David Irving sets out his views to an Eighth-Grader
Wow, that is a major task, Brittni. First, you are right to ask around to get different viewpoints. But it will win you few friends, and a lot of enemies. Second, I am not a Holocaust denier, whatever that is. I am a partial Holocaust sceptic, and definitely a non-conformist. You will find that other historians like to conform: they swim with the tide. (Nobody ever got imprisoned for swimming with the tide.) But I have always said you have only the one life, and it behoves you to use it properly. As an historian, you find out perhaps too late in your career, that you have already passed a vital crossroads in your life: one signpost points to "Big Money," and the other to "The Whole Truth." They are different roads, and they don't intersect. In short: you don't make big money by writing the whole truth. You can (and many do) avoid poverty by conforming with the liars. What are the lies? Well, it is true that the Nazis killed lots of enemies in and before World War II. So did we, the Allies, and the Soviet Russians. Round about 1970 the international Jewish community began to make their voice heard with a very cleverly constructed propaganda-campaign about what called The Holocaust. Why "1970"? Because you won't find that word in any newspaper index (The Times, The New York Times, etc) before about 1970. Somebody told them how to make money out of it - the basic rules of marketing: give it a catchy title, holocaust; no, it needs a CAPITAL letter, like a brand-name - like Kleenex or Tylenol - if you're going to sell it. So, Holocaust. Important: Put a "The" in front of it, to suggest there was only ONE Holocaust. Thou shalt have no other holocaust than ours. If somebody suggests that burning 100,000 innocent civilians alive in Dresden, or fifty thousand in Hamburg, or 150,000 in Hiroshima was a holocaust, then smear him, attack him, vilify him, imprison him, financially ruin him, silence him, frighten him. Big bucks are at stake. Now you're getting the picture, Brittni. I have many times suggested that the real atrocity in World War II was what I call "innocenticide" - the mass killing of innocents. What undoubtedly happened to the Jews in Nazi hands was not a crime because they were Jews, but because they were (mostly) innocent Jews. It was their innocence that made it a crime, not their Jewishness. But once you accept my word, "innocenticide", instead, that reduces the total pot of Gold available to the Jews, because then the victims of Dresden, Coventry and Hiroshima, might qualify for cash handouts, so they object to it: they can't have that. What did happen was ugly enough: From 1940 inward, and particularly from 1941, the Germans began the systematic killing of Jews as part of their police and mopping-up operations. The killings, mostly done by shooting, gradually took on a more pragmatic, political nature, and became less of a straightforward security operation. From 1942 onward the Nazis began sweeping the Jews in their occupied areas into various camps where they were applied to hard labour, maltreated, and in many instances put to death by various means - those that had not succumbed to the appalling and lethal typhus plagues that swept the eastern territories and the prison camps. How were they killed, and where? On
a small scale, unwanted Jews were put to death by gassing in
two small units at Auschwitz, the White House and the Red
House, which is now in Poland. It was a death camp as well
as a slave-labour camp. A Polish court in 1947 found that
its German officers, who were mostly hanged, were guilty of
running a camp in which "up to 300,000 people" of all
nationalities had died from all causes [ That Judgment is hard to reconcile with the propaganda language used later about "4 million victims" of Auschwitz. In fact the most intensive killing (i.e. extermination) operations were done at four other sites in eastern Poland, Sobibor, Belzec, Treblinka and Majdanek (Lublin). One top-secret Nazi radio message which we British decoded in January 1943 reveals that these camps had dealt with 1,250,000 in 1942 alone; they probably killed about the same number by October 1943. Any argument about numbers seems immaterial, even obscene, given a death roll on such a scale. Notice by the way that although I have repeatedly stated the above, and have published the documents on my website (e.g. at http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz ) you and school pupils around the world are told that I am a Holocaust Denier. The big money is on their side, and it is useless, and hopeless, to argue against them. But the truth remains on my side, and stays here. I have written the above especially for you Brittni, and it is dedicated to you, as you were fair enough to contact me, and ask. I wish you well in your life. When you reach that crossroads, the one I mention above, decide for yourself, and make sure you take the right turning. David Irving |
see video of the court and Judgment