Introduction

[Eli Jason]

Hello. I’ve been a revisionist for nearly a decade but I’m new around here and just wanted to say that I’m looking forward to learning as much as I can about this topic. For many years I only watched revisionist video documentaries but recently I’ve been collecting some of the books mentioned in said videos and some other books as well and I’m currently reading my first revisionist book, Breaking the Spell by Dr Nicholas Kollerstrom and I’m really hooked on revisionism at this point. I have about 50 pages left and then I’ll begin The Leutcher Report. I’ve purchased several books from CHP and other sources and I can’t wait to dive into every one of them. Also, I’m excited to engage with like minded people and read what others have to say because it’s difficult for me ( as I’m sure it is for many ) to strike up intelligent conversation regarding the H. But I’m a beginner and an amateur and am only starting my own “research “ ( aside from revisionist material I’ve acquired Hilberg and a handful of “eye witnesses “ testimonies ) , and I use the term loosely because I’m not a scientist or a historian, I haven’t been to the camps or examined any authentic documents, etc… basically I’m only ingesting the hard work of others by reading their writings, so If anyone has any suggestions concerning reading material or video sources, I’d appreciate it greatly. Thanks, everyone.

[Butterfangers]

Welcome aboard, Eli. Although the Leuchter Report is perhaps worth reading for its historical value and former position within Revisionism, I'd personally recommend skipping right ahead to The Chemistry of Auschwitz (The Rudolf Report) which is a more scientific approach and represents the current and longstanding position of Revisionism on the question of the 'gas chambers' at Auschwitz. A documentary version is here:

https://odysee.com/@Trufe:f/ChemistryOf ... hb27-est:e

...but I'd also recommend the book, at least as a companion or guide for future reference.

Be sure to check out the "Cyanide Chemistry at Auschwitz" thread linked in this "Introduction" thread here on the CODOH forum (there are many other great threads linked here as well):

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=14843

I'd suggest watching Eric Hunt's documentaries, wherever you find them. They're some of the most engaging, in my opinion. A fan favorite is "The Last Days of the Big Lie".

There are some other great documentaries out there as well, a few are on holocausthandbooks.com. Here is one I like:

"Probing the Holocaust"
https://odysee.com/@revisionary:b/Probi ... 17-1080p:2

Once you have a sound grasp on Auschwitz and some of the other camps (Majdanek, Dachau); the sooner you can start branching into the 'Aktion Reinhard' (AR) camps and the Einsatzgruppen, the better. These are very long-winding topics that can take years to understand well enough to debate confidently about but the weight of evidence (or lack thereof) strongly favors the Revisionist position. I'd recommend just taking your time with it, learning as much as you can, keeping a mental "pin" in those questions you run into along the way, bringing them back here for discussion. You'll find sound answers for all of them eventually, it's just a large ocean to wade through.

Best of luck.

[Eli Jason]

Thank you, Butterfangers.

I’ll oder Rudolf this coming payday and I’ll check out those links this weekend as well.

I had the Eric Hunt videos saved in an app called dailymotion but they’ve been removed. The same with the David Cole video. I have a couple of the Dr Toben videos on that app and Denierbud as well.

For some reason I’m unable to upload a photo of my “library “ thus far so I’ll just list it out:

FAIL: Debunking Holocaust Denial Theories - C. Mattogno

Auschwitz Open Air Incinerations - C. Mattogno

Ulysses’s Lie - Paul Rassinier

Belzec - Propaganda, Testimonies, Archaeological Research and History- C. Mattogno

Special Treatment At Auschwitz - C. Mattogno

The Leutcher Report Critical Edition - F. Leutcher, R. Faurrison, G. Rudolf

Chelmno - A German Camp In History And Propaganda- C. Mattogno

The Holocaust Industry- N. Finklestein

Other Losses - James Baque

The Destruction of the European Jews - Raul Hilberg

Inside the Gas Chambers- Shlomo Venezia

A Rebel In Auschwitz- The True Story Of. Resistance Hero Who Fought The Nazis From Inside The Camp - Jack Fairweather

The Fifth Diamond- Irene Zisplatt

[Hektor]

One needs to be familiar with the arguments. And also what the positions of each side actually are (they vary internally).

Exterminationist position: "The Nazis wanted to exterminate all the Jews they could get hold of and did do so with gas chambers in concentration camps. They murdered in the range of six million ".

Revisionist position: "There was a psychological warfare campaign against NS-Germany, already in the 1960s. The NS policy towards the Jews developed over time. But essentially they wanted to remove all Jews from the German sphere of influence. They did do so during world war two via evacuation to the East. Some Jews were detained in concentration camps, while others were put into ghettos. There was mortality in the camps due to epidemics, especially during the end-phase of WW2. Allied psychological warfare units did photograph casualties of epidemics and used that as insinuative proof of 'Nazi-Atrocities'/'Extermination'."

Exterminationists avoid the fact of psychological warfare, since this would make the accusations and defamations they peddle suspect to the audience.

[Eli Jason]

One needs to be familiar with the arguments. And also what the positions of each side actually are (they vary internally).

Exterminationist position: "The Nazis wanted to exterminate all the Jews they could get hold of and did do so with gas chambers in concentration camps. They murdered in the range of six million ".

Revisionist position: "There was a psychological warfare campaign against NS-Germany, already in the 1960s. The NS policy towards the Jews developed over time. But essentially they wanted to remove all Jews from the German sphere of influence. They did do so during world war two via evacuation to the East. Some Jews were detained in concentration camps, while others were put into ghettos. There was mortality in the camps due to epidemics, especially during the end-phase of WW2. Allied psychological warfare units did photograph casualties of epidemics and used that as insinuative proof of 'Nazi-Atrocities'/'Extermination'."

Exterminationists avoid the fact of psychological warfare, since this would make the accusations and defamations they peddle suspect to the audience.

Thank you, Hektor.

Yes, I do understand the basic arguments and positions of both sides. It becomes more and more fascinating to me as I learn details. I believe at some point soon - before I get too deep into it - that I begin a journal of sorts, or at least take notes on what I’m learning, so that I can keep things straight and organized in my own mind and also to have a quick reference point for the few occasions that I’m able to have any sort of conversation regarding this subject at all.

[Hieldner]

Welcome to the forum, Eli!

Please note that Holocaust Handbooks Volume 16, The Leuchter Reports, which contains four reports prepared by Fred Leuchter but apparently mainly by Prof. Robert Faurisson, has a different scope than Rudolf's chemical analyses. You get Robert Faurisson's view of the alleged gas chambers at Auschwitz, Birkenau, Majdanek, Dachau, Hartheim Castle, and Mauthausen, as well as critical comments on Jean-Claude Pressac's Auschwitz: Technology and Operation of the Gas Chambers.

For an introduction to this topic (in addition to the aforementioned documentary and forum thread), I recommend volume 42 of the Holocaust Handbooks series, Auschwitz: Technique and Operation of the Gas Chambers. An Introduction and Update to Jean-Claude Pressac's Magnum Opus. In my opinion, this is one of the best written books in the entire series. It is concise, not difficult to follow, beautifully laid out, and contains all the essential arguments of the Rudolf Report as well as the Leuchter Reports. It can be read in conjunction with Pressac's book, but I don't think this is a must. As far as I know, this book is out of print and only available at outrageous prices, but you can get a digitized version of somewhat inferior quality here: https://archive.org/details/JCPAuschwitzTechniqueAndOperationOfTheGasChambers (PDF) or https://www.historiography-project.com/books/pressac-auschwitz/index.php (HTML; you can also find a digitized version of the original first Leuchter report on this page). It is the basis not only for Pressac's second, less technical book on the subject, The Auschwitz Crematoria, but also for Robert van Pelt's Auschwitz book and the related critiques by Carlo Mattogno and others that form the core of the Auschwitz canon of Holocaust manuals.

Some of the Holocaust Handbooks are really just critiques of other books and are very dry and difficult to understand in the absence of context. This is especially true, for example, of Curated Lies, I think.

For more general introductory material, I would recommend the Bungled/Failed series of CHP books, where Mattogno's critique of Raul Hilberg's work is more advanced, but still readable also for beginners, in my opinion. Thomas Dalton's books also give a good overview without delving too deeply into documentary criticism.

If you are getting into research, I recommend taking notes from the beginning and reviewing and revising them as things clear up as you read more, which will save you a lot of time in the end.

[Hektor]

One needs to be familiar with the arguments. And also what the positions of each side actually are (they vary internally). ....
Exterminationists avoid the fact of psychological warfare, since this would make the accusations and defamations they peddle suspect to the audience.

Thank you, Hektor.
Yes, I do understand the basic arguments and positions of both sides. It becomes more and more fascinating to me as I learn details. I believe at some point soon - before I get too deep into it - that I begin a journal of sorts, or at least take notes on what I’m learning, so that I can keep things straight and organized in my own mind and also to have a quick reference point for the few occasions that I’m able to have any sort of conversation regarding this subject at all.

Welcom to the journey.
My question is always. Assume the Holocaust happened as alleged. Assume they gassed the amount of people in the camps they claim. What evidence would we have to expect to find at the camps, if this were true? It needs to demonstrate various things. This would be corpse remains, 'murder weapons' (E.g. homicidal gas chambers) and a lot of things around it. Now they can show us crematoria. But a crematoria is designed to dispose of bodies only. It is not a homicidal gas chamber. So what they do is to claim that a morgue in the basement was a gas chamber. Now fine, but would that even be feasible to work. Could the amount of bodies even be disposed of as the claim. And there the bending of the story starts. And like with any con-scam, they start hoping between the claims. First for million for Auschwitz than 1.5 mil now 1 mil. Not that anything like this was actually demonstrated, but then they simply say that the Frankfurt Auschwitz Trial proved it. Not true, it was assumed to be true, but the Trial verdict notes that they didn't have any hard evidence to begin with. No corpse, no murder weapon not any of the data that could have provided. So all is based on circumstantial evidence and some testimony at best. But most witnesses did not claim that they had seen it. Most claim they heard this only after the war. That means not even the testimony supports the Holocaust Thesis. So what the Holocaust Missionaries do is to cherry-pick testimony they deem useful. They won't tell you about the hordes of potential witnesses that 'didn't notice it at the time'. On the other hand those would have experienced increased mortality and also that those that died were cremated. Then there is the showers for healthcare and hygiene as well as people cracking jokes with the gullible that they may go through the chimney. After the war the Extermination by gas chamber claim is chased repetitively through the news over and over again. And people also talk about this among each other. Not about the facticity of it, they simply assume it. They will talk about 'how horrible' this all was. So they easily land in moralistic fallacy as well. "It happened, because it was horrible and disputing it will hurt the victims kind of thing". Those that were in the camp think they are something very special now. And that's how we get Holocaust survivors. And if there are millions of Holocaust Survivors, how can you say the Holocaust is not true?

The Holocaust is a cultural icon. Popular culture views it as a 'historical fact', because the cultural production and news affirms this over and over again. That is in the end why people believe in it. And they do so without even ever having looked at the evidence. They've seen photos, camps, heard 'testimony', see all those authority figures asserting it. So it must be true. If it wasn't they'd be scared, because that would mean they are surrounded by idiots.

[Archie]

Once you've read a book or two, there are many possible paths. It will depend a lot on your interests and inclinations. You might look more into the propaganda aspects of the holocaust. You might do a deep dive into particular camps of topics. You might be interested in contemporary legal and free speech issues. You might look at how revisionism itself developed.

You might also consider reading at least some of the opposition literature. Imo, it is a mistake to only read revisionist material just because you can appreciate the critiques more if you are somewhat familiar with the standard literature and their approaches, and their methods can be highly revealing. On specific topics as well, there are often mainstream books that contain interesting new information even if the underlying assumptions and conclusions are very, very wrong.

Here is a book that I would recommend. Samuel Crowell's The Gas Chamber of Sherlock Holmes (Part I, which is only around 160 pages).
https://archive.org/details/TheGasChamb ... lockHolmes

[Fred zz]

[quote="Hieldner"]Welcome to the forum, Eli!

Please note that Holocaust Handbooks Volume 16, The Leuchter Reports, which contains four reports prepared by Fred Leuchter but apparently mainly by Prof. Robert Faurisson, has a different scope than Rudolf's chemical analyses. You get Robert Faurisson's view of the alleged gas chambers at Auschwitz, Birkenau, Majdanek, Dachau, Hartheim Castle, and Mauthausen, as well as critical comments on Jean-Claude Pressac's Auschwitz: Technology and Operation of the Gas Chambers.

I am sorry I will state, Leuchter botched his work on Majdanek, Errors do exist in his work at Majdanek and I would not recommend

[Eli Jason]

Welcome to the forum, Eli!

Please note that Holocaust Handbooks Volume 16, The Leuchter Reports, which contains four reports prepared by Fred Leuchter but apparently mainly by Prof. Robert Faurisson, has a different scope than Rudolf's chemical analyses. You get Robert Faurisson's view of the alleged gas chambers at Auschwitz, Birkenau, Majdanek, Dachau, Hartheim Castle, and Mauthausen, as well as critical comments on Jean-Claude Pressac's Auschwitz: Technology and Operation of the Gas Chambers.

For an introduction to this topic (in addition to the aforementioned documentary and forum thread), I recommend volume 42 of the Holocaust Handbooks series, Auschwitz: Technique and Operation of the Gas Chambers. An Introduction and Update to Jean-Claude Pressac's Magnum Opus. In my opinion, this is one of the best written books in the entire series. It is concise, not difficult to follow, beautifully laid out, and contains all the essential arguments of the Rudolf Report as well as the Leuchter Reports. It can be read in conjunction with Pressac's book, but I don't think this is a must. As far as I know, this book is out of print and only available at outrageous prices, but you can get a digitized version of somewhat inferior quality here: https://archive.org/details/JCPAuschwitzTechniqueAndOperationOfTheGasChambers (PDF) or https://www.historiography-project.com/books/pressac-auschwitz/index.php (HTML; you can also find a digitized version of the original first Leuchter report on this page). It is the basis not only for Pressac's second, less technical book on the subject, The Auschwitz Crematoria, but also for Robert van Pelt's Auschwitz book and the related critiques by Carlo Mattogno and others that form the core of the Auschwitz canon of Holocaust manuals.

Some of the Holocaust Handbooks are really just critiques of other books and are very dry and difficult to understand in the absence of context. This is especially true, for example, of Curated Lies, I think.

For more general introductory material, I would recommend the Bungled/Failed series of CHP books, where Mattogno's critique of Raul Hilberg's work is more advanced, but still readable also for beginners, in my opinion. Thomas Dalton's books also give a good overview without delving too deeply into documentary criticism.

If you are getting into research, I recommend taking notes from the beginning and reviewing and revising them as things clear up as you read more, which will save you a lot of time in the end.

Thank you, Hieldner.

I just purchased the Rudolf Report as well as Auschwitz Crematorium I and they’ll be arriving soon. I’ll look into the books you suggested and I’m also going to start a notebook. I may re-read Breaking The Spell, because I neglected to take notes the first time around.

[Eli Jason]

One needs to be familiar with the arguments. And also what the positions of each side actually are (they vary internally). ....
Exterminationists avoid the fact of psychological warfare, since this would make the accusations and defamations they peddle suspect to the audience.

Thank you, Hektor.
Yes, I do understand the basic arguments and positions of both sides. It becomes more and more fascinating to me as I learn details. I believe at some point soon - before I get too deep into it - that I begin a journal of sorts, or at least take notes on what I’m learning, so that I can keep things straight and organized in my own mind and also to have a quick reference point for the few occasions that I’m able to have any sort of conversation regarding this subject at all.

Welcom to the journey.
My question is always. Assume the Holocaust happened as alleged. Assume they gassed the amount of people in the camps they claim. What evidence would we have to expect to find at the camps, if this were true? It needs to demonstrate various things. This would be corpse remains, 'murder weapons' (E.g. homicidal gas chambers) and a lot of things around it. Now they can show us crematoria. But a crematoria is designed to dispose of bodies only. It is not a homicidal gas chamber. So what they do is to claim that a morgue in the basement was a gas chamber. Now fine, but would that even be feasible to work. Could the amount of bodies even be disposed of as the claim. And there the bending of the story starts. And like with any con-scam, they start hoping between the claims. First for million for Auschwitz than 1.5 mil now 1 mil. Not that anything like this was actually demonstrated, but then they simply say that the Frankfurt Auschwitz Trial proved it. Not true, it was assumed to be true, but the Trial verdict notes that they didn't have any hard evidence to begin with. No corpse, no murder weapon not any of the data that could have provided. So all is based on circumstantial evidence and some testimony at best. But most witnesses did not claim that they had seen it. Most claim they heard this only after the war. That means not even the testimony supports the Holocaust Thesis. So what the Holocaust Missionaries do is to cherry-pick testimony they deem useful. They won't tell you about the hordes of potential witnesses that 'didn't notice it at the time'. On the other hand those would have experienced increased mortality and also that those that died were cremated. Then there is the showers for healthcare and hygiene as well as people cracking jokes with the gullible that they may go through the chimney. After the war the Extermination by gas chamber claim is chased repetitively through the news over and over again. And people also talk about this among each other. Not about the facticity of it, they simply assume it. They will talk about 'how horrible' this all was. So they easily land in moralistic fallacy as well. "It happened, because it was horrible and disputing it will hurt the victims kind of thing". Those that were in the camp think they are something very special now. And that's how we get Holocaust survivors. And if there are millions of Holocaust Survivors, how can you say the Holocaust is not true?

The Holocaust is a cultural icon. Popular culture views it as a 'historical fact', because the cultural production and news affirms this over and over again. That is in the end why people believe in it. And they do so without even ever having looked at the evidence. They've seen photos, camps, heard 'testimony', see all those authority figures asserting it. So it must be true. If it wasn't they'd be scared, because that would mean they are surrounded by idiots.

I believed it whole heartedly until I began to take other “conspiracy theories” a little more seriously… then one day I stumbled across the David Cole video on YouTube. That put all the doubt in my mind that i needed. From there I found Dean Irebodd and Eric Hunt and Dr Fredrick Toben. I only recently began searching out the books mentioned in those videos, though, and even though I’ve called myself a Revisionist for a ling time, I feel i’m only scratching the surface. I’m excited to read about both sides of the story and to keep a good notebook or journal/log of some sort of what I’m learning.

[Eli Jason]

Once you've read a book or two, there are many possible paths. It will depend a lot on your interests and inclinations. You might look more into the propaganda aspects of the holocaust. You might do a deep dive into particular camps of topics. You might be interested in contemporary legal and free speech issues. You might look at how revisionism itself developed.

You might also consider reading at least some of the opposition literature. Imo, it is a mistake to only read revisionist material just because you can appreciate the critiques more if you are somewhat familiar with the standard literature and their approaches, and their methods can be highly revealing. On specific topics as well, there are often mainstream books that contain interesting new information even if the underlying assumptions and conclusions are very, very wrong.

Here is a book that I would recommend. Samuel Crowell's The Gas Chamber of Sherlock Holmes (Part I, which is only around 160 pages).
https://archive.org/details/TheGasChamb ... lockHolmes

I actually have several books by the opposition because I agree 100% that if one doesn’t know both sides of the story the one can’t accurately ascertain what happened.

[Hektor]

Thank you, Hektor.
Yes, I do understand .... at all.

Welcom to the journey.
My question is always. Assume the Holocaust happened as alleged. Assume they gassed..... They've seen photos, camps, heard 'testimony', see all those authority figures asserting it. So it must be true. If it wasn't they'd be scared, because that would mean they are surrounded by idiots.

I believed it whole heartedly until I began to take other “conspiracy theories” a little more seriously… then one day I stumbled across the David Cole video on YouTube. That put all the doubt in my mind that i needed. From there I found Dean Irebodd and Eric Hunt and Dr Fredrick Toben. I only recently began searching out the books mentioned in those videos, though, and even though I’ve called myself a Revisionist for a ling time, I feel i’m only scratching the surface. I’m excited to read about both sides of the story and to keep a good notebook or journal/log of some sort of what I’m learning.

I find the conspiracy theory argument rather ridiculous as it got all the marks of fallacious reasoning. Against Holocaust Revisionism the argument works more or less like this: " If the Holocaust is not true, than there must have been a major conspiracy to forge the evidence, make false testimony, etc.. In this conspiracy the Allies, the Jews, the German courts, the accused must all cooperate for a common goal and no Nazi ever denied the Holocaust."

That's more or less what they try to argue. It's of course a straw man. Most of what is presented as evidence isn't proving what people nowadays think it does. Same for the testimony. It's about being in the camp and actually camp rumor about stuff supposedly happening there. The testimony relating the 'extermination', 'gas chamber' is rather rare. And well, it's highly suspicious.

All of the mentioned had a vested interest in pressing the Holocaust Narrative. Allies to demonize the enemy through atrocity propaganda. Jews for obvious reasons the same and of course to play the victim and have a Myth to prep for Zionism and defend it. The Germans were compelled to 'show remorse' and 'work up their past'. Most accused disputed knowledge about any 'extermination program'.

But that's of course not known to most people. Their info is superficial, they are already prejudiced concerning the matter given movies they've seen and stories they heard.

So the story is really entrenched in people that take it partially really seriously. It's when people are confronted with the lack of evidence and other problems in the Holocaust Narrative that they start reacting. Either they shut down and don't want to think about it. Or they now try to find all kinds of excuses why the story is still true. Those that realize that they have been taken for a ride AND admit that this is the case are mostly a minority.