Arthur R. Butz – The Hoax Of The Twentieth Century

Supplement 2: Context and Perspective in the Holocaust Controversy
quiet substitution, in public controversy, of the “gas chamber” question for the
“extermination” question, not because they confuse the two, but because by so doing
they are able to take advantage of certain routine reservations that apply to
nearly every historical subject.
For example, until a short time ago, if I were asked if the Japanese had gassed
prisoners during World War II, I would have answered that I was unaware of any
such gassings. Now I have very recently read a credible report that they gassed
404 “human guinea pigs” in connection with “research on biological warfare.” 508
However, I continue to be certain that the Japanese did not “exterminate” any
populations.
As another example, I am certain that during World War II the Allied powers
did not exterminate any significant portion of the Eskimo population, and I am
also confident that no individual communities of Eskimos were gassed by them,
but not that I am “certain” in the former case and only “confident” in the latter.
The difference arises from the fact that, while one can show that there was no extermination
program for Eskimos (e.g. insignificant absences were noted after the
war), one cannot show that no Eskimos were gassed. Of course, one can cite the
lack of an evident motivation for gassing Eskimos, the lack of subsequent charges
of Eskimo gassings, etc., and one can be “confident” no communities of Eskimos
were gassed (of course, individual Eskimos might have been gassed for specific
offenses in California). However, one must e.g. allow the possibility that some
isolated Eskimo community, perhaps posing a security menace to some highly secret
Allied military operation, was gassed in great secrecy. This is just routine historical
reserve, applying to all phases of history, whose potential relevance to
every historical subject is so taken for granted that it is rarely mentioned.
We can prove that the Eskimos were not exterminated, but we cannot prove
that no communities of Eskimos were gassed. Likewise, and at the risk of giving
the opposition words, which can be lifted out of context and used dishonestly, I
can prove that there was no German program of physical extermination of the
Jews, but I cannot prove that no Jews were gassed, although after living long with
the evidence I am confident that no Jews were gassed.
If one examines closely the arguments that are offered when the tack is to argue
that Jews were gassed, it is clear that the allegation is of the “isolated Eskimo
community” sort. In place of geographical isolation, there is substituted the claim
of administrative isolation, i.e. that no written records were kept of the design of
the gas chambers or of their construction or of the gassings themselves, that in order
to conceal the deeds the bodies were burned and not a trace was left, and that
in order to keep the number of witnesses to a minimum Jewish work parties were
used in the operations, these Jews later being killed also. Why such secrecy
should have been considered necessary or relevant, given rallies in Madison
Square Garden against the alleged slaughter, official Allied and Presidential declarations
in condemnation, etc., 509 is never explained, and few will ask such questions.
The important thing is that the whole thing can then be “proved” via decla-
508
509
Chicago Tribune, August 5, 1982, section 1, p. 5.
See pp. 98-111 and 183-185.
389