-Caveat Lector-
In a message dated 9/26/00 8:18:01 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>: That means 8 million in May 1945. Well, there were fewer than 8 million
>: Jews in all of Nazi-occupied Europe. In other words, if these numbers
>are
>: correct, the Holocaust didn't happen. As my mother used to say, if everyone
>: who claims to be a Holocaust survivor actually is one, who did Hitler
>kill?"
from:
http://www.nizkor.org/features/qar
-----
How many Jews were in areas that came to be controlled by the Germans before
the war?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. How many Jews were in areas that came to be controlled by the Germans
before the war?
The IHR says (original):
Fewer than four million.
The IHR says (revised):
Fewer than six million.
Nizkor replies:
Didn't they just say in question 1 that there were "no credible demographic
statistics"?
About three million in Poland, a million in Hungary, more than a million in
the area of Russia occupied by the Nazis, and many, many more all over
Europe. According to the Nazis' own figures given in the Wannsee Protocol,
there were eleven million Jews in occupied Europe in 1942. See the reply to
question 1.
Note also that if real historians had changed a Holocaust-related estimate
from six million to four million or vice versa, the "revisionists" would be
repeating it and citing it as proof that historians are changing their story
and don't have any real figures to back up what they say. But when the
revisionists change their own figures by two million, they don't raise much
of a fuss, it seems.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. What proof exists that the Nazis practiced genocide or deliberately killed
six million Jews?
The IHR says (original, Samisdat, and revised versions combined):
None. The only evidence is the postwar testimony of individual "survivors."
This testimony is contradictory, and no "survivor" claims to have actually
witnessed any gassing. There are no contemporaneous documents and no hard
evidence whatsoever: no mounds of ashes, no crematoria capable of disposing
of millions of corpses, no piles of clothes, no human soap, no lamp shades
made of human skin, no records, no credible demographic statistics.
Nizkor replies:
Lie piled upon lie, with not a shred of proof.
This is as good a place as any to present some detailed evidence which is
consistently ignored, as a sort of primer on Holocaust denial. It will make
this reply much longer than the other sixty-five, but perhaps the reader will
understand the necessity for this.
Let's look at their claims one at a time:
* Supposedly the only evidence, "the postwar testimony of individual
survivors."
First of all, consider the implicit conspiracy theory. Notice how the
testimony of every single inmate of every Nazi camp is automatically
dismissed as unconvincing. This total dismissal of inmates' testimony, along
with the equally-total dismissal of the Nazis' own testimony (!), is the
largest unspoken assumption of Holocaust-denial.
This assumption, which is not often spelled out, is that the attempted Jewish
genocide never took place, but rather that a secret conspiracy of Jews,
starting around 1941, planted and forged myriad documents to prove that it
did; then, after the war, they rounded up all the camp survivors and told
them what to say.
The conspirators also supposedly managed to torture hundreds of key Nazis
into confessing to crimes which they never committed, or into framing their
fellow Nazis for those crimes, and to plant hundreds of documents in Nazi
files which were never discovered until after the war, and only then, in many
cases, by sheer luck. Goebbels' diary, for example, was barely rescued from
being sold as 7,000 pages of scrap paper, but buried in the scattered
manuscript were several telling entries (as translated in Lochner, The
Goebbels Diaries, 1948, pp. 86, 147-148):
February 14, 1942: The Führer once again expressed his determination to clean
up the Jews in Europe pitilessly. There must be no squeamish sentimentalism
about it. The Jews have deserved the catastrophe that has now overtaken them.
Their destruction will go hand in hand with the destruction of our enemies.
We must hasten this process with cold ruthlessness.
March 27, 1942: The procedure is a pretty barbaric one and not to be
described here more definitely. Not much will remain of the Jews. On the
whole it can be said that about 60 per cent of them will have to be
liquidated whereas only 40 per cent can be used for forced labor.
Michael Shermer has pointed out that the Nazis' own estimate of the number of
European Jews was eleven million, and sixty percent of eleven million is 6.6
million. This is fairly close to the actual figure. (Actually, forty percent
was a serious overestimate of the survival rate of Jews who were captured,
but there were many Jews who escaped.)
In any case, most of the diary is quite mundane, and interesting only to
historians. Did the supposed Jewish conspiracy forge seven thousand pages to
insert just a few lines? How did they manage to know Goebbels' affairs
intimately enough to avoid contradictions, e.g. putting him or his associates
in the wrong city at the wrong date?
As even the revisionist David Cole has admitted, revisionists have yet to
provide a satisfactory explanation of this document.
Regarding postwar testimony from Nazis, were they all tortured into
confessing to heinous crimes which they supposedly did not commit? This might
be believable if only a few Nazis were captured after the war, or maybe if
some had courageously stood up in court and shouted to the world about the
supposed attempt to silence them. But hundreds testified regarding the
Holocaust, in trials dating from late 1945 until the 1960s. (For example, see
Böck, Hofmann, Hössler, Klein, Münch, and Stark.)
Many of these Nazis testified as witnesses and were not accused of crimes.
What was the basis for their supposed coercion?
Many of these trials were in German courts. Did the Germans torture their own
countrymen? Well, Holocaust-deniers sometimes claim that the Jews have
secretly infiltrated the German government and control everything about it.
They prefer not to talk too much about this theory, however, because it is
clearly on the lunatic fringe.
The main point is that not one of these supposed torture victims -- in fifty
years, not one -- has come forth to support the claim that testimony was
coerced.
On the contrary, confirmation and reconfirmation of their testimony has
continued across the years. What coercion could have convinced Judge Konrad
Morgen to testify to the crimes he witnessed at the International Nuremberg
Trial in 1946, where he was not accused of any crime? And to later testify at
the Auschwitz trial at Frankfurt, Germany, in 1963-65? What coercion was
applied to SS Doctor Johann Kremer to make him testify in his own defense in
1947, and then, after having been convicted in both Poland and Germany,
emerge after his release to testify again as a witness at the Frankfurt
trial? What coercion was applied to Böck, Gerhard Hess, Hölblinger, Storch,
and Wiebeck, all former SS men, all witnesses at Frankfurt, none accused of
any crime there?
Holocaust-deniers point to small discrepancies in testimonies to try to
discredit them. The assumption, unstated, is that the reader will accept
minor discrepancies as evidence of a vast, over-reaching Jewish conspiracy.
This is clearly ludicrous.
In fact, the discrepancies and minor errors in detail argue against, not for,
the conspiracy theory. Why would the conspirators have given different
information to different Nazis? In fact, if all the testimonies, from the
Nazis' to the inmates', sounded too similar, it is certain that the
Holocaust-deniers would cite that as evidence of a conspiracy.
What supposed coercion could reach across four decades, to force former
SS-Untersturmführer Dr. Hans Münch to give an interview, against the will of
his family, on Swedish television? In the 1981 interview, he talked about
Auschwitz:
Interviewer: Isn't the ideology of extermination contrary to a doctor's
ethical values?
Münch: Yes, absolutely. There is no discussion. But I lived in that
environment, and I tried in every possible way to avoid accepting it, but I
had to live with it. What else could I have done? And I wasn't confronted
with it directly until the order came that I and my superior and another one
had to take part in the exterminations since the camp's doctors were
overloaded and couldn't cope with it.
Interviewer: I must ask something. Doubters claim that "special treatment"
could mean anything. It didn't have to be extermination.
Münch: "Special treatment" in the terminology of the concentration camp means
physical extermination. If it was a question of more than a few people, where
nothing else than gassing them was worthwhile, they were gassed.
Interviewer: "Special treatment" was gassing?
Münch: Yes, absolutely.
And what supposed coercion could reach across four decades, to force former
SS-Unterscharführer Franz Suchomel into giving an interview for the film Shoah
? Speaking under (false) promises of anonymity, he told of the crimes
committed at the Treblinka death camp (from the book Shoah, Claude Lanzmann,
1985, p. 54):
Interviewer: You are a very important eyewitness, and you can explain what
Treblinka was.
Suchomel: But don't use my name.
Interviewer: No, I promised. All right, you've arrived at Treblinka.
Suchomel: So Stadie, the sarge, showed us the camps from end to end. Just as
we went by, they were opening the gas-chamber doors, and people fell out like
potatoes. Naturally, that horrified and appalled us. We went back and sat
down on our suitcases and cried like old women.
Each day one hundred Jews were chosen to drag the corpses to the mass graves.
In the evening the Ukrainians drove those Jews into the gas chambers or shot
them. Every day!
Ask the deniers why they shrug off the testimony of Franz Suchomel. Greg
Raven will tell you that "it is not evidence...bring me some evidence,
please." Others will tell you that Suchomel and Münch were crazy, or
hallucinating, or fantasizing.
But the fantasy is obviously in the minds of those who choose to ignore the
mass of evidence and believe instead in a hypothetical conspiracy, supported
by nothing but their imaginations.
That total lack of evidence is why the "conspiracy assumption" almost always
remains an unspoken assumption. To our knowledge, there has not been one
single solitary "revisionist" paper, article, speech, pamphlet, book,
audiotape, videotape, or newsletter which provides any details about this
supposed Jewish/Zionist conspiracy which did all the dirty work. Not one.
At best, the denial literature makes veiled references to the World Jewish
Congress perpetuating a "hoax" (in Butz, 1976) -- no details are provided.
Yet the entire case of Holocaust-denial rests on this supposed conspiracy.
As for the testimony of the survivors, which the "revisionists" claim is the
only evidence, there are indeed numerous testimonies to gassings and other
forms of atrocities, from Jewish inmates who survived the camps, and also
from other inmates like POWs. Many of the prisoners that testified about the
gassing are not Jewish, of course. Look for instance at the testimony of
Polish officer Zenon Rozansky about the first homicidal gassing in Auschwitz,
in which 850 Russian POWs were gassed to death, in Reitlinger, The Final
Solution, p. 154:
Those who were propped against the door leant with a curious stiffness and
then fell right at our feet, striking their faces hard against the concrete
floor. Corpses! Corpses standing bolt upright and filling the entire corridor
of the bunker, till they were packed so tight that it was impossible for more
to fall.
Which of the "revisionists" will deny this? Which of them was there? Which of
them has the authority to tell Rozansky what he did or did not see?
The statement that "no 'survivor' claims to have actually witnessed any
gassing" is clearly false; this was changed to "few survivors" in later
versions, which is close to the truth.
But we do not need to rely solely on testimony, from the survivors, Nazis, or
otherwise. Many wartime documents, not postwar descriptions, specifically
regarding gassings and other atrocities, were seized by the U.S. armed
forces. Most are in the National Archives in Washington, D.C.; some are in
Germany.
Regarding the gassing vans, precursors to the gas chambers, we find, for
example, a top secret document from SS Untersturmführer Becker to SS
Obersturmbannführer Rauff (from Nazi Conspiracy and Aggression, 1946, Vol. I,
pp. 999-1001):
If it has rained for instance for only one half hour, the van cannot be used
because it simply skids away. It can only be used in absolutely dry weather.
It is only a question now whether the van can only be used standing at the
place of execution. First the van has to be brought to that place, which is
possible only in good weather. ...
The application of gas usually is not undertaken correctly. In order to come
to an end as fast as possible, the driver presses the accelerator to the
fullest extent. By doing that the persons to be executed suffer death from
suffocation and not death by dozing off as was planned. My directions now
have proved that by correct adjustment of the levers death comes faster and
the prisoners fall asleep peacefully.
And Just wrote of the gas vans to Rauff, on June 5, 1942, in a letter marked
both "top secret" and "only copy". This is a horrific masterpiece of Nazi
double-talk, referring to killing as "processing" and the victims as
"subjects" and "the load." (See Kogon, Nazi Mass Murder, 1993, pp. 228-235.)
Since December 1941, for example, 97,000 were processed using three vans,
without any faults occurring in the vehicles. ...
The normal capacity of the vans is nine to ten per square meter. The capacity
of the larger special Saurer vans is not so great. The problem is not one of
overloading but of off-road maneuverability on all terrains, which is
severely diminished in this van. It would appear that a reduction in the
cargo area is necessary. This can be achieved by shortening the compartment
by about one meter. The problem cannot be solved by merely reducing the
number of subject treated, as has been done so far. For in this case a longer
running time is required, as the empty space also needs to be filled with CO
[the poison exhaust gas]. ...
Greater protection is needed for the lighting system. The grille should cover
the lamps high enough up to make it impossible to break the bulbs. It seems
that these lamps are hardly ever turned on, so the users have suggested that
they could be done away with. Experience shows, however, that when the back
door is closed and it gets dark inside, the load pushes hard against the
door. The reason for this is that when it becomes dark inside, the load
rushes toward what little light remains. This hampers the locking of the
door. It has also been noticed that the noise provoked by the locking of the
door is linked to the fear aroused by the darkness.
Slip-ups occurred in written correspondence regarding the gas chambers
themselves, some of which, fortunately, escaped destruction and were found
after the war. A memo written to SS man Karl Bischoff on November 27, 1942
describes the gas chamber in Krema II not with the usual mundane name of
"Leichenkeller," but rather as the "Sonderkeller" "special cellar."
And two months later, on January 29, 1943, Bischoff wrote a memo to Kammler,
referring to that same chamber as the "Vergasungskeller." (See Gutman,
Anatomy of the Auschwitz Death Camp, 1994, pp. 223, 227.) "Vergasungskeller"
means exactly what it sounds like: "gassing cellar," an underground gas
chamber.
Holocaust-deniers turn to Arthur Butz, who provides a specious explanation
for the Vergasungskeller: "Vergasung," he says, cannot refer to killing
people with gas, but only to the process of converting a solid or liquid into
gas. Therefore, he says the "Vergasungskeller," must have been a special room
where the fuel for the Auschwitz ovens was converted into gas -- a
"gasification cellar."
There are three problems with this explanation. First, "Vergasung" certainly
can refer to killing people with gas; Butz does not speak German and he
should not try to lecture about the language. Second, there is no room that
could possibly serve this function which Butz describes -- years after
writing his book, he admitted this, and helplessly suggested that there might
be another building somewhere in the camp that might house a gasification
cellar. Third, the type of oven used at Auschwitz did not require any
gasification process! The ovens burned solid fuel. (See Gutman, op. cit., pp.
184-193.)
So what does the term "gassing cellar" refer to? Holocaust-deniers have yet
to offer any believable explanation.
An inventory, again captured after the war, revealed fourteen showerheads and
one gas-tight door listed for the gas chamber in Krema III. Holocaust-deniers
claim that room was a morgue; they do not offer to explain what use a morgue
has for showerheads and a gas-tight door. (See a photograph of the document,
or Pressac, Auschwitz: Technique and Operation, 1989, pp. 231, 438.)
A memo from the Auschwitz construction office, dated March 31, 1943, says (
Hilberg, Documents of Destruction, 1971, pp. 207-208):
We take this occasion to refer to another order of March 6, 1943, for the
delivery of a gas door 100/192 for Leichenkeller 1 of Krema III, Bw 30a,
which is to be built in the manner and according to the same measure as the
cellar door of the opposite Krema II, with peep hole of double 8 millimeter
glass encased in rubber. This order is to be viewed as especially urgent....
Why would morgues have urgently needed peepholes made out of a double layer
of third-of-an-inch-thick glass?
The question of whether it can be proved that the cyanide gas was used in the
Auschwitz gas chambers has intruiged the deniers. Their much-heralded
Leuchter Report, for example, expends a great deal of effort on the question
of whether traces of cyanide residue remain there today. But we do not need
to look for chemical traces to confirm cyanide use (Gutman, op. cit., p.
229):
Letters and telegrams exchanged on February 11 and 12 [1943] between the
Zentralbauleitung and Topf mention a wooden blower for Leichenkeller 1. This
reference confirms the use of the morgue as a gas chamber: Bischoff and
Prüfer thought that the extraction of air mixed with concentrated prussic
acid [cyanide] (20 g per cu m) required a noncorroding ventilator.
Bischoff and Prüfer turned out to be wrong, and a metal fan ended up working
acceptably well. But the fact that they thought it necessary demonstrates
that cyanide was to be routinely used in the rooms which deniers call
morgues. (Cyanide is useless for disinfecting morgues, as it does not kill
bacteria.)
Other captured documents, even if they don't refer directly to some part of
the extermination process, refer to it by implication. A captured memo to
SS-Brigadeführer Kammler reveals that the expected incineration capacity of
the Auschwitz ovens was a combined total of 4,756 corpses per day (see a
photograph of the document or Kogon, op. cit., p. 157).
Deniers often claim that this total could not be achieved in practice (see
question 45). That's not the point. These crematoria were carefully designed,
in 1942, to have sufficient capacity to dispose of 140,000 corpses per month
-- in a camp that housed only 125,000. We can conclude that massive deaths
were predicted, indeed planned-for, as early as mid-1942. A camp designed to
incinerate its full capacity of inmates every four weeks is not merely a
detention center.
Finally, apart from the abundant testimonies, confessions, and physical
evidence of the extermination process, there is certainly no want of evidence
of the Nazis' intentions and plans.
Here are just a few examples. Hans Frank's diary (from Nazi Conspiracy and
Aggression, 1946, Vol. I, pp. 992, 994):
But what should be done with the Jews? Do you think they will be settled down
in the 'Ostland' [eastern territories], in [resettlement] villages? This is
what we were told in Berlin: Why all this bother? We can do nothing with them
either in the 'Ostland' nor in the 'Reichkommissariat.' So liquidate them
yourself.
Gentlemen, I must ask you to rid yourself of all feeling of pity. We must
annihilate the Jews, wherever we find them and wherever it is possible, in
order to maintain the structure of the Reich as a whole. ...
We cannot shoot or poison these 3,500,000 Jews, but we shall nevertheless be
able to take measures, which will lead, somehow, to their annihilation....
That we sentence 1,200,000 Jews to die of hunger should be noted only
marginally.
Himmler's speech at Posen on October 4, 1943 was captured on audiotape (Trial
of the Major War Criminals, 1948, Vol. XXIX, p. 145, trans. by current
author):
I refer now to the evacuation of the Jews, the extermination of the Jewish
people. This is one of those things that is easily said: "the Jewish people
are being exterminated," says every Party member, "quite true, it's part of
our plans, the elimination of the Jews, extermination, we're doing it."
The extermination effort was even mentioned in at least one official Nazi
court verdict. In May 1943, a Munich court wrote in its decision against
SS-Untersturmführer Max Taubner that:
The accused shall not be punished because of the actions against the Jews as
such. The Jews have to be exterminated and none of the Jews that were killed
is any great loss. Although the accused should have recognized that the
extermination of the Jews was the duty of Kommandos which were set up
especially for this purpose, he should be excused for considering himself to
have the authority to take part in the extermination of Jewry himself.
And Hitler spoke quite clearly in public on no fewer than three occasions. On
January 30, 1939, seven months before Germany invaded Poland, he spoke
publicly to the Reichstag (transcribed from Skeptic magazine, Vol. 2, No. 4,
p. 50):
Today I want to be a prophet once more: if international finance Jewry inside
and outside of Europe should succeed once more in plunging nations into
another world war, the consequence will not be the Bolshevation of the earth
and thereby the victory of Jewry, but the annihilation of the Jewish race in
Europe.
By the way, this last phrase is, in German, "die Vernichtung der jüdischen
Rasse in Europa," which German-speakers will realize is quite unambiguous.
In September, 1942:
...if Jewry should plot another world war in order to exterminate the Aryan
peoples in Europe, it would not be the Aryan people which would be
exterminated but Jewry...
On November 8, 1942:
You will recall the session of the Reichstag during which I declared: if
Jewry should imagine that it could bring about an international world war to
exterminate the European races, the result will not be the extermination of
the European races, but the extermination of Jewry in Europe. People always
laughed about me as a prophet. Of those who laughed then, countless numbers
no longer laugh today, and those who still laugh now will perhaps no longer
laugh a short time from now.
There are many other examples of documents and testimonies that could be
presented.
Keep in mind that the IHR's answer to "what proof exists?" is "none." It has
certainly been demonstrated already that this pat answer is totally
dishonest. And this is the main point we wish to communicate: that
Holocaust-denial is dishonest.
We continue by analyzing the remaining, more-specific, claims about what
evidence supposedly does not exist.
* "No mounds of ashes" is an internal contradiction. In an article in the
journal published by the same IHR that publishes these Q&A, the Journal's
editor reported that a Polish commission in 1946 found human ash at the
Treblinka death camp to a depth of over twenty feet. This article is
available on Greg Raven's web site.
(Apparently some survivors claimed that the corpses were always thoroughly
cremated. Because uncremated human remains were mixed with the ash, the
editor suggested that the testimonies were false. Amazingly, he had no
comment on how a twenty-foot layer of human ashes came to be there in the
first place. Perhaps he felt that to be unworthy of mention.)
There are also piles of ashes at Maidanek. At Auschwitz-Birkenau, ashes from
cremated corpses were dumped into the rivers and swamps surrounding the camp,
and used as fertilizer for nearby farmers' fields.
* "No crematoria" capable of disposing of millions of corpses? Absolutely
false, the crematoria were more than capable of the job, according to both
the Nazis' own internal memos and the testimony of survivors.
Holocaust-deniers deliberately confuse civilian, funeral-home crematoria with
the huge industrial ovens of the death camps. This is discussed in much
detail in the replies to questions 42 and 45.
* "No piles of clothes"? Apparently, the IHR considers piles of clothes to
be "hard evidence"! This is strange, because they do not deny the other sorts
of piles found at Nazi camps: piles of eyeglasses, piles of shoes (at
Auschwitz, Belzec, and Maidanek), piles of gold teeth, piles of burned corpses
, piles of unburned corpses, piles of artificial limbs (see Swiebocka,
Auschwitz: A History in Photographs, 1993, p. 210), piles of human hair (ibid
, p. 211), piles of ransacked luggage (ibid, p. 213), piles of
shaving-brushes (ibid, p. 215), piles of combs (ibid), piles of pots and pans
(ibid), and yes, even the piles of clothes (ibid, p. 214) that the IHR claims
do not exist.
Perhaps the authors of the 66 Q&A realized that it was dangerous for them to
admit that these piles were hard evidence, because then they would also be
forced to admit a number of other things as "hard evidence." Perhaps this is
why they removed this phrase from the revised 66 Q&A.
If items were not generally found in mass quantities, it is only because the
Nazis distributed them to the German population. A memo on this was captured,
revealing that they even redistributed women's underwear.
* "No human soap"? This is true, but misleading. Though there is some
evidence that soap was made from corpses on a very limited experimental
scale, the rumored "mass production" was never done, and no soap made from
human corpses is known to exist. However, there is sworn testimony, never
refuted, from British POWs and a German army official, stating that soap
experiments were performed, and the recipe for the soap was captured by the
Allies. To state flatly that the Nazis did not make soap from human beings is
incorrect.
* "No lamp shades made of human skin?" False -- lampshades and other
human-skin "ornaments" were introduced as evidence in both trials of Ilse
Koch, and were shown to a U.S. Senate investigation committee in the late
40s. We know they were made of human skin because they bore tattoos, and
because a microscopic forensic analysis of the items was performed. (A
detailed page on this is being prepared.)
* "No records"? This is nonsense (which may explain why this claim was
removed from the "revised" versions of the 66 Q&A). True, extermination by
gassing was always referred to with code-words, and those victims who arrived
at death camps only to be immediately gassed were not recorded in any books.
But there are slip-ups in the code-word usage that reveal the true meanings,
as already described. There are inventories and requisitions for the Krema
which reveal items anomalous with ordinary use but perfect for mass homicidal
gassing. There are deportation train records which, pieced together, speak
clearly. And so on. Several examples have been given above.
* "No credible demographic statistics"? This is the second internal
contradiction -- see question 2 and question 15. The Anglo-American committee
who studied the issue estimated the number of Jewish victims at 5.7 million.
This was based on population statistics. Here is the exact breakdown, country
by country:
Germany 195,000
Austria 53,000
Czechoslovakia 255,000
Denmark 1,500
France 140,000
Belgium 57,000
Luxemburg 3,000
Norway 1,000
Holland 120,000
Italy 20,000
Yugoslavia 64,000
Greece 64,000
Bulgaria 5,000
Rumania 530,000
Hungary 200,000
Poland 3,271,000
USSR 1,050,000
Less dispersed refugees (308,000)
Total number of Jews killed 5,721,500
(This estimate was arrived at using population statistics, and not by adding
the number of casualties at each camp. These are also available -- for
instance, a separate file with the ruling of a German court regarding the
number of victims in Treblinka is available. The SS kept rather accurate
records, and many of the documents survived, reinforced by eyewitness
accounts).
Some estimates are lower, some are higher, but this is the magnitude in
question. In an article in CMU's student newspaper, the head of CMU's History
Department, Peter Stearns, is quoted as saying that newly discovered
documents -- especially in the former USSR -- indicate that the number of
victims is higher than six million. Other historians claim not much over five
million. The Encyclopedia of the Holocaust uses 5,596,000 as a minimum and
5,860,000 as a maximum (Gutman, 1990, p. 1799).
* In summary:
"Revisionists" often claim, correctly, that the burden of proof is on
historians. The proof, of course, has been a matter of public record since
late 1945, and is available in libraries around the world. The burden has
been met, many, many times over. You've just seen a brief presentation of
some of the highlights of that immense body of proof; much more is readily
available.
To even argue that the Holocaust never happened is ludicrous. To claim
straight-faced that none of this proof even exists is beyond ludicrous, and
it is a clear example of "revisionist" dishonesty.
-----
Aloha, He'Ping,
Om, Shalom, Salaam.
Em Hotep, Peace Be,
All My Relations.
Omnia Bona Bonis,
Adieu, Adios, Aloha.
Amen.
Roads End
<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
<A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
<A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
