THE RUDOLF REPORT

7. ZYKLON B FOR THE KILLING OF HUMAN BEINGSBöck’s testimony was one of the few which the Frankfurt tribunalconsidered credible after careful examination, that is, the inconsistencieswould not be so easily recognized by the layman, in contrast to themany other testimonies. And yet it is entirely incredible.Pressac himself becomes very critical in quite a few of his passagesrelating to the reliability and credibility of eyewitness testimonies;452 yet it is upon these eyewitness testimonies that all the descriptionsof the ‘gas chamber’ killings are based. He lists the untruths, impossibilities,and exaggerations of the witnesses and explains how theypresumably materialized. Finally, in an interview, he said: 453“No, no. One cannot write serious history based only upon eyewitnesstestimonies.”At the same time, however, he bases all of his remarks on the allegedexistence of homicidal ‘gas chambers’ exclusively on these eyewitnesstestimonies! And elsewhere, he states, with a naiveté whichcan hardly be surpassed: 454“Witnesses never lie, but they can be mistaken.”Pressac seems to be the only person of the establishment whotakes notice of the progress of revisionist research. He knows that traditionalhistoriography of the Holocaust is reduced to absurdity by thefacts revealed by this research. Consequently, he keeps changing hisattitude when making public statements. The most vehement attack ofthe media darling Pressac on the dominating historiography occurredduring an interview published as an appendix to a PhD thesis analyzingthe history of Holocaust revisionism in France. In it, Pressac describedthe established historiography of the Holocaust as “rotten” andstated: 455 “Can we alter the course? It is too late. A general correction is factuallyand humanely impossible [...]. New documents will unavoidablyturn up and will overthrow the official certainties more and more. Thecurrent view of the world of the [National Socialist] camps, though tri-452 J.-C. Pressac, op. cit. (note 67), pp. 124-128, 162, 174, 176f., 181, 229, 239, 379f., 459-502.For additional eyewitness testimonies, see also note 442 and E. Kogon et al., op. cit. (note 42),pp. 194-239.453 Focus no. 17/1994, pp. 118, 120.454 Die Woche, Oct. 7, 1993, p. 8455 In: Valérie Igounet, Histoire du négationnisme en France, Editions du Seuil, Paris 2000, p.652. I thank R. Faurisson, who made me aware of this interview.205