General Holocaust Denial Discussion Part II

[Clayton Moore]

Now what?

Well I undebunked the

I mean, Jon Harrison dealt with it

explanation.

So do you wanna undebunk something else?

Here are some undeathcamp like Auschwitz facts I've gleaned. Plus some questions. All in my own words.

Inmates got married at Auschwitz.
3,000 live births were recorded at the maternity hospital.
Who watched the kids?.

Auschwitz inmates built a swimming-pool in the camp with a diving board and 'starters' blocks for races.

Auschwitz inmates sunbathed next to it on weekends as they watched water-polo matches.

Paintings from Auschwitz art classes still exist.

An Auschwitz camp library for inmates had about forty-five thousand volumes and periodicals for inmates to select from.

Auschwitz inmates were paid for their work and services and special money was printed for them to use.


For extra work Auschwitz inmates could earn coupons for cake or ice cream in the Camp Cantina.

Six camp orchestras at Auschwitz/Birkenau. One orchestra had about 100-120 musicians.

Theatrical performances were held at the Auschwitz centre.

A rather saucy review was held at Auschwitz on Saturdays.

The last pictures taken inside the centre had pianos, costumes and a stage where the inmates put on productions.

Birkenau at Auschwitz had a own soccer field, The SS staff and camp inmates had weekly games. The soccer field was next to the alleged gas chambers. And they played soccer there? Must have been a secret.

There was a central sauna at Auschwitz.

A fencing class at Auschwitz.

Cultural and non-political films were shown weekly at the Auschwitz camp cinema.

Legal advice was available to Auschwitz inmates, pertaining to any non-natural deaths.

The SS were not allowed to hit Auschwitz prisoners.

It was a standing order that any inmate could approach Hoess personally to register a complaint.

About 4,800 sick Auschwitz prisoners were under medical care.

There was a dental unit for Auschwitz inmates

The Auschwitz surgical unit was very modern.(Elie Wiesel told of his operation there in his Night essay) Expert surgeons were sent from the famous Berlin "Charité" surgical clinic to it for difficult cases.

Special "dietetic cooking" meals for some of the sick were prepared by the Auschwitz cook-houses.


Visitors were free to go and come at the Auschwitz camps. Wives visited their husbands at Auschwitz.

In 1943 a camp brothel was established just inside the Auschwitz main gate, on orders from Himmler, as a reward for privileged prisoners.

Female guards were used in the Auschwitz women's sections.

How about the soccer field?

 

[Bluespaceoddity]

Now somebody explains why weddings in a work camp and the attempted extermination of a race are mutually exclusive.

Oh, wait. They're not.

No, wait. They really aren't. Neither performed weddings nor cancelled weddings* in a transit camp are mutually exclusive with the attempted extermination of a race.

* "Rudolf Raphaelsohn and Lotte Neumund had given notice of their intended marriage. The wedding could not take place, because one of them was deported before the marriage.
Documents concerning intended marriages which were not performed; archives of the Westerbork municipality, currently at the archives of Gemeente Midden-Drenthe in Beilen."

So, Clayton Moore must have had another reason for posting that wedding photo from that site without explaining why?

 

[Dcdrac]

No, wait. They really aren't. Neither performed weddings nor cancelled weddings* in a transit camp are mutually exclusive with the attempted extermination of a race.

* "Rudolf Raphaelsohn and Lotte Neumund had given notice of their intended marriage. The wedding could not take place, because one of them was deported before the marriage.
Documents concerning intended marriages which were not performed; archives of the Westerbork municipality, currently at the archives of Gemeente Midden-Drenthe in Beilen."

So, Clayton Moore must have had another reason for posting that wedding photo from that site without explaining why?

It is possibly an attempt to normalise the horrific and therefore try to say I they were allowing marriages in these camps they cannot have been death camps, disregarding the fact of course the inmates were not there out of choice.

 

[Bluespaceoddity]

Well I undebunked the

I mean, Jon Harrison dealt with it

explanation.

So do you wanna undebunk something else?

How about the soccer field?

I don't know what the first part of your reply to me is supposed to mean. Christian and Jewish wedding ceremonies took place in Westerbork. Municipal clerks registered births and deaths as well as weddings and divorces. It is recorded history. Has been for a while. What are you trying to say by posting a photo without explanation? Some of the married people survived the final solution, others didn't. What about the couple in the photo you posted? Do you know who they are?

When the Red Cross wrote in 1946 that Sobibor was the extermination camp for Jews deported from Westerbork in 1943 the Red Cross representatives already knew that some of the victims of the mass murder in Sobibor had been married - or had attempted to marry- in Westerbork because such bureaucratic records remained for them to examine. Now What?

What about soccer? Primo Levi wrote about a soccer match involving Sonderkommando of Birkenau Crematoria. The killing and body disposal there continued regardless. What do you have to tell me?

Football does not expose the Holocaust as a hoax either but rather -like most of "your" examples- exposes the ignorance of Holocaust deniers regarding the complexity of the camps.

Are you starting over again? Reset the merry-go-round? What do you think will change this time around?

 

[LSSBB]

I don't know what the first part of your reply to me is supposed to mean. Christian and Jewish wedding ceremonies took place in Westerbork. Municipal clerks registered births and deaths as well as weddings and divorces. It is recorded history. Has been for a while. What are you trying to say by posting a photo without explanation? Some of the married people survived the final solution, others didn't. What about the couple in the photo you posted? Do you know who they are?

When the Red Cross wrote in 1946 that Sobibor was the extermination camp for Jews deported from Westerbork in 1943 the Red Cross representatives already knew that some of the victims of the mass murder in Sobibor had been married - or had attempted to marry- in Westerbork because such bureaucratic records remained for them to examine. Now What?

What about soccer? Primo Levi wrote about a soccer match involving Sonderkommando of Birkenau Crematoria. The killing and body disposal there continued regardless. What do you have to tell me?

Football does not expose the Holocaust as a hoax either but rather -like most of "your" examples- exposes the ignorance of Holocaust deniers regarding the complexity of the camps.

Are you starting over again? Reset the merry-go-round? What do you think will change this time around?

His response is just more of the same pattern of argument by incredulity. For some reason we are supposed to be convinced that there was no mass killing of Jews, merely because he is unable to reconcile one fact with another. He doesn't apparently realize that how a brain works is no proof of anything to anyone besides someone who has absolute faith that their brain works flawlessly.

 

[CaptainHowdy]

Now somebody explains why weddings in a work camp and the attempted extermination of a race are mutually exclusive.

Oh, wait. They're not.

It was a huge war that took place over years across all of Europe. Lots of things happened at lots of different times.

Allowing marriages between two members of a race (sic) that you are attempting to exterminate and exterminating that race (sic) are not mutually exclusive. Selecting Jewish children and Jews unable to work for extermination in the gas chamber while simultaneously providing Jewish children who are too sick or injured to work with medical treatment and a period of recuperation are not mutually exclusive either. But they are incongruous to people who don't understand the subtle complexities of the Holocaust. It WAS a huge war that took place over years across all of Europe. Exceptions to the Rule don't negate the Rule.

 

[EtienneSC]

[.....] There are many hypotheses advanced in psychology and sociology relevant to explaning why human beings decide to participate in violence or are reluctant to stop it when they learn about it, including

dehumanisation
social construction of otherness and/or race
the bystander effect
obedience to authority

You have mentioned the Milgram experiements, which are certainly relevant. However, this book by David Grossman addresses military psychology more directly. It could presumably be extended to para-military psychology in case of many of the groups involved or accused of mass killings in the East. One point it makes is that proximity to the victim reduces the likelihood of killing, which makes comparison with the allied bombing crews less relevant.

This post allowed but please try to stay closer to the topic. A new thread regarding social psychology and tolerance of violence may be in order.

Posted By: Loss Leader

 

[Bluespaceoddity]

Clayton Moore, Has the purpose for your posting of that wedding photo been guessed accurately by other posters on this topic? Would you like to rephrase anything from their recent contributions to this thread or are you content with the way a message has been articulated for you, Clayton Moore?

Philip Mechanicus' wrote a diary while in Westerbork, published in Dutch as "In dépôt". He included:

"Huwelijksaankondiging ‘an die Kamaraden Baracke 21’:
‘Es heiraten: Ella Silberstein - Oskar Biro.
Bürgerliche Trauung: Freitag, 24.9.43 um 4 Uhr Administratie.
Chuppoh: Sonntag, 26.9.43 um 3 Uhr Baracke 101
(eetzaal van het verplegend personeel en de artsen).
Empfang: Freitag Baracke 37 B, Sonntag Baracke 101.’" (Donderdag 23 September. page 169)

Was there a -self evident- message I didn't pick up when I first read this book? Mechanicus repeatedly speaks about marriages and mentions several other weddings that took place in Westerbork. Have you read his diary? Did you see implications there that so many people apparently miss when he posthumously shows them glimpses inside the Westerbork universe?

"Om drie uur, terwijl de nieuw aangekomenen werden geregistreerd en Lippmann & Rosenthal hen plunderden, een choeppoh (kerkelijke huwelijksinzegening) in barak 35. Hij in keurig colbert, met witte aster in het knoopsgat, zij met witte sluier, beiden ernstige mensen van distinctie. Een paar honderd belangstellenden. Kerkelijke gezangen, een toespraak, toepasselijk op deze tijd, plechtige voorlezing en tekening van het huwelijksverbond. Dit huwelijk is voorlopig slechts een getuigenis, want als man en vrouw mogen deze jonge mensen hier niet leven, daartoe bestaat niet de mogelijkheid." (Woensdag 29 September, Page 174)

I assume you didn't read his book in Dutch but there are English translations. Perhaps you can post the published English version of this passage?

In 1999 Chronos made a Westerbork documentary. After 40 minutes the German narrator, Harry Kühn, comments on scenes filmed by Rudolf Breslauer in May 1944. Kühn explains to the viewers that young people fall in love, and people marry, as the film footage stops and is replaced with a photo, the wedding picture, you posted. But the Chronos documentary doesn't end there and the narrator doesn't fall into confused silence. For some reason they continue and a little later he narrates that over a 100.000 of the people were deported from Westerbork never to return. States that many of them died in extermination camps. Gas chambers. Why is that? These people looked at that wedding photo, selected it for their documentary and ... ? Did they miss something?

The monument at the end of their documentary, composed of a stone for each individual victim, is based on an idea of Louis de Wijze. A man who credits football as one of the things that allowed him to survive. Football in Westerbork and football in Auschwitz-Monowitz.

Breslauer filmed football and Mechanicus mentions football in his Westerbork diary. (Diary entries: Zondag 30 Mei page 18, Woensdag 7 Juli p. 73, Zondag 21 Augustus p. 135, Dinsdag 24 Augustus p. 138) That he attends matches. That Han Hollander is the announcer in the camp during such games. Hollander was the first live radio reporter of an international football match in the Netherlands and had also been commentator for the Berlin Olympic games. In his diary Mechanicus relates how Hollander is deported -despite his prominent position- because of an unwise crack from his wife (p.73). Did Hartog "Han" Hollander announce anywhere else after that?
Has Philip Mechanicus himself reported anywhere after 1944? His diary and its publication history, are they from the old Holocaust or the new? Continuing citations from his work, where do they fit?

Louis de Wijze came back and talked a lot about football. Wrote about it in his memoirs - which have been translated. He was interviewed about it for a national TV broadcast in the Netherlands on the day people commemorate the dead there. Why can Louis de Wijze appear on national TV and talk about time on the football team and his participation in camp cabaret without turning a substantial portion of the watching population into Holocaust deniers?

Regarding football I mentioned Primo Levi. Have you read his books? The Italian original of "If this is a Man" was published in 1947. I have a 1987 English paperback. The page numbers are different in other editions but these words he wrote -about his experiences as a new arrival in Monowitz- are in the chapter "On the Bottom" (Abacus, London (1987) Page 31):

"We ask him many questions. He laughs, replies to some and not to others, and it is clear that he avoids certain subjects. He does not speak of the women : he says they are well, that we will see them again soon, but he does not say how or where. Instead he tells us other things, strange and crazy things, perhaps he too is playing with us. Perhaps he is mad - one goes mad in the Lager. He says that every Sunday there are concerts and football matches. He says that whoever boxes well can become cook. He says that whoever works well receives prize-coupons with which to buy tobacco and soap. [...] Some feel refreshed but I do not know. I still think that even this dentist, this incomprehensible person, wanted to amuse himself at our expense, and I do not want to believe a word of what he said."

Makes me wonder if Holocaust deniers take that literally from Levi? Is it from passages like these that their lists are drawn up? What happens, then, with the other chapters that follow? The rest of his writings - are they simply disregarded? Where does the information for such lists come from and why do interpretations of the original material differ when evaluated by Holocaust deniers? Why do their explanations -if provided at all- fall short as explanation of the whole?

Primo Levi's books, do they represent the old Holocaust or the new? Because of the length of his career as a writer, his writings must straddle some presumptive dividing line between these two periods that are frequently hinted at but never defined. At which point during reading of his works does one diverge from Primo Levi's own explanations? Why does he not conclude that coupons and football preclude the existence of gas chambers? Was he supposed to?

After looking over the rest of the list once more I wonder again if it ever occurs to Holocaust deniers that, perhaps, these examples and their lists aren't convincing? Not if that is the point they're hoping to make. Do they ever stop and think why not? If so, why are they still repeated?

 

[CaptainHowdy]

I don't know what the first part of your reply to me is supposed to mean. Christian and Jewish wedding ceremonies took place in Westerbork. Municipal clerks registered births and deaths as well as weddings and divorces. It is recorded history. Has been for a while. What are you trying to say by posting a photo without explanation? Some of the married people survived the final solution, others didn't. What about the couple in the photo you posted? Do you know who they are?

When the Red Cross wrote in 1946 that Sobibor was the extermination camp for Jews deported from Westerbork in 1943 the Red Cross representatives already knew that some of the victims of the mass murder in Sobibor had been married - or had attempted to marry- in Westerbork because such bureaucratic records remained for them to examine. Now What?

What about soccer? Primo Levi wrote about a soccer match involving Sonderkommando of Birkenau Crematoria. The killing and body disposal there continued regardless. What do you have to tell me?

Football does not expose the Holocaust as a hoax either but rather -like most of "your" examples- exposes the ignorance of Holocaust deniers regarding the complexity of the camps.

Are you starting over again? Reset the merry-go-round? What do you think will change this time around?

Weddings in the death camps have been known since the end of the war. Konrad Morgen testified at Nuremberg that he discovered the extermination of the Jews when he was investigating corruption in the concentration camps. What was it that tipped him off? It was a Jewish wedding.

MORGEN: As I said before, 1,100 guests participated in this Jewish wedding. What followed was described as quite extraordinary owing to the gluttonous consumption of food and alcoholic drinks. Among these Jews were members of the camp guard, that is to say some SS men, who joined in this revelry. This report only came into my hands in a roundabout way, some months later, due to the fact that the Commander of the Security Police suspected that the circumstances indicated that some criminal acts had occurred. This was my impression as well, and I thought that this report would give me a clue to another big case of criminal corruption. With this in mind, I went to Lublin and called at the Security/ Police there, but all they would tell me was that the events happened at a camp of the Deutsche Ausrustungswerke. But nothing was known there. I was told it might possibly be a rather odd and shrouded (this was the actual term used) camp in the vicinity of Lublin. I found out the camp and the commander, who was Kriminalkommissar Wirth.

I asked Wirth whether this report was true or what it meant. To my great astonishment, Wirth admitted it. I asked him why he permitted members of his command to do such things and Wirth then revealed to me that on the Fuehrer's orders he had to carry out the destruction of Jews.

 

[FluffyPersian]

You have mentioned the Milgram experiements, which are certainly relevant. However, this book by David Grossman addresses military psychology more directly. It could presumably be extended to para-military psychology in case of many of the groups involved or accused of mass killings in the East. One point it makes is that proximity to the victim reduces the likelihood of killing, which makes comparison with the allied bombing crews less relevant.

Randy Collins' Violence: A Micro-Sociological Theory, which Dr. Terry cited above, discusses the mechanism behind this tendency. According to Collins' research, what makes killing difficult is especially making eye contact with the victim and thus seeing his reaction. As a result, the police units who participated in the shootings in occupied Russia often had to ply themselves with alcohol or find other methods of coping. As a result, Himmler famously decided on a different method of killing that put less stress on his men.

In the camps, those who put the Zykon B into the hatches did not have to see their victims, who were safely enclosed. The Sonderkommando and others not directly involved in the killing did the work of leading the victims to the gas chamber.

 

[Wahrheitseeker]

I was also hoping that EtienneSC could expand on his point regarding understandings of the perpetration of mass violence, maybe trying to get us back on course. Elsehwere in the thread he stated:

There are both domain specific (animal) and domain general (rational) mental mechanisms that might be at play. For the former, there are general facts about territorial mammal behaviour and pack animal behaviour that result in mauling and less often killing. This is also found in humans. Here though, you have to include the fact that submissive behaviour by one animal will inhibit aggression by another (think of dogs). Holocaust narratives often show this inhibition being overridden, though it is a human behaviour pattern too.

Where reason/ideology is at work, it can override other behaviour patterns. This is alleged in the case of the holocaust (e.g. the supposed influence of Christian anti-Semitism or Social Darwinism). However, Christianity has been around for 1000s of years and the influence of people like Dawkins is probably as great as that of Haeckel in the 1930s.

I note in general that you don't introduce any specific text that compares the behaviour alleged in the holocaust with the known facts of human nature. I suspect that there is none, for the reason that the allegations are out of line with knowledge drawn from other historical facts. This is not so for the revisionist interpretation that propaganda has seeped into the historical narrative. I refer you to Jean Norton Cru on Testimonies and Witnesses in WW1 for example.

In his most recent post, he brought up Grossman's work On Killing to make the point that proximity to the victims reduces the willingness of perpetrators to commit violence. This is a fairly common point across many investigations (Milgram included). However, Grossman also focuses on the point that he is largely talking of armed soldiers combatting other armed soldiers on a battlefield. He notes that when one side suddenly becomes unarmed (i.e. POWs), violence against them is nearly epidemic from the victors in historical terms. He also spends a good chunk of the book detailing episodes of face to face massacres and atrocities, analyzing their causes and motivations.

And needless to say, any claims that the events of the Holocaust are historically unique are rather spurious. So, any discussions of the motivations of violence or the perpetration of mass atrocities in other contexts (i.e. Japan, Russia, etc) also help provide an analytical framework from which to understand the Holocaust as well. Indeed, the more "unique" components of the Holocaust (e.g. gas chambers) would ease the ability of the Nazis to perform mass killings on a wide scale.

 

[Bluespaceoddity]

Weddings in the death camps have been known since the end of the war. Konrad Morgen testified at Nuremberg that he discovered the extermination of the Jews when he was investigating corruption in the concentration camps. What was it that tipped him off? It was a Jewish wedding.

That wedding, of Frieda "Friedel" Alexander - at the time Lagertälteste, later murdered during Aktion Erntefest, took place in the Zwangsarbeitslager für Juden "Alter Flughafen" [Flugplatz] in Lublin. Identified in "Die Deportation der Juden aus Deutschland" by Beate Meyer and Birthe Kundrus, p. 129.

The Jewish wedding was also mentioned by some, though not all, witnesses* in a ZAL Lublin trial in Hamburg against Ernst Gollak a.o. but I don't see in the files where either the defendants in Nuremberg or Hamburg pointed out the wedding as part of their defence. Maybe I overlooked this?
Neither the court in Nuremberg nor the court in Hamburg in that case 831 concluded as a result of information about a wedding that a general pardon -and rewrite of history books- was in order. For some reason the court decided that there had been criminal activity in and around Lublin and convicted Gollak for his role, affirmed on appeal (1977). The acquittal of a co-defendant appears to be unrelated to the wedding in the camp as well. Curious, isn't it?

* "... und war sehr erstaunt darüber, dass Juden im Lager geheiratet haben sollen, was ihre Schwester kurz zuvor bestätigt hatte." If the German Courts were as astonished as this witness herself, the record does not reflect.

 

[CaptainHowdy]

That wedding, of Frieda "Friedel" Alexander - at the time Lagertälteste, later murdered during Aktion Erntefest, took place in the Zwangsarbeitslager für Juden "Alter Flughafen" [Flugplatz] in Lublin. Identified in "Die Deportation der Juden aus Deutschland" by Beate Meyer and Birthe Kundrus, p. 129.

The Jewish wedding was also mentioned by some, though not all, witnesses* in a ZAL Lublin trial in Hamburg against Ernst Gollak a.o. but I don't see in the files where either the defendants in Nuremberg or Hamburg pointed out the wedding as part of their defence. Maybe I overlooked this?
Neither the court in Nuremberg nor the court in Hamburg in that case 831 concluded as a result of information about a wedding that a general pardon -and rewrite of history books- was in order. For some reason the court decided that there had been criminal activity in and around Lublin and convicted Gollak for his role, affirmed on appeal (1977). The acquittal of a co-defendant appears to be unrelated to the wedding in the camp as well. Curious, isn't it?

* "... und war sehr erstaunt darüber, dass Juden im Lager geheiratet haben sollen, was ihre Schwester kurz zuvor bestätigt hatte." If the German Courts were as astonished as this witness herself, the record does not reflect.

I'm sorry if I suggested that the wedding was part of anybody's defense. I don't think it was. My reading of the testimony is that Konrad Morgan was merely telling the court how he became aware of the final solution. It wasn't an attempt at justifying or exonerating himself for any role in it.

 

[Bluespaceoddity]

I'm sorry if I suggested that the wedding was part of anybody's defense. I don't think it was. My reading of the testimony is that Konrad Morgan was merely telling the court how he became aware of the final solution. It wasn't an attempt at justifying or exonerating himself for any role in it.

Of course you didn't suggest that the wedding was part of anybody's defence. I didn't think you suggested anything like that. It would not have made any sense if you had. I'm sorry if I gave the impression that I interpreted your comment that way.
Konrad Morgen became aware of the final solution, not in spite of a Jewish wedding but because of a Jewish wedding.

 

[Clayton Moore]

I don't know what the first part of your reply to me is supposed to mean. Christian and Jewish wedding ceremonies took place in Westerbork. Municipal clerks registered births and deaths as well as weddings and divorces. It is recorded history. Has been for a while. What are you trying to say by posting a photo without explanation? Some of the married people survived the final solution, others didn't. What about the couple in the photo you posted? Do you know who they are?

When the Red Cross wrote in 1946 that Sobibor was the extermination camp for Jews deported from Westerbork in 1943 the Red Cross representatives already knew that some of the victims of the mass murder in Sobibor had been married - or had attempted to marry- in Westerbork because such bureaucratic records remained for them to examine. Now What?

What about soccer? Primo Levi wrote about a soccer match involving Sonderkommando of Birkenau Crematoria. The killing and body disposal there continued regardless. What do you have to tell me?

Football does not expose the Holocaust as a hoax either but rather -like most of "your" examples- exposes the ignorance of Holocaust deniers regarding the complexity of the camps.

Are you starting over again? Reset the merry-go-round? What do you think will change this time around?

More lies? You do know that the inmates traversed the camp/camps unescorted by guards.

Again, how many babies and small children carried out of an alleged gas chamber would push a Sonderkommando over the edge?

Again, the soccer field was right next to the alleged gas chamber.

The ritual aspect of the alleged policy of extermination of Jewish people is pure idiocy. In the alleged death camps there are too many stops and starts and exceptions. Children couldn't work yet many survived the camps. Old people couldn't work but many survived. Women inmates got pregnant by their husbands? They couldn't work yet they and their children survived. Many famous/rich Jewish people didn't work and survived the camps. Ill Jewish people were treated in hospitals. Why weren't they just killed.


Bottom line the alleged 5 to 6 million Jewish killed in alleged gas chambers and other methods of alleged extermination never existed.

 

[Dcdrac]

mr Moore can you prove with reference to primary soruces that the hard evidence presented so far arelies?

 

[Clayton Moore]

mr Moore can you prove with reference to primary soruces that the hard evidence presented so far arelies?

The ritual aspect of the alleged policy of extermination of Jewish people is pure idiocy. In the alleged death camps there are too many stops and starts and exceptions. Children couldn't work yet many survived the camps. Old people couldn't work but many survived. Women inmates got pregnant by their husbands? They couldn't work yet they and their children survived. Many famous/rich Jewish people didn't work and survived the camps. Ill Jewish people were treated in hospitals.

The Holocaust lies didn't begin in earnest till 1967 when Israel found out, after it attempted to slaughter the crew of the USS Liberty, that it could get away with anything in America.

 

[Dcdrac]

Calyton I asked you about what evidence you have drawn from the primary historical documentary evidence.

And you are factually incorrect about the Holocaust not getting reported prior to 1967 and it has nothing at all to do with the attack on USS Liberty

 

[000063]

I'm having difficulty finding anyone but HD theories and things like this and this and this talking about this alleged soccer field.

Does anyone know more? Dr. Terry?

 

[Loss Leader]

The Holocaust lies didn't begin in earnest till 1967

It appears you should read this book, which is replete with primary sources that demonstrate that you are wrong.