The Nizkor Project: Remembering the Holocaust (Shoah)

Shofar FTP Archive File: orgs/australian/adelaide-institute/1997/statement-of-graf

Archive/File: orgs/australian/adelaide-institute/statement-of-graf
Last-Modified: 1998/04/19

                                                                   [Page 1]
Jeremy Jones and members of the Committee of Management of the Executive
Council of Australian Jewry on Behalf of those members of the Jewish
community of Australia who are members of organisations affiliated to the
Executive Council of Australian Jewry

Fredrick Toben on Behalf of the Adelaide Institute


 Witness Statement: Mr Juergen Graf, Herrenbergweg 28, CH - 4054 Basel,

I am a revisionist who has written several books about the 'Holocaust',
including `Auschwitz, Taetergestaendnisse und Augenzeugen des Holocaust,'
Neue Visionen, Wuerenlos/Switzerland, 1994, the first book analysing in
detail the 'eyewitness accounts' about the alleged homicidal gas chambers
at Auschwitz. Together with Italian historian Carlo Mattogno, I am
currently working on a book about Majdanek concentration camp.

I had the privilege of meeting Dr Fred Toben personally in April, when he
visited Europe. Dr Fred Toben is a totally honest man and a serious
researcher whose aim is to separate historical facts from fiction. I am
therefore happy to testify on his behalf As English is not my mother
tongue, I trust you will apologize the linguistic errors this text
undoubtedly contains.

As to the complaint of one Jeremy Sean Jones of Darlinghurst, and
Australian citizen embracing the Jewish faith who accuses Dr Fred Toben of
spreading "antisemitism" and "racial hatred", I would like to make the
following remarks:

1. Mr Jones is obviously incapable of opposing any arguments to the results
of Dr Toben's research and, indeed, to the studied the 'Holocaust' issue
and published their findings under very difficult circumstances (I am, of
course, referring to the media censorship prevailing in the 'free West' and
the police-state style repression of revisionism in several European
countries, especially Germany). Revisionist authors have dealt with every
important aspect of the 'Holocaust' story: Analysis of documents,
demography, examination of 'eyewitness accounts', but especially with the
technical aspect of the question. This fundamental aspect has always been
totally ignored by those who defend the official version of the
'Holocaust'. It is quite obvious that Mr Jones has not even bothered to
read the revisionist literature.

2. Nobody in his right mind would deny the persecution of the Jews under
Hitler and the deportation of large sections of Europe's Jewish population
to labour camps where the death rates were extremely high (mainly because
of typhus and other diseases during the chaotic last phase of the war also
because of starvation). All these persecutions and deportations are
thoroughly documented On the other hand, there is not a single document
proving that even one Jew was ever gassed in a German concentration camp.
If you don't believe me, I strongly suggest you read Jean-Claude Pressac's
Les crematoires d'Auschwitz (CNRS, Paris, 1993), a book enthusiastically
praised by the media. In his introduction, Pressac boasts that he does not
depend upon eyewitness accounts but bases his conclusions on documents. But
whenever Pressac speaks about the gassing of human beings, the source he
quotes is the statement of a 'witness'! Tills is unavoidable because
documents corroborating the story of human gassings simply don't exist.
In 1995, I twice visited Moscow with Italian historian Carlo Mattogno. In
the 'special archives' of Wyborna Street, we saw all 88'000 pages of
documents of the Auschwitz 'Bauleitung'. These documents were captured by
the Red Army after the liberation of the camp. If the Soviets had found any
proofs of human gassings and mass murders perpetrated at Auschwitz, they
would triumphantly have shown them to the world long ago. But the documents
were locked up in the archives for 46 years; they were made accessible to
historians as late as in 1991. Why? Because they refute the traditional
Auschwitz story. In 1998, Mattogno will publish a large book containing
hundreds of photocopies of documents we found in Moscow. Rather than
confirming the gas chamber and extermination story, they illustrate its
utter absurdity.

3 . in any trial of even the most ordinary murder, one can expect a lot of
information about the murder weapon, including a description of its use.
With regard to a slaughter as spectacular and as fiendish as the alleged
'Holocaust', we should expect that the postwar trials involving that crime
would provide us with an abundance of information about the murder weapon,
the 'gas chambers'. But no: As far as the 'extermination process' is
concerned, the reader of the standard 'Holocaust' literature has to content
himself with short and vague descriptions. A close analysis of these
descriptions reveals how preposterous they are; they are teeming with
technical and physical impossibilities. As Germar Rudolf has conclusively
demonstrated in his study, the alleged mass gassings in the rooms baptised
'gas chambers' after the liberation of the Auschwitz cannot have taken
place for architectural and chemical reasons. As Carlo Mattogno has proved
in his study of the Auschwitz crematoria, the maximum number of corpses
they could have incinerated does not exceed 162'000.

4. Many 'Holocaust' claims made earlier have been dropped by the adherents
of the orthodox thesis. Today, no historian claims that there were
homicidal gas chambers at Dachau or that the Germans made soap from the
bodies of killed Jews. But the Dachau gas chamber story and the human soap
story were based upon 'eyewitness accounts'. Now, why should the
'eyewitness accounts' about the human gassings at Auschwitz and Sobibor be
more reliable that the 'eyewitness accounts' about human gassings at Dachau
or 'human soap factories'? To this simple question, the exterminationists
have no answer.

5. Mr Jones quotes Jewish historian Lucy Dawidowicz who claims that denying
the gas chambers is comparable to "asserting that slavery had never existed
in the United States, that blacks invented the story in order to get
preferential treatment and federal aid". This is a bit weak. There are
mountains of documents proving the reality of slavery in the United States.
For example, lists with the names and owners of the salve ships which
brought the Negroes to North America can still be found at the Carnegie
Institute. Incidentally, most of the slave ship owners were Jewish. On the
other hand, there is not a single document showing that even one Jew was
ever gassed by the National Socialists. Historians have been desperately
trying to find such a document for over half a century - in vain.

6. Mr Jones writes: "The claim, repeated a number of times on the web-site,
that there was a 'Jewish-Bolshevik Holocaust' is reasonably likely, in all
the circumstances, to offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate' Jewish
It is a well established fact that Bolshevism was predominantly Jewish, at
least until the end of the thirties. Winston Churchill, whom not even Mr
Jones will brand as a 'Nazi', clearly pointed out this fact in his article
'Zionism versus Bolshevism. A struggle for the soul of the Jewish people',
Illustrated Sunday Herald, February 8, 1920, page 5, in which he set forth
tile fact that the Jewish people all over the world were divided between
two courses of action, Zionism and Communism, and that most leaders of the
'Russian' revolution were Jewish.

In his book, Tajnye sily w istorii Rossi, St Petersburg, 1996, p.223-239,
Russian historian Dr Juri Begunow enumerates the names of 543 individuals
who were holding leading positions in the Soviet Union in 1920. 447 of
these 543 people were Jews, Exactly 30 of them were Russians! So much for
the 'Russian' revolution.

In the second volume of his Gulag archipelago, Alexander Solshenzyn
publishes the photographs of the six charming gentlemen who were the main
architects of the Communist slave labour camp system. Their names were
Aaaron Solz, Naftali Frenkel, Jakow Rappaport, Matwej Berman, lasar Kagan
and Genrich Jagoda. All six of them were Jews!
According to Mr Jones, mentioning these facts "offends, insults, humiliates
and intimidates" Australians of Jewish descent. But what about the
countless millions of Russians, Ukrainians, etc. who were murdered or
exposed to a slow and ugly death in the slave labour camps by these Jewish
Communist terrorists? This was the REAL Holocaust, not a phoney one like
the alleged Nazi gas chamber 'holocaust'.

Of course, this does not mean that ALL Jews were, or are, Communists. Fred
Toben has never claimed such a thing.

7. According to Mr Jones, "approximately 40% of the Australian Jewish
community are Holocaust survivors or their direct descendants". Now, if the
National Socialists had intended to exterminate the Jews, hardly any Jews
would have survived in the German sphere of influence, and there would be
no 'Holocaust survivor' in Australia, Every Jewish survivor of the
concentration camps is a living refutation of the extermination myth.

Incidentally, the fate of the most famous victim of National Socialist
persecution, Anne Frank, is totally in compatible with the official version
of the "Holocaust". In summer 1944, the Frank family was deported to
Auschwitz, allegedly the "biggest extermination camp". But no member of the
family was gassed there.

Anne and her sister Margot were later transferred to Bergen-Belsen where
they died from typhus shortly before the end of the war. Their father, Otto
Frank survived. Their mother Edith Frank died in January 1945. 1 do not
know the cause of her death, but she cannot have been gassed since
according to the orthodox historians, the homicidal gassings were stopped
in October or November 1944. Had the German pursued a policy of physical
extermination, the whole Frank family would have been gassed upon arrival.
Tragic as the fate of this family was, it can by no means be reconciled
with the gas chamber and extermination legend.

8. Being pitifully unable to oppose revisionism scientifically, the Zionist
hypocrites shudder at the very idea of a free and open debate about what
really happened to the Jews during World War 11. So they resort to their
usual weapons: Intimidation, slander, downright lies, smear campaigns in
the controlled media, repression and terrorism. But such measures cannot
prevent the final victory of revisionism, just as the terror of the
inquisition could not prevent the final victory of Kopernikus and Galilei.
They can at the very most delay it for some more years.

Juergen Graf

Home ·  Site Map ·  What's New? ·  Search Nizkor

© The Nizkor Project, 1991-2012

This site is intended for educational purposes to teach about the Holocaust and to combat hatred. Any statements or excerpts found on this site are for educational purposes only.

As part of these educational purposes, Nizkor may include on this website materials, such as excerpts from the writings of racists and antisemites. Far from approving these writings, Nizkor condemns them and provides them so that its readers can learn the nature and extent of hate and antisemitic discourse. Nizkor urges the readers of these pages to condemn racist and hate speech in all of its forms and manifestations.