Leuchter: "ovens can cremate one body in 1.25 hours" - cf Continuous Loading

Peter Myers, February 9, 2009; update April 30, 2009.

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

You are at http://mailstar.net/holocaust-debate15.html .

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

Back to the previous bulletin in the debate: holocaust-debate14.html.

{start of bulletin 15}

Leuchter: "ovens can cremate one body in 1.25 hours" - cf Continuous Loading

(1) Dogmatic (and lunatic) churches - Lobby on one side, Revisionists on other (2) Leuchter's shortcomings corrected in Rudolf's study (3) Deportation, not Extermination (4) & (5) Pressac's Proof in reply to Faurisson's challenge (6) Van Pelt And Pressac (7) Himmler speeches on exterminating Jews - "never been written ... never shall be written" (8) But how could it be so?, by Paul Eisen (9) Reply to Paul Eisen - Peter M. (10) Nazi policy changed from Ethnic Cleansing to Extermination once Barbarossa faltered - Arno J. Mayer (11) What Does Holocaust Denial Really Mean? by Daniel McGowan (12) Argentina orders Bishop Williamson out (13) Pressac's Proof in reply to Faurisson's challenge; urns for the ashes (14) Relatives sue because bodies were cremated en masse (15) Leuchter: "ovens can cremate one body in 1.25 hours" - cf Continuous Loading (16) "Please remove me" - Dick Eastman, "Holocaust Denier Bigtime"

(1) Dogmatic (and lunatic) churches - Lobby on one side, Revisionists on other

From: Joe Fallisi <flespa@tiscali.it> Date: 20.02.2009 06:42 PM

Go on!

Yes, the paradox is that just the "revisionists" (that should mean to be skepical and broadminded) became themselves a kind of dogmatic (and lunatic) church. For sure the incredible, shameful repression by the Lobby is one of the reasons of that, probably the most relevant. Anyway, we're actually at this death point. To be fair and rational and persistent is the only solution.

(2) Leuchter's shortcomings corrected in Rudolf's study

From: Don <NX7933@hotmail.com> Date: 19.02.2009 10:22 AM

>The major part of that occurred in China. The Great Leap Forward, alone, > contributed 30 million to the total. The "Let 100 Hundred Flowers Bloom"
> campaign and the Cultural Revolution contributed millions more. Pol Pot
> likerwise; others too..

If the numbers from China are included then the figure is certainly more believable. I still doubt that total 100 million number. And I have certainly seen anti-communists claim that the USSR killed between 60-80 million people. Anyway, my observation is that atrocity stories are almost always exaggerated, even when they are true.

>The Inquisition did give Jews the option of converting. Some converts be
>came Conversos, and if discovered they were punished. But I believe that
> the others were left alone.

The interesting thing is that even the Nazis made exceptions for those that they considered good Jews. Even Hitler had some Jews declared "Aryan."

>"It is pointless discussing history with Holocaust deniers," Rees says. >"It would be like discussing climate change with members of the Flat Ear >th Society. My experience is that they do not want to know the answers a >nd they want to suck you in so as to publicise themselves and pretend th >is is a 'legitimate debate'. It isn't legitimate and it isn't a debate. > >"Can you 'prove' that William the Conqueror wasn't really a MartianH >ow can you 'prove' he didn't have a funny green pointed head - in fact, >isn't that almost certainly why the Normans wore those funny helmets"

This is the typical libeler tactic of ridiculing the opposition with specious comparisons, while not addressing the valid issues raised by revisionists. The revisionists have proven that the "gas chambers" could not have operated as alleged. This is supported by evidence produced by expert chemists and execution experts.

>"I loathe Judaism and I see things through that prism."

Is it really so surprising that people persecuted and jailed by the Jews, just for having a different point of view, would come to dislike Jews?

>Leuchter is (I'm pretty sure) completely discredited - see http://www.nizkor.org/faqs/leuchter/ Although his cyanide tests are significant, they were done on the rebuilt chambers where you'd not expect any residues (the Auschwitz guides don't tell you this, but the ones they show off are rather poor reconstructions after the war, they're the ones that used to say "4 million gassed here"). Leuchters results are off beam because, for physiological reasons, lice need something like 250 times the concentration of Zyklon to kill them than what humans need.

Leuchter's study had a few shortcomings, which were corrected in Rudolf's study. Nonetheless the essence of Leuchter's work is sound and the results were confirmed by Rudolf's studies.

As for the that argument about lice needing 250 times less HCN than humans to be killed... This is an absurd argument that has been addressed by revisionists.

Here are the concentrations of HCN compounds in the alleged execution gas chambers, in the delousing chambers and in an ordinary Bavarian farmhouse:


> Table 3: Cyanide Concentrations in the Walls of 'Gas Chambers' and Delousing Chambers of Auschwitz & Birkenau

{I can't reporoduce that table; visit the link to see it}

As can be observed, the concentration of HCN compounds is between 1,000 and 10,000 times higher in the delousing chambers than in the alleged extermination gas chambers. Indeed, the concentrations found in the alleged extermination gas chambers are lower than that found in the Bavarian farmhouse (where no exterminations are alleged).

A difference of this magnitude cannot be explained away with the argument that humans require less HCN to be killed than do lice. Further, this ignores the fact that in order to kill 100% of the victims, the Nazis would have needed to use a high concentration of HCN, much higher than the minimal level that is lethal to humans. Further yet, if the "eyewitness" accounts are to be believed and the Nazis completed a gassing in 15 minutes, then the concentrations of HCN used must have been astronomical. This is something that even the libelers admit to:

> However, Dr. Green makes some concessions which are important to note: 1. He agrees that basically all witnesses attest to very short execution times, indicating a rather high concentration of HCN used.

What concentrations of HCN are fatal in humans? A concentration of 0.02% by volume can be fatal. However, to ensure death of even the strongest and best-constituted people within 10 minutes, a concentration of 0.5% by volume is necessary. If the Nazis had HCN extermination gas chambers, this is the minimal concentration that they would have needed:


> Table 2 shows which concentration of HCN in air can be rapidly fatal to humans. Naturally these values are not the results of experiments on humans, but projections based, for safety reasons, on the lower safety limit. To demonstrate: a stout person weighing 100 kg (roughly 220 lbs.) must absorb approximately 100 mg HCN for this to be fatal. The respiration rate of a person at rest is about 15 liters of air per minute.[85] Given a HCN concentration of 0.02%/vol. (approximately 0.24 mg/liter), the victim must breathe in about 416 liters of air before he has absorbed the fatal dose of HCN. At 15 liters per minute, this would take just under half an hour. If he has a robust constitution, he may survive even this exposure time. If, however, one postulates a sensitive person of only 50 kg body weight (approximately 110 lbs.), whose respiration rate has increased to 40 liters per minute due to hard work or excitement, then the fatal 208 liters of air will have been breathed in by this person within 5 minutes. These mathematical examples show that safety guidelines are always set in such a way as to protect even the smaller and weaker persons from harm under a kind of worst case scenario. Also, the specifications given in the literature, "immediately" and "rapidly fatal", are so indefinite as to be unsatisfactory.
> The limiting values look very different when the requirement is that even the most robust among the hypothetical victims must be dead after a few minutes.[86] Naturally the concentration required for this greatly exceeds the values cited in Table 2. It could be determined accurately only by mass screening, which of course is not an option. The only data available here are those that have been collected in the course of executions with HCN that have been performed in the United States. A review of the conditions, based on several publications in the USA about that subject concluded that it takes at least 10 minutes to kill a victim, if it is immediately subjected to the full concentration of around 0.5 %/vol.[87] In other words, concentrations more than ten times greater than that cited as "immediately fatal" in Table 2 are necessary to safely kill all executees in the United States. From cases of accidental poisoning we also know that even victims who were exposed to great overdoses die only after a surprisingly long period of unconsciousness and subsequent respiratory arrest.[88]

In its lice argument, Nizkor, no doubt, is using the lower concentration that can be fatal, instead of the 100% fatality concentration.

However, due to the characteristics of the fumigant Zyklon B, the Nazis would have needed to use even higher concentrations than that. Zyklon B was designed to kill insects, not humans. It was designed to be placed in a structure, and to let the poison soak for 24 hours or more. As such, Zyklon B released the HCN slowly over a period of hours. Zyklon B was not designed to kill humans in a matter of minutes.

> 3.2. The Fumigant Zyklon B
> Insects and especially their eggs are considerably less sensitive to HCN. For the most part it is necessary to expose them for several hours to rather high concentrations (0.3 to 2%/vol.) before their death is certain. Right until the end of World War Two, Zyklon B, a substance produced and licensed by the company DEGESCH of Frankfurt/Main, was of paramount importance in combating insects and rodents in food storerooms, large-capacity transports (trains, ships), public buildings, barracks, prisoner-of-war camps, concentration camps, and of course for hygiene and for disease control in general in many countries around the world.[92] The Zyklon B allegedly used for gassing human beings consisted of lumps of gypsum mixed with starch 1/4" to 1/2" in diameter and soaked with hydrogen cyanide.[93] The evaporation of the poison gas from its carrier proceeds rather slowly. The characteristics of HCN evaporating from the carrier substance were documented in 1942 by an employee of DEGESCH.[94] On dry air of 15°C (59ºF), HCN evaporated from the carrier as indicated in Graph 1, i.e., it took 1.5 to 2 hours until 90% of the HCN had been released. > > Graph 1: Speed of vaporization of HCN from the carrier substance of Zyklon B (gypsum carrier) at various temperatures and finely dispersed, according to R. Irmscher/DEGESCH.[94] (click on picture to enlarge) > > At lower temperatures this process slows down at a rate proportional to the decreasing vapor pressure of the HCN. It is worth noting that according to Irmscher the evaporation rate decreases remarkably if the surrounding air has a high relative humidity, as it must be expected in unheated underground rooms, filled with many human beings. The reason for this is that the Zyklon B carrier cools down while HCN evaporates. Subsequently water from the surrounding damp air condenses on the carrier. Since HCN is extremely soluble in water, a wet carrier would release the remaining HCN only very slowly. > > For future reference, we shall point out the probability that at a temperature of 15° C (59ºF), in a highly humid environment, a maximum of not more than 10% of the HCN will be released by the carrier substance during the first five, probably even ten minutes.

Thus, only 10% of the HCN, would have been released by the Zyklon B cannisters in the time that the eyewitnesses say that all the victims were dead. This implies that the Nazis must have used even more Zyklon B than normally necessary to reach a lethal 0.5% concentration. The Zyklon B cannisters would have been releasing dangerous HCN at an increasing rate, right at the time that the "eyewitnesses" state that the Nazis were opening the doors to remove the bodies. The concentration of HCN would have been rapidly rising way above the 100% fatality concentration at the moment that the Nazis opened the doors.

Here is Rudolf's response to the specious argument:


> To explain the differences in cyanide content of 'gas chamber' and delousing chamber walls (a factor of 100 to 1,000), then for the homicidal gassings the product of the concentration and fumigation-time and "sponge" factors must have been lower by at least a factor of 1,000 to 10,000 in order to make up for the greater absorptivity of the damp basement walls. Therefore, even if only a tenth of the quantity of HCN normally used for delousing had been used for the homicidal gassings, the duration of the gassing process could nevertheless not have exceeded one-sixhundredth to one-sixthousandth of the time allowed for delousing. Even if the time for delousing is generously set at 12 hours, this means that the execution gassings could have taken from just over 0.1, to 1 minute at most. And what is more, no residual poison gas could have remained in the chamber after this time, in other words, the facilities would also have had to be fully aired out within this time.

The difference in the concentration of HCN compounds found between the delousing gas chambers and the alleged extermination gas chambers ranges from 1,000 to 10,000. Even if the Nazis had used a lower concentration of HCN than that used in the delousing gas chambers, then the gassings would have had to take no more than a minute in order to account for such low concentrations of HCN in the alleged extermination gas chambers. And that said, it is unlikely that they used a lower concentration than they used in the delousing gas chambers because they would have wanted to make sure that 100% of the victims were dead in a matter of minutes!

>Leuchter got involved in this discussion and trial because he was busy making himself a career building gas chambers to execute
>US prisoners sentenced to death - for which he wasn't really a bit qualified. These are not historians, they're profiteers.

Leuchter had a career as the foremost gas chamber designer in the USA, until the Zionists destroyed his career. There are many professions where one doesn't need a formal degree to practice. Traditionally, a formal degree in engineering has not been required to design gas chambers. In any case, the fact that Leuchter designed such gas chambers, and had such clientelle, made him a de facto gas chamber engineer, regardless of formal education. This made him a qualified expert to evaluate the alleged Nazi gas chambers.

And on a related matter, I have noticed that the libelers often try to deny the qualifications of the revisionists, in ad-hominem style attacks. They attack the person instead of the argument. For instance, you Peter, questioned the qualifications of the revisionist doing the ground penetrating radar studies. One of your correspondents questioned Leuchter's. But this kind of ad-hominem argumentation can go both ways. Jean Claude Pressac, for example, was a pharmacist. He had no qualifications in chemistry, which Germar Rudolf did have. What qualifications does Hilberg have in physical anthropology, or Deborah Lipstadt in chemistry? When the libelers resort to ad-hominem attacks (and yes, libel) it is because they have run out of evidence and logical arguments and instead try to label the opponent as "Nazi" or as unqualified, as if this had any relevance to the quality of the evidence and arguments presented.

Reply (Peter M.)

Van Pelt dealt with Leuchter's points in the Van Pelt Report to the Lipstadt/Irving trial, which I sent out a few days ago.

A gas chamber with ventilation will have much less residue than one without. See the trial transcript:


[The Van Pelt Report]: Electronic Edition, by Robert Jan van Pelt

IX The Leuchter Report

... First of all it is necessary to point out some of the assumptions that led Leuchter to assume that their would be residual cyanide, in the form of ferro-ferri-cyanide, in the walls of the Auschwitz gas chambers. In the second Zündel trial, Leuchter admitted that one should not expect any residual cyanide in the walls of American gas chambers.

[Pearson]: "You'd agree with me that the purpose of a ventilation fan is to remove the gas from the--the place where the gas is at. [Leuchter]: "That is true."
Q.: "And it will have a bearing on what traces are present at some later date. Isn't that right?"
A.: "That's very true."
Q.: "Very True."
A.: "Yes."
Q.: "Now, with respect to the delousing chamber, if there was no ventilation at all, we could expect high levels of cyanide traces, couldn't we?"
A.: "It depends upon how--the system we used. That's partially true, yes.
Q.: "Well, if there's not ventilation at all and there's no way for the gas to get out, then we would expect high levels of cyanide traces, wouldn't we?"
A.: "Again, counsellor, it depends upon the ventilation system."
Q.: "I'm saying no ventilation system."
A.: "Probably."
Q.: "All right. Now, if, on the other hand, the location is extremely well ventilated to get all the gas out, I suppose that's the optimum, if the ventilation system works perfectly, and would you agree with me that it's very difficult to reach perfection with respect to ventilation?"
A.: "I do."
Q.: "Although that's basically one of your engineering tasks with these modern gas chambers you produce, isn't it?"
A.: "Yes, it is."
Q.: "Do you expect that forty-five years from now, people will be able to find cyanide traces in your gas chambers?"
A.: "No, I do not." 809

(3) Deportation, not Extermination

From: bill Date: 19.02.2009 12:35 AM

This whole debate has consisted of one simple technique - arguing endlessly over details of German construction documents. In other words, all the real factors which disprove the extermination of the Jews are ignored while getting bogged down in endless technical details. Here are the simple facts that disprove the story.

(1) The German records speak only of deportation, not extermination;

(2) The Nuremberg court was a kangaroo operation run by Jews behind the scenes;

(3) The German camp records speak only of disease and epidemics, not extermination;

(4) The Jews survived the war in Soviet Russia and in European countries from which many of them were never even deported;

(5) The German camp records are supported by the forensic investigations;

(6) There are way too many "survivors" for the story to be true.

Since these points are non-rebuttable, evade the real issues and try to ressurect Jean-Claude Pressac who constantly misinterprets construction documents and takes them out of context.

(4) Pressac's Proof in reply to Faurisson's challenge

From: Ardeshir Mehta <ardeshir@mac.com> Date: 19.02.2009 01:53 AM

> The link you supplied is dead.
> I just rang a local Funeral Director, Bayside Gardens, at Hervey Bay. They advertise "Funerals & Cremations".
> I asked if morgues have Gas-tight doors.
> They said, No. Their morgue has a pull-out door and a sliding door.
> The phone number is +61741247511 if you'd like to check.

The tinyurl link I gave was to this full URL:


I got to it from the following Google entry:

Autodesk Seek - Side Opening Morgue - Refrigerators

Mopec morgue refrigerators are manufactured to last using only top-quality ... with flush mount doors and magnetic seals, making them virtually airtight. ... seek.autodesk.com/...Morgue...morgue/ H4sIAAAAAAAAAEtMT7fKTU4vSizPyMzJsfIL... - 13k - Cached - Similar pages

Try it now.

Check out also this patent for a "mobile morgue", and search for the word "airtight" in it:


There's also this, from a mortuary manufacturer:

[QUOTE] The doors are connected by very sturdy chrome plate hinges and fitted with hard chrome plated lubricated latches for opening the door. The doors are made of galvanized steel sheets, lined with stainless steel for extra protection and long life. All the doors are fitted with high quality neoprene rubber gaskets for air tight fittings. [My emphasis - A.] [END QUOTE]

The full page containing the above passage is at:


Note also that Pressac's statement doesn't tell us whether the doors in his inventory of the equipment installed for "Leichenkeller 1 / Corpse cellar [morgue] 1" are doors as those for entering a room, or doors for morgue compartments each containing one corpse. Pretty much ALL mortuary compartment doors ARE air-tight.

Reply (Peter M.);

The link still doesn't work for me.

In any case it's about a "morgue refrigerator". Refrigerators themselves are sealed, but morgues not.

You've done net-wide searches to try to back up your claim that morgues have gas-tight doors. And come up with very few hits, considering the size of the Funeral industry.

Do you think the Nazis were trying to preserve dead bodies for relatives to visit? That they had priests, rabbis and ministers coming in to give the last rites?

(5) Pressac's Proof in reply to Faurisson's challenge

From: Peter Wakefield Sault <info@odeion.org> Date: 20.02.2009 12:34 PM

It has just occurred to me that the morgue might well have been fumigated regularly, along with any lousy corpses that had been brought into it, for the protection of the morgue and crematorium staff.

(6) Van Pelt And Pressac

From: bill Date: 20.02.2009 08:09 AM

You grow more laughable by the minute. All you can do is engage in endless manipulations regarding construction documents. You persist in ignoring all the real factors. Typical blowing smoke, my boy.

Let's talk, once again, about all the real evidence you wish to ignore. Where are the documented orders for the extermination? Why did the Germans leave large numbers of Jews alone in their host countries until late in the war? Why were, and are, there so many "survivors" of this purported extermination? Why do the German camp documents speak only of typhus epidemics and delousing operations? Why do the death books not support the story? Why were these key pieces of evidence not produced at the Nuremberg Trial? Where did all the Jewish commissars in Eastern Europe come from if the Jews were exterminated? Why did the Germans use such a clumsy and ineffective method of extermination? Why did all the inmates, free laborers and underground intelligence groups operating in the camp not report what was taking place before their very eyes? Why did the camps have a hospital, a brothel, a theater and concert hall, a swimming pool, all for the use of the inmates who were supposedly being exterminated? Why did Heinrich Himmler order that the death rate in the camps be reduced "at all costs"? Why did Adolf Hitler state that he wanted the solution of the "Jewish problem" delayed until the end of the war? There are innumerable basic questions like these you are simply ignoring.

So why do you go on endlessly quoting Jew bought and paid for liars like Pressac and Van Pelt whose only job is to ignore the real questions? Are you covering up Peter because you are a Jew? Let's take up the real issues and cease and desist with the confuse-the-issue bullshit.

(7) Himmler speeches on exterminating Jews - "never been written ... never shall be written"


Famous speeches by Heinrich Himmler

"To have gone through this, and at the same time, apart from exceptions caused by human weaknesses, to have remained decent, that has made us hard. This is a chapter of glory in our history which has never been written, and which never shall be written; since we know how hard it would be for us if we still had the Jews, as secret saboteurs, agitators, and slander-mongers, among us now, in every city -- during the bombing raids, with the suffering and deprivations of the war. We would probably already be in the same situation as in 1916/17 if we still had the Jews in the body of the German people." Heinrich Himmler, Poznan speech, Oct. 4, 1943

Himmler speaks to the SS troops

Heinrich Himmler's famous speech at Poznan, Poland on October 4, 1943

I want to mention another very difficult matter here before you in all frankness. Among ourselves, it ought to be spoken of quite openly for once; yet we shall never speak of it in public. Just as little as we hesitated to do our duty as ordered on 30 June 1934, and place comrades who had failed against the wall and shoot them, just as little did we ever speak of it, and we shall never speak of it. It was a matter of course, of tact, for us, thank God, never to speak of it, never to talk of it. It made everybody shudder; yet everyone was clear in his mind that he would do it again if ordered to do so, and if it was necessary.

I am thinking now of the evacuation <Evakuierung> of the Jews, the extermination <Ausrottung> of the Jewish people. It is one of those things that's easy to say: "The Jewish people will be exterminated" <wird ausgerottet>, says every Party comrade, "that's quite clear, it's in our program: elimination <Ausschaltung> of the Jews, extermination <Ausrottung>; that's what we're doing." And then they all come along, these 80 million good Germans, and every one of them has his decent Jew. Of course, it's quite clear that the others are pigs, but this one is one first-class Jew. Of all those who speak this way, not one has looked on; not one has lived through it. Most of you know what it means when 100 bodies lie together, when 500 lie there, or if 1,000 lie there. To have gone through this, and at the same time, apart from exceptions caused by human weaknesses, to have remained decent, that has made us hard. This is a chapter of glory in our history which has never been written, and which never shall be written; since we know how hard it would be for us if we still had the Jews, as secret saboteurs, agitators, and slander-mongers, among us now, in every city -- during the bombing raids, with the suffering and deprivations of the war. We would probably already be in the same situation as in 1916/17 if we still had the Jews in the body of the German people.

Listen to Himmler's speech

Heinrich Himmler's second speech at Poznan, Poland on October 6, 1943

Es trat an uns die Frage heran: Wie ist es mit den Frauen und Kindern? Ich habe mich entschlossen, auch hier eine ganz klare Lösung zu finden. Ich hielt mich nämlich nicht für berechtigt, die Männer auszurotten- sprich also, umzubringen oder umbringen zu lassen - und die Rächer in Gestalt der Kinder für unsere Söhne und Enkel groß werden zu lassen. Es mußte der schwere Entschluß gefaßt werden, dieses Volk von der Erde verschwinden zu lassen.

We came to the question: How is it with the women and children? I decided to find a clear solution here as well. I did not consider myself justified to exterminate the men - that is, to kill them or have them killed - and allow the avengers of our sons and grandsons in the form of their childreen to grow up. The difficult decision had to be taken to make this people disappear from the earth.

Speech by Heinrich Himmler to a gathering of German generals at Sonthofen on May 24, 1944

I believe, gentlemen, that you know me well enough to realize that I am not a bloodthirsty man nor a man who takes pleasure or finds sport in the harsher things he must do. On the other hand, I have strong nerves and a great sense of duty - if I do say so myself - and when I recognize the necessity to do something, I will do it unflinchingly. As to the Jewish women and children, I did not believe I had a right to let these children grow up to become avengers who would kill our fathers [sic] and grandchildren. That, I thought, would be cowardly. Thus the problem was solved without half-measures. At this time -- it is one of those things peculiar to this war - we are taking 100,000 male Jews from Hungary to the concentration camps to build underground factories, and will later take another 100,000. Not one of them will ever come within the field of vision of the German people. I am convinced that things would look bleak for the front that has been built up to the east of the Government General if we had not resolved the Jewish problem there, if, for example, the ghetto in Lublin, or the massive ghetto in Warsaw, with its 500,000 inhabitants, were still in existence. It cost us five weeks of street-fighting, using tanks and all sorts of weapons, to clean out the Warsaw ghetto last year. In that walled-in ghetto, we had about 700 bunkers.

(8) But how could it be so?, by Paul Eisen

From: Paul Eisen <paul@eisen.demon.co.uk> Date: 19.02.2009 03:49 AM

Have you read this? It's an extract from my paper "The Holocaust Wars" and it addresses the question: If the Holocaust is untrue, then how could such a falsehood have been so widely accepted?


But how could it be so?

This must surely be the establishment's strongest weapon - the sheer incredibility of the revisionist proposition. How could such a deception have taken place? How could all those survivors be so wrong in their testimonies? How could all those perpetrators be so wrong in their confessions? How could all those documents, unspecific as they are, have been falsified? Arthur Butz called his groundbreaking revisionist study "The Hoax of the Twentieth Century", but a hoax of this size and nature just defies belief. Conspiracy theories rarely convince, nor do those who propagate them, so surely the sheer absurdity of the revisionists' claim tells us all we need to know. If revisionism is to have any credibility at all, it must demonstrate how, if false, the Holocaust narrative, as we know it, came to be.

The first reports of the mass slaughter of Jews by the Germans were propagated in the spring of 1942 by Jewish and Zionist agencies and published in the Jewish press. These entirely uncorroborated reports received immediate and unmatched credibility by being broadcast (on one occasion in Yiddish) back into Poland by the BBC, and by repetition in the American press, particularly the New York Times. They spoke for the first time of extermination, but not only by gas. According to these reports Jews were being steamed to death, suffocated to death, pressed to death and electrocuted as well as being gassed. It is only later in reports compiled by the Soviet authorities, when they liberated the camps of Majdanek and Auschwitz-Birkenau in 1944 and 1945, that gassing emerges as the main method of slaughter and even later, as just one element in the shower-gas-cremation sequence which now lies at the heart of the Holocaust narrative.

It is with these Soviet reports, plus others from the World Refugee Board, that the now-familiar extermination narrative emerges. The victims disembark from trains for selection. Those designated for extermination are taken to complexes designed to look like disinfection facilities. There they are separated into sexes and led to undressing rooms where they undress. Then they are led, 600-700 at a time, into huge rooms resembling shower rooms. When the rooms are crammed full, Zyklon B pellets are dropped from apertures in the roof and, as the temperature rises, hydrogen cyanide gas is released. The victims take about five to fifteen minutes to die, watched all the time through glass peepholes in the doors by SS personnel. An interval of about half an hour is allowed for the gas to clear, assisted by a ventilation system, after which a Jewish Sonderkommando (special detachment) enters with gas masks, rubber boots, gloves, hooks and hoses to disentangle, hose down and remove the bodies. The bodies are taken to mortuaries, where gold teeth etc. are extracted with pliers, and they are then transported to crematoria where they are burned to ashes. If the number of corpses should prove to be too great for the cremation facilities, then those remaining are taken to be burned in specially designed open pits.

But if such a narrative is false, it is interesting to speculate as to how it took the form it did. Possible answers may be found in the 50-100 year history of Europe prior to the events under investigation. This period saw huge movements of people westwards, many of them Jews and many of them migrating to or through Germany. All over central and western Europe, but particularly in Germany, there was a problem with, and a fear of epidemics, particularly of typhus - and many of the receiving authorities, and particularly the German authorities, were intent of developing and implementing mass disinfection and disinfestation procedures. These included mobile and stationery mass steam and shower baths and mobile and stationery facilities for the disinfestation of clothing by gas. The gas used for disinfestation was of course hydrogen cyanide gas in the form of Zyklon B pellets.

This use of gas for delousing and disinfestation must be set against the background of the very real use of poison gas as a weapon in the Great War and in various other areas of conflict both real (such as by the Italians in Abyssinia) and imaginary (as by the Martians in The War of the Worlds radio broadcast of 1938). It should also be noted how after the introduction of gas onto the battlefield in 1915, stories of homicidal gassings of civilians began to appear in atrocity propaganda. In March 1916 the Daily Telegraph reported that the Austrians and Bulgarians had murdered hundreds of thousands of Serbians using poison gas.

At roughly the same time cremation was increasingly being used for the disposal of bodies and particularly for the mass disposal of epidemic victims. Cremation as a means of corpse disposal was widely promoted by the German National Socialist regime - a regime noted for its modern attitudes to technology - and it was also universally used in its euthanasia programme. One result of the use of cremation in these euthanasia killings, was that it fed the general suspicion that cremation was used to conceal the cause of death by gas poisoning (deaths in the euthanasia programme are now thought more likely to have been by lethal injection) which was widely (and falsely) believed to cause disfigurement. So cremation became associated with attempts to deceive the population about the cause of death. In effect, all these techniques of disinfection and cremation, considered to be at the very cutting-edge of modernism by enlightened western Europeans, were viewed by large sections of the European masses - and particularly by immigrants, usually poor, conservative and deeply superstitious, and even more particularly by the eastern Jewish masses with their additional religious concerns about mass undressing and cremation etc - with the deepest suspicion.

It's not so crazy if you put yourself in the shoes of a poor Jewish immigrant fleeing the conditions of Tsarist Russia. You arrive exhausted and terrified together with a mass of similarly exhausted and terrified folk at a German border station where you are confronted with uniformed guards and officials shouting at you in a language you barely understand. They want to separate you from your men- and women-folk, to undress you and to put you into large cold and forbidding chambers. You've heard the stories as you stand naked and shivering under the showerheads and wait for what you have been told will be water, but for what a part of you fears will be gas.

An account from a surprising quarter illustrates the point - Ingrid Rimland {wife of Zundel - Peter M.}:

I remember fairly clearly one such "experience" sometime in 1944. This was during the Wehrmacht retreat from the Eastern front, when huge refugee treks of ethnic Germans traveled westward with horse-drawn wagons under German Army protection, experiencing horrendous hardships from hunger and cold, the advancing Red Army ever in our backs.

My family belonged to German-descent Mennonites, a fundamentalist Christian community who had come to the Ukraine in 1789, but we still considered ourselves to be Germans and still spoke the German language. Ever since the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution - which happened when my grandmother was still a young woman and my mother was only four years old - my people had been savagely persecuted by the Communists. Many of my cousins, aunts, uncles, more distant relatives perished in waves of ethnic cleansings. This persecution started before I was born and became deadly in 1938, affecting practically every male age 14 and over. My own father was exiled to Siberia when I was only five years old in 1941, and our entire family escaped exiling only at the last moment, literally hours before the German Army overran the Ukraine in September of that year - only weeks after my father was taken from us forever

When the (for us) voluntary retreat to Germany began two years later, in the fall of 1943, there were four of us left - my grandmother, my mother, my baby sister and I. The rest of our family had either been exiled to Siberia, been killed, or simply disappeared in the havoc of those horror years since 1917. Now we were running for our lives from the Red Army - almost all of us women and children.

We entered Nazi-occupied Poland sometime in 1944 and were invited to be officially naturalized as Germans. I remember the city as Litzmannstadt (Lodz) but I cannot be sure.

But first we had to be deloused. Naturally! As far as I know, this was routine for everybody entering German-occupied territory and certainly Germany proper, an obligatory health measure to control epidemics such as typhus, a disease that was carried by lice. Everybody who was coming from the East was infested with lice in those days - Russians, Poles, Germans, Jews - soldiers and civilians. There was no way not to have lice, unless you underwent delousing. We were made to enter a long train. Whether that train took us to a building, or if it ended in a building, I don't remember any more. Somehow the rumor sprang up that we were going to be gassed. I have no idea who started it. As a seven-year old, I do remember how terrified I was.

We were all stripped naked, had our hair shorn, and then, while we were all sitting, old and young, in long rows of benches, water and soap, probably mixed with insecticide, rained down on us from shower heads

above. I don't remember the relief, only the fear. Similarly, the rumor sprang up on that train that the Germans were looking for "yellow blood", presumably Jewish, by clipping our ear lobe. I was just as terrified of that one. Ingrid Rimland

So these Soviet reports with their now-detailed descriptions of the shower-gas-cremation procedure of extermination, coming after three years of other terrifying reports of exterminations of Jews and others by the Germans, and also in the context of fears in Europe about the use of gas as a weapon used against civilians and of cremation as a new and unfamiliar method of the disposing of bodies, could possibly have been instrumental in laying the foundations of the Holocaust gas-chamber narrative as we know it. Certainly from the time of those reports, the mere presence of showers, disinfestation gas chambers and crematoria had become in itself evidence of mass homicidal gassing.

So when the western armies came across the German concentration camps at Belsen, Dachau and Buchenwald sites at which it is now known that there were no mass extermination facilities, and saw the now familiar images of skeletal, diseased inmates and piles of discoloured corpses and discovered sealed rooms, showers and crematoria which we now know had been used only for disinfection and disinfestation, and encountered inmates who were prepared to tell them tales of mass exterminations, they were both able and willing to interpret it all in terms of what they had heard, rather than what, in this instance at least, was the truth.

Whatever conditions might have been in the German camps throughout the war, by 1945 and the final defeat of Germany the system, and particularly the camp system, had collapsed and conditions were catastrophic and it was the results of this collapse which the western armies came across. The Americans and the British saw these things, and, most critically, filmed and photographed them, as clear evidence of a planned genocide, rather than what they were: the result, particularly in the form of typhus epidemics, of a breakdown of Germany generally and the camp system in particular, under the onslaught of the allied saturation bombing.

Although it cannot entirely be ruled out that some of these authorities knew that they were propagating a myth, it seems most likely that the Jewish authorities who first spread reports of exterminations, were reacting only from a real concern for their fellow-Jews, known to be under ferocious assault by the Germans who, at the time of those first reports, were ratcheting up their assault on the Jews by beginning brutal deportations to the East. But what of the other authorities involved - the Americans, the British and the Soviets? These authorities surely would have been happy to accuse the Germans of absolutely anything and possibly not averse to a little falsification of the evidence if needed. After all, these same authorities had been perfectly prepared to continue to accuse the Germans of the massacre of over 4000 Poles at Katyn - a deed they knew full well had been perpetrated by the Soviet NKVD. In fact, the only cases where there is any evidence of contrived fabrication occur at the liberation of the camp at Majdanek by the Red army, at which time the Soviet authorities closed the site for a month and then presented to the world some highly questionable evidence of mass extermination of Jews. A similar conscious fabrication may also have taken place at Auschwitz. In any event, intentional or not, all was now ready for the story to take off.

Any story, true or false, is easily spread if there are fabricators, peddlers and believers, and this is all the more so if all three are combined. The Holocaust had plenty of all three. Moving down the chain of command we find plenty of examples at the Nuremberg trials where the alleged crimes of the vanquished were formalised by the victors. The Nuremberg investigators, as they worked their way through the mountains of alleged eyewitness testimonies, believed that there were gas chambers as they strove to establish the truth. The army interrogators, as they punched and pummeled their way through the hapless defendants, believed that there were gas chambers and that they were merely trying to get at the truth. The lawyers, as they presented highly questionable documents as hard evidence, believed that there were gas chambers and that they were only trying to get at the truth. And the survivors of the deportations, raw and traumatized, full of unimaginable feelings including hatred and a thirst for revenge, were surely perfectly capable of believing that there were gas chambers and that they were only telling the truth. After all, was not all Europe, including the camps, rife with reports of gas chambers and anyway, had not so-and-so seen them? And as for the defendants, many unsure of the truth themselves and possibly themselves totally bewildered by the extermination claims, they may have seen it in their best interests to go along with what the court had ready decided. Some may even have found some comfort in their moment of world-class notoriety as they mounted the gallows and anyway, stopping the pain was motivation enough: the solitary confinement and sleep deprivation, the floggings, the threats to family and loved ones and the constant humiliations - perhaps it was just easier to confess.

Nor do we need much to persuade us that the Jewish leadership might have been ready and willing to propagate and believe such a tale. Jews suffered terribly under National Socialism - nobody denies that, neither revisionist or non-revisionist. They had been persecuted, expelled and assaulted. They had been forcibly deported and incarcerated in brutal labor camps where thousands upon thousands had died from exhaustion, malnutrition and maltreatment. In the East many Jews had been shot. Jews had little reason to love the Germans.

Nor would it be the first time that Jews have accepted and propagated stories, true, false or a mixture of both, of their suffering. The Holocaust is only the latest, albeit the worst of a series of tragic calamities to have befallen the Jewish people, and Hitler sits well with Pharaoh, Amalek, Haman, Tomas de Torquemada and Bogdan Chmielnitski - all enduring hate-figures in the Jewish martyrology. Nor would this be the first time that Jewish chroniclers (or any other chroniclers for that matter) have used some poetic license in describing their suffering. The Talmud tells that at the time of the destruction of the second temple - held in Jewish history to be the one historical precedent for the Holocaust - the Romans slew 'four billions," the blood of the Jewish victims was so great that it became a 'tidal wave carrying boulders out to sea', and staining the water for four miles out. The bodies of the Jews were used as 'fence posts' and Jewish children were "wrapped up in their Torah scrolls - and burned alive all 65 million of them." In a context like this, the utterances of Elie Wiesel, become a little more understandable.

Not far from us blazed flames from a pit, gigantic flames. They were burning something. A lorry drove up to the pit and dumped its load into the pit. They were small children. Babies! Yes, I had seen it, with my own eyes...Children in the flames (is it any wonder, that sleep shuns my eyes since that time?). We went there, too. Somewhat further along, was another, bigger pit, for adults. 'Father", I said, ' if that is so, I wish to wait no longer. I shall throw myself against the electrified barbed wire fence. That is better than lying around in the flames for hours." (19)

But for a story of this magnitude to be spread, many more believers were needed, than a few over-mighty politicians and soldiers and thousands of traumatized and broken survivors, and, save for a few insightful cynics at the very top of the British, American, Soviet and Jewish leaderships, believe it they did. True, there was little hard evidence, but what there was could so easily be made to fit. After all, everyone knew that the Germans had engaged in purposeful mass extermination of Jews therefore "special treatment" and "deportation to the East" must be euphemisms for extermination, and any sealed chamber attached to a crematorium, especially if used for disinfestations by gas, must have been a homicidal gas chamber.

Once momentum is achieved, all that is needed is an extended game of Chinese whispers to result in a Holocaust narrative, conceived in the real and terrible wartime suffering of Jews, portrayed as imagined in newsreels and photo-reportage, framed and formalized at Nuremberg and subsequent trials and then, most critically of all, later turned into religious dogma. Set all this in the context of a western world obsessed by Jews and its own ambivalence about Jews and Jewish suffering, a Jewish population traumatized by its very real and recent suffering, an immensely influential Jewish culture which places suffering at the core of its self-identity, and a Zionist leadership desperate to win world sympathy for a Jewish state in Palestine, and the idea of such a story, even if false, gaining near universal acceptance, really isn't that hard to believe.

After all, people once believed the earth was flat and sat on the back of four elephants riding on a turtle. They believed the earth was the centre of the universe and persecuted skeptics with the same fervor and with about as much justification as they do today's Holocaust revisionists. People today believe that JFK was assassinated by a lone gunman with a magic bullet. They believe in astrology and fortune telling, in bodily auras and out-of-body experiences. They believe that the Children of Israel were guided in the desert by a pillar of smoke by day and of fire by night, that Jesus was born of a virgin, died and was resurrected, and that the Prophet Mohamed ascended to heaven after seeing Mecca and Jerusalem. Why, they even believe that Palestine was a land without a people for a people without a land! So what is so hard to believe about the planned and premeditated slaughter of six million Jews by modern industrial methods, loaded in their millions onto trains and taken to industrialized killing centers where they are done to death thousands at a time in huge slaughter halls, their bodies burned to ashes and their bones ground into dust? People believe in heaven and they believe in hell - so why not the hell of the Holocaust?

(9) Reply to Paul Eisen - Peter Myers, February 21, 2009

The most important word in your essay is the "if" at the start: it allows you to write the rest on the assumption you make there.

Consider the attack on Elie Wiesel by a Revisionist/Denier; it's now in every new biography of Wiesel. Ziopedia applauded the attack.

That attack set back the Revisionist/Denial cause by years. All their intellectualism was reduced to an act of violence on an old man.

It was an "Own Goal".

I submit that Denial itself has become an "Own Goal".

If you're an anti-Zionist activist or a 9/11 activist or you oppose mass immigration, or you want to nationalize the banks, or you're a Bishop Williamson exposing the subverting of the Church, coming out as a Denier is the end of you. It allows the other side to ignore all your valid points, and reduce you to pariah status.

That would be worthwhile if there were no Nazi extermination - but what a waste if there was.

I think that Arno J. Mayer is correct in saying that initially, Nazi policy was only Ethnic Cleansing - they wanted to get the Jews out of Europe, to Madagascar or the US or Siberia. But when Operation Barbarossa started suffering defeats, a policy of Exterminating Jews developed.

Initially, Denial as enunciated by Rassinier was just a sort of Scepticism. Pressac noted that Faurisson introduced dogmatism and an "ex cathedra" attacking style.

The studies of Leuchter and Rudolf have been met by Van Pelt. At the trials instigated by Irving's suing Lipstadt for calling him a Denier, unprecedented expertise was brought to bear. It has changed the debate greatly, but the Revisionist/Deniers seem not to read it.

Suppose one admits the Nazi Judeocide, as Mayer calls it (like Pressac, he refuses to use the word "holocaust". The Index entry for "holocaust" in his book Why Did the Heavens Not Darken? says "see Judeocide"). What then?

Then one uses Benjamin Freedman's explanation: Germans were upset with Jews because Zionists had backed Germany in WWI until the Czar was overthrown, then played off Britain & Germany to get Palestine. The Balfour Declaration (whose quid-pro-quo was getting the US in) was the cause of Germany's losing the war.

Further, Freedman says, Jews had been promoting Communism as the destruction of European Christian Civilization. He makes no mention of Stalin's stealing the Jewish conspiracy, in response to which the Jewish Bolsheviks switched to Trotsky and the New Left.

On top of that, Benjamin Ginsberg shows that Jews dominated the economy of Weimar Germany.

Once the historical pieces are in place, the Nazi attempt to Exterminate Jews becomes comprehensible, even though it punished the innocent Jews too.

If we deplore Israel's shooting of babies in the 2008 Gaza war - and Hesham Tillawi can supply photos of that - then we should also deplore Nazi cruelty too.

The point is not to perpetuate a feud - which Deniers seem to want - but to bring it to an end, as happened in Northern Ireland. That requires non-partisan policies.

(10) Nazi policy changed from Ethnic Cleansing to Extermination once Barbarossa faltered - Arno J. Mayer

Why Did the Heavens Not Darken? The "Final Solution" in History

by Arno J. Mayer

Pantheon Books, New York, 1990

{p. 234} The Judeocide was forged in the fires of a stupendous war to conquer unlimited Lebensraum from Russia, to crush the Soviet regime, and to liquidate international bolshevism. The regular Wehrmacht and the special Waffen-SS first blazed the trail for the Einsatzgruppen and the exercised the power of last resort over the territories and populations surrounding the extermination sites. Without Operation Barbarossa there would and could have been no Jewish catastrophe, no "Final Solution." Not that the Jews went unscathed in the period between the invasion of Poland on September 1, 1939, and the invasion of Russia on June 22, 1941. During this early phase of the Second World War, between 5,000 and 10,000 Jews, virtually all of them adult males, were murdered individually, and twice to three times that many Jews of both sexes died of malnutrition and disease, above all in the ghettos of Warsaw and Lodz. But this killing was neither systematic nor comprehensive: it affected a small percentage of several Jewish communities and it was confined to German-occupied Poland.

The invasion of the Soviet Union brought a quantum jump in the scale and intensity of the suffering inflicted on the Jews. It is certain that Barbarossa and the Judeocide were symbiotically linked, although the permutations of this interdependence were extremely complex and fluctuating. ...

{p. 235} The course of the war accounts for the radical transformation of the initial Commissar Order into the subsequent "Final Solution." While the unsettling slowdowns in the blitzkrieg between late July and late October 1941 intensified the anti-Jewish furor of the assault squads, the desperate but unsuccessful race to Moscow in November-December 1941 precipitated the rush to the "Final Solution."

{p. 236} Significantly, as of October 1941 the fuhrer made more and more frequent and ominous threats against the Jews, and did so in public statements as well as in private. His coded signals were translated into concrete orders and diffused by leaders of the SS, notably Himmler and Heydrich, who had direct access to him.

{p. 237} After a brief, victorious campaign the Nazis expected to resettle the Jews of Europe, including the Russian Jews, in a Lublin-like reservation beyond the Volga or the Urals. And it was not until they woke up to the enormous difficulties of winning the war and "liberating" Moscow, this century's profane Jerusalem, that Nazi fanatics fastened upon the Jews as the most reachable and vulnerable incarnation of "Judeobolshevism." In particular, the SS, the archetypal crusaders of their day, made it their business to eradicate what they saw as the Jewish arm of this biform specter.

{p. 257} Although from its inception Barbarossa carried a lethal anti-Jewish charge, the assault on the Jews did not explode with the same immediate virulence as the attack on Soviet Russia. The start of Barbarossa did not mark the start of a further aggravation of the Jewish condition either in Old Germany or in any of the annexed and occupied territories. Nor were there any plans to massacre the Jews who were certain to be trapped by the lightning sweep into and through the territories that Moscow had seized since 1939. In various places there were savage pogroms immediately following the arrival of German troops. But these instant and unpremeditated pogroms, reminiscent of those attending the conquest of Poland in September 1939, were the work of local vigilantes, not of the Wehrmacht or the Einsatzgruppen.

{p. 264} As they advanced into Soviet Belorussia, the Russian Ukraine, and the Crimea, the invaders found ever fewer collaborators and ran into defiant populations and partisans.

{p. 274} The vast majority of the Jews killed were massacred after the military campaign began to falter.

{p. 291} The invasion of the Soviet Union gave the idea of a territorial solution a new lease on life. After conquering the eastern Leberraum along with additional Jews, the Reich would banish European Jewry to vast lands deep in Russia, east of the Urals.

{p. 299} As we have seen, as long as the military drive fared well, except for the pogromlike assaults of the first weeks, the violence wreaked on Jews was part of the general, ideologically driven violence of Barbarossa, which was also directed against Bolsheviks, commissars, and partisans. It did not take on a unique character until the military frustrations of the late summer and fall ...

{p. 354} At first, and until the incipient impasse of Barbarossa, Auschwitz was charged with holding and putting to work first Polish and then also Soviet prisoners of war and political enemies while at the same time, as we shall see, advancing the cause of eastern colonization. As of late 1941 this mission was radically redefined. Like all the other concentration camps, Auschwitz was geared to serve an uphill and desperate war effort by hyperexploiting an inexhaustible reservoir of "expendable" foreign slave labor. Before long it was also turned into a center for the willful and outright extermination of "unproductive" Jews and Gypsies.

{p. 362} At Auschwitz - and Majdanek - the idea and practice of gassing only developed gradually. ...

Sources for the study of the gas chambers are at once rare and unreliable. Even though Hitler and the Nazis made no secret of their war on the Jews, the SS operatives dutifully eliminated all traces of their murderous activities and instruments. No written orders for gassing have turned up thus far. The SS not only destroyed most camp records, which were in any case incomplete, but also razed nearly all killing and cremating installations well before the arrival of Soviet troops. ...

Most of what is known is based on the depositions of Nazi oflicials and executioners at postwar trials and on the

{p. 363] memory of survivors and bystanders. This testimony must be screened carefully ...

In the meantime, there is no denying the many contradictions, ambiguities, and errors in the existing sources. ... Just as the fact of the Jewish ordeal at Auschwitz is not contingent on the use of gas chambers, so the crime of gassing does not turn upon the exact number of Jews gassed. The want of precise and verifiable information about the method and extent of the mass murder of Jews by the crusaders in the Rhine Valley in 1096 does not in any way put into question the reality and general magnitude of this prototypical Judeocide of the Middle Ages.

{p. 365} At Auschwitz the assembly-line selection did not really begin until the arrival of the first transports of unselected Jews from western Europe during the summer of 1942. By then the construction of Birkenau was well advanced.

{p. 436} The ordeal of Hungarian Jewry was impossible to hide. For one thing, it was too massive and public to go undetected.

{p. 451} The ways of studying the recent mass murder and torment of European Jews, which I call the Judeocide, are similarly complicated by dogmatists who refuse any opening or reopening of legitimate questions about the Jewish catastrophe, and skeptics who simply deny that it ever occurred.

{p. 452} But exact precision, which the existing data cannot sustain, is not necessary to establish the monstrous nature and equally monstrous general magnitude of the Judeocide, for which the evidence is simply overwhelming and incontestable.

{p. 458} Until late July or early August 1941 the Jewish victims of both the Nazi Einsatzgruppen and the local fascist vigilantes were primarily adult males, and the killing of Jews was essentially war-related

There was, however, a major change in policy and practice in midsummer and early fall of 1941. During those few weeks, when the Wehrmacht s advance was being seriously slowed down, the killing of Jews spiraled to include mass executions of women, children, and the elderly.

{p. 459} Unlike the military campaign on the western front in the Second World War, that on the eastern front was from its inception a total war. Not that this secular crusade was genocidal from the start, nor that it would necessarily have become so after a blitzlike victory, which was planned and anticipated by Hitler and his generals. As I have indicated, the evidence suggests that the SS did not preplan the systematic killing of Soviet Jews, let alone of all European Jews.

{p. 461} It is no less striking that the first gassing of Jews probably took place at Chemno, west of Warsaw, in early December 1941, which was the time of the devastating reversal at Moscow.

{p. 499} INDEX Holocaust, see Judeocide

(11) What Does Holocaust Denial Really Mean? by Daniel McGowan

From: IHR News <news@ihr.org> Date: 20.02.2009 08:21 AM

What Does Holocaust Denial Really Mean?

Prof. Daniel McGowan


What Does Holocaust Denial Really Mean?

by Daniel McGowan / February 17th, 2009

In April 2007 the European Union agreed to set jail sentences up to three years for those who deny or trivialize the Holocaust.1 More recently, in response to the remarks of Bishop Richard Williamson, the Pope has proclaimed that Holocaust denial is "intolerable and altogether unacceptable."

But what does Holocaust denial really mean? Begin with the word Holocaust. The Holocaust2 (spelled with a capital H) refers to the killing of six million Jews by the Nazis during World War II. It is supposed to be the German's "Final Solution" to the Jewish problem. Much of the systematic extermination was to have taken place in concentration camps by shooting, gassing, and burning alive innocent Jewish victims of the Third Reich.

People like Germar Rudolf, Ernst Zundel, and Bishop Williamson who do not believe this account and who dare to say so in public are reviled as bigots, anti-Semites, racists, and worse. Their alternate historical scenarios are not termed simply revisionist, but are demeaned as Holocaust denial. Rudolf and Zundel were shipped to Germany where they were tried, convicted, and sentenced to three and five years, respectively. Williamson may not be far behind.

Politicians deride Holocaust revisionist papers and conferences as "beyond the pale of international discourse and acceptable behavior."3 Non-Zionist Jews who participate in such revisionism, like Rabbi Dovid Weiss of the Neturei Karta, are denounced as "self-haters" and are shunned and spat upon. Even Professor Norman Finkelstein, whose parents were both Holocaust survivors and who wrote the book, The Holocaust Industry, has been branded a Holocaust denier.

But putting aside the virile hate directed against those who question the veracity of the typical Holocaust narrative, what is it that these people believe and say at the risk of imprisonment and bodily harm? For most Holocaust revisionists or deniers if you prefer, their arguments boil down to three simple contentions:

1. Hitler's "Final Solution" was intended to be ethnic cleansing, not extermination. 2. There were no homicidal gas chambers used by the Third Reich. 3. There were fewer than 6 million Jews killed of the 55 million who died in WWII.

Are these revisionist contentions so odious as to cause those who believe them to be reviled, beaten, and imprisoned? More importantly, is it possible that revisionist contentions are true, or even partially true, and that they are despised because they contradict the story of the Holocaust, a story which has been elevated to the level of a religion in hundreds of films, memorials, museums, and docu-dramas?

Is it sacrilegious to ask, "If Hitler was intent on extermination, how did Elie Wiesel, his father, and two of his sisters survive the worst period of incarceration at Auschwitz?" Wiesel claims that people were thrown alive into burning pits, yet even the Israeli-trained guides at Auschwitz refute this claim.

Is it really "beyond international discourse" to question the efficacy and the forensic evidence of homicidal gas chambers? If other myths, like making soap from human fat, have been dismissed as Allied war propaganda, why is it "unacceptable behavior" to ask if the gas chamber at Dachau was not reconstructed by the Americans because no other homicidal gas chamber could be found and used as evidence at the Nuremburg trials?

For more than fifty years Jewish scholars have spent hundreds of millions of dollars to document each Jewish victim of the Nazi Holocaust. The Nazis were German, obsessed with paperwork and recordkeeping. Yet only 3 million names have been collected and many of them died of natural causes. So why is it heresy to doubt that fewer than 6 million Jews were murdered in the Second World War?

"Holocaust Denial" might be no more eccentric or no more criminal than claiming the earth is flat, except that the Holocaust itself has been used as the sword and shield in the quest to build a Jewish state between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River, where even today over half the population is not Jewish.

The Holocaust narrative allows Yad Vashem, the finest Holocaust museum in the world, to repeat the mantra of "Never Forget" while it sits on Arab lands stolen from Ein Karem and overlooking the unmarked graves of Palestinians massacred by Jewish terrorists at Deir Yassin. It allows Elie Wiesel to boast of having worked for these same terrorists (as a journalist, not a fighter) while refusing to acknowledge, let alone apologize for, the war crimes his employer committed. It makes Jews the ultimate victim no matter how they dispossess or dehumanize or ethnically cleanse indigenous Palestinian people.

The Holocaust story eliminates any comparison of Ketziot or Gaza to the concentration camps they indeed are. It memorializes the resistance of Jews in the ghettos of Europe while steadfastly denying any comparison with the resistance of Palestinians in Hebron and throughout the West Bank. It allows claims that this year's Hanukah Massacre in Gaza, with a kill ratio of 100 to one, was a "proportionate response" to Palestinian resistance to unending occupation.

The Holocaust is used to silence critics of Israel in what the Jewish scholar, Marc Ellis, has called the ecumenical deal: you Christians look the other way while we bludgeon the Palestinians and build our Jewish state and we won't remind you that Hitler was a good Catholic, a confirmed "soldier of Christ," long before he was a bad Nazi.

The Holocaust narrative of systematic, industrialized extermination was an important neo-conservative tool to drive the United States into Iraq. The same neo-con ideologues, like Norman Podoretz, routinely compare Ahmadinejad to Hitler and Nazism with Islamofascism with the intent of driving us into Iran. The title of the recent Israeli conference at Yad Vashem made this crystal clear: "Holocaust Denial: Paving the Way to Genocide."

"Remember the Holocaust" will be the battle cry of the next great clash of good (Judeo/Christian values) and evil (radical Islamic aggression) and those who question it must be demonized if not burned at the stake.

1.Associated Press, "EU approves criminal measures against Holocaust denial," Haaretz, 19 April 2007. [?]

2.Holocaust. Dictionary.com. The American Heritage® New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy, Third Edition. Houghton Mifflin Company, 2005. [?]

3.Statements of Senator Hillary Clinton. [?]

Daniel McGowan is a Professor Emeritus at Hobart and William Smith Colleges. Because of admonishment by the administration, it is hereby stated that the above remarks are solely those of the author. Hobart and William Smith Colleges neither condone nor condemn these opinions. Furthermore, the author has been instructed to use his personal email address of mcgowandaniel@yahoo.com and not his college email at mcgowan@hws.edu for those wishing to contact him with comments or criticisms. Read other articles by Daniel.

(12) Argentina orders Bishop Williamson out

From: Iskandar Masih <iskandar38@hotmail.com> Date: 20.02.2009 06:27 PM

Argentina orders Holocaust-denying bishop out

By DEBORA REY Reuters | Friday, 20 February 2009


BUENOS AIRES, Argentina (AP) - The traditionalist bishop whose denials of the Holocaust embarrassed the Vatican was ordered Thursday to leave Argentina within 10 days.

The Interior Ministry said it had ordered Richard Williamson out of Argentina because he had failed to declare his true job as director of a seminary on immigration forms and because his comments on the Holocaust "profoundly insult Argentine society, the Jewish community and all of humanity by denying an historic truth." ...

(13) Pressac's Proof in reply to Faurisson's challenge; urns for the ashes

From: patrick <patrickh@ymail.plala.or.jp> Date: 20.02.2009 04:57 AM


Faurisson asked for "one proof... one single proof" of the existence of homicidal gas chambers. The "traditional" historians provided him with an "abundance of proofs" which were virtually all based on human testimony, from SS and surviving former prisoners and Sonderkommando men. But human testimony is fallible. It is unreliable and Faurisson wanted a CONCRETE historical proof, that is proof based on incontestable and irrefutable documents. Four types of historical document would meet these stringent criteria:

photographs and films made between 1942 and the end of 1944 in KL Auschwitz. German letters and documents, original drawings concerned with the camp.

COMMENT: Thomas formulated five proofs for the existence of God, but all five are designed for people who already believe in God. Pressac's "proof" is designed for those who already believe in the Auschwitz homocidal gas chambers. The quote above from Pressac shows that he already believed in the existence of homicidal gas chambers.

Like Aquinas' proofs, Pressac's book provides a facade of Enlightenment rationality to make an otherwise merely "faith-based" religious doctrine socially acceptable to believers.

However, there is at least one major difference between the proofs of Aquinas and Pressac. Roman Catholics still preach, publish, and push the five proofs for the existence of God. The holocaust affirmers never really believe very much in Pressac's ruminations and have completely abandoned him. Even the first and last edition of the English version was only in a very limited and expensive edition. Israel Shahak has some other example of this tactic used by the big Judaics.

Pressac states, "But human testimony is fallible." This is far too universal a judgment. Of course, testimony in murder cases must be corroborated. The basic evidence required to backup a murder accusation is a dead body. There must also be evidence linking the cause of death to the accused. But holocaust testimony cannot even be questioned, little lone be corroborated, scientifically studied, and analyzed.

Pressac states, "It is unreliable and Faurisson wanted a CONCRETE historical proof, that is proof based on incontestable and irrefutable documents." THIS IS NOT TRUE. Faurisson wanted something far more important and concrete than documents. Even the documents written by Homer had to be backed up with the concrete archeological work that began with Schliemann. Before Schliemann most people did not believe in a real Troy.

Why has more scientific research been done at Troy than at Auschwitz?

Even if ( a very big IF), the documents and the drawings of homocidal gas chambers were to be produced, we would still be very far away from proof that thousands (or even dozens) of folks were gassed to death. Faurisson wanted a drawing of an actual homocidal gas chamber and the holocaust affirmers could not even produce that. We need massive investigations of the soil in each and every places where mass murders are said to have taken place. In Japan today cremation is required by law, but the survivors always receive an urn with the ashed. Of the thousands supposedly gassed and cremated at Auschwitz cannot a single urn of ashes be found.

Patrick Henry McNally, Japan outside of HOT (Holocaust Occupied Territory)

Reply (Peter M.):


Pressac poses the question, how can gas-tight doors and shower-heads go together? They were both part of the inventory of equipment installed in Krematorium III .

He concludes, "This inventory is absolute and irrefutable proof of the existence of a gas chamber fitted with dummy showers in Krematorium III".

You have not addressed Pressac's Proof.

Re the Urns: There have been court cases in the US because the ashes of various cremated people were mixed. For this reason, cremations in normal situations are "one person at a time". Which means that the kiln/firnace must be fired up, burn the body, and be cooled down to remove the ashes - this for each person. That takes a lot of time.

The Nazis had no qualms about doing multiple bodies at once. What did it matter if the ashes were mixed?

I built a Russian masonry heater in Tasmania - a kiln/furnace fired with wood. The Nazis would have loaded bodies in the furnace as I loaded wood. Load a few at a time, then as each burns down, load more.

When you are firing pottery, you want to keep the wood and ash away from the pots. The word "muffle" came into use, meaning a protective barrier.

The Nazi crematoria (in the camps we are debating) are called "muffle kilns", each muffle being the opening/doorway where bodies were put in. Each oven had one fire (started with coke) but multiple muffles. It did not matter if the ash of the burnt bodies got mixed with the ash of the coke.

If you have a high-temperature wood-fired heater in your house, you can get the idea. You start the fire with coke, then feed bodies in; well-fed bodies burn, and they in turn help emaciated bodies to burn. The Nazis would have just fed the fire with bodies continuously until they ran out or needed to remove the ash etc.

A closed fire like this burns much hotter than an open fire. It's enclosed with firebricks which store the heat, and keep radiating it, instead of letting it escape. Temperatures of around 900 C (1650 F) are quoted for Russian masonry heaters. The conversion formula is 9/5 C = F-32.

Note that the 900 C figure is quoted not for the firebox itself, but for secondary combustion in the expansion chamber (this is where the bodies would have been in the crematoria): http://www.pyromasse.ca/infoe.html.

That particular model is a Finnish fireplace with glass doors for loading wood. But the one I built was of a traditional type, with no glass but instead a cast-iron metal door. The firebox (about 18" wide, 18" high & 4' deep) passed through the wall of the house; you loaded it from a back-room where wood was stored. But most of the firebox was inside the house, as was the expansion chamber.

The more air you let in, the hotter and faster the fire burns. If you want it to burn slowly through the night, you shut off the air supply.

If you use a blower to force air in, the fire will burn at higher temperatures.

Another site on Russian masonry heaters is http://stove.ru/index.php?lng=1&rs=85.

It says there, "According to I.Kovalevsky, the combustion process takes place at temperatures of 800-900 o C for wood and 1000-1200oC for coal, while the temperature of firebox walls is 200oC lower."

Masonry heaters are now a fashion item, with glass doors to add charm (but glass reduces their effectiveness): The Masonry Heater Association of North America: http://mha-net.org/

(14) Relatives sue because bodies were cremated en masse


... Burning more than one corpse simultaneously

There are many testimonies describing this "technique" (see, for instance, Henryk Tauber's testimony). The "Holocaust revisionists" claim that it is impossible; however, while it is certainly illegal today, there is no technical problem in burning a few corpses in the same muffle at the same time. Actually, Dr. Kenneth V. Iverson writes the following in his book "Death To Dust", Galen Press, 1994 (_Iverson_), p. 264-265:

Examples of such litigation abound. The Harbor Lawn-Mount Olive Mortuary and Memorial Park in Costa Mesa, California, paid $14 million to settle a suit by 25,000 people who claimed that their relative's bodies have been cremated en masse, rather then separately [140]. Another southern California firm, the Pasadena Crematorium, which was luridly described in the book, A Family Business, routinely packed nine to fifteen bodies into each oven.... [141] [140] Englade, A Family Business, p. 130. [141] Englade, A Family Business, p. 49-51. Dr. Iverson cites "Settlement proposed for class action", The American Funeral Director, 1992;115(4):18-19 as another source for such "multiple cremations".

In Auschwitz, two or three adult corpses were usually cremated simultaneously, as were an even higher number of children's corpses; there are many testimonies concerning this, for instance that of Henryk Tauber. This considerably speeded up the cremation process.

Inserting additional corpses before the ones in the muffle were entirely consumed

This is, of course, prohibited under normal circumstances, but it was practiced in Auschwitz-Birkenau and other camps; as a matter of fact, the manual for operating the Topf furnaces in Auschwitz states (see German original and translation):

"As soon as the remains of the corpses have fallen from the chamotte grid to the ash collection channel below, they should be pulled forward towards the ash removal door, using the scraper. Here they can be left for a further 20 minutes to be fully consumed, then the ashes should be placed in the container and set aside to cool. In the meantime, further corpses can be introduced one after the other into the chambers."

In the 1975 conference report of the Cremation Society of Great Britain, we read that the last 20 minutes of the cremation are required to dispose only of a "very very small quantity of body material in the shape of chest and lung material" (p. 83). Hence, barring any legal considerations - not to mention plain decency - it was not a problem to save considerable time in the cremation process, by inserting more corpses when those already in the muffle were mostly consumed. The "Holocaust revisionist" claim that a muffle cannot be opened while the previous corpses are still burning, has no basis in reality; people routinely work near even higher temperatures (as in manufacturing of steel etc.). Naturally, those operating the furnaces did not put their hands and their heads into the open muffle, but used various devices to insert the corpses into the hot muffles - including a simple stretcher-like device on which the corpse was slid into the muffle (see, for instance, Tauber's aforementioned testimony). See also the following description about how a furnace cremation is opened in the midst of the cremation process, without any ill-effects:

"Rapp checks on the corpse's progress. He raises the retort's door about 10 inches and peers into the hearth. It looks like a giant fireplace at the end of a cozy night." [source] ...

Temperature of cremation

"Holocaust revisionists" sometimes claim that the Topf furnaces in Auschwitz and other camps, could not achieve a high enough temperature which is required for quick cremation. This is patently false, for two reasons:

* The Topf furnaces did reach high temperatures; see their operation manual, which includes the following:

Once the cremation chamber (muffle) has been brought to a good red heat (approximately 800 C), the corpses can be introduced one after another in the cremation chambers...

After each incineration, the temperature rises in the furnace. For this reason, care must be taken that the internal temperature does not rise above 1100 C (white heat).

* Higher temperatures result in "cleaner" cremation, but are not essential for the burning time. A detailed study, presented in the 1975 conference report of the Cremation Society of Great Britain (see summary of results in p. 88), proved that in the range of temperatures between 500 and 1100 degrees Centigrade, there is only a margin of 6 minutes in the cremation time. ...

(15) Leuchter: "ovens can cremate one body in 1.25 hours" - cf Continuous Loading


The crematoria ovens at Auschwitz couldn't have disposed of the remains of the 1.1 million Jews

Holocaust Deniers Say:

The crematoria ovens at Auschwitz couldn't possibly have disposed of the remains of the 1.1 million Jews who supposedly died there. After all, it takes several hours to burn one body in a civilian crematorium oven.

In the Leuchter Report, Leuchter theorized that since modern crematoria ovens can cremate one body in 1.25 hours, or 19.2 bodies in 24 hours that must mean it was the same at Auschwitz-Birkenau. Based on this observation and allowing for down time for maintenance and repairs, he concluded that 'only' 85,092 bodies could have been cremated.1

Carlo Mattogno, an Italian denier, built his arguments on Leuchter's amateurish speculations, in a 1994 monograph.2 To prove the ovens could not have cremated enough bodies he compared the operation of modern civilian ovens to the situation in Auschwitz-Birkenau.3

What is the cremation process in the civilian world?

In a civilian crematorium, based on laws and out of respect for the dead and their families, each body must be cremated individually so the ashes can be collected and returned to the family.

The civilian crematorium oven is heated up and cooled down for each cremation and is cleaned out after each use. The body is usually burned together with a coffin or some kind of container, which lengthens the time required to complete the process. On the average it takes between one and two hours for each cremation depending on the oven and the remains being cremated.4

The cremation process in Auschwitz-Birkenau

In Auschwitz the authorities were not burdened by respect for the dead or any need to consider civilian rules or laws regarding cremation.

Multiple bodies were cremated together. The muffles (the actual openings in the oven; there were 52 in total in Auschwitz) were filled with as many bodies as could be fit into them.

The men who worked in the Sonderkommandos quickly learned how to combine the bodies of fat people, skeletal 'Muselmänner' and children to achieve maximum results (that is, more bodies could be burned in less time).

Once the first bodies started to burn they just kept putting more bodies in to keep the fires hot. The result was continuous operation at very high efficiency in which very little fuel was needed to keep the process going for hours or days.

Eyewitness evidence about the burning of multiple bodies

Mattogno and his fellow deniers refuse to address a detailed body of survivor and perpetrator eyewitness evidence about body disposal at Auschwitz-Birkenau. Here is some of the evidence they ignore:

* Henryk Tauber, a member of a Sonderkommando that worked in Cremas 1, 2 and 5, recalled after the war: "We worked in two shifts, a day shift and a night shift. On average, we incinerated 2,500 bodies a day."5

* Tauber also described how the muffles were filled with multiple bodies: "The procedure was to put the first body with the feet towards the muffle, back down and face up. Then a second body was placed on top, again face up, but head towards the muffle. ... We had to work fast, for the bodies put in first soon started to burn, and their arms and legs rose up. If we were slow, it was difficult to charge the second part of bodies ... We burned the bodies of children with those of adults. First we put in two adults, then as many children as the muffle could contain. It was sometimes as many as five or six. We used this procedure so that the bodies of children would not be placed directly on the grid bars, which were relatively far apart. In this way we prevented the children from falling through into the ash bin. Women's bodies burned much better and more quickly than those of men. For this reason, when a charge was burning badly, we would introduce a woman's body to accelerate the combustion."6

"Generally speaking, we burned four or five bodies at a time in one muffle, but sometimes we charged a greater number of bodies. It was possible to charge up to eight 'Muselmanns.' Such big charges were incinerated without the knowledge of the head of the crematorium during air raid warnings in order to attract the attention of airmen by having a bigger fire emerging from the chimney. We imagined that in that way it might be possible to change our fate."7

* Filip Müller, also a member of a Sonderkommando that cremated bodies, confirmed the process of multiple cremations in his memoirs. The bodies were "... sorted according to their combustibility: for the bodies of the well-nourished were to help burn the emaciated. Under the direction of the Kapos, the bearers began sorting the dead into four stacks. The largest consisted mainly of strong men, the next in size of women, then came children, and lastly a stack of dead Mussulmans, emaciated and nothing but skin and bones. This technique was called 'express work,' a designation thought up by the Kommandoführers and originating from experiments carried out in crematorium 5 in the autumn of 1943. The purpose of these experiments was to find a way of saving coke. ... Thus the bodies of two Mussulmans were cremated together with those of two children or the bodies of two well-nourished men together with that of an emaciated woman, each load consisting of three, or sometimes, four bodies."8

Evidence about multiple body burning from the perpetrators

Rudolf Höss, the commandant of Auschwitz, confirmed Tauber's and Müller's accounts of burning multiple bodies in each muffle: "Depending on the size of the bodies, up to three bodies could be put in through one oven door at the same time. The time required for cremation also depended on the number of bodies in each retort, but on average it took twenty minutes."9

Additional instructions from Topf in September 1941 advised that "once the cremation chamber has been brought to a good red heat the bodies can be introduced one after the other in the cremation chambers." This letter again cautioned against letting the ovens cool.10

The Topf instructions for their double muffle furnaces envisaged that a body would be added in the oven during the last twenty minutes before the last one was fully cremated. "As soon as the remains of the bodies have fallen from the chamotte grid to the ash collection channel below, they should be pulled forward towards the ash removal door, using the scraper. Here they can be left for a further twenty minutes to be fully consumed ... In the meantime, further bodies can be introduced one after the other into the chambers."11

According to Topf's calculations this would result in a 25 minute burning cycle for each body.12


The authorities in Auschwitz abandoned any respect for the dead and did not abide by civilian laws of cremation. They burned multiple bodies at one time, continuously pushing in more to keep the fires hot.

Therefore, citing the civilian cremation process as some kind of proof that the ovens in Auschwitz-Birkenau couldn't have handled so many bodies is a false comparison.

Notes 1. Robert Jan van Pelt, The Case for Auschwitz: Evidence from the Irving Trial (Indiana University Press, 2001): p. 385. See also Fred Leuchter, Leuchter Report: The End of the Line? The First Forensic Examination of Auschwitz, with a foreword by David Irving (Focal Point Publications, 1989): p. 19 (Table VIII, factoring out the Majdanek figures.) 2. Carlo Mattogno and Franco Deana, "The Crematoria Ovens of Auschwitz and Birkenau," http://www.codoh.com/found/fndcrema.html, pp. 3-11 of 58. 3. Ibid. 4. "Cremation," Wikipedia. See also National Funeral Directors Association, Cremation FAQ, http://www.nfda.org and Internet Cremation Society at http://www.cremation.org/. 5. Van Pelt, Case for Auschwitz: p. 198. Deposition of Henry Tauber, as quoted in Jean-Claude Pressac, Auschwitz: Technique and Operation of the Gas Chambers, p. 489. 6. Van Pelt, Case for Auschwitz: pp. 198, 199; Robert Jan van Pelt, Expert Witness Report for the 2000 libel trial, pp. 192, 193 at http://www.hdot.org ("Evidence.") 7. Van Pelt, Case for Auschwitz: pp. 198, 199; van Pelt, Expert Witness Report, pp. 192, 193. 8. Filip Müller, Eyewitness Auschwitz: Three Years in the Gas Chambers (Ivan R. Dee, 1979): p. 99; John C. Zimmerman, "Body Disposal at Auschwitz: The End of Holocaust Denial," http://www.holocaust-history.org/auschwitz/body-disposal/: p. 23 of 42. 9. Van Pelt, Case for Auschwitz, p. 317; Rudolph Höss, Death Dealer: The Memoirs of the SS Kommandant at Auschwitz, edited by Steven Pakuly (Prometheus Books, 1992), p. 45. 10. Zimmerman, "Body Disposal at Auschwitz," p. 16 of 42. 11. Ibid., p. 14 of 42. 12. Ibid.xs

(16) "Please remove me" - Dick Eastman, "Holocaust Denier Bigtime"

From: Dick Eastman <oldickeastman@q.com> Date: 21.02.2009 02:04 PM

Peter -- please remove Dick Eastman from my list -- your priorities in your work are too discouraging to me in comparison to the good you do

I'd rather do without.

I know enough of what is wrong and what will fix it. What I need to find is people looking to apply what they know.

Dick Eastman Holocaust Denier Bigtime

{end of bulletin 15}

On to the next bulletin in the debate: holocaust-debate16.html.

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

Write to me at contact.html.