THE RUDOLF REPORT

GERMAR RUDOLF · THE RUDOLF REPORTonly five buildings in the camp, the crematoria, 67,90 but due to his lackof technical and architectural expertise, nevertheless fails miserably inhis self-appointed task of explaining the technique and manner of functioningof these buildings. 91Robert van Pelt and Deborah Dwork, in their history of the city ofAuschwitz, deal only superficially with the subject of the concentrationcamp, 92 and van Pelt’s more recent book is perhaps a bit too narrowlyfocused on homicidal gassings and does not really go beyond whatPressac already presented. 69Books available on bookstore shelves are—for the most part—acompendium of eyewitness reports, scattered amongst serious attemptsat documentation and literary pretensions. 93Only in the very early 1990s, i.e., since the collapse of the Communistregime in Eastern Europe, did the files of those agencies of theThird Reich become available to us which allow a reliable history ofAuschwitz camp to be written. The files of the Zentralbauleitung derWaffen SS und Polizei Auschwitz (Central Construction Office of the90919293J.-C. Pressac, Les crématoires d’Auschwitz. La machinerie du meurtre de masse, CNSR, Paris1993; German: Die Krematorien von Auschwitz. Die Technik des Massenmordes, Piper, Munich1994; if not mentioned otherwise, back references to this footnote refer to the Frenchoriginal.For a criticism of Pressac’s first book, see R. Faurisson, JHR, 11(1) (1991), pp. 25ff.; ibid.,11(2) (1991), pp. 133ff. (online French.: www.vho.org/F/j/RHR/3/Faurisson65-154.html); F.A. Leuchter, The Fourth Leuchter Report, Samisdat Publishers Ltd., Toronto 1991 (online:www.zundelsite.org/english/leuchter/report4/leuchter4.toc.html); for critique of Pressac’s secondbook see: Herbert Verbeke (ed.), op. cit. (note 43); for a criticism of the principles underlyingPressac’s methodology, see G. Rudolf, “Gutachten über die Frage der Wissenschaftlichkeitder Bücher Auschwitz: Technique and operation of the gas chambers und LesCrématoires d’Auschwitz, la Machinerie du meurtre de masse von Jean-Claude Pressac”, in:W. Schlesiger, Der Fall Rudolf, Cromwell, London 1994 (Engl. online:www.vho.org/GB/Books/trc/index.html#expert-report); Pressac has since been the target ofmassive, quite unscientific, attacks from Jewish quarters as well; see also Rivarol, March 22,1996, p. 8 (online: abbc.com/aaargh/fran/archFaur/RF960322.html); ibid., April 12, 1996, p.4; see also Pierre Guillaume’s criticism, De la misère intellectuelle en milieu universitaire,B.p. 9805, 75224 Paris cedex 05, 1995 (online:abbc.com/aaargh/fran/archVT/vt9309xx1.html).Robert van Pelt, Deborah Dwork, Auschwitz: 1270 to the Present, Yale University Press, NewHaven and London 1996; see also Carlo Mattogno’s criticism “Architektonische Stümpereienzweier Plagiatoren”, VffG, 4(1) (2000), pp. 25-33 (online:www.vho.org/VffG/2000/1/Mattogno25-33.html; Engl.: “Auschwitz 1270 to the Present” (online:http://www.codoh.com/granata/irving-eng.html).See, in this regard, Norman G. Finkelstein’s condemnation in Norman G. Finkelstein, RuthBettina Birn, A Nation on Trial: The Goldhagen Thesis and Historical Truth, MetropolitanBooks, New York 1998; see also Richard Widmann’s criticism, “Holocaust-Literatur versusHolocaust-Wissenschaft”, VffG 2(4) (1998), pp. 311ff. (online:www.vho.org/VffG/1998/4/Buecher4.html).52