Vital points are outlined here by Revisionist extraodornaire, Germar Rudolf.
- Hannover
Was Auschwitz Liberated or Merely Occupied by the Red Army?
by Germar Rudolf
[email protected]
Jan. 26, 2005
In the book for which Elie Wiesel is most famous, namely "Night" (Bantam
paperback edition, 1960), which is required reading in many public schools across
the globe, Wiesel paints a horrendous picture of life in Auschwitz from April
1944 to January 1945 when he was there. Although many hundreds of thousands of
Jews were supposedly gassed there during this time, Wiesel makes no mention
of gassings or gas chambers anywhere in his book, as Jürgen Graf and Robert
Faurisson have pointed out to us.
(Cf. the table compiled by J. Graf at the end of R. Faurisson, "Witnesses to
the Gas Chambers of Auschwitz," in: G. Rudolf (ed.), "Dissecting the
Holocaust," 2nd. ed., Theses & Dissertations Press, Chicago, IL, 2003, p. 144,
http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/dth/fndwitness.html.)
He does however claim to have seen flames from the crematory chimneys and Dr.
Mengele wearing a monocle. Both claims are clearly lies, since the Auschwitz
crematories, fired with coke, could not produce flames that could travel
trough 15 m of flue and 30 m of chimney (see Carlo Mattogno, "Flames and Smoke
from
the Chimneys of Crematoria," "The Revisionist" 2(1) (2004), pp. 73-78,
http://www.vho.org/tr/2004/1/Mattogno73-78.html.).
When the Russians were about to overrun Auschwitz in January 1945, both Elie
and his father "chose" to go west with the retreating 'Nazis' and SS rather
than be "liberated" by America's greatest ally. They could have told the
whole
world about Auschwitz within days--but, both Elie and his father as well as
countless thousands of other Jews chose instead to trek west with the 'Nazis' on
foot at night in the middle of one of the coldest winters and continue working
for the defense of the Reich thereafter. In effect, they chose to collaborate.
Some of Wiesel's exact words in "Night" are (p. 78 ):
"The choice was in our hands. For once we could decide our fate for
ourselves. We could both stay in the hospital, where I could, thanks to my doctor,
get
him [the father] entered as a patient or nurse. Or else we could follow the
others. 'Well, what shall we do, father?' He was silent. 'Let's be evacuated
with the others,' I told him."
Elie's tale in this regard is corroborated by other "survivor" accounts
including that of Primo Levi. In Levi's book "Survival in Auschwitz," we have
his
words for January 17th, 1945:
"It was not a question of reasoning: I would probably also have followed the
instinct of the flock if I had not felt so weak: fear is supremely contagious,
and its immediate reaction is to make one try to run away."
But he's talking here about running away with the 'Nazis'--and not 'Nazis'
who were mere rank and file party members but supposedly the worst of the worst.
He's talking here about running away with the same 'Nazis' and SS who had
supposedly carried out the greatest imaginable mass murders of Jews and others in
the entire history of the universe. He's talking about running away with the
people who supposedly did the actual killings of thousands daily for several
years. But, according to his own words he would probably have gone with them
nonetheless, except that he was not feeling good that day; he was feeling weak.
The "fear" that he overcame was clearly fear of the Russians and not the
'Nazis;' there is no mention of fear of what the 'Nazis' and SS might do when the
evacuees entered the forest or sometime later.
The choices that were made here in January 1945 are enormously important. In
the entire history of Jewish suffering at the hands of gentiles what moment in
time could possibly be more dramatic than this precious moment when Jews
could choose between, on the one hand, liberation by the Soviets with the chances
to tell the whole world about the evil 'Nazis' and to help bring about their
defeat--and the other choice of going with the 'Nazi' mass murderers and to con
tinue working for them and to help preserve their evil regime. In the vast
majority of cases, they chose to go with the 'Nazis'.
The momentous choice brings Shakespeare's Hamlet to mind:
"To remain, or not to remain; that is the question:" to remain and be
liberated by Soviet troops and risk their slings and rifles in order to tell the
whole world about the outrageous 'Nazis'--or, take arms and feet against a sea of
cold and darkness in order to collaborate with the very same outrageous
'Nazis'. Oh what heartache--ay there's the rub! Thus conscience does make cowards of
us all.
So what was the final score--here a drum roll seems fitting in the background
as Vanna White comes onto the stage with the sealed envelope and the answer
to the great riddle. The envelope is torn open and the choice is--drum roll
again--according to Levi himself 800 choose to remain in Auschwitz, but 20,000
choose to go and collaborate with the 'Nazi' mass murderers. Wow! Such a
surprise--already!
We see the same deliberate pro-'Nazi' collaboration in the "survivors" from
Schindler's List. In their well-known story, as the Russians were about to
overrun Plaszow just thirty miles down the road to the east from Auschwitz in
November 1944, Schindler and more than a thousand Jews chose to go west with the
retreating 'Nazis' rather than hang back and be "liberated" by the Soviets.
Some even spent the next several weeks at Auschwitz--and none were gassed, not
even in the movie. The hoax has certainly had its day. If there had been any
kind of extermination of Jews at all in Auschwitz, all of the Jews in Cracow and
Plaszow would have known about it as well. All of the Jews who went west in
effect also denied the Holocaust, albeit only with their hands and feet. The
Jews themselves were the first true Holocaust deniers, and it is about time they
get all the credit they deserve.
The rather simple analysis of Holocaust survivor tales I have given here is
an easy to understand refutation of the hoax in general. I urge all readers to
reexamine the survivor accounts for themselves but critically and
systematically. The Internet with search engines like Google allows anyone to analyze
literally thousands of survivor accounts in seconds for major flaws of the type I
have discussed. Just search for keywords like "evacuation" or combinations of
words like "holocaust survivor Auschwitz."
An Implied Message
There is an implied but unstated message in Holocaust revisionism which we
should address because that message is so shocking that it is actually a major
hurdle for our work in general and, therefore, we should deal with it. When we
say the Holocaust story is not true, I believe we are, in effect, also saying
that there is something seriously wrong with America. Most Americans firmly
believe that America is still far and away the most wonderful, most nearly
perfect society in every possible way that the world has ever seen. If the
Holocaust is not true, then there must be something seriously wrong with America
because the accepted story is almost universally embraced by the media, press and
institutions generally. Since America is so wonderful, the revisionists must
therefore be wrong--or so the pseudologic goes.
The Real Holocaust
Japanese and German women and children were murdered by the US by the most
excruciatingly horrible means imaginable--by roasting them alive. If the 'Nazis'
had murdered people in gas chambers, although criminal it would nonetheless
have been humane and painless and even civilized compared to what Americans
actually did even when, in the very last months of the war, there was no real
danger to the US. To this day in America, there is still no sense of shame or
apology. Please do not be taken in by the false argument that it was the Germans
who started the bombing of civilian targets and therefore have nothing to
complain about. It was the British who began the deliberate bombing of civilian
targets already in May of 1940, to which Germany, after much restraint, only
responded in kind in September of 1940. The Japanese bombing of Pearl
Harbor--which at that time was NOT a part of the U.S., but a mere colony!--was
clearly
aimed only at military targets without any consultation with the women and
children of Hiroshima or Nagasaki or Tokyo or any other Japanese city.
Adapted from: "Poison Gas Über Alles," by Friedrich Paul Berg, "The
Revisionist," 1(1) (2003), pp. 37-47 (http://www.vho.org/tr/2003/1/Berg37-47.html).
================================
When the inmates of various camps went west with the German armed forces in
early 1945--some of them forced, some voluntarily--many of them died in what is
today called "death marches." What is forgotten today, however, is the fact
that millions of German civilians were also on "death marches" during those
months. The invading Red Army wreaked havoc in eastern Europe. They mercilessly
deported and/or mass-murdered all actual and suspected collaborators, including
many inmates of German concentration camps, most of whom had, after all,
helped Germany's war effort. Reaching the eastern parts of Germany, almost all
soldiers of the Red Army engaged in mass-rapings, in plundering, looting, and
killing what ever they could find.
Eventually, more than two million Germans lost their lives during those
events and the death marches resulting from them (see, e.g., A.M. de Zayas,
"Terrible Revenge.
Ethnic Cleansing of East European Germans," 1944-1950,
http://www.vho.org/store/UK/bresult.php?ID=120; Antony Beevor, "The Fall of
Berlin 1945,"
http://www.vho.org/store/UK/bresult.php?ID=134). Hence, most victims of the
"death marches" were not
victims of the SS, but victims of the chaos of collapsing Germany, caused by
the invading Red Army in the east and the carpet bombings of the U.S. and
Britain.
So, was Auschwitz liberated by the Red Army? Could anyone be liberated by
this army? The answer is, of course, NO. Auschwitz was occupied by the Red Army,
as were all other camps. As was the Ukraine, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary,
Romania, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, and Bulgaria. The harsh regiment of the
SS in the camps and the German occupational forces in most of those countries
was replaced by the terror of the Red Army, which was far worse than anything
the Germans ever did. Everybody knew what was awaiting them, so millions of
Ukrainians and civilians of the Baltic states tried to move west with the
retreating Germans since 1943.
The inmates of Auschwitz behaved no different. They, too, knew what was
awaiting them, so most of those who were given the option to leave with the Germans
or to stay, chose to leave with the Germans rather than to be terrorized by
the Soviets. This is also proven by the fact that uncounted thousands of those
Auschwitz inmates who went west with the Germans survived the war and are able
to tell their sometimes quite twisted tale today. There are claimed to have
been at least one million such Holocaust survivors in 2000. Calculating back to
1945, there must have been some five million such survivors at that time. Go
figure! (see G. Rudolf, "Holocaust Victims: A Statistical Analysis," in G.
Rudolf (ed.), "Dissecting the Holocaust," 2nd. ed., Theses & Dissertations
Press,
Chicago, IL, 2003, pp. 209-211, http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/dth/fndstats.html)
Even the British Government knew what was awaiting those to be "liberated" by
the Red Army. On February 29, 1944, the British Ministry of Information sent
the following note to the higher British clergy and to the BBC:
Sir:
I am directed by the Ministry to send you the following circular letter:
It is often the duty of the good citizens and of the pious Christians to turn
a blind eye on the peculiarities of those associated with us.
But the time comes when such peculiarities, while still denied in public,
must be taken into account when action by us is called for.
We know the methods of rule employed by the Bolshevik dictator in Russia
itself from, for example, the writing and speeches of the Prime Minister himself
during the last twenty years. We know how the Red Army behaved in Poland in
1920 and in Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Galicia and Bessarabia only recently.
We must, therefore, take into account how the Red Army will certainly behave
when it overruns Central Europe. Unless precautions are taken, the obviously
inevitable horrors which will result will throw an undue strain on public
opinion in this country.
We cannot reform the Bolsheviks but we can do our best to save them - and
ourselves-from the consequences of their acts. The disclosures of the past
quarter of a century will render mere denials unconvincing. The only alternative to
denial is to distract public attention from the whole subject.
Experience has shown that the best distraction is atrocity propaganda
directed against the enemy. Unfortunately the public is no longer so susceptible as
in the days of the "Corpse Factory," and the "Mutilated Belgian
Babies," and
the "Crucified Canadians."
*Your* cooperation is therefore earnestly sought to distract public attention
from the doings of the Red Army by your wholehearted support of various
charges against the Germans and Japanese which have been and will be put into
circulation by the Ministry.
*Your* expression of belief in such may convince others.
I am, Sir, Your obedient servant
(Signed) H. HEWET, ASSISTANT SECRETARY
The Ministry can enter into no correspondence of any kind with regard to this
communication which should only be disclosed to responsible persons.
(Source: Edward J. Rozek, "Allied Wartime Diplomacy," John Wiley & Sons, New
York 1958, pp. 209f.; Rozek gives as his source: Poland, Official Government
Documents, Vol. LVI, Doc. 78 )
What unfolded in the following years was exactly that: atrocity propaganda to
cover up for the outlandish crimes against humanity committed not only by the
Red Army, but also by the western allies.
The real liberation of Auschwitz--a liberation from distortions,
exaggerations, lies, and censorship laws--has yet to come.
Germar Rudolf
Castle Hill Publishers
http://www.vho.org
[email protected]
