Wednesday, November 18, 2015

Anne Frank Diary Co-Authored by Father

The Basel, Switzerland, Anne Frank Fonds (Anne Frank Fund)—which controls the copyright to the Diary of Anne Frank—has admitted that the book was in fact at least co-authored by Otto Frank, Anne’s father, after the war.

The admission proves that the book, which is still heavily promoted as a “holocaust memoir,” is in fact largely a postwar fabrication which contained parts of the young Anne’s diary with extensive additions added by her father.

This is obvious from even a cursory look at the actual diary. See, for example, the image below of two pages from the diary, which shows both Anne’s real youthful handwriting and her father’s obviously adult handwriting—although he signs his entries as “Anne Frank.”

The difference between Otto Frank's adult writing, and Anne Frank's juvenile handwriting, is obvious from this "original" diary page. Note the inscription top left, in Otto Frank's handwriting, signed as "Anne Frank."

As the New York Times has pointed out, when “Otto Frank first published his daughter’s red-checked diary and notebooks, he wrote a prologue assuring readers that the book mostly contained her words, written while hiding from the Nazis in a secret annex of a factory in Amsterdam.”

Normal copyright on books extends only 70 years after the author’s death. As Anne Frank died of typhus in Bergen Belsen in February 1945, the book theoretically entered the public domain in February 2015.

But, as the New York Times went on to say, the Anne Frank Fonds has now decided to try to extend copyright on the book past the 70 year cut-off period—by admitting that Otto Frank, who died in 1980, was indeed a “co-author” after all.

The implications of this admission are obvious. As the New York Times put it:

While the foundation, the Anne Frank Fonds, in Basel, signaled its intentions a year ago, warnings about the change have provoked a furor as the deadline approaches. Some people opposed to the move have declared that they would defy the foundation and publish portions of her text.

Foundation officials “should think very carefully about the consequences,” said Agnès Tricoire, a lawyer in Paris who specializes in intellectual property rights in France, where critics have been the most vociferous and are organizing a challenge. “If you follow their arguments, it means that they have lied for years about the fact that it was only written by Anne Frank.”

Actually, as I pointed out in Section 110 of The Six Million: Fact or Fiction, Otto Frank actually admitted in an Amsterdam court that much of the handwriting was in fact his, and not that of Anne’s.

He explained that he had “transcribed” Anne’s diary before publication, and this was why the handwriting was his. Furthermore, Otto Frank announced, he had actually only published a “novel” called The Annex: Diary Notes 14 June 1942 – 1 August 1944 (in Dutch, Het Achterhuis. Dagboekbrieven 14 juni 1942 – 1 augustus 1944) and had never called it the Diary of Anne Frank. The title Anne Frank: The Diary of a Young Girl had been given to the book’s first English translation.

This “transcription” by Otto Frank finally explained the 1980 report by the German Bundeskriminalamt (Federal Criminal Investigation Bureau, or BKA) which showed that portions of the dairy had been altered or added after 1951. The manuscript was examined on orders of a West German court as the result of a libel action brought by Otto Frank against a German publisher who had claimed the book was a fraud.

The manuscript, in the form of three hardbound notebooks and 324 loose pages bound in a fourth notebook, was examined with special equipment. The results of tests performed at the BKA laboratories show that portions of the work, especially of the fourth volume, were written with a ballpoint pen. As ballpoint pens were not commercially available until after the war, the BKA concluded that those sections were added after Anne Frank died.

The real story of Anne Frank is tragic enough, but the cruel exploitation, exaggeration, and faking of her diary by the Holocaust storytellers is a scandal of epic proportions.

Tuesday, September 22, 2015

The Wannsee Conference: Another Lie Crushed

One of the more commonly perpetuated myths around the Holocaust is that the Nazis held a conference in the Berlin suburb of Wannsee on January 20, 1942, where the “extermination of the Jews was planned.”

One of the high-profile claims in this regard was made by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, at the UnitedNations in 2009, when he held up a copy of the minutes of the Wannsee meeting, and told the world that:

“There, on January 20, 1942, after a hearty meal, senior Nazi officials met and decided how to exterminate the Jewish people. The detailed minutes of that meeting have been preserved by successive German governments. Here is a copy of those minutes, in which the Nazis issued precise instructions on how to carry out the extermination of the Jews. Is this a lie?”

The simple answer to Netanyahu’s question is, yes, this is a lie. An outright, shameless, blatant lie.

The actual minutes of the Wannsee Conference can be read in their entirety—in the original German here, and in full English translation, thanks to the work of Francis Dupont, in his small book The Myth of the Wannsee Conference ($6.95 on Amazon).  I cannot recommend that book enough.

As Dupont’s book clearly shows:

- The Wannsee meeting and its minutes do not contain a master plan to kill Jews;

- Nowhere in the meeting’s minutes is genocide discussed, planned, proposed, or even suggested;

- The Wannsee meeting never discussed gas chambers, shootings, or any of the fantasies propagated by the exterminationists;

- The Wannsee Minutes reported that there were only 4.5 million Jews under German control (yet 4.3 million Jewish compensation claims have been lodged against the postwar German government);

- The Wannsee meeting was a planning meeting on how Europe’s Jews should be deported, via transit camps, to the East; with able-bodied Jews being forced to build roads and other labor intensive tasks in those regions;

- The Wannsee Conference also made allowance for specific exceptions to Jewish evacuation, such as Jewish German World War I veterans; ALL Jews over the age of 65; and ALL Jews working in industries vital to the German war effort, to be released from the threat of evacuation and be allowed to stay in Germany.

There is therefore, no justification for the allegation that the Wannsee Conference was a ‘master plan for mass murder’ and everyone who claims this to be the case, from Netanyahu down, is simply lying.

That the Wannsee Conference never discussed killing Jews in any way, has actually been confirmed in public by Yehuda Bauer, professor of Holocaust Studies at the Avraham Harman Institute of Contemporary Jewry at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

Bauer is also the founding editor of the journal Holocaust and Genocide Studies, and a member of the editorial board of the Encyclopaedia of the Holocaust, published by Yad Vashem in 1990. 

He is not, therefore, as some Holocaust storytellers claim, some obscure figure, but a leading and major—in fact, one of the most senior—Jews promoting the Holocaust fable.

As long ago as 1992(!), Bauer, speaking at a conference held in London to mark the fiftieth anniversary of the Wannsee meeting, told the audience that the claim that Wannsee was a “master plan” to kill Jews was nothing a but a “silly story.”

Bauer’s remarks were reported in the Jewish Telegraphic Agency of January 23, 1992, and the Canadian Jewish Times of January 30, 1992.

London (JTA)—An Israeli Holocaust scholar has de-bunked the Wannsee Conference, at which top Nazi officials are said to have gathered at a villa in a Berlin suburb in 1942 to draw the blueprints of the ‘Final Solution.’
According to Prof. Yehuda Bauer of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, Wannsee was a meeting, ‘but hardly a conference’, and ‘little of what was said there was executed in detail.’
Bauer addressed the opening session of an international conference held here to mark the 50th anniversary of the decision to carry out the "Final Solution". "But it was not made at Wannsee", the Czech born scholar said.
"The public still repeats, time after time, the silly story that at Wannsee the extermination of the Jews was arrived at, Wannsee was but a stage in the unfolding of the process of mass murder," he said.

His comments were repeated in the Canadian Jewish News, which read as follows:

Wannsee’s importance rejected 
London (JTA) — An Israeli Holocaust scholar has debunked the Wannsee Conference, at which top Nazi officials are said to have gathered at a villa in a Berlin suburb in 1942 to draw the blueprints of the “Final Solution.”
According to Prof. Yehuda Bauer (photo) of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, Wannsee was a meeting, “but hardly a conference”, and “little of what was said there was executed in detail.”
“The public still repeats, time after time, the silly story that at Wannsee the extermination of the Jews was arrived at.”

In other words, even the leading “Holocaust scholar” in Israel knows that to claim that the Wannsee Conference was all about “killing Jews,” or as Netanyahu told the United Nations, that the minutes contain “precise instructions on how to carry out the extermination of the Jews . . .” is an outright lie, a "silly story."

Once again, like everything else associated with the “Holocaust,” the Wannsee Conference myth collapses when subjected to even the most basic investigation.

Recommended Reading:

By Francis Dupont



Participants and the Minutes

The Real Wannsee Protocols

Jewish Emigration and Evacuation to the East

Wannsee Protocol Expressed Concern for Jewish 

No Jews over 65 to be Evacuated to the East

No Jewish World War I Veterans to be Evacuated East

No Jews Working in “Vital Industries” to be Evacuated

The Number of Jews under German Control Identified Only 4.5 Million Jews Ever Under Direct German Control

Category “B” Countries Excluded from German Control 

Russian Jews Flee Advancing Germans

Einsatzgruppen Exaggerations

4.5 Million Jews under Direct German Control—Yet 4.3 Million Claim Compensation

Wannsee Protocol Details Forced Jewish Labor

“Appropriate Action” Meant Sterilization

Conclusion—The Wannsee Conference Was a Discussion about the Mechanics of Moving Certain Groups of Jews to the East, and Never Mentioned Mass Murder in Any Form

Appendix A: The Wannsee Protocol: Full English Translation

Appendix B: The Wannsee Protocol, Full German Originals

Appendix C: Adolf Eichmann and the Wannsee Protocol

Saturday, September 5, 2015

On the Uses of the Holocaust

In the very last section of The Six Million: Fact or Fiction, I put forward the reasons why the Holocaust Storytellers continue with the “gassed six million” fable, concluding that:

Finally, “the Holocaust” has served as a tool for those who seek to suppress any discussion of race, immigration, or ethnic issues.
This last factor has led to, for example, any group which advocates the preservation of its national identity or homogeneity, being dismissed as “Nazi” and therefore “one step away from the gas chambers.”

The recent events surrounding the ongoing flooding of Europe with “migrants” (and I use that word advisedly, because it certainly seems that many of them are actually just opportunistic illegal immigrants) have turned out to be a case in point—and have shown the accuracy of my point.

According to an article that has now appeared in the New York Times, we find that a significant number of major Jewish organizations in the US have announced that any European who is opposed to the current “migrant” flow is only doing so because they are not “aware of the Holocaust.”

The New York Times article (Humanitarian Crisis Evokes Europe’s Darkest Hour, Sept.4, 2015) goes on to tell us:

“It was horrifying when I saw those images of police putting numbers on people’s arms,” said Robert Frolich, the chief rabbi of Hungary. “It reminded me of Auschwitz. And then putting people on a train with armed guards to take them to a camp where they are closed in? Of course there are echoes of the Holocaust.”
Europeans are facing one of the Continent’s worst humanitarian crises since World War II, yet many seem blind to images that recall that blackest time in their history.
This migrant crisis is no genocide. The issue throughout the Continent is how to register, house, resettle or repatriate hundreds of thousands of migrants and refugees, a daunting logistical challenge. But perhaps not since the Jews were rounded up by Nazi Germany have there been as many images coming out of Europe of people locked into trains, babies handed over barbed wire, men in military gear herding large crowds of bedraggled men, women and children.
At the same time, the images may reveal a deeper truth about Europe and its seeming unpreparedness for a crisis so long in the making: While extolling the virtues of human rights and humanism, it remains, in many parts, a place resistant to immigration and diversity.
As a result, some here are reacting in ways that recall some of the Continent’s darkest impulses.
 “They must be oblivious because who would do that if they had any historical memory whatsoever,” said Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch. “It’s amazing, really. Certainly those images of the trains can’t help but conjure up nightmares of the Holocaust.”
But for others, the fact that it was not done on purpose was even more frightening, showing a puzzling historical disconnect in many of the very places that the Holocaust caused the deepest devastation.
 It may be correct that they didn’t know, but the insensitivity and the ignorance of the imagery their actions evoked is stunning; it’s just sickening,” said Jonathan Greenblatt, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, in New York.
For many migrant advocates, what is so puzzling about this historical amnesia is that the countries taking the hardest line are among those that suffered the most during World War II and produced the most refugees in the war’s aftermath.
 “It’s hard to understand how people lose their sense of history so quickly,” said Andrew Stroehlein, European media director for Human Rights Watch.

“We all say we have learned the lessons of history, but to be turning away these desperate people who are fleeing a horrific situation suggests that we haven’t learned the lessons at all.”

It should not be necessary for me to point out that Kenneth Roth, Jonathan Greenblatt, and Andrew Stroehlein are all Jewish.

So there you have it: if you don’t accept the migrant flow, you are repeating the Holocaust—exactly the type of tactic I pointed out in my book.

It is sad to see the tragedy of current events in the Middle East and its results in Europe become the subject of yet more “Holocaust” blackmail:  and this makes it even more imperative that the fable of the “six million” be squashed once and for all. 

Ending the Debate on Auschwitz I’s “Gas Chamber”

The time has come to end forever the silly “debate” on the claimed existence of a “gas chamber” at Auschwitz I.

The alleged "gas chamber" at Auschwitz I, complete with fake "chimney," as shown to tourists.

The alleged "gas chamber" at Auschwitz I, photographed in 1945 after the German defeat, showing no "chimney."

Let’s be absolutely clear about this: this “gas chamber” — still the “main” tourist attraction in the entire Auschwitz legend, through which literally millions of unsuspecting tourists have tramped — is a post-war fabrication from start to finish.

Anyone who had any doubts about can do themselves a favor and consult even the Holocaust Storytellers’ own accounts.

Take as one example a leading Holocaustian Robert van Pelt, who wrote as follows in his book The Case for Auschwitz: Evidence from the Irving Trial as follows:

“With its chimney and its gas chamber, the crematorium functions as the solemn conclusion for tours through the camp. Visitors are not told that crematorium they see is largely a post-war reconstruction.
“When Auschwitz was transformed into a museum after the war, the decision was taken to concentrate the history of the whole complex in one of its component parts. The infamous crematoria where the mass murders had taken place were ruins in Birkenau, two miles away. The committee felt that a crematorium was required at the end of the memorial journey, and crematorium I was reconstructed to speak of the history of the incinerators at Birkenau. This program of usurpation was rather detailed. A chimney, the ultimate symbol of Birkenau, was re-created; four hatched openings in the roof, as if for pouring Zyklon-B into the gas chamber below, were installed, and two of the three furnaces were rebuilt using original parts. There are no signs to explain these restitutions, they were not marked at the time, and the guides remain silent about it when they take visitors through this building that is presumed by the tourist to be the place where it happened.” - Robert van Pelt, The Case for Auschwitz: Evidence from the Irving Trial, (Indiana University Press, 2002, ISBN 978-0253340160), page 121.

So there you have it, from the horse’s mouth as it were.

Everything in the “gas chamber” at Auschwitz I: the ovens, the unattached chimney, and the “Zyklon-B insertion holes” in the ceiling are post-war additions. Everything.

Let’s not even argue about this any further.

The fake "Zyklon B insertion holes" on the roof of the alleged "gas chamber" at Auschwitz I: Built in 1947, the camp museum and official Holocaust storytellers  now admit.
The "recreated" ovens in the alleged "gas chamber" building at Auschwitz I: another post-war (1947) addition, now admitted to by the camp museum and all official Holocaust storytellers.
As a matter of interest, the Auschwitz Museum has been steadily forced to retract its position on this “gas chamber” over the years.

The official Auschwitz Camp Museum,website in 2006 admitted that the "chimney" and "two incinerators" had been added to the building after the war.
Up to 2006, the official Auschwitz Museum website claimed that this “gas chamber” was first used in the “autumn of 1941” and was used to “kill thousands of newly arrived Jews, as well as several groups of Soviet POWs.”

This continued, the 2006 Auschwitz Museum website continued, until July 1943, when the “incinerators, chimney, and some walls were dismantled and the holes in the roof, through which the SS men had poured Zyklon B, were sealed.

“After the war, the Museum carried out a partial reconstruction. The chimney and two incinerators were rebuilt using original components, as were several openings in the gas chamber roof.”

So in fact, the official Auschwitz Museum admitted as early as 2006 that the “gas chamber” had been rebuilt, although they still continued to claim that it had actually been a gas chamber.

The growth of the internet served to sabotage these claims, and by 2012, the Auschwitz Museum had updated its website description of the Auschwitz I “gas chamber” as follows:

Gas Chamger[sic] and Crematory I.
Soon after taking this picture the crematory chimney was recreated, one door was removed and the bricked window was uncovered. It was done to recreate the crematory exterior look.”
In 2012, the Auschwitz Camp Museum website admitted even more post-war "reconstructions" to the alleged "gas chamber" at Auschwitz I.

Once again, the official Auschwitz Museum website admitted that the building had been “recreated” and although they still called it a “gas chamber” they were far less forthcoming about the details and date of operation as they had been in 2006.

In 2015, the Auschwitz Museum website had once again “updated” their page on Auschwitz I to completely remove any reference to a “gas chamber,” although separate documentation they put out still claims that it was used as an “experimental gas chamber.”

So, although

- The Holocaust Storytellers freely admit that the “chimney, ovens, Zyklon B holes in the roof, and doors” were all built in 1947; and

- The problems involved in using this room as a “gas chamber” are obvious to anyone with a modicum of logic — for example, it is located right in front of the main entrance, the camp hospital (!), and in full view of the main road and the passing locals;

 . . . the Holocaust Storytellers still insist that it was used as a “gas chamber” . . . One has to wonder just how stupid they think people are to believe their nonsense.

Friday, September 4, 2015

The Six Million: Fact or Fiction

This work is without doubt the single most important revisionist overview of the legend of the “Six Million” Holocaust ever yet published.

Just some of the amazing revelations in this book include:

- How Zionists and Nazis cooperated before the war on writing Germany’s racial laws—and in the setting up of Jewish settlements in Palestine;

- How Zionists offered to take up arms for Nazi Germany against Britain during World War II;

- How Nazi policy was first aimed at encouraging Jews to emigrate, and then after the war broke out, to evacuating them east of the Urals;

- How official German records shows that there were 4.5 million Jews under Nazi control, and of that number, 4.3 million lodged claims as “Holocaust victims” after the war;

- How the Soviet Union used torture to produce the lion’s share of “confessions” extracted from Germans to support the “extermination” allegations;

- How the Jewish lead prosecutor in the “Einsatzgruppen” trials publicly admitted to having witnessed torture and personally used death threats to extract “confessions”;

- Exactly what Adolf Eichmann Confessed to—and what he did not;

- The shocking lies and distortions contained in the two John Demjanjuk trials;

- How the Auschwitz Camp Museum has formally admitted that the “gas chamber” it has shown to millions of tourists is actually a fake;

- How original German architect plans of Auschwitz show no “gas chambers”;

- How forensic chemical examination of Auschwitz has disproved the use of Zyklon-B in the so-called “ruined gas chambers”;

- How official Israeli and Polish university archaeological digs at Belzec and Sobibór have failed to find any evidence of “gas chambers”; and of how a similar dig at Chelmno directly contradicted “eyewitness” testimony;

- How the “gas chambers” at Majdanek have glass windows, baths, and real showers for the alleged “victims”;

- How the “carbon monoxide” gas bottles on display at Majdanek, still connected to a “gas chamber,” are in fact engraved and marked as “carbon dioxide!”;

- Details of the “Star of David gas chamber tile” hoax at the 2013 Treblinka archaeological dig;

- How a delousing chamber at Dachau has been misrepresented as a homicidal gas chamber;

- How German POWs were forced to alter a shower room at Sachenhausen to support a Soviet show trial—but that the forgery was so crude and embarrassing that the Communists knocked down the building in 1952.

- The Bergen-Belsen camp is also reviewed, along with an explanation of the typhus epidemic which swept the camp in the last months of the war and created the horror images of emaciated dead bodies now associated with “the Holocaust.”

This new version also deals with the “eyewitness survivor” memoirs and their outright lies and forgery, starting with a superbly illustrated expose of the faked memoirs of “Nazi hunter” Simon Wiesenthal and many others.

Finally, the last section discusses the all-important question of how and why the Holocaust storytellers have gone through so much trouble to make up the incredible story of the “Six Million.”




Section 1: Nazi Anti-Semitism and Jewish Emigration from Greater Germany 1933–1940

Section 2: Zionist and Nazi Collaboration on the 1935 Nuremberg Laws

Section 3: “A Nazi Travels to Palestine”—How the SS Supported the Zionist Colonization of Palestine

Section 4: Nazi Financial Assistance to Zionism: the “Haavara” Transfer Agreement

Section 5: The Jewish Declaration of War against Germany and the Organized Boycott of German Goods

Section 6: The Truth about Kristallnacht

Section 7: The Creation of the Concentration Camps

Section 8: Zionists Offered to Fight for the Nazis against the British


Section 9: There Were 4.5 Million Jews under Nazi Control

Section 10: 4.3 Million Postwar “Holocaust Claims” against German Government

Section 11: Yad Vashem’s “Victim List” Compiled on Hearsay

Section 12: Dieter Wisliceny and Wilhelm Höttl—The Spurious Origin of the “Six Million” Number

Section 13: Jewish Holocaust Scholar Raul Hilberg Reduces Total Death Toll to 2.8 Million—but Media Still use the “Six Million Dead” Figure

Section 14: Auschwitz “Death Toll” Officially Reduced by 2.5 Million—but Media Still use the “Six Million Dead” Figure

Section 15: The Shrinking Number of Dead at Auschwitz: From 9 Million to 73,000

Section 16: The Korherr Report


Section 17: The Outrageous Lies and Distortions of the “Kurt Gerstein Statement”

Section 18: Jewish Scholars and Yad Vashem Forced to Deny “Soap,” “Lampshades” Horror Stories

Section 19: What Was Really Said at the Wannsee Conference

Section 20: What the “Final Solution” Actually Meant: Deportation to the East

Section 21: Hitler’s 1939 Reichstag “Threat to the Jews” Speech

Section 22: What Hitler Said about the “Extermination” Rumors

Section 23: Himmler’s 1943 Posen Speech and the Meaning of “Ausrotten”

Section 24: Himmler’s Personal Correspondence Never Mentions “Extermination” Claims

Section 25: The Bad Arolsen “International Tracing Service” Archives Provides No Evidence of any Mass Murder Program


Section 26: The Legally-Flawed Nuremberg “War Crimes Trials” Did Not “Prove” the Holocaust

Section 27: The Katyn Massacre—How the Soviets Tortured Nazis to “Obtain Confessions”

Section 28: Official “Holocaust” Journal Admits Soviet Torture used to Obtain Nazi “Confessions”


Section 29: Anti-Partisan Warfare—The Real Purpose of the Einsatzgruppen (“Task Forces”)

Section 30: Benjamin Ferencz, Jewish Chief Prosecutor at the Einsatzgruppen Trials,  Admits to Using Forced Confessions and Death Threats

Section 31: The Einsatzgruppen Ereignismeldungen (“Event Reports”)

Section 32: The Babi Yar Massacre in Kiev: Wartime Aerial Photography Exposes the Lie

Section 33: The “Confession”—and Retraction—of Einsatzgruppen Commander Otto  Ohlendorf

Section 34: The Wildly Varying Numbers of Einsatzgruppen “Victims”

Section 35: The Oswald Pohl “Confessions”—Textbook Example of the Nuremberg Miscarriage of Justice

Section 36: The Perjured Testimony of Erich von dem Bach-Zelewski


Section 37: Eichmann Only Admitted Deporting Jews, Never Murdering Them

Section 38: Eichmann’s Doctored “Memoirs”


Section 39: John Demjanjuk—Acquitted in Israel!

Section 40: “Survivor” Testimony Identifies Demjanjuk—But Israeli Supreme Court Dismisses them as Liars

Section 41: German Court Ignores Israeli Decision


Section 42: Why Would Anyone “Confess?”

Section 43: The Suchomel “Confession” in Claude Lanzmann’s “Shoah” Movie


Section 44: The Distribution of the Concentration Camps


Section 45: Auschwitz Founded as a POW Camp for Polish Soldiers in 1940

Section 46: Auschwitz “Gas Chamber” Shown to Tourists Is Officially Admitted to be Fake

Section 47: Auschwitz Museum Finally Admits that “Gas Chamber” Was Built After the War

Section 48: Auschwitz II: Architect’s Plans Show No “Gas Chambers”

Section 49: Real Showers in Auschwitz and the “Gas through the Shower-head” Legend

Section 50: Steam Disinfection Stations for Prisoner Clothing as Part of the Anti-Typhus Measures

Section 51: Delousing Chambers for Clothing Used Zyklon-B in All Camps

Section 52: The Real Auschwitz Gas Chambers—The “Kanada I” Delousing Chambers Which Used Zyklon-B

Section 53: Photographs of Auschwitz’s Kanada I and Its Clothing Delousing Installation Gas Chamber in Action

Section 54: Forensic Investigation of “Gas Chamber” Ruins Reveals No Evidence of Gassings

Section 55: The Rudolf Report Confirms the Lack of Forensic Evidence

Section 56: The Auschwitz “Gas Chambers” Change Location

Section 57: Auschwitz’s Real Purpose: A Massive Labor Camp

Section 58: Photographs of Auschwitz Inmates Belie Mass Gassing Allegations

Section 59: The Rudolf Höss Memoirs

Section 60: The Auschwitz Swimming Pool

Section 61: The Frankfurt Auschwitz Trial of 1963


Section 62: Details Unknown for Decades

Section 63: The Höfle Telegram

Section 64: Problems with “Gassing by Diesel”

Section 65: The Purpose of the Reinhard Camps


Section 66: Chelmno—“Operational” for Eighteen Months

Section 67: Yad Vashem’s Gas Van That Wasn’t

Section 68: Walter Rauff and the “Gas Van” Story

Section 69: Forensic Digs Contradict “Official History” by Finding “Crematoria” in Chelmno

Section 70: The Chelmno Trials


Section 71: The Belzec Camp—Given Little Prominence Because of Unbelievable Allegations

Section 72: Belzec’s Incredible Execution Methods: Electrocution and Drowning in Excrement

Section 73: The Belzec Trial

Section 74: Forensic Digs at Belzec Contradict “Official” History and Fail to Find “Gas Chambers”


Section 75: Sobibór—A Temporary Camp Which Only Existed for 15 Months

Section 76: Chlorine and Electricity: “Survivors” Claim Bizarre Execution Methods in Sobibór

Section 77: Yitzhak Arad’s Contradictory Official History of Sobibór

Section 78: Official Documents Show Sobibór’s True Function

Section 79: The Sobibór Trials

Section 80: Archaeological Digs Fail To Find Sobibór “Gas Chamber”

Section 81: 2014 Archaeological Dig Contradicts Earlier “Gas Chamber” Claims


Section 82: Treblinka— Another Temporary Camp Which Only Existed for 15 Months

Section 83: Treblinka I and II—Labor Camp and Transit Area

Section 84: The Famous “Black Book of Polish Jewry” Claims Execution by “Steam” in Treblinka

Section 85: “Survivors” Claim Execution by “Vacuum Chambers”

Section 86: First 1999 Forensic Examination of Treblinka Site Reveals No Mass Graves

Section 87: US National Archive Aerial Photography of Treblinka Shows No Sign of “Extermination Camp”

Section 88: The 2010 Second Forensic Analysis of Treblinka Reveals No “Mass Graves”

Section 89: The 2013 Third Forensic Analysis of Treblinka and the “Star of David Gas Chamber Tiles” Hoax

Section 90: The “Evidence” of “Treblinka Guard” Paval Leleko

Section 91: The Franz Stangl Trial and His “Memoirs”


Section 92: Majdanek, Lublin—Originally Built as POW Camp for Soviet Army Prisoners

Section 93: First Majdanek Soviet Show Trial, November 1944

Section 94: Number of Madjanek “Victims” Varies Wildly from 1.7 Million to 79,000

Section 95: “Gas Chamber” Added to Postwar Rebuilt Madjanek Crematorium Building

Section 96: The Impossibility of the Majdanek “Gas Chambers”

Section 97: Majdanek’s Real Showers for “Gassing Victims”

Section 98: Majdanek’s “Gas Bottles” on Display are Carbon Dioxide, Not Carbon Monoxide

Section 99: The Anomalies of Majdanek’s Second and Third “Gas Chambers”

Section 100: The Plain Glass Window in Majdanek’s Fourth “Gas Chamber”

Section 101: The Operation “Harvest Festival” Hoax

Section 102: The Mußfeldt “Confession”

Section 103: The Second Madjanek Trial of 1975


Section 104: Dachau and Its Mysterious “Gas Chamber”

Section 105: The Real Dachau Gas Chambers—Delousing Cubicles

Section 106: Dachau Casualty Figures Officially “Reduced” from 238,000 to 20,000


Section 107: Sachsenhausen: Gas Chamber Built in November 1945, Knocked Down in 1952


Section 108: Typhus Deaths—Origin of Horror Images in Bergen-Belsen—No Gas Chambers


Section 109: Simon Wiesenthal’s Faked “Holocaust Memoirs”

Section 110: The Diary of Anne Frank—Father Admits “Transcribing” to “Explain” Ball Point Pen Use

Section 111: Rudolf Vrba’s “I Cannot Forgive”

Section 112: Olga Lengyel’s “Five Chimneys”

Section 113: Kitty Hart’s “Return to Auschwitz”

Section 114: Martin Gray’s “For Those I Loved”

Section 115: Jean Francis Steiner’s “Treblinka”

Section 116: Miklos Nyiszli’s “Auschwitz: A Doctor’s Eyewitness Account”

Section 117: Filip Müller’s “Eyewitness Auschwitz: Three Years in the Gas Chambers”

Section 118: Truthful Survivor Books Not Given Prominence

Section 119: Paul Rassinier—The Holocaust Victim Who Argued Against the “Gas Chambers”

Section 120: Martin Gilbert’s “Auschwitz and the Allies”


Section 121: Bears and Eagles in Cages Eating Jews; Jewish “Soap Burial” in Atlanta, USA; Sausages Made out of Jews; Mummified Thumbs as Light Switches; “Pedal-driven Brain-bashing Machines”—And More, All in Nuremberg Court as “Evidence.”


Section 122: The “Holocaust”—What Actually Happened

Section 123: Why Was the Holocaust Story Invented?

Appendix 1: Alois Brunner and the “I Would Do It All Again” Lie

Appendix 2: Deceit, Lies and Swindles: The Psychology behind “Holocaust Survivor Testimonies”

Appendix 3: The Ongoing “Survivor” Financial Swindles

Appendix 4: The Oskar Groening “I Saw the Gas Chambers” Story

Appendix 5: Auschwitz—Reality versus the Claims