Origins and Development of Historical Revisionism False testimony portrayed as truth and the double standards of the anti “anti-Semitism” lobby Origins of Historical Revisionism 1. French Communist Paul Rassinier was interned at Buchenwald and several other concentration camps during WW2. He was the world's first Holocaust Revisionist. His works are now largely surpassed by the recent progress of modern WW2 Revisionism, however it is worth citing a phrase from his book Le drame des juifs européens, with particular reference to the unreliability of eyewitness testimony (Paris 1964, p. 79, https://www.amazon.fr/Paul-Rassinier-Drame-Juifs- europ%C3%A9ens/dp/B0014QCHQO): “Each time when I was told during the last fifteen years that there was a witness in the part of Europe not occupied by the Soviets who claimed to have experienced a gassing himself, I immediately travelled to him in order to listen to his testimony. But in every case it ended the same way: With my folder in my hands, I asked the witness a series of precise questions, to which he could respond only with quite obvious lies, so that he finally had to admit that he had not experienced it himself, but that he had related only the story of a good friend, who had died during his internment and whose honesty he could not question. That way I travelled thousands upon thousands of miles throughout all of Europe.” Development of Revisionism; scholarly critique of Revisionism; doubts increase regards the alleged use of Zyklon B in “gas chambers” for the mass extermination of Jews in Nazi Germany 2. In 1976 Arthur R Butz, Professor of Electrical Engineering at Northwestern University in Evanston, Chicago, published a book dealing with the Holocaust The Hoax of the Twentieth Century (https://www.waterstones.com/book/9781591480792). A year after publication, ADL Chicago representative Abbot A. Rosen stated (Pittsburg Press, Jan 26, 1977): 1 “We have known about it [Butz's book] for some time. But we didn't want to give it any publicity and help the sales. Now it is too late; it is out in the open and we have to face it squarely.” A few months later, there was an indirect reference to Butz's book by two Israeli scholars (Chicago Sun-Times, Oct. 25, 1977): “Bauer and Prof Moshe Davis agreed that there is a 'recession in guilt feeling' over the Holocaust, encouraged by fresh arguments that the reported extermination of six million Jews during World War II never took place […] 'You know, it is not difficult to fabricate history,' Davis added.” It is also worth noting that Butz mentions and likens official Holocaust historiography to the document known as The Donation of Constantine, a 9th century forgery, passed off as an original written during the 4th century, and exposed as a fraud during the 15th century. This document laid the foundation for the claim that Emperor Constantine bequeathed the Roman Empire to Christendom. The Reformation put an end to Rome’s power. 3. In 1979 inspired by Butz's book, Judge Wilhelm Stäglich (Hamburg, Germany), published The Auschwitz Myth (https://books.google.co.uk/books/about/The_Auschwitz_Myth.html? id=6xP6GwAACAAJ&redir_esc=y), for which he had his 1951 conferred University of Goettingen doctorate revoked in 1983. Towards war’s end Stäglich was stationed as an officer at Auschwitz, and thus the German authorities used this administrative tool against an authentic eyewitness with the aim of sending a clear message to German academics that matters Holocaust-Auschwitz-homicidal gassings are taboo – and it has worked to this day. 4. The search for the truth was also taken up by French scholar, Professor Robert Faurisson of L'université de Lyon. Following publication of a skeptical article by Prof Faurisson in Le Monde in 1978 regards the alleged Auschwitz homicidal gas chambers, 34 mainstream French historians responded in the same newspaper, Feb. 21, 1979: (http://aaargh.vho.org/fran/inst/doc/decla34.html) “One should not ask oneself how a mass murder was possible. It was technically possible because it happened. This is the inevitable starting point of any historical examination of this 2 subject. We simply want to recollect this truth: there is no debate about the existence of the gas chambers, and neither should one be permitted.” One of the historians who signed, Pierre Vidal-Naquet, later remarked on the above statement (L'histoire, June 1992): “We were certainly wrong, at least in form, even if the substance of our argument was correct.” (http://aaargh.vho.org/fran/arvs/mieuxfaire/PVNvictimes.html). 5. French journalist and distinguished opponent of Revisionism, Eric Conan, writing in L'Express, 1995, about the problem with Auschwitz (https://www.lexpress.fr/actualite/societe/la-memoire- du-mal_487340.html): “Another sensitive topic: What to do with falsifications left behind by the Communist administration? In the 1950s and 1960s several buildings which had disappeared or had been reallocated to other uses, were reconstructed with major errors and presented as authentic […] With the creation of the museum in 1948, Crematoria #1 was converted into its assumed [sic] original condition. Everything there is false: the dimensions of the gas chamber, the location of the doors, the openings for the introduction of Zyklon B, the furnaces which, according to the admission of some survivors, were newly rebuilt, the height of the chimney. […] For the moment, this remains as such and nothing is said to the visitors. That is too complicated. As for the future, we shall see.” 6. Conan's evaluation of the Auschwitz Crematorium #1 exhibit was confirmed in 1992 in video footage shot by Jewish-American activist David Cole. On camera, the Auschwitz Museum director, Dr Franciszek Piper, told Cole that the building had been significantly altered after the war (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2DYtbNMeSg) As recently as 2016, Cole wrote the following lines (Denial is Dead, Taki's Magazine, Sept 29 http://takimag.com/article/denial_is_dead_david_cole): “Ah, Auschwitz. Yes, here's where we still have a problem. […] there are genuine problems with what is commonly claimed to be part 3 [of the Holocaust] – that in 1943 Auschwitz-Birkenau was 'renovated' to become an ultra-super be-all end-all extermination facility. To me, the 3 evidence just isn't there, and the evidence that does exist calls that claim into question. [… Orthodox historians] backed themselves into a corner by putting Auschwitz, with its phony, postwar tourist-attraction 'gas chamber' and its complete lack of documentary evidence supporting a killing program, front and center as the heart of the Holocaust. They're in so deep at this point that they can't back off.” 7. The late German professor of history, Dr Werner Maser, wrote in 2004 (Fälschung, Dichtung und Wahrheit über Hitler und Stalin, Olzog, Düsseldorf 1988; p. 32; p 220; p 339 https://www.amazon.de/F%C3%A4lschung-Dichtung-Wahrheit-Hitler-Stalin/dp/3789281344): “To be sure, […] the extermination of the Jews is considered to be one of the best researched aspects of contemporary history […], but that is not the case. Indeed, whole regions remain as much terra incognita as ever, […]. 8. Jewish-American political scientist, Dr Norman G Finkelstein, published his work The Holocaust Industry: Reflections of the Exploitation of Jewish suffering (Verso, London/New York https://www.amazon.co.uk/Holocaust-Industry-Reflections-Exploitation- Suffering/dp/185984488X) in 2000 and which includes several statements in support of Revisionst arguments: “The tales of 'Holocaust survivors' – all concentration camp inmates, all heroes of the resistance – were a special source of wry amusement in my home. Long ago, John Stuart Mill recognised that truths not subject to continual challenge eventually 'cease to have the effect of truth by being exaggerated into falsehood.” (p. 7) “Invoking The Holocaust was therefore a ploy to delegitimise all criticism of Jews: such criticism could only spring from pathological hatred.” (p. 37) “Deploring the 'Holocaust lesson' of eternal Gentile hatred, Boas Evron observes that it 'is really tantamount to a deliberate breeding of paranoia... This mentality... condones in advance any inhuman treatment of non-Jews, for the prevailing mythology is that 'all people collaborated with the Nazis in the destruction of Jewry. 'hence everything is permissible to Jews in their 4 relationship to other peoples.' ”(p. 51) “ '[...] How come we have no decent quality control when it comes to evaluating Holocaust material for publication?' (quoting Prof Raul Hilberg, p. 60) “Given the nonsense churned out daily by the Holocaust industry, the wonder is that there are so few skeptics.” (p. 68). “Because survivors are now revered as secular saints, one doesn't dare question them. Preposterous statements pass without comment.” (p. 82) “The challenge today is to restore the Nazi holocaust as a rational subject of inquiry. Only then can we really learn from it.” (p. 150). 9. In 1990, US historian Dr Arno Mayer, Professor emeritus of Modern Jewish History at Princeton University, wrote (Why did the Heavens not Darken? Pantheon, New York 1988 (1990) p. 362, https://www.amazon.co.uk/Heavens-Darken-Verso-World- History/dp/184467777X/): “Sources for the study of the gas chambers are at once rare and unreliable.” 10. Long-considered to be the world's leading Holocaust expert, Dr Raul Hilberg, said in 1983 (Georges De Wan, The Holocaust in Perspective, Newsday, Long Island, New York, Feb. 23): “But what began in 1941 was a process of destruction [of the Jews] not planned in advance, not organised centrally by any agency. There was no blueprint and there was no budget for destruction measures. They [these measures] were taken step by step, one step at a time.