moral and intellectual bankruptcy of a scholar: Dr. Christian Lindtner
and Holocaust Revisionism
visited Copenhagen in 1997 and 1998, I had several lengthy discussions
with Danish revisionist Dr. Christian Lindtner, a Sanscrit scholar and
expert in the history of Buddhism. Lindtner impressed me with his
extraordinary knowledge of classical languages, and he seemed to be
thoroughly familiar with the revisionist arguments. Therefore I was very
glad when I learned in December 2006, during the Holocaust Conference in
Tehran, that he had been chosen as a member of the committee for the
promotion of revisionist research. (Later this committee turned out to
be completely useless, as it did strictly nothing.)
meantime, Lindtner has come, or pretends to have come, to the conclusion
that Holocaust Revisionism is „a moral and intellectual aberration“
and „chutzpah“. On 20 July 2011, he stated in an e-mail to Dr.
hope that you will find the time to study the two huge books about the
German Ordnungspolizei by Wolfgang Curilla (2006 & 2011). His
admirable research is based on original German sources. It can no longer
be denied that more than four million Jews were murdered by various
units of German police etc. Hence the time has come to face the fact
that Holocaust revisionism, or denial, is simply irresponsible
I a second
e-mail to Toben, dated July 21, Lindtner raised the ante:
have now studied these [Curilla’s]
and other books by the best German scholars for several years, and of
course I am certain that one can rely on their research. As a classical
philologist, I recognize traditional German scholarship when it is at
its best. The claim that Leichenkeller 1 in Krema II was not a gas
chamber is also a case of chutzpah. As you are aware, Bischoff wrote to
Kammler 29 January 1943 that it was a Vergasungskeller, and the two
engineers from Topf &Söhne (Karl Schultze and Fritz Sander, 17
February 1943) called it a Gaskeller. […] The
lacking holes can also easily be explained. When Leichenkeller 1 was
blown up, the holes, i. e. the edges of the holes, would have been the
first to be blown away by the enormous pressure seeking to’escape’. The
evidence for gas vans is also convincingly established. It is also
chutzpah to say: ‚No holes, no holocaust’ – as if the shooting of
millions of Jews had nothing to do with the Endlösung! So, for these
and many other reasons, it is now my firm conviction that Holocaust
Revisionism is a moral and intellectual aberration. […] My
claim is serious: Denial is chutzpah. […] Now
we understand why Himmler said to the generals in Sonthofen, 21 June
1944: ‚Es ist gut, dass wir die Härte hatten, die Juden in unserem
Bereich auszurotten.’ [It is good that we were tough enough to
exterminate the Jews in our sphere of influence.] He
goes on to say that the Weiber and Kinder [women and children] were
also murdered. […] Himmler
was honest, and we have to be honest as well.“
I will now
analyze Lindtner’s arguments point after point.
Wolfgang Curilla and the
all, I readily acknowledge that I have not read the two books by
Wolfgang Curilla. Together with two other revisionists, I plan to write
a study on the Einsatzgruppen question; if this project materializes
(which is far from certain because it would require considerable funds
we are still lacking), we will undoubtedly have to read these books. Now
let us have a look at what the website buecher.de says about the first
of them, Die deutsche
Ordnungspolizei und der Holocaust im Baltikum und in Weissrussland
1941-1944 (Schöningh, 2006):
Ordnungspolizisten waren für die Deportation oder Ermordung der über
zwei Millionen jüdischen Opfer in der Sowjetunion mitverantwortlich. W.
Curilla beschreibt den Einsatz der Ordnungspolizei erstmals flächendeckend
für das Baltikum und Weissrussland. Als Quellen dienten ihm neben der
zeitgenössischen Überlieferung eine Fülle von grossenteils bisher
unveröffentlichten Dokumenten und Zeugenaussagen aus weit über 100
Strafverfahren gegen NS-Täter in der Bundesrepublik, in Österreich und
der damaligen DDR.“
(The members of the Ordnungspolizei were jointly responsible for the
deportation or murder of the more than two million Jewish victims in the
Soviet Union. W. Curilla gives a comprehensive description of the
activities of the Ordnungspolizei in the Baltic states and White
Russian. In addition to contemporary documents, his sources were
hitherto largely unpublished documents and eyewitness reports from far
more than 100 trials of National Socialist perpetrators in the Federal
Republic, Austria and the former German Democratic Republic.)
Curilla’s sources were contemporary documents such as the „Ereignismeldungen“
of the Einsatzgruppen, plus post-war trials against „National
Socialist perpetrators“. This is indeed the kind of evidence the
Holocaust historians routinely adduce. Raul Hilberg does the same thing
in his three-volume classic The
Destruction of the European Jews. We will soon see what these
sources are worth.
The lack of forensic evidence for the alleged mass murders
assume that the Holocaust historians are right and that the Germans
indeed killed more than two million Jews in the Soviet Union. If this
were the case, there would be a huge amount of material evidence. When the Germans discovered the bodies of 4,143
Polish officers shot by the Soviets at Katyn, they flew in an
international commission, consisting of physicians from no fewer than 12
countries, to inspect the site of the crime and to carry out autopsies.
They then published a detailled forensic report about the massacre.
months later, the Germans did the same thing after finding the bodies of
9,432 Ukrainians murdered by the NKVD at Vinnitsa before the war,
inviting no fewer than eight local and six foreign commisions to verify
The National Socialist propagandists used the grisly discoveries for a
very successful anti-Bolshevist campaign.
Now according to the Holocaust historians and the august Sanscrit scholar
Dr. Christian Lindtner, the German murdered more than two million Jews
in the Soviet Union alone. This figure is about 140 times higher than
the combined toll for Katyn and Winnitza. Surely the Soviets followed
the German example and flew in international commissions to repay their
adversaries for the shame of Katyn and Winnitza with interest and
compounded interest? Surely at the Nuremberg trial they showed films
about the exhumation of hundreds of thousands of bodies? No, they did
This did not mean that the Soviets had not dug up any mass graves
containing the bodies of victims of the Germans, or that they had not
carried out any autopsies. Such investigations had indeed taken place,
however their results were not widely publicized because they belied the
phantastic exaggerations of Soviet propaganda. The following three
examples will amply suffice to illustrate this point:
In August 1944, three graves containing a total of 305 bodies were
detected by the Red Army near the former labour camp Treblinka I, about
2 kilometers from the alleged “extermination camp” Treblinka II.
In January 1945, after the liberation of Auschwitz, the Soviets found a
masse grave containing 536 bodes.
On the site of the former concentration camp Salaspils in Latvia the
Soviets discovered 564 bodies.
This did not prevent their propagandists from brazenly claiming that no
fewer than 101.000 people had been murdered at Salaspils.
Today’s Holocaust historians, such as the Latvian Hinrichs Strods and
the Germans A. Angrik and P. Klein, put the Salaspils death toll at
If the higher of these two figures is correct, the Soviets had
exaggerated the number of victims by more than 30 times – just as they
did at Auschwitz (4 million
versus the real figure of about 135.500),
Majdanek (1,5 million
versus the real figure of between 42.200 and 50.000)
and Sachsenhausen (840.000
versus the real figure of slightly over 20.000).
In other words, the Soviet forensic investigations only proved that many
people (Jews and non-Jews) had indeed died in German capitvity, and that
the German had indeed carried out executions – something no serious
revisionist has ever disputed. They did not produce a shred of evidence
for the large-scale massacres claimed by Soviet propagandists, Jewish
and German Holocaust historians and Danish Sanscrit scholars.
The “Aktion 1005”
According to Holocaust lore, in June 1942 Heinrich Himmler ordered SS-Sturmbannführer
Paul Blobel to erase the traces of the massacres in the East. Being his
master’s obedient servant, Blobel formed a special kommando with the
code denomination 1005. This Kommando had to dig up the mass graves and
to remove the corpses. Blobel and his men travelled to all occupied
territories to fulfill their ghastly task.
The Encyclopedia of the Holocaust
shows a map with the most important locations where these activities are
supposed to have transpired. This is a huge area which extends from
north to south across approximately 1,500 kilometers and from west to
east across some 1,300 kilometers. On this gigantic
territory, Blobel and his team are supposed to have dug up many hundreds
of graves and to removed the bodies of the victims without leaving the
slightest documentary or material traces! One really has to be a
Holocaust historian or a Sanscrit scholar to believe such a rubbish.
One example will suffice to show the overwhelming absurdity of this fairy
tale. In late 1941, the Germans are supposed to have shot and buried
27.800 Jews in the outskirts of Riga. Blobel and his Kommando could not
possibly have erased the traces of the mass grave, because such graves,
whether full or empty, are easily discernible on air photographs owing
to the altered configuration of the territory. (This method has been
sucessfully applied in Bosnia and other places.) Could Blobel’s men at
least have removed the corpses? Theoretically yes, but this would have
been a very difficult task indeed:
They would have had to remove millions of bones and bone fragments;
They would had to remove (27,800 x 30 =) 834,000 teeth (we assume that
each of the hypothetical victims had two teeth lacking);
Thdey would have had to remove (27,800 x 2,5 =) 69,500 kilograms of body
ashes (we assume that the victims had an average weight of 50 kg; the
ashes left after cremation correspond to 5% of the body weight) plus a
much bigger amount of wood ashes.
Of course, the 27.800 Jews allegedly murdered near Riga represented only
1,3% , or less, of the alleged total of at least two million Jewish
victims! Even if the Blobel boys had been supermen, they could never
ever have accomplished such a task.
It goes without saying that the splendid German scholars whose works
Lindtner has studied so diligently and who, in his distinguished
opinion, embody “traditional German scholarship at its best” never
give a thought to such irksome facts. Like Lindtner himself, they are
“paper historians” (an apt term coined by Robert Faurisson) who are
living far from the physical reality of things in their world of
documents and books.
It suffices to read Jens Hoffmann’s book about the “Action 1005”
to realize that the whole tale is exclusively based on “eyewitness
evidence”, “confessions” and post-war trials where such
“eyewitness evidence” and “confessions” formed the sole basis of
“Eywitness evidence” and
The Holocaust scholars will object that in American custody Blobel
himself confessed having erased the traces of the massacres. He indeed
but such confessions were not worth the paper they were written upon. As
an American commission reported in 1949, confessions had frequently been
extorted by barbarous torture.
A well-known case is Rudolf Höss, who after three days of merciless
beating by a British torture team lead by the Jew Bernard Clark
confessed to having gassed 2,5 million Jews up to November 1943.
Not all defendants made their declarations under duress; there were more
refined methods as well. Erich von dem Bach-Zelewski, former SS-Obergruppenführer
and Höherer SS- und Polizeiführer Russland-Mitte, stated at the
Nuremberg trial that in early 1941, Heinrich Himmler had said at the
Wewelsburg that the purpose of the coming campaign in Russia would be
the reduction of the Slavic population by 30 million.
let us take a look at von dem Bach-Zelewski’s fate. According to the official “holocaust”
story, he was one of the worst criminals. He is said to have ordered the
aforementioned murder of 27,800 Jews near Riga and the massacre of tens
of thousands of Soviet civilians. Under these circumstances, one would
assume that he was certainly put on trial and sentenced to hang after
the war, but precisely this did not
happen. In Nuremberg he was used as a witness for the prosecution and
then released. Obviously this lenient treatment was the reward for
having made statements as the one quoted above, which allowed the allies
to accuse the Germans of having planned not only the total extermination
of the Jews, but also a horrific genocide of tens of millions of Slavs.
It is true that von dem Bach-Zelewski was later tried by the West German
justice, but not for his alleged role in the “holocaust” or the
slaughter of Soviet citizens. He was tried for two murders he – really
or allegedly - had committed in 1934.
Even more important than the allied post-war trials were the court
proceedings against “Nazi war criminals” in the Federal Republic of
Germany. As we have seen, W. Curilla bases his accusations against the
Ordnungspolizei primarily on the documentation of these trials. As a
matter of fact, it is hardly an exaggeration to say that most of the
“evidence” for the holocaust was fabricated by the West German
justice. To prove this, we only have to point to the fact that in his
chapter about the “killing centers”, Raul Hilberg’s most important
source is Adalbert Rückerl’s Nationalsozialistische
Vernichtungslager im Spiegel deutscher Strafprozesse (National
Socialist extermination camps in the mirror of German court
proceedings); Hilberg quotes this book, which exclusively relies on
eyewitness evidence and confessions, no fewer than 41 times.
It goes without saying that torture was not used in West Germany. The
courts of the puppet state basically pursued the same strategy as the
Allied had done in the case of von dem Bach-Zelewski. Those defendants
who admitted the alleged mass murders were often meted out a lenient
treatment, while those who “stubbornly denied” the crime could not
hope for mercy. At the Sobibor trial in Hagen (1965/1966) four
defendants “convicted” of aiding and abetting with others the murder
of between 15,000 and 79,000 persons got surprisingly mild sentences of
three and four years imprisonment respectively.
The defendants Schütt and Unverhau, who had been “convicted” of
aiding and abetting with others the murder of 86,000 and 72,000 persons
respectively, were even acquitted. This proves that these
trials were primarily seen as an instrument to establish the judicial
notoriety of the alleged mass murders.
It is true that some defendants were sentenced to life imprisonment
(after all, the Jews wanted their pound of flesh!), but if they feigned
repentence, most of them could hope for pardon. Karl Frenzel, who at the
Hagen trial had got a life term for aiding and abetting with others the
murder of at least 150,000 persons and for the murder of nine persons,
was released on appeal in 1981. Although his life
sentence was later confirmed, Frenzel did not have to return to prison,
the reason almost certainly being that in 1984 he had admitted the
alleged mass murders at Sobibor in a conversation with former Sobibor
detainee Toivi Blatt.
As we see, it was quite easy for the courts of “democratic” West
Germany to obtain the desired confessions. For the communist regime of
East Germany, this was certainly not difficult either. So much for the
“scientific basis” of the “German scholarship” Dr. Lindtner so
The Einsatzgruppen reports
As proof for the alleged huge slaughter in the occupied Eastern
territories, first and foremost are cited the so-called
“Ereignismeldungen” (event reports) of the four Einsatzgruppen.
These documents fall in the period from June 1941 to May 1942 and
mention numerous massacres, with victims occasionally numbering in five
digit figures. The “Ereignismeldungen” were supposedly found by the
Allies in the Berlin RSHA. That the Germans let this sort of
incriminating material fall into the hands of their enemies is
The alleged slaughter of 33,711 Ukrainian Jews at Babi Yar near Kiev is
the most notorious massacre ascribed to the Germans on the Eastern
Front. This figure appears in an Einsatzgruppen report from 7 October
According to the established version of the facts, these 33,711 Jews
were shot and their bodies thrown into the ravine of Babij Yar on 29
September 1941. But the first witnesses told completely different
stories: The massacre was perpetrated on a graveyard, or near a
graveyard, or in a forest, or in the very city of Kiev, or on the shores
of the Dnepr. As to the murder weapon, the early witnesses spoke of
rifles, or machine guns, or submachine guns, or hand grenades, or
bayonets, or knives; some witnesses claimed that the victims had been
put to death via lethal injections whereas others asserted that they had
been drowned in the Dnepr, or buried alive, or killed by means of
electric current, or squashed by tanks, or driven into minefields, or
that their skulls had been crushed with rocks, or that they had been
murdered in gas vans.
Now that is what we call good, solid evidence, is it not, Dr. Lindtner?
When the Red Army approached Kiev, the Germans allegedly dug up the mass
graves and burnt the bodies. This work was reportedly finished on 28
September. But two days before, on 26 September, Babi Yar was
photgraphed by a German reconnaissance aircraft. The air photo shows no
fires, no open graves and no traces of human activity.
After the Soviets had
reconquered Kiev, a commission inspected Babi Yar and made a couple of
photographs. The only discernible things on them are a pair of old shoes
and some rags.
Irrefutable proof for the murder of 33,711 Jews, is it not, Dr. Lindtner?
So the report from 7 October 1941, which mentions an imaginary slaughter,
is a fraud. This means that all other Einsatzgruppen reports are equally
suspect from the beginning.
Documentary evidence that there was no extermination policy in the East
Had the Germans planned the physical extermination of the Jewish
population, they would of course have killed children and old people
first; able-bodied adults would perhaps have been temporarily spared,
because they could have been used as slave-laborers. As a matter of
fact, solid documentary evidence shows that Jewish children and old
people were not exterminated. The following four examples will
- On 5 June 1942 there were about 9,000 Jews living in the
ghetto of Brest (White Russia). Among them there were 932 old people
over 65 (the oldest one was 92) and more than 500 children under 16.
In an unknown month of the year 1943, 225 children under the age of 16,
plus some old people of up to 86 years of age, were living in the ghetto
of Minsk (White Russia).
At the end of May 1942 there were many old people living in the ghetto of
Vilnius (Lithuania); the oldest one, a woman by the name of Chana
Stamleriene, had been born in 1852. There were also 3,693 children under
The angel of death was not hovering over these Jewish children: As we
learn from an “Anthology of holocaust literature,” more than 20
schools were founded in the first year of the existence of the ghetto.
In October 1942 between 1,500 and 1,800 children were studying at these
schools, and in April 1943 school attendance became compulsory.
In the summer and autumn of 1944 many Jews of various nationalities (also
Hungarian Jews who had been previously deported to Lithuania and Latvia
to work for the German army) were transferred from Riga and Kaunas to
the Stutthof concentration camp, east of Danzig. On 26 July 1944 1,983
Jews, most of them Lithuanian ones, arrived at Stutthof. 850 of them
were under 15 years old
which means that the oldest ones had been 12 when the Germans conquered
Lithuania in the summer of 1941.
All this proves that the shootings committed by the Einsatzgruppen, the
Ordnungspolizei and the SS in no way possessed the scope ascribed to
them by the court historians.
The “Vergasungskeller” letter
Basically it is quite possible to reject the “western half” of the
Holocaust story (“Shoa by gas”) and to accept the “eastern half”
(“Shoa by bullets”). This is precisely what a clever person wishing
to save at least a part of the myth would do: While the revisionists
have pointed out numerous impossibilities in the gassing story, there is
nothing technically impossible about a mass shooting. But for the Jews
this kind of semi-revisionism is totally inacceptable because the gas
chambers are an absolutely central element of the legend. For this very
reason Lindtner, who fully identifies with the Jewish version of the
events and even uses Jewish newspeak (he calls revisionism
“denial”!), defends not only the myth of the “millions of Jews
shot in the East”, but the Auschwitz gas chamber myth as well. This is
an unspeakably foolish thing to do, because together with Majdanek,
Auschwitz is the most untenable part of the lie, its Achilles heel if
there ever was one. In order do demonstrate the historical reality of
the alleged gassings, Lindtner quotes a well-know document, the
“Vergasungskeller” letter. On 29 January 1943 the chief of the
Central Construction Office of Auschwitz, Karl Bischoff, stated in a
letter to SS-Brigadeführer Hans Kammler:
Krematorium II wurde unter Einsatz aller verfügbaren Kräfte trotz
unsagbarer Schwierigkeiten und Frostwetter bei Tag- und Nachtbetrieb bis
auf bauliche Kleinigkeiten fertiggestellt. Die Öfen wurden im Beisein
des Herrn Oberingenieur Prüfer der ausführenden Firma, Firma Topf u. Söhne,
Erfurt, angefeuert und funktionieren tadellos. Die Eisenbetondecke des
Leichenkellers konnte infolge Frosteinwirkung noch nicht ausgeschalt
werden. Dies ist jedoch unbedeutend, da der Vergasungskeller hierfür
benützt werden kann.” (Crematorium II has been completed, by using all
available manpower, in spite of extreme difficulties and severe frost
and by running day and night shifts. The ovens were fired up in the
presence of senior engineer Prüfer of the contracting firm, Messr. Topf
& Söhne, and function perfectly. The planking of the reinforced
concrete ceiling of the corpse cellar could not yet be stripped because
of the effect of the frost. This is, however, of no importance, because
the gassing cellar can be used for this intent.)
For the Holocaust historians, this letter proves that Leichenkeller 1 of
Krematorium II in Birkenau was used as a homicidal gas chamber.
This thesis was severely criticized by Jean-Claude Pressac; in Auschwitz:
Technique and Operation of the Gas Chambers he wrote:
affirmation, solely based on the letter of 29 January 1942, that the
term ‘Vergasungskeller’ referred to a homicidal gas chamber
installed in the Leichenkeller 1 (corpse cellar) of Krematorium II, was
irresponsible, for even if ‘gas chamber’ were correct, there was no
evidence that it was a ‘homicidal’ one.”
So even Pressac concedes that this letter does not prove the existence of
a homicidal gas chamber in Krematorium II. Carlo Mattogno explains the
letter in the context of the epidemic of spotted fever which was the
main cause of the frighteningly high mortality in Auschwitz. Quoting
numerous documents, Mattogno argues that the SS planned to install a
provisional Zyklon B delousing chamber in the Leichenkeller 1 of
This project never materialized.
The missing holes
A key argument against the alleged homicidal gassings in the corpse
cellar of Krematorium II is the fact that the four round holes in the
ceiling, through which the Zyklon B was reportedly introduced into the
“gas chamber”, do not exist. To this argument, Lindtner objects:
lacking holes can also easily be explained. When Leichenkeller 1 was
blown up, the holes, i. e. the edges of the holes, would have been the
first to be blown away by the enormous pressure seeking to’escape’.“
ridiculous. The roof of Leichenkeller 1 survived the demolition of the
crematory relatively well; the two irregularly shaped holes, one of
which was not even cleared from the steel reinforcement rods, which were
simply bent backwards, were not „blown away“ at all. So how could
four big round holes in the very same ceiling simply disappear?
The gas vans
has the audacity to claim:
evidence for gas vans is also convincingly established.“
problem is that no such van has ever been found. Nobody has ever seen a
blueprint, or a photograph, of these mythical vehicles.
The Holocaust historians regularly refer to two documents allegedly
proving the use of homicidal gas vans, the „Just document“
and the Becker document“,
but as French revisionist Pierre Marais has irrefutably demonstrated in
his vitally important study about the subject,
these documents are grotesque forgeries. But perhaps Dr. Lindtner has
not found the time to read this book because he was too busy studying
the „German scholars“!
Himmler’s alleged speech to his generals in Sonthofen on 21 June 1944
On 21 June
1944, Heinrich Himmler reportedly told his generals in Sonthofen that
the SS had done well to exterminate the Jews, including the women and
the children. For Lindtner, this alleged speech corroborates the
matter of fact, the European Jews had not
been exterminated. In France, 75% of the Jewish population, and 90% of
the Jews which French passports, were not deported at all.
In most other countries under German control, the percentage of
deportees was considerably higher, but countless documents prove that,
while large numbers of Jewish concentration camps inmates died as a
result of the conditions in the camps, there was no extermination
27 July 1944 the administration of Auschwitz compiled a statistics about
the prisoners “temporarily quartered in the camp of the Hungarian
Jews.” The document shows that until that date 3,138 Hungarian Jews
had received medical treatment at the camp hospital. 1,426 of them had
undergone surgical operations.
to the Holocaust story, a huge number of Hungarian Jews were gassed at
Auschwitz between 15 May and 9 July 1944. While not a single of these
alleged gas chamber murders is confirmed by a German document, the
medical treatment of 3,138 Hungarian Jews at Auschwitz until 27 July is
indeed documented.) As Polish historian Henry Świebocki reports, no
fewer than 11,246 prisoners underwent surgery at Auschwitz between 10
September 1942 and 23 February 1944.
A very strange “extermination camp” indeed, is it not, Dr. Lindtner?
In its English language edition, the Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz
reported on 18 April 2004 that there were still 687.000 “Holocaust
survivors“ around – which means that there must have been several
millions in 1945. How does this fact square with an extermination
policy, Dr. Lindtner?
The moral and intellectual bankruptcy of a scholar
arguments adduced here are not new. All of them can be found in
revisionist books and journals Lindtner cannot possibly pretend not to
know. These books and journals are available in English and German, two
languages Lindtner reads as fluently as his Danish mother tongue. But in
order to justify his about-face, Lindtner prefers to ignore this
literature and to rely on the works of dogmatic and bigotted court
historians who, in their burning hatred of the National Socialist
system, violate every principle of scientific historiography and gladly
endorse any rubbish as long as it incriminates Adolf Hitler and the evil
past I felt respect for Christian Lindtner, in spite of the fact that I
by no means shared his views about the origins of Christianity. Now I
feel nothing but contempt for him.
Amtliches Material zum
Massenmord von Katyn, Berlin 1943.
 Amtliches Material zum Massenmord von Winniza,
 Gosudarstvenny Arkhiv Rossiskoj Federatsii, Moscow, 7021-115-11, p. 13.
 Gosudarstvenny Arkhiv Rossiskoj Federatsii, Moscow, 7021-108-21.
 Gosudarstvenny Arkhiv Rossiskoj Federatsii, Moscow, 7021-93-21, p. 15-18.
 Wikipedia, Russian entry for „Salaspils“.
 Wikipedia, German entry for „Salaspils“.
 Carlo Mattogno, „Franciszek Piper und die Zahl der Opfer von Auschwitz“, Vierteljahreshefte für freie Geschichtsforschung 1/2003.
 IMT, volume VII, p. 590.
 Jürgen Graf and Carlo Mattogno, Concentration Camp Majdanek. A historical and technical study,Theses & Dissertation Press, Chicago 2003, chapter 4. www.juergen-graf.vho.org/articles/zur-revision-der-opferzahl-von-majdanek.html.
 IMT VII, p. 416, 417, 644.
 Carlo Mattogno „KL Sachsenhausen. Stärkemeldungen und ‚Vernichtungsaktionen’, Vierteljahreshefte für freie Geschichtsforschung 2/2003.
 Israel Gutman (ed.), Encyclopedia of the Holocaust, Macmillan, New York 1990, vol. I, entry „Aktion 1005“.
 Jens Hoffmann, „Das kann man nicht erzählen“. Wie die Nazis die Spuren ihrer Massenmorde im Osten beseitigten, Konkret Verlag, Hamburg 2008.
 NO 3842. NO-3947.
 E. van Roden, „American Atrocities in Germany“, The Progressive, February 1949.
 Rupert Butler, Legions of Death, London 1983, p. 235 f.. Robert Faurisson, „How the British obtained the confessions of Rudolf Höss“, Journal of Historical Review, Vol. 7, no. 4 (Winter 1986/1987).
IMT, Volume IV, p. 535/536.
 Jürgen Graf, The Giant with Feet of Clay. Raul Hilberg and his standard work about the Holocaust, Theses & Dissertation Press, Capsha 2001, chapter VII, 1.
 Jürgen Graf, Thomas Kues, Carlo Mattogno, Sobibor. Holocaust Propaganda versus Reality, The Barnes Revue, Washington 2010, p. 183.
 Idem, p. 185.
 Idem, p. 397.
 Stern, No. 13, 22 March 1984.
Herbert Tiedemann, “Babi Yar: Critical
Questions and Comments,”
in: Germar Rudolf (ed.), Dissecting
the Holocaust, Theses & Dissertations Press, Chicago 2003,
John Ball, Air Photo Evidence, Delta (B. C.) 1992, p. 107, see also J.C. Ball,
“Air Photo Evidence,”
in. G. Rudolf (ed.), ibid., pp. 269-282, here p. 273f.
 Gosudarstvenny Arkhiv Rossiskoj Federatsii, Moscow, 128-132 (photo album).
Raisa Tschernoglasova, Трагедия
Белоруси в 1941-1944
Minsk 1997, p. 274 f.
 Judenfrei! Свободно от евреев, Minsk 1999, p. 289 f.
 Vilnius Ghetto. List of prisoners, Volume 1, Lietuvos valstybinis muziejus, Vilnius 1996.
 J. Glatstein, I. Knox, S. Marghoses (ed)., Anthology of Holocaust Literature, Atheneum, New York 1968, p. 90 f.
 Archiwum Muzeum Stutthof, I-IIC-3.
 Archiwum Państwowego Muzeum w Oświęcimiu, BW 30/34. p. 100.
 Jean-Claude Pressac, Auschwitz: Technique and Operation of the Gas Chambers, The Beate Klarsfeld Foundation, New York 1989, p. 142, quoted according to Carlo Mattogno, Le camere a gas di Auschwitz, effepi, Genova 2010, p. 47. Retranslation from the Italian.
 C. Mattogno, Le camere a gas di Auschwitz, op. cit., p. 47 f.
 An alleged photograph of a gas van can be found in Gerald Fleming’s book Hitler und die Endlösung (Limes Verlag, Wiesbaden and Munich 1982) But in 1945 a Polish commission, which inspected this van, had come to the conclusion that it had only be used to transport furnitue. Carlo Mattogno, Il campo di Chelmno fra storia e propaganda, effepi, Genova 2009, p. 49-51.
 Bundesarchiv Koblenz, 58/871.
 Pierre Marais, Les camions à gaz en question, Polémiques, Paris 1994.
 Serge Klarsfeld, Le mémorial de la déportation des juifs de France, The Beate Klarsfeld Foundation, Paris 1978.
Gosudarstevenny Arkhiv Rossiskoj Federatsii, Moscow, 7021-108-32, p.
 Henry Świebocki, „Widerstand“, in: Auschwitz. Studien zur Geschichte des Konzentrations- und Vernichtungslagers, vol. IV, Oświęcim 1999, p. 330.
©-free 2011 Adelaide Institute