Archive/File: holocaust/usa/wmm.0694
Last-Modified: 1994/06/15

From: wmmichael@aol.com (Wm Michael)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.german
Subject: Legal Testimony Against the Holocaust #1
Date: 15 Jun 1994 12:38:08 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 681
Sender: news@search01.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <2tnapg$a71@search01.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: search01.news.aol.com

[The following text, which concerns Ernst Zundel's trials in Canada,
was originally posted by Walking Wounded #42 @5313 on the "Hidden
Agenda" sub of WWIV-net.]

_____________________________________________________________________
__


     The following excerpts are from the two trials of Ernst Zundel
in Canada during the years 1985 and 1988.  These trials, had they
been reported honestly, would have been the biggest setback for the
standard Holocaust story perpetuated by the popular media up to that
time.  More recent are the "Leuchter Report" and confirmation by the
Polish Government of his test results which show that Zyklon-B was
not used in the so-called "Gas Chambers."  These test results are
suppressed by the media.

     I will quote from the book "The Great Holocaust Trial", by
Michael A. Hoffman II, and "The Holocaust on Trial" by Robert Lenski.
I'm sure you won't find these at your local library.

     In the 70's Zundel founded the Samisdat Publishers Ltd., a
publishing house exposing the Holocaust hoax.  The first title
published was "The Auschwitz Lie" by Thies Christophersen, who had
been
stationed in Auschwitz for 11 months in 1944.  In 1977 he began
massive
mailings of revisionist information around the world, including
thousands of mailings to the media and governments around the globe. 
He then started into video.  Then, the trouble started.  As the book
says, "The Zionists will try to ignore books.  They will overlook
pamphlets.  But they cannot afford to ignore the invasion of their
formerly exclusive territory.  Television has been possibly the
greatest weapon...in the arsenal of the enemies of mankind.  No tool
has been more expertly used to misguide and pollute the perception of
humanity than TV.  The power of the TV image has actually supplanted
reality in the minds of million who can no longer distinguish between
TV play-acting and life.  Actors playing the parts of medical doctors
on soap operas receive hundreds of letters requesting advice on
diseases and ailments."

     Zundel has Jewish as well as Gentile supporters.  "True
reconciliation signified the admission of wrong doing on BOTH SIDES. 
The great injustice done to Jewish people...as a result of the
'Holocaust' monomania and the fear among gentiles of being tarred
with
the anti-Semitism brush, has been a failure to honestly and
constructively criticize Jewish excesses; excesses exhibited by all
nations of people.  By accepting the racist claims of the Zionists,
gentiles refrained from criticism.  Human nature being what it is,
people who are dwelling in a contrived milieu of fawning and
flattery,
end up as out-of-touch megalomaniacs and paranoids.  Hence,
reconciliation of the authentic kind can come about only when
Zionists
also admit wrongdoing."

     When asked about distributing Nazi literature Zundel replies,
"Who
are the biggest purveyors of Nazi and neo-Nazi literature in Canada? 
Zionist hypocrites, liars and opportunists...It is quite clear that
purveying Third- Reich-related material is both profitable and
permissible, provided that 'the right people' are making the bucks."

     Zundel wrote to Jewish leaders and groups to have "a meeting of
minds to strive for clarifications of grievances, fears and
animosities."  He was ignored and rebuffed.

     The government then got into the act by charging him with
Canada's
anti-hate provision of its criminal code.  The media then began to
whip
up the public against Samisdat and Zundel.  After the 'Canadian
Jewish
News' and other periodicals staged a rally and 1,500 tried to attack
the Samisdat headquarters, the media "would have condemned from the
high pulpits...in ringing tones of self righteousness had it been a
mob
of Klansmen or Nazis, is ignored when it is a gaggle of 'noble
survivors' who riot."

     "With Zundel able to pierce the monopoly as a sensational news
maker whom the media could no longer ignore...the Zionists had to
take
unfair advantage the other way, through their influence in the
courts."

     Throughout 1983 Zundel continued to produce videos with Ditlieb
Felderer, a Jewish anti-Zionist dissident and an exploration of
rigged
war crimes about the accused Nazi war criminal Frank Walus, about
whom
11 eyewitnesses from Israel swore they saw him kill and maim their
friends and relatives.  It was later revealed that at the time he was
supposed to have done this he was doing forced labor in a German
farm.

     A Commissar Citron said that Zundel was resorting to the
supposed
Nazi use of the 'Big Lie'.  Zundel quoted from "Mein Kampf" Hitler's
words that say that is the method of the Zionist establishment and
nowhere advocates this policy himself.

     At the start of the hearing in Dec, 1983, he was met by a
vicious
crowd of Jewish rioters led by the terrorist JDL (Jewish Defense
League).  Of course you gasp, "How could he call the JDL a terrorist
organization?  They are always shown on TV as such nice guys."  Well;
in a 1979 California state Attorney General's report on political
terrorism, this group was described as "an alarming phenomenon" whose
members "appear armed and ready for violence."  The Attorney General
wrote that the JDL "attacks with bombs and explosive devices on
foreign
consulates" and predicts that "the group's violent activities will
not
diminish."  According to the U.S. F.B.I.'s Terrorist Research Branch,
the JDL were responsible for a total of 15 acts of terrorism between
1981 and 1983, which killed one person and left seven injured.  The
media usually calls them "militant defenders of synagogues against
vandals" and so forth.  Accusations of terrorism and hate mongering
are
special categories the media has reserved for Arabs and Germans as
part
of the indoctrination campaign which has worked very well.

     The JDL proceeded to beat Zundel and his supporters outside and
into the court house with almost no police protection.  This
continued
throughout the trial.  Zundel and his followers had to wear hard hats
every time they showed up for court.  Even elderly people who
accompanied them were attacked and knocked to the ground.  "This
comes
as no surprise to students of the psychological warfare principles
imbedded in "Holocaust" movies.  The...graphic acting out of Jewish
fantasies about what Germans supposedly did, gives the public a
latter
day witch to punish, hang and burn.  Remember, the slogan of the JDL
is
'Butchers have no rights' - and it is the JDL who will decide what
the
definition of a butcher is."

     Zundel says, "...the media are not closed to us, no matter how
much they may disagree with us, provided we understand how to use
them
to get our message across...the JDL...by doing their worst, showed us
at our best, thereby winning us more public support."

     In the summer of 1984 on July 4, the Institute for Historical
Review (IHR) is burned to the ground in an arson attack which
destroys
their $300,000 inventory of revisionist books.  It was a professional
operation done in 5 minutes defeating the elaborate burglar and fire
alarm system.  Irving Rubin, Los Angeles director of the JDL,
applauds
the bombing.  In Sept, 1984 Zundel's house is pipebombed, causing
damage to his and neighbors houses.

     Once the trial started, one of the prosecution witnesses was Dr.
Hilberg, a political scientist regarded as the world authority on the
Exterminationist theory.  Dietlieb Felderer refers to him as a
"theologian," not an historian.  At one point Hilberg stated that he
"could find no satisfactory evidence" of the Germans having made soap
from Jewish human fat.  But further on he told the court "there may
have been, in fact, one or two instances where there was soap
production (from human fat)...but it was not happening as a routine."

Only a theologian or high priest of a cult would first admit that
there
is 'NO EVIDENCE" for soap ...and then on the other hand claim,
mystically, that "there may, have been, in fact, one or two instances
when there was soap production."

     As to the supposed unbiased nature of the media charged with
protecting the public's right to know, reality was revealed by Sol
Littman.  Littman is not only a reporter for the national CBC TV
network but the Canadian representative of the main "Holocaust"
racketeering outfit, the Simon Wiesenthal Center.  During the
preliminary hearing, while Mr. Littman was presumably impartially
reporting the case for millions of Canadians with "fairness," he was
caught red-handed by the judge passing notes of advice to the
prosecutor!  It doesn't get any worse than that in the U.S.S.R.. It's
probably better, since at least in Russia most of the people realize
the news media is controlled, whereas in Canada there are a good many
naive true believers in its "objectivity."

     During the Jury selection judge Locke refused Christie (Zundel's
attorney) to question potential jurors about their views on the
"Holocaust" allegations, their biases -if any- toward Germans, and
their affiliations with Zionists, Jews and Freemasons.  Just prior to
the Zundel trial, Jewish abortionist Dr. Henry Morgenthaler was tried
for violations of the abortion laws and HIS attorneys were permitted
to
ask four probing questions of potential jurors and to exclude Roman
Catholics and others deemed holding preconceptions about
Morgenthaler. 
The Crown had an unlimited number of jury challenges, but Christie
was
left with four and these were to be used without in any way
substantively questioning potential jurors.  Christie was restricted
to
asking them to repeat information that they had already given
regarding
their names and occupation.

     The judge did not sequester the jury in hotel rooms under orders
not to watch TV during the trial, as was done in the far less
emotional
and controversial Von Bulow trial in May.  Locke said such a move
would
insult the jury's intelligence.  Surprise, surprise, during the trial
the major networks broadcast movies such as "The Execution", "The
Belarus File", and other Hollywood "Holocaust" hype movies.  They
were
heavily advertised and noted in the press.  It seems likely that some
jurors watched them, much to the detriment of their ability to be
fair.

     The first witness for the prosecution was Sgt. Ron Williams, a
researcher for the Attorney General's support staff.  On cross
examination by Christie he admitted that in 7 months of studying the
pamphlet "Did Six Million Really Die?" (The pamphlet that Zundel was
being tried for distributing) he didn't even read the whole thing and
didn't bother to check sources cited in the pamphlet.  On top of this
he admitted that he was a practicing Freemason.  It would be doubtful
that he could give an unbiased testimony.

     The next on the stand was a 56 year old Hungarian Jew, Arnold
Friedman.  He was touted as an "eyewitness" to homicidal gassings at
Auschwitz.  According to the news media, people like Friedman are the
hard facts-oriented truth-tellers who can "blow away" with their
righteous testimony those "damned liars" who deny gas chambers. 
According to Prosecutor Peter Griffiths, Friedman was the type of
person whose feelings would be hurt if Holocaust doubters continued
to
be allowed to question the unquestionable.  As revisionist have
always
pointed out, they can only get away with their gassing accusations as
long as they are protected from critical scrutiny by media
insulation.

     Mr. Friedman testified that he had seen "fourteen foot flames"
shooting out of the crematorium chimneys at Auschwitz.  He also gave
sworn testimony that he was able to tell whether the Nazis were
burning
fat Jewish Hungarians or skinny Jewish Poles by looking at the
different colors of the smoke and flames!  Christie then cited the
scientific fact that crematoria were specifically designed NOT to
give
off either smoke, flame, ashes or odors.  It is technically
IMPOSSIBLE
for crematoria to emit them.  (We have all the plans for the
crematoria
the Germans built.  They were as modern as used now and we know how
they operated.)

     Friedman tried to save face by claiming the German crematoria
were
not "ordinary" crematoria.  It is here that most major American news
media stopped their report on the testimony of Friedman.  This made
it
look like Friedman was right when he gave his testimony.  It gave the
impression that those sinister Nazis even went so far as to build
special crematorium to do what no other could do - give off smoke,
flames, and odors to scare the hapless Jews "before they were Gassed"
and to draw attention from Allied bombers.  Of course the plans
showing
the crematorium and proof of the impossibility was never told in the
media.  Now comes the good part.  Christie then asked Friedman,
"Couldn't there have been many other explanations for the smoke and
flames?"

     "Yes, there could have," Friedman admitted, "If I had listened
to
you at the time when I was listening to other people (in the camp), I
might have listened to you.  But at the time I listened to them."

     In other words, a frightened boy at Auschwitz, had had his head
filled with the wildest of rumors.  These were then probably
compounded
by watching post-war fantasy movies that depict massive crematoria
belching clouds of smoke.

     You will note that the media still continue to repeat the
nonsense
about smoke and ash.  In the April 23, 1985 edition of the N.Y.
Times,
one Pearl Herskovic says she saw her whole family go up in "billowing
smoke" in Auschwitz.  She stood there watching the smoke and suddenly
her family's "ashes began to fall on my arm."  This supposed
irrefutable fact is able to seem credible only because it is shielded
from contradiction by Zionist media control.

     In his article for the Times, reporter Douglas Martin did not
report even the first half of the Friedman-Christie exchange as had
some other U.S. papers:

"The upshot (of the trial) has been a bizarre flurry of newspaper
headlines calling the existence of crematoriums in Nazi death camps a
theory not a fact..."

     Clever, eh?  The NY Times is telling its millions of trusting
readers that they were clashing over whether or not 'there were
crematoriums in the camp: whether or not they "existed" at all.' 
This
was not the issue whatsoever.  The issue pertained to what the
crematoria gave off, not whether there were crematoria in Auschwitz.

     Now back to Hilberg, the author who did not even take a ONE day
tour of Auschwitz and Treblinka until 18 years after he wrote his
"definitive" Holocaust history.

     The principle document upon which Hilberg bases his
Extermination
theory on is the "confession" of SS Obersturmbanfueher Kurt Gerstein.

It consists of 7 1/2 pages of text.  In his 7 1/2 page confession,
Gerstein supposedly swore that: "700 to 800 Jews were squeezed into a
gas chamber at Belzec measuring 25 square meters."  This is the size
of
about a 2 car garage.  Also that "Adolf Hitler was personally at a
homicidal 'gassing' camp," and that "25 million people were gassed."

     Arthur R. Butz (another Jew on the Revisionist side who wrote
"The
Hoax of the 20th Century") pointed out that it was unforgivable that
Hilberg would use such an obviously spurious "confession" as a
source. 
(Gerstein died under mysterious circumstances awaiting a war crimes
trial).

     Hilberg said that he "did not rely on any statements by Gerstein
that he regarded as imaginative or incredible."  In other words he
edited out those statements that would have seemed too insane to his
readers and which would have cast doubt on the parts of the
confession
he did use!

     Gerstein was the only eyewitness to a 'gassing' quoted by
Hilberg
in his "history".

     Christie requested that Hilberg offer some scientific evidence
of
the millions killed by gas, since their was supposed to be mountains
of
evidence.  

Christie:  "Can you give me one scientific report that shows the
existence of gas chambers anywhere in Nazi-occupied territory?"

Hilberg:  I'm at a loss."

Christie:  "You are at a loss because you can't.  I want one report,
before, during or after the war that shows that someone was killed by
the use of those gasses."

Hilberg:  "You want an autopsy (report) and I know of no autopsy."

     Hilberg told the court he could not think of any reason why a
scientist would undertake such a study.

     Christie later confronted Hilberg with information from U.S.
Judge
Edward L. Van Roden published in 1949, showing that German prisoners
had been tortured by US soldiers.  The Judge stated that 137 German
soldiers that he investigated "had been kicked in the testicles
beyond
repair."  The Judge also concluded that the Americans shoved burning
matches under German POW's fingernails and broke their jaws during
the
so-called "Dachau" war crimes trials.  The Judge was a member of the
Simpson-Van Roden Commission, a panel which had looked into the
torture of German POW'S.  Hilberg told the court he was unaware of
the
Judge's report.  Not so well informed for such a thorough historian,
I
would think.  Not surprisingly, Hilberg refused to testify in the
second trial of Zundel.

     The next 'Big Gun' brought up to bat was Rudolf Vrba.  Vrba
claimed to have been in Auschwitz and Majdaneck concentration camps
until April of 1944.  Vrba's account of killing gas chambers for
humans...became one of the most crucial cornerstones of the entire
gassing and "abandonment of the Jews" thesis.  Vrba's report is part
of
an exhibit at Auschwitz.  He testified against Germans during the
Auschwitz trials in West Germany.  His book, 'I Cannot Forgive', is
holy scripture, revered for its "honesty" and depth of righteous
anger
at the "Nazi Beasts" throughout the world.

     At first it was tough going.  Vrba was an insulting and
disrespectful witness.  Vrba wisecracked, "Should I bring you 6
million
bodies here that are the proof?"  Christie retorted, "I'd be content
with just one autopsy report."

     Vrba testified that 150,000 French Jews were gassed at
Auschwitz. 
Christie produced evidence that the entire number of Jews deported
from
France was only 75,721 (a figure from another Jew, no less).  Asked
how
he arrived at the figure of 150,000 for Auschwitz alone, Vrba's
scientific method consisted of his having listened to the language
the
inmates spoke, and by examining what style of luggage they carried!

     Vrba's downfall came when Dr. Faurisson noted Vrba's testimony
that he had seen an SS man pour poison gas through a roof hole in an
upper-level gas chamber and then jauntily climb down.

     Christie forced Vrba to admit that the "chamber" in question was
not a homicidal gas chamber at all but a mortuary and that it was not
up high enough that someone had to climb down from it, because it was
in fact located partially underground.  Vrba said his error was "in
good faith."

     Then, suddenly came a stunning series of confessions from Vrba.

     Vrba actually confessed that his book was "an artistic
picture...not a document for a court."  He agreed that he had NEVER
ACTUALLY WITNESSED ANYBODY BEING GASSED TO DEATH, but had heard
rumors!
 
     He further admitted that his written and pictorial descriptions
of
Auschwitz crematoria were a result of guessing, based on "what I
heard
it might look like".

     Trying to keep up some semblance of a front, Vrba squeeked that
his mistakes were due to his "great urgency" to warn his fellow Jews.

     Vrba had turned out to be as big a fraud as Hilberg.  No wonder
the Zionists use every conceivable legal, economic, political,
defamatory and violent ploy they can to stop the questioning of the
Holocaust.

     Another interesting witness for the prosecution was Dennis
Urstein, an "eyewitness" with the "positive proof."  He claimed he
saw
bodies gassed with Zyklon B hauled out of the "gas chamber."  He
described the bodies as being "greyish-greenish" in color.  Persons
who
have died from Zyklon B poisoning would turn a bright cherry red.

     In assisting with the disposal of bodies in the gas chamber it
seems that Urstein wore no protective clothing.  If this was the case
he would have died too.  Urstein also claimed with absolute certainty
that 154 of his family died in the Holocaust but he had the greatest
of
difficulty naming even 20 of them.  Of the 20 that he said died at
the
hands of the Nazis, one of these actually died in the U.S. in the
late
1970's.

     Henry Leader was another "eyewitness" who couldn't get the body
color of the supposed Zyklon B gas victims correct.  He didn't even
agree with Urstein's gray-green color.  Leader came up with a new
one:
blue.

     One witness told of 30-40 people packed into a chamber ONE METER
SQUARE.  When told of the impossibility of this the judge said he
would
have to see how large that was.  (This is a little larger that one
square yard).  When they brought a replica of one sq. meter into
court,
the judge would not allow it because he needed several qualified
people
to measure it before it could be allowed!  It never was.  (This was
done with no jurors present, as many other details refused by the
judge
were.)

     The exterminationist ace-in-the-hole has always been Hollywood,
so
as the final "argument" which closed their case, the jury was shown
the
movie 'Nazi Concentration Camps', which was filmed in 1945 by
Hollywood
director George Stevens.  It is filled with inaccuracies (such as
that
gas chambers existed in camps where even the ZIONISTS NOW ADMIT they
did not.  And maximum exploitation of scenes of piles of bodies to
'prove' the means of death (do piles of bodies prove the bodies were
'gassed'?)

     The Defense was not allowed to show the jury a SINGLE visual
exhibit!

     Dr. Faurisson, during his testimony, discussing the figure of
"six
million murdered Jews," alluded to a German officer named Hoettl who
just blurted this number out at his trial, with no substantiation. 
No
one knows where he got the figure but it was made a part of the
"documentary" record at Nuremberg.  "This figure has just kept on
being
slavishly reproduced by the media and historians," Faurisson said.

     Another powerful witness for the defense was Dr. William Bryan
Lindsay, with a doctorate in Chemistry from the University of
Indiana. 
For 33 years he has been employed at a top U.S. corporation as a
research chemist.

     He informed the court that the safety and time factors involved
in
the supposed gassing of millions of people with Zyklon B pesticide
are
scientifically impossible.  "I have come to the conclusion that no
one
was willfully or purposefully killed with Zyklon B in this manner.  I
consider it absolutely impossible."

     Not being able to wriggle out of so devastating a contradiction
to
the myth by so eminent a scientist, the media downplayed or
suppressed
it altogether.  The Toronto Sun refused to mention that Dr. Lindsey
was
a doctor of chemistry, referring to him as merely as a "chemist",
which
in a former British colony like Canada can also mean a druggist. 
Canada's national TV network gave absolutely no mention of his
testimony in its entire 10 p.m broadcast.

     Ditlieb Felderer also testified for Zundel.  He has been
mentioned
in previous posts.  Not one of his 30,000 photographs was allowed to
be
offered as evidence.

     A courageous reporter (there still are a few), with over thirty
years experience, Doug Collins next testified about the atmosphere of
intimidation that surrounds free inquiry into the history of WW II. 
He
said there was no topic that frightens reporters into submission to
Zionist dogma than "Holocaust" revisionism.  Any newsman who
investigates revisionist critiques is smeared with the "anti-Semite"
label.

     Mr. Collins warned that, should Zundel lose the case, reporters
will have to check with the Jewish "Defense" League (which he called
the "attack league") before having their material cleared for
publication.

     Since the false news law was itself Orwellian in the sense that
it
claimed that jurors can telepathically determine if someone 
"knowingly" published "false news", Collins addressed the fundamental
absurdity of the verdict the jury was ordered to decide.

     German historian Udo Walendy gave the jury background on the
faking of photographs (a whole other story here) and the role of
Zionist propagandists who were inserted into key positions in the
Allied command and charged with determining what the Germans
allegedly
did.  He too was severely restricted in what he could say and talk
about by Judge Locke.

     Playwright and literature professor Dr. Gary Botting took the
stand and informed the court that George Orwell, the great prophet
who
warned of the dangers of mind control, was the first to question the
validity of gas chamber exterminations as far back as 1945.

     When Zundel was questioned, Griffiths suggested that Zundel's
"fixation" on Jews implied that they were a problem.  Zundel
rebutted:

"There are race problems, there are Jewish problems.  (CTV reporter)
Brian Nelson was fired for touching on the Jewish problem.  He called
Israel "the Zionist entity" (in a TV broadcast from Kuwait), and was
kicked out of his job.  That was the Jewish problem for Nelson."


     As a postscript, the book has a few things to say about how the
media reported the trial:

     By grouping things that did happen and that Zundel and
revisionists never denied in court: that there were crematoria, that
possibly hundreds of thousands of Jews died from typhus and
unintentional starvation brought on by merciless Allied bombing of
supply lines, and placing them all under the heading of "Holocaust,"
people are led to believe that this is what is being denied.

     This is the delirious confusion inherent in the Newspeak
linguistics which George Orwell warned against in '1984'.  It is this
confusion that is exploited to maximum effect by the Exterminationist
propagandists.  They want people to believe that revisionists are
saying that there were never any concentration camps, no crematoria,
no
deportations, no innocents killed.

     But no revisionist from Butz to Berg to Faurisson to Martin has
ever held this...Why do they need to invent this lie about
revisionism?
 
     Let us examine the cover story of Canada's equivalent of TIME
magazine...Maclean's magazine for March 11, 1985.

     If the "truth" was vindicated by that trial and gas chambering
proven, why would Maclean's have to lie about the trial or distort
the
testimony?  Wouldn't it be damaging enough just to accurately report
it
as it happened, if all went as well for Zionist orthodoxy as the
Establishment now claims?

     The reader should note how Maclean's is counting on the laziness
and gullibility of its readers.  They are banking on the gamble that
their readers will not check the transcript of the trial themselves,
and that they haven't even saved or remembered the newspaper
clippings
of the Toronto press which covered Vrba's testimony and even
headlined
his confession of never actually having seen gassings himself.

     The media has a very low opinion of their reader's intelligence.

     The holocaust hoax has only existed for this length of time
based
on these very methods of censorship, omission and outright lying.

     On to the second trial.

     The final witness in the Zundel trial in 1988 was British
historian David Irving. He has written nearly 30 books over 30 years.
He has written 'Germany's Cities Did Not Die', 1961. His first famous
book was 'The Destruction of Dresden (1963)', an investigation of the
British and American air raid in which over 100,000 people were
killed
in the space of 12 hours. Even better known are the two volumes on
the
political and military biography of Adolph Hitler, 'The War Path:
Hitler's Germany, 1933-1939' and 'Hitler's War, 1939-1945'.

     The Hitler biography required 10 years of archive research, as
did
'Churchill's War'. To show what kind of author he is, I quote him:
"For
10 years I researched Hitler's life based entirely on primary
records.
I don't believe in buying other peoples books or reading them on
Adolf
Hitler. We can readily surmise there must be many tens or hundreds of
tons of books. I think it's easier to go to the archives and look at
the documents. That way you avoid soaking up other people's
prejudices." Irving named the "three criteria for a document to be
acceptable to a historian," as laid down by the great English
historian, Hugh Trevor-Roper. "First, "Is it genuine?" Second, "Was
the
person who wrote the document in a position to know what he is
writing
about?" Third, the historian must ask, "Why has {this document} come
into existence?" People often create documents in order to protect
themselves."

     Irving persuaded Hitler's staff to trust him with their private
papers that they had not shown to anyone else. He also built up a
card
index of 10 or 15 thousand filing cards on a day-by-day basis so you
knew exactly what Hitler was doing, rather like a diary. It meant
that
you had a useful tool to check any document. Any document that was
shown to you had to fit with that card index. If it didn't, then
there
was something phony about the document.

     He also had scientific tests done on certain documents.

     When asked about his opinions formed about the so-called
Holocaust
and HITLER'S knowledge of it, he says:

From: wmmichael@aol.com (Wm Michael)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.german
Subject: Legal Testimony Against the Holocaust #2
Date: 15 Jun 1994 12:39:02 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 311
Sender: news@search01.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <2tnar6$a7b@search01.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: search01.news.aol.com

     "...I had found no documents showing any involvement between
Adolph Hitler and the Holocaust, which was very disturbing for me. So
I
reinvestigated ... I couldn't believe what I was seeing, the fact
there
were no documents whatsoever showing that a Holocaust had ever
happened...This was very disturbing for me and it was even more
disturbing for my literary agent who warned me of the consequences of
producing the Hitler book in this fashion."

     He later lost approx. 1 million dollars by writing this because
of
the many publishers who did not handle or cover his book.

     He states that "...Germany, by the end of the war, was a Fuehrer
state without a Fuehrer. He had lost control of whatever was going on
and I'm not going to be so simple as to say it was quite simply what
is
now called the Holocaust. Whatever it was that was going on, there is
no evidence to satisfy an English Magistrate's Court and it certainly
shouldn't satisfy a historian."

     Asked if there were six million Jews exterminated as a result of
an official German policy, he said "We historians are not
familiar...with the slightest documentary evidence that there was any
such German policy. And I should be familiar with it, having spent 10
years wading around in the archives of the German High command...it
isn't there....All Hitler's other crimes are documented in
statistical
details in the archives. This is supposed to have been the biggest
crime of all and yet the documents just aren't there..."

     Asked of any evidence to support the policy of deportation, he
said, "Quite definitely. The documents exist and it's quite clearly
referred to as Hitler's order." When asked, "Did you find any orders
for the extermination of Jews in the archives of any country?", he
said, "None whatsoever and the British were reading the code signals
of
the SS." What about Himmler, Heydrich, Frank and other top Nazis?
"There are no explicit orders and this is where the academic
historians
start asking us to read between the lines and find fancy translations
for certain words and I wouldn't go along with these methods. I want
in
a crime as big as this to find explicit evidence. What one does find
is
documents pointing in the other direction. For example, in the spring
of 1942, Hans Lammers, who was something like the German Prime
Minister, telephoned the Secretary of State of the German Ministry of
Justice, who made a note of their conversation. Lammers said that
Hitler had repeatedly said that he wanted the solution of the Jewish
problem postponed until after the war. This document was concealed at
Nuremberg, and resurfaced only recently. It takes some explaining and
this is the kind of document which embarrasses the academic
historians."

     As for how he evaluates the Einsatzgruppen reports: "Here we
have
to look at the third of the Trevor-Roper criteria...why does this
document exist. A man is out in the field behind the Russian front
doing his job for the SS...and he is going to show he's doing a jolly
good job...Statistics like this are meaningless." Sounds like our
inflated body counts during Viet Nam.

     Asked if he thought an enterprise of the magnitude of the
extermination of the Jews of Europe could be accomplished...without
the
existence of explicit orders and plans, he says: "...I have to say
that
the German wartime civil servant was basically a cowardly animal and
he
would not do something that he considered to be criminal without
getting a document clearing himself. That is why there are letters
showing Himmler saying "by the Fuehrer's orders we are deporting the
Jews." Which was the extent of the Fuehrer's orders and which was the
extent, to my mind, of the Final Solution...Hitlers other
crimes...The
euthanasia order, the order to kill British commandos, the orders to
lynch American airmen, the orders for the killing of the male
population of Stalingrad if they ever occupied it. Hitler's other
crimes, simple crimes, the documents are there where you expect to
find
them. And yet this biggest crime of all, there is no document.
Further,
these orders would have been referred to in countless files of
different ministerial bodies. So it would have been impossible for
these documents to have been destroyed at the end of the war. There
would always be carbon copies somewhere."

     Asked if, in his opinion, the Holocaust had been sufficiently
investigated to determine accurately its extent and meaning, he
replied: "I think there has been virtually no investigation of the
Holocaust....The standard works like Allan Bullock's 'Hitler: A Study
in Tyranny' are riddled with errors, yet they go into reprint after
reprint." Has there been any indication of hard evidence for numbers
killed at all? He answers: "Certain numbers for certain specific
tragedies," yet he cautioned, "these episodes are served up again and
again and again as being examples of what was going on."

     He also says: " There were very large numbers of massacres which
can only be described as bloody and mindless, of Jews and other
ethnic
minorities in occupied Europe during the War." He also agreed that
Himmler and Heydrich had knowledge of the massacres. But he says "I
don't think there was any overall Reich policy to kill the Jews."

     He also testifies on "...some very interesting documents in the
British Archives which show the British Intelligence Service
suggesting
a propaganda campaign against Germany on the basis of invented
allegations of gas chambers..."

     Irving mentions that Himmler's diary is in the hands of the
Israelis. They will not allow any historians to examine it. If there
had been any evidence of a Holocaust they would be the first to
release
it.

     Irving talks about the many documents that have been altered.
For
instance, "attempts by historians to find veiled allusions to
genocide
in speeches like that of Himmler's to his SS Ogergruppenfuehrers." He
says he was "unhappy about the integrity because of the remarkable
fact
that at this point the type script changes, a page appears to have
been
inserted by a different typist, the numeration of the pages changes
from a typewritten page number at the top to a penciled page number
at
the top, and there are various other indications about that speech
that
make me queasy." Also, the speech by Himmler talking of the solution
of
the Jewish problem. "You can imagine how I felt executing this
soldierly order issued to me, but I obediently complied..."  The page
containing this pregnant sentence "was manifestly retyped and
inserted
in the transcript at a later date, as the different indenting
shows...Another example of a document being tampered with."

     He quotes many examples of documents being changed, especially
those used at the Nuremberg trials.

     So don't take at face value all those 'FACTS' you all out there
use to repudiate the revisionists literature, unless you have
personally seen the original documents or the author has seen them
and
not just quoting from another book he has read.

     This is an author who admits that when he started his books,
believed in the standard Holocaust story. But he has changed his mind
as time went on. Even as now many noted Jewish historians are
changing
their minds. Examples are:

     Jewish historian Samuel Gringauz emphasized the extreme lack of
objectivity of Jewish survivors in an article published in a 1950
issue
of the New York journal, Jewish Social Studies. "The question thus
arises whether participants of such a world-shaking epoch can at all
be
its historians and whether the time has yet come when valid historic
judgment, free of partisanship, vindictiveness and ulterior motives
is
possible."

     The Jerusalem Post of Aug. 17, 1986 quoted Shmuel Krakowski, the
director or Israel's major Holocaust archives, as saying that more
than
half of the survivor testimonies in his records were "unreliable."
Many
elderly Jews had taken second-hand information and "let their
imaginations run away with them," said the Post.

     In his book, The Final Solution, historian Gerald Reitlinger
referred to the tendency of Jewish Holocaust survivors to exaggerate
their stories.

     French-Jewish historian Olga Wormser-Migot made the point that
"many Jewish inmates in the concentration camps made up stories about
gas chambers" in order to suggest they had suffered as badly as other
Jews in other camps.

     There are many Jews world wide who agree with much of what the
Revisionists say. One such person is Noam Chomsky, one of the worlds
leading experts in linguistics. He signed a petition, along with many
other prominent persons, recommending that Robert Faurisson's
declaration that the Holocaust did not happen, as is usually
believed,
should be investigated further.

     Mr. Chomsky did not testify at Zundel's trial but one Jew that
did
testify in his defense was Joseph G. Berg, who is Jewish on both
sides
of his family. He has published Holocaust-debunking books since 1960.

He has spoken with hundreds of people who were in Auschwitz during
the
war. Asked whether there were gas chambers at Auschwitz, he answered
"There were NO extermination camps at all". During the war, Berg had
lived in a district under Romanian control which was reserved for
Jews
of the region. He says; "It was a lot worse for us than in a
concentration camp...The German authorities looked after the inmates
in
the camps...We were left to our own devices." Berg spoke of meeting
Ilya Ehrenburg, the famous Soviet Jewish writer and propagandist, at
the Nuremberg trials. Ehrenburg had examined Auschwitz after the war,
and was with another prominent Jew, a publisher, who had been
interned
there for several years. Burg asked both men if they saw anything
suggestive of gassings, and both answered in the negative.

     He was asked about statements made by Jews saying Jews were
burned
and gassed. He answered: "I would like to see a Jew who has given
such
statements during trial. One should force him to take an oath under
the
rabbinical rites with the skull cap, without pictures of Christ
present, with the Hebrew Bible, in the presence of a rabbi or a pious
religious Jew. Then he should swear an oath that he has seen
something
like that. Then these false oaths, these false statements, these sick
statements, would go down by 99.5 percent. Because the superficial
oath
is not binding, morally binding, for these Jews."

     He was asked about how the yellow star came to be worn by the
Jews. Berg replied that, "The director of the Zionist movement in
Germany had called for it as early as 1933. The measure was finally
implemented in 1938, against the wishes of both Goering and Goebbels.
The Zionists didn't understand it as an insult, but rather as a
heroic
gesture. Just like the SS wear the swastika."

     He also said: "It was a matter of the establishment of the State
of Israel. The large Jewish bankers did not want to go to Israel
themselves, but they did support the country in their own way...they
play a double game...They helped support the Hitler regime. Some had
said they would sacrifice European Jewry if it brought them Israel."

     Along these lines, testimony of Bradley Smith, mentioning a case
of Holocaust fraud. He cited the fantasies of Elie Wiesel, who claims
"...that when some Jews were executed in the Ukraine, that for months
after the shootings...their cadavers continued to spurt geysers of
blood from their graves into the air." Mr. Smith says, "Now, I have
two
ways to look at this. I can either look at it as if Mr. Wiesel
believes
it, then of course he's not wrapped too tight, or I can look at it
that
he's passing along fraudulent information. You don't have to have a
doctorate in hydrology to understand in this day and age that even
Jewish cadavers cannot spurt geysers of blood from their graves for
months after they have been buried. Now, not only is the fraud in the
original statement, but the fraud is also perpetuated by the
unwillingness of our academics and the press to question him about
such
matters...it is an expression of the cowardice of these professions
in
the face of the lobby that runs the Holocaust story."

     Another historian, Mark Weber, spoke of testimony at the
Nuremberg
trial. The "very common defense strategy used at Nuremberg and other
postwar trials was, The attorney will argue that...there was a
terrible
extermination program that we will not dispute but MY particular
defendant was not involved in it, and this is done in order to avoid
getting into what is an almost impossible task and that is to call
into
question the entire Holocaust extermination story which is held to
with
an almost religious fervor..." When asked, "Do you know whether any
of
the defendants at Nuremberg admitted to extermination?", Weber
replied,
"EVERY single defendant denied that he knew of ANY program to
exterminate the Jews during the war."

     Berg mentioned the case of Dr. Benedikt Kautsky, a prominent
socialist Jew who spent three years in Birkenau. His mother was there
as well. She was about 80, became ill, and got "special treatment" -
which in her case meant especially good food and care. After the war,
Kautsky returned to Vienna, to publish a Workers newspaper which
brought out the truth. He also published a book, 'Teufel und
Verdammte
(1946)', which told the truth about the alleged extermination of the
Jews. "The whole edition was burned." The story of the gassings, said
Burg, "comes from a sick mind".

     This should help show that the Revisionists message is not
strictly a Gentile against Jew story. Some Jews are also on their
side,
with more changing their mind all the time. Even without the gassing
story, the Jews still suffered very much during the war.

     Just to toss another fact at you before I am through... Kurt
Gerstein has written about the extermination of people in Belzec,
Sobibor and Treblinka by an old Diesel motor in each camp. I am sure
all of you have heard the story also. I'm sure none of you have read
along with the story that Diesel motors don't produce enough carbon
monoxide to kill people reliably!  The Germans would certainly have
used gasoline engines or another more suitable method.

Thanks,
WALKING WOUNDED



Article 32264 of soc.culture.german:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!hookup!news.moneng.mei.com!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!jussieu.fr!univ-lyon1.fr!swidir.switch.ch!scsing.switch.ch!xlink.net!nntp.gmd.de!Germany.EU.net!EU.net!uunet!newstf01.cr1.aol.com!search01.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: wmmichael@aol.com (Wm Michael)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.german
Subject: "Liberators"
Date: 18 Jun 1994 00:40:03 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 617
Sender: news@search01.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <2tttr3$g2@search01.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: search01.news.aol.com

From _The Journal of Historical Review_, Vol. 13, Number 3 (May/June
1993):


                    MULTI-MEDIA 'LIBERATORS' PROJECT
                           EXPOSED AS FRAUD
      Historical Truth Survives "Politically Correct" Exploitation

                       Mark Weber and Greg Raven


Exposing historical and media fraud sometimes takes years or even
decades.
In the case of a recent heavily promoted and widely praised
multi-media
project - designed to promote the Holocaust story, condemn official
racism
against blacks in America during the Second World War, and encourage
racial
tolerance - debunking has come much more quickly.

     _Liberators: Fighting on Two Fronts in World War II_ - a
lavishly
financed project that claims to tell the story of how black troops
liberated Buchenwald and Dachau - was exposed as an error-packed
fraud
within weeks of its debut.

     Producers Nina Rosenblum and William Miles collaborated with
author
Lou Potter on the slickly promoted project that includes a
much-touted
"documentary" film, a book, a high school workbook, a screenplay and
a
theatrical version.  Even before its public debut, "Liberators" had
garnered impressive national and international support.

     Typical of the hype was the praise by _Publishers Weekly_ (Oct.
19, p.
32), a leading publishing trade periodical:


     It's been a long time in coming, but _Liberators: Fighting on
Two
     Fronts in World War II_, as a book, a TV documentary, a workbook
for
     high schools to accompany the documentary, and a theatrical
feature,
     is going to make its presence felt.  This is the story, not
found in
     standard historical accounts, of the role played by the 761st
Tank
     Battalion in freeing the prisoners of Dachau and Buchenwald.


     Jesse Jackson presented a copy of the sumptuous book version of
_Liberators_ (published by the prestigious firm of Harcourt Brace
Jovanovich) to President-elect Clinton.  The black leader also
announced
that, with financial backing from financier Felix Rohatyn, he would
distribute copies to every school library in the United States.


Gala Premiere

     New York Mayor David Dinkins introduced the "Liberators" film at
its
premiere showing on November 9 at a star-studded gathering of more
than 700
leaders of the city's Jewish and black communities.  The gala event
at New
York's Lincoln Center was cosponsored by the US Holocaust Memorial
Council
(a taxpayer-funded federal government agency) and WNET television
(New York
City's prestigious PBS station).

     Referring obliquely to the high level of tension between the
city's
Jews and blacks, Dinkins said: ". . . When we see those brave
African-American soldiers freeing Jewish prisoners of concentration
camps,
let us remember all that binds us together." Reporting on the
premiere
showing, the US Holocaust Council's (Winter 1992-93) _Newsletter_
similarly
boasted that the film "offered a rare opportunity for reconciliation
and
communication between two of New York's most prominent ethnic
groups."

     Two days later (Veteran's Day), WNET broadcast "Liberators"
nationally
on the PBS television network as part of its prestigious "American
Experience" series.  In mid-December, Jesse Jackson introduced the
film at
its showing at the Apollo Theater in Harlem, a high-profile event
sponsored
by media giant Time Warner and a host of rich and influential New
Yorkers.
(_New Republic_, Feb. 8, p. 13; _New York Guardian_, March 1993)


Truth Emerges

     Because its errors are so blatant and readily discernible, it
wasn't
long before critics began pointing them out.  The first periodical to
take
aim was a relatively obscure monthly, the _New York Guardian_.  In
its
December 1992 issue, the paper reported:


     After an intensive examination of Army records and interviews
with
     military historians, Holocaust experts, [and] World War II
veterans
     including black soldiers whose lives were depicted in
"Liberators,"
     the Guardian has learned that the most celebrated facts of
     "Liberators" are not true.  Neither soldiers of the 761st All
Black
     Tank Battalion nor the soldiers of the 183rd Black Combat
Engineers
     ever liberated Buchenwald or Dachau.


     Veterans' groups and individual veterans of the 761st soon
joined in,
confirming that black units did not liberate Buchenwald or Dachau. 
Robert
Abzug, professor of history at the University of Texas, and author of
_Inside the Vicious Heart: Americans and the Liberation of Nazi
Concentration Camps_, said that the _Liberators_ book and film
"violates
any sense of historical accuracy." (_New Republic_, March 8, p. 42)


Staged "Reunion"

     The "highlight" of "Liberators," reports the Winter 1992-93
_Newsletter_ of the US Holocaust Memorial Council, is a "deeply
moving
reunion" at Buchenwald of former inmate Benjamin Bender "with two of
his
liberators," E. G. McConnell and Leonard Smith.  "In autumn 1991,"
readers
of _Liberators_ (p. vii) are told:


     Jewish survivors of Dachau and Buchenwald were reunited, under
the
     auspices of the production team, with members of the 761st.  The
     dramatic and poignant event received widespread media coverage,
which
     led to Harcourt Brace Jovanovich's decision to employ the
publishing
     medium in making this exciting and previously untold story
available
     to the widest possible audience in this country and abroad.


     This "moving" and "poignant" event is a deceitful fraud.  "It's
a
lie," confirms McConnell.  "We were nowhere near these camps when
they were
liberated.... I first went to Buchenwald in 1991 with PBS, not the
761st."
(_New Republic_, Feb. 6, p. 13)


[Photograph captioned, "A fraudulent scene from 'Liberators.'
According to
the caption to this photo in the Winter 1992-93 Newsletter of the US
Holocaust Memorial Museum, former inmate Benjamin Bender 'recalls the
day
the American troops freed him and his fellow inmates from Buchenwald
with
two of his liberators, E.G. McConnell, left, and Leonard (Smitty)
Smith.'
Their 'reunion' here at Buchenwald is a lie.  McConnell and Smith
were
miles away from the camp when it was liberated."]


     Rosenblum and Miles blatantly disregarded the truth, McConnell
says:
"I called their attention to it.  I tried to stop them, but in the
final
stages they decided to deviate from the fact."  In an effort to
secure his
cooperation with the project, "Liberators" co-producers Rosenblum and
Miles
offered McConnel $11,000.  He turned them down.  (_New York
Guardian_, Dec.
1992)

     "Liberators," McConnell charges, is a "distortion of black
history.
They [the producers] had received a lot of money from the Jewish
community
based on the story and they [the producers] didn't want to change
it."
(_New York Guardian_, Dec. 1992)


More Lies

     One person who figures prominently in "Liberators" is Leon Bass,
a
black veteran who has made a second career speaking to gatherings
sponsored
by Jewish groups, and to classrooms of impressionable school
children.  He
has been featured on the "MacNeil/Lehrer News Hour" and in other
major
media as a liberator of Buchenwald.

     In the Rosenblum/Miles film, and in his frequent lectures, Bass
calls
himself a "liberator."  (_New Republic_, Feb. 8, p. 14)  He has
received
numerous awards and large speaking fees for retelling his
"liberation"
story, and was named co-chairman of the Philadelphia Council on the
Holocaust. (_New York Guardian_, March 1993)

     In fact, though, he only visited Buchenwald - on orders - five
days
AFTER its liberation.

     In both in the film and the book version of "Liberators," Bass
also
emotionally recounts how he and his unit, the 183rd Combat Engineers,
built
a bridge in a Belgian town during the December 1944 "Battle of the
Bulge."
He and his men worked "...in spite of strafing by the airplanes that
would
come down daily and machine-gun us.  In spite of the shelling of the
howitzers, we worked on that bridge."  As a result, Bass continued,
"many
of my friends" were killed building the bridge.  (_Liberators_, p.
190)

     In fact, the only soldier to die while constructing the bridge
was one
officer who was killed in an accident involving his jeep.  There was
no
strafing by German planes.  During its entire time of service in
Europe,
the 183rd lost three of its members, all due to accidents. (_New York
Guardian_, March 1993)

     According to _Liberators_ (p. 217), Buchenwald was liberated
when


     The tankers from the 761st broke through the Buchenwald gates
and,
     with their accompanying infantrymen, quickly ended resistance
from the
     SS guards.... Johnnie Stevens recalls: "We ... shot up the place
and
     chased the guards out of there.  It was a sight I never want to
see
     again, I'll tell you that.


     This account is sheer invention.  American troops did not break
through the camps' gates (they entered on foot), nor did they shoot
up the
place or chase guards.

     On liberation day, "recalls" former Buchenwald inmate Ben
Bender, an
airplane flew overhead and gunfire was exchanged.  (_Liberators_, p.
217)
In fact, the German camp guards had already abandoned the camp hours
before, and there was no gunfire or planes flying overhead.


_The New York Times_ Record of Falsehood

     Over the years, few institutions have been more guilty of
distorting
the truth about the wartime fate of Europe's Jews than _The New York
Times_, America's most influential daily paper, and an important
booster of
"Liberators."  (Joseph Sobran, syndicated columnist and _National
Review_
writer, once joked that the paper "really ought to change its name to
Holocaust Update.")

     The _New York Guardian_ detailed "a clear pattern of inaccurate
reporting, and the employment of faulty journalistic practices" by
_The New
York Times_ since 1985 in its coverage of the liberation of the
German
camps, and particularly the supposed role of black US Army units. 
The
monthly paper cited eleven specific examples of such distortion of
fact by
the _Times_.  (_New York Guardian_, March 1993)


Defending Deceit

     Revealing and instructive has been the response of the project's
producers and supporters to honest efforts by those who tried to
point out
its errors.  Co-producer Rosenblum angrily castigated her film's
critics as
Holocaust Revisionists and racists.  "These people are [of] the same
mentality that says that the Holocaust didn't happen," she said.
(_New
Republic_, Feb. 6, pp. 13-14)


[Photograph captioned, "The 'Liberators' film premiered at a gala
gathering
in New York City, November 9, cosponsored by the US Holocaust
Memorial
Museum and public television station WNET.  Among the attendees were,
from
left: Entertainer Lena Horne, an unidentified person, Harvey
Meyerhoff
(chairman of the US Holocaust Memorial Council), Nina Rosenblum
('Liberators' co-producer), actor Louis Gossett, Jr., William F.
Baker,
Elizabeth Rohatyn (WNET vice chairperson), and William Miles
('Liberators'
co-producer)."]


     When military affairs specialist and New York City radio talk
show
host Jim Dingman confronted Rosenblum about her film's inaccuracies,
she
called him a "racist."  And when he tried to explain the truth to the
Anti-Defamation League (which had eagerly endorsed the project), an
ADL
spokesperson dismissed him as a "revisionist." (_New York Guardian_,
Dec.
1992)

     McConnell tells a similar story.  When he tried to explain the
film's
fraud to the Anti-Defamation League, he was sharply rebuffed.  The
ADL
"treated me like I was a kook or something," he says.

     While admitting that the film's description of the "reunion"
scene
"may be misleading," Rosenblum told one skeptic: "You can't speak to
him
[McConnell] because he's snapped.  He was hit in the head with
shrapnel and
was severely brain-damaged." Informed of this, McConnell responded:
"If I
was so disturbed, why did they use me in the film?"  (_New Republic_,
Feb.
8, p. 13)  As it happens, McConnell is referred to on more than 20
pages of
_Liberators_, often in direct quotes.

     As criticism mounted, Rosenblum "continually encouraged the
veterans
to blame any challenge of the film's veracity on bigotry" and
"deflected
criticism of the film by charging prejudice."  To one critic she
responded
by asking why he was "willing to believe a white commander and not
[the
black] soldiers."  (_New York Guardian_, March 1993)

     Finally, Rosenblum tried to explain away criticism of her film
by
charging:


     There's tremendous racism in the Jewish community.  How people
who
     have been through the Holocaust can be racist is completely
     incomprehensible.  To think that black people are less, which is
what
     most Jewish people think, I can't understand it.  (_New
Republic_,
     Feb. 6, pp. 13-14)



Damage Control

     After the essentially fraudulent character of "Liberators" had
been
widely reported, the project's most prominent backers engaged in some
"damage control" and sought to distance themselves from the
now-discredited
production.

     WNET announced on February 11 that "Liberators" was being
"withdrawn"
from circulation.  Explaining the decision, WNET vice president Harry
Chancey, Jr., referred to "the sacred nature of the Holocaust....
Rather
than let this film go up like an incendiary bomb, we decided that we
would
withdraw the film. . ."


Defiance

     Even so, "Liberators" still had staunch defenders.  One was
Peggy
Tishman, a former president of the Jewish Community Relations Council
of
New York.  "Liberators," she said, is "good for the Holocaust. ...Why
would
anybody want to exploit the idea that this is a fraud?. . ."  What is
important here is not historical accuracy but black-Jewish
"dialogue," she
explained, and added: "There are a lot of truths that are very
necessary.
This is not a truth that's necessary."  (_New Republic_, Feb. 8, p.
14)


[Photograph captioned, "American soldiers who liberated Dachau
summarily
killed 520 of the 560 German camp personnel who had surrendered. 
Here,
soldiers of the 157th Regiment, 45th Division, have just
machine-gunned a
group of about a hundred German prisoners.  Four who were missed are
still
standing, they were killed moments after this photo was taken.  No
one has
ever been punished for this atrocity.  (US Army photo SC 208765.)"]


     At Yale University, "Liberators" was "defiantly" shown to a
gathering
of 200 students and citizens of New Haven.  "This is one more tool to
help
us address the issue of racism," said Gertrude Sparks, director of
the New
Haven YMCA which, along with local Jewish leaders, cosponsored the
showing.
"This is not the time to concern ourselves with who gets credit for
what
camps were taken.  This film will illuminate history."  (_Forward_,
March
5)

     "Liberators" was also shown on February 8 at Harvard University.
 One
person defended the film there by absurdly asserting that "for eight
days
the 761st held the German army.  If they hadn't held it, the German
army
would have gone back to Paris.  ...Whether they went into the camps
first
or last... is not relevant."  (_Forward_, Feb. 12)

     In San Francisco, television station KQED broadcast "Liberators"
on
February 21, ten days after it had been "withdrawn" by the PBS
network.

     Harcourt Brace Jovanovich decided not to withdraw the
_Liberators_
book from circulation, and it remained a selection of the prestigious
Book
of the Month Club.  (_New York Times Book Review_, Feb. 21, p. 36)

     Perhaps most astonishingly, on February 17 it was announced that
the
"Liberators" film had been nominated for an Oscar award in the
category of
Best Documentary.


What Critics Missed

     Regrettably - but understandably - none of the prominent critics
of
"Liberators" have been able or willing to point out the project's
falsehoods as they touch on the Holocaust extermination story itself.

     For example, _Liberators_ (pp. 58, 239) revives the now
well-discredited story that inmates were killed in gas chambers at
Dachau:


     As the 761st and the 100th were preparing for combat, inmates at
     Dachau - outside Munich - were being murdered by the thousands. 
Most
     were gassed, shot, or hanged ...

     "Then I [GI Walter Lewis] went in the back to what they called
the
     shower room.  I didn't go in, I just peeked through the window
because
     I feared that maybe the gas was still on."


_Liberators_ (p. 135) also reports that


     In Buchenwald, that summer of '44, [inmate] Ben Bender could
only
     gaze, in numbed horror, at the gray clouds billowing twenty-four
hours
     a day from the crematorium's towering smokestacks.


     Actually, crematories are designed in such a way that they do
not
"billow" smoke.

     Bender has also claimed to have "stood in the gas chamber" at
Buchenwald.  (_Los Angeles Times_, "TV Times" sec., Nov. 8, p. 7.) 
As
every reputable historian of this era acknowledges, there was no "gas
chamber" at the camp.

     _Liberators_ (p. 158) also cites the "confession" of Auschwitz
Commandant Rudolf Hoss as proof that three million were killed in
that
camp. (As Dr. Robert Faurisson and others have pointed out, this
confession
is demonstrably inaccurate on key points, was obtained by torture,
and is
worthless as proof.  See _The Journal of Historical Review_, Winter
1986,
pp. 389 ff.)


Unmentioned Atrocity

     "Liberators" makes no mention whatsoever of what was almost
certainly
the worst single atrocity committed at Dachau: the murder by the
camp's
American liberators of 520 of the 560 German camp personnel who had
surrendered.  About 100 were shot down wherever they were found
scattered
around the camp.  GIs permitted inmates to kill another 40 prisoners
with
shovels, clubs and guns.  But most of those who surrendered - 358 in
all -
were lined up against walls and summarily machine-gunned by American
soldiers.  (Source: Howard Buechner, _Dachau: The Hour of the
Avenger_,
Metairie, La., 1986.)


Conclusion

     Summing up the "Liberators" debacle, the _New York Post_
pointedly
commented: "What we have here, in short, is an effort to rewrite
history to
suit contemporary political purposes."  (Quoted in _The Washington
Times_,
Feb. 7)

     While few of those who have pointed out errors and fraud in
"Liberators" would regard themselves as "revisionist," Rosenblum's
angry
denunciation of her critics as such is quite apt.  Every person who
helps
set straight the historical record is indeed a revisionist - in the
best
sense of the word.  And although the larger Holocaust questions have
remained untouched by mainstream commentators, the relatively
successful
spotlighting of the fraudulent nature of the "Liberators" project,
and the
debunking of many of its specific lies, is nevertheless a welcome
blow for
historical truth.

[end of article]


[Reprinted by permission from _The Journal of Historical Review_,
P.O. Box
1306, Torrance, CA 90505, USA.  Subscription rate: $40 per year,
domestic.
$50 per year, foreign.]


     This article was scanned by the System Operator of the "Banished
CPU"
computer bulletin board system, which is located in Portland, Oregon,
U.S.A.


                    Banished CPU supports Freedom of Speech!
          ___________________________________________________________
         |                                                          
|
         |  For 300-9600 bps (3 lines w/V.32) call:  (503) 232-5783 
|
         |  For 14400 bps (2 lines w/V.32bis) call:  (503) 232-6566 
|
        
|___________________________________________________________|

                        Sysop: Maynard "the Main Nerd"

[end of file]




Article 12742 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news.ans.net!newstf01.cr1.aol.com!search01.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: wmmichael@aol.com (Wm Michael)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: LEUCHTER: Use your modem to reach him!
Date: 18 Jun 1994 15:01:03 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 5
Sender: news@search01.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <2tvg9f$aia@search01.news.aol.com>
References: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: search01.news.aol.com

With regard to the title:  What was Fred Leuchter's modem number?

WmMichael@aol.com




Article 12809 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!gatech!newsfeed.pitt.edu!uunet!newstf01.cr1.aol.com!search01.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: wmmichael@aol.com (Wm Michael)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Group Integrity
Date: 21 Jun 1994 20:00:02 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 6
Sender: news@search01.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <2u7uu2$bku@search01.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: search01.news.aol.com

How about all the "exterminationists" keep their stuff off and put it
in the right group, the same for the "Identity" people, etc. so that
this board can be used for authentic historical revisionist
arguments, evidence, etc.

WmMichael@aol.com


Article 13032 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news.ans.net!newstf01.cr1.aol.com!search01.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: wmmichael@aol.com (Wm Michael)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The consistency of the denier mind (was re: Bacque)
Date: 27 Jun 1994 16:58:05 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 33
Sender: news@search01.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <2unegt$on5@search01.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: search01.news.aol.com



In Message <2ulh48$1vu@mary.iia.org> Fritz Berg bergf@mary.iia.org 
stated:

>> Let me also repeat what I have said elsewhere that American GIs in
Germany near the end of the war generally were pigs and their
officers did next to nothing to control them.  Rape was rampant and
taken for granted-<<

Nothing technical, but I was recently getting some work done on my
wifes car, and, while sitting in the waiting room, began listening
to an ongoing conversation.  An older man was telling a younger one
about his experiences in WWII.  After listening for awhile, when the
younger man (a somewhat captive audience to my observation) left, I
asked him the question, Did American troops really rape German women
in areas under US control.

His reply as near as I can quote it was as follows: Anyone who says
it didnt happen wasnt there.  Yes it went on all the time.  More of
it happened in France in my company where some officers and troops
were hanged for raping French women.  But mostly they looked the
other way in Germany, although some were hanged for it.  It was worse
in surrounding companies.

I also knew a German woman who said that a GI tried to rape her
mother after she wouldnt trade sex for a candy bar.  She said she
ran and got the officer who dragged the GI away before he could
actually rape her.  She also stated that rape of German women by GIs
was common.

William M. v. Peters

Home ·  Site Map ·  What's New? ·  Search Nizkor