A brief overview of Thomas Dalton's "The Holocaust: An Introduction"

Published by carolyn on Mon, 2016-10-03 01:15

by Carolyn Yeager

THE FULL TITLE IS THE HOLOCAUST: AN INTRODUCTION -- EXPLORING THE EVIDENCE, which may mean it is the first of a series and there is at least one more coming. I didn't ask about that because this slender paperback of 120 pages stands alone just fine. Some might say about this book: Do we need another introductory level revisionist book? Hasn't it all been covered already?

Yes to both questions. We need this book because its fundamental premise is that the debate is over, the revisionists have won. It makes clear that unless the holocaust historians – or the keepers of the holocaust, as I would call that group – can come up with some new evidence for their claims, they have lost. What this book sets out to prove, in very simple language, is that the standard holocaust story is not based on evidence at all, never has been, for the reason there is no evidence for it. Lacking evidence, the keepers of the holocaust rely on the cooperation of the law, the mainstream media in its broadest sense, and the most prestigious academic institutions to give the official WW2 narrative public credibility.

People who believe in the Holocaust don't want to hear that there is no evidence for it. They point to photographs of piles of emaciated corpses (as on the book cover) taken at the time of 'liberation' at a few camps, believing that is representative of all the camps, which it is not. They don't understand that those photographs are not evidence of the death of 6 million Jews. And 6 million is still widely insisted upon by the Jews themselves, with a separate number given to represent non-Jews.

Along with the number 6 million, the two other pillars of the Holocaust that must be upheld are a definite order from Adolf Hitler himself to exterminate all Jews in German-occupied territory, and the means of extermination – the homicidal gas chamber using Zyklon B pesticide as the killing agent.

Dalton covers these three pillars in a sufficiently thorough fashion, while also covering the number of possible deaths from being confined in ghettos and shot by the Einsatzgruppen patrols on the Eastern front. These are now emphasized more than in earlier times in order to come up with the requisite 6 million. (Note, the Auschwitz death number was reduced from 4 million to 1.1 million, and the Majadanek number has also shrunk dramatically.)

The early chapter “The Big Picture” asks how the 6 million number was determined. Breaking it down, Dalton concludes it amounts to killing an average of 3000 Jews per day, every day, from Sept. 1939 to May 1945. This is a gargantuan undertaking (not as much the killing as disposing of the bodies), while at the same time waging a war on two fronts against the world's three major powers. No historian has ever adequately explained how this was done. Dalton's second point is that people die all the time from natural causes and accidents. This is ignored when it comes to the Jews in Europe between 1933 and 1945. The natural rate between those years would have been 1.3 million Jewish deaths, but these are included as holocaust deaths. And thirdly, the 6 million number is never broken down as to how many died where, from what. The holocaust 'experts' are unable to provide that information so Dalton comes up with his own breakdown among “death camps”, other camps, ghettos, and shootings.

Related to that, in a later chapter Dalton finds that a rule of thumb for the holocaust is that it exaggerates on the order of ten – that is, most accurate death totals are only around 10% of the official figures. So 6 million becomes 600,000 and 1.5 million at Auschwitz-Birkenau becomes 150,000. These are generous estimates from the revisionist point of view. But they do come to that when everything is worked out carefully and added up. It's like the propagandists just multiplied the numbers by ten.

The chapter “Origins of the 6 Million” is extremely well done, but we have known for some time now that Jewish leaders and organizations have been using this number since 1850 (!) in campaigns to raise money ostensibly for “endangered Jews” in Eastern Europe and Russia. The news releases were very often carried in the New York Times (also known as the Jew York Times).

In “The Mystery Deepens,” Dalton examines the German words Ausrottung, and it's verb form ausrotten, meaning to 'root out' or 'uproot,' the word often used by Hitler when speaking about removing the Jews from Germany. The word has been given the sole meaning of 'exterminate,' in the sense of 'kill' but there are other meanings, such as 'eradicate,' and to 'totally remove.' Another word Hitler and others used regarding the Jews was Vernichtung – the root word being nicht – nothing. The verb vernichten means 'to bring to nothing' or 'deconstruct', 'unbuild' something – although the historians translate it only as 'to destroy.' So Hitler's program of 'extermination' becomes one of deportation. Dalton gives many examples of how these words were used.

“The Run-up to the War” describes how the National-Socialists under Hitler's leadership wanted, from 1923 on, to separate the Jews out from the Germans. When they came to power, they incrementally took rights and privileges away from Jews, encouraging them to emigrate, even allowing them to take most of their wealth with them. After what was intended by Hitler to be a local war with Poland ended in victory, Germany had gained 1.7 million more Jews. They now devised a plan to deport and confine all Germany's Jews to reservations in this newly acquired territory they called the General Government. There was a longer-range plan to ship them further away, but this had to be postponed for the time being because the war had widened.

The next chapter, "The Mechanism of Mass Murder," is the longest one and is divided into Ghettos, Einsatzgruppen and Gas Chambers, figuring the number of deaths in each category. Gas Chambers is sub-sectioned into Majdanek, Chelmno, Belzec-Sobibor-Treblinka, and Auschwitz, the so-called 'death' camps. All the necessary details of each of these camps is discussed. Dalton comes up with the number of 570,000 Jewish holocaust-related deaths during the duration of World War II. Shocking? It fits the 10% rule.

At the end of the book, the chapter “The Experts Respond” uses as examples two well-known holocaust historians who attack “deniers” but fail to discuss at all the issues Dalton brings up in this book – Richard Evans and Deborah Lipstadt. Evans was an expert witness for the defense in the Irving-Lipstadt trial, where he tore into David Irving calling him a liar. But Dalton's criticism of Evans is that he refers only to the older generation of revisionists, completely ignoring the newer generation of Carlo Mattogno, Germar Rudolf, Juergen Graf, Thomas Kues, and a few more. Evans also resorts to ad hominem attacks, a distorted presentation of revisionism, and straw-man argumentation. The same goes for Lipstadt except that she is worse. Dalton says of her 12 points of alleged commonality amongst all deniers, only five are legitimate and relevant. He covers them all.

Finally, in a very short “Closing Thoughts,” he really shines in bringing up the role of Jews in restricting freedom of thought and ideas in favor of the official narrative. For example, a search of Amazon reveals 10,130 pro-holocaust book titles since the year 2000 – roughly two releases per day! Yet revisionist authors are rejected by mainstream publishers. This is just one example (he mentions others) of the domination of society by Jews. He says this is what Hitler was fighting in Germany. Yes, he goes there! He writes: “When the Jews were driven out, German economy, culture, civic life and national spirit all flourished to a remarkable and unprecedented degree.” He rightly suggests that if such a trend were to catch on with enough nations, it truly would be a holocaust for the Jews, from their point of view. This is what is behind their ferociousness in combating the evil “deniers,” he says. He calls for justice, and for pursuing the truth leading to reconciliation, saying our future depends on it.

The Holocaust: An Introduction is priced at 9.95. It contains a bibliography and an index of names. Because it is small and lightweight, it's perfect to keep around, and even carry around, as a resource and “fact-book” for when you might get into a discussion about the topic. The information it contains is reliable and easy to locate. You can't go wrong in purchasing this book.


--"Finally, in a very short “Closing Thoughts,” he really shines in bringing up the role of Jews in restricting freedom of thought and ideas in favor of the official narrative."

A restriction practised even among their own:


"Rabbi Yosef Mizrachi quotes Hitler on how Jews brought Holocaust upon themselves"

Sad to say the Tribe's more energetic members are busily out gathering wood to burn this priestly 'heretic' even though he doesn't even 'deny' the Holocaust but simply invites consideration of the idea that (some - the Bolshevik) Jews were to blame.

(And no, I appreciate being a 'religious' Jew as opposed to being an atheistical/Bolshevik one isn't itself a salve given their 'god' has promised the Jews the world along with all property of the hateful goyim! - but hey - the Rabbi's hint at a need for Jewish introspection is a hope for humanity... )

--"He writes: “When the Jews were driven out, German economy, culture, civic life and national spirit all flourished to a remarkable and unprecedented degree.” "

The happy state of affairs later called "Merrie England" that succeeded the expulsion of the Jews in 1290.
(Hilaire Belloc's book "The Jews" has a particularly interesting Chapter X: 'Position of the Jews in England'. There he cites factors which may explain why today's Jews are so keen to replace the Brits through mass immigration of other races).

There can never be too many (revisionist) introductions to the Holocaust, for at least two reasons: (1) the crushing weight of (traditionalist, lying, deceived) books on the Holocaust must be offset, if only at a ratio of 1 to 100; and (b) the world today has billions of people who believe the (traditionalist, etc.) version who if possible are to be weaned of their lifelong convictions. The way, in each of these cases, is individual - who invites the weaning, how, when, and with what. Introductions like this constitute the what, so as long as they are all different (and they are), each and every one of them is needed.
Badly needed. Write one yourself.

Why, I have a deaccessioned 1937 edition of Hillare Belloc's book right here that I've never cracked. Thanks for the tip on Chapter X. I'll read it tonight. SHANA TOVAH  

Let us know what you think of it.

An appeal to de-criminalize holocaust denial. http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/10/02/first-they-came-for-the-holocaust-deniers-and-i-did-not-speak-out/

Last 2 pararaphs:

European memory laws have spread and metamorphosed to the extent that they now serve as the model for criminalizing accurate but nationally inconvenient historical accounts, as well as entrenching deeply flawed alternative histories used as foundations for specific national ideologies and repressive political agendas. This was hardly what the EU and its member states had in mind in the 1990s. But, in hindsight, this development was almost unavoidable in a globalized world, where legal norms spread to countries with very different histories, values, and systems of government.

Given the role that memory laws have come to play in undermining both academic freedom and political speech, the EU should urgently reconsider its approach. The Holocaust can still serve as the low point of modern European history, and its lessons as a focal point for European institutions, without criminalizing its denial. In fact, decriminalizing the denial of genocide and international crimes will only serve to strengthen the very values that have allowed historians to demonstrate beyond doubt the occurrence and magnitude of the Holocaust. That has ultimately been the most effective means of marginalizing deniers of historical truth to the ranks of xenophobes, pseudo-historians, and conspiracy theorists.

It remains to be seen if that would be the result, but heck, they can call us names as long as they don't drag us into court, fine us and sentence us to jail. Right?

...and that should be to require complete recantation from the knowing liars, and complete refunding of the false claims to the BRD.

Without fail and before Jr High School, young minds throughout the western world are forcefed the "official holocaust narrative". The story is always simple and easy to understand: The evil Hitler came to power, he hated the Jews and rounded 6 million of them up to be gassed to death in gas chambers.
"The holocaust" began its injection into history through gross exaggerations, staged evidence and outlandish eyewitness testimony -- all of which has since been exposed as such.
Among the scholars who have warned about the dubious worth of Holocaust survivor testimony is Jewish historian Samuel Gringauz, himself a "Holocaust survivor.” In an article published in the January 1950 issue of Jewish Social Studies, Gringauz wrote:
    “The hyperhistorical complex [of survivors] may be sensibly described as judeocentric, lococentric and egocentric … This is the reason why most of the memoirs and reports are full of preposterous verbosity, wildly inconsistent and contradictory versions, graphomanic exaggeration, dramatic effects, fanciful self-indulgence, overestimated self-inflation, dilettante philosophizing, would-be lyricism, unchecked rumors, bias, partisan attacks and apologies.”
The Nuremberg trials, procedures and tortured testimony have also been exposed as a blatant fraud and a miscarriage of justice.
With sensible, unbiased research into the core aspects of "the holocaust", it becomes apparent that the promoters perform remarkable acrobatics with physical evidence and expect observers to suspend their common sense.
Esoteric information, contradictory and disproved evidence is not welcomed into discussions.
With due diligence, nearly any first-year law student could disassemble many of the central claims surrounding the so-called holocaust in a court of law.
Immense collections of "eyewitness testimony", (from people at the same concentration camps, at the same times), are often inconsistent, contradictory and filled with proven exaggerations and absurd verbosity.
Testimonies by Jews that were charged with handling the bodies of "victims that were gassed to death" are rich with unworkable claims and outright impossibilities. One such person claimed that he witnessed a gas chamber packed so tightly with victims, that when the gassing was over, each and every dead body was still standing.
Immediately following WWII and after hundreds of autopsies had been performed, not one person dying at any German concentration camp was found to have died of poison gas of any kind.Not one.
No shower head, (or anything resembling a shower head), was ever used to dispense any gas of any kind at any concentration camp.Rooms alleged to have served as gassing chambers are shown to have flimsy doors, no sealing or exhaust features and, in some cases, glass windows.
Many mass graves were claimed by eyewitnesses, yet after scores of scientific expeditions and extensive use of ground-penetrating radar, not a single mass grave has ever been discovered -- including those that are written into history books of the western world.
Many previous inmates claimed that the nationality of a Jew could be determined by the color of the smoke coming from the crematorium chimney.
Others spoke of sandpaper being issued to inmates, in lieu of toilet paper.For 45 years, a prominent marble plaque was on display at the entrance to Auschwitz concentration camp that claimed "4 million people were murdered by German Nazis here". That figure was lowered to 1.4 million in 1990 when the complete records from the camp were released by the former Soviet Union -- yet the claim of "6 million murdered Jews" remains unchanged.  
When one important matter in any narrative is soundly dis-proven, other claims become suspect. When numerous claims become untenable, the entire narrative falls into disrepute.
In such cases, always suspect the source and how they benefit from the story.
On dozens of occasions and by prominent Zionist leaders and Rabbis, claims of "6 million Jews dead, dying or suffering" was widely broadcasted in American newspapers long before the start of WWII.
Once again, the figure of 6 million murdered Jews had been established by mid 1942, nearly 3 years before the war's end.
With a broad view of the big picture, always question motives.

It just occurred to me why the witnesses for the homicidal gas chamber narrative are so blatantly false.  For example, we have in the Spielberg lie about the holocaust, The Last Days, Irene Zisblatt testifying to eating her own excrement in order to save the diamonds that she later made into a broach.  (Talk about money hungry.)  Anyway, the other so called witnesses are just as incredible.  But the reason there are not more credible witnesses is because they couldn't get decent people to lie and they had to then rely on the bottom of the barrel.  Now the movie Denial is out with its blatant lies and character assassination of David Irving.  Why?  The people alive today who weren't around then have been given the lie and they, for the most part moral, see the holocaust as a terrible injustice.  So they take a moral stand.  The real evil is that people like Spielberg and Mike Jackson and Lipstadt, who have no knowledge that is verifiable, continue to malign the German people and anyone who doesn't agree with them.  

Boy! is the movie DENIAL inspiring. I felt like such a schlub after watching the actress who plays the praeternatural moral force Deborah Lipstadt fight her publisher, fight the London Jewish community, and fight her solicitor and barrister for the right to fight David irving in court. Thank G-d there are people on the planet like professor Lipstadt who do battle with the evil of anti-Semitism, racism and the falsifiers of history. What can I fight now? I will fight for a moratorium on intemperate tattooing. Please join me in the fight to turn young people away from choosing a future as a human billboard, or monster comic.