Holocaust or Hoax?

The Arguments

by Jürgen Graf



The following appeared in mid-1993 Reuters report:

Innocent Man Released After Nine Years in Prison

Jessup, 28 June 1993 (ap). - "A man originally sentenced to death, commuted to three life sentences, is to be released in Maryland USA. 32 year-old Kirk Bloodworth, who spent almost nine years in prison, including two years on Death Row, was convicted in 1984 in Rosedale, Maryland, of the rape-murder of a nine-year old girl. Examination of a previously undiscovered sperm sample on the victim's underwear -- during which the experts utilized the DNS procedure, the so-called 'genetic fingerprint' -- revealed that Bloodworth could not have been guilty at all... Bloodworth was convicted and sentenced to death on the testimony of five witnesses, who alleged to have seen him with the nine-year old victim shortly before the crime."

A case like this shows clearly what every jurist knows, namely, that physical proof is greatly superior to eyewitness testimony, since witnesses may lie or err in good faith.

For this reason, an autopsy of the corpse, as well as an expert report on the weapon, are ordered in any normal non-political murder trial, regardless of whether or not there are any witnesses available. If the eyewitnesses contradict the results of the forensic tests, the forensic tests are conclusive. Eyewitness testimony has the lowest value of all types of proof (1).

What is true in an ordinary murder case, must apply to an even greater extent when hundreds of thousands or millions of victims are involved.

Accordingly, the "gas chambers" should have been forensically tested right after the war. Furthermore, technical experts should have calculated whether or not the innumerable victims of the "extermination camps" could really have been disposed of in the crematoria concerned (if crematoria existed in the particular camps in question).

In the "pure extermination camps" of Treblinka, Sobibor, Belzec, and Chelmno, the bodies are alleged to have been buried first, then dug up, then burned in the open. If there had ever been any huge mass graves for the several hundred thousand bodies in each case, they could have been located very easily, even years after the war; areas where bodies are supposed to have been buried could have been easily located either by digging or by air-photographs. The latter method was regularly practiced in 1996 by air reconnaissance flights in Bosnia.

Nothing of the kind was done by Germany's accusers after WWII. Scientific testing of the "gas chambers", crematoria, and alleged mass graves was simply neglected. Not one single autopsy of a dead concentration inmate has ever showed "gassing" as the cause of death.

On the part of the exterminationists, only two forensic examinations were undertaken to prove the mass murders; in both cases, the presentation of proof was a basic failure:

- according to the Cracow report of 1945 (1) cyanide residues were discovered among other things in the hair of former female Auschwitz inmates. Now, not only can this report no longer be duplicated -- in contrast to the revisionist expert reports, which can be reproduced at any time -- but it would lack any probative value, even if it were true. Human hair was used for industrial purposes in the Third Reich, as in other states (for example for stuffing mattresses). In this case, it was logical to delouse the hair afterwards with Zyklon B. Assuming that there were mass gassings, it would be nonsensical to cut the hair off later, since Zyklon B clings stubbornly to surfaces, and would have been a source of danger to the workers involved in cutting off the hair. This would have to have been done before the murders!

- the Polish Hydroscope Report shows that great quantities of human remains were found in the earth in the vicinity of Auscwitz (3). We have no reason to doubt the correctness of this report, since many thousands of Auschwitz inmates were certainly burned in the open, particularly during the second half of 1942; at that time, typhus was raging and causing over 300 deaths a day. The only existing crematorium, that of the main camp, could not handle more than 100 bodies a day, and was often out of operation. If human remains were found, this only proves that very many Auschwitz inmates died, which is not disputed by any revisionist. It does not prove mass extermination.

Thus, we face the remarkable fact that technical proof of the "greatest crime in history" was never produced by the accusers of Germany. Such proofs were only produced later, by the revisionists. As we will see, they disprove the Holocaust thesis on all decisive points.


1) In this regard, seen Manfred Koehler's contribution on the value of the testimonies and confessions on the Holocaust in Ernst Gauss, Grundlagen zur Zeitgeschichte, op. cit.

2) The Cracow report is reproduced in the anti-revisionist volume Wahrheit and Auschwitz-Luege (published by Brigitte Bailer-Galanda, Wolfgang Benz and Wolgang Neugebauer), Deuticke, 1995, p. 79 ff reproduced.

3) On the Hydroscope report, see no. 60 of Historischen Tatsachen.

Back to table of contents
To the next chapter
To previous chapter
Back to archive