Holocaust Denial - 35 responses. "There are a lot of witnesses to UFOs too"

Peter Myers, April 30, 2009.

My comments within quoted text are shown {thus}; write to me at contact.html.

You are at http://mailstar.net/holocaust-debate02.html.

Please report broken links. Write to me at contact.html.

Back to the previous bulletin in the debate: holocaust-denial.html#Flaw.

{start of bulletin 2}

Sorry for the delay.

Just by chance, I have been too busy to do the emails for the last 3 days.

I had to devote one day to my local Fruit/garden club, which unfortunately has just withdrawn from the Rare Fruit Council.

Next day, after my main hard disk developed intermittent problems when copying to a backup disk, I decided to play safe & replace it. I took the opportunity to install Mac OS 10.4.11 on the new backup disk (so that I can use Skype for video calls), but I still run the old Mac OS, 9.2, on my main disk.

I also had to do some changes on my wife's computer, which I would use in an emergency. It has Mac OS 10.4.11 on its main disk and 9.2 on its backup disc, so that I can do the newsletters & website from there if need be.

On the third day, I had social engagements.

Now back to Holocaust Denial. I plan to devote two webpages to it.

The best Denial and anti-Denial material will be at holocaust-denial.html.

And I plan to put the debate taking place in this mailing list/forum at denial-debate.html.

If you have any objection to your contribution being placed there, please let me know.

There are 35 responses today; too many to index, but I have numbered them all. I have only been able to read bits of them so far.

There are just over 400 people on this mailing list. More of the responses favour Denial than the other way, but most people on the list are "sitting out" the debate.

(1) There are a lot of witnesses to UFOs too

From: T Date: 06.02.2009 11:16 PM

You obviously have not done your research.

I will pass your letter on to others.

With this you need to learn how to categorize and sift evidence. You have not learned this yet.

There are a lot of witnesses to UFOs too. Still we remain sceptical.

(2) Holocaust Denial a magnet for violent gangs

From: Palestine Remembered <palestineremembered@googlemail.com> Date: 06.02.2009 10:33 PM

Well done to cast off the Holocaust Denying parasites - and I like the specific argument you've selected as being "unanswerable". There's a lot more that exposes the bulk of Holocaust Deniers as profiteering frauds, pandering to racial obsessives. Holocaust Denial acted (and still acts) as a magnet for violent gangs, some of whom probably want to persecute and rob vulnerable minorities.

However, lets also condemn censorship. Laws against Holocaust Denial served to draw a veil over what had happened, and even to protect war-criminals quietly going back to their businesses all over Europe. It gave the Zionists a powerful weapon against anyone who criticises Israel.

And lets not forget that the Deniers also advanced knowledge on the subject of the Holocaust (though, in the event, not by very much). Nobody but the deniers ever queried whether cyanide gas actually kills people. The Holocaust Deniers may have put to bed the myth of "Bodies made into soap". Did they prove or disprove the "Lamp-shades from human tatooed skin" story? I don't know, but the Deniers helped see it dropped from the standard story.

Sadly, some of the material from critics of Israel is poor or nastily racist too - though not, as best I can see, very much. Before we assume that everything about the Holocaust is uncontentious, let me commend everyone to "The Holocaust Industry" by Norman Finkelstein. Here are just a few of the gems that have been purged from Wikipedia (one finds these things by checking the "history" pages, all the stuff that exposes Israel is vigorously removed):

*(p.86): ... a guiding principle of the claims conference prohibited use of monies for "direct allocations to individuals"... In a classic instance of looking after one's own, however, the conference provided exemptions for two categories of victims: rabbis and "outstanding Jewish leaders" received individual payments."

*(p. 87): ... the conference came under attack from defrauded Jews ... When Germans or Swiss refuse to pay compensation, the heavens cannot contain the righteous indignation of organised American Jewry. But when Jewish elites rob Jewish survivors, no ethical issues arise: it's just about money."

*(p. 89): "In recent years, the Holocaust industry has become an outright extortion racket... this double shakedown of European countries as well as legitimate Jewish claimants first targeted Switzerland."

*(p. 93): The campaign rapidly degenerated into a libel of the Swiss people. Tom Bower, in a study supported by the Simon Wiesenthal Centre "Nazi Gold", reports that they had "knowingly profited from blood money"; "committed an unprecedented theft"; that "Swiss greed was unique"; that the "Swiss character" combined "simplicity and duplicity"; that the Swiss were "not just a peculiarly charmless people who had produced no artists, no heroes since William Tell and no statesmen, but were dishonest Nazi collaborators who had profited from genocide", and so on.

*(p. 94): The Holocaust industry first alleged that Swiss banks had systematically denied legitimate heirs of Holocaust victims access to dormant accounts worth between $7bn and $20bn.

*(p. 98ff) By 1996, the Swiss banks had agreed to establish an investigative committee, and abide by its findings. The so-called Volcker committee, "the independent committee of eminent persons",

*(p. 99): The pressures from the Holocaust industry for a final settlement did not relent; rather, they continued to mount. Renewed Swiss pleas that a settlement should await the commissions´ findings - it was the WJC, after all, that originally called for this moral reckoning -...fell on deaf ears.

*(p. 100): "Beyond whipping up public hysteria, the Holocaust industry coordinated a two-pronged strategy to "terrorize" (Bower) the Swiss into submission: class-action lawsuits and an economic boycott."

*(P. 102-103) In 1997 the Swiss reportedly spent $500m to fend off the Holocaust industry attacks. In April 1998 they started buckling under pressure. In June the banks made a "final offer" of $600m. The next month stiff US sanctions were threatened. The Swiss caved in and agreed to pay $1.25bn. "The aim ..." a Swiss bank's press release read, "is to avert the threat of sanctions as well as long and costly court proceedings."

*(p. 103): The settlement covered three classes: claimants to dormant Swiss accounts; refugees denied Swiss asylum; and victims of slave labour which the Swiss benefited from... the comparable American record is, on all these counts, just as bad, if not worse. Like Switzerland, the US denied entry to Jewish refugees fleeing Nazism before and during the second world war. Yet the US government hasn't seen fit to compensate them. And, although dwarfed in size and resources by the US, Switzerland admitted just as many Jewish refugees as America (approximately 20,000) during the Nazi Holocaust.

*(p. 105): In an address to the Swiss parliament, US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright explained that the economic benefits accruing to the Swiss from withheld Jewish accounts "were passed along to subsequent generations and that is why the world now looks to the people of Switzerland ... to be generous in doing what can be done at this point to right past wrongs." Noble sentiments all, but nowhere to be heard - unless they are being ridiculed - when it comes to African-American compensation for slavery.

*(p. 107): .., the Holocaust industry forced Switzerland into a settlement because time was allegedly of the essence: "Needy Holocaust survivors are dying every day." Once the Swiss signed away the money, however, the urgency miraculously passed. More than a year after the settlement was reached there was still no distribution plan. By the time the money is finally divvied out, all the "needy Holocaust survivors" will probably be dead. In fact, by last December [2002], less than half of the $200m "Special Fund for Needy Victims of the Holocaust" established in February 1997 had been distributed to actual victims. After lawyers' fees have been paid, the Swiss monies will then flow into the coffers of "worthy" Jewish organisations."

*(p. 111-112) In December 1999 the Volcker committee issued its report on Dormant Accounts of Victims of Nazi Persecution in Swiss Banks... "For victims of Nazi persecution there was no evidence of systematic discrimination, obstruction of access, misappropriation, or violation of document retention requirements of Swiss law... there is ample evidence of many cases in which banks actively sought out missing account holders or their heirs ... and paid account balances of dormant accounts to the proper parties."

*(p.114): The most explosive finding of the Volcker committee went unreported in the American media. Alongside Switzerland, the committee observed, the US was also a primary safe haven for transferable Jewish assets in Europe.

*(p.116) "The United States", Rubin concluded, "took only very limited measures to identify heirless assets in the United States, and made available a mere $500,000, in contrast to the $32m acknowledged by Swiss banks even prior to the Volcker inquiry." In other words, the US record is much worse than the Swiss record.

*(p. 118): In October 1998, ... Haaretz stated that the WJC and the WJRO decided "to refrain from dealing with the subject of assets in Israel of Holocaust victims on the ground that responsibility for this lay with the Israeli government". The writ of these Jewish organisations thus runs to Switzerland but not to the Jewish state. The most sensational charge levelled against the Swiss banks was that they required death certificates from the heirs of Nazi holocaust victims. Israeli banks have also demanded such documentation. One searches in vain, however, for denunciations of the "perfidious Israelis"

(3) Jews were deported behind the Ural Mountains to work in the Soviet arms factories

From: bill Date: 07.02.2009 02:44 PM


Peter Myers thinks that variations in German train schedules for Jewish deportations to the east disproves the revisionist claim that there was no extermination of the Jews during WWII. The argument will not hold up. First, Mr. Myers is in error when he thinks that no revisionist has answered the question of where the Jews went if they were not exterminated. Both professor Arthur Butz and Walter Sanning have addressed the question, the latter in his book The Dissolution of Eastern European Jewry. The short answer is that they were deported behind the Ural Mountains to work in the Soviet arms factories. As Sanning demonstrates in his book, before and during the German invasion of Russia, 50%-65% of RussiaÕs western Jews were taken as technical and skilled workers to work for the heavily Jewish Soviet regime in military production facilities outside the reach of the Germans. This does not address the fate of the Jews deported by the Germans to the occupied Eastern territories. The Germans had the habit of using Jews for labor. Those uses in Russia could have included the building of roads, growing crops and making uniforms and other equipment for the German army. It is highly significant that all German records on the Jewish resettlements in Russia have disappeared. Instead of assuming that the Germans destroyed the records, it might be wiser to inquire whether the records have been suppressed/destroyed by the Soviets to cover up the fact that the Jews were still alive. The same problem applies to the real and alleged exterminations of the Einsatzgruppen, the German security police in Russia. Not merely did the Einsatzgruppen lack the personnel to kill the number of Jews alleged, the relevant data on their activities is also missing. The only Einsatzgruppen reports that have survived are the reports by the commanders to the authorities back in Berlin. The field reports by the soldiers in the field back to their commanders have conveniently disappeared. Thus, there is no way to compare the field reports with the Berlin reports. One suspects that the field reports would give much lower figures than reports carefully edited to impress the authorities several thousand miles away.

But there are even more fundamental problems with Mr. Myers thesis. Heinrich Himmler was the German official in charge of all German security and anti-Jewish operations on the Eastern front. He, of all persons, would know exactly what the real number of Jews liquidated was. His complete diaries, including those dealing with the war time years in Russia, have been in Israeli hands since the end off WWII. To this day, those diaries have not been released to the public. This raises the inevitable suspicion that the diaries do not support the story the Jews are telling. Why else suppress such a key piece of evidence? One very good reason for doubting the claims of huge massacres in Russia sufficient to constitute a real extermination program is given by professor Butz in The Hoax of the Twentieth Century. Had the Germans been conducting a real extermination of Jews in Russia, there would have been no need for the Ògas chamberÓ hoax. Those who have real evidence do not need to fake evidence. None of this is to deny that the Germans killed huge numbers of Jews in Russia. Russian Jews were unanimous supporters of a murderous communist regime that they had created. The partisan warfare which claimed so many German soldiers lives during the war was largely in Jewish hands. In plain English, many of these Jews deserved to die. As to the more civilized western Jews who were shot because of inadequate housing facilities or plain indifference to their fate, one can have a measure of sympathy.

Mr. Myers thinks that zigzagging patterns in German train schedules means something. Not necessarily. The deportation and reallocating of Jews during the war depended on many factors, such as where the Jews were required for labor at any given moment, shifting fortunes in the war in Russia, availability or non-availability of land for resettlement, etc. Indeed, one of the reasons for shifting the Jews westward in the latter stages of the war was undoubtedly to remove the labor they represented from the advancing Red Army. There is nothing sinister in this. The huge flood of Jews out of Russia post-war on their way to invade the Arabs of Palestine is clear proof that the vast majority of Jews survived the war. If Mr. Myers will consult The Hoax of the Twentieth Century he will read of the Army and Congressional reports post-war that describe a huge flood of Jew, numbering as many as three million pouring out of Russia and the Iron Curtain countries to various locations. It is also noteworthy that in November 1943 the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service dropped the classification ÒJewÓ from its records. This allowed innumerable Jews to come to America and South America camouflaged as Hungarians, Poles, Rumanians, etc. UNRRA (United Nations Rehabilitation and Relief Centers) assisted Jews moving out of Europe to move to new locations. All this was noted in the reports of British and American intelligence officials of the time.

If Peter Myers thinks that revisionists have not settled the question of what really happened to the Jews during and after WWII, he should read more revisionist research. The revisionists have not settled every question relating to the actual fate of the Jews but that is only because the Jews and their political allies have suppressed so much of the relevant data. The mysteries, then, are the result of cover up, not the product of any fallacies in revisionist research. Revisionists have never claimed that Jews did not suffer in WWII like everyone else, merely that their suffering was not unique. And that, really, is the purpose of revisionist research: to puncture the claim to eternal martyrdom arising out of an allegedly unique experience, and to reduce the fate of EuropeÕs WWII Jews to its proper dimensions. Attempting to shift the non-extermination of EuropeÕs Jews to Soviet Russia from the non-existent Ògas chambersÓ of Auschwitz does not contribute to that objective.

Reply (Peter M.):

RE "where the Jews went if they were not exterminated".

Yes, the USSR moved Jews east before the Nazi invasion. But the Jews we are debating are those of Western Europe, Poland, Belarus & Ukraine - in the areas the Nazis controlled. These were not sent to work for the USSR.

(4) Thank you for fairness

From: Jude10901@aol.com Date: 06.02.2009 08:41 PM

I deeply appreciate your fairness. Thanks, Judy Andreas

(5) Beyond belief

From: ausgrass <ausgrass@gmail.com> Date: 06.02.2009 08:44 PM

One other flaw I constantly read is the inconsistency in the numbers of supposed victims of the gas chambers. Don't get me wrong, the gas chambers and the Nazi extermination scheme was an abomination that defies description. It is because thinking sane humans have such a problem coming to terms with the actions of humans not so different to themselves, that this issue will not go away. To some the entire holocaust deal is simply beyond belief? So the best way for some to cope with something beyond belief is denial. But I have yet to see anyone really do the mathematics and prove beyond doubt that any of the claims are entirely legitimate. You know, x numbers of victims were gassed in x number of days by x numbers of gas chambers and disposed off by x number of methods.

The logistics of some of the claims are simply outside the time limits of reality.

The policy is that "Might is right" and if you are powerful enough any action, however brutal, can be justified, even murdering innocent women and children, does however continue a flaw in human behaviour that does not seem to go away as the Israeli Army is currently illustrating. So what has changed, who is murdering who?

Maybe we are back to "What is God doing" while mankind exhibits its darker side, I tend to believe some religions are worshiping the "Wrong God" and He is most pleased with their wrathful nature. How any religion can justify blowing ones body to a thousand gruesome pieces can short cut the trip to Paradise? does indicate there is still a major flaw in the thinking process of modern man and that basically mankind's major flaw is insanity.

Maybe the "Good God" is standing in a quiet corner of Paradise, listening to "Hymns of Praise" on his iPod and hoping humans will do themselves in once and for all if left to their own devices and save "Him" all this grief.?? It has been thousands of years and humans still do not have a clue.? Howard Miller.

(6) The onus is on Affirmers, not Deniers, to prove their position

From: Peter Wakefield Sault <info@odeion.org> Date: 06.02.2009 08:51 PM

My position on the so-called 'Holocaust' is what it has always been. If you, or anyone else, wants me to believe in it then I want to see some evidence. Please don't play the zionist lawyer by trying to make those who QUESTION, not deny, responsible for proving their non-existent position. That is as ludicrous as asking an indigenous Amazonian native for proof that the Tooth Fairy does not exist and leads to the absurd conclusion that the Tooth Fairy must exist unless it can be proved not to exist by people who never even heard of it before.

You say you want to know where all those Jews went. I ask - all WHAT Jews? YOU, not me, FIRSTLY have to show that they existed since YOU are the one asserting that their existence was terminated in gas chambers on the direct orders of Adolph Hitler.

By dividing the world into Holocaust worshippers on the one hand and Holocaust deniers on the other you are playing the zionist game. I am neither. Nevertheless, until and unless I see some evidence to support the stories then in my view they will remain a matter of FAITH.

(7) New Perspective. Thank you!

From: WB <buggnu@windstream.net> Date: 06.02.2009 09:08 PM

I've read reams through the years for and against. Since the Nazis were supported by Ford and so many of the West's "heroes," that has always put suspicions in my mind about their treatment of the Khazars/"jews." You are a master at research, so I await your further info that can help us get a proper perspective on this subject. Further, the Crown/Vatican desire for control always intrigued me, and the creation of "Israel" clinches the fact that they worked with Khazars all along toward this goal. And I can see that the Crown/Vatican still controls their empire, including CorpUSA, through their Banksters and the World Bar controlled from London. You probable have reams on the Jesuits' workings in all of this, too. The solution as I see it, since seeing so much in the interviews Regina conducts on www.consciousmedianetwork.com , is for the world's spiritual consciousness to become so elevated that we will bring a change from the inside out, i.e., from our lives to all those about us, to the dissolution of all the black ops in power. Or a disaster will occur when we have the solstice alignment on 21 Dec 2012. Then all efforts fail.

(8) Different definitions of Holocaust

From: J Taylor <taylorj1@mweb.co.za> Date: 08.02.2009 10:19 PM

Before you get the debate going perhaps you need to define your terms

By Holocaust do you mean

1-The nuremburg definition of mass murder of 6m Jews by Steaming electrification and gassing

2-The 1960's definition when the word was defined which is 6m Jews killed by gassing then burning

3- The definition of as a unique event in comparison to say the 15-66m death of Slavs or the 2-13m death of Germans pre and post the 2nd world war

4- The persecution of the Jews as a complex phenomena entailing many many people and the massing of Jews which lead in the collapse of Germany to the death of most

5-The massing of Jews with the intention of killing all the Jews as designed by Hitler and/or his central command(Goebbels)

The other question under debate is the death toll

Is it the

a- 6m

b The numbers that appear in the Jewish yearbooks of 2-5m (and the raol hillberg no of 5.1m

c the number appearing in the population yearbooks of the time of about 1-2m

The 6m is a mystical number coming from the Talmud which may or may not be true but has other connotaions like 666

You are presumably proposing option 5 and ignoring say option 3 and bypassing the numbers. Option 5 has the debate about the numbers and who orderred it.

Perhaps you must define the debate more narrowly or debate the different points seperately

I am agnostic on the debate and would like to see a well structured flow of data and insight without name calling and hyperbole. The debate itself is an act of defiance against the rullers of the present age and might end you in trouble.

Rgds John

(9) Wannsee Conference

From: RW Date: 08.02.2009 08:09 PM

>Bialystok is in the north-east of Poland. Trainloads of Jews from Bialystok were sent to Auschwitz and Treblinka, both to the south-west. Yet Belarus is to the EAST of Bialystok. If you wanted to resettle these Jews in the East, you wouldn't send them West.
>Witnesses say that at Auschwitz, Jews faced Selection - some as Labourers, the rest for Extermination. At Treblinka, there was no Selection because there were no Labour Camps there. It was just Extermination.

In connection with the idea of train routes as part of an extermination plot it may be useful to mention the Wannsee Conference. The conference is conventionally assumed to be the moment the Nazis decided on an extermination policy of the Jews. According to Germar Rudolph, Lectures on the Holocaust, page 121 - 122, The Wannsee Protocol dealt with various problems in how to determine who was sufficiently Jewish and where to move them to. Rudolph's source is from the author Ney, in the edition, The Wannsee Protocol, written in German. Accordingly:

"[T]he deportation to the east has replaced the policy of emigration. In connection with this it speaks of the fact that Jews should immediately be put to work constructing roads to the east, from which a reduction in their total number will follow due to a natural selection process as a result of the harsh conditions. There is not a word in the Protocol to the effect that the Jews were going to be sent to extermination camps."

Furthermore, Yehuda Bauer of the Hebrew University confirmed in 1982 that Wannsee was not a reliable source for any paper trail in determining an extermination policy. However, Peter may be right that the Nazis assumed a certain toll on the population would occur under the harsh wartime conditions. Cruel, yes, but planned genocide, no.

(10) Talmudic-Marxist dialectic - from Frederick Toben

From: Adelaide Institute <infoadelaideinstitute@adelaideinstitute.org> Date: 06.02.2009 09:44 PM

Peter, your thinking is fatally flawed - "The Deniers have no answer to this. This is End-Game for Holocaust Denial."

Are your Talmudic-Marxist dialectic twists and contortions finally catching up with you and swirling you into a sea of particulars where the outcome for your mindset's activities is all too obvious? The fact that you accept the term 'Holocaust denial' as an issue indicates you will, like your other enterprises that you consider 'intellectual', pussy-foot about and continue to sit on the fence. However, I wish you luck in re-inventing the wheel and perhaps something good will emerge for those who know nothing about the issue


Reply (Peter M.):


I was wondering with trepidation what anathemas your email would bear.

In the end, it wasn't too bad.

You argue that the Zionist say, "the Holocaust is our strength". I agree with you, but I don't think they invented it. Rather, they've tried to use it as "moral capital" to further their agenda, just as PNAC urged the US, after the Cold War, to use its weaponry and "moral capital" against the Islamic world.

Both Israel and the US have used up their "moral capital" now. No more compensation money should be paid; the UN's Holocaust Day should be replaced with Genocide Day.

In Zionist eyes, the Nazi Holocaust confirms the Jewish religion's depiction of history as a series of holocausts launched by non-Jews againsts God's people.

The first Holocaust, the Exodus as escape from slavery in Egypt, probably never happened - it was a litarary construct by Exra to give precedent and motivation for Jews "returning" from Babylon to Palestine.

The feast of Purim celebrates another holocaust, in the Persian empire. But the names of the Jewish heroes, Esther and Mordecai, are just variant spellings of Ishtar and Marduk, the goddess and god of Babylon, so this story is suspect too.

But we know that the Maccabean revolt was real, as was the Jewish uprising against Rome and the Roman suppression of it (Masada, destruction of the 2nd temple etc). Christian attacks on Jews, eg during the First Crusade, were also real.

Of course Jews themselves dished out violence too - as leaders of Bolshevism before Stalin overthrew them, and in the struggle for Eretz (Greater) Israel. The Bible itself canonises the genocide ordered by Yahweh and administered (in the stories) by Moses, Joshua, Samuel et al.

I think that denying the Nazi Holocaust plays into the hands of Zionists. They say to Jews, "these Deniers have no remorse; they will do it again when they get the chance".

(11) False consciousness: denier v believer - from Frederick Toben

From: Adelaide Institute <infoadelaideinstitute@adelaideinstitute.org> Date: 09.02.2009 05:17 PM

Peter, I think I can follow your thinking - but as Peter Wakefield Sault indicated your dialectic reveals false consciousness - denier v believer. We are not denyers - how can I deny that which never happened?

Cheers Fredrick

(12) Treblinka

From: James P. Hogan <james@jamesphogan.com> Date: 06.02.2009 11:38 PM

I received your article, forwarded via Michael Santomauro's "Reporters' Notebook" newsletter, which I would assume you are familiar with.

First, congratulations on your open-mindedness, which is such a rarity where this topic is concerned. It's refreshing to see a rational level of debate finally percolating through to the level of public visibility.

I have two questions concerning the "fatal flaw," however. First, if Treblinka was the site of such mass exterminations, where are the bones, teeth, ash, evidence of mass graves (no sign of disturbed earth in aerial photographs), and records of the mountains of fuel that cremations on this scale would require?

Second, the official line is that the agent used for execution was the exhaust from Russian tank engines. But it is generally acknowledged among chemists that diesel exhaust, while noxious and unpleasant, simply doesn't contain enough carbon monoxide to constitute a poison gas.

[As a footnote, according to The American Jewish Committee, the world population of Jewish people in 1939 was just under 15.7 million. The New York Times for Feb. 22, 1948, gives a figure for that year of 18,700,000. If 6 million were indeed exterminated during the war period, it would mean that 9.7 million (15.7 minus the 6) had doubled itself in under 9 years, which is impossible. The most comprehensive demographic study of the question that I know, which takes account not only of pre- and post-war census figures but also the large migrations of populations and changes of borders that took place, is Walter Sanning's "The Dissolution of Eastern European Jewry," 1983. He arrives at a figure of between 800,000 and 1,000,000 Jews disappearing from the region from all causes, 300,000 of which are unexplained. The largest single group was the mass deportation conducted by the Soviets into Siberia in 1941, when the Germans invaded Russia. Given their initial numbers, distribution, and the kinds of conditions they were exposed to, it's about the number that one would expect statistically. Hence, it wouldn't appear to leave any excess for gas chambers to account for.]


James Hogan Sligo, Ireland

(13) 'Prof Anonymous': A short reply to Mr. Myers

From: reportersnotebook <msantom629@aol.com> Date: 07.02.2009 12:02 PM

Feb. 6, 2009

From 'Prof Anonymous':

A short reply to Mr. Myers:

First, his insight is not new. This issue has been raised at least since Zimmerman's book 'Holocaust Denial' (2000, pp. 14-19).

Second, revisionists already have acknowledged this problem (see Mattogno and Graf's 'Treblinka', pp. 253, 293, 301), and have admitted that it is "entirely unclear" where deported Jews ended up.

Third, the Reinhardt camps (Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka) were funnel points through which most deportees were channeled. So it is not surprising that some would have first gone 'west' before continuing on east.

Also, once deportees crossed the Bug river they were likely considered 'gone', and hence little need for rigorous tracking of movements.

Keep in mind that Belzec shut down by Dec 1942; Treblinka by May 1943; and Sobibor by Sept 1943. They shut down when eastward deportations ceased to be a viable option. Hence the shift to Auschwitz, and to the function of forced labor (some were also sent to Majdanek).

Myers' "clincher" only demonstrates that, indeed, deportations to the east were not possible in mid-1944, and labor was badly needed -- 2 good reasons to ship Jews to Auschwitz.

So it is hardly an 'end-game' for revisionism. At worst it puts revisionists on equal footing with conventional historians: given the striking lack of ash, human remains, or disturbed earth for mass graves, neither side can account for the bodies. But it's worse for orthodoxy, since they claim to know where to look -- but have never bothered to conduct detailed excavations.

P.A. +++


I know Richard Krege, who did that Radar study at Treblinka. He has only presented his findings (as a Powerpoint presentation, I recall) to private groups. I've suggested to him that he publish his study and findings on the internet, and accept the challenge to visit the site "with qualified scientists" - a challenge issued to him at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Krege. Don't forget, his study is not definitive. The location he chose could have been wrong, for example. Extra studies are needed.

(14) Giuseppe Furioso's Rebuttal to Mr. Myers on Holocaust Debate...

From: reportersnotebook <msantom629@aol.com> Date: 08.02.2009 07:20 PM

Feb. 7, 2009

Dear ReporterNotebook:

Mr. Myers rebuttals of revisionism are amateurish at best...and we've heard them before. Of course if you posit in advance that there were some eleven million Jews within the German sphere during World War ll then approximately five to six million were missing at its conclusion. On the other hand if you rely on the researched figures of both Butz ( The Hoax of the Twentieth Century) and Sanning ( The Dissolution of European Jewry) then only about half that number ever came under German control and fewer than one million Jews were unaccounted for at the end of the war. Furthermore it is a quite leap from '' unaccounted for '' to ''genocide ...just because there were '' missing '' Jews at the end of the war, that in itself is not proof of the Holocaust.

Mr. Myers has logistical problems with some of the revisionist assertions...it would be illogical, he argues if '' selections '' took place at camps like Auschwitz whereby some Jews were selected to move on for resettlement and others would remain behind as conscripted labor. Why employ scarce transportation resources when you could make the selections at the point of collection. But if it was the German plan to exterminate the Jewish people why employ any transportation assets at all ...why not mass executions on the spot.

Now to the Hungarian Jews. Here Mr. Myers thinks he's delivered the fatal blow to revisionism...The Hungarian Jews were rounded up in the summer of 1944. At this point in the war, most of Hitler's eastern conquests had been retaken by the Red Army...there was simply no place for the Jews to be ''resettled'' thus any sane person would have to conclude that the purpose of the trip to Auschwitz was extermination. Perhaps it was for conscripted labor or perhaps it was because the Jews were viewed as a security risk...why jump to the conclusion that they were headed for the gas chambers? And again, if extermination was to be their fate, why not do it on the spot in Hungary, why tie up valuable rolling stock while awaiting a Russian offensive, when you could dispatch the Jews the old fashion way with a bullet to the back of the head.

Revisionists have amassed a mountain of evidence against the Holocaust anchored in first rate scholarship, what Mr. Myers has to say is only a minor diversion.

joe aka giuseppefurioso@aol.com

(15) Tooth Fairy and Holocaust

From: Ardeshir Mehta <ardeshir@mac.com> Date: 08.02.2009 07:13 PM

On 6-Feb-09, at 7:51 AM, Peter Wakefield Sault wrote:

There is NO justifiable reason for believing in that for which no irrefutable evidence exists. This principle doesn't just apply to the Tooth Fairy or Santa Claus. It applies to historical "facts" too.

In fact the Tooth Fairy and Holocaust(TM) have quite a few characteristics in common. For example:

1. Millions of gullible children believe the Tooth Fairy exists.

Millions of gullible adults believe the Holocaust(TM) took place.

2. The ONLY physical "evidence" for the Tooth Fairy are the coins under the pillow, which were actually put there by the parents during the night.

The ONLY physical "evidence" for the Holocaust(TM) are the reconstructed "gas chambers" at Auschwitz, which were actually put there by the Soviets and/or their stooges in the wake of WW-II.

3. As time goes by, many parents do admit to their children that they made the Tooth Fairy up.

As time has gone by, many Holocaust(TM) eyewitnesses have admitted that they made their stories up.

4. Re. the Tooth Fairy, many parents justify making it all up by saying, "It's all in a good cause".

Re. the Holocaust(TM), many zionists justify making their stories up by saying, "It's all in a good cause".

5. The Tooth Fairy: it's mostly about the money.

The Holocaust(TM): it's mostly about the money.

(16) First things first

From: Ken Freeland <diogenesquest@gmail.com> Date: 07.02.2009 10:54 PM

I appreciate the reasoned nature of your recent challenge to " deniers," but I think your analysis must begin from the beginning. How many European Jews were incarcerated in the first place? Before having to account for transfers vs. exterminations, you must have a clear number incarcerations, and subtract from this the number lost to disease and natural causes of death, of which there are records (and severe losses towards the end of the war when cholera ravaged the famished populations of these camps). THEN you can demand that deniers account for discrepancies. What are those figures Peter? Do you even know?

(17) 'Final solution' changed as the prospects of Nazi defeat loomed

From: Eric Walberg <efgh1951@yahoo.com> Date: 07.02.2009 04:37 AM

>My new perspective enables me to better understand the "never again" siege mentality of Zionism. I agree that we can't settle the exact details of the 'final solution'. it changed as the prospects of Nazi defeat loomed. They might well have cut a deal to just deport Jews if things had gone 'better'. Who knows? But the siege mentality should not lead to Zionism. It was the Zionists who cooperated with Hitler, trading Jews for money, and preferring dead Jewish babies who might have made it to Palestine rather than live assimilated ones in America, as Gurion famously said. It's that schizophrenia that must be addressed. Zionism is poison to Jews and non-Jews alike.

(18) I considered myself a "denier" after I read Norman Finkelstein`s The Holocaust Industry

From: patrick <patrickh@ymail.plala.or.jp> Date: 07.02.2009 12:48 AM

Your letter was forwarded to me and I would appreciate the opportunity to participate in this most important discussion. A very important issue is involved in the use of the word "deniers." I considered myself a "denier" after I read Norman Finkelstein`s The Holocaust Industry. It was because of his quote from his mother who said, "If all these people survived Auschwitz, who did Hitler kill?"(paraphrased) You see that I did misunderstand his book. However, he got me interested in the issue and I carefully read Germar Rudolf`s Lectures on the Holocaust 2-3 times. That made me more of a "denier." However, I met Professor Robert Faurrison at the Holocaust Conference in Tehran and he explained and insisted that we revisionists not allow ourselves to be referred to as "deniers." It is not just an emotional or rhetorical matter but involves a crucial issue of the burden of proof. Faurrison said, "We do not deny anything. We affirm that there is not sufficient evidence for the Holocaust charge of deliberate genocide against the Germans." (paraphrased) When a crime is alledged or charged, the burden of proof rests with the accuser. What is affirmed without proof can be denied withou proof. The Holocaust is very different from the 9/11 terror attacks because the allegded took place over several years and in different place. Let us just focus in on the Auschwitz homocidal gas chambers. Are these gas chambers a crucial and essentail part of the Holocaust accusation? Patrick Henry McNally Holocaust revisionist

Comment (Peter M):

I wrote to Finkelstein; he was adamant that the Nazi Holocaust happened, and referred me to Hilberg's book The Destruction of the European Jews.

(19) At Treblinka, there was no Selection ... It was just Extermination

From: patrick <patrickh@ymail.plala.or.jp> Date: 09.02.2009 08:33 AM Subject: Unfounded assertions in Holocaust narrative

>Witnesses say that at Auschwitz, Jews faced Selection - some as Labourers, the >rest for Extermination. At Treblinka, there was no Selection because there were >no Labour Camps there. It was just Extermination.

What and where is the proof for the statement: "It was just Extermination."

Assertions are not proofs. The main selection at the camps was between men and women.

Just like in army camps.

Patrick Henry


(20) Don't use a capital "H"

From: poncecuba40 <poncecuba40@netzero.net> Date: 07.02.2009 01:22 PM Ponce here in Oregon........RIGHT ON........ only thing that I have to say is..........don't use a capital "H" when saying holocaust, by using a capital "H" you are only giving them cridit sinse they were the ones to start using it in order to make it into the only holocaust on Earth.....thanks...........Ponce

(21) Refuse to believe in impossibilities

From: Wilf Heink <wheink@telus.net> Date: 07.02.2009 01:50 PM

Today I received your article ÒFatal Flaw in Holocaust DenialÓ, via Mr. Wolfram Grätz, allow me to make a few comments.

You wrote: ÒThe Deniers have written reams on Gas Chambers - denying them - but next to nothing of where those millions of Jews evacuated from the West, actually went to.Ó

First, I am not a denier but someone who refuses to believe in impossibilities. Second, debating people who defend the official version will inevitably ask, when cornered: ÒWell, where are they then if not killed?Ó. With that question they are admitting that a solid case for murder can not be made, for, if that case was made the question would be redundant.

You also mention Treblinka and the fact that no selection took place, or so we are told, and all arrivals, men, woman and children were killed. According to you that was because Treblinka was not a work camp. This is true, it was a transit camp. Train records? Yes, a few are produced, also some showing empty trains returning to Warsaw. All of this is circumstantial evidence at best, but since the case for murder rests exclusively on tall tales by eyewitnesses, unbelievable tales claiming the impossible happened, there must logically be an alternative to the murder claim. And that is what Revisionists are working on.

Demographics will not solve this, make a solid case for murder, only solid evidence can do this and that evidence is lacking, non existent.

Best regards Wilfried Heink

(22) "Resettlement" quibbles

From: hhall1999@comcast.net Date: 07.02.2009 02:30 PM

However the Jews were or were not moved around Europe, that doesn't have anything to do with whether there were gas chambers or how many millions were killed or not killed. It's not forensic evidence, only circumstantial.

"Resettlement" quibbles are really not what it is all about, it's about ridiculous claims and the total lack of forensic evidence for the charge of mass murder to be brought.


(23) They secretly immigrated to the USA

From: Louis-Laurent <infografia@sympatico.ca> Date: 07.02.2009 03:19 PM

The 6 millions secretly immigrated to the USA, changed their name and infiltrated and corrupted the american political and media institutions.

In my studies on the subject, I remember having read a letter of a congressman in the US, who during the second world war, was expressing his grave concern about a major hidden secret operation about which he had received information and confirmation. This operation was the mass secret immigration in the other of multiple millions of european jews to the US. This operation was conducted in great secrecy and with the connivance of certain administrative circles within the immigration departement of the US government. It was also mentionned that a systematic change of jewish names to american sounding names was part of this secret mass immigration scam operation, in order to give it even more stealth qualities.

A well known proven case of this mass immigration scam, is the nomination of Madleen Albright as secretary of state at the time when important peace negociations were to proceed between the rogue zionist state and palestinians. She at first denied that she was actually a jew. But when some journalist came out with more substantial proofs of her original jewish name change, she had to admit the truth that Madeleen Albright was not her true name, and that her parents during the second world war did exactly what I just mentionned above.

It is my understanding that this information and historical fact is the very core paradigm and well hidden solution of the whole question.



(24) Holocaust Denial Videos

From: janet walker <whydoyounotunderstand@yahoo.com.au> Date: 07.02.2009 12:07 AM

In your article on what you call the fatal flaw in holocaust denial you mention that Treblinka was used for "extermination". The documentary ONE THIRD OF THE HOLOCAUST which is at the following link is about Treblinka, Belzec and Sobibor. I do not think there was any policy of extermination at any nazi concentration camp. But I do not think of myself as a holocaust "denier". That is a media term. I use the name holocaust revisionist. You state that soviet and nazi systems were totalitarian. But what about the laws against holocaust revisionists in a dozen countries in Europe where no dissent is allowed and people are imprisoned for expressing a non violent opinion on a historical subject. Ernst Zundel who is doing 5 years in Germany has also had hundreds of letters deliberately withheld from him. So democratic countries can be totalitarian when they want to be. http://www.holocaustdenialvideos.com

Yours faithfully, Janet Walker.

(25) World Hate Establishment

From: Michael McDonnell <mmcd@mmnet.com.au> Date: 07.02.2009 12:17 AM

The clearest measure of the World Hate Establishment's dominance of the 20th century is its titanic version of its Second Great War for world mastery and its "holocaust," credited by virtually everyone everywhere. Proof the Holocaust never happened is that the Auschwitz homicidal gas chamber, singular, was crudely deemed after the war from a gutted, quite small air raid shelter. (Peter, do post the various addresses of David Cole's 1992 interview with the Auschwitz curator. That bullet proof, cheeky young Jew is a hero of our terrible times! He just objected to being lied to.) Though physical extermination of Jews was alleged, but only by Jews, in 1945, gas chambers were not mentioned by any war leader, the Red Cross or Jewish HollywoodÕs mountain of 1950Õs war movies. Asserted sotto voce in Judgment at Nuremberg 1961 (when Eichmann was paraded in a sound proof cage in Jerusalem because he spoke Yiddish because he was a Zionist who trained Irgun in Palestine); nothing in the classic Pawnbroker 1964; stated in the World Book Encyclopaedia 1965, but ignored with vast hilarity in Mel BrookeÕs The Producers 1968, mass media did not AMPLIFY the 6m gassed Jews until 1978 in NBCÕs Holocaust. Thereafter it was alleged ad nausiam, but only by Jews without physical corroboration. After revision history spread in the 1980Õs, the criminally insane Spielberg expediently avoided gas chambers in his definitive SchindlerÕs List, 1993. Final proof is that enquiry called Òholocaust denialÓ is deemed criminal. Only Goy hating hunchbacks litigate historical facts. Blinding, deafening repetition mentions only Jews, ignoring multiple 20th century genocides committed by the beasts of globalism whose main recruiting ground is Jewry, whose influence is banned from public discussion. Hitler was demonised for breaking the ban, well, for building a value-backed currency, actually.

The very concept of genocide is never heard outside Judaism because it is unthinkable because it is so pointless. Thus the great butchers of history are never accused of it. The Shorter Oxford Dictionary says "racism" dates from the mid 1930's. Proof that racism does not exist is that it is hurled only at whites. This writer still does not understand why, though the lately matured absurdity of calling whites ÒCaucasian,Ó of core Jewish stock, presumably has something to do with it. Human beings do not hate their neighbour, they love their own. Still the globalist Hate media tell us Sunnis hate Shiites more than their massively murderous foreign invaders. Only Judaism teaches racial superiority, and the silent commandment "Hate thy neighbour" This deflects onto the host society that maddening guilt which is inflicted by debilitating fear of having inherited divinely cursed blood from the "Christ killers." That unmentionable fear actually defines Jewishness, while also explaining why most Jews have always deserted Judaism - because they reject the demand to hate without provocation, and because divinely cursed blood is an absurdity.

VIVA VALIDLY CONSECRATED BISHOP WILLIAMSON. This is why the media super criminals tried in vain to marginalise him with two month old footage. That is why John Paul II purported to excommunicate Archbishop Lefebvre and the four validly ordained priests he validly consecrated as bishops in 1988.

(26) On the Hungarian Jews

From: Don <NX7933@hotmail.com> Date: 07.02.2009 11:39 AM

You argue that the fact that the Hungarian Jews were deported when they could not have been resettled to Belarus is a "fatal flaw" in the revisionist thesis.

I have read some revisionist texts arguing that the number of Hungarian Jews deported has been greatly exaggerated. If true, this would go a long way towards answering your question.


{QUOTE from above webpage by Butz} It was completely new to us that evidently many Hungarian Jews were deported to Riga(!) even in summer 1944, which seemed illogical in view of the military situation at the time. From Riga they were later transferred to Stutthof.

In his present paper Graf refers to these movements, without repeating that the deportations to Riga were "illogical in view of the military situation at the time." For me Graf's 1997 passage supported a hypothesis that I had raised in my letter to him of November 5, 1993. I repeated it to Graf in Australia in 1998 and at the IHR conference in 2000.

In my book I wrote that at his trial Eichmann claimed that, after Stalingrad, the deportations were stepped up "for camouflage reasons" to conceal the desperate military situation.[note 30] That could be the key to understanding the Goebbels account of deportations of almost all Hungarian Jews, in the absence of convincing evidence that such actually happened, and in consideration of convincing reasons to believe they could not have happened.

By May 1944, there is no doubt that the Germans wanted to clear the Jews out of Hungary; they made that clear. Goebbels was the propaganda minister, responsible for maintaining the morale of the German population. Why admit that the desired deportation could not be accomplished? The point of sending a small number Hungarian Jews to Riga could have been precisely that it was illogical. It implied a false military and logistic situation. That was also the case for the general claim of mass deportation of Jews out of Hungary. It was, in a sense, a semi-hoax of the sort that propagandists are hired to create. Graf declares, "The declarations of a Soviet propagandist should be regarded with skepticism." So should the declarations of a Nazi propagandist.

There exist dozens of photos showing deported Hungarian Jews upon their arrival at Auschwitz-Birkenau in 1944. Taken by one or more anonymous German photographers, they were published in a 1981 book The Auschwitz Album.[note 31] (Several of these are also in Jean-Claude Pressac's 1989 book, and in a more recent work published by the Auschwitz Museum, which identifies them as "taken by the SS, 1944.")[note 32]

Braham remarks that "It was during the deportations from Hungary that the SS authorized for the first time the taking of photographs in Auschwitz." He means of course photos of people from arriving Jewish transports. I believe Braham is right, since I can't recall seeing comparable photos taken at earlier dates. He adds "the Germans also produced a propaganda film" on the deportations.[note 33] I believe I have seen excerpts of this film.

Braham should have said "ordered" rather than "authorized", for these are clearly official photos. Why did the German authorities take these photos? My hypothesis would explain why, and why they would have taken other publicity measures such as make a film on the deportations.

In summary I think I must refine my earlier conclusions only slightly.[note 34] I implied that only employable Jews were deported. That is not true. Some families were deported for reasons given above, and perhaps also as part of a camouflage operation. As for the number deported, I had written "somewhat less than 100,000"; now I would be more reticent to give a number, but I can't believe any number on the order of 438,000 for May-July, for reasons given, and my original statement is probably valid provided the October-November deportations on foot are not included. It is possible that a fairly precise number will be determined some day. In all accounts, northern Transylvania receives a great emphasis. Perhaps that region was more hard hit by deportations than others.

Jürgen G raf and Carlo Mattogno are commended for their hard work and their research visit to Hungary. This is a difficult problem, as is suggested by Graf's wavering positions on it over the years. As for Graf's present paper, it is on the whole a good one.

I believe that starting in March 1944 the Germans made a lot of noise about wanting to deport the Hungarian Jews, and the Jewish propagandists then decided to take them up on it, giving the story their own twist. If I am right then Goebbels was an unwitting co-author of the Hoax! {ENDQUOTE}

I have read other revisionist texts on the matter. Now that I know you have an interest in this subject, I'll send them to you as I find them. Just bear in mind that many revisionists dispute that 400,000+ Jews were deported from Hungary.

Also, why are you so averse to discussing the gas chambers? If the Nazis were such homicidal maniacs, shouldn't this be open to discussion? After all, if the Nazis exterminated the Jews, we should be able to discuss how, where and how many. Do you not want to discuss this even though you posit an extermination program?

I also have to wonder how accurate the train data is. The whole Holocaust story seems to be based on eyewitness testimony (often obtained by torture) and assumptions derived from train traffic. Do we have all the train traffic? I have read from some revisionists that we do not. If we do not, then we cannot jump to assumptions based on such incomplete data.

(27) Revisionists do not have all the answers

From: Don <NX7933@hotmail.com> Date: 07.02.2009 11:08 AM

I also want to point out, Peter, that revisionists do not have all the answers. Revisionism is a work in progress. So far I am satisfied that there could not have been homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz. But it is difficult for research to progress when such research is made illegal by the "free democratic" governments of Europe. The question of what exactly happened to the European Jews has not been fully answered. But there is no doubt in my mind that the gas chamber stories are a propaganda falsehoodÑit is just trivially easy to demonstrate this.

Revisionists call for open research. The Zionists and the "free democracies" make research illegal. It is hard to get all the answers when these "democratic" governments jail researchers.

(28) Robert Faurisson will set you straight

From: Fritz <fja0527@bellsouth.net> Date: 07.02.2009 10:27 AM

the man for you to contact is Robert Faurissant. Engage him in such a debate and he will set you straight. In the attachment is the chronicle of Bergen Belsen and a graph showing the mortality rate. Note the time period and put it into the context of the times when Germany was prostate, with a 'brown-out' across the country, with no more supplies available and every one going hungry. I was there and remember only too well. I'll translate the chronicle for you. (I took these pictures myself during a visit around 1960. The information shown at Bergen Belsen was accepted as fact at the time and does not represent German war time propaganda.) 1940-43

Use and expansion of an existing barracks compound as a POW camp (Stalag 113). Beginning in the summer of 1941 it was used as a POW camp for Russian soldiers. Mass dying in a "spot-fever" epidemic took place.

Apr 1943

Turned over to the SS and changed into a holding/transit camp for several thousand Jews, who were to be exchanged for 'interned' Germans under allied control. Steady increase of the number of in-mates.

From Mar 1944 onward

Inmates from other concentration camps, who had become unable to work, were housed in a separate section of what was then called an "internment camp".

Oct/Nov 1944 A section of Bergen Belsen was prepared as best as was possible to house 8,000 women who arrived from the concentration camp Auschwitz/Birkenau.

Dec 1944

Completion of change-over of Bergen Belsen into a concentration camp. New camp commander SS-Hauptsturmführer Josef Kramer, formerly in charge of Auschwitz/Birkenau. Number of inmates on December 1, 1944: 15,257

Since Jan 1945

Numerous prison transports arrive at Bergen Belsen from concentration camps in the battle zone. The begin of the inferno. Intolerable over-crowding conditions in the camp. Hunger, epidemics, very high death rate. Number of inmates Number of deaths Feb 1, 1945 22,000 For Feb 1945 = about 7,000 Mar 1, 1945 41,520 For Mar 1945 = 18,168 Apr 1, 1945 43,042 1st half of Apr = about 9,000 Apr 15 about 60,000 English troops arrived and took the camp over. Inspite of all efforts to save as many inmates as possible, another 9,000 died by the end of April, as did another 4,000 by the end of June. The total number of deaths at Bergen Belsen from 1943 to 1945 were about 50,000 Peter, these are revealing numbers and they also show where the inmates came from. Auschwitz was a labor camp. It was near a factory which employed 80,000 workers. Laborers were at a premium and the fact that 8,000 women arrived fro Auschwitz near the end of the war tells a story quite different from what we are being told. Heck, when the Russian front approached Auschwitz, the inmates had the choice of being liberated by the Russians, but they preferred to head west together with the retreating German army! Get the straight dope from Faurissant, Germar Rudolf, Ernst Zündel etc. that is if you really are interested and want to know. Best regards, Fritz Adam, Fayetteville, GA

(29) Armchair philosophising

From: Paul <pixelpix9@gmail.com> Date: 07.02.2009 07:04 PM

Dear Mssrs Santomauro, Myers,

The problem with Mr Myers argument is that its all armchair philosophising. Has he been to ANY of the places he writes about ? For example he writes about "Treblinka" exterminations, but his countryman R Krege did forensic testing of the site and proved that no extermination camp even existed in Treblinka only a work camp.

Before anyone can speak SENSE about how many Jews died (regardless of cause) they must first come up with credible evidence of 1) The numbers of Jews in Hitlers sphere of power. 2) The numbers of Jews actually taken into custody because many thousands of Jews living in occupied territories were NEVER even taken into Nazi custodyÉ..many thousands continued to live untouched in German cities/towns .

Mr Myers has, in his rush to prove genocide, NOT taken into consideration that many hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of Jews died 1) of Natural causes (it happens you know) 2) Fighting for Partisans/ Foreign Armies. 3) Were killed in bombing raids on their homes/places of work ie factories etc. 4) Were murdered by NON-Nazis such as Poles/Latvians/Russians/Ukrainians/British etc

YES BRITISH !!. In 1945 Reichfuehrer SS Heinrich Himmler had many thousands of prisoners from Nth German Concentration Camps put onto three German Luxury Cruise Ships (Cap Arcona, Deutschland, Thielbek) These were supposed to ship these prisoners off to Scandinavia.. The RAF attacked and sank these ships (DESPITE the fact the Captains put up white flags) killing more than 7500 of those prisoners. This was DELIBERATE murder by the British.

A few yrs ago I went to the trouble of getting the Natural Death rate statistics for Jews living in Poland for the period 1930-1945, from the Polish Bureau of statistics.

These showed a Natural death rate of around 2.5% for that period. In the meeting at Wannsee the Nazis stated they BELIEVED there were around 11 million Jews in the WHOLE of Europe. (not all were within their grasp) So if one applies 2.5% natural death rate to 11 million one gets 275.000 deaths yearly from purely natural causes. If one expands this out to cover the 12 years 1933-1945 the number reaches 3.3 MILLION. That is three point three million Jews who would have died of purely NATURAL causes during the Nazi period. Interestingly, 3 million is the number of names Yad Vaschem has listed as Holocaust victims.

NOW to Mr Myers Unresearched statement that young & older people were being murdered in the CampsÉ..PROVE IT Mr MYERS or SHUT UP.

TRUTH /FACT is WRITTEN ORDERS from Berlin to ALL Camp Commandants EXIST that state unequivocally that DEATH RATES IN ALL CAMPS MUST BE LOWERED AT ALL COSTS !! This was to be done by all means possible, better food, better medical treatment AND the Camp Commandants were to be held responsible by Berlin for carrying this out. NOW Mr Myers come up with JUST ONE written order to prove people were mass gassed !!

I could go on, but I suggest NO-ONE take any notice of Peter Myers Fantasies UNTIL he has gotten off his sofa and gone and done some real researching.


P. (Im withholding my identity for very good reasons)

(30) "Fritz Berg informed me that you would not allow him to subscribe"

From: Charles Krafft <whodareswings@yahoo.com> Date: 07.02.2009 06:44 PM

Holocaust denier Fritz Berg informed me that you would not allow him to subscribe to your excellent e-news letters. Is this because of the staunch Australian "thought crime" surveillance and legislation, or simply because you find his Holocaust gassings research scurvy?

Your "Fatal Flaw..." piece today implies that you've lookaed at both sides of the question, but if you are turning away subscribers who also happen to be holocaust deniers than you are being rather disingenuous about your impartiality here, no?

What is your reason for excluding Fredrich Berg from your subscriber's list? He tells me he tried to subscribe (at my behest) in good faith and was rejected.

Best from Seattle USA,

Charles Krafft

Reply (Peter M.):

Friedrich Paul Berg wrote to me using the email address hoaxbuster <hoaxbuster@earthlink.net>.

The words "Learn everything at www.nazigassings.com" appear at the bottom of all his emails.

I asked him to supply a neautral email address, and not to use confrontational material in his emails. He replied, "Forget it, hero. It's nice of you to remind me just how gutless so many people are", and in a subsequent email, "You are a pathetic coward. Drop dead!"

Toben never uses such tactics. Not all Deniers are the same.

(31) New Light on the Fate of the Hungarian Jews

From: Monique Sulter <m.sulter@worldnet.att.net> Date: 07.02.2009 05:31 PM Institute for Historical Review Beyond Auschwitz New Light on the Fate of the Hungarian Jews Samuel Crowell

According to the standard anti-revisionist history of the Holocaust, from May to July of 1944 approximately 430,000 Jews from wartime Hungary were deported to Auschwitz, and about ninety percent of them immediately selected out, gassed, and burned. Most of the remainder were held as "transport Jews" (Durchgangsjuden) until their transfer to other camps.[see note] The support for this version derives from several contemporaneous sources in Hungary that indicate the deportation of about 430,000 Hungarian Jews in May-July 1944; from evidence that some Hungarian Jews were registered at Auschwitz that summer, and, as usual, a number of rather implausible eyewitness testimonies and postwar confessions.

While the above is the standard story, it is important to note that in recent years even traditional Holocaust scholars have shown that they are not completely comfortable with it.

For example, Jean-Claude Pressac, in an early edition of his second book on the crematoriums at Auschwitz (1993), argued that the number of "transport Jews" was 118,000, that is, 27 percent, rather than 10 percent, of the 430,000 deported, and in a later edition of the book argued that only between 160,000 and 240,000 Hungarian Jews were deported to Auschwitz at all.[see note] Robert Jan Van Pelt, in his expert opinion for the defense in the Irving v. Lipstadt trial, indicated his discomfort with the standard calculations, but pointedly dismissed Pressac's revisions. Van Pelt further claimed that the current numbers for the disposition of Hungarian Jews at Auschwitz -- both arrivals and those allegedly killed -- were accurate within a range of about ten percent.[see note]

In our view, the fact that Pressac, as probably the leading anti-revisionist student of Auschwitz, should have so much trouble establishing precise figures for the Hungarian Jews only goes to show how slender is the evidence which upholds the traditional narrative. No less an authority than Istvan Deak, a leading expert on Hungarian history, has recently written: "Let me note here that statistical data on such things as the number of Second Army soldiers and forced laborers, or the casualties they suffered, or the number of Hungarian Jews gassed at Auschwitz, or the total number of Jewish dead, are not much better than guesses. There exists no reliable information on these subjects."[see note]

There have been two revisionist responses to the general claim of a massive Hungarian Jewish extermination. The first, articulated by Professor Arthur R. Butz in his 1976 book, The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, is that the documentation is so slender that no revisionist is bound to accept it.[see note] In addition, Professor Butz has suggested that there may have been some manipulation of the documentary record.

The other response, recently made by Jürgen Graf, and responded to by Professor Butz,[see note] is that the number of Jews deported is probably correct, but that they were widely distributed in the concentration camps. Graf's thesis rests largely on his discovery, along with Carlo Mattogno, of records of the passage of some thousands of Hungarian Jewish women through the concentration camp of Stutthof, near Danzig. The data further indicate that some of them had earlier been in Riga, Latvia and Kovno, Lithuania. All three locations, of course, are far beyond Auschwitz. Graf also appeared emboldened by a comment of Pressac that Hungarian Jews could be found in some 386 camps.[see note]

Describing the fate of the Hungarian Jews at Auschwitz is difficult, for reasons which will be discussed below. Nevertheless, in our own research we have been surprised to find a number of approaches, and types of data, which, we believe, suggest a provisional solution. In this article, we simply want to elaborate and expand on what we consider to be the main questions concerning the Hungarian Jewish deportations, to provide some generally unused data, and to point to how the question might be ultimately settled.

The main questions seem to us to be the following: How many Hungarian Jews were deported? How many were deported to Auschwitz? After arriving at Auschwitz, to what other places were they sent? To what purpose? Is there evidence concerning Hungarian Jews that specifically contradicts the extermination claim? How many of these deportees survived the war?

The scope of the deportations

The claim that 430,000 Hungarian Jews were deported derives principally from a series of telegrams to the German Foreign Office prepared by Edmund Veesenmayer, a German bureaucrat who worked with the Hungarian government. The telegrams, issued every few days, list the number of Jews that had been deported as of that date. The telegrams do not, however, indicate specific destinations, other than that the were being sent to "the Reich." The numbers in Veesenmayer's telegrams are more or less corroborated by notes by Ferenczy, an official of the Hungarian police, or gendarmerie, as well as by the recently discovered lists of an attorney in Kosice, a Slovakian town on the main rail spur through which the trains would have traveled to Auschwitz.[see note]

The support these documents provide for a deportation on the scale alleged is not particularly compelling. First of all, we have reason to believe that Veesenmayer and Ferenczy both received their numbers from the same source: namely, the Hungarian gendarmerie. In essence, then, this evidence consists of two bureaucrats who are simply repeating information obtained from someone else, which means their numbers do not independently corroborate each other. Instead, the proper focus should be the accuracy of the original gendarmerie data.

Second, none of the evidence moves much beyond giving us numbers of deportees. We lack the kind of layered documentation such a massive movement of people would entail: railway records, memos about delays, shortages of guards or fuel, complaints about the timetable, emergencies and their resolution, and so on. It must also be said that the lists of the Hungarian attorney, which surfaced only in 1988, are not much better on detail than Veesenmayer and Ferenczy, and furthermore offer an unlikely scenario: that the trains stopped in the Slovakian town of Kosice for accurate head-counts before proceeding, that the attorney and his friend carefully recorded the date, place of origin, and numbers for each transport, and then, apparently, forgot about them for over forty years.[see note]

Still, if we accept that the deportation lists are generally accurate, an interesting statistic emerges: only about 150,000 of the deportees come from inside the boundaries of Hungary as determined by the Treaty of Trianon in 1919 and, later, after the Second World War. The rest of the deportees, including 150,000 from Transylvania, and 85,000 from Sub-Carpathia, come from areas that, while traditionally part of the Kingdom of Hungary, were under Hungarian control after Trianon only from 1938 to 1945. In other words, if the deportations were on the scale alleged, they still would have affected only about a third of the Jews of interwar or postwar Hungary, that is, about 150,000 out of a total population of 450,000. This might help explain the well-known comment of the Red Cross in its postwar report, which describes 100,000 Hungarian Jews fleeing to Budapest from the provinces in November of 1944.[see note]

In our judgment, there are certainly good reasons to question the suitability or even the veracity of the evidence offered for the deportations. The Veesenmayer and Ferenczy data represent high-level documents with no underlying support. Meanwhile, the notes of the Hungarian attorney at Kosice present an unlikely scenario, were discovered late, and, given the highly charged and partisan nature of this topic, are bound to be viewed with suspicion.

Still, we are inclined to believe that hundreds of thousands of Hungarian Jews were deported in the summer of 1944. The reason lies in three data points that we have for the population of the German concentration camp system. The first, developed by Richard Widmann in an interesting statistical study,[see note] is that the total population of the German concentration camp system in April 1944 was 280,000.

The second data point, a well-known telegram by Wilhelm Burger, indicates that by the beginning of August that population had swelled to 524,286.[see note] The third data point, a letter from Himmler dated February 20, 1945, but evidently based on data from the end of January, indicates 700,000 prisoners in the camp system, exclusive of Auschwitz and Monowitz, and including 28,000 prisoners over the age of 50, and 5,000 over the age of 60.[see note]

It follows that the growth of the German concentration camp system tracks fairly closely the influx of large numbers of Hungarian Jews, and other Jews, who would have been entering the camp system via Auschwitz at this time. However, we should keep in mind that to the extent that the Veesenmayer-Ferenczy statistics are inaccurate, any other calculations will be skewed accordingly.

To Auschwitz or Elsewhere?

Assuming that there was a general plan to deport all of the Hungarian Jews to Auschwitz, for whatever reason, we can expect that there would have been exceptions to the rule. In his writings, the father of Holocaust Revisionism, Paul Rassinier, provided an example:[see note]

Once again, my personal testimony: I refer to a group of Hungarian Jews whose convoy, originally bound for Auschwitz, had arrived at Dora at the end of May 1944. Of the 1,500 or so people of this convoy, a certain number were sent to satellite camps around Dora as soon as they arrived. How many remained with us, I do not know; maybe they filled an entire block ... After a little while, the special surveillance over them became hardly more than a facade: once in a while we could exchange a few words with them, and even have short conversations. Thus it was that we learned about their odyssey. They told us about what they had had to leave behind when they came into the camp, and, since we were old hands in their eyes, they asked if they would get it back, when, how, and so on. They had been transported from Hungary to Dora, 70 to 80 persons in a car, with all of their baggage. They had made a long periplus of six to seven days before arriving. They had been told when leaving that they were being taken to Auschwitz, and when they learned that it was at Dora that they would be unloaded, they were pleased. They told the most appalling things about Auschwitz. There were neither women nor children among them. The latter had been separated out on departure, and at the moment it did not surprise us since that is what happened to us.

Of course, as eyewitness testimony or hearsay, we cannot give too much weight to Rassinier's observation. But, as with all eyewitness testimony, it can in many cases give us an inkling of what might have occurred, not only in this case, but in others. The one detail that appears most striking is the claim that the women and children were separated out before departure: this reminds us that the Hungarian Jews were incarcerated in ghettoes, and that these ghettoes could have been the source of all kinds of numbers that would be reported by the Hungarian gendarmerie to Budapest. The second point is that the separating out of the women and children would seem to violate the whole purpose of the deportations, if that purpose was mass murder.

Strangely enough, a personal letter written just after the war was over, and which is posted on an anti-revisionist site, supports Rassinier's account.[see note] Recently translated from Hungarian, the eleven-page letter describes in great detail the experiences of a Hungarian woman during the deportations in late June 1944. On the appointed day, the Jews were gathered in a synagogue, the women to age twelve were inspected for pregnancy, and then, over the course of some ten days, they passed through a series of staging areas by truck and train until they ended up in Szeged. There, the Germans demanded a list of those Jews under the age of twelve and over the age of fifty: to the horror of the woman writing the account, her parents, in-laws, and four-year-old daughter were all placed on the list. Again according to her account, the woman managed to place herself on the list with the rest of her family, so as to share their fate. The rest of the letter describes the journey of the woman with her family to Strasshof, outside Vienna, and to Bergen-Belsen toward the end of the war. The only fatality described is the death of the woman's mother-in-law, apparently from typhus, a few days after the war was over.

Naturally, when we consider that the source of this letter is a website very hostile to revisionism, we are inclined to be skeptical of this account, and would prefer to see the letter authenticated. Nevertheless, we consider the account probably true. Moreover, there is independent corroboration: in the last days of June 1944, over 20,000 Hungarian Jews were sent to the Strasshof camp, including 5,200 from Szeged, which would have been the transport the woman described.[see note]

To sum up, it is clear that there were significant numbers of Hungarian Jewish deportees who were not sent to Auschwitz. Moreover, the selecting out of those incapable of work appears to have taken place at least in certain areas and at certain times throughout the course of the deportations, and that the deportations themselves involved the confinement and transfer of the Hungarian Jews in several different locations within Hungary. This last circumstance could also have contributed to inaccurate statistics. After Auschwitz

Those who argue for the massive gassing and burning of the Hungarian Jews at Auschwitz usually claim that there are no significant records of Hungarian Jews sent from Auschwitz to anywhere else, and rest their case on the Auschwitz Chronicle, compiled by Danuta Czech, a Polish Communist.

Most of Czech's data consists of various lists of prisoners who were registered in the camp, in various number sequences. It is assumed, of course, that most of those registered were ultimately gassed themselves, and it is furthermore assumed that any quantity of registrations presupposes a much larger quantity gassed without registration. Thus, for example, we might read that on a certain date one hundred Jews were selected from an RSHA transport from Hungary and assigned a range of inmate numbers, and that the rest were taken to the gas chambers. Such an entry might appear authoritative, but in fact usually the only source material at Czech's disposal is a list of the prisoners (in this case, one hundred) who were registered on the day in question. In short, we have no way of knowing how many Hungarian Jews were in fact sent to Auschwitz. Even so, Czech's statistics do indicate that some 26,000 Hungarian Jews were registered in the camp between May and early September 1944 (usually in the "A" series), and that another 25,000 were transferred to other camps, including 20,000 in May, June, and early July alone, usually in packets of 1,000 or more, and usually to Buchenwald and Mauthausen. The combined total, some 50,000, is the general upper bound of Hungarian Jews not exterminated on arrival.[see note]

Yet Czech's data are glaringly incomplete. The German historian Isabell Sprenger's history of the Gross Rosen concentration camp lists in an appendix a chronology of all known transports to that location.[see note] For May 16-17, 1944, that is, at the very beginning of the Hungarian deportations, we find reference to a transport of 1,500 Hungarian Jews arriving at Gross Rosen from Auschwitz. There is no record of this transport in Czech. Another transport, from May 24, lists 3,189 Hungarian Jews arriving in Gross Rosen from Auschwitz. This is not properly recorded by Czech. Still another, on June 8, records the arrival of 4,000 Hungarian Jews from Auschwitz. Again, Czech makes no mention of this transport, and, in fact, mentions no numbers for Gross Rosen at all until the fall, where a transport of 200 Hungarian Jews to Gross Rosen is recorded for September 19.

It is a certainty that the initial transport of May 16-17 was not registered at Auschwitz, indeed, it is likely that the prisoners were not even debarked from their train before being sent on. So this is not a question of double-counting. However, the fact that 1,500 Hungarian Jews would be sent to a non-extermination camp after passing through a camp supposedly designed for their extermination, and in the very first transports, strongly contradicts the assertion that the Hungarian Jewish deportations ever had mass murder as their aim. Furthermore, in reviewing the incoming transports for only one camp, out of some twenty main concentration camps, and several hundred satellite camps, we have already accounted for almost 10,000 Hungarian Jews, who would normally be assumed to have been gassed and burned at Auschwitz. This points up the serious unreliability of the Auschwitz Chronicle as a source for accurate statistics.

Indeed, other sources for other camps provide further missing Hungarian Jews. For example, the records of Mauthausen indicate a shipment of 2,000 Hungarian Jews from Auschwitz on May 28, 1944, which also is not recorded by Czech.[see note] Of course, Czech also fails to record the Hungarian Jews in Riga, Kovno, or Stutthof discovered by Graf and Mattogno.

The overall approach of attempting to quantify the Hungarian Jews outside of Auschwitz would entail locating all the camps where Hungarian Jews were sent, gathering data, and then analyzing the results. For lack of time and resources, we can only make a few observations in this area. To begin with, the 386 camp figure that Graf cites from Pressac almost certainly derives from a passing comment made by Randolph Braham in his lengthy Politics of Genocide, later repeated in an article in Auschwitz: Anatomy of a Death Camp.[see note] The source of Braham's figure, cited in the first book, is an appendix to a study on Hungarian forced labor by the Hungarian historian Szabolcs Szita, which has not been translated from Hungarian. Consulting Szita's book ourselves, we find that it contains not just a list of 386 camps, but rather of over 520 locations where Hungarian Jews were held, including seventeen main concentration camps, hundreds of their satellites, and over a hundred other kinds of camps in which Hungarian Jews were imprisoned.[see note]

Some of the satellite camps in Szita's list are well known and have been the subject of special studies in English, for example, the story of the thousand or so Hungarian women sent to the Hessisch Lichtenau sub-camp of Buchenwald in order to work in an explosives factory.[see note] Of greater interest are those locations listed that are not affiliated with any concentration camp, for example, Unterlüss near Hannover, or Moerfelde-Walldorf near Frankfurt. Van Pelt indicated that large numbers of Hungarian women worked at Unterlüss,[see note] which was a subsidiary camp of Rheinmetall, while news reports inform us that 1,700 Hungarian Jewish women labored at Moerfelde-Walldorf building an airstrip for the construction firm Zueblin, after having been transferred from Auschwitz in May.[see note] Again, neither of these locations appears to be mentioned in the Auschwitz Chronicle. The fact that significant numbers of Hungarian Jews eventually were assigned outside the concentration camp system makes the numbers for Hungarian Jews derived from records of the growth of the concentration camp prisoner population seem underestimates of their actual numbers in the Reich.

Turning to the Baltics, we find that Szita has Hungarians listed in several concentration camps and labor camps throughout the region, including Kovno, Klooga, Riga-Kaiserwald, Stutthof, and several sub-camps. According to Andrew Ezergailis, author of The Holocaust in Latvia, one of these sub-camps, at Dundaga, employed between two to five thousand Hungarian Jewish women who had been transferred from Auschwitz from May 1944 on.[see note]

Overall, by following up on the data gathered by Szita and other historians of Hungarian forced labor, we find that there was a very wide distribution of Hungarians throughout the German areas of influence very soon after the deportations began. In many cases, the Hungarians at these other camps are described as having been sent from Auschwitz. It may be presumption in some cases to claim that these Hungarian Jews passed through Auschwitz, yet it seems clear that the deportations of Hungarian Jews were very extensive. This is indicated not only by the fact that Hungarian Jews were distributed to so many different locations, but also because it was typical to dispatch concentration camp inmates for labor in packets of 500 to 1,000.[see note] The Purpose of the Deportations

The idea that the Hungarian Jews were deported simply for the purpose of killing them would seem to be a strategy contrary to the interests of the German Reich, which, by May 1944, was fighting for its life. It seems therefore reasonable to argue, as many have done, that the deportations of the Hungarian Jews are simply not credible given the priorities of the war, transport and otherwise.

Yet, if we consult the documents and the various public declarations of the time, we find unanimity about the desperate need for labor for a variety of war-related programs, and specifically for the kind of labor that the Hungarian Jews would provide. These include the remarks of Himmler, referencing the planned influx of 200,000 Hungarian Jews for labor purposes, the specific authorization of Hitler to allow these intakes, and records of the various conflicts among the various agencies desperate for labor.[see note] Among these projects were the construction of large concrete bunkers for Speer's Organization Todt, the assembly of V-2 rockets for the V-weapon campaign, the construction of defensive barriers on the eastern frontier of Austria and Czechoslovakia, the construction of fighter planes for the Luftwaffe, and many other war-related projects.[see note] These needs alone, vital to Germany's war effort, could have allowed for the prioritization of Hungarian Jewish transports of considerable size.

On the other hand, if forced labor was the purpose of the deportations, that does not very well explain the reason why considerable numbers of women, children, and the elderly also appear to have been deported. Part of this appears traceable to conflicts with the Hungarian government. We should keep in mind that many Hungarian Jewish men wore the uniform of the Hungarian Labor Service, and, while discriminated against, tens of thousands of them lost their lives serving their country, which was, after all, Germany's ally in the war against the Soviet Union. It also appears that the Labor Service underwent significant expansion at the time of the deportations, and that thousands more Hungarian men avoided deportation in this manner.[see note] (This too may have contributed to statistical inconsistencies.) These drafts of Hungarian Jewish men help explain why the Germans were initially surprised to be receiving so many women, and others incapable of work. Still, it is known that Himmler and Oswald Pohl, chief of the concentration camp system, soon found a way to integrate the Hungarian women into the German war economy.[see note]

But what of those Hungarians incapable of work? No doubt interned because of the unjust suspicion that they, as Jews, would foment rebellion before the advancing Red Army, there is plenty of evidence that they were not exterminated as a matter of course. We have seen, for example, Himmler's reference to over 30,000 concentration camp inmates outside of Auschwitz over the age of fifty: it is a certainty that the vast majority would be Jewish prisoners, and probably included many incarcerated at Theresienstadt. At Theresienstadt itself, we find a record of 1,150 Hungarian Jews, apparently transferred from Auschwitz, and by definition non-workers: twelve had died by the end of the war.[see note] We can also find records of Hungarian Jews incapable of work -- by definition, including children and the elderly -- at Bergen Belsen, where there were at least two camps for Hungarian Jews, and at Buchenwald, which had a block set aside for over a thousand children of various nationalities. Even at Auschwitz itself, as Graf has noted, significant numbers of children and elderly were liberated by the Red Army, including Hungarian Jewish children mentioned by name. This is the proper context for the famous photograph showing a group of smiling Hungarian Jewish women, liberated at Dachau with their newborn babies on their laps.

Calculating the Survivors

The final question one can pose about the Hungarian Jews deported in the summer of 1944 is the most difficult to answer, because, as we have seen, there is some uncertainty about the accuracy of the numbers of the deportations.

The first thing we have to recognize is that the losses of Hungarian Jews are usually calculated globally: that is, the problem is looked at in terms of the overall losses of the Hungarian Jewish community, but not in terms of how many survived the summer 1944 deportations. Indeed, the latter question is never addressed in detail. At the same time, there are several categories of Hungarian Jewish losses related to the war or to the deportations of fall 1944 that have nothing to do with the deportations to Auschwitz, and the combined totals are hard to analyze. There is a canonical number of Hungarian Jewish victims of the Holocaust, but instead of six million it is six hundred thousand, generally rounded up from about 560,000. The ultimate source of this number is calculations of the World Jewish Congress made in 1945 and 1946.[see note]

The statistics concerning Hungarian Jews have been extensively analyzed over the past decade by the Hungarian historian Tamas Stark. There are three main aspects of Stark's analysis. First, he is wary of official statistics, knowing full well their potential political import, and so tries to compare them with any other known sources. Second, Stark tries to address the gaps in the statistical record by itemizing the many reasons for Hungarian Jews not to have returned home, or to have been unable to do so, after the Second World War. Third, Stark is the only expert in this field to stress the fact that after the war large numbers of Hungarians indeed did not return home, but instead emigrated to other countries.

Stark's work has exposed him to some criticism, and perhaps because of this he has revised his calculations. Originally, he estimated the total loss of life for Hungarian Jews at 390,000, but in a recent study he has raised that number to about 500,000.[see note] The point, as far as our analysis is concerned, however, is that any increase in the number of Hungarian survivors generally increases the number of Hungarian Jews who survived the summer 1944 deportations.

To put it another way: it is generally conceded that about 500,000 Hungarian Jews were deported in 1944: these include the assumed 430,000 deported May through July, and another 50,000 or more deported to the Austrian border in the fall.[see note] Of this number, it is universally conceded that about 100,000-120,000 returned from deportation. Assuming a proportional split, this means that about 20 percent of the Hungarian Jews deported to Auschwitz returned home.[see note]

Yet Stark points out that there were reasons not to return home, and, if returning home, not to declare one's Jewish identity. First, there was the psychological dread of returning home and failing to find one's family.[see note] Second, there was the fact that the Red Army typically seized Hungarian Jewish men and dragged them off to forced labor in the Soviet Union (Stark estimates that 30,000 Hungarian Jews went from one dictatorial system to the other: they were never heard from again).[see note] Third, Hungarian Jews were on a path of heavy assimilation even before the war, and there would be little reason for many to return to the community after the war, especially in view of the severe persecution Jews had just endured.[see note] Yet precisely such a failure to be counted in the Jewish community in the postwar period would have contributed to artificially low numbers of returnees. The World Jewish Congress, after all, was interested in determining the size of Jewish communities, not in counting Jews by racial criteria as was the case under the Nazi, Horthy, or Arrow Cross regimes.

In the absence of reliable statistics, Stark did considerable research in contemporary newspapers and other periodicals, noting especially references to Hungarian Jews who remained in Germany or in other countries and who did not return. His research suggests that a considerable number, perhaps as many as 100,000 or more, remained outside of Hungary and made their homes elsewhere.[see note] It is by settling on a conservative figure of 50,000 that Stark arrives at his overall figure of approximately 500,000 Jewish deaths among the Hungarian population in the Second World War.

However, Stark's calculation essentially increases the number of those Hungarian Jews who survived the summer 1944 deportations by 50,000 as well, which in turn means that over one third survived. If his higher estimate of 100,000 Hungarian expatriates is used, that percentage rises to over 45 percent. With such numbers, one cannot sustain the contention that the Hungarian Jews were deported in the summer of 1944 with the intention of exterminating them.


The issue of the fate of the Hungarian Jews deported to Auschwitz has long dominated Holocaust studies, because the deportations took place in the midst of a large-scale media campaign in which the Allies and several Zionist groups protested the deportations even before they began.[see note]

Although the current narrative continues to hold that vast numbers of Hungarian Jews were gassed and burned at Auschwitz, the evidence we have consulted contradicts that notion. Specifically, we can now provisionally answer the questions with which we began.

It appears that hundreds of thousands of Hungarian Jews were deported to Auschwitz. These included Jews of all ages and conditions. However, it seems likely that the figures quoted -- 430,000 -- could well be inaccurate, if only because these figures might have derived from one of the early stages of the deportation process before the deportations beyond Hungary's borders actually took place. Perhaps some tens of thousands were not deported beyond their staging areas; perhaps, too, some thousands of Hungarian men were drafted into the labor service from these areas. It is further possible that some thousands or tens of thousands managed to escape, at least temporarily, to Romania. It is interesting to quote Adolf Eichmann in this regard:[see note]

All told, we succeeded in processing about half a million Jews in Hungary. I once knew the exact number that we shipped to Auschwitz, but today I can only estimate that it was around 350,000 in a period of about four months. But, contrary to legend, the majority of the deportees were not gassed at all but put to work in munitions plants. That is why there are thousands of Jews happily alive today who are included in the statistical totals of the "liquidated." Besides those we sent to Auschwitz, there were thousands and thousands who fled, some secretly, some with our connivance. It was child's play for a Jew to reach relative safety in Rumania if he could muster the few pengö to pay for a railroad ticket or an auto ride to the border. There were also 200,000 Jews left in a huge ghetto when the Russians arrived, and thousands more waiting to emigrate illegally to Palestine or simply hiding out from the Hungarian gendarmerie.

If the number of deportees was appreciably lower than 430,000, and if they managed to remain in the provinces, or in nearby Romania, that would help explain where the 100,000 Jews came from who fled to Budapest in November of 1944. Incidentally, Stark also discusses this flight, which he claims took place from Sub-Carpathia and Transylvania, that is, areas supposedly cleared out by the May-July deportations.[see note] Yet, if the number of deportees was 350,000, as Eichmann claims, or even lower, as Pressac has argued, there still would be ideological reasons to suppress such data. As the controversy over Stark suggests, the Hungarians are as committed to the number of six hundred thousand Hungarian Jewish victims almost as much as Holocaust historians are committed to the six million statistic.

Whatever the number, the Hungarian Jews, from the moment they began arriving at Auschwitz, were sent to other camps: Gross Rosen, Buchenwald, Mauthausen, Stutthof, and hundreds of other camps. This influx of Hungarian Jews into the concentration camp system directly tracks the statistical growth of the concentration camp system as a whole. Nor should we forget that by being sub-contracted to private firms, it seems likely that some thousands of Hungarian Jews would never have appeared on the concentration camp rolls at all. At the same time, our analysis indicates that there are yawning gaps in the canonical record of comings and goings at Auschwitz.

The Hungarian Jews deported to these various other camps were involved in labor that was of critical importance to Germany's war effort and moreover there was considerable competition for their services. It is not believable that any Hungarian Jew capable of work would have been exterminated.

Nor is it believable, on the basis of the data reviewed, to assert that Hungarian Jews incapable of work were automatically killed. While the saving of Hungarian Jewish lives is usually explained by the intercession of this or that saintly diplomat or businessman, there is no easy way to get around the fact that there were significant numbers of Hungarians who did not work in several camps, and who survived the war. This is not to deny the idea that some portion of non-working Hungarian Jews could have been killed: it simply means that the known exceptions are varied enough that the thesis of an extermination policy, let alone an extermination plan, is decisively undercut. Nor should we forget the survival rates implied by Stark's analyses, suggesting that 35 percent to 45 percent of the 430,000 deported survived the war.

But what of the missing Hungarian Jews who apparently did not survive? What happened to them, if they were not exterminated? The question brings us back to the statistical measurements of returnees, and émigrés, measured by Stark in the range of 150,000 to 200,000 or more, versus the canonical statistic of 430,000 deportees, or lower estimates of 350,000 by Eichmann and 160,000 to 240,000 by Pressac. Using Stark's low estimate of returns and emigrations, along with Pressac's low estimate of deportations, we could arrive at a death rate among the May-July deportees of about ten thousand, which strikes us as absurdly low.

We have to remind ourselves that there were many ways for people to die in the closing months of the Second World War, and not just in the concentration camps. Disease no doubt played a large role, as we know that tens of thousands of camp prisoners died in the last months of the war and even after from various epidemics, tuberculosis, and above all, typhus. Nor can we ignore the high death rate in the concentration camp system overall, brought on by poor nourishment and overwork in a psychologically debilitating atmosphere, a death rate that was always high but which reached catastrophic levels in 1945. Combined with Allied bombings, Soviet ship sinkings, and random shootings by panicked soldiers or SS, we could easily account for most of the missing Hungarian Jews, even if we set that number at 150,000 or more.

Still, we cannot exclude the possibility that some number were killed at Auschwitz, although, bearing in mind the many other dangers Hungarian Jews would encounter during the war, and the estimated numbers of returnees and émigrés, that number could not have been more than a few tens of thousands at most. Here we have to keep in mind the iron rule imposed by the limits of the Birkenau crematoriums. Rather than saying that 90 percent of the Hungarian deportees died at Auschwitz, it should be possible to argue the reverse: the evidence suggests that 90 percent of the Hungarian Jews did not die at Auschwitz, regardless of their ultimate fate.

When the Auschwitz death toll was officially revised from four million to about one million in 1989, the traditional figure of 400,000 Hungarian Jews killed at Auschwitz assumed greater importance than ever before. The Hungarian Jews, now 40 percent of the total, became the largest group of Jews said to have been exterminated in that camp. However, the evidence we have reviewed makes it clear that the Hungarian Jews deported in the summer of 1944 were deported for labor in war-important industries, and they were in fact employed in such labor after being transferred from Auschwitz to hundreds of other camps. In addition, we have seen evidence that significant numbers of Hungarian Jews unfit for labor were not in fact exterminated. We have also seen the overall population of the camp system increase, commensurate to the influx of large numbers of Hungarian Jews. Finally, we have seen reasonable statistics that indicate that 45 percent or more of these deportees survived, in spite of the catastrophic death rates that prevailed in the camps at the end of the war.

Determining the fate of the Hungarian Jews at Auschwitz with some finality would entail a detailed analysis of the records of all of the camps and sub-camps of the concentration camp system, as well as all the private and government agencies which had a declared interest in Hungarian Jewish labor in 1944. Probably such materials could be located in the various files pertaining to forced labor during the National Socialist period not only in German archives, but also in those of Washington, Budapest, and above all, the former Soviet Union. It seems likely that such records exist, given the scope of some of the material we have reviewed. We expect these records will continue to be uncovered and used, especially by Hungarian historians, as they try to reconstruct the wartime fate of their countrymen, Jewish and non-Jewish.

It seems to be generally recognized today that the mass exterminations that are supposed to have occurred in "extermination camps" such as Auschwitz have been manipulated for political and ideological purposes.[see note] This does not make the extermination claims automatically false, but what such abuse does accomplish is to reduce the people involved to passive statistics, fit only for posthumous martyrdom.

We say this because the reduction of death statistics at extermination camps is frequently said to rob the victims of their dignity in death. But on the contrary, as the studies of Szita and Stark suggest, a more detailed and nuanced study of the experiences of a people does not diminish, but rather enhances, the dignity and the tragedy of their individual lives. And, as such studies tell us what did happen, they also make it rather clear what did not.

It follows from the evidence at our disposal that 430,000 Hungarian Jews were not gassed and burned at Auschwitz, and that the death toll for that camp should again be revised downward by about 40 percent. But it also follows that historians have barely begun to grasp the fate of Hungary's Jews in the Second World War. Notes

1. The general estimates of Hungarian Jewish casualties come from Randolph L. Braham, The Politics of Genocide: The Holocaust in Hungary (Boulder, CO: Columbia University Press, 1994), p. 792, and László Varga, "The Losses of Hungarian Jewry," in Randolph Braham, ed., Studies on the Holocaust in Hungary, East European monographs, no. 301 (Boulder, CO: Columbia University Press, 1990), pp. 256-265. Of an estimated 509,000 deportees, Varga reckons 383,000 died (p. 262), and gives remarkably low estimates for emigrants, and survivors who did not return (5,000 for each of the se two categories). These estimates were repeated by Robert Jan Van Pelt in his expert report for the Irving v. Penguin/Lipstadt trial (pp. 46-48). His expert opinion, though unpublished, can be found both on Irving's website (www.fpp.co.uk) and a site maintained on Deborah Lipstadt's behalf (www.holocaustontrial.com). 2. Detailed in Van Pelt's expert opinion, pp. 47-48, the changes occurred between the original French version, Les Crématoires d' Auschwitz, and the Italian and German editions of Pressac's book. 3. Van Pelt, op. cit., p. 48. 4. István Deák, "A Fatal Compromise? The Debate over Collaboration and Resistance in Hungary," in István Deák, Jan T. Gross, and Tony Judt, eds., The Politics of Retribution in Europe (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2000), p. 72 n. 22. 5. Arthur R. Butz, The Hoax of the Twentieth Century (Newport Beach, CA: Institute for Historical Review, 1977), pp. 133-159, 170-171. 6. Jürgen Graf, "What Happened to the Jews Who Were Deported to Auschwitz but Were Not Registered There?," and Arthur R. Butz, "On the 1944 Deportation of Hungarian Jews," in the Journal of Historical Review (JHR) 19, no. 4 (July-August 2000), pp. 4-29. 7. Graf, ibid. The source of the "386 camps" will be discussed below. 8. The various classes of data are discussed extensively in Tamás Stark, Hungarian Jews during the Holocaust and after the Second World War, 1939-1949: A Statistical Review, translated by Christina Rosznyai, East European Monographs (Boulder, CO: Columbia University Press, 2000), pp. 21ff. This is essentially a translation of his Zsidóság a vészkorszakban és a felszabadulás után, 1939-1955 [Jewry during the Holocaust and after Liberation, 1939-1955] (Budapest:1995). Szabolcs Szita also discusses the scope of the deportations in Haláleröd: A munkaszolgálat és a hadimunka történetéhez [Death Fort: On the History of the Labor Service and Military Labor] (Budapest: 1989), pp. 45ff., and provides the lists of the attorney in Kosice. 9. Stark, op. cit., pp. 24f. 10. Quoted and discussed by Butz, op. cit., pp. 139, 142ff. 11. See Widmann, "Transfers to the Reich: The unregistered inmates of Auschwitz" page 21, current issue of the JHR. 12. In this August 15, 1944, telegram, Burger also describes 90,000 Jews as part of the Hungarian action. By our interpretation, the 90,000 Hungarian Jews mentioned by Burger refers either to transit Jews not yet assigned to work or to Hungarian Jews who were incapable of work in Auschwitz-Birkenau as of that date. Because, moreover, we know that there were no further Hungarian deportations to Auschwitz later than August 15, 1944, it seems as if the actual population of the concentration camp system would be 90,000 higher, if these 90,000 were included. Braham, op. cit., p. 793, misuses this document, a misuse traceable to Danuta Czech's erroneous claim that the document refers to the population of Auschwitz only, rather than to the concentration camp system as a whole. 13. Robert N. Proctor, The Nazi War against Cancer (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1999), pp. 260, 346 n. 31, and references German researcher. Proctor assumes (p. 260) that the figure is too high for the camps alone, but the magnitude is generally accepted by most scholars, cf. Ulrich Herbert, Fremdarbeiter (Bonn: Dietz Verlag, 1999), p. 426. 14. Paul Rassinier, The Holocaust Story and the Lies of Ulysses, Costa Mesa, CA: Institute for Historical Review, 1978, p. 365 15. www.mazal.org 16. Stark, op. cit., p. 25. 17. Van Pelt, op. cit. 18. Isabell Sprenger, Gross-Rosen: Ein Konzentrationslager in Schlesien, Neue Forschungen zur Schlesischen Geschichte, vol. 6 (Köln: Böhlau Verlag,1996), pp. 335-359. 19. Szita, op. cit., pp. 217ff. 20. Braham, op. cit., pp. 792f. and "The Hungarian Jews," in Yisrael Gutman and Michael Berenbaum, Anatomy of the Auschwitz Death Camp (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1998), p. 466. 21. Szita, op. cit., pp. 281-287. To be fair, Szita also mentions some locations in Russia where Hungarian Jews of the Labor Service were employed, for example, Kiev, locations that were clearly not available as destinations by May, 1944. 22. Dieter Vaupel, "The Hessisch Lichtenau Sub-Camp of the Buchenwald Concentration Camp, 1944-45," in Braham, ed., Studies, pp.194-237. 23. Van Pelt, op. cit., pp. 26ff. 24. The Detroit News, Saturday, July 25, 1998 (Internet edition). 25. Andrew Ezergailis, The Holocaust in Latvia 1941-1944: The Missing Center (Riga:1996), p. 367. 26. Vaupel, op. cit., p. 195, for the minimum figure. 27. Himmler quoted in Wilhelm Stäglich, Auschwitz (Newport Beach, CA: Institute for Historical Review, 1986), pp. 73ff.See also Graf, op. cit., p. 13; also Albert Speer, Infiltration (NY: Macmillan, 1981), pp.289-291, and Herbert, op. cit., pp. 426-431. 28. Speer, op.cit. Szita's various books describe many aspects of Hungarian forced labor, especially for the lower Danube defense works, and for the Mauthausen complex. There are also testimony and documents about the use of Hungarian forced labor in the records of the Nuremberg Military Tribunal (NMT), especially Case 2 (the Milch case), Case 4 (the Pohl, or Concentration Camp, case) and Case 5 (the Farben case). 29. Stark, op. cit., pp. 28ff. 30. The famous exchange between Pohl and Himmler, culminating in Himmler's insistence that enough garlic be provided the Hungarian Jewish women, was recorded in documents of Case 4 of the NMT, and is cited in Braham, Politics, p. 783. 31. Terezin website, www.scrapbookpages.com/CzechRepublic/Theresienstadt/statistics.html; Stark, op. cit., p. 74, cites five to six thousand Hungarian Jews at Theresienstadt at the end of the war. 32. Braham, Politics, p. 1298; Stark, op. cit., p. 127. 33. Stark's original estimate in "A magyar zsidóság veszteségei" (The Losses of Hungarian Jewry), Historia (Budapest), no. 1-2 (1989), pp. 54-56, the later number discussed in Stark, Hungarian Jews during the Holocaust, pp. 136-138. In his original article, Stark gave rough calculations as follows (p. 56): 490,000 deportations, 360 non-returns (inferring 130,000 returns), a minimum of 50,000 who emigrated, and therefore 310,000 deaths among the deportees, or 63% mortality. 34. Other sources claim 100,000 or more deportees from Budapest in this period. However, most of the sources cited by Stark (op. cit., pp. 32-35) mention 30 to 35 thousand. Stark settles on "50-100 thousand." It is a key point, because the lower the numbers deported from Budapest, the lower the overall number of deportees, and, because the number of returnees is fixed at about 100 to 120 thousand, the higher the survival rate among the May-July deportees. 35. This is a key issue, because there is a tendency to assume that the returnees would comprise mostly those deported to the Austrian border in the fall of 1944. Szita's work, however, makes it clear that the death rate on the Austrian border was very high, and that, furthermore, the deportees from the fall were mostly from Budapest, not the provinces targeted during the May-July deportations. Stark Hungarian Jews during the Holocaust, pp. 79f., meanwhile, lists 83,000 registered returnees, of which only about 20-25% come from Budapest, which means the balance must have come from the May-July deportations. 36. Stark, Hungarian Jews during the Holocaust, p. 75, quoting a contemporary newspaper. 37. Stark, Hungarian Jews during the Holocaust, pp. 46-56, esp. 56. 38. Stark, Hungarian Jews during the Holocaust, pp. 85-86, 87, 89, esp. 90,91,93. 39. Stark (see note 33 above). 40. Compare the discussion in Butz, op. cit., and particularly the large literature concerning of the bombing of Auschwitz. 41. Life 49, no. 22, November 28, 1960, p. 109. 42. Stark discusses the influx of Hungarians, presumably including Jews, from the outlying provinces to escape the advancing Red Army, as well as the flight of provincial Jews to the capital to escape deportation. 43. E.g., Norman Finkelstein, The Holocaust Industry (NY: Verso, 2000) and Peter Novick, The Holocaust in American Life (NY: Basic Books, 2001).

About the author

Samuel Crowell is the pen name of an American writer who describes himself as a "moderate revisionist." At the University of California (Berkeley) he studied philosophy, foreign languages (including German, Polish, Russian, and Hungarian), and history, including Russian, German,and German-Jewish history. He continued his study of history at Columbia University. For six years he worked as a college teacher. Bibliographic information

Author: Samuel Crowell Title: Beyond Auschwitz Source: The Journal for Historical Review (http://www.ihr.org) Date: March/April 2001 Issue: Volume 20 number 2 Location: page 26 ISSN: 0195-6752 Attribution: "Reprinted from The Journal of Historical Review, PO Box 2739, Newport Beach, CA 92659, USA. Domestic subscriptions $40 per year; foreign subscriptions $60 per year."

(32) Stutthof An Important but Little-Known Wartime Camp

From: Monique Sulter <m.sulter@worldnet.att.net> Date: 07.02.2009 05:40 PM

Institute for Historical Review

Stutthof An Important but Little-Known Wartime Camp

Mark Weber

While Stutthof is not as well known as other wartime German camps, a close look at the history of this important internment center actually tells more about the reality of the Third Reich's "final solution" policy than studies of much better known camps such as Dachau or Buchenwald. In particular, a dispassionate look at the pattern of Jewish deportations to and from this camp, and the treatment of the inmates there, simply cannot be reconciled with a wartime German program or policy to exterminate Jews.

Stutthof (Sztutowo in Polish) was located 36 kilometers east of the city of Danzig (now the Polish city of Gdansk) in a wooded clearing near the Baltic coast at the mouth of the Vistula river. Hastily set up as an emergency internment center in September 1939, as German forces were subduing Poland, it was soon established on a more permanent basis, and in 1942 was officially designated as a concentration camp. (note).

In 1943 and 1944 it was considerably enlarged until it included three large sections encompassing an area 2.5 by 1.2 kilometers. The Stutthof camp complex eventually embraced several dozen smaller satellite camps spread across a large part of East and West Prussia. In addition to administration and general upkeep work in the camp itself, inmates were employed in nearby workshops and factories that turned out equipment and clothing for the German armed forces. Other internees worked in a camp brick factory and greenhouse, and on nearby agricultural projects, quarries, ports and airfields. Inmates could send letters and receive parcels. At the end of 1943, a new regulation prohibited punishment by beating. (note).

Until 1944 there were relatively few Jewish internees. Most of the prisoners were Poles. In the fall of 1943 several hundred Jews found in hiding in the Bialystok ghetto (after the suppression of the uprising there) were transferred to Stutthof. (note). Beginning in June 1944, large numbers of Jews began arriving at Stutthof from Auschwitz. The first shipment of 2,500 Jewish women from Auschwitz-Birkenau was soon sent on to several hundred factories in the Baltic region. Between June and October 1944, 20,000 to 30,000 Jewish women, originally from Hungary, arrived at Stutthof from Auschwitz. In addition, Jewish women originally from the Lodz ghetto also arrived at Stutthof from Auschwitz. (note).

During the summer and fall of 1944, as Soviet forces advanced toward the Baltic region, thousands of Jews, including Jewish mothers and their children, were evacuated to Stutthof from more than a dozen camps and remnant ghettos in Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia. In particular, Jews were transferred from the camps at Riga (Latvia) and Kaunas (Lithuania), and the ghetto of Siauliai (Lithuania) in July 1944. Most were evacuated by sea on scarce ships. (note).

During the second half of 1944, as Soviet forces continued their westward advance, the Germans transferred large numbers of Jews, including hundreds of Jewish children, from Lithuania and Estonia through Stutthof to Auschwitz. (note). Many of these evacuees were Jews who had earlier been deported to the Baltic region from Germany as part of the "final solution" policy of mass deportation to occupied Soviet territories in the "East." (note).

These transfers to Stutthof are difficult, if not impossible, to reconcile with a German policy to annihilate Europe's Jews. If there had been such an extermination policy, it is particularly difficult to understand why Jews from the Baltic region -- all of whom were supposedly doomed -- were evacuated on Germany's overtaxed transportation system instead of being killed on the spot. The fact that many of the Jews evacuated by the Germans from the Baltic area to Stutthof were unemployable children is particularly difficult to reconcile with a general extermination policy. (note).

This new influx dramatically changed the camp's character. By late 1944, Jews made up about 70 percent of the inmate population. Russians constituted about 20 percent, and other nationalities made up the remaining ten percent. (note). The camp was divided into separate male and female compounds. Most of the inmates were reportedly young, above all Jewish girls and young women between the ages of 13 and 22. There was a separate barracks block for Jewish boys below the age of 17. As a rule, Jews did not have to work, although some were occasionally assigned to farm work on the outside. (note).

As a result of the chaos and tremendous overcrowding brought about by the worsening military situation, conditions in the camp deteriorated badly during 1944. Although new arrivals were routinely subjected to a quarantine period of two to four weeks, an epidemic of typhus broke out in the second half of the year. The death rate rose dramatically and reached a high point at the end of that year, when nine percent of the total inmate population reportedly died during December 1944. Besides typhus, inmates fell victim to enteric fever and hunger. (note).

Camp administrators did what they could under the almost impossible conditions to save lives. Hospital facilities for inmates were greatly expanded, and eventually took up a whole complex of barracks. Inmate physicians and nurses, as well as SS medical personnel, worked in these facilities, which were divided into 12 departments. Unfortunately, care for sick internees was severely limited by a serious lack of medicines and proper instruments. (note). In mid-January 1945, there were about 50,000 Stutthof inmates, about half of whom were in the main camp. There were 29,000 Jewish internees, including nearly 26,000 women. (note).

On January 25, 1945, with Soviet forces only a few kilometers away and the sound of gunfire audible in the distance, camp commandant SS Major Paul-Werner Hoppe, acting on higher instructions, ordered a general evacuation of internees to the interior of the Reich. Sick inmates, as well as a group needed to dissolve the camp, were to remain behind, he added. (note). Israeli Holocaust historian Yehuda Bauer has acknowledged the difficulty of reconciling this evacuation order with an extermination policy. At a 1981 conference, he asked rhetorically: "What was their [the Germans'] intention? Why did the SS march these people away? ... Why did the commander of the camp in Stutthof give an order in January 1945 that everybody was to march except for the sick?" (note).

Coming as it did in the middle of winter, this mass evacuation in groups of fifteen hundred each was a terrible ordeal that claimed many thousands of lives. The ten-day march was carried out in snow and freezing temperatures, with very little food or adequate shelter. One Polish historian has estimated that 30,000 died during this evacuation trek. (note). One group of evacuees was rescued by Soviet forces in February 1945, but many in this group died after their liberation. (note).

Stutthof's prisoners were not the only ones to endure this terrible calamity. During this same period, hundreds of thousands of German civilians, most of them women and children, as well civilians of other nationalities, were slowly making their way westward in the snow and freezing weather. Many of these people also died during the winter trek. (note).

In March and April 1945, Soviet war planes repeatedly attacked the Stutthof camp. A bomb that hit the Jewish hospital on March 26, 1945, killed 28 and wounded 35. (note). During the following weeks, Soviet air and artillery strikes became more frequent. By April 20, 1945, a former Jewish inmate later recalled (note).

Stutthof was bombarded from the air and ground. The bombing went on day and night.... The Stutthof camp was enormous and from one end to the other it was burning down from the air attacks. Countless numbers of Katzetler [inmates] were killed by the bombs. I myself was lucky, because a bomb hit our ward and three-quarters of the sick were killed or wounded.

Evacuation by Sea

In late April 1945, with Stutthof now cut off from unoccupied Germany except by sea, it was finally decided to evacuate the 3,000 or so Jewish women still remaining in the camp. One inmate who was evacuated on a cargo ship later recalled her terrible ordeal: (note).

We sailed and sailed and went into ports many times. Which, I can't remember. But no port would let us stay because there was a yellow flag flying from the top, meaning the ship was supposed to be carrying people with contagious diseases on board. ...At every port, the captain declared that he was carrying women refugees and asked permission to unload them.

But time and time again they were turned away, although at one port some German soldiers gave them some bread. With almost no water or food, the ship drifted for eleven days from one port to another. During this terrible period, Allied planes twice attacked the unarmed vessel, killing many of the Jews on board. During a third bombing attack, which came while the ship was anchored outside of Kiel harbor and only a day before the arrival of British troops there, the vessel caught fire and sank. Many died in the flames or during the mad scramble to get on deck, and others drowned. One survivor recalls that all but 33 of the 2,000 Jewish women on board perished.(note)

The final evacuation from Stutthof took place on April 27, 1945. Under attack from Soviet warplanes, the prisoners were loaded onto several barges at nearby Hela harbor, which were then towed westward to territory still under German control. One barge, packed with sick inmates, was destined for Kiel. Others were taken to the port town of Neustadt near Lübeck.(note) One Polish historian has estimated that 3,000 of the Stutthof internees who were evacuated by sea lost their lives in the ordeal.(note)

Not all of Stutthof's inmates were evacuated. Hundreds who were not able to move were left behind in the camp, which remained in German hands as part of the fiercely defended Danzig enclave until it was surrendered to Soviet forces on May 10, 1945.(note)

Gas Chamber Allegations

Some historians have insisted that prisoners were killed at Stutthof in a camp gas chamber.(note) According to a 1985 statement by Munich's Institute for Contemporary History "more than one thousand" people were killed in a Stutthof gas chamber.(note) However, the evidence cited for homicidal gassings at Stutthof is meager and not very credible. The camp's "gas chamber" building, which is still intact, is a small brick structure about two and a half meters high, five meters in length, three meters wide. American historian Konnilyn Feig has written that it looks "almost like a toy." Polish officials have seriously claimed that the Germans gassed one hundred persons at a time in the chamber (that is, six or seven persons per square meter). Homicidal gassings with Zyklon were supposedly carried out intermittently between June and December 1944 in this chamber.(note)

Polish historian Krzysztof Dunin-Wasowicz believes that this building was neither designed nor built as a homicidal gassing facility. In an essay published in a semi-official work about the alleged homicidal "gas chambers," he writes that this building was built as a (non-homicidal) gas chamber for treating clothes. However, he goes on to claim that this it was sometimes also improvisationally used to kill people. ("Originally the gas chamber was built as a room for delousing clothing, and it continued to be used for this purpose, too, for as long as it existed.")(note)

Interestingly, the "gas chamber" building is not at all hidden or camouflaged, nor is it disguised as a shower. Therefore, if it had actually been used as a homicidal gassing facility, prospective victims apparently would have been under no illusion about the fate that awaited them. It is worth noting that the Germans in charge of the camp never made any effort to destroy or dismantle Stutthof's supposed "extermination facility," which is difficult to believe if, in fact, it had been a execution gas chamber. (note).

A West German court that heard "eyewitness testimony" about homicidal gassings at Stutthof declared in its 1964 verdict that "with regard to the gassings a positive determination was likewise not possible." Evidence given by several supposed witnesses of gassings was found to be dubious or not credible.(note) Raul Hilberg makes no mention of homicidal gassings at Stutthof in his detailed three-volume Holocaust work. Two other prominent Holocaust historians, Lucy Dawidowicz and Nora Levin, likewise said nothing about the camp's alleged extermination facility.

Estimates of Victims

According to Polish historian Czeslaw Pilichowski, director of Poland's "Central Commission for the Investigation of German Crimes," of the 120,000 people (Jews and non-Jews) who were ever interned in Stutthof or its satellite camps, 85,000 died. (note). Polish historian Krzysztof Dunin-Wasowicz has estimated that of the camp's 120,000 inmates, "about 80,000 of them either died or were murdered." (note). Another Polish historian gives a "conservative" estimate of 65,000 Stutthof victims. (note)

Altogether more than 52,000 Jews were interned in Stutthof and its satellite camps, according to Jewish historian Martin Gilbert and the Encyclopaedia Judaica. Only about 3,000 survived, they estimate, and add that perhaps 26,000 of the Jewish victims died or drowned during the evacuation in 1945. (note).

Although it is difficult to determine the actual number of deaths with any precision, in this regard it is important to keep in mind that the great majority of Stutthof's victims were direct and indirect victims of war, including thousands who lost their lives in Allied air attacks during the final weeks of fighting. As was also the case at Dachau, Buchenwald and other German camps, a considerable portion of those who died in the Stutthof main camp were victims of typhus and other diseases who succumbed during the final months of the war.

As we have seen, most Stutthof victims apparently lost their lives in the grim and hastily organized evacuations by foot or sea. As harsh as they were, these evacuations were not part of any extermination program. In spite of its high death rate, Stutthof was certainly not an "extermination camp," and the many deaths there were not the result of a policy or program. Notes

1. Krzysztof Dunin-Wasowicz, "Stutthof," in: I. Gutman, ed., Encyclopedia of the Holocaust (New York: Macmillan, 1990), pp. 1421, 1423. 2. Krzysztof Dunin-Wasowicz, Oboz Koncentracyjny Stutthof (Gdynia: 1966), pp. 253-254 (English-language abstract); "Stutthof," Gedenkbuch (Koblenz: Bundesarchiv, 1986), p. 1772. 3. "Stutthof," Encyclopaedia Judaica (New York and Jerusalem: Macmillan and Keter, 1971), vol. 15, p. 464; Martin Gilbert, Atlas of the Holocaust (New York: William Morrow, 1993), pp. 194-195. 4. Jean-Claude Pressac, Die Krematorien von Auschwitz: Die Technik des Massenmordes (München: Piper, 1994), p. 199. (In the earlier, French edition of this book, Pressac writes of the deportation of 40,000-50,000 Hungarian Jewish women from Auschwitz to Stutthof and surrounding area. Jean-Claude Pressac, Les Crémetoires d'Auschwitz: La Machinerie du Meurtre de Masse [CNRS Editions, 1993], p. 147.); "Stutthof," Encyclopaedia Judaica (1971), vol. 15, p. 464; Martin Gilbert, The Holocaust (New York: 1986), p. 686; M. Gilbert, Atlas of the Holocaust (1993), p. 194. 5. "Stutthof," Encyclopaedia Judaica (1971), vol. 15, p. 464; Roman Hrabar, et al, The Fate of Polish Children During the Last War (Warsaw: 1981), p. 72; M. Gilbert, The Holocaust (1986), pp. 705, 722; Encyclopaedia Judaica (1971), vol. 6, p. 917; M. Gilbert, Atlas of the Holocaust (1993), pp. 200, 207, 208, 209; Benjamin B. Ferencz, Less Than Slaves (Harvard, 1979), p. 107; "Stutthof," Gedenkbuch (1986), p. 1772; Raul Hilberg, The Destruction of the European Jews (New York: Holmes & Meier, 1985), p. 985. 6. Y. Gutman and M. Berenbaum, eds., Anatomy of the Auschwitz Death Camp (1994), pp. 417, 420. 7. Justiz und NS-Verbrechen (Amsterdam: Univ. Press Amsterdam, 1968 ff.), vol. 20, p. 600, or p. 585-6 (Verdict in 1964 Tübingen case Ks 5/63). 8. R. Hrabar, et al, The Fate of Polish Children During the Last War (1981), p. 72. 9. Olga M. Pickholz-Barnitsch, "The Evacuation of the Stutthof Concentration Camp, Yad Vashem Bulletin (Israel), No. 17, Dec. 1965, p. 37. 10. Olga M. Pickholz-Barnitsch, "The Evacuation," Yad Vashem Bulletin, Dec. 1965, p. 36. 11. K. Dunin-Wasowicz, Oboz Koncentracyjny Stutthof (1966), pp. 252, 255; Olga M. Pickholz-Barnitsch, "The Evacuation," Yad Vashem Bulletin, Dec. 1965, p. 37; Justiz und NS-Verbrechen, vol. 20, p. 600; Central Commission for Investigation of German Crimes in Poland, German Crimes in Poland (Warsaw: 1946-1947), vol. 2, p. 112. 12. K. Dunin-Wasowicz, Oboz Koncentracyjny Stutthof (1966), p. 252. 13. K. Dunin-Wasowicz, Oboz Koncentracyjny Stutthof (Gdynia: 1966), pp. 253-254; "Stutthof," Encyclopaedia Judaica, vol. 15, p. 464. 14. Hoppe order, Jan. 25, 1945. Nuremberg document NO-3796. 15. Brewster Chamberlain and M. Feldman, eds., The Liberation of the Nazi Concentration Camps 1945 (Washington, DC: USHMC, 1987), p. 92. 16. K. Dunin-Wasowicz, Oboz Koncentracyjny Stutthof (1966), p. 257; Konnilyn Feig, Hitler's Death Camps (New York: Holmes & Meier, 1981), p. 202; "Stutthof," Gedenkbuch (1986), p. 1772; M. Gilbert, Atlas of the Holocaust (1993), pp. 216-217. 17. M. Gilbert, The Holocaust (1986), p. 783. 18. See: Alfred-Maurice de Zayas, Nemesis at Potsdam: The Expulsion of the Germans From the East (Lincoln: Univ. of Nebraska, 1989; 3rd rev. ed.), and, Alfred-Maurice de Zayas, The German Expellees: Victims in War and Peace (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1993). 19. M. Gilbert, The Holocaust (1986), p. 786. 20. Isaiah Trunk, Jewish Responses to Nazi Persecution (New York: Stein and Day, 1982), pp. 322-323. 21. I. Trunk, Jewish Responses (1982), pp. 323-326. 22. I. Trunk, Jewish Responses (1982), pp. 323-326. 23. R. Hilberg, The Destruction of the European Jews (1985), p. 985; O. Pickholz-Barnitsch, "The Evacuation," Yad Vashem Bulletin, Dec. 1965, p. 37; M. Gilbert, Atlas of the Holocaust (1993), pp. 228-229. 24. R. Hrabar, et al, Fate of Polish Children (1981), p. 74. See also: M. Gilbert, The Holocaust (1986), p. 806. 25. "Stutthof," Gedenkbuch (1986), p. 1772; K. Feig, Hitler's Death Camps (1981), p. 203. 26. Eugen Kogen, et al., Nazi Mass Murder (New Haven, Conn.: 1994), pp. 190-193, and, in the original German-language edition, Nationalsozialistische Massentötungen durch Giftgas (Frankfurt: S. Fischer, 1986), pp. 263-266; The entry by K. Dunin-Wasowicz in the Encyclopedia of the Holocaust (New York: 1990), p. 1423, refers to "the camp's gas chambers" (plural). 27. Statement by the Institut für Zeitgeschichte (Hellmuth Auerbach), March 6, 1985. Facsimile in: I. Weckert, "Massentötungen" oder Desinformation, "Historische Tatsachen Nr. 24" (published by U. Walendy in 1985), p. 21. 28. E. Kogen, et al., Nazi Mass Murder (1994), p. 191 (in the 1986 German edition, Nationalsozialistische Massentötungen durch Giftgas, this is p. 263); Justiz und NS-Verbrechen (Amsterdam), vol. 20, p. 600 or p. 585-6 (Verdict in 1964 Tübingen case Ks 5/63.); K. Feig, Hitler's Death Camps (1981), pp. 192-193, 200; Central Commission..., German Crimes in Poland (Warsaw: 1946-1947), vol. 2, pp. 118-119. 29. E. Kogen, et al., Nazi Mass Murder (1994), p. 191 (in the 1986 German edition, Nationalsozialistische Massentötungen durch Giftgas, this is p. 263). 30. It has also been claimed that Jews were gassed at Stutthof with Zyklon in a rail car. See: E. Kogen, et al., Nazi Mass Murder (1994), pp. 192-193; Central Commission..., German Crimes in Poland (Warsaw: 1946-1947), vol. 2, p. 119. 31. Justiz und NS-Verbrechen (Amsterdam), vol. 20, p. 615. 32. Czeslaw Pilichowski, No Time Limit for These Crimes (Warsaw: Interpress, 1980), pp. 156-157. 33. K. Dunin-Wasowicz, Oboz Koncentracyjny Stutthof (1966), p. 255. 34. Szymon Datner, et al, Le Genocide Nazi 1939-1945 (Warsaw: 1962), p. 218. 35. "Stutthof," Encyclopaedia Judaica, vol. 15, p. 464; M. Gilbert, Atlas of the Holocaust (1993), pp. 195, 217.; According to Polish historian K. Dunin-Wasowicz, "Of the fifty thousand Jews who were brought to Stutthof, nearly all died." Source: Encyclopedia of the Holocaust (New York: 1990), p. 1423.

(33) Auschwitz: The Dwindling Death Toll

From: kurt.templin <kurt.templin@congstar.de> Date: 07.02.2009 06:24 PM Subject: TR 1/2003: C. Mattogno: Auschwitz. Fritjof Meyer's New Revisions

Please read this : http://www.vho.org/tr/2003/1/Mattogno30-37.html

(34) My brother was in the SS; I was an American GI

From: gerard@germancross.com Date: 07.02.2009 07:01 PM

In early 1944 my second oldest brother Helmuth, then 18, voluteered for the SS. He completed military training at Wildflecken. As an ironic aside, I was in Wildflecken as an American GI in 1958. Helmith decided to refuse the oath of allegiance to Hitler upon graduation of basic training. he was tried and sentenced to death by an SS Military Court. His defense attorney, a SS Colonel, succeeded in having th sentence put on hold. Helmuth was send to Stutthof. Strangely the article omits to mention that Stutthof was also used to house incalcitrants such as my brother and/or young deserters and such whose Courts martial sentences were under review. At the approach of the Russians he was transferred along with the others as outlined in the article. He ended up at Bergen-Belsen were he was liberated by British Forces. When I spoke to him via telephone before his death in 1992 (the only time I ever spoke to him - he having voluntarily disappeared from the family for personal reasons in 1951), he categorically denied any gassing claims and categorically denied any SS-violence. Such violence as occurred usually originated with the Kapos, mostly German communists who frequently beat and harassed their fellow inmates mercilessly. He told me things were awful to be sure, but conditions were the result of war time conditions, not deliberately created by the SS. I wonder why he was never called as a witness at any of the trials, even though he was listed with allied authorities as a `survivor´ of the concentration camp system. Hmm, could it be they interviewed him and did not like his story? Unfortunately he died before I was ablle to confront him man-to-man. Ger

(35) Name of one person who was gassed at Auschwitz?

From: Chris Fitzmaurice <cfitzmaurice@cox.net> Date: 09.02.2009 12:55 AM

Can you provide, with proof, the name of one person who was gassed at Auschwitz?

{end of bulletin 2}

On to the next bulletin in the debate: holocaust-debate03.html.

Back to the Holocaust Denial Debate menu: holocaust-debate.html.

Write to me at contact.html.