a) - How to use myths properly as stages in the humanization of
Man. Every people, even before the discovery of writing, has
elaborated oral traditions that are sometimes based on real events
but whose common point is to give a justification - often poetic - to
its origins, its social organization, its cultural practices, its
leaders' source of power or the community's projects for the
future.
These great myths mark the epic of the dawn of humanity, expressing,
through the tale of the exploits of a god or a legendary ancestor,
the major moments during which man grew aware of his powers and his
duties, of his vocation to surpass his present condition by way of
his experience or his hopes, projecting himself into an ultimate
future in which all his dreams of happiness and "salvation" would be
accomplished.
To mention but a few examples stemming from various continents, the
Ramayanah of India gives us, through the tale of the trials and
victories of its hero, Rama, and his wife,Sita, the highest image of
man and woman, their sense of honor, of fidelity to the demands of a
spotless life. The very name of the hero, Rama, is close to that of
God: Ram. The power of the myth is such - far beyond the tale - that
it provided inspiration for thousands of years in the lives of
different peoples, giving them a grandiose vision of man on the
horizon of their own existence: centuries after the version of
Valkimi, which gathered together in writing the finest oral
traditions, the poet Tulsidas rewrote the Ramayanah in the XVth
century, in accordance with a more profound mystic vision of the
never-ending poem of human ascent. When Gandhi was dying, as he
blessed his assassin, the last word upon his lips was the name of
Ram. The same holds true of the Mahabaratha, which culminates in the
Bhagavah Gitah, in which Prince Arjunah asks himself in the midst of
battle the ultimate question as to the meaning of life and its
struggles. In another civilization, in other words within another
concept of the relationship between man and nature, of man with other
men and of man with God, there was the Iliad; all the popular oral
traditions of which it is made up were set in writing by Homer, as
Valkimi had done for the Ramayanah. The Iliad gave the highest
possible image that could be given of man, as for example when Hector
walked to a predestined death with inflexible resolve for the
salvation of his people.
The characters in the Prometheus of Aeschylus were to become, two
thousand years later in the XIXth century, with Shelley's "Prometheus
Unbound", the eternal symbol of the greatness of struggles for
freedom, or Antigone's appeal to the "unwritten laws" whose echo has
continued to ring in the heads and hearts of all those who wish to
"live high", beyond the written word, the powers and the laws.
The great epics of initiation from Africa, such as those of the
Kaydarah, oral traditions set in writing by Hampate Ba, the African
Homer or Valmiki were, like the anonymous authors of the Exodus of
the Aztec tribes, like Goethe who spent a lifetime nurturing his
"Faust", myth of all XIXth century Europe's desires, like Dostoyevski
creating in his novel, "The Idiot", a new version of Jesus with his
Prince Mishkin, who breaks with all the idols of modern life, as did
the prophet-knight, Don Quixote, who unflaggingly attacked all the
institutions of a century ruled by money, where fearless and
blameless generosity could only end in failure and ridicule.
The above are only a few examples, selected at random, of the "Legend
of the Centuries", as Victor Hugo called the poems with which he too
aroused the conscience of his fellow-men.
But, taken as a whole, the body of these epics makes up the genuine
"Bible" of humanity, the history of man's greatness, asserting itself
even through his abortive attempts to go beyond established order and
customs. What we call "History" is written by the winners, by the
masters of empires, by generals who devastate men's lands, by the
financiers who loot the world's wealth and subjugate the genius of
great scientific and technical inventors, putting it at the service
of their economic or military domination.
Traces have remained of those masters, inscribed on stone monuments,
in fortresses, in triumphal arches, in palaces, in texts praising
their glory, in the images carved on stone such as those of Karnak,
celebrating the ferocious deeds of Ramses, or in the memoirs of the
chronicler, Gilbert de Nogent, which are an apologia of the crusades,
or in the writings of greedy conquerors like Julius Caesar, with his
"Gallic Wars", or Napoleon, who boasted of his exploits through the
complacent pen of Las Cases in the "Memorial of Saint Helena", though
all he achieved was to leave France smaller than he had found it.
This kind of history is not above pressing myths into its service and
chaining them to its chariots of victory.
b) - The myth disguised as history and its political use A reading of
this work on "The founding myths of the policy of Israel" must not
engender any religious or political confusion.
Criticism of the Zionist interpretation of the Torah and of the
"historical books" (especially those of Joshua, Samuel and Kings) in
no way implies an underestimation of the Bible or what it too has
revealed of man's human and divine epic. Abraham's sacrifice is the
eternal model of how a man can go beyond temporary morality and the
fragile logic on which it is based, in the name of unconditional
values that make morality a relative value. In the same way, the
Exodus remains a symbol of a people's quest for freedom, wresting
itself from bondage in its quest for God and the Spirit.
What we reject is Zionism's tribalistic and nationalistic
interpretation of those texts, the reduction of a great idea - an
Alliance between God and all of mankind, His presence within each
human being - to the most nefarious concept of all: that of a
"chosen" people, elected by a partial god, a notion which justifies
in advance every kind of domination, colonization and massacre.
This work is based entirely on factual sources; its aim is not to
preach the destruction of the State of lsrael, but simply to
desacralize the underlying concept: the land in question was never
promised but conquered, just like that of France, Germany or the
United States, according to the prevailing balance of power at the
time.
The object is not to wage war on anyone or to rewrite history
indefinitely, but simply to demand the application for all concerned
of an international law that will not perpetrate the law of the
jungle.
In the case of the Middle East, we only ask for the application
(without questioning their original legitimacy) of the decisions
taken by the United Nations after World War II, in particular
resolution 242, which excluded the erosion of the frontiers of
neighboring countries and the illegal appropriation of their waters,
as well as the implantation in illegally occupied zones of colonies
protected by the Israeli army and settlers' guns. It is the
perpetration de facto of the occupation which makes a genuine peace
impossible, as it prevents a lasting peaceful cohabitation between
two equal and independent peoples; this peace would be symbolized by
the common respect of Jerusalem, without claims to exclusive
possession; the holy city would be a meeting-place for the three
religions derived from Abraham.
In the same way, the critique of the myth of the "Holocaust" is
not a macabre body-count of the number of victims. If only one person
had ever been persecuted for his faith alone or for his ethnic
origins, this would still be a crime against all mankind.
But the political exploitation by a nation, which did not exist at
the time the crimes were committed, of arbitrarily exaggerated
figures, used to try and prove that the suffering of some far
surpassed that of others, and the sacred nature given the event by
the very use of a religious term like "Holocaust", tend to make us
forget other, even more ferocious genocides such as the massacre of
the American Indians and the enslavement of countless Africans, as
well as many other mass murders by bloody dictatorships.
The Nuremberg trial by the winners of World War II satisfied
everyone, making the Americans forget their Indian manhunts, and
letting Stalin forget his purges, while the English and the French
could blot out the memory of their imperialist crimes.
The biggest winners were the Zionists, who posed as the sole victims
of the war and created the State of Israel in the process; despite
the 50 million people killed in the war, the Zionists made themselves
out to be almost the only ones to have suffered at Hitler's hands,
and thus placed themselves above and beyond the law in order to
legalize all their internal and external exactions.
It is not my intention to accuse of bad faith the millions of
honest people who have believed in these deceitful myths propagated
by all the media; they are justly horrified by the gas chambers, or
else convinced by a literal reading of the Bible which totally
ignores a modern reading of that text, believing in the god-given
truth of the divine promises to a "chosen people". For over a
thousand years (from the Vth century A.D. to the Renaissance, pious
Christians believed that Constantine had "donated" the Papal estates
to the Roman pontiff. That deceit lasted a whole millennium. Like
thousands of other people in good faith, my own grandmother saw with
her very eyes a bleeding cross rise up in the sky on the night of
August the 2nd, 1914, and she believed in her vision until her
death.
The sole purpose of this book is to provide the reader with elements
that will enable him to judge the bloody misdeeds engendered by a
Zionist mythology which, with the unconditional support of the United
States, has already engendered five wars and poses a constant threat
to world peace and unity, due to the influence exerted by its lobby
on the United States and, through that, on world opinion.
c) The forgers and critical history Finally, it was essential for us
- by giving the source and the proof of what we assert even for the
smallest item of information to separate ourselves radically from all
the forgeries destined to throw discredit on a religion or a
community, and to thus draw hatred and persecution upon it. The model
of this type of forgery is the infamous "Protocol of the Elders of
Zion", which I spoke of in my book: "Palestine, land of divine
messages (p.206 to 214), demonstrating how it was fabricated, basing
myself upon Henri Rollin's irrefutable demonstration, "L'Apocalypse
de notre temps" (published by Gallimard in 1939). This work was
destroyed by Hitler in 1940 because it annihilated one of the Nazis'
favorite instruments of anti-Jewish propaganda.
Henri Rollin exhumed one of the two plagiaries from which the forgery
was fabricated by Von Plehven the Russian Minister of the Interior,
at the beginning of the century.
1° - A pamphlet written in France in 1864 by Maurice Joly
against Napoleon III: « Dialogue in Hell between Montesquieu and
Machiavel », of which he reproduced, paragraph by paragraph, all
the criticisms of the Emperor's dictatorship, which can be applied to
any policy of domination.
2° - An essay composed by a Russian emigré, Ilya Tsion,
against Russia's Minister of Finance, Count de Witte, entitled:
« Where Mr. Witte's dictatorship is leading Russia »
(1895), which was already a plagiarism of a pre-1789 lampoon against
Monsieur de Calonne, and which can be applied to all the relations
between a Minister of Finance and the international banks. In this
particular case, the attack was directed by Von Plehve against de
Witte, whom he hated.
Unfortunately, this ignoble police forgery has widely been used
(especially in certain Arab countries, that I have long blamed for
doing so). It gave the Zionists and the Israelis an excuse to
denounce any criticism of their policy in the Middle East and of
their pressure groups throughout the world, assimilating it to the
work of forgers.
This is why, at the risk of tiring the reader who is eager to reach
conclusions without going through the wearisome labor of reading
through the evidence, we have not put forward a single argument
without giving the sources.
Let us sum up what critical history can say without being
sacralized by myths used to serve a policy.
Hitler based himself on his racist ideology from the first political
manifestations to take the Jews as a target after Communism, whose
destruction was his principal mission ( a fact which gained him the
indulgence of the "Western democracies" for a long time, leading to
his rearmament by industrialists as well as betrayal of populations
by the West, as at Munich). Hitler's first pretexts for fighting the
Jews were contradictory: on the one hand, he claimed that the October
Revolution was the work of Jews who threatened to set up Communism in
Europe, and he developed the theme of "Judeo-Bolshevism" as the
incarnation of the world Communist movement; at the same time, he
denounced the Jews as the incarnation of world capitalism.
The program of the National-Socialist Party proclaimed from the start
that « a Jew cannot be a compatriot. »
Source: P.S. 1708.
Hitler thus excluded from Germany some of its most outstanding
figures in the realm of culture, music and science, because they were
of Jewish descent; he deliberately ignored the distinction between
religion and race. Starting from this monstrous exclusion, which
disowned the poet Heine as well as the great Einstein, Hitler defined
what he called his "ultimate goal" ("letztes Ziel") in a letter to
his friend Gemlich as early as 1919: "the removal of the Jews". This
"ultimate goal" would remain a constant until his death, as would the
struggle against "Bolshevism", which led to his defeat.
This "removal of the Jews", one of the leitmotifs of his policy, was
to take various forms according to the vicissitudes of his career. As
soon as he came to power, his Minister of the Economy signed an
agreement with the Jewish (Zionist) Agency, on August 28th 1933. This
agreement facilitated the "transfer" ("Haavara" in Hebrew) of German
Jews to Palestine.
Source: Broszat, Jacobsen, Krausnick: "Anatomie des SS staates",
Munich 1982. vol.II,p.263.
Two years later, the Nuremberg laws of September 15th 1935 turned
into official legislation article 4 and 5 of the Party program
formulated at Munich on February 24th 1920. These laws concerned
citizenship of the Reich and the "defense of the blood" as the
"Catholic kings" of Spain had done in the XVIth century for the sake
of "purity of the blood" (limpieza del sangre"), against Jews and the
Moors. Both Hitler and the Spaniards were only copying the example of
Ezra and Nehemiah in the Bible. These laws made it possible to
exclude the Jews from the Civil Service and from prominent positions
in private business. They made intermarriage illegal and gave to the
Jews the status of foreigners.
Discrimination was to become more fierce still in 1938, with the
"Crystal night" set off on a pretext.
On November 7th 1938, a young Jew called Grynspan assassinated Von
Rath, an embassy councillor in Paris.
The event,clamored by the Nazi press, sparked off a manhunt of Jews
in the night of the 9th-10th November, with the looting of their
shops, the ransacking of their wares and the breakage of their
shop-windows (from whence the name "Crystal night").
The end result was appalling : « Looting and destruction of 815
shops, 171 houses, 276 synagogues, 14 other monuments of the Jewish
community, arrest of 20,000 Jews, 7 Aryans, 3 foreigners, 36 dead and
36 injured. » Source: Report by Heydrich to Goering dated
November 11th 1938, Nur. T. IX. p.554. Document recognized as
authentic by Goering and all the accused against which it was
produced."
It was not a passionate reaction on the part of the German people but
a pogrom organized by the Nazi party. This is borne out by the report
of the Supreme judge of the National-Socialist party, Walter Buch,
who was put in charge of the investigation that followed (Doc. P.S.
3063 dated February 13th 1939, Nur. T. XXXII,pp.29) who was to judge
the 174 Party members arrested on November 11th by order of Heydrich
for having organized the pogrom and taken part in it.
But the 174 included only minor Party cadres.
The government (apart from Goebbels, who approved of the crime), and
even the Fürher himself, disowned the pogrom. But this does not
exclude the theory of directives "from above", as would suggest the
fact that Goering immediately passed three decrees aggravating the
discrimination. - the first concerned the German Jews, who were given
a collective fine of one billion marks (P.S. 1412 Reichsgesetzblatt
1938, part I, page 1579); - the second excluded the Jews from German
economic life (P.S. 2875 Reichsgesetzblatt 1938, part I, page 1580);
- the final one decided that the insurance companies would pay the
State and not the insured the damage caused to his property on the
Crystal night (P.S. 2694 Reichsgesetzbatt 1938, part I, page
1581).
1 - A striking parallel can be drawn between the pretexts and methods
used to persecute the Jews in Germany and the Arabs in Palestine: in
1982, an attempt was made on the life of an Israeli diplomat in
London. The Israeli leaders instantly attributed it to the PLO ,
invaded the Lebanon to destroy the PLO bases, resulting in the death
of 20,000 people. Begin and Ariel Sharon, like Goebbels in the past,
had their "crystal night", with a much higher number of innocent
victims.
The difference is in the pretext for setting off an invasion of
Lebanon planned by Israeli leaders a long time in advance. On May
21st 1948, Ben Gurion wrote in his "Diary":
« The Achilles' heel of the coalition...is Lebanon. Muslim
supremacy in that country is artificial and could easily be reversed;
a Christian state must be set up in that country. Its southern
frontier would be the Litani river. »
Source: Michael Ben Zohar: "Ben Gurion ; le prophète
armé". p. 139.
General Moshe Dayan set out the method on June 16th 1955: « All
that remains to be found is an officer, even a simple captain. We
must win him to our cause, buy him, so that he will declare himself
to be the savior of the Maronite population. Then, the Israeli army
would enter Lebanon, would occupy the territories where a Christian
regime allied to Israel would be established, and everything would
work like clockwork. The Southern part of the Lebanon would be
completely annexed to Israel. »
Source: "Diary" of the ex-Prime Minister of Israel, Moshe Sharett,
published in Hebrew in 1979
What makes the crime of Lebanon even more odious by its very
principle (beyond the massacres perpetrated under Sharon's very eyes
and prepared thanks to him) is that the pretext for them could not be
imputed to the PLO.
Margaret Thatcher brought the proof before the House of Commons that
the crime had been the deed of a declared enemy of the PLO.
Immediately after the arrest of the criminals and the police
investigation, she declared: « On the list of personalities
marked out for assassination, found on the authors of the attempt,
figured the name of the head of the PLO in London...This would tend
to prove that the attackers did not, as Israel has claimed, have the
PLO support... I do not believe that the Israeli attack on Lebanon
was an act of reprisal consecutive to this attack: the Israelis used
it as a pretext to reopen hostilities. »
Source: International Herald Tribune, June 8th 1982.
This denial of Israeli propaganda went almost unnoticed in France,
while it destroyed the legend of "legitimate defence" which had
served as a pretext for this new aggression.
For this war, like all the aggressions and extortions of the State of
Israel, was wholly in keeping with the Zionist doctrine, just as the
"Crystal night" was wholly in keeping with the internal logic of
Hitlerian racism.
The situation of the Jews after the "Crystal night" became more and
more dramatic. The "Western democracies" met at the Evian Conference
in 1938, an assembly of 33 countries (the Soviet Union and
Czechoslovakia were not represented; Hungary, Romania and Poland were
only allowed observers to ask to be rid of their own Jews).
President Roosevelt set an example of selfishness when he declared at
the "Warm Springs" press conference that « no revision or
increase in immigration quotas to the United States was forecast.
»
Source: Mazor: "Il y a trente ans, la Conférence d'Evian"
in"le monde Juif", April-June 1968, N° 50; p.23 and 25.
At Evian, no-one was concerned to « take charge of the
persecuted ones, or even to be seriously concerned by their fate
»
Source: "Dix leçons sur le Nazisme", edited by Alfres
Grosser. Paris 1976,p.216.
In March 1943, Goebbels could still declare ironically : « What
will be the solution to the Jewish question ? Will a Jewish State be
created one day in one territory or another ? We shall know later.
But it is curious to note that those countries whose public opinion
is in favor of the Jews still refuse to take them in. »
Source: Leon Poliakov. "Bréviaire de la haine"
p.41.
After the defeat of Poland, another temporary solution to the Jewish
question seemed possible: on September 21st, Heydrich, recalling the
"ultimate goal" (Endziel) ordered the heads of security to create a
sort of "Jewish reserve" at the new frontier with the USSR.
Source: Leon Poliakov. Op. Cit. p.41.
The defeat of France opened new perspectives to the Nazis. One could
use the French colonial empire for the "final solution" of the Jewish
question. The idea of expelling all the Jews to Madagascar had
cropped up at the time of the Armistice in June 1940.
As early as May 1940, Himmler wrote in a note entitled « A few
thoughts concerning the treatment of foreigners in the East »:
« I hope to see the notion of Jew definitively eradicated
through the evacuation of all the Jews towards Africa or in a colony.
»
Source: V.f.Z. 1957.p.197.
On June 24th 1940, Heydrich wrote to Ribbentrop, the Minister of
Foreign Affairs, that one could henceforth glimpse "a final
territorial solution". ("eine territoriale Endlosung") of the Jewish
problem.
Source: Gerald Fleming: "Hitler und die Endlosung" Wiesbaden
Munich. 1982.p.56.
From that time on, the "Madagascar project" was elaborated
technically-speaking: on July 3rd 1940, Franz Rademaker, who was in
charge of Jewish affairs at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs,
elaborated a report which said: « Imminent victory gives Germany
the possibility and, in my opinion, also the duty to resolve the
Jewish question in Europe. The desirable solution is: all Jews out of
Europe ("Alles Juden aus Europa"). Referat D III proposes as a
solution to the Jewish question: in the peace treaty, France must
make the island of Madagascar available for the solution of the
Jewish question and must transfer and compensate the 25,000 French
residents. The island will be placed under German mandate. »
Source: N.G. 2586 -B. See: "Documents on German Foreign Policy
(1918-1945)" Series D Vol.X.London,1957.p. 11-113.
On July 25th 1940, Hans Frank, governor of Poland, confirmed that the
Fürher agreed to this evacuation, but that overseas transport on
that scale would not be feasible for as long as the British hold the
keys to the seas.
Source: P.S. 22.23. I M G vol. XXIX, p. 405.
A temporary replacement solution had to be found. It is said in the
"minutes of the meeting"(cf s): « It is the SS Reichfürher
and the head of the German police who will be responsible for the
overall measures required for the final solution (Endlosung der
Judensfrage), without regards for the geographical limits. »
Source: N.G.2586 G.
Henceforth, the Jewish question was posed on the European scale, in
those countries occupied by the Nazis. The Madagascar project was
temporarily postponed; « The war against the Soviet Union has
placed new territories at our disposal for the final solution (fur
die Endlosung). Consequently, the Fürher has decided to expel
the Jews not to Madagascar but towards the East. »
Source: N.G. 5570.
Indeed, the Fürher had declared on January 2nd 1942: « The
Jews must leave Europe. The best thing is for them to go to Russia.
»
Source: Adolf Hitler: "Monologues" 1941-1944.Albrecht Krauss
Verlag. Hamburg 1980.p.241.
With the surging back of the German armies under the pressure of the
Soviet army, the solution to the "Jewish question" demanded "ruthless
severity". Source: H. Monneraey: "La persecution des juifs dans les
pays de l'Est." p.91-92.
In May 1944, Hitler gave orders for 200,000 Jews guarded by 10,000
Waffen SS to work be put to work in the armament factories or in the
concentration camps. Conditions were so dreadful that tens of
thousands died of typhus, leading to the multiplication of
crematorium ovens.
The deportees were then sent out on roads that they themselves had to
build in conditions of exhaustion and famine such that the majority
of them died by tens of thousands.
This was the martyrdom of the deported Jews and slaves of the
savagery of the Hitlerian masters, who treated them like slaves
deprived even of the human value of useful workers.
These crimes by Hitler cannot be underestimated, any more than the
untold suffering of the victims. That is why there is no need to add
to this horrendous picture the light of flames borrowed from Dante's
Inferno, or to attribute to them the theological and sacrificial
attributes of the "Holocaust" to describe such basic deeds of stark
inhumanity. The least emphatic history is, on its own, more
accusatory than the myth. And above all it does not reduce the
breadth of the true crime against humanity, which led to 50 million
deaths, to the dimensions of a pogrom towards only one category of
innocent victims, while millions died fighting to combat barbarity.
This historical evaluation, we must emphasize once again, is still
provisional. As for any critical history and any science, it is
revisable and will certainly be revised according to the the
discovery of new elements: tons of German archives were seized and
taken to the United States: they have not yet been completely
analyzed. Other archives in Russia, whose access had long been
forbidden to researchers, are starting to be opened.
A great deal of work therefore remains to be done, on condition myth
and history are not confused and conclusions not reached before
research, as a certain intellectual terrorism has tried to impose it
until now: "the canonization of the Nuremberg texts has proved
extremely fragile. History, like science, cannot use an untouchable a
priori as a point of departure.
Nuremberg had promulgated figures whose most important have proved to
be false: the "4 million" dead at Auschwitz have been reduced by
scientific research to "a little over a million", and even the
"authorities" have had to accept this revision and change the plaques
commemorating the crime. The dogma of the "six million", already
questioned by the most intransigent defenders of the genocide like
Reitlinger, who reached the figure of four and a half million in his
book ,"The Final Solution", is henceforth excluded by the entire
scientific community, even if it remains a theme of propaganda with
the media for schoolchildren and the general public.
If we challenge the figures regarding the number of Jewish victims,
it is not in a macabre or quibbling spirit, but to show how the
deliberate wish to perpetrate a lie has forced people to falsify
history systematically and arbitrarily.
Because they supposedly did not want the genuine martyrdom of the
Jews to seem "banal", the deaths of 17 million Russians and 9 million
Germans have been relegated to second place, and the real suffering
of the Jews was also given a "sacred" character (under the name of
"Holocaust") which was denied to the others.
To attain this objective, it was necessary to violate all the
elementary rules of justice and of the establishment of the
truth.
For example, the "final solution" had to mean extermination,
"genocide", whereas no text allows this interpretation, always
dealing with the expulsion of all the Jews from Europe, first to the
East and later to some African reservation. This in itself was
monstrous enough. To do this, all documents had to be falsified: the
word "transfer" translated by "extermination", in such a way that
this "method" of interpretation made it possible to make any text say
what it was supposed to say. What was a horrible massacre became a
"genocide". To quote only one example of this tendentious
manipulation of the texts: in his book, "Les crématoires
d'Auschwitz" (1993), Claude Pressac was so determined to add further
horrors to this fearful mortality that every time he encountered the
German word "Leichenkeller", "body chamber", in other words "morgue",
he translated it as "gas chamber" (example p.65), once again
introducing the notion of "coded language", explaining that Messing,
the killer, "did not have the guts to write that the "body chamber"
was a "gassing cave""(p.74)
The hypothesis of the "coded language" constantly used to make texts
say what one wants them to say has no foundation; first of all
because, as we have already shown (p....) Hitler and his accomplices
never tried to dissimulate their other crimes, proclaiming them
cynically in clear language, and secondly because the British had
developed to a very high degree the techniques and the apparatus used
for deciphering codes, having access to the messages, which would
have been numerous if there really had existed a technical
undertaking huge enough for the deliberate extermination of millions
of people.
In the same arbitrary way, when it was proven that, despite a large
number of "eyewitness accounts" concerning the existence of "gas
chambers", these had never existed on German soil, so people
continued to regard as unchallengeable the identical accounts on
their existence in the Eastern camps.
Finally, the refusal to discuss in a scientific and at the same
public way the technical appraisements by experts, and on the
contrary to answer them only by repression and silence, can only
serve to maintain doubt. There is no more effective indictment
against Hitlerism than the establishment of the historical truth.
It is to that truth we wanted to contribute with this work.