The Journal of History     Spring 2005    TABLE OF CONTENTS

"Compare: Nuremberg, then and now!" - Part 2

By Ernst Zündel

Most of the evidence in the trials was "documentary," selected by the  Allies from the large tonnage of captured records. The document selection was made by the prosecution. The defense had access only to  those documents which the prosecution considered material to the case  and were made available to the defense. The Allies could choose to release or to hide and/or destroy any documents which did not fit  their post-war strategy or plans at Nuremberg. The Allies admitted elsewhere that their propaganda ministries and intelligence services  had previously forged Nazi stamps, Nazi passes, Nazi passports,  orders, ID cards etc. which fooled the Nazis many times because they  were so perfect and over which the Allied propagandists gloat to this  day. It does not take a great leap of the imagination to think what  these same Allied Government agencies, their personnel and forgers of  documents could do now with all the captured genuine German document-producing facilities, the captured type writers, rubber  stamps, and tons of letter heads of all sizes and description and of  any National Socialist organization you care to mention.

Even setting aside questionable "documentary" evidence, let's look at  some of the accused's "testimony" - how it was extracted, and what it  really means.

Like vile exclamation marks, at the heart of the Nuremberg Tribunal  stand certain words: "Genocide" "Gas chamber." "Six million." These  words, and the value judgment concepts they connote, were derived  largely from the admissions and affidavit of one man, Rudolf Hoess, the one-time war-time Kommandant at Auschwitz.

Rudolf Hoess was the Allies' most important witness to the  "Holocaust." His affidavit and his testimony were quoted extensively  both by the prosecution and in the judgment of the IMT at Nuremberg,  as well as by the press. It was his testimony which laid the  foundation and validated the claim of the ". . . extermination of  millions of people by gas at Auschwitz." Hoess's "confession" is  heavily relied upon by historians like Raul Hilberg and others as a  primary documentary source to this day.

It is true that Hoess witnessed at Nuremberg to horrendous  "atrocities," and he also confirmed the "truth" under oath of an affidavit which he agreed to sign for the prosecution. In it, he confessed to having given orders for the gassing of millions of  victims. The affidavit, by the way, was in English, a language he did  not speak or understand, according to family members.

We now know from the book "Legions of Death" that Rudolf Hoess was beaten almost to death by Jewish members of the British Field Police Force upon capture and badly mistreated thereafter until he gave this very devastating "testimony" and "affidavit" used by the Allies propagandists ever since. You be the judge. Here is an excerpt from this book by Rupert Butler, published by Hamlyn Paperbacks, page 235:


At 5 PM on 11 March 1946, Frau Hoess opened her front door to six intelligence specialists in British uniform, most of them tall and menacing and all of them practiced in the more sophisticated techniques of sustained and merciless investigation.

No physical violence was used on the family: it was scarcely necessary. Wife and children were separated and guarded. Clarke's tone was deliberately low-key and conversational.

He began mildly: "I understand your husband came to see you as recently as last night."

Frau Hoess merely replied: "I haven't seen him since he absconded months ago."

Clarke tried once more, saying gently but with a tone of reproach: "You know that isn't true." Then all at once his manner had changed and he was shouting: "If you don't tell us, we'll turn you over to the Russians and they'll put you before a firing squad. Your son will go to Siberia."

It proved more than enough. Eventually, a broken Frau Hoess betrayed the whereabouts of the former Auschwitz Kommandant, the man who now called himself Franz Lang. Suitable intimidation of the son and daughter produced precisely identical information.


When they found Hoess, here is how the capture played out. Clarke, one of the participants, recalls it vividly:


"He was lying on top of a three-tier bunker wearing a new pair of silk pyjamas. We discovered later that he had lost the cyanide pill  most of them carried. Not that he would have had much chance to use it because we had rammed a torch (flashlight) into his mouth."

Hoess screamed in terror at the mere sight of the British uniforms.

Clarke yelled: "What is your name?"

With each answer of "Franz Lang," Clarke's hand crashed into the face of the prisoner. The fourth time that happened, Hoess broke and admitted who he was.

The admission suddenly unleashed the loathing of the Jewish sergeants in the arresting party whose parents had died in Auschwitz following an order signed by Hoess.

The prisoner was torn from the top bunk, the pyjama ripped from his body. He was then dragged naked to one of the slaughter tables, where it seemed to Clarke the blows and screams were endless.

Eventually, the Medical Officer urged the Captain: "Call them off, unless you want to take back a corpse."

A blanket was thrown over Hoess and he was dragged to Clarke's car, where the sergeant poured a substantial slug of whiskey down his throat. Then Hoess tried to sleep.

Clarke thrust his service stick under the man's eyelids and ordered in German: "Keep your pig eyes open, you swine." . . .

The party arrived back at Heide around three in the morning. The snow was swirling still, but the blanket was torn from Hoess and he was made to walk completely nude through the prison yard to his cell. It took three days to get a coherent statement out of him.

This statement, tortured and terrorized out of him, was the one we are all familiar with - the "proof" for the so-called "gassing of the Jews."


Historians today are finally admitting that Hoess is a totally  unreliable witness - and is it any wonder? He spoke of a concentration camp "Wolzek" which does not even exist. He swore that 2,500,000 people were gassed and burned at Auschwitz and a further half million died of disease, for a total dead of three million. The Toronto Sun of July 18, 1990 claimed 1.5 million. The Washington Post, on the same date, also mentioned 1.5 million. Quoted from an article by Krzyszlov Leski, we have the following:


Poland has cut its estimate of the number of people killed by the  Nazis in the Auschwitz death camp from 4 million to just over 1 million.

The vast majority of the dead are now accepted to have been Jews, despite claims by the former Polish communist government that as many Poles perished in Hitler's largest concentration camp. . .

The new study could rekindle the controversy over the scale of Hitler's final solution."

Shevach Weiss, a death camp survivor and Labor Party member of the Israeli Parliament, expressed disbelief at the revised estimates, saying: "It sounds shocking and strange. . . ."

Shmuel Krakowsky, head of research at Israel's Yad Vashem memorial for Jewish victims of the Holocaust, said the new Polish figures were correct.

"The 4 million figure was let slip by Capt. Rudolf Hoess, the death camp's Nazi commander. Some have bought it, but it was exaggerated. . . ."

But the Polish authorities said accurate estimates of the number killed could only be made by studying German documents seized by the Soviet Union. But Moscow has refused to return the archives.


A most convenient excuse! In 1989 I organized a write-in campaign to  persuade the then-Soviet Leader Gorbachev to release the Auschwitz Death Registers captured in 1945 when the Red Army took over the Auschwitz complex. A few months afterwards this actually happened. Gorbachev released these all-important documents to the Red Cross, which showed in minute detail why people had died in Auschwitz, the cause and time of death, their birth, address etc.

74,000 names of people who had died were listed, of which only approximately 30,000 were Jews, along with an almost equal number of Poles and members of other nationalities.

The incredibly shrinking Holocaust! The "millions" that we have heard about for half a century and that we hear and read about still today all started with the "testimony" beaten out of poor Hoess on that horrible night in defeated Germany.

Historian Christopher Browning finally had to admit in a recent Vanity Fair article that Hoess was an unreliable witness. Browning stated that

". . . Hoess was always a very weak and confused witness. The revisionists use him all the time for this reason, in order to try and discredit the memory of Auschwitz as a whole." (Holocaust
Revisionism Source Book, 1994, p. 1)

But does that invalidate the Revisionist claims or their strategy? Not at all. On the contrary. After all, Hoess's testimony was used as the skeleton on which the entire Holocaust myth about mass gassings was constructed in the first place. Revisionists have concentrated on Hoess precisely because he is probably the most important source for Holocaust historians' conclusions on and exaggerations about the Holocaust. Raul Hilberg, who wrote the "Bible" of the "Holocaust," The Destruction of the European Jews, (Holmes & Meier, Revised  Edition, 1985 ) relies on Hoess's testimony heavily, and Hoess was the primary witness relied upon by the Nuremberg Tribunal in their judgment regarding the "extermination of the Jews," even though he told the court of having been savagely tortured.

What's more, Hoess's treatment by the Allies and the total unreliability of his "evidence" are not unusual. We don't know how many of the accused at the Nuremberg trials were badly mistreated, since references in the trial transcripts to their mistreatment was expunged from the record. (Read this again! Material damaging to the Allies was expunged from the Nuremberg trial transcripts!)

An example is Streicher's testimony. Streicher was reported in the London Times as having testified that he was tortured, whipped, spat on, and forced to drink from a latrine. (Streicher Opens His Case, The Times, April 27, 1946). His testimony was later expunged from the record of the trial with the active participation of the prosecution, the president of the Tribunal, and even his own defense lawyer!

Other traces of the brutal treatment of the Nuremberg prisoners, however, have survived. One of these witnesses was Gauleiter Sauckel's reference to threats to his family, which did remain in the transcript. During his testimony in May of 1946, Sauckel testified that he signed a document, even though he did not know what was in that document, after his family of 10 children was threatened with deportation to Russia.

And finally, it must not be forgotten that this is the only judicial proceeding conducted in the name of civilized nations where there was no appeal mechanism to a parallel or higher authority for a review of the proceedings or any verdicts that this so-called international military tribunal arrived at. Their judgments over the leadership of Europe's most populous state, against whom they had just fought a murderous, near genocidal war, were final and deadly. Keep all that in mind as you read, watch and listen to all the emotional hype in the mass media on television and radio of these days. And for what?

The Jewish leader Nahum Goldman spells it out for you in his astounding book, The Jewish Paradox, Pages 123-125, admitting to the mother of all frauds. In his own words, at the conclusion of the agreement Goldman obtained from Dr. Adenauer, the German Quisling State's first Allied-appointed chancellor,


". . . the Germans will have paid out a total of 80 billion. . . Without the German reparations that started coming through during its first ten years as a state, Israel would not have half of its present
infrastructure: All the trains in Israel are German, the ships are German, and the same goes for electrical installations and a great deal of Israel's industry . . . and that is setting aside the individual pensions paid to survivors. Israel today receives hundreds of millions of dollars in German currency each year . . . In some years the sums of money received by Israel from Germany has been as much as double or treble the contribution made by collections from international Jewry. Nowadays, there is no longer any opposition to the principle.


Not anywhere you look!

After the Nuremberg Trials and Proceedings are stripped of the hyperbole and smoke screens which surrounds them, it can be put quite bluntly:

The Allies did it all. The Allies fought a war on foreign shores - in part to establish the State of Israel. The Allies lent a willing hand to political ambitions that grew out of the Zionist camp. By means of the Nuremberg trials, the Allies helped the establishment and financing of Israel. So as to secure Israel, the Allies and their personnel became accusers, researchers, interrogators, prosecutors, judges and executioners - all in one! The Allies supplied the "experts" who sifted through the German documents, which were all totally in Allied control, highlighting incriminating documents, discarding exonerating evidence. These investigators were told only to "find" incriminating documents against the hapless accused, as I was told by the American scholar Charles Weber, Ph.D., who had been one of these Allied researchers, and who testified at my own trials. These researchers were told to ignore the documents that might have spared the lives of the accused German leaders. When all was said and done, there was not even an appeal.

U.S. Chief Justice Harlan Fiske Stone, speaking of the American Chief Prosecutor, Jackson, finally had this to say, as mentioned in the Viking Press hard cover, cited before, p. 746 :


"Jackson is away conducting his high grade lynching party in Nuremberg," he remarked. "I don't mind what he does to the Nazis, but I hate to see the pretense that he is running a court and proceeding according to common law.

This is a little too sanctimonious a fraud to meet my old-fashioned ideas."


Some sanctimonious fraud!

Some record for the Allies to be "proud of" - to have helped manufacture such a sick, perverted Marxist/Zionist inspired legal farce that would condemn to death the leaders of the only military
effort ever undertaken to stop the "evil empire" from bringing to us all their "hate law" ideology.

I bow my head in reverence to those who were judicially murdered at Nuremberg. They were the world's martyrs, not villains. Not one of them would have been condemned to death in a fair trial. Not one! They  sacrificed an entire nation, and in the end themselves, to save Western civilization. They were defeated by thugs in robes and gangsters in uniform and by the conspiracies hatched by shysters from the ghettos and shtetls of Eastern Europe.
The concepts expressed in this document are protected by the basic human right to freedom of speech, as guaranteed by the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, reaffirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court as applying to the Internet content on June 26, 1997.

Editor's note: It is my theory that the Nuremburg trials were conducted to establish the myth that 6 million Jews were exterminated using gas for the direct purpose of enabling the State of Israel to be established. If anyone can corroborate this theory, please contact me at with documentation. Please request to be added to my Address Book as I have SpamBlocker on this Email address.


The Journal of History -Spring 2005 Copyright © 2005 by News Source, Inc.