Arthur R. Butz – The Hoax Of The Twentieth Century

Arthur R. Butz, The Hoax of the Twentieth Century
In addition, it seems quite peculiar that Himmler would have allowed the recording
of a speech containing material that he “will never speak of […] publicly,”
and then, despite his control of the Gestapo, have seen these recordings fall
into the hands of his political rival Rosenberg. On the basis of these considerations
and also on account of the fact that it is very difficult to believe that
Himmler would have wasted the time of so many high SS leaders by delivering
the supposed text in document 1919-PS (a most general discussion of the war),
one can be sure that we have another forgery here. However, parts of the alleged
speech may be authentic, and some parts may have been delivered during the
Posen speech or on other occasions.
It is true that Pohl testified in Case 4 that he was present at the Posen speech
(probably true) and that Himmler did deliver the remarks concerning extermination
of the Jews.
However, Pohl’s real point was a ludicrous one. We have noted that Pohl’s basic
trial strategy was to attempt to exploit the fact that the extermination charges
had been thrown specifically at the Gestapo and the RSHA, and he was quick to
pounce on such things as the Höss affidavit as absolving him in regard to exterminations.
His defense strategy had the same basic logic as the strategies of all defendants
we have examined, except for Göring. Thus, Pohl’s testimony concerning
the Posen speech came in the context of his declaration that the speech was his
first information about the exterminations! In other words, the exterminations
were allegedly so far removed from his official responsibilities that it required a
declaration by Himmler for him to learn of them. He naturally further testified
that he shortly later protested to Himmler but was told that it was “none of your
business.” Thus was expressed merely Pohl’s defense strategy of putting selfserving
interpretations on that which was passing as fact in court. 345
A lesser point should be made before we leave the subject of the Posen speech.
It is possible to argue that the text may be genuine at his point but that by “Ausrottung”
Himmler merely meant “uprooting” or some form of elimination less drastic
than killing. The principal basis for such an argument would be that Ausrottung is
indeed explicitly equated in the text with Judenevakuierung and with Ausschaltung.
The corpses referred to could easily be interpreted as German corpses produced
by the Allied air raids, for which the Nazis often claimed the Jews were ultimately
responsible. On the other hand, it can be noted that if the remarks are authentic
then Himmler regarded it as a right and a duty dieses Volk umzubringen,
and the comparison with the bloody purge of 1934 at the outset of the remarks
seems to justify taking “Ausrottung” in its primary sense of extermination. Thus,
while such an argument could be made, it would not be very solid.
The conclusive point is that in being asked to believe that the text is genuine
we are, in effect, being asked to believe Kempner.
345
240
NMT, vol. 5, 666, 675.