Free candy in the gas chambers queue
Giddeon Hausner, the Chief Prosecutor at the 1961 trial of Adolf Eichmann in Jerusalem, stated in his opening address:
In Majdanek there was only one place where the children were treated kindly: At the entrance to the gas chambers each one was handed a sweet.
An astounding admission from a Jewish American psychologist is found in an article in the current (Summer 2012) issue of Inconvenient History Journal. It's titled "On The Roads of Truth: Searching for Warwick Hester"by Klaus Schwensen.
Schwensen tells of a certain "Warwick Hester" who (in the 1950's) wrote "critically about the 6-million number and the Jewish death toll in what since became known as 'the Holocaust.'"
"Warwick Hester" mentions the increase of the Jewish world population by3 million between 1933 and 1950, which of course is in contradiction to the 6 million murdered by the Nazis. In this connection, he tells the following story:
"Recently when talking to a North American of Jewish origin whom I esteem very much I referred to that discrepancy [of Jewish population numbers]. I asked him whether he himself believed in earnest that the Nazis had killed 6 millions. He said:´Naturally not. For that they had neither the time nor the means. What they obviously had, was the intention. Here begins politics [i.e. the psychology of propaganda]. Given the imputed intention, you can make any number. We thought that 6 millions are not too much to appear plausible, but sufficient to make mankind shiver for one century. This chance Hitler has given to us, and we make the most of it, to good effect, as you see.´ I said he ought to consider that a political lie like this will, in light of subsequent investigation, disclose itself and turn against those who invented it. But this Jew, a psychologist, denied that. It [the propaganda] had penetrated too deep into the subconscious of the masses, so that it could never be dislodged. Humans in general are completely uncritical. What is anchored in the subconscious, even an individual with common sense almost never is able to expunge. As a proof he cited the fact that already now [1954!], after a relatively short propagandistic campaign, that item required no further discussion. ´We have no problem, since we have created a historical fact which from now on is in the history books of schools, like the date of a battle.´" (my emphasis-CY)
I believe this Jew was speaking honestly to his colleague Warwick Hester and that many educated Jews, including "holocaust historians," know the truth of this perfectly well. In other words, they don't believe it, but they profess it anyway.
One of the most lurid and slanderous Holocaust claims is the story that the Germans manufactured soap from the bodies of their victims. Although a similar charge during the First World War was exposed as a hoax almost immediately afterwards, it was nevertheless revived and widely believed during the Second.
More important, this accusation was "proved" at the main Nuremberg trial of 1945-1946, and has been authoritatively endorsed by numerous historians in the decades since. In recent years, though, as part of a broad retreat from the most obviously untenable aspects of the "orthodox" extermination story, Holocaust historians have grudgingly conceded that the human soap tale is a wartime propaganda lie. In their retreat, though, these historians have tried to dismiss the soap story as a mere wartime "rumor," neglecting to mention that international Jewish organizations and then Allied governments endorsed and sanctioned this libelous canard...
A revisionist extracted a segment from my documentary The Last Days of the Big Lie and uploaded it to YouTube.
They named the segment "Holohoax Survivors Who Tell The Truth".
This segment now has over 100,000 hits !
Spielberg's cabal doesn't want you to see these "survivor" interviews. That's why they banned me from Stanford University[/URL] after sharing these, along with Irene Zisblatt's criminal "testimony" with the world.
"Holohoax Survivors Who Tell the Truth" has really hit a nerve. It's shocking to hear Auschwitz inmates tell about their elaborate stage, with curtain rings and a grand piano, where they had plays and other musical performances. It's shocking to see video of happy children playing in Theresenstadt juxtoposed with a woman telling about fun costumed children's plays in her Auschwitz block, along with arts and crafts activities, with beautiful children's murals painted on the walls. According to the official Holocaust narrative, all children were immediately gassed upon arrival!
"Testimony" such as this is extremely important to cast doubt on the "factory of death" Holocaust promoters push.
Auschwitz and Buchenwald inmates speak about being paid for their work in special currency, using their currency in camp cantinas and at the camp movie theater, receiving and sending postcards, and playing in well organized soccer tournaments.
See for yourself !To to celebrate the 100,000th view, I uploaded a higher quality version of this segment:
Feel free to upload this video to youtube and elsewhere. You can download it here -
Holohoax Survivors Who Tell The truth : Eric Hunt : Free Download & Streaming : Internet Archive
In spite of the repression, revisionism will win
This past July 25, in Paris, a judge notified me of three criminal proceedings brought against me, essentially for having taken part in the international conference in Tehran on “the Holocaust”. I shall remind the reader that at that conference, held on December 11th and 12th 2006, all participants without exception, whether believers or disputers of the new religion, were able to have their arguments heard freely. On December 13, 2006, Jacques Chirac, then president of the French Republic, had decried my participation in the conference and announced his request that a judicial investigation be opened against me. It is precisely that investigation that has resulted now, five and a half years on, in my triple prosecution. One must also note that certain pious organisations have since joined their own legal complaints to the initiative of “Superliar” who, as was quite normal, had hurried to the rescue of a Superlie in distress [“Superliar” was for a long time the nickname given to Jacques Chirac in a highly popular comical programme on French television devoted to current affairs – translator's note].
Moreover, today, July 28, I have received a police summons for questioning on July 31. Having inquired of local officers by telephone, I know that it concerns revisionist remarks that I seem to have made recently on the Internet.
I usually accede to the summonses of investigating magistrates or police officers but I never answer their questions, apart from those about my identity. Even if the person in charge balks and grumbles, I always have him record in the minutes my brief ritual statement: “I refuse to collaborate with the French police and justice system in the repression of historical revisionism”. I warn him beforehand that should he refuse to write down that sentence I will not sign the minutes.
The inexorable victory of revisionism
On the strictly scientific and historical level the revisionists’ victory is already total but the news must still be brought to the knowledge of the general public, which is no small matter.
In any case, there is necessarily a considerable time lag between the moment when a staggering scientific find occurs and the moment when public opinion finally decides to accept that find. In former times it could take centuries but nowadays, especially thanks to the Internet, two or three generations may suffice (from 66 to 99 years after 1945!). Some day researchers from all backgrounds will work together to publish on the Internet an interminable Encyclopaedia of Lies of the Holocaust, a huge Collection of Holocaust Howlers, a vast inventory of fakes and falsification by the “true falsifiers of history”. With sources or references to hand, readers will discover the names and works of those who have dishonoured themselves either by lies, slanders and false testimony or by calls for repression against revisionists. Future generations will see, in the actual evidence, how a certain type of universal religion largely founded on hatred, fraud and lucre is born, lives and dies. No plot or conspiracy has been needed to turn out these holocaustic abjections; the self-assurance of a victor with unlimited power, his insolence, cynicism and taste for vengeance, on the one hand, and the exploitation of Stupidity, Lies and Credulity, on the other hand, have been enough.
On the victories won thus far by revisionism and most often hidden from the general public see, on the blog http://robertfaurisson.blogspot.com, my writings of December 11, 2006 (http://robertfaurisson.blogspot.it/2006/12/victories-of-revisionism.html) and September 11, 2011 (http://robertfaurisson.blogspot.it/2011/09/victories-of-revisionism-continued.html). Here I shall call the reader’s attention to the part of the latter article (“The Victories of Revisionism – continued”) under the heading The coup de grâce given, on December 27, 2009, to the myth of the Nazi “gas chambers”. It deals with Robert Jan van Pelt, whom I sometimes call “the last of the Mohicans of the exterminationist cause”. Van Pelt is a Jewish researcher who, giving up the fight, has come to acknowledge that there exists at Auschwitz, capital of “the Holocaust”, no EVIDENCE of an extermination of the Jews but only “testimonies” (sic). He recommends that the entire site of Auschwitz and Birkenau be surrendered to nature. In other words, if I understand correctly, the tens of millions of tourists or pilgrims who have visited the place have been and continue to be fooled with an abundance of false evidence. For me, the exploiters of the Auschwitz myth are not just making fools of the living but are also mocking the dead, whose real sufferings are thus relegated to make way for phantasmagorical tales born of sick brains and turned to profit by swindlers.
I confirm it here: today – since December 27, 2009, in fact – there is no one to be found putting forth any scientific evidence to support this cause built both on the too real pain of victims and on too many “facts [not] established” and, consequently, “bound for the rubbish bins of history”.The admission is Jean-Claude Pressac’s. Still reeling from the defeat that he had had to endure during my trial of May 9, 1995, where barrister Eric Delcroix and I had demanded his appearance, the man signed that admission a month later, on June 15, 1995, at the end of a text of nearly forty pages. This capitulation by a former employee of the Klarsfeld couple was first kept under lock and key for five years. Then the piece was finally revealed by Valerie Igounet in small print towards the very end of her book, Histoire du négationnisme en France, Seuil, Paris, 2000, p. 613-652.
Sic transit gloria turpis mendacii! [How quickly doth the glory of the foul lie pass away!].
The Auschwitz swindle has had its day. As for the repression exerted by the swindlers, it is a sign that they have run out of arguments. They were asked for “one proof, one single proof” to back up their terrible accusation: according to them, for over four years Germany had perpetrated against the Jewish people a crime without precedent in the history of mankind and, for all that time, the whole world, except for a handful of “Righteous”ones, had remained indifferent to the unspeakable horror. At first, the swindlers provided an abundance of “evidence”, all of which proved to be fallacious, so much so that later, from 1979, they had to conclude that there was, after all,no need to prove the obvious! * It only remained for them to strike blows at the noncompliant and strike they did. They have struck in producing works where guessing vies with speculation, in the cinema as well as in novels, both with brainwashing and with physical violence, along with the unjust power of the law. All a waste of effort. Revisionism will win.
July 28, 2012
* “La politique hitlérienne d'extermination: une déclaration des historiens français”, Le Monde, February 21, 1979, p. 23.
What a smashing looking gas chamber
"During the whole period of its existence, no gas chamber was built in Flossenbürg."
Jakub's World: A Boy's Story of Loss and Survival in the Holocaust (2005) p.131.
"There were no gas chambers at this camp (Flossenbürg),"
Backing Hitler : Consent and Coercion in Nazi Germany: (2002)
Jewish supremacist Ze'ev Jabotinsky (1880—1940), founder of fascist sympathising Revisionist Zionism movement, wrote in his 1942, posthumously published book The War and the Jew:
"When the Nazis across the frontiers, or their hirelings in Britain and France, yell or whisper that this is a "Jewish War," they are perfectly right: the microbe of war would have died had it not been allowed to batten on the Jewish tragedy."
Jabotinsky, Vladimir. The War and the Jew. New York: The Dial Press. 1942. p.52.
For Netanyahu, the real bomb!
The real bomb that Netanyahu fears!
Video: "A Man: Robert Faurisson talks to Paul-Eric Blanrue" (October 2010), in French, Italian, German, Arabic, English, Croatian:
Pour Netanyahu, la vraie bombe !
La vraie bombe que craint Netanyahu !
Vidéo "Un homme : Robert Faurisson répond aux questions de Paul-Eric Blanrue" (octobre 2010), en français, italien, allemand, arabe, anglais, croate :
United Nations Department of Public Information, in partnership
with Yahad-In Unum, is pleased to invite you to
“The Holocaust by Bullets:
Uncovering the Reality of Genocide”
Wednesday, 7 November 2012
6:30 p.m. - 8:30 p.m.
ECOSOC Chamber, Temporary North Lawn Building (UNHQ NY)
Father Patrick Desbois with an eyewitness who can identify unmarked mass graves in Moldova. Photo: Aleksey Kosyanov.
Yahad-In Unum is the leading research organization investigating mass executions and collecting evidence of more than 2.2 million Jews and Roma killed in Eastern Europe between 1941 and 1944. To date, YIU has identified over 800 extermination sites and recorded the testimony of more than 3000 eyewitnesses to these crimes Belarus, Moldova, Poland, Romania, Russia and Ukraine.This event, organized by the Holocaust and the United Nations Outreach Programme in New York, will highlight Yahad-In Unum’s work and action by the international community to help prevent genocide today.
Opening Statement: Peter Launsky-Tieffenthal, United Nations Under-Secretary-General for Communications and Public Information, and Ambassador Martin Briens, Deputy Permanent Representative and Chargé d’Affairs of France to the United Nations.
- Father Patrick Desbois, Catholic priest and President of the association “Yahad-In Unum”
- Paul Shapiro, Director of the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum’s Center for Advanced Holocaust Studies
- Karen Odaba Mosoti, International Lawyer, Head of the Liaison Office of the International Criminal Court to the United Nations in New York
- Gillian Kitley, Senior Political Affairs Officer, Office of the Special Adviser to the United Nations Secretary-General on the Prevention of Genocide
The discussion will be moderated by Pamela Falk, CBS News - United Nations Resident Correspondent
The Holocaust and the United Nations Outreach Programme
Father Patrick Desbois is one hell of a prankster
The myth of the Nazi gas chambers was in such a bad way that a substitute or simulation had to be found. The “mass graves in the Ukraine” will do the trick for the time being, at least on the media level. But these alleged “mass graves” have not been dug open and never will be! Our hoaxers will have to be taken at their word. And so we’re being given the gas chamber deal all over again: no evidence and nothing but hair-raising tales in the style of Filip Müller or Shlomo Venezia.
The people claiming to have discovered the “mass graves” have not, in reality, carried out any excavations, hence no inventory of remains, no verification, forensic studies or physical or material certifications of the standard, compulsory kind made in the inquest following the discovery, anywhere, of even a single corpse or skeleton. No police or justice official has been to any of the sites to do any examination whatsoever. Credence will have to be lent to the statements of representatives of two Jewish associations who presume to tell us that if those procedures, albeit normal and routine ones, haven’t been followed, it’s because the Jewish religion forbids such “desecration” of Jewish bodies!
These associations have merely gone about gathering “testimonies” which, afterwards, they’ve sorted through in line with criteria not revealed to the trusting public, but which are known to all the specialists of the “comm.-biz” and “story-telling” (the art of “getting up a good story” as, for example, when the neo-cons want to launch a war). Ukrainian villagers, mustered for the occasion, are filmed giving their accounts from which, subsequently, only choice bits will be picked in order to obtain tidy, well-formatted narratives (good stories to tell), neat disposal being made of any contradictions or precise points that might be checked on and thus, possibly, refuted. In the spectacle of this “witness parade” the viewer-voyeur will not learn anything real but will be bathed in the emotion, the anger, the whining and the horror of vaudeville-hall monstrosities and Dracula stories: a real Jacuzzi of comfort. He’ll enjoy the gentle warmth of a mixture of hatred and goodness, deftly blended. He’ll hate those Nazi “bastards” capable of senseless exploits of evil and, simultaneously, he’ll feel suffused with a particular goodness, the goodness felt in feeling oneself to be good, not all alone off to one side, where your goodness is liable to go unnoticed, but good together with others, lots of others, amidst a community whose members all admire each other and pat themselves on the back for being so good and compassion-laden. From his emotion Jacuzzi, the viewer-voyeur will gaze at the TV screen and find the usual fare, what his psyche has grown accustomed to. He won’t want any other. Above all, the menu of the Shoah soap opera mustn’t vary. Always the same camera shots, the same colours, the same hackneyed expressions and the same refrains of the propaganda of war and hatred. A drug! People want it and ask for more. Take care not to disappoint the customers! They’ve become addicted. The dose is going to need strengthening: we’ve got to out-match Claude Lanzmann.
But, coming back to those alleged “mass graves”, how is the value of testimony to be assessed if the material reality of the facts hasn’t been established beforehand? How will it be determined whether, at such or such place, so much as a single corpse lies buried? How will the number of victims be set? How can it be affirmed that they were Jews? And Jews killed by the Germans? The mere fact that, apparently, spent German cartridges are to be found in the vicinity of the supposed location of a supposed mass grave proves nothing. Who’s going to prove to us that those cartridges were found at that spot? And isn’t the land of Russia and the Ukraine littered all over with used bullets from the German, Soviet and other armies’ weapons? Actually, it has been proved by real investigations, diggings and forensic studies that the 4,410 Polish officers duly ascertained to have been executed, with a bullet to the back of the head, by the Soviets in Katyn forest in 1940 were all killed with bullets supplied by the German war industry to the Soviet Union within the framework of the Germano-Soviet pact. Have there not, these last few years in Russia and the Ukraine, been uncovered a number of common graves which, after scientific examination, all prove to contain victims of the Tcheka, the NKVD and the NKGB, except for a few containing the remains of men of Napoleon’s army, the study of which, nearly two centuries after their burial, has established that they died of typhus?
Some months ago, in a long private interview, Professor Robert Faurisson had the occasion to bring up the myth which, today more than ever, can be seen developing round the Einsatzgruppen, Babi Yar and the “Holocaust by bullets in the Ukraine”, thanks in particular to Father Patrick Desbois, that friend of Elie Wiesel, of the late Cardinal Lustiger and of Mgr Vingt-Trois. Below is a passage from that interview where, after clarifying a few things about the Einsatzgruppen andBabi Yar, the professor went on to speak about Patrick Desbois.
These days, in the Ukraine, there’s a Roman Catholic priest who’s been getting a lot of attention, father Patrick Desbois, a Frenchman and great friend of the Jews. His speciality consists in travelling the length and breadth of the land in search of “mass Jewish graves”. He has the good Ukrainian peasants of a given area informed that he’ll soon be calling at such or such locale and that he intends to garner testimonies about the slaughters of Jews by the Germans during the war. It’s wholly in the inhabitants’ interest to be able to boast that the environs actually possess such mass graves over which, afterwards, may be erected monuments that may in turn attract the odd foreign tourist. The “witnesses” get together and prepare a story. The priest then pays his visit and has his photograph taken with the country-folk as they point towards some spot or other. One may, to begin with, be astonished at the age of certain witnesses photographed thus far: they are quite plainly below the necessary age, which would normally be about 80. But there’s something more astonishing still: these supposed mass graves will not be dug open; no disinterment or any material verification will be carried out, all under the admirable pretence that the Jewish religion prohibits the touching of Jewish corpses; however, it’s enough to look in the Encyclopedia Judaica (1978) at the entry “Autopsies [plural] and Dissection [singular]” to see that there is no such prohibition at all. Only at a single location, Busk outside Lvov, have fifteen common graves been dug open, but none of the skeletons found there were examined and the sites were all covered over with a thick layer of concrete, meaning no authentication will be very possible in future! A curious way of respecting a body in accordance with Jewish law! The historian will thus have to be satisfied with what father Desbois, a clever man, tells us the witnesses told him. Hence, unverified numbers of unfound and unshown victims will be added up and, at the end, we shall be told that the Ukraine contains so many mass graves with so many Jewish victims. And all this under the seal of the respective representatives of the Roman Catholic Church, the “Yahad-in-Unum” association and “Zaka”, a group presenting itself as “dedicated individuals determined […] to accord the proper respect for the dead in accordance with Jewish law, heritage and tradition”. As at Auschwitz, tourism will stand some chance of thriving.
We’ve been told that Professor Faurisson himself has visited the exhibition at the Mémorial de la Shoah in Paris on the “Mass shootings of Jews in Ukraine 1941-1944 / The Holocaust by bullets”, and that he caused some anxiety by asking a woman in charge the simplest of questions: “How is it known that there are mass Jewish graves there?” He was unable to get any answer. Perhaps the question can be put to Father Desbois, who’s now busy giving courses at the Sorbonne on his “mass graves”. Holocaust here, Holocaust there! Decidedly, “There’s no business like Shoah business”. Father Patrick isone hell of a prankster!
A Quarter Century Ago: "The Leuchter Report"
By Germar Rudolf
In February 1988, Fred Leuchter Jr., in the 1980s America’s only expert for execution technologies, was asked by the defense team of German-Canadian Ernst Zündel to go to the infamous Auschwitz and Majdanek concentration camps in Poland to verify whether or not the facilities actually used poison gas to kill inmates by the thousands – if not millions. He agreed to do this and write an expert report about his findings to be used in a Canadian court of law where Zündel was being tried for “Holocaust denial” at that time.
Before Fred Leuchter went to Poland, he was a firm believer in all he had been taught in school and through books and the mass media. But when he looked into the evidence, he changed his mind. A few months later he described his conversion succinctly as follows:
“1988 was a very informative and likewise disturbing year. I was appalled to learn that much of what I was taught in school about twentieth-century history and World War II was a myth, if not a lie. I was first amazed; then annoyed; then aware: the myth of the Holocaust was dead.”
No End of the Myth
Such declarations of victory over the myth were quite frequent in those days immediately after the release of the Leuchter Report. But unfortunately it turned out that the last part of this statement was a myth itself, because 25 years later, the Holocaust Myth is very much alive. As a matter of fact, it can be argued that it has even gained in momentum and persuasive power – but not because the evidence presented for it has become more convincing. It was the increased propaganda output on all levels – media, schools, politics, academia – combined with an ever-increasing societal persecution and illegitimate, though nevertheless “legal” prosecution of all dissidents which has stifled many revisionist efforts to undermine and destroy this myth.
There are many reasons why Leuchter’s work or any of the others that followed it – my own expert report included, which followed in his footsteps – did not cause the myth to collapse – or at least not so far.
The most important is that the powers that be simply build a major part of their power on the psychological control of the masses by setting the standards for Good and Evil, where “Auschwitz” – or rather the events this moniker stands for – denotes the absolute zero, the absolute evil.
Challenging this upsets the way our modern post-WWII world is rigged, so it won’t happen without a fight. Hence we revisionists have been and are being fought fiercely by these powers and their lackeys.
But there is another reason why Leuchter and his ghostwriter Prof. Robert Faurisson did not ring in the end of the current world order, and this lies in the fact that the Leuchter Report simply wasn’t bullet-proof. Indeed, it had so many flaws that the opponents of revisionism had a heyday in taking it apart and gloating over its discrepancies and deficiencies.
In all fairness, this had to be expected. After all, Leuchter had no in-depth knowledge of what he was investigating, and he had only a few weeks to get at least a superficial idea about the issues involved. But he did get one thing right: If we want to understand what was going on at Auschwitz, Majdanek and many other places of the claimed judeocide, we need to apply standard forensic methods as they are used in any murder investigation, and Leuchter was the first to do exactly this. By so doing, he laid his fingers in a festering wound of orthodox historiography which up to that point had been content to merely uncritically regurgitate anecdotal evidence of individuals who claim that they had been there and had seen it all.
Leuchter’s work may have been wanting, but its flaws invited the opponents to deal with it. They made the Leuchter Report a part of their news – bad news, admittedly, but as we all know, there is no good news like bad news – so the revisionists at least got attention and for a short while they could no longer be completely hushed up. As a result, many more people perked up their ears and started listening. Walter Lüftl, in those early post-Leuchter years the President of the Austrian Chamber of Engineers, was one of them. He said to me once that, if you want to stir a public debate on a topic that those in power want to hush up, you have to include a few mistakes in your work so that your enemies will pick it up, drag it into the public arena, and gloat over the mistakes. That’s what they did with Leuchter’s work, and that was a mistake. The idea that the Holocaust has yet to be the subject of real, forensic, critical scrutiny caught on in many circles around the world. Ever since, a growing number of people has chipped in to widen the scope and scale of such research, to deepen its reach, and to improve and solidify the results.
So the story is far from over. Leuchter started it, and despite all the persecution that resulted from it for him and for those who preceded or followed him, they all keep on fighting. As Fred Leuchter stated five years ago:
“The harder the fight, the tougher we get.”
In the summer of 1989, I managed to get a copy of David Irving’s edition of the Leuchter Report. Back in those years my command of the English language was rather inferior, so I had to sit down and translate it with a dictionary in my hands in order to understand what it said. The result both amazed and unsettled me in more than one way. I went through a similar experience as Leuchter has summarized in my initial quote. But I also recognized a number of profound mistakes, and as my knowledge of the topics increased over the months with every book I read about it – foremost Jean-Claude Pressac’s 1989 tome on Auschwitz – I realized that this wasn’t the final word on the matter. Hence I started doing my own research to find out more.
After many years of my own forensic research and revisionist publishing activities, I decided in 2005 that Leuchter’s work deserved to be re-published in a second edition – all of his four reports, actually. But considering all the weaknesses that had been discovered in his first report on Auschwitz and Majdanek over the years, such a new edition needed to be improved. I didn’t want to mess with the original text, though, which by then had become a historic icon itself. I merely included numerous footnotes with corrections, explanations, and further source material, and added a brief discussion of some of the issues raised by Leuchter.
I am glad that The Barnes Review under the aegis of Willis Carto has now issued a 3rd edition, which has been brought up to date with the current state of research. Equipped with all the improvements of this third, revised edition, the Leuchter Report is as sharp a weapon in the fight for truth as it was 25 years ago.
On occasion of the 25th anniversary, The Barnes Review is honored to issue a new, revised edition of the famous Leuchter Reports:
The Leuchter Reports. Critical Edition
By Fred A. Leuchter, Robert Faurisson, Germar Rudolf
3rd, revised edition, Nov. 2012
The "Holocaust" is often characterized as the greatest crime in the history of mankind. Yet for 44 years not a single forensic investigation into this alleged crime was ever undertaken.
The Leuchter Reports. Critical Edition  - $20.00 : The Barnes Review, Home of the TBR Bookclub
PO Box 439016
San Ysidro, California 92143
12 October 2012
Director, Center for Holocaust & Genocide Studies
College of Liberal Arts
University of Minnesota.
Congratulations on being named to the Stephen Feinstein Chair and the new Director of the Center for Holocaust and Genocide Studies (CHGS).
On the CHGS website http://tinyurl.com/9yqvyq7 it is noted that you are a distinguished scholar of Holocaust memory and testimony. On that page it is reiterated: you are interested in memory of the Holocaust, memory and Anti-Semitism, abuses of Holocaust memory, the transnationalization of memory, and memory of the Holocaust as portrayed in images.
Taking all this together, which is impressive, I would like to ask if you have treated with the memory of such men as Filip Muller and Abraham Bomba, each of which provided central eyewitness testimony from memory about gassing chambers, Muller about those at Auschwitz and Bomba at Treblinka. Or the memory of Irene Zisblatt where she recalls that for a year and a half at Auschwitz she routinely swallowed and defecated her family diamonds.
I have searched the Web looking for how you have treated with these three central figures of Holocaust memory but find nothing. It could be my lack of sophistication in how I use the search tools. I am interested in how you deal with such pivotal figures of Holocaust memory-and there are many, many others like these-who have demonstrably used memory to intentionally corrupt the historical record of those events in which they were caught up.
I take it as a given that you do not want false memory about the Holocaust to be taught to students at University of Minnesota, or to be ignored by their faculty for any professional or political reason.
I look forward to hearing from you, however briefly.
PS: You might want to watch Irene Zisblatt using memory to purposely demonize others. See: http://tinyurl.com/9l7ofqv Do you believe such use of memory regarding the Holocaust should be ignored?
NOTE: To date, Professor Baer has not responded. My letter to him was copied to some 480 faculty, administration and student orgs on the Twin Cities campus.