For a while in the 1990s, Holocaust revisionist legend Ernst Zundel had a TV show.

It was called “Another Voice of Freedom.”

Here are the surviving English episodes.

01 Introduction

02 Street Politics in Canada

03 Political Realities

04 Douglas Cristie on Freedom of Speech

05 David Cole on Auschwitz

06 Rudolf Hess

07 Carlos Whitlock Porter

08 The David Irving Saga

09 With Prof Robert O Driscoll about Celts

10 Russell Barton

From the website of Carlos Whitlock Porter:

As a “proven fact” protected by special laws not applicable to other “proven facts”, the Holoco$t must be considered as something of an endangered species

All one need do to endanger the species a bit further………. or perhaps even drive it into extinction….. is to get the Nuremberg Trial transcript and read some of it.

If Germans gassed millions of Jews, did they also………..

1. Steam people to death like lobsters in 10 steam chambers at Treblinka
2. Zap them to death with mass electrical shocks
3. Blast them into the twilight zone with atomic bombs
4. Beat people to death, then carry out autopsies to see why they died
5. Force people to climb trees, then cut the trees down
6. Kill 840,000 Russian POWs at Sachsenhausen, and burn the bodies in 4 portable ovens
7. Bash people’s brains in with a pedal-driven brain-bashing machine while listening to the radio, then burn the bodies in 4 portable ovens
8. Torture and execute people in time to music at the Yanov camp in Russia — shoot every member of the orchestra
9. Grind the bones of millions of people in portable bone-grinding machines
10. Grind the bones of 200 bodies [¾ ton] at one time as described in photographs and documents which have disappeared — study bone grinding in special 10-day crash-course seminars
11. Whup people with special spanking machines
12. (Note that photographs of German leaders, concentration camps, etc., are in full supply, but that photos of bone grinders, portable ovens, etc., have all disappeared)
13. Make lampshades of human skin
14. Cut people’s heads off and then shrink them — make pocketbooks and driving gloves for SS officers out of human skin
15. Paint pornographic pictures on canvasses made of human skin
16. Bind books in human skin
17. Make saddles, riding breeches, gloves, house slippers, and ladies handbags out of human skin
18. Drive Jews to cannibalism in all those freight cars
19. More “scientific experiments” — another ridiculous accusation — another bizarre hallucination — another example of German efficiency
20. Torture people in specially mass-produced “torture boxes” made by Krupp
21. Kill people for sleeping in their underwear — kill people for wearing dirty underwear — wear underwear stolen from gassed persons — (didn’t they have any underwear in Germany?) — kill people for having armpit hair — stuff chairs with human hair — (an objection from defendant Göring) — make socks out of human hair — (actually, the correct translation should be hair-yarn “booties” for U-boat crews) — (commentary) — collect seven tons of hair for human sock making — collect 293 hair bales (net weight seven thousand kilograms) at Auschwitz for mattress stuffing and making hair socks — gas them to death, then destroy the bodies with quicklime at Auschwitz
22. Use human ashes for repairing the roads — mix human ashes with manure and sell it
23. Burn human bodies using human fat for fuel — burn human bodies using no fuel at all after removing them from the gas chambers without wearing gas masks — burn 80,000 bodies in 2 old ovens
24. Burn human bodies in holes dug in a swampy plain which is frozen in January where it rains and snows constantly and there is mud everywhere — what did they do when it was raining?
25. Kill people with poisoned soft drinks — shoot 135,000 people in Smolensk and bury them Katyn-style — shoot 200,000 people in the Lisenitz forest — using the same methods of concealment they used at Katyn

Translated by Carlos W. Porter

1. The “crimes” of Dr. Mengele

In 1997, Helena Kubica, researcher at the Auschwitz Museum, published a long article entitled “Dr. Mengele und seine Verbrechen im Konzentrationslager Auschwitz-Birkenau” (“Dr. Mengele and His Crimes in the Auschwitz-Birkenau Concentration Camp”).1 The author sifted through the numerous documents on Dr. Mengele’s activities at Birkenau preserved in the archives of the Museum in search of documentary proof of his presumed criminal medical experiments on twins. The situation is as follows.

Dr. Josef Mengele entered service at Auschwitz on 30 May 1943. His direct superior, SS–Standortarzt (garrison doctor) Dr. Eduard Wirts, appointed him Lagerarzt (camp doctor) at the so-called “Zigeunerfamilienlager” (gypsy family camp), Sector BIIe of Birkenau.2

He was particularly interested in the study of twins, especially identical twins, organising a daycare center solely for this purpose:

“In the gypsy camp, he caused Barracks 29 and 31 and a nursery – a  sort of daycare center and preparatory school –  to house not only the children under his observation (these lived in Barracks 31), but all gypsy children up to 6 years of age.

A total of several hundred children were housed in the nursery school from 8 to 14 years of age, where they were supervised by many prisoners. […]. The barracks used as a nursery school were in slightly better condition than the others, entirely plastered on the inside, decorated with coloured images representing fairy tales. For a short time, the children who lived there received a better diet – milk, white bread, vegetables and meat broth concentrates, even marmalade and chocolate […].

The area behind Barracks 31 was enclosed and a playground was installed, with sandboxes, merry-go-round, swings and gymnastic equipment.”3

Naturally, for H. Kubica, all this was intended solely for “propaganda purposes.”4 We need only inquire, however, for whom this alleged propaganda was intended, since not even the delegate from the Red Cross who visited Auschwitz in September 1944 was permitted to visit Birkenau Camp.5

And how about the diet, incredibly rich for a concentration camp – as confirmed by former inmate Anna Lipka6 – was this also solely intended for “propaganda purposes”?

This scene is not easy to reconcile with the panoply of the unprecedented crimes attributed to Dr.  Mengele, but Kubica has decisive “proof” to hand.

An epidemic of noma faciei, a gangrenous illness affecting mostly children, broke out in the Zigeunerlager in the summer of 1943. The patients were transferred on Dr. Mengele’s order to an isolated barracks in the hospital of the gypsy camp and, we are assured by H. Kubica,

“many of the sick children were killed, always by order of Dr. Mengele, and their bodies were taken to the institute of hygiene of the Waffen-SS at Rajsko for histopathological research. There preparations of the individual organs were prepared and preserved in glass, even including the entire head of a child, among others, for the SS academy of medicine in Graz.”7

From the pertinent footnote, we learn that our information on the entire affair is based exclusively on post-war testimonies. In this context, the author mentions a single document, reproduced below. The document is a bill of lading to the Institute of Hygiene of the Waffen-SS (SS-Hygiene-Institut) of Rajsko, Hygiene and Bacteriology Section, relating to the “head of a cadaver” (Kopf einer Leiche) taken from a “12-year old child” (12-jähriges Kind). Nothing is known of the cause of death of the child; the only thing that is certain is that the request for histological examination originated from the H-Krankenbau Zigeunerlager Auschwitz II, BIIe, that is, the prisoner hospital of the gypsy camp. The explanation advanced by H. Kubica is clearly a pretext. Noma faciei (or cancrum oris) is a disease which destroys the orofacial tissues. It currently strikes chiefly sub-Saharan African children between the ages of 2 and 16; the mortality rate, in the absence of adequate treatment, ranges between 70 and 90%.8 One may therefore reasonably suppose that, at Birkenau, in the years 1943-1944, the mortality rate of young gypsy children stricken with noma was even higher. In 1943, 2,587 children below the age of 10 in the gypsy camp died,9 including practically all those suffering from noma.

But then, what occasion was there to kill children who were inexorably dying of disease?

The obvious response to this rhetorical question is supplied by H. Kubica herself where she cites the testimony of Dr. Jan Čespiva, who had worked as a physician in the gypsy camp hospital:

“There was an outbreak of noma. The disease caused entire pieces of flesh to fall off, also affecting the lower jaw. I had never seen gangrene of the face like that. The crania of the children were prepared for the SS Academy at Graz. I know because we wrote the address. The heads were preserved in formaldehyde, the bodies were destroyed in Crematory III.”10

It is therefore obvious that the child in question died of noma and that the German physicians hoped to find a cure by studying the heads of children who had died of this disease.

And this request for histological examination is the only documentary “proof” of the “crimes” of Dr. Mengele to be found in the archive of the Auschwitz Museum! Not much for the so-called “Angel of Death” of Auschwitz, and H. Kubica, apparently aware of this, as a last resort cites the “eyewitness” so decisive to her,  Miklos Nyiszli, about whom, more below.

After creating the school already mentioned above, Dr. Mengele created an “experimental laboratory,” the location where the “camp research on the birth of twins and congenital anomalies”11 was performed – in a word, the ogre’s lair –  to the head of which he appointed Dr. Bertold Epstein, from Prague. His assistant was another Czech, Dr. Rudolf Weiskopf (Vitek).12 Two camp inmates also worked in Dr. Mengele’s laboratory: a Polish anthropology Ph.D., Martyna Puzina,13 and the Czech painter Dinah Gottliebova, who produced drawings of the parts of the body of the children under examination.14

The activities of this “experimental laboratory” are well documented:

“The archives of the Auschwitz-Birkenau Museum contain numerous documents signed by Dr. Mengele, such as requests for analysis by the Institute of Hygiene.”15

but no document attests to Dr. Mengele’s presumed crimes. This is not at all surprising, considering the activities performed in his laboratory:

“As shown by reports of inmates who performed tasks in the twins block, as well as reports from the twins themselves, the individual pairs of twins were subjected by Dr. Mengele to research of any kind, which constituted the starting point for the performance of the most varied types of experiments on the same. In general, they were subjected to anthropometric, morphological, psychiatric and radiological research. The anthropological research was initially performed in Dr. Mengele’s laboratory in the sauna of the gypsy camp. In November 1944, this laboratory was transferred to barracks 15, in the vicinity of the men’s hospital (BIIf). Every individual part of the body of the persons subjected to examination was measured in the most accurate manner: the twins were measured in pairs, comparing the results. The documentation contained annotations of the shape of the mouth, the nose, the muscles of the ears, the colour of the eyes and skin of the individual parts of the body.16

There was no criminal activity, therefore, and it is easy to see what M. Puzyna and D. Gottliebova’s tasks consisted of:  anthropometrical studies and anatomical drawings.

H. Kubica adds:

“All the documentation, that is, photographs, drawings, descriptions and analytical results, were preserved in individual folders for every person examined,”17

and she published a few of these documents. Notwithstanding this abundant documentation, H. Kubica notes:

“Nevertheless, unfortunately, it has not been possible to find any document showing how many gypsy twins passed through Dr. Mengele’s laboratory.”18

But a few pages later, the Polish researcher states:

“The Archives of the State Museum of Auschwitz-Birkenau also contain a document which contains personal data and copies of anthropological studies on 295 inmates – Greek, Hungarian, Dutch, French and Italian Jews – upon whom Mengele performed experiments. This list also contains the names of 117 Hungarian Jewish pairs of twins in the women’s sector of the camp. As for male twins from Barracks 15 of Camp BIIf, we know from the report on one pair of twins that there were 107 of them, aged from age 4 to 60.”19

Thus, the total number of documented twins available to Dr. Mengele amounted to between 402 and 412. What happened to them?

A series of daily reports, not mentioned by H. Kubica, although they can be found precisely at the Auschwitz Museum, the Arbeitseinsatz (assignment of labour) of the Birkenau camp,20 reports starting from 28 July up to 3 October 1944 (the reports are complete only for the month of August) bears the heading “Zwillinge für Versuchzwecke” (twins for experimental purposes). In the 35 reports which are preserved, the number of these inmates never varies: it always reads 49. This absence of variation over a period of more than three months allows one to rule out any continual replacement of “guinea pigs”, and is fully compatible with the “anthropometric, morphological, psychiatric and radiological examinations” mentioned above.

H. Kubica, by contrast, claims that the fate of these twins was quite a different one:

“The last stop in the search for several pairs of twins or individual persons was the analysis of the individual organs of the body during the autopsy. To this end, these persons were killed at Dr. Mengele’s order or by Dr. Mengele himself, by an injection of phenol in the heart. The bodies were taken to the dissecting room.”21

At this point, the Polish researcher unveils her “decisive witness”: none other than the notorious impostor Miklos Nyiszli! The whole fable of Dr. Mengele’s “crimes” originates from the ravings of this mythomaniac, to whom I shall return in greater detail in the section below devoted to him.

Notwithstanding the absurd lies he told, this person is nonetheless held in high esteem in the official historiography, but, in a sort of veiled schizophrenia, only as regards his accusations against Dr. Mengele. And in fact, his testimony constitutes the “demonstrative” framework for the accusations of every book on the subject, starting with Gerald L. Posner and John Ware on Dr.  Mengele,22 one of the most important, also mentioned by H. Kubica. The two authors cite him on pages 19, 20, 26, 33, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41, 53 and 152. In fact, the entire chapter on the “crimes” of Dr. Mengele at Auschwitz is built upon Nyiszli’s “testimony”! Even Robert Jay Lifton mentions him repeatedly.23 H. Kubica cites him just as often. She even reproduces his photograph24 and cites him several times.25

But Dr. Mengele’s “crimes” are not only not attested to by one single document: they are even overtly disproven by absolutely indisputable facts. In his description of the first autopsy allegedly performed by him upon a pair of twins, Nyiszli writes:

“My legs are trembling with excitement. I have discovered the most monstrous secret of Third Reich medical science. They don’t only kill with gas; they kill with chloroform injections to the heart as well.”26

If this had been true, Dr. Mengele would have proceeded to liquidate all the witnesses of his alleged criminal activity – his collaborators who also worked with twins – before leaving Auschwitz on 17 January 1945. He had enough time! But he allowed all the “eyewitnesses” of his alleged crimes to survive, i.e.:

– Dr. Bertold Epstein, one of the signers of the famous appeal by former Auschwitz inmates dated 4 March 1945;27

– Dr. Rudolf Weisskopf, liberated from Bergen-Belsen;28

– Martyna Puzyna, interviewed by G.L.Posner and J. Ware in June 1985;29

– Dinah Gottliebova, who moved to the USA in 1947, where she still lives;30

– Miklos Nyiszli, the purported essential “witness”, who, in his capacity as the physician of the so-called crematory “Sonderkommando,” would have shared in the “terrible secret” of the mass gassings, was also casually allowed to survive!

But what about the twins? What happened to the victims of Dr. Mengele’s experiments? Were they all killed en masse? Quite the contrary!

H. Kubica informs us that, in 1984, these twins were still numerous enough to form their own association:

“In 1984, the victims of Dr. Mengele’s experiments, who had lived in the children’s camp, formed the organisation Children of Auschwitz Nazi Deadly Lab Experiment Survivors (CANDLES), with the self-appointed task of documenting Mengele’s crimes, informing the world, capturing the “Angel of Death” and dragging him before a court”31

The Website of the association lists almost 400 twins from Auschwitz.32 H. Kubica also presents a list of twins from Auschwitz, consisting of over 320 names.33 The great majority of them were twins, but some were merely siblings, such as the sisters Tatiana Liliana and Alessandra Bucci. Both were deported to Auschwitz on 29 March 1943. The first, born on 19 September 1937, was registered under number 76484; the second, born 1 July 1939, was registered under number 6483.34  Luigi Ferri, born on 9 September 1932, was deported in August 1944 and registered under number B-7525.35 Sergio De Simone, born at Naples on 29 November 1937, was deported to Auschwitz on 29 March 1944, at the age of nearly 7 years, and registered under number 179614.36

No official historian has yet succeeded in explaining why these children were not gassed immediately upon arrival. In reality, it is not so surprising, because on 16 January 1945, in just the men’s camp at Birkenau, there were 770 “Jugendliche bis 18. Jhr.” (youths aged up to 18 years), in addition to 400 “Invaliden” (invalids)!37 When the Soviets arrived, there were still 205 children at Birkenau, from just a few months up to 15 years of age, many of them twins.38

The three documents mentioned above, the list of the CANDLES organisation, the list compiled by H. Kubica and the Soviet list of 1945, in addition to the Soviet list of inmates liberated at Birkenau,39 permit the compilation of a list of 543 twins having passed through Auschwitz:40 of these, 376 survived until the liberation of the camp; four died in the following months, one died on the evacuation transport on 27 January 1945 and twelve perished during the existence of the camp. Nothing is known of the remaining 154.

In just three cases, H. Kubica notes: «Starb im Lager infolge der durchgeführten Experimente» (“died [not: killed] in the camp as a result of the experiments performed [on them],”41 so that these three would seem to constitute Dr. Mengele’s victims. It goes without saying that such an assumption is in no way backed up by proof of Mengele’s personal complicity.

In conclusion, the known facts are as follows:

Dr. Mengele’s alleged crimes are not proven by any document. No document shows that Mengele ever killed even one single child, or that one single child was ever killed on his orders. The essential and sole witness, the one upon whose testimony the whole accusation is based, was an extraordinarily creative impostor. Dr. Mengele’s closest collaborators, including the presumed essential witness, and at least 543 of his “victims” were allowed to live: but how, then, are we to believe seriously in the fairy tale of the “Angel of Death” of Auschwitz?

2. Miklos Nyiszli’s False Testimony

In an article on Dr. Mengele published in 1986,42 Zdenek Zofka discussed the quality of the anti-Mengele testimony, writing:

“The Mengele phenomenon presents a few mysteries. The available sources are few. Almost all the written notes capable of providing information on Mengele’s crimes at Auschwitz have been destroyed. We must have recourse almost exclusively to eyewitness testimonies.  [But] testimonies, forty years later,43 are always problematical – all the more so in an extreme case such as this one. In the minds of many former inmates, “harrowing reality and nightmares have inextricably merged together over a period of forty years.” All too often, it is impossible to be sure that their recollections really refer to Mengele at all: it is all too often possible to show that Mengele has been confused with other SS physicians. Almost all the inmates state that they were selected by Mengele on the ramp. But camp physicians performed the selections in shifts: Mengele performed no more selections than any of the others. One gets the impression that Mengele’s name has gotten separated from his person. For the inmates, he became synonymous with all Auschwitz camp physicians as such.”44

Zofka then added:

“As has already been stated, the testimonies against Mengele must be treated with great caution. A number of incorrect statements can be explained on the grounds of mistaken identity, in which Mengele had gotten confused with other camp physicians or SS guards. Some witnesses in their statements were certainly motivated by self-importance and attention-seeking. Finally, even certain ‘exaggerations’ can be explained as innocent attempts to communicate and render the atrocity that was Auschwitz understandable — at least to a certain extent — to persons living later who hadn’t experienced it. Since Mengele was never tried, it has not been possible to put individual witnesses to the test. Even at the Mengele trial in Jerusalem in February 1985, rigorous cross-examination was waived for psychological reasons which were, after all, only too understandable – the need to recall to mind the horrors of Auschwitz was no doubt sufficiently agonising. Nevertheless, clarification of Mengele’s crimes at Auschwitz requires a critical and detailed examination of the testimonies.”45

But the critical examination undertaken by the author to “assess the individual crimes attributed to Mengele as more or less probable46 considers only obviously false, poorly supported accusations and does not in any way probe Miklos Nyiszli, whose testimony is, in the author’s view, “of fundamental importance”47 – so much so that the author cites it repeatedly.48

It therefore remains only critically to assess the statements of this fundamentally important witness to the alleged crimes of Dr. Mengele.

Miklos Nyiszli wrote a memoir published in Hungarian in 1946 entitled Dr. Mengele boncolóorvosa voltam az auschwitz-i krematóriumban (I Was Dr. Mengele’s Anatomical Physician in the Auschwitz Crematorium.)49 The work was later translated into French, German, English, Polish and Italian, rising to prominence in the Holocaust historiography of the 1960s.

Nyiszli claims that he reached Birkenau by train with a trainload of Jews deported from Hungary, in May of 1944 – May 29th, to be exact – as shown by the registration number A-8450, with which he was tattooed on that same day upon his arrival at the camp. After spending a few days in Sector BIIf of Birkenau, on 3 or 5 June (his chronology is contradictory), he was assigned as physician to Sonderkommando of the crematoria, under Dr. Mengele’s direct supervision, where he remained until January 1945. But in his sworn statement dated 8 October 1947,50 Nyiszli asserts that he reached Auschwitz on 19 May 1944 and that he was immediately transferred to the “Buna-Monowitz” camp, where he remained between 20 May and 5 June. These two versions of his arrival at Auschwitz stand in total mutual contradiction. But this is nothing compared to the wave of contradictions, absurdities, historical falsifications and various impostures to be found in his work, which was published in Italian under the title Medico ad Auschwitz and later under a different title: Sopravvissuto a Mengele:51 in my cursory study dedicated to this self-proclaimed “eyewitness”, I listed 120 of them.52

Let us now summarise the most salient of these nonsensical claims.53

Nyiszli provides a completely invented history of the Birkenau crematoria, even stating that they were built during the winter of 1939-1940, when Auschwitz didn’t even exist yet.

His description of the ovens of Crematoria II and III (which he refers to as 1 and 2) is also completely afactual. He speaks, in fact, of 15 individual furnaces located in a room 150 metres long, while the actual room in question was only 30 metres long, equipped with five furnaces, each with three muffles.

The alleged gas chamber, a room (Leichenkeller 1) 30 metres long, becomes, for Nyiszli, 200 metres long [but no width given]; Nyiszli also describes an “adjacent room” which never existed.

The small freight elevator (Aufzug) located in the vestibule of the subterranean part of the crematorium is transformed, in Nyiszli’s narrative, into four powerful lifts.

What Nyiszli says about the crematory capacity of the crematory ovens is technically impossible and historically nonsensical. He speaks of the cremation of 3 bodies in 20 minutes in one muffle, in each of the 15 muffles of Crematoria II and III, corresponding to a theoretical capacity of 3,240 bodies in 24 hours, which, for Nyiszli, however, becomes, incomprehensibly, 5,000. Therefore, according to him, the total capacity of the four Birkenau crematoria was 20,000 bodies per day. All this is absurd: in the coke-fired Topf ovens of Auschwitz-Birkenau, 20 minutes would not even have sufficed to vaporise the water contained in a single body. The real capacity of such installations, as declared by Topf engineer Kurt Prüfer, who designed the furnaces, and Karl Schultze, who designed the blowers, was one single body per muffle per hour, or one ninth as much as asserted by “eyewitness” Nyiszli.

Moreover, while Crematoria II and III had a total of 30 muffles, Crematoria IV and V had only 16, but Nyiszli nevertheless attributes a capacity of 5,000 bodies per day each to this pair of crematoria as well. Therefore, one single muffle in Crematoria IV-V had almost double the capacity of the same muffle in Crematoria II-III, but, according to Holocaust historiography, the furnaces in Crematoria IV and V were less efficient than those in Crematoria II and III. For example, at the Höss trial, the expert Roman Dawidowski stated that a load of 3-5 bodies in one muffle burned in 20-30 minutes in Crematoria II-III, but in 30-40 minutes in Crematoria IV-V.54 It goes without saying that Dawidowski’s “expert opinion” has the same value as the Polish-Soviet “expert opinion” on the 4 million deaths, in which he himself, Dawidowski, likewise concurred.55

Based on the absurd cremation capacity of 5,000 bodies in 24 hours for each crematorium, Nyiszli has built an arithmetically fantastic history of the mass gassings. Here are a few examples:

• The inmates in Sector BIId, 10,500 people, according to Nyiszli, were gassed and cremated in a single day in Crematoria III and IV (= 5,250 bodies in 24 hours each). In reality, even with a theoretical continuous duty cycle of 24 hours per day (which in practice is unattainable),56 these installations would have required at least 19 days for the cremation of such a large number of bodies.
• 4,500 gypsies were gassed and cremated in one single night in Crematoria II and III, that is, 2,250 in 12 hours. This many cremations would in fact have required over six days.
• The 20,000 gassing victims from the ghetto of Theresienstadt were cremated in 48 hours in Crematoria II and III (= 5,000 bodies in 24 hours each). In actual fact, that many cremations would have required over 27 days.

Nyiszli claims that flames could often be seen shooting from the crematory chimneys, which is technically impossible.57

The gassing technique described by Nyiszli is completely invented, based on the erroneous supposition that Zyklon B (the alleged homicidal agent) was chlorine (rather than hydrocyanic acid). Since chlorine is heavier than air,58 Nyiszli imagined that, in an area in which it was released in large quantities, the chlorine would spread from the floor to the ceiling, as if the area were being filled with water. As a result, he claims that the bodies, in the “gas chamber”, “were piled up in a mass up to the ceiling”, because “the gas first fills the lowers strata of air and then moves slowly upwards”. The victims therefore climbed on each others’ shoulders to get closer to the ceiling and escape the gas so as to survive for a short time longer. But hydrocyanic acid vapours are slightly lighter than air,59 therefore the diffusion of the gas as described by Nyiszli is physically impossible.60

This absurdity was later appropriated lock, stock and barrel by the plagiarist Filip Müller, another self-described “eyewitness” who shamelessly plagiarized Nyiszli’s work.61

In a letter to the American translator of his memoirs, Nyiszli declared that he had discovered that the name “cyklon” (sic) was derived from the abbreviation of its principal ingredients: CYanid, ChLOr and Nitrogen, stating that there were two types of “cyklon”, Type A, which was an insecticide, and Type B, which was used for the homicidal gassings. This is another stupid fantasy. “Zyklon” in German is not an acronym, but, rather, an ordinary word meaning “cyclone”. And not only did Zyklon B not contain chlorine, but the German word for nitrogen is “Stickstoff”!

As for Zyklon A, use of this product was discontinued in Germany in the 1920s, when it was superseded by Zyklon B.

Nyiszli mentions eight extermination operations in the alleged gas chamber and in the vicinity of the “cremation pits”, at which he claims to have been personally present. Adding up the number of victims indicated by Nyiszli, we obtain a total of 605,000 persons, but he claims to have personally seen two million people enter the “gas chambers” with his own eyes. But in fact, near the “cremation pits”, the final destination for the “excess numbers from the Jewish ramp,” that is, those for whom there was no room in the over-filled gas chambers, 650,000 Jews were, according to him, killed with a bullet in the back of the neck, which is to say, that more than the total of all the gassing victims for the excess numbers of whom the “cremation pits” were supposed to have been dug in the first place.

Based on the data provided by this “eyewitness”, we get over 30 million people, all cremated in these “cremation pits” alone!

Nyiszli’s chronology is purely fictitious, as deduced from the numerous contradictions it contains.  For example, the presumed homicidal mass gassings ceased definitively on 17 November 1944, but 20,000 Jews from the ghetto of Theresienstadt were gassed, starting on that date.

One day in August, Nyiszli met his wife and daughter in Sector BIIc, but this meeting took place after the gassing of the gypsy camp (BIIe), which, for Nyiszli, occurred in the last ten days of September. What is more, according to his chronology, this meeting occurred in combination with that of Camp BIIc, and yet there was an interval of at least 26 days between the two alleged events.

Nyiszli moreover claims that the crematoria were located 2 kilometers from Birkenau camp, while in reality they were located inside the camp, and that the so-called Kanada warehouse barracks was not the Effektenlager (the camp warehouse containing the personal effects of the inmates), but, rather, a collection of rubbish which burned continuously!

In short, Nyiszli knew nothing of the alleged “Bunker 2”: according to him, this Polish farmhouse was not transformed into a homicidal gas chamber by the SS, but, rather, into an “undressing room” for the victims of the “cremation pits”, who were then killed with a pistol shot to the back of the neck.

This overall picture, although highly condensed, shows clearly that Miklos Nyiszli was a false witnesss. The Holocaust historical industry recognised this immediately, but, in a sort of “see no evil” posture, they prefer to continue utilising Nyiszli’s “testimony” in support of the alleged crimes of Dr. Mengele.

In 2002, Charles D. Provan wrote an article entitled Miklos Nyiszli and His Auschwitz Book in a New Light62 in which, based on research considered fundamental by himself, he attempted to justify the absurdities proffered by the self-proclaimed “eyewitness” (which Provan magnanimously referred to as “errors”), asserting that Nyiszli’s book was not a historical record, but a novel. This claim is based on two erroneous assertions:

1) that the first edition of Nyiszli’s book appeared between 16 February and 5 April 1947 in the Budapest newspaper Világ (World);

2) that the same newspaper, in its edition of 30 September 1947, stated that Nyiszli’s book was a novel.

In reality, as I have already mentioned, Nyiszli’s first edition was published in 1946. Moreover, the newspaper Világ, mentioned by Provan, refers to Nyiszli’s book as an “élménregény”, which means, not “a novel based on one’s own personal experiences”, but, rather, “a novel of experience”, that is, a real experience so exceptional in nature as almost to resemble a novel.

That this is the correct interpretation is proven beyond doubt by the Affidavit forming the preamble to the first edition of the book:

“I, the undersigned, a doctor of medicine, Nyiszli Mikloś, ex-inmate of the concentration camp, bearer of tattoo number A 8450, in this book, which has just been published, a work which contains, in itself, the darkest pages of human history, free from all passion, without the slightest exaggeration, write as direct spectator and actor of the activities of the crematoria and funeral pyres of Auschwitz, in the fires in which [sic] millions of fathers, mothers and children disappeared.”63

The Affidavit closes with these words:

“Oradea-Nagyvárad, month of March, 1946. Dr. Nyiszli Mikloś.”

There is not the slightest doubt that Nyiszli described his book as an historical narrative; in fact, he explicitly stated that it was written “free from all passion, in accordance with the truth, without the slightest exaggeration”.

In this context, even if Provan’s interpretation were correct (and it is not), it would be improper to attribute greater value to the opinion of an unknown journalist writing in September 1947 than to the Affidavit of the author himself, writing in March 1946.

Therefore, the excuse that the book is a “novel” does not hold water and Nyiszli remains an impostor. This is shown no less clearly by another important fact.  Provan writes:

“Although Dr. Nyiszli was sent as a witness at the IG-Farben trial at Nuremberg, he did not testify, probably because he was only at Monowitz for two weeks and could only supply information of little value. He was allowed to return to Romania during the course of the same trial.”64

In effect, the IG-Farben trial records contain no mention of Miklos Nyiszli being excused; he is not even mentioned.65 Notwithstanding the simple fact that he never testified, upon returning to Romania, he immediately proceeded to write a series of articles entitled Tanu voltam Nürnbergen (I Was a Witness at Nuremberg) in which he pretended to have been interrogated by the Soviet representative of the defendant Emanuel Minskoff, quoting whole dialogues entirely invented by  Nyiszli. The first of these mendacious articles appeared in the Világ newspaper on 18 April 1948.

It is impossible to ascribe good faith to this “eyewitness,” who was and remains a mere impostor.

In consequence, the essential eyewitness testimony of Dr. Mengele’s alleged crimes at Auschwitz crumbles inexorably, and the rest of the legend along with it.

Read More

]]> https://www.anglinarchive.com/2013/12/07/slavery-indians-and-mulattoes/ Sat, 07 Dec 2013 00:00:00 +0000 Carlos Porter
December 7, 2013

[Excerpts from an exchange with a White nationalist who believed that most slaves were owned by Jews]

No, I don’t believe that all or even most slave holders were Jews. About 10% per cent of all whites owned slaves, although 5% might well be correct. Slaves were a necessity because they were immune to tropical diseases, also there was the rationalization of baptising them, Christianizing them, saving them from being eaten or tortured to death, typical Christian do-good stuff.

In 1860 there were 28 million white people in the whole country, plus 4 million slaves. New Orleans might have been a special case, if what you say is true. First, I do not believe that slave holding was ipso facto immoral at all.

According to your theory Washington, Jefferson, Lee, etc. were just exceptions and all other plantations were owned by Jews! I see no evidence of this, although no doubt Jews, free blacks and American Indians owned slaves, too. How many, I don’t know. The only study based on actual statistics and archive records, like testamentary bequests, contracts of purchase and sale, is TIME ON THE CROSS, by Fogel. The author claims that there are millions of pages of archive documents which have never been studied, because they are too voluminous (and because nobody wants to be accused of trying to “whitewash slavery”).

Most accounts of slavery are based on eyewitness accounts by travellers, who may not have understood what they were seeing and were often wrong.  I see nothing wrong with holding slaves if they are treated humanely, which they were.

That the Jews invested financially in plantations, yes, at interest, the same way they invest in Broadway plays. It is simply untrue that slavery was cruel and it is also untrue that the mulattoes resulted from mass interracial sex and/or rape by whites.

It is not difficult to disprove the alleged cruelty of North American slavery, at least in the South. A few isolated cases, more likely in the North, I would think. One famous case I do know of, but an exception. A lot of legends, a few exaggerations of real cases, but it’s obvious that slavery as practiced in the South was not cruel and cannot have been cruel.

The American Indians owned slaves, too, sometimes other Indians, sometimes whites, but very often blacks as well. The Creeks became largely Negroid as a result, and the case of the Seminoles is very well known. They’re black.

Most sources say only 10% of all Southerners owned slaves. But most of those owned very few, maybe 2 or 3, maybe most often just 1. They worked beside them in the fields and were simply treated as hired help. So the number of large slave holders must have been very small, 5% or less. John Randolph of Roanoke was said to have owned 300 slaves, but that was in the 18th century and I don’t know how that figure was computed.

Robert E Lee was said to have been one of the biggest slave holders in the South and he only owned 55 slaves. He freed them during the war, sent them back to Africa, and received letters from them through the blockade. He obviously taught them to read and write.

Nathaniel Bedford Forrest had approximately 40 or 45 slaves, and is said to have offered them their freedom win or lose if they would fight with him, and most of them did. Very few refused. One, named Napoleon, is said to have escaped Yankee captivity several times and returned to Forrest.

There was never one single case of a slave rebellion at any time during the entire war, even though the men were all off in the army and the women, children and blacks ran the plantations. Think about it. You live in a big expensive wooden house – some plantation homes were built of brick, but this was unusual — with lots of windows, and you’re surrounded by flammable crops most of the year. Any injustice to a slave will become known to every other nigger for miles around, including the house niggers owned by everybody you know — friends, enemies and neighbors — which means that your family will find out sooner or later. And you’re going to go around raping slaves under these circumstances?

Plus your slaves have access to fire, to heavy farm tools, and they’re not locked in or chained up at night. Even if they were, what’s to prevent them from burning your crops during the daytime? Do have a fire brigade? Probably the best you could manage would be a bucket brigade from the nearest swamp.

During the two Cuban wars of Independence, the guerrillas — most of whom were freed or escaped slaves — roamed the island burning crops and attacking the plantation houses. So the houses were built like forts, fire-proof, bullet-proof walls 3 feet thick, slits for windows, gun ports in all the walls, etc. Southern plantations were never built that way.

What happens if you’re talking to 5 blacks hoeing a garden and one of them hits you on the head with a tool from behind? Slave owners were very vulnerable. But nothing happened at any time during the whole war. The closest thing to it was a Sioux Indian uprising in Minnesota in 1861 which killed 800 people in 6 weeks, almost all of them women and children. This never happened in the South at any time during the war.

In any case Jews have never shown an interest in farming.

The fact that the slave markets or exchanges were closed on Jewish holidays does not prove that the slave OWNERS were Jews, only that most of the TRADERS were Jews, many of whom were also importers, at least in a financial sense. No Jew will ever concentrate on purely business matters if he has the slightest chance of concentrating on the purely financial end of the business. Henry Ford offered 1000 dollars to anyone who could produce even one Jewish farmer, and the money was never claimed.

I think French Louisiana must have been a special case in most ways, which I’ll explain. The English and Scots came to the New World with their families, the only nationalities to do so. The Spanish, French and Portuguese were all single men and always mated with native women. The Latin races have always been less adverse to race mixing than the Anglo-Saxons. Louisiana was a huge territory, easily equal to 5 or 6 modern US states. For this reason, large numbers of mulattoes must have originated in that area of the United States, rather than elsewhere. In Canada, the French produced tens of thousands of “métis”, mixed race Indians, just as the Spanish produced millions of “mestizos” in Central America.

TIME ON THE CROSS states flatly that Southern white men were not attracted to full-blooded blacks, and that all known free black prostitutes in the South were mulattoes. He also asserts that nothing could be kept secret in the crowded atmosphere of a Negro slave quarters, and the stories of race-mixing and white rape of blacks are pure myth.

Many people assume that because most American niggers are anywhere up to 75% white, that there must have been a lot of interracial sex going on, including rape by whites. In fact, there is no evidence of this and it goes against all logic. At the risk of having to explain the birds and the bees all over again, mulattoes can be produced in 3 ways: sex between a white person and a full-blooded nigger (the whites involved being almost invariably sailors, sealers, itinerant workers, transients, bargemen, i.e., really scummy people), or sex between mulattoes and blacks — which is always very rare, because mulattoes constitute a unique racial and cultural group in all countries, and are always cordially hated by full-blooded blacks — or sex between mulattoes themselves.

You could put a million mulattoes down on a desert island on planet Mars and in a million years they’d all still be mulattoes. The added ingredient of sex with whites is not required, must less interracial rape.

According to some sources, there was quite of bit of interracial sex in the slave trade, but only between the top officers and a few slaves kept apart during the voyage, women they picked out before they were mixed with the others in the hold. There are always women willing to “put out” to obtain better conditions, so if that is rape, then so is everything that happens in Hollywood between producers, agents (or people like JFK) and potential starlets.

You may be very sure that ordinary seamen avoided their slave cargoes during the voyage because of the danger of disease. Hugh Thomas’s HISTORY OF THE TRANSLATLANTIC SLAVE TRADE cites many cases in which the death rate was higher among the white crew than among the Negro cargo! Remember, blacks are largely immune to tropical disease, while whites are not.

Another problem is that Northern soldiers raped many thousands of Negro slaves during the Civil War, and niggers raped many thousands of white women during Reconstruction.

Then you had a century during which white trash women were free to go looking for their more or less imaginary “big nigger dicks” the same way they do today. Segregation was not strictly enforced among white trash, that’s what made them trash. Or rather, it was enforced by excluding white trash from all dealings with decent people (with some occasional physical chastisement). In any case, no white Southerner ever cohabited openly with a Negro woman, like Thaddeus Stevens of the North.

Some nigger on www.youtube.com describes this, it might have been David James Manning, white women looking to get picked up by niggers. His mama told him that any white woman that would look for a black man would have to be trash.

On white soldiers raping nigger slaves, see Walter Cisco’s WAR CRIMES AGAINST SOUTHERN CIVILIANS. David L. Hoggan, DAS BLINDE JAHRHUNDERT [The Blind Century], Part I, Chapter III, pp. 170-176, claims that niggers raped “hundreds of thousands” of white women after the war. But never DURING the war. Cisco cites one slave woman who said she “never saw a Yankee yet that wasn’t common as dirt”. Typical nigger-lovers.

Just found an interesting book, JEWISH PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN by Edward Kritzler. That’s a new one to me. I thought Jews were too cowardly for that. I would have expected them to finance piracy through limited companies, and so on.

Fogel even claims that only about a third of all slave plantations had white overseerers! What does that tell you?

I’m sure Jews owned a lot of slaves, but only indirectly, only financially, they would never want to bother with making them work and worry about getting the crops in. There may have been a few exceptions, somebody like Judah P Benjamin. If you research his life you’ll probably find the answer. You can bet they dominated the trade, owned the exchanges, advanced money at interest to buy them, etc. But who wants the trouble of actually owning niggers? I wouldn’t give you a nickel for 10 of them.

I think the figure would be about 5% of white Southerners, apart from those that owned only one. And what about the Indians? The Cherokees even fought for the Confederacy! Or at least a faction of them. The last Confederate general to surrender is sometimes said to have been a Cherokee Indian named Stand Watie.

Plus, you know why the American Indians, the Tasmanians, and so on, died out as a race, to the extent that they did? The Indians, because they killed each other off, then intermarried with their captives to keep their numbers up. Some of these captives were whites, whom they kidnapped and kept as slaves, while the Tasmanians, like all non-white races, treated their women as slaves and sold them to white sealers for a bag of flour or sugar. They raided each other for women, so the tribe that lost the war couldn’t reproduce, then they sold the women to white sealers, who treated them better than their own people, and now the Tasmanians claim we made them extinct!

See also Darwin,VOYAGE OF THE BEAGLE, on the way the Tierra del Fuegians treated THEIR women!

There are a lot of Tasmanians still alive, but they are 31/32nds white. So by what right does the 1/32 presume to lecture us?

Whites took over America, and Canada when the whole continent was almost empty. There were never more than 10 million Indians on the whole continent, the whole hemisphere, most of them in Central America. Now they lie and say, “There used to be 150 million of us, now there are x hundred thousand, that proves you murdered the rest of us”. There is no proof of this.

The French Canadian film LES INVASIONS BARBARES [The Barbarian Invasions, actually a comedy about the collapse of the Canadian public health care system), claims that “Without the atomic bomb and with gas chambers, the Spanish and Portuguese exterminated 150 million Indians. Then the English exterminated 50 million more. The biggest massacre in the history of the world took place right here, all around us”.

But those 200 million people never existed in the first place! This is very easy to prove. A whole continent (North American), with no cities to speak of, except in Mexico, Guatemala, and parts of Peru, Ecuador, and Bolivia, no aquaducts, no large-scale farming, no transport systems (they never even invented the wheel), and we’re supposed to believe that both these continents were the most thickly populated areas on earth, more so than Europe or China?

In fact, 90% of the land was completely empty. In North America, 1 million Indians occupied 2 million square miles of land, starving, murdering and eating each other, torturing each other to death, living in misery. Francis Parkman describes a hunting party of 19 Iriquois who had nothing to eat for 3 days except for one porcupine and one rabbit.

The American Indians were the 19th century equivalent of Mexican drive-by shooters: they had to be defeated, disarmed, confined to reservations and made to stay there. There was no other way. This is why we cut down the forests, because anywhere there were trees, there were Indians. Just as the Australian Aborigine is perfectly adapted to life in the desert – they will sit in the shade of a tree and never move a muscle all day — the Iriquois were perfectly adapted to life in the forests: they could lie down behind a log and conceal themselves under leaves and never move a muscle, for days. You come along and they bash your brains in.

2 million square miles of land occupied by 1 million people, most of them migrant bands of only a few hundred people who roamed thousands of square miles and only passed through most areas once or twice a year, if that? Sometimes for centuries nothing happened, but then for no reason they show up and butcher 300 white people by surprise, mostly women and children. And we’re supposed to recognize a legitimate title to the whole continent on that basis? Apart from the fact that they were paid very large amounts of money for their land in many cases.

At worst, we treated them they way they treated each other. In the end, the Iroquois obtained firearms from Dutch traders and exterminated all the other related tribes, speaking related Iroquois languages, 5 whole tribes. There were none of them left except for a few who ran away all the way down into the USA someplace, the Wyandots, who are now found only in North Dakota, if memory serves. Plus, they’re all more white than Indian anyway, since they adopted white captives into the tribe after massacring, torturing and eating all the others (they were all cannibals), so in the end they became more or less white and died out as a race. Same with the Tasmanians. They treated their women as slaves and sold them to white sealers for a few bags of tea or sugar, then they couldn’t reproduce as a race, now they say we exterminated them. All the so-called Tasmanians today are about 31/32ths white, but they claim their 1/32th gives them a right to criticize everybody else and demand money?

Plus the other original 1/32, the white half, were the same people they accuse of committing all the atrocities! Their own ancestors! By what right do they even call themselves “Tasmanians”? By what right do they demand money from us?

By the Indians’ own rules, we conquered them, so we own it.

The Mexican and Peruvian empires had no knowledge of each other’s existence, but they both had a religious tradition of white gods. The Spanish exploited that, and the locals never recovered their manliness. Prescott calls the Peruvians “effeminate”. They never got their act together even after they discovered that the Spaniards weren’t gods at all! Peru was one of the most highly advanced, best organized societies that ever existed, millions of Indians, and it fell almost completely without a fight. The Jews did the same thing to us. We think they’re “Israelites”. The Spanish were never more than a few hundred men. The Jews did the same things to us that the Spanish did to the Mexicans and Peruvians. Exploited all their weaknesses.

Sources:
CONQUEST OF MEXICO and CONQUEST OF PERU by Prescott
HISTORY OF THE JESUITS IN NORTH AMERICA IN THE 17th CENTURY by Parkman
HISTORY OF THE TRANSATLANTIC SLAVE TRADE by Hugh Thomas
THE FALSIFICATION OF ABORIGINE HISTORY vols 1 and 3 by KeithWindschuttle
NUMBERS FROM NOWHERE by David Henige
1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica, “Indians”, plus look up individual tribes. Very interesting table at the end of the article on “Indians” describes most of the New York tribes as “more white than Indian” or “Indians in name only”.
COMING OF THE CIVIL WAR by Avery Craven
TIME ON THE CROSS by Fogel (slavery)
THE MARTIAL SPIRIT by Walter Millet (Cuba)