Arthur R. Butz – The Hoax Of The Twentieth Century

Arthur R. Butz, The Hoax of the Twentieth Century
1944. It would have been dishonest to merely reference Hilberg on this point, because
Hilberg believes that the first raid occurred in December 1944 and is obviously
confused on this point. 423
Another reason for the frequent referencing of Reitlinger and Hilberg is my
sincere wish that the reader would take a look at such books; it is only then that
the reader can become completely convinced that the hoax is a hoax. In this connection
one can recommend a typical procedure that the reader may go through to
confirm the matter in a general way. First, get a copy of Hilberg’s book. On pages
567-571, Hilberg presents a magnificent discussion of the alleged role of the Zyklon
B in the exterminations, and on page 619 or 621, he points out that the German
documents speak only of a program of deportations to the East and associated
operations. It is also useful to read his discussion of what the Nuremberg trial
documents say happened in Hungary, 509-554, and to note the document numbers
he cites in this connection. Next find, if possible, a copy of Reitlinger’s book, first
or second edition. On pages 158-159 (150 in the first edition), he reproduces the
text of document NO-4473, in which he notes that the “gas chamber” that allegedly
existed in the building which contained Crematory II at Auschwitz was described
as a “Vergasungskeller” in the original German. On pages 118, 121 and
182 (112, 114-115 and 169 in the first edition) Reitlinger remarks on the “mystery”
that “at certain periods, entire transports (of Jews) were admitted” into
Auschwitz. Reitlinger also briefly mentions the chemical industry at Auschwitz,
pages 109 and 492 (105 and 452 in the first edition). Hopefully, the reader will
undertake a more thoroughgoing confirmation, but the above would be a good
start.
Some people may assume, fallaciously, that opinions expressed by Jews and
Germans on the subject of the “Final Solution” carry nearly authoritative weight.
Under circumstance where the subject of this book is being discussed by a
group of people, a seemingly potent argument – because it is so laden with emotion
and can upset the decorum of the group – may be offered by a Jew who
claims to have lost some relative or close acquaintance in the “holocaust,” and he
may even have knowledge that the supposedly missing relative had been sent to
Auschwitz, Treblinka, or some such place.
There are several ways to react to such a point. An obvious possibility is that
the man is lying. However, it is more probable that he is telling the truth as he
knows it. Assuming that his story is valid, there is only one sense in which it can
be valid. That is, all he can claim is that he or his family lost contact with some
relative in Europe during the war and never heard from that person again. Obviously,
such data does not imply the existence of a Nazi extermination program.
That contact was lost during the war was almost inevitable, either because it
was difficult for Jews deported to the east to communicate with people in allied
countries, or because it was difficult or impossible to communicate from the east
to points farther west during the chaotic last year of the war. Thus, the only point of
interest in such a case is the claim that contact was not reestablished after the war.
423
290
Hilberg, 632.