I also suggest everyone read Mark's overview of the "Holocaust" and the revisionist success in laying it to waste.
Bernard Clarke, the Jewish interrogator who led the squad responsible for obtaining Hoess' confession, for example, admitted twenty years later in 'Legions of Death' (Hamlyn Paperbacks) a book by British historian Rupert Butler, that Hoess' testimony stating that 2.5 million Jews had been gassed at Auschwitz and a further 500,000 had died of natural causes while under his command had taken three days of torture and death threats made against his children to obtain. For years and years Hoess' declaration was the bedrock of the extermination claim, its descriptions of the gassing process repeated ad infinitum, including the famous line 'we knew when to open the doors because the screaming stopped'. To further discredit it, it has emerged that the original document was actually written in English, a language Hoess didn't read, speak or understand. Not only was he beaten senseless and fearful for the lives of his family, he didn't even know what he was signing. The mere fact that this was done should arouse suspicion in most critical thinkers. If you have to resort to coercion, torture and death threats to prove that something happened, it surely suggests that you don't have real proof.
What is more, due to the principal of legal precedent, once Hoess and other leading Nazis had been forced to confess, it established the gas chamber story as 'fact' in the eyes of the court, meaning that subsequent defendants at Nuremburg could not dispute it. The only option available to a Nazi on trial who had any interest in avoiding the death penalty was to admit that the gas chamber / genocide story was true, but that they, personally, had nothing to do with it. It is unsurprising that in such circumstances this is what virtually all of them said.