Free PDF

Author : Mattogno Carlo
Title : Auschwitz : The Case for Sanity A Historical and Technical Study of Jean-Claude Pressac’s “Criminal Traces” and Robert Jan van Pelt’s “Convergence of Evidence”
Year : 2010

Link download : Mattogno_Carlo_-_Auschwitz_The_Case_for_Sanity.zip

Editors’ Prologue. When faced with demands by Congressman Ron Paul to bring our (the U.S.’s) troops home from the various wars the United States are currently waging, Senator John McCain stated during a Republican Debate on CNN on Nov. 28, 2007:1 “I just want to also say that Congressman Paul, I have heard him now in many debates talking about bringing our troops home and about the war in Iraq and how it’s failed, and I want to tell you that that kind of isolationism, Sir, is what caused World War II. We allowed Hitler to come to power with that kind of attitude of isolationism and peace.” So what’s the big deal, one might ask? Well, the real reasons for World War II can be found in the way the world ended World War I and how it treated democratic Germany between 1919 and 1933. The war was ended with the promise of free trade, ethnic self-determination, and disarmament for all – U.S. President Wilson’s famous Fourteen Points.2 Yet what followed was a 15 year lasting occupation, subjugation, plundering, humiliation, and forced one-sided disarmament of Germany and Austria only, whose people were denied any attempt at self-determination, frequently by use of force. What the world had been denying peaceful democratic Germany during all those years, it then conceded to National Socialism under Hitler, who had learned that the world would give Germany what was rightfully hers (and later more than that) only under the threat of violence. That is not the point we want to make here, though. If we look into the war propaganda put forth by the U.S. before and during the wars against Serbia in 1999 and against Iraq in 1991 and 2003, plus when we look into how certain lobby groups have been pushing for a war against Iran over the past three years or so, we can see a pattern: Slobodan Milosevic, in 1999 leader of tiny Serbia, as well as Saddam Hussein and now Mahmoud Ahmadinejad are compared with – Adolf Hitler. Milosevic and Hussein were even accused of committing (or having committed) similar crimes of genocide – against the Kosovo Albanians here or the Kurds there. Hussein is even said to have used poison gas for that purpose. These claims, among others, were used to justify the war. And there is no better justification for a war than to prevent a new Hitler – or a new threat to exterminate the Jewish people, an accusation currently leveled against Ahmadinejad. We know today that the claims about weapons of mass destruction raised against Hussein were false. But they served their purpose well, because the world is so conditioned to react with automatic, Pavlovian style reflexes to such claims. One reason why these accusations work so well and why the world is so gullible to believe them, no matter how often they have been revealed to be wrong in the past, is because of that giant boogeyman called Hitler. Once his name is dropped and successfully put into the “right” context, there seems to be no stopping. War is the only solution to stop Hitler, Slobo-Hitler, Saddam-Hitler, Mahmoud- Hitler, or whatever their names may be. Genocidal hysteria is today used to justify the wars of the U.S. and their allies, Israel being the most belligerent of them. Not that preventing genocide isn’t a worthwhile goal. It actually is, and in extreme cases maybe even by military intervention. But today genocide or the (real or fabricated) threat of it is attracting the U.S. government’s and military’s attention only if it is about either securing the almighty dollar, the free flow of goods (mostly oil), and – well, dare we say it? – the subjectively perceived security of Israel and its interests (which includes an aggressive expansionism into Palestinian lands). Genocide in Somalia, Congo or Darfur? Who cares… It has come to the point where summoning the evil spirits of Adolf Hitler and “his” über-genocide – the holocaust – is the trump card needed to start just about any war the Powers That Be want to wage. Wasn’t one of the primary lessons of the World Wars supposed to be that wars are evil? And wasn’t another lesson that governments use propaganda tricks to drive people into discriminating against minorities, into ethnic cleansing, into genocide, and into wars? Presentations in today’s media frequently give the impression that World War II was fought to prevent or stop the holocaust, when in fact nothing could be further from the truth. In 1939 there was only one statesman who had proven to be a gargantuan mass murderer: Joseph Stalin. Yet instead of fighting him, the U.S. and Great Britain decided to gang up with Stalin in order to fight Hitler, who in 1939 may have caused the death of several hundred innocent people, but that was an almost ridiculous amount, if compared to Stalin’s peacetime(!) death toll of many millions of innocent souls. Yet still, today’s media, politicians, and even many scholars on the subject agree almost in unison that World War II really was a “good” war, where the good guys – the Allies – beat the bad guys – Hitler, plus the Japs as a collateral. But how can anyone seriously call the Allies “good guys,” when Stalin was one of them, who, in addition to his prewar massacres, was also responsible for innumerable atrocities during the war, for the ethnic cleansing of uncounted millions in Eastern Europe at war’s end, and for the subjugating of some 20 nations afterwards? Hence: – World War II was NOT a good war! – The good guys did NOT win that war, as there were no good guys! – The holocaust was NOT the reason why it was fought. And yet, after World War II the Powers That Be have been very successful in driving their people into one war after the other by referring to this “mother-of-all-wars.” Pacifists are dumbfounded at how good those warmongers are in using the horrors of this greatest war ever to instigate even more wars. And so have some of us been for the past decade or so. And then we eventually stumbled over holocaust revisionism or “holocaust denial,” if you wish, and we suddenly knew why those warmongers are so good at it. Mainstream media, politicians and academics depict holocaust revisionists as evil creatures trying to re-establish National Socialism, to prepare for another holocaust. As a consequence the world wages a constant war on holocaust revisionists, and this even includes the United Nations, which have passed a resolution against those wicked “deniers,” urging all nations to take action against them.3 Those nations in turn pass laws to outlaw revisionist thoughts, to imprison the revisionists, to burn their books, and to ban their ideas from public fora. Every revisionist a little Hitler… But is that true? As far as we have found out by now, it is not true. But do you know what? We don’t care anymore.4 Because what we have come to understand is that the holocaust is the secret weapon of psychological warfare of the Powers That Be, which they use to expand and maintain their militaristic empire, to justify wars and subjugations, to foist their financial, economic and cultural system upon others against their will. Summon the evil ghosts of Hitler and the holocaust, and the world will blindly and defenselessly follow your war drums. Against that, revisionism in general is the key to peace, where revisionism stands for: Be critical! Don’t take for granted what those militant Powers want you to believe in justification of their deeds! Instead, look again (Latin: revidere) into their claims! Review their evidence! Revise your opinion, if needed. This definition of revisionism is the opposite of what those warmongers want you to believe, isn’t it? And for a good reason: because they want to prevent with all means that we obtain and entertain a critical mind. Holocaust revisionism is the most important one of those critical attitudes, as it is the key to understanding that governments have lied, are lying, and will always lie to us. And it is a key to understanding what modern “democratic” governments are willing to do in order to suppress ideas which threaten their nefarious ways. The continual, annoying resorting to the holocaust theme as a means to justify war is the reason why we became skeptical and curious. And we have found out that we are not alone with that attitude. Famous British- Jewish musician and writer Gilad Atzmon, for instance, had a similar experience, as he has described on March 13, 2010, in an essay which wraps it all up nicely:5 “When I was young and naïve I regarded history as a serious academic matter. As I understood it, history had something to do with truth seeking, documents, chronology and facts. I was convinced that history aimed to convey a sensible account of the past based on methodical research. (…) When I was young, I didn’t think that history was a matter of political decisions or agreements between a rabid Zionist lobby and its favorite holocaust survivor. (…) When I was young and naive I was also somehow convinced that what they told us about our ‘collective’ Jewish past really happened. (…) As it happened, it took me many years to understand that the holocaust, the core belief of the contemporary Jewish faith, was not at all an historical narrative, for historical narratives do not need the protection of the law and politicians. (…) It took me years to accept that the holocaust narrative, in its current form, doesn’t make any historical sense. (…) I think that 65 years after the liberation of Auschwitz, we must be entitled to start to ask the necessary questions. We should ask for some conclusive historical evidence and arguments rather than follow a religious narrative that is sustained by political pressure and laws. We should strip the holocaust of its Judeo-centric exceptional status and treat it as an historical chapter that belongs to a certain time and place. (…) We should also ask, what purpose do the holocaust denial laws serve? What is the holocaust religion there to conceal? As long as we fail to ask questions, we will be subjected to Zionists and their Neocon agents’ plots. We will continue killing in the name of Jewish suffering. We will maintain our complicity in Western imperialist crimes against humanity. As devastating as it may be, at a certain moment in time, a horrible chapter was given an exceptionally meta-historical status. Its ‘factuality’ was sealed by draconian laws and its reasoning was secured by social and political settings. The holocaust became the new Western religion. Unfortunately, it is the most sinister religion known to man. It is a license to kill, to flatten, no nuke, to wipe, to rape, to loot and to ethnically cleanse. It made vengeance and revenge into a Western value. However, far more concerning is the fact that it robs humanity of its heritage, it is there to stop us from looking into our past with dignity. Holocaust religion robs humanity of its humanism. For the sake of peace and future generations, the holocaust must be stripped of its exceptional status immediately. It must be subjected to thorough historical scrutiny. Truth and truth seeking is an elementary human experience. It must prevail.” (In)famous political scientist Norman G. Finkelstein recently agreed to this when he stated in an interview to the 2009 documentary Defamation by Israeli documentary filmmaker Yoav Shamir:6 “The irony is that the Nazi holocaust has now become the main ideological weapon for launching wars of aggression. Every time you want to launch a war of aggression, drag in the Nazi holocaust.” The most impressive thing about Shamir’s documentary, however, is that he lets his audience experience how young Jewish Israelis are being traumatized by holocaust “education,” which should better be called brainwashing, and how many Jews in the world, due to that kind of socialization, have become thoroughly paranoid about every single Gentile being a potential anti-Semite and about a new holocaust lurking behind every corner. This way many Jews have become prepared to do just about anything to protect themselves and their interests from both (rarely) real and (often) purely imaginary threats: ostracizing, stigmatizing, abusing, mistreating, harming, even killing Gentiles, if they stand in their way. What is all the suffering of gentiles compared to the holocaust anyway? Nothing. So why bother? Although the holocaust – even the revisionist version of it, which is still filled with the horrors of persecution suffered by a religious minority – could be employed to worthwhile educational ends by teaching people to be tolerant toward individuals with other ethnic, cultural, religious, political, or philosophical backgrounds, it is actually misused to foster hatred and distrust among Jews against Gentiles in general and Germans (and in extension: Europeans and Christians) as well as Palestinians (and in extension: Arabs and Muslims) in particular. The “holocaust” of the current prevailing notion has created a paranoia among Jews and has thus become a mental ghetto of modern-day Jewry, forcefully separating it from the rest of the world. If Jewry wants to overcome this paranoia, it needs to break out of this ghetto. Having had similar insights, we figured that the “holocaust” version forced down our throats for obvious political ends might not be kosher at all. Hence we started reading every scholarly book written about “holocaust deniers,” and written by them in order to make up our own minds. ...