisionists argue that certain groups of homosexuals and Gypsies (not all groups) were imprisoned in camps were some died from the same causes as argued for Jews. Also some non-revisionists are argued to support that there were no extermination policies and that some estimates of the numbers of deaths are greatly exaggerated. Many other Western countries at this time considered it a crime to live openly as a homosexual. See the following links for details.^[70][13][71] See also The Myth of a Nazi Extermination of Homosexuals.

• Deliberate mass murder in response to partisan activity. Revisionists have argued that at this and earlier times certain forms of regulated reprisals were not illegal and committed also by the Allies and others. Thus, "a wartime reprisal is the case if one warring party retaliates against another by means which are otherwise unlawful acts of warfare, and with which he wants to force his opponent, his opponent’s branches and the members of the opposing armed forces to give up their illegal acts of war and to return to the principles of lawful warfare."^[13] Revisionists have argued that "We have no difficulty admitting that the German reprisal measures in the East, and not only there, were at times excessive and disproportionate, sometimes even performed with false pretenses, but this has nothing to do with a “radicalization” which would have almost automatically led to a mass extermination of the Jews."^[39] See also the article on the Einsatzgruppen.

• Deliberate mass murder related to Lebensraum. See the article on this subject.

• Deliberate mass murders of foreign workers. See the article on National Socialist Germany and forced labor.

• Deliberate mass murder of Soviet POWs. Revisionists have argued that large scale deaths of Soviet POWs due to factors such as malnutrition and epidemics were due to causes such as difficulty finding enough food for the prisoners due to the Soviet scorched-earth policy (see the Lebensraum article), large scale maltreatment and deaths of German POWs captured by the Soviets (few of who would ever return to Germany), and refusal by the Soviet Union to accept the Hague and Geneva conventions on POWs and rejection of German proposals for better treatments of POWs (The Soviet POWs who returned to the Soviet Union, in many cases forcibly deported there by the Western Allies after the war, were often killed/deported to the Gulags since they were seen as traitors for not having fought to the death and as possible collaborators).^[72][73]

See also the articles on Guernica, Malmedy massacre, Oradour incident, Lidice, and Jedwabne.

More generally revisionists have also been critical regarding many other aspects of the politically correct history of National Socialist Germany and World War II. See for example Category:Allied War Crimes of World War II, World War II, and Revisionist views on the causes of the World Wars.

External links

See Holocaust revisionist websites.

Gallery

Poison gas investigation	Mass graves investigation	No liquidation	Zyklon B investigated
USA newspaper announcing holocaust of 6 million in 1919.	A lot of photos used to supposedly prove the Holohoax were Soviet crimes.	Exposing the hoax of jewish ovens

References