Holocaust denial, the denial of the systematic genocidal killing of millions of ethnic minorities in Europe (including Jews) by Nazi Germany in the 1930s and 1940s, is illegal in 14 European nations.[1] Many countries also have broader laws that criminalize genocide denial. Of the countries that ban Holocaust denial, some, such as Austria, Germany, Hungary, and Romania, were among the perpetrators of the Holocaust, and many of these also ban other elements associated with Nazism, such as the expression of Nazi symbols.

In several nations such as the United Kingdom and the United States, laws against Holocaust denial have come up in legal discussion and have been proposed, but the measures have been rejected. Organizations representing groups that have been victimized during the Holocaust have generally been split about such laws.

Scholars have pointed out that countries that specifically ban Holocaust denial generally have legal systems that limit speech in other ways, such as banning hate speech. According to D. D. Guttenplan, this is a split between the “common law countries of the United States, Ireland and many British Commonwealth countries from the civil law countries of continental Europe and Scotland. In civil law countries the law is generally more proscriptive. Also, under the civil law regime, the judge acts more as an inquisitor, gathering and presenting evidence as well as interpreting it”.[2] Michael Whine argues that Holocaust denial can inspire violence against Jews; he states, “Jews’ experience in the post-World War II era suggests that their rights are best protected in open and tolerant democracies that actively prosecute all forms of racial and religious hatred.”[3]

Jnos Kis[4] and in particular Andrs Schiffer[5] feel the work of Holocaust deniers should be protected by a universal right to free speech. An identical argument was used[6] by the Hungarian Constitutional Court (Alkotmnybrsg) led by Lszl Slyom when it struck down a law against Holocaust denial in 1992.

The argument that laws punishing Holocaust denial are incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights have been rejected by institutions of the Council of Europe (the European Commission of Human Rights,[7] the European Court of Human Rights[8]) and also by the United Nations Human Rights Committee.[9]

Historians who oppose such laws include Raul Hilberg,[10]Richard J. Evans, and Pierre Vidal-Naquet. Other prominent opponents of the laws are Timothy Garton Ash,[11]Christopher Hitchens, Peter Singer,[12] and Noam Chomsky.[13] An uproar resulted when Serge Thion used one of Chomsky’s essays without explicit permission as a foreword to a book of Holocaust denial essays (see Faurisson affair). These laws have also been criticized on the grounds that education is more effective than legislation at combating Holocaust denial and that the laws will make martyrs out of those imprisoned for their violation.[14]

It seems to me something of a scandal that it is even necessary to debate these issues two centuries after Voltaire defended the right of free expression for views he detested. It is a poor service to the memory of the victims of the holocaust to adopt a central doctrine of their murderers.[15]

While Australia lacks a specific law against Holocaust denial, Holocaust denial is prosecuted in Australia under various laws against “hate speech” and “racial vilification”.[4][5] Gerald Fredrick Tben and his Adelaide Institute would be the best-known case of someone being prosecuted in Australia for Holocaust denial.[6]

In Austria, the Verbotsgesetz 1947 provided the legal framework for the process of denazification in Austria and suppression of any potential revival of Nazism. In 1992, it was amended to prohibit the denial or gross minimisation of the Holocaust.

3g. He who operates in a manner characterized other than that in 3a 3f will be punished (revitalising of the NSDAP or identification with), with imprisonment from one to up to ten years, and in cases of particularly dangerous suspects or activity, be punished with up to twenty years’ imprisonment.[16]

3h. As an amendment to 3 g., whoever denies, grossly plays down, approves or tries to excuse the National Socialist genocide or other National Socialist crimes against humanity in a print publication, in broadcast or other media.[17]

In Belgium, Holocaust denial was made illegal in 1995.

Article 1 Whoever, in the circumstances given in article 444 of the Penal Code denies, grossly minimises, attempts to justify, or approves the genocide committed by the German National Socialist Regime during the Second World War shall be punished by a prison sentence of eight days to one year, and by a fine of twenty six francs to five thousand francs. For the application of the previous paragraph, the term genocide is meant in the sense of article 2 of the International Treaty of 9 December 1948 on preventing and combating genocide. In the event of repetitions, the guilty party may in addition have his civic rights suspended in accordance with article 33 of the Penal Code.

Art.2 In the event of a conviction on account of a violation under this Act, it may be ordered that the judgement, in its entity or an excerpt of it, is published in one of more newspapers, and is displayed, to the charge of the guilty party.

Art.3. Chapter VII of the First Book of the Penal Code and Article 85 of the same Code are also applicable to this Act.

Art. 4. The Centre for Equal Opportunities and Opposition to Racism, as well as any association that at the time of the facts had a legal personality for at least five years, and which, on the grounds of its statutes, has the objective of defending moral interests and the honour of the resistance or the deported, may act in law in all legal disputes arising from the application of this Act.[18]

In May 2007 Ekrem Ajanovic, a Bosniak MP in the Bosnian Parliament proposed a legislation on criminalizing the denial of Holocaust, genocide and crimes against humanity. This was the first time that somebody in Bosnia and Herzegovina’s Parliament proposed such a legislation. Bosnian Serb MPs voted against this legislation and proposed that such an issue should be resolved within the Criminal Code of Bosnia and Herzegovina.[19] Following this, on 6 May 2009 Bosniak MPs Adem Huskic, Ekrem Ajanovic and Remzija Kadric proposed to the BH parliament a change to the Criminal Code of Bosnia and Herzegovina where Holocaust, genocide and crimes against humanity denial would be criminalized.[20] Bosnian Serb MPs have repeatedly been against such a legislation claiming that the law “would cause disagreement and even animosity” according to SNSD member Lazar Prodanovic.[21]

In the Czech Republic, Holocaust denial and denial of communist perpetrated atrocities is illegal.

260 (1) The person who supports or spreads movements oppressing human rights and freedoms or declares national, race, religious or class hatred or hatred against other group of persons will be punished by prison from 1 to 5 years. (2) The person will be imprisoned from 3 to 8 years if: a) he/she commits the crime mentioned in paragraph (1) in print, film, radio, television or other similarly effective manner, b) he/she commits the crime as a member of an organized group c) he/she commits the crime in a state of national emergency or state of war

261 The person who publicly declares sympathies with such a movement mentioned in 260, will be punished by prison from 6 months to 3 years.

261a The person who publicly denies, puts in doubt, approves or tries to justify nazi or communist genocide or other crimes of nazis or communists will be punished by prison of 6 months to 3 years.[22]

In France, the Gayssot Act, voted for on July 13, 1990, makes it illegal to question the existence of crimes that fall in the category of crimes against humanity as defined in the London Charter of 1945, on the basis of which Nazi leaders were convicted by the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg in 1945-46. When the act was challenged by Robert Faurisson, the Human Rights Committee upheld it as a necessary means to counter possible antisemitism.[23] In 2012, the Constitutional Council of France ruled that to extend the Gayssot Act to the Armenian Genocide denial was unconstitutional because it violated the freedom of speech.[24]

MODIFICATIONS OF THE LAW OF JULY 29, 1881 ON THE FREEDOM OF THE PRESS Art 8. – Article 24 of the Law on the Freedom of the Press of 29 July 1881 is supplemented by the following provisions: In the event of judgment for one of the facts envisaged by the preceding subparagraph, the court will be able moreover to order: Except when the responsibility for the author of the infringement is retained on the base for article 42 and the first subparagraph for article 43 for this law or the first three subparagraphs for article 93-3 for the law No 82-652 for July 29, 1982 on the audio-visual communication, the deprivation of the rights enumerated to the 2o and 3o of article 42 of the penal code for imprisonment of five years maximum;

Art 9. As an amendment to Article 24 of the law of July 29, 1881 on the freedom of the press, article 24 (a) is as follows written:

Art 13. – It is inserted, after article 48-1 of the law of July 29, 1881 on the freedom of the press, article 48-2 thus written:

In Germany, Volksverhetzung (“incitement of the people”)[26][27] is a concept in German criminal law that bans incitement to hatred against segments of the population. It often applies to (though not limited to) trials relating to Holocaust denial in Germany. In addition, Strafgesetzbuch 86a outlaws various symbols of “unconstitutional organisations”, such as the Swastika and the SS runes.

(1) Whosoever, in a manner capable of disturbing the public peace:

shall be liable to imprisonment from three months to five years.[28][29]


(3) Whosoever publicly or in a meeting approves of, denies or downplays an act committed under the rule of National Socialism of the kind indicated in section 6 (1) of the Code of International Criminal Law, in a manner capable of disturbing the public peace shall be liable to imprisonment not exceeding five years or a fine.[28][29]

(4) Whosoever publicly or in a meeting disturbs the public peace in a manner that violates the dignity of the victims by approving of, glorifying, or justifying National Socialist rule of arbitrary force shall be liable to imprisonment not exceeding three years or a fine.[28][29]

The definition of section 6 of the Code of Crimes against International Law referenced in the above 130 is as follows:

(1) Whoever with the intent of destroying as such, in whole or in part, a national, racial, religious or ethnic group:

The following sections of the German criminal code are also relevant:

Whoever disparages the memory of a deceased person shall be punished with imprisonment for not more than two years or a fine.[31]

(1) An insult shall be prosecuted only upon complaint. If the act was committed through dissemination of writings (Section 11 subsection (3)) or making them publicly accessible in a meeting or through a presentation by radio, then a complaint is not required if the aggrieved party was persecuted as a member of a group under the National Socialist or another rule by force and decree, this group is a part of the population and the insult is connected with this persecution. The act may not, however, be prosecuted ex officio if the aggrieved party objects. When the aggrieved party deceases, the rights of complaint and of objection devolve on the relatives indicated in Section 77 subsection (2). The objection may not be withdrawn.

(2) If the memory of a deceased person has been disparaged, then the relatives indicated in Section 77 subsection (2), are entitled to file a complaint. If the act was committed through dissemination of writings (Section 11 subsection (3)) or making them publicly accessible in a meeting or through a presentation by radio, then a complaint is not required if the deceased person lost his life as a victim of the National Socialist or another rule by force and decree and the disparagement is connected therewith. The act may not, however, be prosecuted ex officio if a person entitled to file a complaint objects. The objection may not be withdrawn. (…)[32]

The Parliament of Hungary declared the denial or trivialization of the Holocaust a crime punishable by up to three years’ imprisonment on February 23, 2010.[33] The law was signed by the President of the Republic in March 2010.[34] On June 8, 2010, the newly elected Fidesz-dominated parliament changed the formulation of the law to “punish those, who deny the genocides committed by national socialist or communist systems, or deny other facts of deeds against humanity”.[35] The word “Holocaust” is no longer in the law.

In 2011, the first man was charged with Holocaust denial in Budapest. The Court sentenced the man to 18 months in prison, suspended for three years, and probation. He also had to visit either Budapest’s memorial museum, Auschwitz or Yad Vashem in Jerusalem. He chose his local Holocaust Memorial Center and had to make three visits in total and record his observations.[36]

In January 2015, the court ordered far-right on-line newspaper Kuruc.info to delete its article denying the Holocaust published in July 2013, which was the first ruling in Hungary of its kind.[37] The Association for Civil Liberties (TASZ) offered free legal aid to the website as a protest against restrictions on freedom of speech,[38] but the site refused citing the liberal views of the association, and also refused to delete the article.[39]

In Israel, a law to criminalize Holocaust denial was passed by the Knesset on July 8, 1986.

Definitions 1. In this Law, “crime against the Jewish people” and “crime against humanity” have the same respective meanings as in the “Nazis and Nazi Collaborators Law, 5710-1950.

Prohibition of Denial of Holocaust 2. A person who, in writing or by word of mouth, publishes any statement denying or diminishing the proportions of acts committed in the period of the Nazi regime, which are crimes against the Jewish people or crimes against humanity, with intent to defend the perpetrators of those acts or to express sympathy or identification with them, shall be liable to imprisonment for a term of five years.

Prohibition of publication of expression for sympathy for Nazi crimes 3. A person who, in writing or by word of mouth, publishes any statement expressing praise or sympathy for or identification with acts done in the period of the Nazi regime, which are crimes against the Jewish people or crimes against humanity, shall be liable to imprisonment for a term of five years.

Permitted publication 4. The publication of a correct and fair report of a publication prohibited by this Law shall not be regarded as an offence thereunder so long as it is not made with intent to express sympathy or identification with the perpetrators of crimes against the Jewish people or against humanity.

Filing of charge 5. An indictment for offences under this Law shall only be filed by or with the consent of the Attorney-General.[40]

Although not specifically outlining national socialist crimes, item five of section 283 of Liechtenstein’s criminal code prohibits the denial of genocide.

Whoever publicly denies, coarsely trivialises, or tries to justify genocide or other crimes against humanity via word, writing, pictures, electronically transmitted signs, gestures, violent acts or by other means shall be punished with imprisonment for up to two years.[41]

In Lithuania, approval and denial of Nazi or Soviet crimes is prohibited.

In Luxembourg, Article 457-3 of the Criminal Code, Act of 19 July 1997 outlaws Holocaust denial and denial of other genocides.[43] The punishment is imprisonment for between 8 days and 6 months and/or a fine.[43] The offence of “negationism and revisionism” applies to:

While Holocaust denial is not explicitly illegal in the Netherlands, the courts consider it a form of spreading hatred and therefore an offence.[44] According to the Dutch public prosecution office, offensive remarks are only punishable by Dutch law if they equate to discrimination against a particular group.[45] The relevant laws of the Dutch penal code are as follows:

In Poland, Holocaust denial and the denial of communist crimes is punishable by law.

Article 55 He who publicly and contrary to facts contradicts the crimes mentioned in Article 1, clause 1 shall be subject to a fine or a penalty of deprivation of liberty of up to three years. The judgment shall be made publicly known.

Article 1 This Act shall govern: 1. the registration, collection, access, management and use of the documents of the organs of state security created and collected between 22 July 1944 and 31 December 1989, and the documents of the organs of security of the Third Reich and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics concerning:

2. the rules of procedure as regards the prosecution of crimes specified in point 1 letter a), 3. the protection of the personal data of grieved parties, and 4. the conduct of activities as regards public education.[48]

Although denial of the Holocaust is not expressly illegal in Portugal, Portuguese law prohibits denial of war crimes if used to incite to discrimination.


2 Whoever in a public meeting, in writing intended for dissemination, or by any means of mass media or computer system whose purpose is to disseminate:

with intent to incite to racial, religious or sexual discrimination or to encourage it, shall be punished with imprisonment from six months to five years.[49]

In Romania, Emergency Ordinance No. 31 of March 13, 2002 prohibits Holocaust denial. It was ratified on May 6, 2006. The law also prohibits racist, fascist, xenophobic symbols, uniforms and gestures: proliferation of which is punishable with imprisonment from between six months to five years.


Article 3. (1) Establishing a fascist, racist or xenophobic organisation is punishable by imprisonment from 5 to 15 years and the loss of certain rights.


Article 4. (1) The dissemination, sale or manufacture of symbols either fascist, racist or xenophobic, and possession of such symbols is punished with imprisonment from 6 months to 5 years and the loss of certain rights.


Article 5. Promoting the culture of persons guilty of committing a crime against peace and humanity or promoting fascist, racist or xenophobic ideology, through propaganda, committed by any means, in public, is punishable by imprisonment from 6 months to 5 years and the loss of certain rights.

Article 6. Denial of the Holocaust in public, or to the effects thereof is punishable by imprisonment from 6 months to 5 years and the loss of certain rights.[50]

Genocide denial was illegal in Spain until the Constitutional Court of Spain ruled that the words “deny or” were unconstitutional in its judgement of November 7, 2007.[51] As a result, Holocaust denial is legal in Spain, although justifying the Holocaust or any other genocide is an offence punishable by imprisonment in accordance with the constitution.[52]

Chapter II: Crimes of genocide – Article 6071.

1. Those who, with the intention to total or partially destroy a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, perpetrate the following acts, will be punished:

2. The diffusion by any means of ideas or doctrines that deny or justify the crimes in the previous section of this article, or tries the rehabilitation of regimes or institutions which they protect generating practices of such, will be punished with a prison sentence of one to two years.[53]

Holocaust denial is not expressly illegal in Switzerland, but the denial of genocide and other crimes against humanity is an imprisonable offence.

Racial discrimination

Whoever publicly, by word, writing, image, gesture, acts of violence or any other manner, demeans or discriminates against an individual or a group of individuals because of their race, their ethnicity or their religion in a way which undermines human dignity, or on those bases, denies, coarsely minimizes or seeks to justify a genocide or other crimes against humanity […] shall be punished with up to three years’ imprisonment or a fine.[54]

The European Union’s executive Commission proposed a European Union-wide anti-racism xenophobia law in 2001, which included the criminalization of Holocaust denial. On July 15, 1996, the Council of the European Union adopted the Joint action/96/443/JHA concerning action to combat racism and xenophobia.[55][56] During the German presidency there was an attempt to extend this ban.[57] Full implementation was blocked by the United Kingdom and the Nordic countries because of the need to balance the restrictions on voicing racist opinions against the freedom of expression.[58] As a result a compromise has been reached within the EU and while the EU has not prohibited Holocaust denial outright, a maximum term of three years in jail is optionally available to all member nations for “denying or grossly trivialising crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes.”[59][60]

The EU extradition policy regarding Holocaust denial was tested in the UK during the 2008 failed extradition case brought against the suspected Holocaust denier Frederick Toben[61] by the German government. As there is no specific crime of Holocaust denial in the UK, the German government had applied for Toben’s extradition for racial and xenophobic crimes. Toben’s extradition was refused by the Westminster Magistrates’ Court, and the German government withdrew its appeal to the High Court.

The text establishes that the following intentional conduct will be punishable in all EU Member States:

Member States may choose to punish only conduct which is either carried out in a manner likely to disturb public order or which is threatening, abusive or insulting.

The reference to religion is intended to cover, at least, conduct which is a pretext for directing acts against a group of persons or a member of such a group defined by reference to race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin.

Member States will ensure that these conducts are punishable by criminal penalties of a maximum of at least between 1 and 3 years of imprisonment.[62]

Laws against Holocaust denial have been enforced in most jurisdictions that have them. Convictions and sentencings include:

See original here:
Laws against Holocaust denial – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Written on October 26th, 2015 & filed under Holocaust Denial Tags:

Holocaust denial is the claim that The Holocaust did not happen, or was not as bad as most people think it was. History experts agree that during World War II, the Nazis did kill millions of people during the Holocaust, including many people in concentration camps. They agree that there is more proof in writing, pictures, and places about the Holocaust than any other great killing of people. Holocaust deniers usually call themselves Holocaust revisionists. They use these words to make their beliefs sound true to people who do not know this history.[1] They say that the Holocaust is a hoax made up by Jewish people working together.[2][3]

It is against the criminal law to deny the Holocaust in many European countries, especially in Germany.[4] Some Holocaust deniers, like Ernst Zndel, have been charged with crimes.

These are Holocaust deniers’ most common arguments:

Holocaust denial also includes these claims:

History experts agree that the Holocaust happened.[2][3] They agree that Holocaust deniers use bad research, misunderstand things, and sometimes make things up to support their claims.[2][3]

Many things together prove that the Holocaust did happen:

Read the rest here:
Holocaust denial – Simple English Wikipedia, the free …

Written on October 26th, 2015 & filed under Holocaust Denial Tags:

The official story is essentially correct, although the full scale of the crimes is generally not understood, even in the United States (far removed from the events). The basic facts of the Holocaust are also not generally taught in the Arab world (few peoples anywhere learn accurate information about distant genocides).The issues of the State of Israel’s behavior toward Arab populations are a separate issue than the Holocaust. Downplaying or denying the Holocaust is a great way to ensure that Israel will not want peace with the Palestinians and other neighboring peoples. Downplaying or denying massacres and injustices on the Arab / Palestinian side since 1948 also makes peace unlikely.

No known limited hang outs.

Most popular descriptions of the Holocaust ignore complicity of the United States and Britain. Churchill and Roosevelt were provided with extremely accurate information about the mass shootings and the extermination camps but chose not to use their propaganda services to warn potential victims to resist or inform civilian populations in Germany about the full extent of Hitler’s crimes and threaten post-war prosecution of the perpetrators. Toward the end of the war, a small effort was made to interfere with the conclusion of the “Final Solution,” which saved perhaps a quarter million Jews. To its credit, the US Holocaust museum in Washington, DC admits these facts in its displays. The “lessons of the Holocaust” are to watch for the rise of fascism and similar nastiness, and to work to prevent this emergence while it is still possible to stop it (not once the violence is at full strength). Few Holocaust books or movies adequately describe the level of resistance in the Ghettos, Jewish partisans in the forests, and even some of the death camps — revolts under the most extreme conditions imaginable.The Nazis also killed millions of Poles, communists, Russian civilians and prisoners of war, so-called Gypsies (Roma), political dissidents, Catholics, Jehovah’s Witnesses, male homosexuals, psychiatric patients and the infirm, among others. The Nazi war machine killed tens of millions, total, in their quest to take over the world. Some Nazis were exempted from prosecution through secret deals with the Allies. Operation Paperclip smuggled thousands of Nazi criminals into the US to help with the space program and the CIA, others were helped to relocate to South America, where some destablized local governments and helped institute fascism (Chile, Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay).

Some advocates for Holocaust Denial admit that the genocide happened, but claim that it probably was exaggerated in its scope – a subtle, sneaky form of denial. Perhaps some people find it hard to believe how severe these crimes were, but others with this view are merely trying to plant a seed of doubt among those who would not believe claims that it never happened. While the precise number of Jews and non-Jews killed by the Nazis will never be known, the estimates of the number of Jewish victims only vary by a few percent, and not worth arguing about – credible statistics range between 5 and 6 million Jews killed. We will never determine the precise numbers of victims of the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the Soviet gulag, Tibetan monks murdered by the Chinese, Vietnamese killed by the Americans, Armenian victims of the Turks, Timorese killed by the Indonesians, Guatemalans killed by their military, Cambodians killed by the Khmer Rouge, Rwandan genocide victims, casualties of the ongoing Congo war (millions of dead from war, disease and starvation), student protesters in Tiananmen Square, to cite a few massacres that are well documented without exact casualty lists.

There are many efforts to expose the lies of Holocaust Denial, two of the best websites are

These are excellent analyses that refute the internet era effort to revive Holocaust Denial, which is falsely marketed as “Historical Revisionism” but is really thinly disguised efforts to rehabilitate the image of Nazism. Considering the large amount of nonsense on 9/11 complicity (no planes, etc) that some Holocaust Denial efforts have also promoted, it is possible that some Denial groups are false-flag operations from intelligence services to discredit examination of deep politics. Hopefully, some of their leaders are covert agents and don’t actually believe their own lies.

on this page:

related pages:

Israel is a country, Judiaism is a religion.

Israel’s genocide of the Palestinians is NOT an excuse for tolerating Holocaust Denial.

The Holocaust is not an excuse for Israeli occupation of Palestine. Gaza has been returned to the Palestinians, but it is under siege by Israeli military forces and has no future without a viable economy, water supplies, and reparations for decades of damage. [note: in late 2008 the Israeli military escalated the low intensity war into a full scale invasion]

Holocaust Deniers do not belong in efforts to expose the 9/11: American Reichstag Fire, not because they are promoting racist nonsense, but also because the Deniers are promoting fake claims of complicity that discredit independent investigations.

holocaust denial is not a neutral topic of historical inquiry, it’s a lure cast by Nazi apologists for vulnerably open minds, which exploits their fresh sense of distrust of history by suggesting that this, too, must be a lie. — Jeff Wells, Rigorous Intuition http://rigorousintuition.blogspot.com/2006/03/inoculations_16.html

“I have to say, I do not consider these people [Holocaust deniers] normal. We have to stick to the truth. There are people denying it, but what happened, happened, and it is not up for dispute.” — SS veteran Oswald Kaduk, who served at Auschwitz http://www.holocaustresearchproject.org/othercamps/kaduk.html

Those who deny Auschwitz would be ready to remake it. — Primo Levi, survivor of a year’s imprisonment in Auschwitz http://www.arifrankel.com/levi18.html

If the Party could reach into the past and say of this or that event “it never happened” surely that was more terrifying than mere torture and death. — George Orwell, 1984

“The real purpose of Holocaust revisionism is to make National Socialism an acceptable political alternative again.” — Harold Covington, leader of the National Socialist White Peoples Party http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/orgs/american/national-socialist-white-peoples-party/nswpp-on-revisionism.html

Although an exact figure will never be known, approximately 1,500,000 people were murdered by the Einsatzgruppen. The Einsatzgruppen submitted detailed and specific reports of their actions to their superiors both by radio and written communication; these reports were checked against each other for accuracy at Heydrich’s headquarters. According to those reports approximately 1,500,000 people were murdered. In evaluating this large number Justice Michael Musmanno, who presided at the trial of the Einsatzgruppen wrote:

One million human corpses is a concept too bizarre and too fantastical for normal mental comprehension. As suggested before, the mention of one million deaths produces no shock at all commensurate with its enormity because to the average brain one million is more a symbol than a quantitative measure. However, if one reads through the reports of the Einsatzgruppen and observes the small numbers getting larger, climbing into ten thousand, tens of thousands, a hundred thousand and beyond, then one can at last believe that this actually happened — the cold-blooded, premeditated killing of one million human beings.


There are some who would try to deny or justify the murders committed by the Einsatzgruppen. The most benign explanation for this denial was given by Justice Michael Musmanno — an experienced judge and hardened combat veteran — who presided at the trial of the Einsatzgruppen. Shocked and sickened by the evidence which he heard, Justice Musmanno wrote:

One reads and reads these accounts of which here we can give only a few excerpts and yet there remains the instinct to disbelieve, to question, to doubt. There is less of a mental barrier in accepting the weirdest stories of supernatural phenomena, as for instance, water running up hill and trees with roots reaching toward the sky, than in taking at face value these narratives which go beyond the frontiers of human cruelty and savagery. Only the fact that the reports from which we have quoted came from the pens of men within the accused organizations can the human mind be assured that all this actually happened. The reports and the statements of the defendants themselves verify what otherwise would be dismissed as the product of a disordered imagination. Judgement of the Tribunal, p. 50.

An Introduction to the Einsatzgruppen an essay by Yale F. Edeiken http://www.einsatzgruppenarchives.com/documents/introduction.html

http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2006/05/dylan-co-suck-up-to-holocaust-denier.html At 20 May, 2006 09:26, Alex said… What gets me is the sheer…arrogance and horror behind these “revisionists”. They cloak themselves in the mantle of “legitimate research” by saying they’re not “denying the holocaust” but rather trying to prove that ONLY 2 million died. That’s like claiming that Jeffrey Dahmer didn’t kill 16 people, but instead ONLY had 7 victims. Frankly, even if you were right, what kind of demented individual would actually WANT to prove that? In the case of Dahmer, it’d have to be either a close family member who still cares about him despite his crimes, or someone who really, REALLY hated his victims. In the case of holocaust deniers, it’s quite clear what their agenda is. They can attempt to masquerade it as “legitimate research” all they want, but the way they present their “facts” always destroys any legitemacy behind that claim. There’s only two reasons why they’d spend so much effort attempting to revise the historicaly accepted number of Jews (and other minorities) massacred during the holocaust. Either they’re neo-nazis trying to clean up the image that they present to the world, or they’re anti-semitic assholes who simply hate Jews. There’s really no other alternative.

the Ku Klux Klan offers their solidarity to the Holocaust Denial movement

updated on 2008-03-17

The 9/11 truth movement has suffered from some infiltration by advocates of what is euphemistically called Holocaust revisionism, who have written in defense of various aspects of Holocaust Denial and have praised neo-Nazis who seek to downplay the Holocaust.

The 9/11 truth movement has attracted a lot of people who want to be instant experts. Some crave public recognition. Others, no doubt, have their unique psychological reasons, some good, some not so good. But those who make very bold conclusions while being ignorant of most of the available evidence run the risk of “foot in mouth” disease, and worse, their antics can rub off on the rest of us, especially if they seek to connect neo-Nazi pseudo historians and 9/11 truth activists in common cause.

Due to these (and other) efforts to link 9/11 skeptics with Holocaust denial, there are a fair number of citizens who think that 9/11 investigation is really all about blaming “the Jews” for the atrocity, both from those who want to blame the “jews” and those who think that 9/11 investigation is anti-semitism.

Not all “conspiracy theories” are true – some are blatant revisions of history to snare the gullible or those who let their anger get in the way of the facts.

The 9/11 truth movement should not be co-opted by those who want to pretend that one of the greatest crimes in history was oversold by Jews in order to justify a land grab in Palestine.

It would not be surprising if many of the voices most loudly advocating Holocaust Denial were “false flag” operatives of the Israeli government – since the fact that some crazy people promote these lies makes it more difficult to find political space to criticize Israeli human rights abuses (even though the two issues are quite separate). In other words, the spectre of Holocaust Denial is used to discredit legitimate criticism of Israeli crimes — who benefits is always a useful question to ask.

It is possible that some well-meaning people have been lured into believing Holocaust Denial due to a lack of critical thinking abilities and the fact that much of the best historical material from murdered victims, survivors, bystanders and perpetrators is not on the internet (a failure of only doing research on the web!) and the neo-Nazi liars are aggresive in their advocacy. Fortunately, there is a large amount of material documenting the reality of the Holocaust and refuting the Deniers.

http://www.911review.com/denial/holocaust.html Holocaust Denial Versus 9/11 Truth

http://www.truthmove.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=272 Holocaust Denial and the next 9/11 Conference?

a conference on “9/11 Accountability” planned in Arizona in February 2007 turned out to be organized by a Holocaust denier. Naturally, the media and prominent debunkers have highlighted this situation. The roots of the problem are not this particular event (which is a mix of some good speakers and a lot of absurd nonsense) but the much larger tolerance of Holocaust deniers as credible sources in 9/11 “truth” publications, movies, and even the Deception Dollars.

International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network IJAN


Points of Unity

While we all come from diverse organizing and activist experiences, and have diverse relationships to our Jewish histories and identities, we share the following points of unity:

* Solidarity with the struggle for Palestinian self-determination, including full political, economic, cultural, social and land rights for all those living in the historic Palestine, and the right of return for its refugees; * Rejection of the Israeli apartheid state, premised on Jewish supremacy and Zionist ideology, and support for all struggles for legal and economic equality against it; * Support for the building of just societies in historic Palestine, the larger region, and the other places in which we live; * A commitment to the values of democratic self-determination, social justice and solidarity, gender equality and cultural rights, and to assert the same values in our own organizing and political practice; * Commitment to the call from Palestine for Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions against Israel; * Challenging the current use of Islamophobia as a strategy for defending and justifying an imperialist US-European agenda; * Challenging white racism, including its manifestations as Ashkenazi racism against Mizrahi Jews; * Challenging the privileging of Jewish voices in conversations and negotiations about Palestine; * Rejection of the ways in which the Zionist movement and Western governments exploit the Nazi holocaust to justify the historic and current actions of the State of Israel; and * Rejection of alliances with anti-Jewish racists, white supremacist and Nazi holocaust deniers in our Palestinian solidarity work.


comments posted in response to a person trying to “bait” the list with implicit support for Denial

It doesn’t take much investigation to see the issue is owned by fascists, racists and Nazi apologists using disingenuous methods to lure the curious, naive and open minded to their extremes.

The real difficulty lies in exercising both your reason and your intuition in order to assess contrary notions, and then in assimilating the new insight into an expanding, rigorously flexible worldview. Here are two quick examples. … The other example is this Holocaust Denier Syndrome. The vast majority of us cling resolutely to either the official story or we abandon all reason and march over to the Nazi camp because something bothers us about the well-known narrative. Why is it so difficult to perceive that the official story in this case has been used by both “sides” to their own ends? Is the collaboration between American & German Nazis to kill off Eastern European Jewry and enslave the rest of us somehow easier to stomach than Norman Finkelstein’s description of the Holocaust Industry, which, contrary to widespread belief, does not deny the central truth of that event? Just because you’re opening your frontal lobes to new invasive paradigms doesn’t mean you need to surrender your ability to make distinctions.

Frankly, I don’t know why you await the “dollars and cents reasoning,” as it is staring you right in the face. The Nazis murdered millions of Jews, as well as Christians, leftists, Communists, Freemasons, Gypsies, homosexuals, etc. etc. etc. All of these people had . . . wait for it . . . property! Yes, that’s right, property. Land, companies, stocks, bonds, jewelry, money, houses, factories, shops, buildings, jobs, etc. Before the Nazis murdered the Jews, they passed a bunch of . . . wait for it . . . laws! What did the laws do? Why, like Jim Crow laws, they systematically disenfranchised Jews. The laws economically and socially alienated the Jews from Nazi-controlled German society. This made it easier to murder them. What happened to the Jews during WWII has often been referred to as . . . wait for it . . . liquidation. Where have we heard that term before? Finance? Business. That’s right. The Jews were “liquidated” and the Germans got the Jews’ stuff. Their houses, their businesses, their jobs, their property, etc. See, the Jews have always been a “model minority.” The problem? They’re too good at the game. The game of capitalism, or life, that is. Prior to the Nazi ascension, the Jews held a high percentage of positions in law, medicine, and academia. Why did they hold these positions? Could it have anything to do with the fact that Judaism tolerates doctrinal and intellectual dissent, even over sacred texts, and that most Jews had to be fluent in several languages, including one that you have to read backward, Hebrew? Would this be because such cultural traits automatically make one more competitive for positions that require intellectual faculties? I’ll let you decide. Anyway, after the disenfranchising laws, they lost these positions. It was a big incentive for intelligent, upwardly mobile, gentile Germans to join the Nazis; they would get to take over those positions earlier, and in greater numbers. Likewise, the gentile businesses saw “opportunities” in that they would get to take over Jewish-controlled business. These were the carrots that the Nazis dangled for the German people. The promise of upward mobility. Plus, if you’re a typical gentile, you’ve been raised to view the Jews as weak, untermenschen. The fact that they succeed in certain areas, at your expense, since its a capitalistic system of winners and losers, is intolerable, since you should win since you’ve been raised to believe that you’re so great. So, you are right. It wasn’t just about hate. There were huge financial incentives as well to appeal to the grasping nature of ordinary people. Now, as for the proverbial, “whole truth” about the Holocaust; sure, it was a complicated event. It wasn’t black and white. There were Nazis who were ethnically Jewish. There were tens of thousands of German Jews who were given the opportunity to Aryanize into the Germany army because they were deemed politically trustworthy. There was Jewish collaboration via the Judenrat in exterminating Jews, some of it done knowingly to save a select few’s hides, and some done unknowingly. And then you have all of the standard fraud and distortion that comes with an event involving millions of people. But none of this changes the fact that the Holocaust was about liquidation and “purification.” That’s why, if you’re a European Jew, and you go back to Europe to see where your grandparents or greatgrandparents used to live, you’ll find that there are other people, non-Jews, living in their houses. Just like how the Native Americans look and see non-Native Americans living on the land of their ancestors. We keep them tucked out of sight too. Out of sight, out of mind. All of this information is readily obtained from reviewing the source material.

The deniers are not engaged in a physical destruction. They are engaged in an attempt to pervert the world’s memory of how a state almost succeeded in destroying an entire people, along with many others. Currently they are trying to taint the worlds memory of those who were entrapped in this horror. If they succeed at that they will then seek to eradicate any memory of them. This is a “double dying.” One hopes to prevent that second dying. It is too late to do anything about the first. Deborah Lipstadt, Denying the Holocaust: The Growing Assault on Truth and Memory (Free Press, 1993) http://www.holocaustdenialontrial.org/nsindex.html


A Brief History of Holocaust Denial Ben S. Austin

http://www.nizkor.org/features/techniques-of-denial/ Deceit & Misrepresentation: The Techniques of Holocaust Denial


http://www.spectacle.org/695/mcvay.html An Interview With Ken McVay (Nizkor)

the best service one can render to those who perished and those who survived, many scarred for life, is to ensure that the facts continue to be published, so that the truth may be preserved. http://www.holocaust-history.org/operation-reinhard/ The Operation Reinhard Extermination Camps by Gord McFee, last modified August 1, 2005


AUSCHWITZ: Technique and Operation of the Gas Chambers A systematic study of the delousing and homicidal gas chambers of Bunkers 1 and 2 and of Krematorien I, II, III, IV and V of the former KL Auschwitz Birkenau, and an investigation of the remaining traces of criminal activity. by Jean-Claude Pressac


Preface by Beate and Serge KLARSFELD A scientific rebuttal of those who deny the gas chambers

“Those propagandists who seek to rehabilitate Nazism are perfectly aware that what marks it indelibly is the infamous genocide of the Jewish people. They take advantage of the credibility of the public and the more or less unconscious desire of the latter that this nightmarish mass murder had never taken place. That is why the Neo Nazis have during recent years launched an offensive which has had a certain success. Their principal themes are the following: that Hitler was not responsible for the “final solution,” that the gas chambers as a means of exterminating the Jews never existed, that the number of Jewish victims has been very considerably exaggerated. “This propaganda is internationally coordinated, and the most virulent of these Neo Nazi publications appear in the major languages.”


Holocaust Denial: Truth or Hoax? One Survivor’s Testimony by William Samelson, Ph.D. Visiting Professor, Trinity University

The Holocaust is an irrefutable fact. As a survivor of several labor and concentration camps, and as one whose entire family, save my elder brother, was murdered by Nazi thugs, I sincerely wish it had not occurred. It is also irrefutable that I am still here – a reminder of those barbaric acts perpetrated not so long ago on the European Jews by an ostensibly civilized German nation. Law-abiding, ordinary citizens of the Third Reich turned fanatical, implementing their beloved Fhrer’s agenda of murder and destruction. They became killers for him and we became the survivors of his madness. We were not expected to remain alive and give testimony to their crimes against humanity. Alas, it can not be denied that I survived this disaster: the most horrendous calamity of the twentieth century. I am here, alive. I represent the tragic truth. It is my belief that I was spared for this purpose. It is now my moral responsibility to bear witness for as long as I shall live, for I am the truth and will not be silenced by lies. To deny the truth, the awful facts of the Holocaust, is simply to lie.

The evidence, of course, is overwhelming. The countless photographs (most of them taken by Nazi SS and military personnel), testimonies of survivors, and Allied liberators as well as from Nazi documentation media and their war-time propaganda films all prove that this mass Judeocide took place. Yet, there are a number of people that claim it was all nothing more than a hoax. These deniers call themselves “revisionist historians.” Their express purpose is to alter documented historical fact. In the process, they turn scholarship into mockery, transforming truth into a make-believe fantasy spawned from unmitigated cynicism. They use the resulting misinformation to spread their anti-Jewish beliefs to the general public. Moreover, their theories, derived from blatant fabrication of data, misquotations, and quotations used out of context, are presented under the deceptive mask of scholarship and are made available to the world by way of the Internet, radio, and television. Although only relatively few fringe groups, propagandists, and pseudo-scholars embrace Holocaust denial, their activity is increasing and the potential for their influence to grow is evident. Therefore, it is incumbent upon all Holocaust survivors, historians, and those sincere chroniclers of the Holocaust to inform the world of the truth before the peoples around the world potentially fall prey, over time, to collective amnesia and adopt a romantic mythical view of the past events.

In Mein Kampf (My Struggle), Adolf Hitler expressed his belief that “the great masses of people…more easily fall victim to a big lie than to a little one” (p. 231); and that the simplest ideas “should be repeated thousands of times” so people will remember them (p. 185). Essentially, Holocaust denial is one big, bold, lie. In an attempt to legitimize the Nazi regime, revive National Socialism, forward their theory of a Jewish-Zionist conspiracy and, evidently, justify their virulent anti-Judaism, deniers repeat this lie over and over. They hide their aims under such legitimate-sounding organizations as the “Institute for Historical Review” and the “Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust.” Some deniers have the audacity call themselves “scholars” or “historians.” Whichever way they chose to identify themselves, their intentions have nothing to do with the preservation of history but with its distortion. ….

if Holocaust denial is so absurd, why should we bother to research its aims? I believe that in order to separate fact from fiction, it is important to learn about the fiction as well as the facts. As a survivor of the Holocaust, I have experienced the factual consequences of that tragic event at great losses to myself and my family. When I confront the deniers’ fictional interpretations of the Holocaust, I can distinguish between them accordingly. Needless to say, there is a large segment of the general public that does not have this advantage. This population will inevitably grow with ignorance, ingrained prejudice or plain naivet. There will always exist people who will be susceptible to the propaganda generated by the deniers of the Holocaust. ….

Historian Michael Sturmer asserts that “in a land without history, the future is controlled by those who determine the content of memory, who coin concepts and interpret the past.” Such an assertion is especially applicable to the Holocaust. As we, the survivors, become scarce, there will be fewer sources of primary information about the Holocaust in the world. Furthermore, the essence of truth vested with the authority of the eyewitness, will no longer prevail. They will no longer be able to impress future generations with the horrors of Nazi genocide. It is hard to conceive whether or not the Holocaust denial movement could further its influence. However, it is up to the vigilance of authentic historians and serious scholars to prevent its spread by educating the general public on how to separate fact from fiction and valid historical interpretation from the “revisionist” propaganda. We hope that future generations of discerning individuals will realize that the deniers’ diatribes are used not only to discredit the Holocaust victims, but also to tarnish the veracity of eyewitness accounts.


There are, in fact, people (among whom Rudolf does not number) who deny the Final Solution out of mental illness. Intense emotional issues have an attraction to some people who are a bit on the edge. They could have latched onto any issue and picked the Final Solution by chance. We have nothing but compassion for such people, but that does not mean they deserve to have their viewpoint taken seriously. One must earn the right to be taken seriously. One must demonstrate seriousness in the way that one treats evidence and the context of that evidence.

http://www.holocaust-history.org/revisionism-isnt/ the euphemism of “revisionism” is really Denial

The “Einsatz Gruppen” were “Special Action Groups” that accompanied the German military when it invaded the Soviet Union in June 1941. These Nazi death squads killed over a million Jews and other perceived enemies of Hitler. Most of this mass murder was done through mass shooting at pits near various cities. The Einsatzgruppen also experimented with “mobile gas vans” — special trucks where the exhaust systems were funneled into a sealed cargo area to kill dozens of people at a time. This technological shift was implemented to spare the perpetrators from the psychological trauma of having to watch each victim die (some of the shooters suffered shock from the blatant crimes they perpetrated in shooting entire populations). The experiments with the gas vans were short lived and led to the construction of the death camps of “Aktion Reinhard” – Treblinka, Sobibor and Belzec, in which perhaps 1.7 million Jews were killed in 1942 and 1943. Those three camps used engine exhausts to fuel their gas chambers. The much better known Auschwitz camp, which was a combination labor camp and death camp, used cyanide gas in its gas chambers to kill over a million people, mostly Jews.

http://www.einsatzgruppenarchives.com/denial/biglie.html Holocaust Denial & The Big Lie

http://www.einsatzgruppenarchives.com/denial/hohd.html Our best defence against this highly offensive “electronic highway litter of hatred” is not to pursue legal redress against the perpetrators, but to focus our resources on ensuring that the facts are as readily accessible as the myths the deniers would have their audience believe.


Julius Bauer, Paul Blobel’s driver, described the unloading of a gas van.

The use of the gas vans was the most horrible thing I have ever seen. I saw people being led into the gas vans and the doors closed. Then the van drove off. I had to drive Blobel to the place where the gas van was unloaded. The back doors of the van were opened, and the bodies that had not fallen out when the doors were opened were unloaded by Jews who were still alive. The bodies were covered with vomit and excrement. It was a terrible sight. Blobel looked, then looked away, and we drove off. On such occasions Blobel always drank schnapps, sometimes even in the car.

Kogon, Eugen, Hermann Langbein and Adalbert Ruckerl, ed. Nazi Mass Murder: A Documentary History of the Use of Poison Gas. New Haven: Yale University Press. 1993. p. 61

http://www.einsatzgruppenarchives.com/documents/introduction.html An Introduction to the Einsatzgruppen

There Is No Way to Rationalize and Justify These Crimes

There are some who would try to deny or justify the murders committed by the Einsatzgruppen. The most benign explanation for this denial was given by Justice Michael Musmanno — an experienced judge and hardened combat veteran — who presided at the trial of the Einsatzgruppen. Shocked and sickened by the evidence which he heard, Justice Musmanno wrote:

One reads and reads these accounts of which here we can give only a few excerpts and yet there remains the instinct to disbelieve, to question, to doubt. There is less of a mental barrier in accepting the weirdest stories of supernatural phenomena, as for instance, water running up hill and trees with roots reaching toward the sky, than in taking at face value these narratives which go beyond the frontiers of human cruelty and savagery. Only the fact that the reports from which we have quoted came from the pens of men within the accused organizations can the human mind be assured that all this actually happened. The reports and the statements of the defendants themselves verify what otherwise would be dismissed as the product of a disordered imagination. Judgement of the Tribunal, p. 50.

http://www.einsatzgruppenarchives.com/revisionism.html How To Be A Revisionist Scholar (parody)

http://www.kimel.net/sublime.html – subtle forms of Denial (whitewashing the Jewishness of the Holocaust – while millions of non-Jews were killed by the Nazis and their allies, the Jews were the primary targets)


http://www.ushmm.org United States Holocaust Memorial Museum website of national museum in Washington, DC – the permanent exhibit courageously mentions how the US government did very little to slow down the Holocaust, and also shows an IBM punch card tabulator (a prototype computer) of the type used by the Nazis to track down Jews

from the Progressive Review, February 21, 2006


THE jailing of Holocaust denier David Irving in Austria is a reminder of how easy it is to imitate evil even as one excoriates it. The law that convicted Irving is of the sort the Nazis would have invoked, albeit for far different purposes, and was a routine offense in Orwell’s 1984. Many fail to see this irony because they are engaged in the greatest Holocaust denial of all: a refusal to look seriously at why there was a Holocaust in the first place. To blame it all on anti-Semitism is as dangerously ahistorical as to deny its existence. Yes, Jews were the victims, but why did an ancient and widespread prejudice produce such an extreme result in this case?

We avoid this question because it takes us places we don’t want to go. Like the role of modern bureaucracy and technology in the magnification of evil. Like the commingling of corporate and state interests in a way the world had never seen before. Like the failure of Germany’s liberal elite to stand effectively against wrong eerily echoed today in the failure of America’s liberal elite to do likewise.

Some of the most important lessons of the Holocaust are simply missed. Among these, as Richard Rubenstein has pointed out, is that it could only have been carried out by an advanced political community with a highly trained, tightly disciplined police and civil service bureaucracy.

In The Cunning of History, Rubenstein also finds uncomfortable parallels between the Nazis and their opponents. For example, a Hungarian Jewish emissary meets with Lord Moyne, the British High Commissioner in Egypt in 1944 and suggests that the Nazis might be willing to save one million Hungarian Jews in return for military supplies. Lord Moynes reply: What shall I do with those million Jews? Where shall I put them? Writes Rubenstein: “The British government was by no means adverse to the final solution as long as the Germans did most of the work. ” For both countries, it had become a bureaucratic problem, one that Rubenstein suggests we understand as the expression of some of the most profound tendencies of Western civilization in the 20th century.

How many school children are taught that, worldwide, wars in the past century killed over 100 million people? In World War I alone, the death toll was around ten million. Much of this, including the Holocaust, was driven by a culture of modernity that so changed the power of institutions over the individual that the latter would become what Erich Fromm called homo mechanicus, attracted to all that is mechanical and inclined against all that is alive. Becoming, in fact, a part of the machinery — willing to kill or to die just to keep it running.

Thus, with Auschwitzlike efficiency, over 6,000 people perished every day during World War I for 1,500 days. Rubenstein recounts that on the first day of the Battle of the Somme, the British lost 60,000 men and half of the officers assigned to them. But the bureaucratic internal logic of the war did not falter at all; over the next six months, more than a million British, French and German soldiers would lose their lives. The total British advance: six miles. No one in that war was a person anymore. The seeds of the Holocaust can thus be found in the trenches of World War I. Individuals had became no better than the bullets that killed them, just part of the expendable arsenal of the state. But we don’t talk about this do we? We don’t teach our children about it, do we?

The problem with using the outcome rather than the origins of the Holocaust as our metaphor and our message is that we are totally unprepared for those practices, laws, and arguments that can produce similar outcomes. We study the death chambers when we should be learning about the birth places.

Follow this link:
Holocaust Denial – Oil Empire

Written on October 7th, 2015 & filed under Holocaust Denial Tags:

Holocaust denial is a belief that the Nazi Holocaust did not occur, or occurred to a lesser extent than believed by the preponderance of scholars. Holocaust deniers assert that the Nazis did not attempt to exterminate the Jews (as well as political opponents, Gypsies, Catholics and other Christian church members opposed to his policies, mentally retarded individuals, homosexuals, etc.) during World War II.

The holocaust denial view point has no support amongst any significant number of scholars. This denial is partly a result of a growing number of existentialist thinkers who refer to history as simply a myth as well as the result of the efforts of history revisionists and anti-Zionists.

As denial of the holocaust is nonfactual, another common strategy of history revisionism is to use relativism by comparing it to other genocides, the death toll of Germans in WWII, persecution of homosexuals in Nazi Germany, or the number of abortions.

One of its main purposes is to discredit the establishment of the nation of Israel in 1948. Questioning the historicity of the Holocaust is considered gravely offensive to Jews [1], and anti-Semitic in nature. Denying the Holocaust is illegal in a number of European countries. In 2007, a German court sentenced notorious historical revisionist and denier Ernst Zndel to five years in prison for “incitement of racial hatred.” [2]

“Holocaust denial” is a simplistic term for a movement with several different schools of thought. Some radical conspiracy theorists and neo-Nazi groups dispute whether the Holocaust occurred, but the the superabundance of evidence undermines their argument. Most holocaust deniers do not deny that the event happened at all, but they question the methods, historiography and truth behind the holocaust. That viewpoint has manifested itself into the following arguments used by most contemporary holocaust deniers

Some holocaust deniers admit that many Jews died during the war, but dispute that there was any official Nazi policy towards extermination of the Jews. To support this argument, the point out that there exists no unequivocal written order from Adolf Hitler that orders the mass murder of Jews. This argument maintains that the Jewish deaths during the war were no more than collateral damage and/or the civilian deaths that are unavoidable, especially in a war of that size.

Despite the lack of a written order, Hitler’s intentions were well-known.In a 1939 speech in the Reichstag, Hitler voiced a goal of “annihilation of the Jewish race in Europe.”[3] Aside from that, an abundance of eyewitness testimony, diaries and orders from other Nazi officials make it clear that there was a planned extermination campaign in place.[4][5] It is higly unlikely that a project of this size would occur without the knowledge or consent of the notoriously autocratic Hitler.

As well, there is abundant evidence that Nazi officials ordered widespread destruction of such written orders towards the end of the war. As it appeared increasingly likely that Germany would lose the war, Himmler ordered such documentation destroyed, so as to avoid incriminating the regime. There also exists a signed order dated April, 1945, in which Himmler orders that no prisoner “fall into the hands of the enemies alive,” since their testimony would condemn the Nazi leaders[6]

While awaiting trial in 1960, Nazi officer Adolf Eichmann said that Reinhard Heydrich, chief of the Reich Main Security Office had told him in August 1941 that “the Fhrer has ordered the physical extermination of the Jews.”[7]

Many deniers question the death toll of the Holocaust, arguing that the numbers are highly inflated. Many contemporary Holocaust deniers put the Jewish death toll between 300,000 and 1.1 million, [8] which is at odds with most widely accepted statistics, which put the Jewish death toll at approximately six million.[9]

Simple demographic evidence effectively rebuts this argument. Deniers claim that many Jews simply emigrated elsewhere, but there are no corresponding population increases in other countries that would support this argument. While it is possible that hundreds, or even thousands of people could “fall through the cracks,” that still leaves several million Jews unaccounted for.[10]

This axis of Holocaust denial consists of several different arguments:

These arguments collapse under the weight of overwhelming evidence. Photographs, written orders and eyewitness testimony from guards and prisoners alike support the position that gas chambers were employed for mass murder. [13][14][15]

Arguments based on the physical structure of the chambers (ventilation, construction and other concerns) spring from the postwar examination of the camps. However, there is ample evidence that Nazis fully or partially destroyed many execution facilities to conceal evidence of their crimes.[16][17]

A letter from Karl Bischoff, the head architect at Auschwitz, to the German Armament Works dated March 31, 1943 orders three gas tight doors for Crema 3 following exactly the size and construction of those already delivered for Crema 2. Bischoff reminded the manufacturer that the doors had to have a spy-hole of double 8-mm glass with a rubber seal and metal fitting. The order was characterized as very urgent.

There are also many photographs of actual gas-tight doors that were found all over Auschwitz immediately after the war. One, which had been used in either Crema 4 or 5, had a peep-hole covered with a heavy mesh screen and still had a gas-tight seal still around the edge, just as Bischoffs letter requested. The blueprints for Crema 2 show ventilation ducts in the walls (labeled Entlftung) and the remains of the ducts can still be seen in the ruins. In the archives there is also a request for a handle for the gastight door and a request for twenty-four-gastight anchoring screws for gas tight doors for Cremas 4 and 5.

The walls and ceilings of the gas chambers were plastered and whitewashed as numerous eyewitnesses have testified. By the time Leuchter arrived at the camp to take his samples, the plaster was gone and the exposed brick had been exposed to 40 years of rain, sun and snow. As HCN leaves only a thin blue chemical residue on surfaces, any Prussian Blue residue from the HCN would have collected on the surface of the plaster and would not have left a substantial presence on the bricks and mortar or concrete underneath.

Leuchter collected 31 handful-sized samples of bricks and mortar from the cremas and one control sample from the delousing chamber in Birkenau. By the time he crawled into the ruins of Crema 2, the plaster was long gone and only the bricks and mortar and concrete remained. Cremas 4 and 5 were constructed entirely of brick. They were totally destroyed before the end of the war. Only the concrete foundations remain and bricks have been gathered from around the area and loosely stacked up to show the general outline of the floor plan of the buildings. The bricks that Leuchter sampled did not necessarily come from anywhere near the gas chamber rooms. In the laboratory the individual samples were ground up into powder. Any trace of the HCN residue that might have been there became a miniscule part of the entire sample. A more appropriate method would have tested only the surfaces of the sample. Testing the total amount of the ground up powder was like trying to analyze the color and chemical structure of paint on the inside of a wall by looking for it in the boards and masonry behind the drywall. In the case of Cremas 4 and 5, it would like analyzing the materials from another room entirely. The fact that Leuchter still found insignificant traces of the chemicals in the ruins of the gas chambers after all these years of being exposed to the elements is proof that there WERE gas chambers in Auschwitz-Birkenau.[18]

A properly authorized and meticulously conducted, rigorously scientific study done by Polish authorities in 1994 found that in spite of the passage of a considerable period of time (over 45 years) in the walls of the facilities which once were in contact with hydrogen cyanide the vestigial amounts of the combinations of this constituent of Zyklon B had been preserved. This is also true of the ruins of the former gas chambers.

Holocaust denial is particularly sensitive issue in Germany, the former seat of the Nazi regime. The country first outlawed denial movements in 1985, making it a crime to deny the extermination of the Jews. The law was amended in 1994, imposing a fine and a five-year prison sentence on anyone who publicly endorses, denies or plays down the genocide against the Jews.[19] In 2007, the German government spearheaded a movement to ban Holocaust denial throughout the European Union.[20]

A base of anti-semitism is observable in the liberal news medias of Japan in which news sources (Shukanshi) including the popular Shukan Bunshun has repeatedly published articles denying the German holocaust of European Jews[21].

The Westboro Baptist Church, a group of homophobic, Christian extremists and self proclaimed “fag-haters” and creators of the website GodHatesFags.com, created a parody of “Hey Jude” by the Beatles titled “Hey Jews”.

This song features several anti-semitic remarks, including the line “Fag & dyke rabbis teach rebellion. You lie about the holocaust days”. Clearly stating that they believe the Holocaust was a lie created by homosexual rabbis. [22]

Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has become an outspoken voice of the denier movement, making many public statements condemning Israel and Jews in general. He has questioned whether the Holocaust actually occurred and hosted a conference designed to cast doubt on the idea of its historicity. [23]

Originally posted here:
Holocaust denial – Conservapedia

Written on September 16th, 2015 & filed under Holocaust Denial Tags:

One of the many photographs that Holocaust denial deniers claim to be digitally retouched or “nonexistent”.

Holocaust denial denial is the belief that Holocaust denial never occurred or at least not to the degree that many believe it to. Holocaust denial deniers suggest that Holocaust denial or “Holohoax denial” is a crock of shit as are its supporters, who they also claim don’t exist”.

Holocaust denial denial accepts the commonly accepted idea that the Jews and other minority groups were killed in Nazi concentration camps. Also prominent is the belief that the Nazis tried to cover up the true events and/or redirect blame for their crimes to the victims, creating sympathy for their cause. In addition, beliefs that the Germans had always planned to frame foreign propaganda for their crimes even from before the war is common, but not universal among Holocaust denial deniers. Some renounce the last claim and assert that it was simply a move made when the prospect fortuitously presented itself.

In summation, Holocaust denial deniers generally believe that the Holocaust was orchestrated by the Nazis for the purpose of restricting living space in Germany to only the rightful Aryan race. While the above is important, it only serves to solidify their claims. Their main claims are as follows:

Holocaust denial deniers argue that unlike Holocaust deniers (whom they deny the existence of), there is an abundant amount of evidence to back up their claims. Indeed, many concentration camps have been found throughout Europe since the end of World War II. Conditions at these camps have been found to be completely inhospitable, providing evidence that their purpose was the methodical slaughter of all people held there. Often mass graves have also been excavated near the sites, demonstrating that what took place was a genocide.

Testimonies of Schutzstaffel officers being tried for crimes against humanity for their involvement in the Holocaust ranged from, “Oh, I’d say about six million Jews or so.” to, “Yes, we did it.” Almost all of them claimed that the accusations were completely true.

Holocaust denial deniers have also asserted that the lack of prominent articles regarding Holocaust denial is evidence enough that Holocaust denial doesn’t exist and is probably a botched hoax of some sorts. The claim that David Irving and other figures who have openly spoken about Holocaust denial “don’t exist” is also somehow justified. An informal 2003 report regarding Holocaust negationism from the Open University of Israel stated the following:

Holocaust denial denial has faced extremely heavy criticism throughout the years from both believers of the Holocaust and Holocaust deniers themselves. Many have claimed that David Irving does in fact exist, though no evidence has been brought forward to substantiate this claim.

It has been extremely difficult for supporters of Holocaust denial to provide evidence that they exist, as do their beliefs. And beyond that, it’s difficult to prove that their claims are as widespread as many believe them to be as Holocaust denial deniers don’t believe in their beliefs to begin with.

Holocaust deniers have stated that Holocaust denial deniers simply attempt to “ignore” Holocaust denial’s ideas and those affiliated with them while subconsciously recognizing them. This however, was proven untrue by Dr. Greenstein of the Open University of Israel, who stated, “Who?” when asked about what he thought regarding Holocaust deniers.

David Irving, who has only made brief comments regarding Holocaust denial denial stated that some deny that the denial Holocaust denial deniers deny is actually legitimate denial, and that they are actually attempting reverse psychology through the denial of denying and absurdism. Certainly, the denial of denial is an effect tactic of denial which can solidify initial claims which the denial being denied rose out of, yet they can also harm these claims undeniably. Of course, to Holocaust denial deniers, Irving doesn’t exist, so his statements have fallen on deaf ears because nobody understands them.

In response to holocaust denial deniers, a growing movement calling themselves the holocaust denial denial deniers refuse to believe that holocaust denial deniers exist and that although the holocaust did exist, certain aspects of denial in relation to the holocaust, including but not limited to, the denial of it’s denial and any other movement with the moniker ‘denial’ attached to it may not exist, although the choosing of which groups to deny the existence of is somewhat arbitrary according to critics of ‘the whole stupid thing’, who themselves are facing growing criticism from the ‘I’m Confused’ movement.

See the article here:
Holocaust denial denial – Uncyclopedia, the content-free …

Written on September 12th, 2015 & filed under Holocaust Denial Tags:


January 31, 2009 | Associated Press

A bishop recently rehabilitated by Pope Benedict XVI expressed regret Friday to the pontiff for the “distress and problems” he caused by his statements denying the Holocaust. In a letter to the Vatican, Bishop Richard Williamson, who in a recent TV interview denied that 6 million Jews were murdered during the Holocaust, called his remarks “imprudent.”


January 25, 2008 | From Times Wire Reports

Israel’s Holocaust memorial institution launched an Arabic version of its website, with vivid photos of Nazi atrocities and video of survivors’ testimony, to combat Holocaust denial in the Arab and Muslim world. Among those featured on the Yad Vashem site is Dina Beitler, a survivor of the Nazi genocide that killed 6 million Jews in World War II. Beitler, who was shot and left for dead in 1941, tells her story on the site, with Arabic subtitles. “Holocaust denial in various countries exists, and so it is important that people see us, the Holocaust survivors, that they’ll listen to our testimonies, and learn the legacy of the Holocaust — also in Arabic,” Beitler, 73, said at Yad Vashem.


July 7, 2007

While I agree with Tim Rutten’s thoughts [about the lack of media coverage on threats against Salman Rushdie] (“Where Is the West’s Outcry?,” June 23), letter writer Gina Nahai needs to check her facts before spewing forth more incorrect information (Letters, June 30). It is absolutely untrue that British schools decided to not mention the Holocaust in their textbooks or curriculum. One history department in northern U.K.


January 27, 2007 | From the Associated Press

The General Assembly on Friday adopted a resolution introduced by the United States that condemns any denial of the Holocaust. The resolution did not single out any country, but Israel and the United States both suggested that Iran should take note, especially after it provoked widespread anger last month by holding a conference aimed at casting doubt on the Nazi genocide of Jews during World War II. Iran was the only nation to reject the measure, calling it an attempt by the U.S.


December 20, 2006 | MAX BOOT, MAX BOOT is a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. mboot@latimescolumnists.com

MAHMOUD Ahmadinejad has an impeccable sense of timing. Just a week after the Iraq Study Group recommended a heart-to-heart with him, the president of Iran convened a conference in Tehran to examine whether the Holocaust really occurred. The answer from such “scholars” as David Duke, the notorious former Ku Klux Klan grand wizard, was a resounding no. On one level, Ahmadinejad’s embrace of Holocaust denial might seem surprising.


December 13, 2006

WHAT’S THE perfect way to top off a Holocaust denial conference featuring input from the likes of such scholars as former KKK Grand Wizard David Duke? Why, calling for Israel’s obliteration, of course. Iran wrapped its two-day gathering of neo-Nazis, hard-line racists and half-baked historians with a rousing speech from Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Tuesday.

The rest is here:
Articles about Holocaust Denial – latimes

Written on September 12th, 2015 & filed under Holocaust Denial Tags:

Deniers of the Holocaust, the systematic murder of around 6 million Jews in World War II, either deny that such a genocide took place or minimize its extent. These groups (and individuals) often cloak themselves in the sober language of serious scholarship, call themselves historical revisionists instead of deniers, and accuse their critics of trying to squelch open-minded inquiries into historical truth.

The deniers claims run a gamut. Some say that most Jews were the victims of disease and other privations, or died in much the same way that other casualties of a huge and horrific war did. Some say that the gas chambers did not exist, or were only used to delouse prisoners, or could not possibly have killed as many victims as mainstream historians have asserted, and many suggest that the gas chambers were built after the war as a way extracting reparations from the Germans. The main purpose of Holocaust denial has been to rehabilitate the German Nazis image as part of a bid to make the ideology of national socialism more acceptable.

David Irving, a British writer who is the worlds best-known denier, sued an American scholar for calling him a denier but suffered a devastating defeat in 2000, when a British judge concluded that Irving had selectively edited the facts in his books as part of his pro-Nazi, pro-Hitler and anti-Jewish ideology.

See the article here:
Holocaust Denial | Southern Poverty Law Center

Written on September 9th, 2015 & filed under Holocaust Denial Tags:

The association of challenges to the official myth of 9/11 with deniers of the Nazi Holocaust of Jews is one of the more potent weapons in the arsenal of the apologists for the official myth, although its use so far has been limited. In a column in Scientific American attacking the 9/11 “conspiracy theories” Michael Shermer states:

The mistaken belief that a handful of unexplained anomalies can undermine a well-established theory lies at the heart of all conspiratorial thinking (as well as creationism, Holocaust denial and the various crank theories of physics).

Following this, Shermer launches into a straw-man attack against 9-11 Research implying that the website embraces the same “conspiratorial thinking” as Holocaust denial, despite the fact that 9-11 Research does not endorse Holocaust denial or Holocaust revisionism, and avoids uncritically linking to websites that do. It is easy to find writers and websites that openly mix 9/11 skepticism with Holocaust denial or revisionism. Some of the more prominent ones are:

In January of 2007 CNN devoted a segment of Paula Zahn NOW to attacking all 9/11 ‘conspiracy theorists’ as racists who assert that Jews were behind the attack.

Christopher Bollyn, writing for the American Free Press, was the source of numerous original stories on the 9/11 coverup. Bollyn — whose prolific work suggests he is a hard-working reporter — was the apparent source of numerous stories including:

Apparently because of his original reporting, Bollyn’s work has been widely cited and copied. Unfortunately, this is also true of a number of hoaxes that Bollyn has promoted — perhaps unknowingly.

The fact that Bollyn is extensively sourced in 9/11 skeptics’ literature, combined with the fact that his employer, the American Free Press, has neo-Nazi associations, gives defenders of the official 9/11 myth effective ammunition with which to attack their critics. Although publications of the American Free Press are generally free of racist, white-supremicist, or anti-Semitic content, its sister publication, The Barnes Review overtly promotes such ideologies. Consider the following facts.

The American Free Press was founded by Willis Carto, believed by some critics to be the leading exponent of anti-Semitism in the United States in the latter half of the 20th century. Carto, widely considered a white supremacist, was co-founder of the Institute for Historical Review, which has championed Holocaust revisionism and has been accused of being a neo-Nazi organization. Carto also founded The Barnes Review, and the Liberty Lobby, best known for publishing the now-defunct paper The Spotlight. Carto and other editors from The Spotlight went on to establish the American Free Press.

Eric Hufschmid was one of the first researchers of the 9/11 attack to come to prominence, with his 2002 book Painful Questions , and his 2003 video Painful Deceptions. Both of these highly original works pair the idea that the Twin Towers and WTC 7 were felled by controlled demolition with the idea that the Pentagon was hit by a small aircraft such as a Global Hawk drone rather than Flight 77. Neither the book nor the video betray Hufschmid as a Holocaust denier or racist — positions he has since openly embraced or been accused of. However, less publicized writings of Hufschmid foreshadow these things, such as one with the punchline, ‘Duh! The Jews!':

The Jews are simply exploiting the suffering and death of their fellow Jews. The moment a Jew suffers or dies, the other Jews look for ways to exploit the situation. It reminds me of the way cockroaches immediately begin eating one another when one of them dies.

Original post:
9-11 Review: Holocaust Denial Versus 9-11 Truth

Written on June 24th, 2015 & filed under Holocaust Denial Tags:

Holocaust denial and distortion Holocaust desecration, denial, and abuse, have all been components of Palestinian Authority ideology. Palestinians from both Fatah and Hamas have accused Israel of burning Palestinians in ovens, and alternatively have accused Zionists of committing the Holocaust against Jews for political, financial or social gain. A PA TV childrens broadcast taught that Israel burned Palestinians in ovens, and at an exhibit in Gaza children put dolls, representing Palestinian children, in a model oven adorned with a Star of David and a swastika. A PA daily wrote: “The exhibit includes a large oven and inside it small [Palestinian] children are being burned; the picture speaks for itself, as if the exhibit was documenting something true. [Al-Ayyam, March 20, 2008] The event was sponsored by the Palestinian National Committee for Defense of Children from the Holocaust.

A senior Palestinian academic taught adults on PA TV: There was no Dachau, no Auschwitz; these were disinfecting sites. A Hamas TV documentary explained that it was Jewish leaders who planned the Holocaust, in order to eliminate Jews who were “disabled and handicapped.

A crossword puzzle clue in the official PA daily identified Yad Vashem (Israels Holocaust memorial) as a Center for the Holocaust and Lies. The same PA daily has published many articles denying the Holocaust, including one that termed the Holocaust a hen laying golden eggs.

Schoolbooks produced by the Palestinian Ministry of Education teach the history of World War II in great detail except for the history of the Holocaust, which is totally ignored. One history book goes so far as to teach that Nazism was a racist ideology and that there were trials of Nazi war criminals, but it leaves out that Jews were the target of the racism, and the crimes for which the Nazis were on trial.

Palestinian education erases the actual Holocaust from history and usurps the word Holocaust or its own wide range of malicious libels.

“They [Israel] are the ones who did the Holocaust, their knife cuts to the length and the width of our flesh… They opened ovens for us, to bake human beings. They destroyed the villages and burnt the cities. And when an oven stops burning, they light a hundred [more] ovens. Their hands are covered with the blood of our children.”

[PA TV (Fatah), March 25, 2004]

Since 2012, there have been a number of statements by the PA or PLO officials acknowledging the Holocaust. This has not yet been incorporated into PA formal education.

This category has the following sections:

Click “full article” below to view a longer excerpt of the article.

See the original post:
Holocaust denial and minimizing | PMW

Written on May 27th, 2015 & filed under Holocaust Denial Tags:

Montreal Alouettes defensive lineman Khalif Mitchell apologized Friday for inappropriate tweets, including a link to a Holocaust denial video.

The apology was made in a joint statement by the CFL Players Association and Bnai Brith Canada.

I wholeheartedly apologize to all those who I know I let down by posting those videos, especially those who look up to me as a professional athlete, Mitchell said. I fell into a trap by watching that video and I hope others can learn from my very public mistake.

This is a learning moment for me.

Mitchell agreed to work with Bnai Brith, a Jewish human rights organization, to educate myself about this and other human rights matters.

The Virginia Beach, Va., native had talks with Bnai Brith chief executive officer Michael Mostyn as well as with the CFL, the CFLPA and the Alouettes after news broke Thursday of a series of posts on Twitter dealing with Israel, including one with a link to a video called The Greatest Lie Ever Told, the Holocaust.

I have come to see that he is a very genuine individual who truly did not comprehend the deceptive nature of this vile video, said Mostyn.

CFLPA president Scott Flory added: We hope that people will accept his apology and we support him on his journey to become a positive force.

Mitchell was fined undisclosed amounts by the CFL and the Alouettes for violating the leagues social media policy. Flory said the league fine will be donated to a charity of the players choice.

The six-foot-six lineman signed with Montreal last season from the B.C. Lions. He was a CFL all-star in 2011.

Original post:
Alouettes lineman Khalif Mitchell apologizes for Holocaust …

Written on May 19th, 2015 & filed under Holocaust Denial Tags: