All images added by this website
Hamburg/Berlin, 9. September 2002  ]
Yes, one can makes things either more difficult or easier for the neo-Nazis. Indeed, whereas proven, believable testimony makes things harder for these men of yesteryear, exaggerations only make things easier for the Nazi apologists. If the mouthpiece of the right-wing radicals, the “Nationalzeitung“, now confirms the mass murder of more than half a million people at Auschwitz, then this is a defeat for the Auschwitz deniers. My essay, as it says at the conclusion, “does not relativise the barbarity, but rather verifies it — a hardened warning ahead of new breaches of civilization.” Thanks also to Sven Felix Kellerhoff for having reproduced essentially correctly my study, which was intended for academic readers, concerning the number of victims of Auschwitz. Of course, its conclusion does not substantially differ from the most recent research conclusions of the expert, Jean-Claude Pressac’s, who calculated at least 631,000 dead at Auschwitz, of which at least 470,000+ were Jews murdered by gas. Pressac calls SS-Bauleiters Bischoff’s letter concerning the “capacity” of the crematoria an “internal propaganda lie of the SS.” I call David Irving a “successful author of proven research ability who increasingly aligned himself with the crazy views of his Nazi colleagues [MS-Gesprächspartner]” and who “persisted in maintaining the absurd position that there were no gas chambers at Auschwitz for the purpose of killing people”. In much the same vein, Richard Evans quotes the verdicts of several acknowledged historians on Irving: “A giant of research”, “profound research”, “endless scholarly diligence”. But surely the Auschwitz denier Irving cannot now employ me as a “key witness”.
Of course historiography can and must revise the findings of previous researchers — and if need be reject them. Only, historians must, according to the topic, handle such revisions (literally) particularly attentively — otherwise they play into the hands of those who unjustly call themselves “revisionists”. Sven Felix Kellerhoff
Related items on this website:
“So who was right then?” Printing: 20,000 copies of a triumphant new full colour 2-language leaflet by Focal Point Publications • View: German | English [100K] [Get copies free] |
|||
MANY thanks to Sven Felix Kellerhof for confirming that I am “anything else but a Holocaust Denier”. I am a confessed anti-fascist.
I expressed the view that doubt about the authenticity of the document is justified. There are several reasons for this, above all the existence of three different facsimile versions.
There is a big difference between calling SS-Bauleiter Bischoff’s letter an “internal propaganda lie” — and, without citing weighty reasons, speaking of a “forgery”. There are also worlds between the previous opinions of historians of consequence quoted by Richard Evans and his own judgement, to which I referred: Evans called Irving a “falsifier of history”.
Die Welt: “
 ![[e-mail]](https://staging.fpp.co.uk/old-web/online/std/dings/email.gif "Welt090902_engl 19"){kind=small}  write to David Irving |
