Arthur R. Butz – The Hoax Of The Twentieth Century

Chapter 5: The Hungarian Jews
continued for several years. With respect to Thadden, German tribunals attempted
to correct the glaring omission by prosecuting him. After he was released from
American detention in 1949, a German court in Nuremberg charged him in December
1950, but he went to Cologne in the British zone and extradition was denied.
Then a Cologne court charged him in May 1952, but the trial never materialized.
He signed a prosecution affidavit for Eichmann’s trial in 1961. In early
1964, he was arrested again but released after he managed to produce $500,000
bail, but then in November 1964 he was in an automobile accident and died of the
injuries received.
Similarly, Horst Wagner was arrested by German authorities in 1949, but he
managed to flee to Spain and then to Italy. Extradition proceedings commenced in
1953 but failed. In 1958, he returned to Germany to apply for a pension, was arrested,
but soon released on $20,000 bond, despite his previous flight to escape
prosecution. His case seemed to disappear, but a trial was finally scheduled for
May 20, 1968, ten years after his return to Germany. However there were several
postponements for various stated reasons, and finally, in late 1972, his trial was
postponed indefinitely. In late 1975, he was living in quiet retirement in a suburb
of Düsseldorf. 286
So much for the documentary evidence supporting the claims of extermination
of Hungarian Jews. Wagner and Thadden had joined, as had Höss and others, the
“new Meistersinger von Nürnberg,” but they evidently did it in an intelligent
manner, because they acquired effective immunity from prosecution. In this connection,
a detailed study of the documents by some expert person would be, most
probably, very worthwhile. One object of analysis should be the language used.
For example, the expression “nach Deutschland” in NG-2262 sounds as peculiar
to me as “to America” would sound in an official State Department document, but
I am not the appropriate judge in this matter. In any case, Wagner and Thadden
held some cards merely by virtue of knowledge of the existence of false documents,
that others did not hold. For example, Höss was in a position of dependence
only on the gratitude of the Allies.
I have not examined all of the documents in the NG series (there are more than
5,000), and therefore I cannot reject the possibility, or even probability, that a few
more exist. It is also possible that one or two might turn up with scribbles, said to
be initials, for which I have no immediate answer. However, the documents study
has been relatively thorough in consideration of the purposes of our study. It goes
far beyond the documents that happen to have been referenced by Hilberg and by
Reitlinger, far enough to satisfy me three times over on the fundamental dependence
of this evidence on the post-war cooperation of von Thadden and Wagner.
It is well worth noting that Wagner and Thadden were not the only Germans
involved with the Hungarian Jews who were mysteriously excused from prosecution.
SS General Otto Winkelmann, Higher SS and Police Leader for Hungary and
in command of all SS operations in Hungary, was also a prosecution witness in
286
Hilberg, 714, 715; Reitlinger, 443, 566, 567; Eichmann, session 85, A1, B1, O1-R1; London
Times (Nov. 20, 1964), 16; New York Times (Nov. 20, 1964), 8. London Daily Telegraph, (Nov. 7,
1975), magazine section, 17.
199