Race Suicide

Source: Free Speech - January 2001 - Volume VII, Number 1

 

by Dr. William L. Pierce

 

With the end of the year at hand this seems like a good time to sum things up. Before we sum up the past year, though, let’s look at the past century. The salient feature of the 20th century was the collective suicide of the White race. In 1900 we ruled the world. We ruled politically, militarily, culturally, economically, scientifically, and in every other way. No other race even came close. We ruled India and Africa directly, and China was for all practical purposes an economic colony of Europe and America. The Chinese Emperor remained on his throne only so long as he let White men have their way in China. Japan was the only non-White nation of any significance that even had pretensions of autonomy.

 

We had superior weapons, superior armed forces, superior communications, superior transportation, superior agriculture and industry, superior standards of health, superior organization, superiority in every facet of science and technology. We had the best universities – really, the only universities worthy of the name – the best engineers. We built things that other races couldn’t even imagine. We explored, we conquered, we ruled.

 

More important than anything else was our moral superiority – and please don’t misunderstand my use of that term. I don’t mean that we were meek and inoffensive and turned the other cheek. I mean that we were proud and self-confident. We knew who we were, and we knew that we were far, far better than anyone else, and we weren’t at all embarrassed by the fact that we were better. We recognized racial differences in the same way we recognized that the sun rises in the east, and we felt not the slightest need to apologize to anyone for that. Egalitarianism was a moral and mental disease that afflicted only a few of our people, despite the murderous outburst of egalitarian insanity that was the French Revolution a century earlier. Any sort of racial mixing was abhorrent to us. We looked on miscegenation with the same disgust and disapproval as on bestiality or necrophilia. We didn’t tolerate it. And we didn’t accept or trust Jews. That was our situation a century ago.

 

We did have some faults, however: some very serious faults. We were not vigilant. We were so confident in our superiority that we failed to heed the warnings of the few among us who were vigilant. We didn’t pay attention when a few warned us, “Hey, we’d better do something about the race problem. We have nine million non-Whites in the United States, according to the 1900 census, and in the future they could become a real problem for us. Let’s start getting rid of them now.”

 

We thought, “Well, as long as they stay on their side of town and stay out of sight, how can they be a problem for us? Besides, they’re useful for picking cotton and as cleaning women and cooks and gardeners.”

 

And when a few warned us about the Jews we also didn’t pay attention. A few warned us about the damage the Jews had done to us in the past, about their malevolence, about their growing wealth, but most of us didn’t take the warnings seriously. We saw the Jews as obnoxious and unpleasant people, and we didn’t let them into our private clubs and our better hotels, but we didn’t consider them really dangerous. We didn’t even become alarmed when they began buying up our newspapers and elbowing their way into other propaganda media.

 

And lack of vigilance wasn’t our only fault. We were too ready to quarrel with one another. No other race was seen as a threat to ours, so we felt no need to suppress our internal rivalries and jealousies and hatreds and form a solid front against the non-White world. We let fester old rivalries between the English and the Germans and between the Germans and the French and between the English and the Boers in South Africa and between those of us who spoke Germanic languages and those of us who spoke Slavic or Romance languages. We didn’t notice our faults, our weaknesses – but others did.

 

The latter half of the 19th century saw not only the beginning of the acquisition of our mass media by the Jews, but also the nearly simultaneous hatching of two long-term, murderous conspiracies designed to exploit our weaknesses and turn them against us. These two conspiracies were Zionism and Marxism. Some Jews went with one, some with the other, but both were deadly for us.

 

The Marxists issued their Communist Manifesto as far back as the middle of the 19th century, but it was another 50 years before they were able to have much of an impact on the Gentile world. As for the Zionists, they also began propagandizing and organizing about the middle of the 19th century and only became noticeable at the beginning of the 20th century, when they began having international Zionist congresses and more or less openly laying their plans to foment wars and revolutions, of which they could take advantage to promote Jewish interests.

 

For example, at the Zionist Congress in 1897, in Basel, Switzerland, the Zionist leader Theodor Herzl told his fellow Jews that they were having trouble persuading the Turks, who at that time controlled Palestine, to turn the country over to them, but that the Jewish leaders had plans for getting around the Turks. And I should mention that Herzl’s address to the 1897 Zionist Congress has been published in a number of places, and any diligent researcher can dig up a copy. Herzl said:

 

“It may be that Turkey will refuse us or will be unable to understand us. This will not discourage us. We will seek other means to accomplish our end. The Orient question is now a question of the day. Sooner or later it will bring about a conflict among the nations. . . . The great European war must come. With my watch in hand do I await this terrible moment. After the great European war is ended the peace conference will assemble. We must be ready for that time.”

 

Remember, Herzl was talking about the Jews’ plans 17 years before the outbreak of the First World War. But the Jews were ready when the time came. In 1916, with the war more or less stalemated, they approached Britain’s political leaders and made a deal to bring the United States into the war on the side of Britain in return for a British promise to take Palestine away from Turkey and turn it over to the Jews after the war. The British side of the deal was made public in the so-called Balfour Declaration. And the Zionists kept their end of the bargain by working through Jews close to the Democratic President of the United States, Woodrow Wilson. Wilson had won the election to his second term in the White House in 1916 by promising America’s voters that he would keep the United States out of the European war. But as soon as he took office in 1917 he began scheming to get the country into the war on the side of Britain, which, of course, he did two months later. That cost a couple of million additional Gentile lives, but it got Palestine for the Jews – and it also prolonged the war enough for the Jews in Russia to topple the czar and get their communist revolution off the ground.

 

When I said that some Jews took the Marxist route and some the Zionist route, I didn’t mean that all Jews became active workers in one or the other of those movements. Most Jews remained full-time money-grubbers and provided propaganda and financial support for their conspiratorial brethren, continuing to buy up mass media and to dispense capital to the Zionists or the communists as needed. And they didn’t wait for the First World War for that. The first big Gentile bloodletting of the last century in which they had a hand was the Boer War in South Africa, between the British and the Boers. This cruel and murderous war, in which Jewish capitalists were allied with British capitalists against South Africa’s Dutch and German and French farmers – the Boers – laid the foundations for Jewish control of much of Africa’s mineral wealth.

 

In 1904 the Jewish Wall Street speculator Jacob Schiff, planning ahead for a communist takeover of Russia, helped to finance the Japanese side in the Russian-Japanese war and used his influence to block loans to the Czar’s government from America. This was the same Jacob Schiff who a little more than a decade later provided the Jewish-Bolshevik movement with an infusion of $25 million to finish the job in Russia: that’s $25 million from capitalist Wall Street to finance the communist butchery of Gentile Russians. In 1917 $25 million was a lot of money; in any case it bought enough bombs and bullets and communist propaganda leaflets to get the job done.

 

Now, none of this Jewish activity was really secret. The lemmings didn’t know about it, because it wasn’t in the funny papers or the movies. But Jews weren’t even trying to keep their sympathies or their activities secret, and observant Gentiles continued to issue warnings to anyone who would listen. But, as I said a moment ago, we weren’t vigilant. White Americans didn’t believe that they were in any danger. Things such as the deal to bring America into the First World War in return for the turning of Palestine over to the Jews were too subtle for the American mind.

 

After the war the mass murder of Ukrainians and Russians by Jewish-Bolshevik commissars might possibly have registered with White Americans, except that the average White American didn’t think of Russians and Ukrainians as real people: they spoke a different language and dressed differently from us. And besides, by that time the Jews had gotten a pretty good grip on Hollywood and the broadcasting industry, and so the only side of the story that most Americans were allowed to see or hear was the Jewish side.

 

Europeans were more vigilant than Americans. For one thing Europeans had longer memories: they were more aware of the long history of Jewish scheming and predation than Americans were. For another thing, in Europe the danger was quite a bit closer. Communist parties in a number of European countries besides Russia had taken advantage of the chaos in the wake of the war to make grabs for power, and in a few countries – Hungary, for example – they succeeded temporarily. People noticed the ethnicity of the commissars and were horrified by their behavior toward the Gentile populations. Even in insular Britain no less a public figure than Winston Churchill spoke out clearly about the danger of Jewish communism. In a full-page feature article in the February 8, 1920, issue of London’s Illustrated Sunday Herald, Churchill wrote:

 

This movement among the Jews is not new. From the days of Spartacus-Weisshaupt to those of Karl Marx, and down to Trotsky in Russia, Bela Kun in Hungary, Rosa Luxembourg in Germany, and Emma Goldman in the United States, this world-wide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilization and the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality has been steadily growing. It played . . . a definitely recognizable part in the tragedy of the French Revolution. It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the nineteenth century; and now at last this band of extraordinary personalities from the underworld of the great cities of Europe and America have gripped the Russian people by the hair of their heads and have become practically the undisputed masters of that enormous empire.

 

There is no need to exaggerate the part played in the creation of Bolshevism and in the actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution by these international and for the most part atheistical Jews. It is certainly a very great one; it probably outweighs all others. With the notable exception of Lenin, the majority of the leading figures are Jews. Moreover, the principal inspiration and driving power comes from the Jewish leaders. Thus Tchitcherin, a pure Russian, is eclipsed by his nominal subordinate Litvinoff, and the influence of Russians like Bukharin or Lunacharski cannot be compared with the power of Trotsky or of Zinovieff . . . or of Krassin or Radek – all Jews. In the Soviet institutions the predominance of Jews is even more astonishing. And the prominent, if not indeed the principal, part in the system of terrorism applied by the Extraordinary Commission for Combating Counter-Revolution [the Cheka] has been taken by Jews, and in some notable cases by Jewesses. The same evil prominence was obtained by Jews in the brief period of terror during which Bela Kun ruled in Hungary. The same phenomenon has been presented in Germany (especially in Bavaria), so far as this madness has been allowed to prey upon the temporary prostration of the German people. Although in all these countries there are many non-Jews every whit as bad as the worst of the Jewish revolutionaries, the part played by the latter in proportion to their numbers in the population is astonishing.”

 

Actually, Churchill said quite a bit more in this article about the dangers of allowing Jewish communism to go unchecked, and if you really want to make a study of the background of our present mess you should read the entire article yourself. That’s the February 8, 1920, issue of the Illustrated Sunday Herald. If you can’t find it yourself in a large research library, the entire article is photographically reproduced in the book The Best of Attack! and National Vanguard Tabloid, which is available from National Vanguard Books, the sponsor of this program. And when you do find the article from which I just read – a major article written by one of the most prominent personalities of the last century and published in a major British newspaper – you might ask yourself why you had never heard of it before I called it to your attention.

 

As I said, we lacked vigilance. A few people paid attention – America’s pioneer automaker Henry Ford, for example – but most White Americans were too busy with their ball games and funny papers. And we didn’t really care about what the Jews were doing to White people overseas, since they weren’t Americans. About the only people who really paid attention were the Germans, who resolved not to let the Jews do to them what they had done to the Russians and had tried to do to the Hungarians. So they proceeded to get Rosa Luxembourg and her pals off their backs and out of Germany. And when the Germans did that, the Jews in America began screaming bloody murder and calling for another world war to save them from the Germans. And by this time the Jews had almost a monopoly on getting their side of the story to the American public.

 

Well, our people had one other fault in addition to an inadequate sense of racial solidarity with other Whites around the world and a lack of vigilance: we also lacked responsible leadership. We lacked even a system for giving us responsible leadership. What we had were politicians: skilled liars – actors, lawyers – who never asked themselves, “What policy is good for our people?” but only, “How can I get elected? What must I promise the people in order to get their votes? What policy will make me popular?” And as the grip of the Jews on the mass media, on Hollywood and Madison Avenue – and therefore on the minds of the public – became more and more nearly complete throughout the last century, the question the politicians asked themselves became, more and more: “What must I do to please the Jews and gain their support?”

 

And so in 1933, in the same year that a German government took office with a policy of freeing the German people from the grip of the Jews, in America a government took office with a policy of doing whatever the Jews wanted done. Franklin Roosevelt surrounded himself with more Jews than any previous American President. In this regard he was the Bill Clinton of his day.

 

Using Roosevelt as their willing tool, the Jews pulled the same sort of bait-and-switch trick on the American people to get us into the Second World War that they had pulled using Woodrow Wilson to get us into the First World War. Just as Wilson had done 24 years earlier, Roosevelt ran for re-election in 1940 on a campaign promise to keep the United States out of the war in Europe, and while he was making that promise to the American people he was actively scheming with his Jewish advisors and supporters to get the United States into the war as soon as he could, and meanwhile to keep the war in Europe going by making promises of support to those countries opposed to Germany.

 

It was fighting on the wrong side of that war, more than anything else, that laid us low. It also destroyed the British Empire and laid Britain low. Throughout the non-White world Whites began abdicating their rule, withdrawing, apologizing. The disease of egalitarianism spread like wildfire. There was a moral collapse throughout the White world. It wasn’t just the German people who lost the Second World War; it was all Europeans, all White people, including European-Americans.

 

The Jews were the only real winners. The First World War resulted in opening up Palestine for their Zionist faction and delivering Russia to their communist faction. The Second World War not only saved them from getting booted out of Europe by Hitler, it delivered all of eastern and much of central Europe to their communist faction and finished delivering Palestine to their Zionist faction. The war cost them a million or so of the less-nimble Jews in Europe, but it gave them the basis for their enormously profitable “Holocaust” story, with which they have beaten the White world over the head ever since.

 

And so today we have George Bush trying to outdo Bill Clinton in multiculturalizing the government of the United States. Conservative Americans, patriotic Americans, put their hope in Bush to pull America back from the insanity of the Clinton era, and the first thing Bush does is try to ingratiate himself with the Clintonistas, with the Jews, by appointing non-Whites to the most important posts in his administration.

 

Read the man’s lips. What he’s saying is: “Hey, I’m really not such a bad guy. See, I’m appointing Blacks, I’m appointing Jews, I’m appointing Mexicans. And the Blacks and Mexicans I’m appointing are just as pro-Jewish as I am. My tough-talking Black secretary of state speaks Yiddish and will support Jewish interests around the world just as strongly as Bill Clinton’s Jewish secretary of state has done. You can trust me. I’ll do whatever you tell me. I’ll support Israel. I’ll support ‘speech crime’ laws. I’m your man.” And he’s not saying that, he’s not making these appointments, because that’s what Republicans want or even what Americans want. It’s what the Jews want. George Bush is a hollow man, an empty man.

 

And George Bush is a splendid symbol of the state of our race today: a splendid symbol of our moral collapse during the past century. It is entirely fitting that such a man should be our figurehead leader as we continue on the course of racial suicide that we have been on for the past century. It is entirely appropriate that he became our figurehead leader through the comic-opera sort of process we have witnessed during the last two months of the first year of this century – which certainly will be our last century if we do not make a radical change of course soon and begin regaining our lost moral strength.

 

* * *

Summer, 1945 – Germany, Japan and the Harvest of Hate

 

DOWNLOAD THE BOOK IN PDF FORMAT

 

by Thomas Goodrich

 

Sometimes a book comes along that changes the way we think. Sometimes a book comes along that changes the way we act. Sometimes a book comes along that changes the way we think and the way we act. Such a book was Hellstorm – The Death of Nazi Germany, 1944–1947. That masterpiece by Thomas Goodrich changed forever not only how we would view World War Two, but it changed how we would view the world itself. For the first time since it happened, because of one bold and breath-taking book, the scales fell from our eyes and we were finally able to see free and unfettered what the abomination called World War Two was really all about. Swept forever into a dark, dirty corner was the filth and disease of seventy years of Jewish propaganda, seventy years of Jewish lies about the so-called “Good War” and the so-called “Greatest Generation,” seventy years of Jewish mendacity about who was bad and who was good. Suddenly, overnight, replacing those lies was an honest, impartial, unbiased, but driving, relentless, and utterly merciless account of the fate that befell Germany in 1945.

 

As incredible as Hellstorm was, is, and will always remain, we now know it was only half the story. While the bloody obscenity that was World War Two was being acted out against a largely helpless German population by as evil a cast of creatures as ever haunted any hell anywhere, a similar horror show was taking place on the far side of the globe. And what is revealed in Tom Goodrich’s latest book, Summer, 1945 – Germany, Japan and the Harvest of Hate, is a story so savage and sadistic as to numb the senses.

 

While some of the events described in Summer, 1945 will be familiar to readers of Hellstorm, many will not. Clearly, the author did a vast amount of new research for this new book since much material is previously unknown, especially regarding the contributions of the “Greatest Generation” to its already ghastly list of war crimes against Germany. In fact, what was previously revealed about the Americans in Hellstorm, horrific as it was at the time, was only the faintest foretaste of what was to come in Summer, 1945. For example…

 

Massive, monstrous, staggering as was the scale of Red Army rape in Germany, it now seems clear that the Americans were not far behind, if behind they were at all. Simply put: No one in control cared. Far from trying to halt the nonstop sexual attacks that their men committed against helpless German females, US officers, like Soviet officers, either ignored them, laughed at them, or actively encouraged them. Upon entering their communities, American officers forced Germans to write the age and sex of all occupants in their homes, then ordered the lists nailed to doors. “The results are not difficult to imagine,” said one horrified priest from a village where women and children were soon staggering to the local hospital after the predictable sexual assaults commenced. Some US generals even blamed the victims themselves for their own gang rape when they dared leave their homes to beg for food. Lt. General Edwin Clarke went further when he announced that the thousands of rape reports in his area were nothing more than a conspiracy by die-hard Nazis to belittle and embarrass his well-behaved and totally innocent troops. Clarke apparently believed that the hundreds of thousands of beaten, bruised and bleeding women and children were all liars with self-inflicted sex wounds. Also, to drive home German defeat, it was noted that GIs were being ordered by their “political officers” to make the gang rapes as public as possible. Although such brutal attacks were already common on streets and sidewalks, in schools and shops, an audience of family members was the preferred crowd for gang rape. Forcing German men to watch was also favored by the Americans, just as it was by their communist comrades. Another hideous American war crime, a despicable act of hate and savagery, was the cold-blooded murder of SS and Wehrmacht soldiers the moment they surrendered their weapons. “You will not accept the surrender of any German SS,” announced one American general, demonstrating his commitment to barbarity and a criminal contempt for the Geneva Convention. By the tens of thousands these German soldiers, some of the best fighters the world had ever seen, were shown no mercy by the cowardly US murderers. In one massacre alone over seven hundred SS men were murdered in a matter of minutes; in another massacre, five hundred died, and so on.

 

“The Americans forced the Germans to walk in front of them with raised hands,” said an eyewitness regarding one group of fifty. “Then they shot the prisoners in their heads from behind.”

 

Additionally, the unbelievably sick and sadistic torture camps operated by the US Army and European Jews in Germany and Poland was on a psychopathic scale beyond belief. Well over a hundred thousand German men, women and even children suffered brutal deaths in these nightmarish torture pens. One might have imagined, and one would have certainly hoped, that after Hellstorm nothing more could have possibly been added to this perfectly hellish script of torture – victims buried alive, women forced to lay with and kiss rotting corpses–but one would have imagined wrong. Those few who survived these demonic camps. where dying was a thing to be postponed, not hurried, could no longer be called human. Of virtually all German men and boys who somehow survived to reach home, it was noticed all had their reproductive organs destroyed beyond repair.

 

But horrific as the so-called “peace” in Germany was, perhaps the greatest revelations for readers of Summer, 1945 come in the war chapters devoted to Japan. From the first page forward we readers, especially we American readers raised on the mythology of the “Dirty Jap,” will find our world of make believe turned upside down and inside out. Winners do write the history. And never was this more apt and terribly illustrated than in the case of America’s victory over Japan.

 

One of the greatest lies to emerge from WWII and survive for over seventy years intact, is the one we have been told over and over ever since December 7, 1941, viz., that the Japanese soldier was a mindless, murderous automaton, that he would never surrender, that he would always fight to the death, that he “lived to die” for the Emperor, that suicide was his second nature, and so on. There is no truth to any of these fairy-tales. Such a revelation as I have just stated here should not have come as any great surprise to anyone when they think about it, but it did come as a great shock to me and it will to everyone else, I am sure. When one has been told a “truth” such as this about the “robotic” Japanese soldier, a truth told for so many years from so many sources, one simply believes it as totally, completely and mindlessly as that night follows day. After reading a few pages of Summer, 1945, however, it will be very clear to everyone that never was there a greater falsehood.

 

While reading what the opposing sides thought, in their own words, it is quickly clear that emotionally there was no appreciable difference between what a Japanese eighteen-year-old wanted and what an American eighteen-year-old wanted. First and foremost, both wanted to live. Both wanted to survive the war so that each might return home and marry that girl they loved so much, to have kids, to get a good job, to buy a car, to raise a small garden, to play in the backyard with pets. The problem for the Japanese was that Americans were taking no prisoners. From the very first battle on Guadalcanal when frightened young Japanese began walking forward with their hands held high to surrender muttering the only English word they knew, “Mercy, mercy,” US Marines began mowing them down… all of them, not just an isolated few here and there . . . all of them. In countless testimonies, it is readily apparent that Japanese soldiers in hopeless situations would have gladly surrendered, by the thousands, if only they could. The hatred was so great, however, and the propaganda so virulent following President Franklin Roosevelt’s orchestrated attack at Pearl Harbor that American soldiers, sailors and airmen were simply taking no prisoners, nor did the folks back home or their commanders want them to.

 

“You will take no prisoners, you will kill every yellow son-of-a-bitch, and that’s it,” yelled a marine colonel as he and his men were about to land on one island.

 

Thus, the manufactured belief after Pearl Harbor that the Japanese always fought to the death and never surrendered worked perfectly into the deep desire of Americans to kill the “sneaky Japs,” kill them all. And so, with no option now but to fight fanatically to the death, the Japanese did. And thus, it was a case where propaganda became a self-fulfilling truth.

 

Added to the merciless murder of helpless enemy soldiers was the torture and mutilation the Americans inflicted on those who were merely wounded. Ears, noses, fingers, toes, and other body parts were cut off the dead and dying for souvenirs; heads were hacked off and their “cured” skulls then sold to sailors or sent home to friends and family members; even Roosevelt received a letter opener carved from a Japanese arm bone.

 

“This is the sort of gift I like to get,” beamed the US president proudly.

 

The few Japanese who were in fact saved for interrogation were kept alive only as long as their information was useful, then they too were shot, bayoneted or pushed from flying aircraft.

 

Another falsehood that has existed as fact for the past seventy years is that the US military conducted itself properly during the occupation of Japan and helped the defeated nation gently back to its feet during peace. Again, nothing could be further from the truth. From the day they arrived, the Americans took ruthless control of what little remained of the destroyed nation. Women, children and the elderly were thrown into the streets and forced to shift among the ruins as best they could. At every available opportunity, Japanese men suffered humiliation and degradation and many were slapped, kicked and beaten in public “for fun.” All Japanese were treated like third-class citizens for years. Starvation stalked the land even before the conquerors arrived but though the Americans had a surplus to draw from food was denied to the people, just as it was in Germany. As a result, it is likely that millions perished during the first years of occupation. It was noticed that starving children were smaller in 1946 than they were in 1936.

 

Additionally, just as in Germany, rape reared its filthy head in “peace.” From the moment American troops came ashore on Saipan and Okinawa – two Japanese islands with large civilian populations–rape of females, and sometimes rape of males, began. And just as in Germany following its surrender, the violent sexual assaults in Japan continued unabated for years. No one in power, from General Douglas MacArthur down, was concerned in the least about the despicable, plague-like crime. Indeed, MacArthur was much more concerned with censoring the news of rape from the outside world than stopping rape in Japan itself. Goodrich estimates that over a million Japanese women and children were raped after the war.

 

There are many other shocking revelations that might be lifted from this blistering book but then, after all, this is only a review of the book and not the book itself. Readers will have to discover the rest of this startling, riveting read for themselves. Truly, Summer, 1945 is aptly subtitled, “the harvest of hate.”

 

In closing, a few final thoughts on the author himself. Anyone who has read anything by Tom Goodrich knows that he is a passionate man who writes with great power, strength and scope. It is a trademark that sets him apart from others. But his books also reveal the inner writer; a writer within who displays a large heart and soul. One senses early in a book that Goodrich actually cares about his subjects. There is, of course, the larger focus of each book, the “big picture,” but Goodrich never loses touch with the small, the fragile, the seeming insignificant, the all-but-forgotten. A touching example is offered in Summer, 1945 when a Japanese adolescent, whose face has been melted beyond recognition by the atomic blast at Hiroshima, makes plans to kill herself rather than be chained for the remainder of her life to the face of a monster. Just as the child is about to commit the final act, she overhears in the next room her anguished father quietly discussing his daughter with her mother. Sadly, agreeing that the child’s face is indeed hideous beyond belief, the man then states with both pain and love in each word that he loves his girl so much that her life, not her looks, is all that matters to him. Stunned, never imagining that anyone could ever love her again with such a terrifying face, the words of love were startling to the child, so startling that she suddenly realized that although death would indeed release her from a life of pain and shame, such a selfish act would only add to the heartbreak of her father. The girl matures to womanhood when she decides then and there to accept her fate, deal with her problems herself, and simply be thankful for the love that still blesses her life when so many others are now bereft of all.

 

Generally, to reach an honest and accurate understanding of an event such as World War II, one must be so dedicated to the truth that they are prepared to plow through days, weeks, months, and years of dry, sterile material filled with tedious facts, figures and stats. Few of us have the time, patience or stamina for such research. Thankfully, there are those like Tom Goodrich who do have what it takes for the long haul. Ultimately, it is the “long haul” that delivers the details of history from which comes what we know as truth. Without our history, without our truth, we are nothing as a people. That’s why our enemy is so determined to hide or distort our history; it is also why people like Tom Goodrich are so determined to retrieve our history. Discovering the truth of our history, even after decades of propaganda and lies, is what will ultimately set us free. These two books – Summer, 1945 and Hellstorm – have gone a very long way toward setting us free. And this is what makes Thomas Goodrich’s writing style so special. Almost in spite of ourselves, we sense the truth in his words. We, the readers, are drawn into a Goodrich book before we hardly know it. Truth is like that, like a strong magnet. A day or two later, when one emerges from the book–one “emerges” from a Tom Goodrich book, they never “finish” something that stays with them forever – they feel like they are different people; they have been to places that they never knew existed; they have gone to worlds that they were not supposed to go; they have gained knowledge and understanding that they were never meant to gain. And that, ladies and gentlemen, is an uncanny writing ability. We call it genius.

 

Summer, 1945 – Germany, Japan and the Harvest of Hate has already taken its place with Hellstorm as one of the all-time most memorable and important books ever written, not just on World War II, but on history in general. If that sounds biased, that’s because it is. We White Nationalists are extremely fortunate to have one of the world’s finest and most dedicated historians fighting on our side. People like Thomas Goodrich are why we are winning and why our victory is just a matter of time.

The Secret Masonic Victory of WW2 - Part 13 - The Last Holy War

Revisionism Will Set Us Free

Book Review

 

Source: https://codoh.com/library/document/revisionism-will-set-us-free/

 

by John Wear

May 7, 2025

 

John Beaumont, The Truth Will Set You Free: The Case for Holocaust Revisionism, South Bend, IN: Fidelity Press, 2023; 349 pp. 6”×9” hardcover, ISBN 978-0-929891-32-3

 

The book The Truth Will Set You Free: The Case for Holocaust Revisionism by John Beaumont is an excellent introduction to Holocaust revisionism. Beaumont writes that, until about the year 2013, he had accepted the traditional Holocaust story. His views began to change when a Jewish gentleman in New York within a short time of their meeting explained to him why Robert Faurisson was one of his heroes. After reading most of Faurisson’s work, Beaumont became converted to the revisionist cause. Ironically, much of the further Holocaust revisionist material brought to Beaumont came from other Jews; for example, the film of Gilad Atzmon’s interview with Faurisson (pp. 13f.; all page numbers given in this text are from Beaumont’s book).

 

Beaumont writes that, sadly, despite the fine work done by scholars such as Robert Faurisson, Fred Leuchter, Germar Rudolf, Walter Lüftl, Carlo Mattogno, Jürgen Graf and other researchers, relatively few people in society are aware of the powerful evidence for revisionism. His book presents Holocaust revisionist information chronologically and concentrates on individual writers. Beaumont shows in his book that the revisionist thesis is proved beyond a reasonable doubt, the standard burden of proof required in criminal cases (pp. 14f.).

 

The Early Revisionists

 

Paul Rassinier was a French history teacher who was arrested during the war for passive resistance activities, which included helping to smuggle Jews into neutral Switzerland. Rassinier stated that, although he suffered greatly during the war in the Buchenwald and Dora concentration camps, he never saw any evidence of homicidal gas chambers or any program to exterminate the Jews. After reading sensationalized accounts that he knew were false, Rassinier felt it was his ethical duty to tell the truth about the camps, and refute the false claims being made in the world’s press.

 

Rassinier wrote extensively about his own experiences and observations in the German camps. He began to research the entire issue of German genocide against the Jews during the war. Rassinier concluded that the death toll in the camps was far lower than alleged. He also concluded that the deaths in the camps were not caused by a German program of mass murder,[1] but rather primarily by the poor conditions of the camps attributable to the economic collapse of Germany during a devastating war. Rassinier had nothing to gain personally from taking his unpopular position, and after suffering greatly in the German concentration camps, he then suffered intense persecution in postwar France for his courageous writings after the war.

 

Paul Rassinier’s writings helped to inspire an interest in Holocaust revisionism in other writers. One of these was Dr. Arthur Robert Butz, who in 1976 published a comprehensive analysis of the so-called Holocaust in his book The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, later sub-titled The Case Against the Presumed Extermination of European Jewry. Butz states in his book that “the simplest valid reason for being skeptical about the extermination claim is also the simplest conceivable reason: at the end of the war, they were still there.”[2]

 

Robert Faurisson wrote a review of Butz’s book as to why the alleged extermination of the Jews did not happen (p. 39):

 

“[I]f, in the middle of Europe, in the space of three years, the Germans had killed so many millions of Jews, such an extraordinary phenomenon could not have gone unnoticed. But the Vatican did not perceive this awesome occurrence. The International Committee of the Red Cross did not see it. The German underground opposition did not mention it. The European Jews had no information on the subject and did not truly believe the vague, absurd, and cacophonous rumors circulating here and there of a physical extermination of industrial proportions. Jews overseas (United States, Palestine, international Jewish organizations) did not behave as if they themselves lent credence to the alarming accounts that they were disseminating, and nor did the Allied governments.”

 

Beaumont writes that Robert Faurisson did an immense amount of work in the cause of revisionism. Of great importance was Faurisson’s study of American gas chambers, which used Zyklon B (hydrocyanic acid) to execute one man in American penitentiaries. Faurisson’s research on gas chambers and Zyklon B took between three and four years of study. Faurisson stated why the alleged homicidal gas chambers never existed (pp. 48f.):

 

“Today’s visitor to Auschwitz or Majdanek discovers, in the way of ‘gas chambers,’ facilities in which any gassings would have spelt catastrophe for the gassers and their entourage. A collective execution by gas, supposing that it was practicable, could not at all be likened either to a suicidal or to an accidental gassing. In order to gas a single convict at a time, with his wrists and ankles shackled, the Americans employ a special gas [hydrogen cyanide] within a small space, from which, after its use, it is extracted and subsequently neutralized. So then, how could 2,000 people (and even 3,000) be held in an enclosure of 210 square meters (!), at Auschwitz, for example, to have a common and powerful insecticide called Zyklon B poured onto them (!); finally, just after the victims’ death, how could a team be sent, without gas masks, into that place saturated with hydrogen cyanide, in order to remove the corpses infused with cyanide?”

 

The 1985 Zündel Trial

 

Beaumont includes in his book a chapter about the 1985 Ernst Zündel trial. This trial originated when Samisdat Publishers Ltd., under the signature of its president, Ernst Zündel, published in the early 1980s a 32-page booklet titled Did Six Million Really Die?. Sabina Citron, a founder of the Canadian Holocaust Remembrance Association, filed a criminal complaint against Ernst Zündel for the alleged criminal offense of “spreading false news” likely to cause racial and social intolerance. This charge was later assumed by the Canadian government and led to a lengthy jury trial in 1985.[3]

 

The booklet Did Six Million Really Die? unquestionably contained some errors. It was written hastily in the early 1970s by a young University of London graduate, Richard Verrall, who used the pseudonym “Richard Harwood.” The booklet critiqued the weaknesses of the evidence and arguments provided in orthodox Holocaust literature, and gave the reader alternative views of what happened in the German camps during World War II. The booklet Did Six Million Really Die? did what polemical works are supposed to do by providing readers with an alternative view of the so-called Holocaust.[3]

 

The primary purpose of the prosecution of Ernst Zündel was to make sure that ordinary Canadians would not have access to the type of information contained in Did Six Million Really Die?. Zündel in his defense decided to put the “Holocaust” on trial. Indeed, Zündel forced pro-Holocaust historians to defend their position that Germany had a program of mass extermination against Jews during World War II.[4]

 

The prosecution in the 1985 Ernst Zündel trial counted on the testimony of carefully chosen survivors to prove the so-called Holocaust happened as described by mainstream historians. These survivors were supposed to testify that they had seen, with their own eyes, the carrying out of homicidal gassings. However, none of the prosecution’s eyewitnesses was able to successfully describe any homicidal gassings at the German camps.[5]

 

Arnold Friedman, a 56-year-old Hungarian Jew, was touted as an eyewitness to the homicidal gassings at Auschwitz. Friedman testified that while in Auschwitz he saw “14-foot flames” shooting out of the crematorium chimneys. Douglas Christie, Zündel’s defense attorney, showed Friedman scientific evidence that the crematoria at Auschwitz were designed not to give off either flames, ashes, or odors. Friedman eventually admitted that his testimony did not come from personal experience; he was simply repeating what others had told him.[6]

 

Rudolf Vrba, who had escaped from Auschwitz in April of 1944, was a world-famous eyewitness to the homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz. Vrba was a coauthor of the War Refugee Board Report, and was the author of the book I Cannot Forgive (with Alan Bestic) published in 1964. Furthermore, Vrba had provided important eyewitness testimony at the Auschwitz trial in Frankfurt in 1964.[7] The prosecution felt that Vrba could produce reliable and authentic testimony at the trial. Vrba was considered one of the most important witnesses in support of the existence of gas chambers at Auschwitz.

 

However, Vrba confessed during his testimony at Zündel’s trial that his book I Cannot Forgive was “an artistic picture […] not a document for the court.” Vrba also testified that he had never actually witnessed anybody being gassed at Auschwitz, but had merely heard rumors. Furthermore, Vrba admitted that his written and pictorial descriptions of the Auschwitz crematory were mere guessing, based on “what I heard it might look like.” Vrba proved to be an unreliable witness who could only cite hearsay evidence of the so-called Holocaust.[8]

 

All the other prosecution witnesses were discredited on cross-examination by Douglas Christie. Today, the evidence that the so-called Holocaust happened is based almost entirely on eyewitness testimony of “survivors.” As the 1985 Ernst Zündel trial showed, such eyewitness testimony has consistently proved to be extremely unreliable.

 

Dr. Raul Hilberg was hired by the prosecution in the 1985 Zündel trial to testify as an expert on the “Holocaust.” He commenced his study of the “Holocaust” in 1948. Hilberg’s major work on the so-called Holocaust was The Destruction of the European Jews, which was first published in 1961, and reprinted many times.

 

When asked in 1983 how the extermination of European Jewry took place without an order, Hilberg replied:[9]

 

“What began in 1941 was a process of destruction not planned in advance, not organized centrally by any agency. There was no blueprint and there was no budget for destructive measures. They were taken step by step, one step at a time. Thus, came about not so much a plan being carried out, but an incredible meeting of minds, a consensus-mind reading by a far-flung bureaucracy.”

 

On January 16, 1985, under cross-examination at the 1985 Zündel trial, Hilberg confirmed that he said these words.[10] Thus, Hilberg stated that the mass murder of European Jewry was not carried out by a plan or order, but rather by an incredible mind reading among far-flung German bureaucrats.

 

Douglas Christie asked Hilberg if he knew of one scientific report that substantiates that any single place was used as a gas chamber. Hilberg, after repeatedly asking for clarification of the question, eventually had to admit that he knew of no scientific report that proved the existence of a gas chamber in German camps during World War II.[11] Thus, the world’s greatest pro-Holocaust expert admitted that there was no scientific evidence or even an autopsy report to back up the prosecution’s incredible extermination claims.[12]

 

After Hilberg’s testimony, spirits were understandably high at Zündel’s headquarters. The prosecution witnesses and their “Holocaust” expert, who were supposed to make a fool of Zündel, had failed miserably in their testimony.[12]

 

Zündel now produced solid evidence in his defense, including eyewitnesses. Dr. Robert Faurisson, the leader of Zündel’s defense team and a recognized expert on text and document criticism, was Zündel’s first witness. Faurisson testified that there was not a single homicidal gas chamber in any of the German concentration camps. He stated:[13]

 

“If it [proof of gassings] had existed, we should have thousands of material [proofs]. We have not one proof.”

 

Dr. Russell Barton, an English physician who later became an American psychiatrist, testified that he entered Bergen-Belsen with British forces as a young medical student on May 2, 1945. Dr. Barton’s first impression of the camp was one of horror: some inmates were dead and piled up outside the huts, others were in various stages of dying, disease and dehydration. Barton examined the camp’s well-equipped kitchens, and found record books listing the food that had been cooked and distributed going back to 1942. Dr. Barton determined from his examination of the camp records that there had not been a deliberate policy of starvation at Bergen-Belsen.

 

Dr. Barton made inquiries with inmates, including Jewish doctors, who told him that Bergen-Belsen had not been too bad until the autumn of 1944. Then, as the Russian armies were advancing, the inmates said they had been given the choice of remaining in the camps about to be overrun by the Soviets, or being repatriated back to Germany. Many chose to return to Germany. As a result, from the autumn of 1944 to early 1945, some 53,000 people were moved into Bergen-Belsen, which had room for only 3,000 inmates. The overcrowding was extreme, and the staff at the camp resented it. Josef Kramer, the commandant of Bergen-Belsen, and Dr. Fritz Klein, the medical doctor at the camp, didn’t know what to do with the huge influx of inmates. Dr. Barton testified that the horrific conditions at Bergen-Belsen were attributable to overcrowding and the collapse of the German economy at the end of the war rather than to an intentional program of extermination.[14]

 

Thies Christophersen was another witness who said that the alleged mass murder of Jews during the war never happened. Christophersen supervised about 300 workers at Auschwitz from January to December 1944. On numerous occasions during this period, he visited Birkenau, where allegedly hundreds of thousands of Jews were being gassed to death. In a memoir first published in Germany in 1973, The Auschwitz Lie, Christophersen wrote that, during the time he was at Auschwitz, he did not notice the slightest evidence of mass gassings. At the 1985 Zündel trial, he successfully answered numerous pointed questions by the prosecuting attorney about his experiences at Auschwitz.[15]

 

Dr. William B. Lindsey, a research chemist employed for 33 years by the DuPont Corporation, testified at the 1985 Ernst Zündel trial that he considered mass homicidal gassings in the camps to be technically impossible. Based on his on-site examination of the alleged homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz, Birkenau, and Majdanek, Dr. Lindsey stated:[16]

 

“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.”

 

Ditlieb Felderer, a revisionist researcher of Jewish descent, testified that he had conducted 27 separate visits to Auschwitz, where he snapped more than 30,000 color photographs, took soil samples and conducted infra-red analysis of rooms and buildings. He examined the camp from top to bottom, and sneaked into areas which were off limits to tourists. Zündel testified that Felderer’s photographs were important in the formation of his understanding of the alleged gas chambers at Auschwitz. However, none of Felderer’s photographs was permitted to be offered as evidence by the judge in Zündel’s trial.

 

Felderer testified that the real Zyklon-B rooms at Auschwitz were delousing chambers. These facilities were designed to save lives by fighting typhus through the fumigation of bedding and clothing. He said that faked or reconstructed exhibits were placed on the guided Auschwitz tour. These fake exhibits included the infamous “execution wall,” which Felderer discovered did not have any bullet holes in the wall. Felderer described Auschwitz as it is now portrayed as being a “Hollywood set” which carries on Zionist and Communist propaganda.[17]

 

Zündel called numerous additional witnesses to testify in his defense. At the end of his trial, Zündel was questioned about his views of the “Holocaust.” His testimony indicated that he had studied the subject quite extensively.

 

Unfortunately, regarding the booklet Did Six Million Really Die?, the jury found Zündel guilty of willfully promoting false news. Judge Hugh Locke sentenced Ernst Zündel to 15 months in prison, followed by three years of probation. While free on bail, Judge Locke placed Zündel under a judicial gag order forbidding him from writing or speaking about the “Holocaust.”[18]

 

Christie appealed the court’s decision. On January 23, 1987, Zündel’s conviction was overturned by the five-judge Ontario Court of Appeals for two very important reasons. First, Locke had not allowed the defense any influence in the jury selection process. Second, the jury had been misled by the judge on the very meaning of the trial. A second trial concerning only the booklet Did Six Million Really Die? was ordered by the court.[19]

 

The 1988 Zündel Trial

 

Beaumont also includes an entire chapter on Ernst Zündel’s second trial, which began on January 18, 1988. Prior to the start of the trial, Crown Attorney John Pearson requested that the new judge, Ron Thomas, take judicial notice of the historical fact that the National Socialist regime of Adolf Hitler pursued a policy of extermination of Europe’s Jews. Judge Thomas granted Pearson’s request. The jury was directed by Thomas to accept as a fact that the “Holocaust” had occurred. Thus, in the 1988 Zündel trial, the judge by this ruling effectively determined the result of the case (pp. 100f.).

 

Not one “Holocaust” survivor entered the witness box in Zündel’s second trial. The prosecution had apparently learned in the first trial that there were no credible witnesses to the existence and operation of German gas chambers. Despite objections by Douglas Christie, the judge in the second trial allowed Raul Hillberg’s testimony from 1985 to be read to the jury, thereby enabling Hilberg to avoid cross-examination in Zündel’s second trial.

 

Dr. Christopher Browning, a professor of history at Pacific Lutheran University, was called by the prosecution as their expert witness to replace Hilberg. Browning admitted in his testimony that, during his 17 years of research, he had never seen a homicidal gas chamber or a technical plan for a homicidal gas chamber. He had never seen an autopsy report for a supposedly gassed individual in any German concentration camp. Browning also could not provide any credible evidence that Hitler had ordered the extermination of the Jews. He was also unaware of the numerous tortures of Germans such as Rudolf Höss, the commandant of Auschwitz, who had spoken of gassings (pp. 101-103).

 

Robert Faurisson provided extensive testimony at this trial as to the nonexistence of gas chambers in the German camps. Faurisson spoke of the very serious practical necessities that would be required for Germany to bring such a system into operation (p. 113):

 

“A gassing is not an improvisation. If the Germans had decided to gas millions of people, a complete overhaul of some very formidable machinery would have been absolutely essential. A general order, instructions, studies, commands, and plans would surely have been necessary also. Such items have never been found. Meetings of experts would have been necessary: of architects, chemists, doctors, and experts in a wide range of technical fields. Disbursements and allocation of funds would have been necessary.”

 

Bill M. Armontrout, the Warden of Missouri State Penitentiary, confirmed at the 1988 Zündel trial the difficulty of conducting homicidal gassings to kill people. He described the procedure used in Missouri after the execution of only one person in a homicidal gas chamber:[20]

 

“After the execution, the ammonia was released and the gas expelled out of the chamber. All staff and witnesses were removed from the area. The ventilation fan ran for approximately an hour before two officers equipped with Scott air-packs (self-contained breathing apparatus which firemen use to enter smoke-filled buildings) opened the hatch of the gas chamber and removed the lead bucket containing the cyanide residue. The two officers wore rubberized disposable clothing and long rubber gloves. They hosed down the condemned man’s body in the chair, paying particular attention to the hair and the clothing because of the cyanide residue, then removed him and placed him on a gurney where further decontamination took place. The officers then hosed the entire inside of the gas chamber with regular cold water.”

 

Obviously, such a difficult and time-consuming procedure would not be an effective means of quickly executing hundreds of thousands of people as allegedly happened to the Jews at Auschwitz-Birkenau.

 

British historian David Irving also provided valuable testimony at the 1988 Zündel trial. Irving was asked: Do you consider it likely that an enterprise of the magnitude of the extermination of the Jews of Europe could be accomplished by the people [Germans], knowing the way they conducted business from their documents, without the existence of explicit orders and plans? David Irving testified:[21]

 

“Not only without existence of orders, but also without the existence of any written reference to it. 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. He would get his superior to write a letter saying, ‘On the Führer’s orders, we are doing the following,’ which is why there are letters showing Himmler saying, ‘On the Führer’s orders, we are deporting the Jews.’ Which was the extent of the Führer’s orders and which was the extent, to my mind, of the final solution. So, the documents don’t exist where you expect to find them. Hitler’s other crimes, the documents are there: 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 ever they 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 […]. I think there would definitely have had to be orders and 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.”

 

The highlight of the 1988 Zündel trial was Fred Leuchter’s testimony. In every murder trial, the prosecution has the burden of proof to show the cause of death. Scientific evidence is usually the most convincing evidence to show the cause of death, because scientific evidence can be verified in an objective manner. Incredibly, in the biggest and most publicized murder trial of all time, the prosecution at the IMT produced no autopsy reports or expert reports on the existence and operation of the alleged homicidal gas chambers. Even in the Auschwitz Trial in Frankfurt in the mid-1960s and the Majdanek Trial in Düsseldorf in the late 1970s, the defense never requested a report on the alleged murder weapons, which have partly survived today. The prosecution in these trials relied almost exclusively on eyewitness testimony to convict the defendants of murder.[22]

 

It was not until the 1988 Zündel trial that a scientific study was conducted concerning the homicidal gas chambers allegedly used in the German camps. As part of his defense in this trial, Zündel commissioned the American gas chamber expert Fred Leuchter to make a scientific examination of the alleged homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz, Birkenau and Majdanek. The resulting Leuchter Report is the first scientific study of the alleged German homicidal gas chambers.[22]

 

Leuchter, who before this assignment had believed in the existence of the homicidal gas chambers and the German genocide of European Jewry, was perhaps the leading expert in the United States on the construction and use of execution equipment. Leuchter had designed and manufactured execution equipment of all types prior to this assignment, including electrocution systems, lethal injection equipment, gallows and gas chamber hardware. He had worked with most, if not all, of the states in the United States having capital punishment.[23]

 

As a result of his on-site examination of the alleged homicidal gas chambers, Fred Leuchter states:[24]

 

“After reviewing all of the material and inspecting all of the sites at Auschwitz, Birkenau and Majdanek, your author finds the evidence to be overwhelming. There were no execution gas chambers at any of these locations. It is the best engineering opinion of this author that the alleged gas chambers at the inspected sites could not have been, or now be, utilized or seriously considered to function as execution gas chambers.”

 

Douglas Christie, in his summation to the jury, stated that the prosecution had produced no technical or forensic evidence, no eyewitnesses and no “survivors.” Christie noted that the defense had covered all these issues, eliciting historic revelations in the process (p. 133).

 

Based on Judge Thomas’s ruling requiring the jury to accept as a fact that the “Holocaust” occurred, the jury found Zündel guilty of spreading false news. Zündel was sentenced to nine months imprisonment. Fortunately, in 1992, Zündel’s conviction was overturned by the Canadian Supreme Court, which ruled that the section of the Criminal Code that had been the grounds for Zündel’s conviction was unconstitutional (ibid.).

 

Germar Rudolf

 

John Beaumont also devotes a lengthy chapter to the Revisionist work of Germar Rudolf. Like most Germans, Rudolf originally believed in the official Holocaust narrative. He began to question the “Holocaust” after reading Paul Rassiner’s book What is Truth. Rudolf became increasingly skeptical of the so-called Holocaust after reading the Leuchter Report. He decided to do original scientific work on his own (pp. 138-141).

 

Rudolf, a certified chemist, expanded on Leuchter’s work by writing the Rudolf Report in the spring of 1992. The Rudolf Report, which has been updated and revised several times, focuses on the engineering and chemical aspects of the alleged homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz and Birkenau. Rudolf observed in his on-site examinations that the delousing facilities at Auschwitz, Birkenau and Majdanek all have one thing in common: their walls are permeated with Prussian Blue. Not only the inner surfaces, but also the outside walls and the mortar between the bricks of the delousing chambers have Prussian Blue staining. Nothing of this sort can be observed in any of the alleged homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz and Birkenau.

 

Rudolf also took samples from the alleged homicidal gas chambers and the delousing facilities at Auschwitz and Birkenau. Similar to Leuchter’s samples, the alleged homicidal gas chambers exhibit only insignificant traces of ferrocyanide residue on the same order of magnitude found in any other building. The samples from the delousing chambers, however, all show very high ferrocyanide residues. Rudolf determined that, if mass execution gassings with hydrocyanic acid had taken place in the alleged homicidal gas chambers, the rooms in the alleged homicidal gas chambers would exhibit similar ferrocyanide residue as the delousing chambers. Therefore, Rudolf concludes that mass gassings with Zyklon B could not have occurred in the alleged homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz and Birkenau.[25]

 

Rudolf states that the alleged homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz-Birkenau could not have been used to exterminate hundreds of thousands of people as described in pro-Holocaust literature for the following reasons:

 

1.      they did not have escape-proof doors and windows;

2.      they did not have panic-proof equipment;

3.      they did not have technically gastight doors and shutters;

4.      they had no provision to quickly release and distribute the poison gas; and

5.      they had no effective devices to ventilate or otherwise render ineffective the poison gas after the execution.[26]

 

By contrast, Germany built highly sophisticated and expensive disinfestation facilities at Auschwitz-Birkenau to kill lice and save inmate lives. These disinfestation facilities:

 

1.      had walls and ceilings covered with gastight coatings;

2.      were equipped with massive steel doors and had no windows;

3.      had technically gastight doors;

4.      had devices to quickly release and distribute the poison gas; and

5.      had effective devices to ventilate or otherwise render ineffective the poison gas after the gas procedure.

 

By one estimate, the SS at Auschwitz-Birkenau spent almost $1 billion in today’s values to bring the typhus epidemics raging there under control.[27] An enormous amount of information exists concerning the German delousing facilities,[28] but no similar information exists regarding the alleged homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz-Birkenau.[29]

 

Additional evidence arguing against the existence of homicidal gas chambers is the roof of the semi-underground Morgue #1 of Crematorium II at Birkenau, which is said to have been the building’s homicidal gas chamber. This roof remains intact to some degree today. Contrary to eyewitness testimony, that roof has no Zyklon-B-introduction holes. This has been acknowledged by pro-Holocaust researcher Robert Jan van Pelt. Since it is impossible to close holes measuring 70 x 70 cm from a concrete roof without leaving clearly visible traces, it is certain that no Zyklon-B-introduction holes ever existed at Crematorium II. Consequently, Zyklon B could not have been introduced through the roof of this morgue as alleged by pro-Holocaust supporters.[30]

 

Beaumont writes that Rudolf has written many articles and books on the so-called Holocaust. Probably Rudolf’s most wide-ranging book is his Lectures on the Holocaust: Controversial Issues Cross-Examined, now in its expanded fourth edition published in 2023. Beaumont writes that this book is a remarkable work and is a powerful refutation of the official Holocaust story (p. 147).

 

Rudolf writes about so many topics in Lectures on the Holocaust that only a few topics can be mentioned here. Regarding the Aktion Reinhardt camps and Chelmno, Rudolf notes that witnesses have claimed that far more than homicidal gassings were used to execute people at these camps. For example, at Treblinka, various witnesses have alleged that mobile or stationary gas chambers, poison gas, quicklime, steam, electricity, machine guns, vacuum chambers, Zyklon B, and exhaust from diesel or gasoline engines were used as murder weapons. Such a mish-mash of eyewitness testimony greatly reduces its credibility.[31]

 

Rudolf also notes that none of the Aktion Reinhardt camps had crematoria even though all the other important German camps had fixed or mobile cremation furnaces. The Germans even built a crematorium for a simple prisoner-of-war transit camp in Russia. Also, when it turned out that the Germans had bought too many cremation furnaces, camp leaders were all asked if such furnaces were needed in their camps. No one at Treblinka, Belzec, or Sobibór indicated a need for such cremation furnaces. This makes no sense if the Aktion Reinhardt camps were the extermination camps they are claimed to have been.[32]

 

According to Holocaust historians, the bodies of Jews gassed at the Aktion Reinhardt camps were first buried in mass graves. The bodies were later exhumed and burned in the open air.[33] This story lacks all credibility. First, it would have required a tremendous amount of work to bury hundreds of thousands of dead bodies in a few months at the Aktion Reinhardt camps. It would have then required an enormous amount of work to recover these buried bodies and place them on the open-air pyres to be cremated. Finally, it would have required an enormous amount of wood to burn the dead bodies on open-air pyres. The Germans were not so stupid to have used such a labor-intensive and costly process when far better alternatives were available.

 

It would have been enormously difficult, if not impossible, to cremate 870,000 bodies at Treblinka through open air cremations. Germar Rudolf calculates that without wood between the corpse layers, each pyre of the fire grates would have been about nine meters high. With wood between the layers, each pyre would have been over 26 meters high. This would result in a total weight of over 700 metric tons per pyre for successful cremations. Even if the Germans had managed to build such a pile, it would be only a matter of time before the corpses fell over to one side, because fires never burn evenly. Realistically, a stable pile cannot be built that is higher than it is wide.[34]

 

Rudolf notes that all three of the Aktion Reinhardt camps were situated near the demarcation line between German- and Soviet-occupied Poland. This geographic fact indicates the likelihood that these camps served as transit camps for Jews to the east. The Soviets used broad-gauge railway tracks in contrast to the rest of Europe. Therefore, transports towards the east had to transfer their people at this demarcation line from trains of the European gauge to those of the Russian gauge. This explains why so many witnesses talked about hygienic measures such as delousing and showering procedures at these camps, which today are often falsely regarded as deceptive measures preceding mass murder.[35]

 

Rudolf writes about the Aktion Reinhardt camps:[36]

 

“Those claiming that a gigantic mass-murder operation unfolded have to deliver the kinds of evidence required in any murder case: primarily traces of the bodies, evidence of them having been murdered, and any kind of trace of the murder weapon.”

 

Official Holocaust historiography has produced no credible evidence of any of these.

 

Rudolf also writes extensively on the so-called Holocaust by bullets. The allegation is that the Einsatzgruppen and other German forces conducted a program of mass extermination against Jews.

 

However, in addition to fighting partisans, Rudolf writes that the Einsatzgruppen had numerous tasks involving the reorganization of civilian life in the Soviet territories occupied by the Germans. In their reports, the Einsatzgruppen addressed such issues as morale, politics and administration, propaganda, cultural life, public health, church, economy, the food situation, agriculture, industry and trade, the resistance movements, as well as the Jews. The Einsatzgruppen were involved in a truly staggering number of tasks. The mass murder of Jews was clearly not the primary function of the Einsatzgruppen .[37]

 

Much of the documentation for the Holocaust by bullets is based on the Einsatzgruppen reports. Rudolf notes, however, that even pro-Holocaust historians question the veracity of these reports. For example, German mainstream historian Peter Longerich comments on the possible exaggeration of Jews killed in the Einsatzgruppen reports:[38]

 

“Regarding the number of victims, it cannot be excluded that the accounting-style accuracy with which the Event Reports were written convey a false impression; it is possible that the exact number of people killed during the massacres was not recorded, and it seems conceivable that the figures given are exaggerated in order to polish the ‘success record.’”

 

Rudolf makes it clear that the alleged massacre of some 33,371 Jews at Babi Yar in September 1941 did not take place. He notes that the established version of this claimed event is that Jews were driven to the edge of Babi Yar and then shot and thrown into the ravine. Other sources claim that the Jews were murdered in a cemetery, in a forest, in the ravine itself, in a brickyard, in the city of Kiev, in gas vans or in the River Dnieper. The murder weapons were supposed to have been machine guns, submachine guns, automatic rifles, rifle butts, clubs, tanks, mines, hand grenades, gas vans, bayonets and knives, live burial, drowning, injections and electrical shocks.[39] Such absurd and conflicting testimony greatly reduces the credibility of the eyewitness testimony.

 

Rudolf also discusses an air photo taken on September 26, 1943 by the German air force which fell into American hands at war’s end. The photo was taken shortly after the corpses of Babi Yar were allegedly exhumed and cremated on gigantic pyres. The resolution of the photo is so good that distinct objects such as shrubs, trees and cars can be recognized. This photo shows nothing indicating that any recently terminated cataclysmic event took place such as the exhumation of 33,371 Jewish bodies. This photo proves that the Babi Yar massacre never took place.[40]

 

Beaumont correctly writes about Germar Rudolf (p. 216):

 

“Evidence, objectivity, and reasoned analysis are at the heart of his writings, which are massive in quantity and, it is submitted, excellent in quality, resulting in a very powerful case for revisionism.”

 

Walter Lüftl

 

Beaumont also includes a chapter in his book on Austrian engineer Walter Lüftl. In 1992, many Austrian and German newspapers reported the resignation of the president of the Federal Austrian Chamber of Engineers, Walter Lüftl, who stepped down from his position after voicing doubts about the Holocaust. There were demands that Lüftl be prosecuted, and allegations were made that he had expressed “Nazi” sentiments. Lüftl’s alleged crime was that he had written a paper that confirmed Fred Leuchter’s findings (pp. 220-222).

 

Lüftl states in his report that, although the hydrocyanic acid contained in the Zyklon B can kill quickly and certainly, the handling requirements for Zyklon B rule out any significant use of Zyklon B for the mass killing of people. Lüftl states that, during the ventilation process after a gassing, Zyklon B would still retain approximately 92% of its hydrocyanic acid content, and would thus continue releasing hydrocyanic acid gas. Lüftl asks: How could the gas chamber operators get rid of the remaining Zyklon B from the midst of dead corpses, without lengthy ventilation periods, and without causing mass deaths outside the gas chambers? Lüftl concludes that, because of operational and time considerations, quasi-industrial killing using Zyklon B is impossible.[41]

 

Lüftl also states in his report that mass murder with diesel exhaust gasses is an impossibility for reasons of time alone. Lüftl writes that this can be easily proven experimentally, even today, with a few brave men. Therefore, Lüftl concludes that the stories of gas chambers with diesel engines and gas vans at places such as Treblinka can only be disinformation. In his report, Lüftl states:[42]

 

“The laws of nature apply both to Nazis and anti-fascists. Nobody can be killed with diesel exhaust gas in the manner described [in the Holocaust literature].”

 

Lüftl summarizes the evidence in his Lüftl Report:[43]

 

“An absolutely unbiased study of the problem must conclude that, by and large, the views of the so-called ‘Revisionists’ – the so-called ‘deniers’ – are far more in line with the laws of nature, logic, and technical realities than the accounts in Holocaust literature (in which, moreover, scientifically verifiable data is generally lacking). When, as an exception, verifiable data is given in the Holocaust literature, a critical examination of such data leads to absurd results (25 persons per square meter, and so forth).

 

The decisive error in the Holocaust literature is the belief that the hydrocyanic acid contained in Zyklon B could be fully released in the alleged time span of 15-30 minutes required for the gassing, and that the carrier material would simultaneously and completely vaporize like a moth ball. The (fact of the) residue of Zyklon B makes the Auschwitz extermination story (‘Auschwitz-Mythos’) obsolete.”

 

Carlo Mattogno and Jürgen Graf

 

Beaumont writes that Carlo Mattogno is arguably the world’s leading Holocaust revisionist scholar. He has published dozens of books and numerous articles, more than any other Holocaust revisionist. The majority of Mattogno’s books are very detailed specialist works about specific topics (p. 275).

 

By the early 1990s, Mattogno had obtained a relatively small amount of documentary evidence concerning Auschwitz and the so-called Holocaust. His real breakthrough came in 1995, when he first gained access to the Moscow archives and made numerous tours in the archives of many eastern European countries in the company of Jürgen Graf. To Mattogno’s great surprise, the Auschwitz archives that he examined in Moscow were both “vast” (over 88,000 pages) and “meticulous.” Everything one could think of was documented except one thing only – the construction and operation of the homicidal gas chambers. There was no mention of the homicidal gas chambers in the Moscow archives (p. 277).

 

Now having extensive documentation, Mattogno began a scientific investigation of many issues regarding Auschwitz and the alleged homicidal gas chambers. Mattogno’s investigations include the issues of cremation at Auschwitz, open-air incinerations at Auschwitz, the alleged first gassing at Auschwitz, the bunkers of Auschwitz, the intention held by the Germans with respect to the fate of the Jews, the healthcare in Auschwitz, the deliveries of coke, wood and Zyklon B to Auschwitz, the unreliability of witnesses at Auschwitz, and the British intercepts of secret transmissions from Auschwitz (pp. 277-286).

 

Mattogno has also done extensive research on the alleged crimes of Dr. Josef Mengele at Auschwitz, and has concluded that Mengele has been falsely accused of these crimes. Mattogno writes (p. 303):

 

“Dr. Mengele’s alleged crimes are not substantiated by any document. No document shows that Mengele ever killed even one single child, or that one single child was ever killed on his orders. The crucial and sole witness, the one upon whose testimony the whole accusation is based, was an extraordinarily imaginative imposter. Dr. Mengele’s closest collaborators, including this presumed crucial witness, and at least 543 of his ‘victims’ were allowed to live. But then, how could anyone seriously believe in the fable of the ‘Angel of Death’ of Auschwitz?”

 

Jürgen Graf became acquainted with the revisionist view of the Holocaust in 1991. He soon published a couple of books which served as an introduction to Holocaust revisionism, but he was subsequently dismissed from his job for alleged unethical behavior. After obtaining a new job teaching German to foreign students at a private language school in Basel, Graf wrote another book about the unreliability of eyewitness reports of the alleged Auschwitz-Birkenau gas chambers. Graf at this time also met Carlo Mattogno, who he began working with in close cooperation, translating many of Mattogno’s writings and co-authoring several books (pp. 246f.).

 

Graf’s fourth revisionist book was published in 1995. In July 1998, Graf and his editor Gerhard Förster went on trial in Baden, Switzerland, for publication of Graf’s Holocaust revisionist views. It was claimed that Graf’s books were a violation of the Swiss “anti-racism law.” Graf was sentenced to 15 months in jail without probation, while Förster was sentenced to 12 months in jail. They were also fined large sums of money. Graf was dismissed from his teaching post after the trial, and his two appeals of the court’s verdict were turned down. He moved to Moscow to avoid serving prison time in Switzerland (pp. 247f.).

 

Jürgen Graf writes about his trials in his efforts to get at the truth of the so-called Holocaust (p. 249):

 

“Revisionism has radically changed my life. Although my existence has become perilous and precarious, it is now more interesting and more meaningful than ever before as I know that I am fighting against something fundamentally evil. Discovering the truth about the holocaust was a singular intellectual adventure and opened my eyes. Having ascertained that the Jewish extermination and homicidal gas chamber story is but a monstrous hoax, I understood the true nature of the so-called ‘Western democracy,’ and I became aware of the fact that a hostile alien minority is the driving force behind the decadence and corruption corroding Western society. The holocaust is but the most extreme case of the lies the Jewish-run media are continuously poisoning the world with…”

 

Conclusion

 

The Truth Will Set You Free: The Case for Holocaust Revisionism is an excellent introduction to the subject of the “Holocaust.” John Beaumont has done extensive research on the subject, and effectively summarizes the work of the major Holocaust revisionists. I highly recommend Beaumont’s book to anyone who wants to learn more about Holocaust revisionism and the fraudulent nature of the official Holocaust narrative.

 

---

Notes

 

1. Rassinier, Paul, The Holocaust Story and the Lies of Ulysses, Costa Mesa, CA: The Institute for Historical Review, 1978.

 

2. Butz, Robert, The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, Newport Beach, CA: Institute for Historical Review, 1993, p. 10.

 

3. Kulaszka, Barbara, (ed.), Did Six Million Really Die: Report of Evidence in the Canadian “False News” Trial of Ernst Zündel, Toronto: Samisdat Publishers Ltd., 1992, p. i.

 

4. Ibid., p. iii.

 

5. Faurisson, Robert, “The Zündel Trials (1985 and 1988),” The Journal of Historical Review, Vol. 8, No. 4, Winter 1988-89, pp. 419-421; https://codoh.com/library/document/the-zundel-trials-1985-and-1988/.

 

6. Hoffman II, Michael A., The Great Holocaust Trial, 3rd edition, Dresden, N.Y.: Wiswell Ruffin House, 1995, pp. 45-47.

 

7. Butz, op. cit., p. 96.

 

8. Hoffman, op. cit. pp. 56-59.

 

9. De Wan, George, “The Holocaust in Perspective,” Newsday: Long Island, N.Y., Feb. 23, 1983, Part II, p. 3.

 

10. See trial transcript, pp. 846-848. Also, Kulaszka, op. cit., p. 24.

 

11. Kulaszka, op. cit., p. 39.

 

12. Hoffman, op. cit., p. 54.

 

13. Rudolf, Germar (ed.), The First Zündel Trial: The Court Transcript of the Canadian “False News” Trial of Ernst Zündel, 1985, Uckfield, UK: Castle Hill Publishers, 2020, pp. 394-483.

 

14. Ibid., pp. 483-495.

 

15. Ibid., pp. 495-505.

 

16. Ibid., pp. 505-521.

 

17. Ibid., pp. 521-533.

 

18. Ibid., pp. 79, 81.

 

19. Ibid., p. 16.

 

20. Kulaszka, op. cit., p. 352.

 

21. Ibid., p. 370.

 

22. Rudolf, Germar, “Some Technical and Chemical Considerations about the ‘Gas Chambers’ of Auschwitz and Birkenau,” in Gauss, Ernst (ed.), Dissecting the Holocaust: The Growing Critique of Truth and Memory, Capshaw, AL: Thesis and Dissertations Press, 2000, p. 337.

 

23. Leuchter, Fred A., “The Leuchter Report: The How and the Why,” The Journal of Historical Review, Vol. 9, No. 2, Summer 1989, p. 133.

 

24. Leuchter, Fred A., Faurisson, Robert, Rudolf, Germar, The Leuchter Reports: Critical Edition, 5th edition, Uckfield, UK: Castle Hill Publishers, 2017, p. 56.

 

25. Rudolf, “Some Technical …,” op. cit., pp. 363-371.

 

26. Rudolf, Germar, The Chemistry of Auschwitz: The Technology and Toxicology of Zyklon B and the Gas Chambers – A Crime-Scene Investigation, Uckfield, Great Britain: Castle Hill Publishers, 2017, pp. 174f.

 

27. Ibid., pp. 175, 293.

 

28. Berg, Friedrich R., “Zyklon B and the German Delousing Chambers,” Journal of Historical Review, Vol. 7, No. 1, Spring 1986, pp. 73-94; https://codoh.com/library/document/zyklon-b-and-the-german-delousing-chambers/.

 

29. Rudolf, Germar, The Chemistry of Auschwitz, op. cit., p. 114.

 

30. Ibid., pp. 143-147.

 

31. Rudolf, Germar, Lectures on the Holocaust: Controversial Issues Cross-Examined, 4th edition, Bargoed, UK: Castle Hill Publishers, January 2023, p. 257.

 

32. Ibid., p. 270.

 

33. Ibid., p. 269.

 

34. Ibid., pp. 271-273.

 

35. Ibid., pp. 290f.

 

36. Ibid., p. 279.

 

37. Ibid., p. 325.

 

38. Ibid., p. 331.

 

39. Ibid., p. 317.

 

40. Ibid., p. 323.

 

41. Lüftl, Walter, “The Lüftl Report,” The Journal of Historical Review, Vol. 12, No. 4, Winter 1992-1993, pp. 395-401; https://codoh.com/library/document/the-luftl-report/.

 

42. Ibid., pp. 403-406, 419.

 

43. Beaumont, op. cit., pp. 229f.; see also Lüftl, op. cit., p. 7.