1. MAIN TERRITORIAL CHANGES IN EUROPE, MARCH 1938 TO MAY 1941
March 1938 Austria incorporated into Germany ("Anschluss"). September 1938 Sudetenland (peripheral areas of western Czechoslovakia) incorporated into Germany as a result of Munich Agreement.
March 1939 Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia established by Germany. Slovakia becomes independent republic.
March 1939 Memel (between E. Prussia and Lithuania) incorporated into Germany.
April 1939 Italy occupies Albania.
September 1939 Western Poland, Danzig, part of Silesia reincorporated into Germany; northern and eastern part of Poland occupied by U.S.S.R.; General Government established by Germany with Crakow as capital.
1939-1940 U.S.S.R. occupies and later incorporates Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania; drives into Southeastern parts of Finland, takes Bessarabia from Romania.
1939-1941 Hungary expands into southern Czechoslovakia, Transylvania and part of Yugoslavia.
April 1940 Denmark and Norway invaded by Germany.
May 1940 Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, northern and western France occupied by Germany; capital of French state establish in Vichy (remaining part of France occupied in November 1942).
September 1940 Southern Dobruja ceded to Bulgaria.
May 1941 Yugoslavia and Greece occupied by Germany, Italy and other allies; area around Marbourg incorporated into Germany.
Note: Frequently cited references are usually given in an abbreviated form. Their full equivalents are given in the bibliography at the end of the questions
Nearly four decades after the end of the Second World War a number of questions remain as to the origins and conduct of the tragic conflict, which still casts a shadow over all mankind, although innumerable books has been written about this war, scholarly, popular, propagandistic, and simply fictional. One of the questions of great significance is the plight of European Jews during the war. Living in a land with a very powerful and vociferous Jewish minority, we Americans still encounter almost daily materials of various sorts pertaining to this aspect of the war, materials created for the most part with a sophisticated calculation. This book has been written primarily for the benefit of thinking, open-minded Americans who want to become familiar with more than one view of the question in order to arrive at the truth. As one participant in the war, I am attempting here to give a view of that aspect based on my own experiences in military intelligence, as well as on subsequent reading, published research and lecturing. As the result of the present and persistent importance of the subject, much innovative investigation has taken place on both sides of the Atlantic, particularly during the last decade or so.
My attempt here is not to present much of my own research on special phases of the question. My attempt, is rather, to summarize the findings of those who have investigated the present questions and have cast doubts of various kinds on the generally accepted versions, to give some background on developments which led to the plight of the Jews and to present some of the chief points of evidence which has caused sincere, objective investigators to question popularly held, energetically propagated versions of this phase of the war. I have attempted to set forth information and observations in a form readily accessible to those readers who have not concerned themselves as specialists in this area and in a form also suitable for use as a school study guide. Furthermore, I have frequently given references to some of the more important and recent specialized literature on which I have drawn in order to lead readers to the more detailed works. The references following many of the answers, however, have a second objective. By including them I wish to acknowledge my debt to those courageous and creative researchers who have made this essentially propaedeutic work possible.
Charles E. Weber, PhD.
Formerly Head of the Department of Modern Languages
The University of Tulsa. Spring, 1983.
3) Definitions and Semantic Development of the Term "Holocaust"
1. What is meant by the term "Holocaust"?
This word is of Greek origin and originally referred to a sacrifice wholly consumed by flames. The word has been appropriated by Zionist propagandists for their allegation that millions of Jews were murdered (largely by lethal gas) during the Second World War in Europe as a result of an extermination policy on the part of Germany and its allies. The number of Jews killed as a result of this alleged policy is usually, but by no means always, claimed to be some 6,000,000. It is sometimes claimed that a similar policy was directed towards the Gypsies, but these are seldom mentioned. The claim has also been called the Extermination Thesis, which is devoid of a propagandistic orientation. The word "holocaust" could far more appropriately be applied to the destruction by fire of a number of European cities, such as Dresden.
4) Importance of the Problem
2. Why is the question of the validity of the "Holocaust" claims of importance to every American?
These claims have been instrumental in determining important aspects of United States foreign policy since about 1944 and have probably even had their effects on domestic law. American foreign policy, in turn, has resulted in a Communist iron curtain running right down the centre of Europe (the motherland of Western Civilisation), has incurred the hostility of scores of millions of people of the Islamic faith (who control huge oil reserves of vital interest to Americans) and has possibly even been responsible in part for the threat of nuclear annihilation of our nation or Communist enslavement. The claims have certainly made our relationship with the German people a less cordial one than it would have been without them. References: Journal of Historical Review, Vol. III, no. 1, pg.5. Instauration, March 1983, pg. 12, where a summary of the immediate costs to the American taxpayer of our unwavering support of the Jewish state in Palestine is given.
3. How do the resources of those who disseminate the "holocaust" material compare to the resources of those who dispute it?
Nearly the whole motion picture industry, the major television networks, and much of the press in the United States have actively propagated the Extermination Thesis. Against this huge array of power only a few conscientious scholars have dared to speak out against the Extermination Thesis at the risk of their positions and even physical safety. Recently such scholars have found support and cohesion in the form of the Institute for Historical Review in Torrance, California. The Institute is a modestly funded organization whose resources are indeed minute compared with those of the proponents of the Extermination Thesis.
5) Bono? Motives for propagating the Extermination Thesis.
4. What have been the motivation of Jews in their intense and prolonged dissemination of the Extermination Thesis ("Holocaust" material)?
After their experiences during the Second World War, European Jews were more strongly attracted than ever to Zionism, the central objective of which was the founding of a secular Jewish state. Palestine was the most strongly desired location for that state, but Palestine had a large non-Jewish population which had to be dislodged by terror, murder, diplomatic, and financial pressure on the British government and other means. By exaggerating the extent of Jewish mortality during the war, the proponents of the Extermination Thesis could put forth the idea that Jewish migration to various countries should be facilitated since it would very small due to the great losses alleged. Moreover, a guilt complex could be engendered in potential host countries (especially the United States) by propagating the idea that they had been guilty of not helping the Jews while they had been doomed to extermination. By constantly reiterating the "Holocaust" material, Jewish organizations could more effectively frighten Jews themselves into making larger donations for various protective measures against future "Holocaust."
The Extermination Thesis has thus served to foster an ethnic awareness and solidarity amongst Jews and to prevent the loss of Jewish identity by intermarriage and other factors. In more tangible, immediate sphere, the "Holocaust" material helped Jews and the Jewish state founded in 1948 in Palestine financially. Zionist efforts culminated in Luxembourg agreement of 1952, which forced the west German (Bonn) government to commit itself to protracted, heavy reparation payments to individual Jews and to the newly formed Jewish state. The "Holocaust" material was also effective in repressing any criticism of the Jewish state, no matter how criminal its actions. The gross exaggeration of Jewish mortality also served to bring about a sort of "obliteration by contrast," since other groups, e.g., the Baltic nations, had suffered heavy losses during and indeed after the war at the hands of the USSR, a government which had given the impression of being heavily under Jewish influences in its earlier stages.
5. What has caused non-Jewish groups to tolerate and in some cases even to help disseminate the "Holocaust" material?
The factors which motivated England and a somewhat reluctant France to declare war on Germany on 3 September 1939, had little or nothing to do with an idealistic desire to rescue the dictatorial Polish state. Rather, England's objectives were to restore a balance of power on the continent and to keep a rival for export markets out of competition. As the war went on and on, the costs became ever greater when Germany proved to be far more difficult to defeat than was originally assumed. Finally, a weakened England lost most of its empire. The utter destruction of the Anti-Comintern powers as military entities left a vacuum in Europe which was readily filled by Communist forces. The extensive destruction of monuments and institutions of European civilization also appalled the world. The "Holocaust" material came in very handy in rationalizing the terrible costs and conduct of the war on the part of England and its allies. As far as the USSR was concerned, the whole world was now forced to realize what a horrible mistake had been made by trusting it and supporting its war objectives virtually without reservation. Those who had warned against the USSR could now be embarrassed by the "Holocaust" claims, which were now propagated energetically to demonstrate that a German victory would have been worse than the postwar ascendancy of the USSR.
Most strangely, we now observe that the government of western Germany in Bonn prosecutes those who question the "Holocaust" claims. This strange behaviour on the part of a "German" government must be understood in terms of fears of boycotts of German goods on international markets and pressures from the victorious powers, which still, to some extent, control western Germany as if it were an occupied land. Most governments have a tendency to claim that their subjects are better off than under previous governments. The Bonn government is no exception to this phenomenon. For that reason it makes every effort to denigrate the National Socialist government. The mood of the Bonn government is well summarized in lines 3581-2 of Goethe's Faust: Wie schien mir's schwarz, und shwazt's noch gar, Mir's immer doch nicht schwarz g'nug war. Reference: Journal of Historical Review, Vol. III, no. 2, pp 105-118.
6. What psychological needs will the future, federally subsidized Holocaust Museum in Washington fulfill?
The Holocaust Museum, estimated to cost from thirty to forty million dollars and to be located adjacent to the mall in Washington 400 yards from the Washington Monument, will fulfill a number of psychological and political needs. It constitutes a gigantic, official rationalization and justification for our role in the Second World War, which resulted in the enslavement of eastern and part of central Europe by the Communists, who had demonstrated their brutality and aims to dominate the world any number of times before and after 1939. The museum is intended as a reminder of crimes alleged to have been committed against European Jews by governments which have long ago passed out of existence. Crimes committed against Gentile nations by the Communists, who are living, present danger to our very existence, will not be thus memorialized. We can rest assured that Congress will not fund huge monuments to the victims of Katyn or the massive deportations of the Baltic populations after World War II, let alone the victims of Operation Keelhaul. Such monuments would simply remind us of our own stupidity in dealing with the prime menace to our to our existence when it would have been very easy to have done so. As one small consolation to the American taxpayers who will be forced to pay for this propaganda triumph of Jewry, the museum will be a permanent admonishment to the American people of the disproportionate political power of the Jews in the United States. It is ironic indeed that the monument to the Americans who fell in Vietnam, located not far from the planned Holocaust Museum, is a simple, modest structure which was funded largely by individual contributions. Reference: Washington Post, 3 March 1983.
7. What was done in Dachau and other concentration camps to make the Extermination Thesis seem plausible?
After the war parts of concentration camps, both in western Germany and Poland, have been rebuilt in such a way as to give an impression to viewers that huge numbers of internees were murdered by lethal gas in special chambers disguised as shower rooms. References: W. Staiglich, Der Auschwitz Mythos, pp 77, 411-412. Journal of Historical Review, Vol. I, pp 255 ff. And 365 ff.
Editor's note: This material was obtained using a Google search and can, if Google still allows it, be accessed at http://www.islam.co.za/themessage/thesis/thesis_3/1-5.htm#1