22 camps claimed to have gas chambers after the war

[offlinehaya]

Hi.

Here is a video from David Cole's last appearence on TV : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTjYB4q0PlU
He says that at the end of the war, 22 camps were claimed to have gas chambers in them, and that even before the 50's, sixteen of these camps had been officialy revised by the Americans, British, etc, so that's why we have now officialy only 6 camps with alleged gas chambers in them.

Is there a document or newspaper that talks about theses camps (the 16 which were revised) and their revision ?
Or any documentation on vho/codoh ? I didn't found it.


Thanks.

[offlinenathan]

Official Doctrine does not speak with one voice. But I think all serious mainstream thinkers agree that:

1 Large scale gas chambers were used for genocidal purposes at the six famous camps in Poland.

2.There were no gassings of any kind in Belsen, Buchenwald or Dachau

3. There were some small-scale homicidal gassings in camps to the west of Poland but they played no significant part in the Final Solution.


Official Doctrine has never conceded that there were no gas chambers on German soil - “The Old Reich”. That mistaken view was due to an (understandable) misreading by Faurisson of a famous but imprecise letter written by Martin Broszat for Die Zeit 19 August 1960. The Martin Broszat letter committed him only to propositions 1 and 2. Elsewhere he later explicitly spelled out that that there were gas chambers at Mauthausen and Neuengamme.

Official Doctrine must also embrace the gas chamber at Ravensbruck. It is true that Olga Wormser-Migot, once considered the leading authority on the concentration camps, was very skeptical about this one. This was partly perhaps due to racial motives – the goyim were trying to get in on the act – but mainly because she could not see much good evidence. But if it were conceded that there were no real gas chambers for those few thousand sick and elderly Gentiles at Ravensbruck, then it would have to be conceded that the British and French authorities were capable of extracting false confessions and using them in formal trials. Where would that end? Ditto for Natzweiler. Orthodoxy must therefore defend certain pesky western gas chambers.

Most of the “18” will fall outside this category. The non-existence of gas chambers at Belsen would not invalidate the British trial of the Belsen staff - the said non-existence was explicitly stipulated in 1945 by all the court-appointed lawyers. Parallel remarks apply to Dachau and Buchenwald, despite some prisoners’ testimony. In 1945 distraught prisoners in every western-liberated camp pointed out some local feature as the site of “the gas chamber.” But serious mainstream writers do not - and need not - feel accountable for gas chambers which depend on nothing more than prisoners’ rumour and PR propaganda.

[offlinenathan]

True to form there is a typo 18 where I should have typed 16 (=22-6). Sorry

[offline PotPie]

Here's a good conversational interview between Zundel and Cole.

http://www.archive.org/details/ErnstZun ... rueHistory

Cole is very well-read and its very unfortunate that the JDL threatened him as they did. Since those who lead the group at the time are now dead, hopefully Mr. Cole will come out and share some of his more recent insights and the sources which he found in his early readings which touched him. He's a very bright person and cannot be simply brushed aside.

[offlinenathan]

What is the date of the Zuendel interview? Cole signed his recantation in early 1998 on a Jewish terrorist website, the very same website where a fatwa had been issued against him in late 1997. There may have unpublished menaces since 1994, when he was physically attacked by the madman Irv Rubin. The recantation is so obviously worthless, even on internal grounds, that Cole cannot have intended it to be seriously believed. As deposed by the maniacal Rubin, Cole describes his own vivacious performance on the Donahue interview as a glazy-eyed product of brainwashing. He recommends Raul Hilberg’s book - for its accuracy. He endorses the fetish number six million, which serious anti-revisionists do not – and need not - defend. If Cole had sincerely made such a 180 degree turn then he would have both a motive and a duty to spell out the reasons for his new certainties. It would not be in his nature to keep quiet, and he would not have lacked outlets. He would be out there in full view, describing his Damascus moments on the Holocaust websites. He would be on Oprah.

This does not mean that he is a full-on revisionist living in fear. Already In 1995 Cole quarrelled with Faurisson, after challenging some of the great man’s ex cathedra pronouncements about Natzweiler. In the complete and easily googled 1994 Donahue programme he comes over as a democrat of leftwing persuasion. Although he derides received notions of a gas chamber programme, he also regards the Nazi regime as an odious tyranny; he is at pains to distance himself from the likeable neo-nazi Zuendel. Without loss of self-esteem Cole could neither retreat into Zionism - which is contrary to the highest Jewish spirit – nor allow himself to become become the pet house Jew of people whose sympathy for Hitler’s Jewish victims is at best perfunctory.

Such a compulsive dissident cannot have lived to be thirty without many changes of mind. Nobody knows exactly what he believes today. Perhaps he has turned, say, 90 degrees. In that case he will find no forum where he could present his case in the rational manner which would be natural to him. His last recorded words are words of contempt, well-merited, for the credulous magazine known as Skeptic Magazine. A simple escape from the whole business would be to give no interviews and sign a comically unbelievable statement dictated by a comically violent madman who had once physically attacked him. It was a way of no longer taking sides. If Cole intends to steer clear both of Zionists and anti-Semites then America will probably never hear from him again.