Best books on Holocaust Revisionism

[ServantOfAhuraMazda]

I'm really interested in books with German testemonials, and not the kind of commandant of Auschwitz that was heavily edited or even written by Rudolf Höss. If anyone can point me in that direction.

I recommend Auschwitz: A Personal Account by Thies Christophersen, who was an SS man serving there.

Auschwitz: A Judge Looks at the Evidence
by Wilhelm Stäglich also includes his very brief personal account of Auschwitz.

[hermod]

It seems that Herr Speer had been very inspired by the fanciful stories told by so-called Holocaust survivors.

The missing ladder episode sounds much like the far-fetched anecdotes made up by most Holohoax storytellers to explain why they were not gassed. I often wonder if they don't add laughable details on purpose only to test the limits of Gentile gullibility and to show us that they regard us as dumb beasts.

You touched on a serious topic, I have a theory about those types of details, it's like a psychology simple thing, you tell a lie if you fill that lie with a bunch of serious details that sort of commitment makes the lie fall of part, but if you throw in the mix a stupid detail like "I didn't find any ladder to reach the vent to drop the poison" it confuses logical thought and the others might think oh this must be true or else he would invent something better. Same with some of the Holocaust stories.

Or perhaps they're just mocking us. Jews know that the insertion of a little truth is enough to make a lie believed by most people. The Zohar teaches them that "whoever wishes to tell a lie will succeed if he first tells the truth as a base on which the lie will then grow and start to act". The truth in Holocaust stories is that there were concentration camps where some Jews were forced to work during WWII. The rest is fantasy used as Zionist atrocity propaganda.

https://sun9-47.userapi.com/impg/9V1wUG ... type=album

https://postimg.cc/CzhNhkk9

https://postimg.cc/3d3T3SL7

[JohnnieDarko]

JohnnieDarko - Carlos Porter has also written Not Guilty At Nuremberg The German Defense Case which is a summary of charges against the defendants and also explains the biased nature of the trials.
In Portuguese -
http://www.cwporter.com/ngport.htm

In English -
http://www.cwporter.com/innocent.htm

Thank you for making the links available to me I really appreciate!

You guys are giving me a lot of reading material and i'm very thankful to everyone, and with this I hope to have a more firm opinion on the holocaust since i don't quite believe things happened the way the say it did. I came here to learn more about this subject and with a open mind, so also thank you for receiving me.

[JohnnieDarko]

Or perhaps they're just mocking us. Jews know that the insertion of a little truth is enough to make a lie believed by most people. The Zohar teaches them that "whoever wishes to tell a lie will succeed if he first tells the truth as a base on which the lie will then grow and start to act". The truth in Holocaust stories is that there were concentration camps where some Jews were forced to work during WWII. The rest is fantasy used as Zionist atrocity propaganda.

I kind of agree but only with lets say the last 20/30 years of testimonials, because they saying things that are not only hard to believe but impossible and people believe them just because their "holocaust survivors" and some of them i bet that didn't even saw the inside of a concentration camp. One of the last documentaries a saw it had a story of a brother and a sister, the brother as 2 years old and the sister 5, and she got sick, they were at a concentration camp at France, and that boy stories were like so over the top he was a mini-macgyver/bear grills with only 2 years, and was being present as a real holocaust hero, I was astonished how people think thats credible and not only the was a super child he could recall every single detail. At least the old testimonies were more sober and kinda maintained a line of thought, the mos recent one they have made up pretty much about anything.

[hermod]

I kind of agree but only with lets say the last 20/30 years of testimonials, because they saying things that are not only hard to believe but impossible and people believe them just because their "holocaust survivors" and some of them i bet that didn't even saw the inside of a concentration camp. One of the last documentaries a saw it had a story of a brother and a sister, the brother as 2 years old and the sister 5, and she got sick, they were at a concentration camp at France, and that boy stories were like so over the top he was a mini-macgyver/bear grills with only 2 years, and was being present as a real holocaust hero, I was astonished how people think thats credible and not only the was a super child he could recall every single detail. At least the old testimonies were more sober and kinda maintained a line of thought, the mos recent one they have made up pretty much about anything.

What helps them a lot is the amazing fact that most people, including "Holocaust survivors" themselves and antirevisionist historians, don't even know the most basic elements of the standard narrative. How could people possibly detect any deviation from a narrative they don't even know? For instance, many "Holocaust survivors" patently believe that the fictitious Auschwitz gas chambers were equipped with pipes delivering gas, not with holes for the introduction of pellets and dummy shower heads. Hence the numerous testimonies about absurd gas-or-water shower rooms. Pathetic...

[Mortimer]

JohnnieDarko - Carlos Porter has also written Not Guilty At Nuremberg The German Defense Case which is a summary of charges against the defendants and also explains the biased nature of the trials.
In Portuguese -
http://www.cwporter.com/ngport.htm

In English -
http://www.cwporter.com/innocent.htm

Thank you for making the links available to me I really appreciate!

You guys are giving me a lot of reading material and i'm very thankful to everyone, and with this I hope to have a more firm opinion on the holocaust since i don't quite believe things happened the way the say it did. I came here to learn more about this subject and with a open mind, so also thank you for receiving me.

Glad to be of help. If you know people who speak a language other than Portuguese or English Not Guilty At Nuremberg is online in the following -
French -
http://www.cwporter.com/ngfrench.htm

German -
http://www.cwporter.com/nggerm.htm

Italian -
http://www.cwporter.com/nuremita.htm

Romanian -
http://www.cwporter.com/roum.htm

Russian -
http://www.cwporter.com/rus.htm

Spanish -
http://www.cwporter.com/nuremspa.htm

[Mortimer]

Here is a list of revisionist books in PDF format. They not only cover the holocaust but also other themes to do with World War 2, as well as banking, history, ritual murder, politics, religion etc.
http://www.jrbooksonline.com/pdf_books_top_list.htm

[Hektor]

I'm really interested in books with German testemonials, and not the kind of commandant of Auschwitz that was heavily edited or even written by Rudolf Höss. If anyone can point me in that direction.

I recommend Auschwitz: A Personal Account by Thies Christophersen, who was an SS man serving there.

Auschwitz: A Judge Looks at the Evidence
by Wilhelm Stäglich also includes his very brief personal account of Auschwitz.

I read both pretty early. Both are of course a bit subjective. But the essence should be clear. When they were there, they didn't notice anything of a 'extermination program'. So did thousands of others, that were however never put on record.

For my taste too much is done dealing with unsubstantiated claims by the Holocaustians. If something that necessarily would lead to massive substantial evidence, doesn't leave something like that behind, then it is save to assume that it never happened. Especially, when the unsubstantiated claims stem from hateful atrocity propaganda. Staeglich dealt with the Frankfurter Auschwitz Trials. Whose records have been placed online by now. What was astonishing to many is of course that some of the accused were rather cooperative with the prosecution, while most actually were not. But most prosecution witnesses didn't claim to have observed homicidal gassings neither, they just heard about it and assumed it to be true. In other words the guilty verdict in the trial was resting on underwhelmingly flimsy evidences. This while the accusation was murder in hundreds of thousands of cases. In that sense the trial was quite unique. Actually the trial and it's outcomes DO proof the opposite of what Holocaustians allege it does.