II - The Myths of the 20th Century

2 - The Myth of the Justice of Nuremberg

"This tribunal represents a continuation of the war efforts of the Allied nations."

Source : Robert H. Jackson, U.S. Attorney-General (26th July 1946 session)

On August 8th 1945, the American, English, French and Russian met in London to organize "the pursuit and the punishment of the great war criminals of the European Axis Powers," by creating a "military international tribunal" (article I,a).

The crimes were defined under Title II, article 6.

1 - Crimes against peace by those who were responsible for starting the war."

2 - Crimes of war for the violation of laws and customs of war."

3 - Crimes against humanity, in other words crimes essentially committed against civilians.

The constitution of this jurisdiction already calls for a few remarks :

1 - It was not an international tribunal since it consisted only of the victors and, consequently, only the crimes committed by the vanquished were taken into consideration. As the American Attorney General, Robert H. Jackson, who presided the audience on July 26th 1946, justly acknowledged :

"The Allies are still, technically-speaking, at war with Germany... As a military tribunal, this tribunal represents a continuation of the war efforts of the Allied nations."

2 - It was therefore an exceptional tribunal constituting the last act of war, and excluding by its very principle any responsibility on the part of the victors - first of all in the unleashing of the war. Any reminder of its primary source was excluded in advance : at Nuremberg, no-one raised the question of the Treaty of Versailles and if it was not to be blamed for the resulting consequences - the bankruptcies and the unemployment especially which allowed the rise of someone like Hitler, with the consent of a majority of the German people. The law of the strongest prevailed when Germany was defeated in 1918, asserting itself as the "right" which made might, when the Germans had to pay 132 billion gold-marks (the equivalent of 165 billion gold francs) as reparation, at a time when their country's national fortune was estimated at 260 billion gold-marks.

The German economy was ruined by such measures, and the German people driven to despair by bankruptcy, by the collapse of the currency and above all by unemployment ; it was all this which made Hitler's rise to power possible, giving him his best arguments to sustain his principal slogan : the cancellation of the Treaty of Versailles, with its sum total of misery and humiliation.

It is easy to compare the unemployment figures and the successes of the "National-Socialist Party" at the different elections :

I - from 1924 to 1930

Dates       Votes         %     Seats       Unemployed

05/04/1924    1,918,000    6.6          32               320,711
12/07/1924       908,000    3.0          14               282,645
05/20/l928        810,000    2.6          12               269,443

II - from 1930 to 1933

09/14/1932    6,407,000  18.3         107             1,061,570
07/31/1932  13,779,000  37.3         230             5,392,248
11/06/1932  11,737,000  33.1         196             5,355,428
03/05/1933  17,265,800  43.7         288             5,598,855

When Hitler and his political allies won the absolute majority in the Reichstag, they obtained aid for rearmament in dollars, pounds and francs. The German bank, Shreider, financed Hitler's department of propaganda, but it was mostly the great American, English and French trusts which financed the rearmament.

This was true in the case of the American chemical consortium, Dupont de Nemours and of the English trust;

Imperial Chemicals Industry, which subsidized I.G. Farbein with whom they had shared the world powder market, and;

Dillon Bank, in New York which subsidized the Vereinigte Stahlwerke, the German steel trust. Others were subsidized by Morgan, Rockefeller, et al.. Thus did the pound and the dollar take part in the plot which brought Hitler to power.

In France, a request by Senator Paul Laffont to the Ministry of the national Economy concerning the quantities of iron ore exported towards Germany from 1934 on,received the following answer :

The quantities of iron ore (N 204 of the customs tariff) exported towards Germany in the years 1934,1935,1936 and 1937, are consigned to the following chart :

Year       Quantities (in quintals)

1934             17,060,916
1935             58,616,111
1936             77,931,756
1937             71,329,234

Source : Journal officiel de la Republique francaise,March 26th 1938.

Yet the directors of Dupont de Nemours, Dillon, Morgan, Rockefeller or François de Wendel were not asked to answer for their actions at Nuremberg, in the chapter entitled "plotting against the peace".

The imprecations of Hitler and the principal Nazi leaders against Communists and Jews are often invoked. This is especially true of Chapter XV of the second volume of "Mein Kampf", in which Hitler evokes the past: that of the war of the gasses initiated by the English during the First World War. The chapter is entitled :

"The right to legitimate defence :

"If, at the beginning or during the war,twelve or fifteen thousand of those Hebrew corruptors of the people had been subjected only once to the toxic gasses that hundreds of thousands of our best German workers from every walk of life had to endure on the front the sacrifice of millions of men would not have been in vain. On the contrary, if we had got rid in time of these twelve thousand or so scoundrels, we could perhaps have saved the existence of a million good brave Germans full of future."

In a speech before the Reichstag on January 30th 1939, he also said :

"If the international world of Jewish finance both within and outside Europe were to succeed in plunging nations once again in a world war, the result would not be the Bolshevization of the Earth alongside with the victory of Judaism, but the annihilation (Vernichtung) of the Jewish race in Europe...For the age in which the non-Jewish peoples were delivered up defenceless to propaganda is over. National-Socialist Germany and Fascist Italy henceforth possess institutions which make it possible each time it is necessary to enlighten the world regarding the full details and issues of a question which many nations feel instinctively without being able to explain it scientifically to themselves."

"Jews can continue to pursue their campaign of harassment in certain States, protected as they are by the monopoly they exert over the press, the cinema, radio propaganda, theatres, literature and still other means. Yet if that people should suceed once again in precipitating millions of people in a completely absurd conflict for them, though it may be profitable for Jewish interests, then we would see manifesting itself the efficiency of a labour of explanation which has made it possible within a few years in Germany alone to get rid of Judaism completely (restlos erlegen)."

Source: I/M.T. Vol.XXXI, p. 65.

On January 30th 1941, Hitler addressed himself to all the Jews of Europe, telling them they "would have finished playing their role in case of generalized warfare." Then, in a speech made on January 30th 1942, he declared that the war would see "the annihilation of Judaism in Europe."

Hitler's political testament, published by the Nuremberg International Military Court is full of statements to the same effect. For example, we read :

"But I have allowed no doubt to subsist on that score if those international conspirators of the world of money and finance start treating the peoples of Europe like packets of shares, that people which is the true culprit in this murderous conflict will have to render accounts: the Jews ! (Das Judentum !)"

"I have left no-one uncertain as to the fate which awaits he through who millions of children of the Aryan peoples of Europe had to die of hunger, millions of adult men had to die and hundreds of thousands of women and children would be burnt alive in the bombardments of their city. Even if it must be done with more humane means, the culprit will have to expiate his fault. "

Hitler spoke of destroying an "influence"; Himmler spoke more directly of destroying people.

This, for example, is what Himmler said in a speech addressed to naval commanders at Weimar on December 16th 1943 :

"When, wherever I was, I was forced to give the order to march against partisans and Jewish commissars in a village, then I systematically gave the order to also kill the wives and children of these partisans and commissars."

Later, speaking before some generals at Sonthofen on May 5th 1944, he added :

"In this conflict with Asia, we must get into the habit of forgetting the rules of the game and the customs in use during European wars of the past, although we have grown attached to them and they suit our mentality better."

This savagery was not, unfortunately, confined to one side.

On September 4th 1940, Hitler declared at the "Sportpalast":

"If the British Air Force throws three or four thousand kilos of bombs on us, we shall throw one hundred, one hundred and fifty, two hundred, three hundred, four hundred thousand kilos and more in a single night."

This is a wild exaggeration of the Lutwaffe's possibilities in terms of strategic bombardments, but it shows the degree of hatred both camps had reached.

In reply, Clifton Fadiman, editor of the "New Yorker" and figurehead of the "Writers' War Board", a semi-official government literary agency, asked writers in 1942 :

"...to arouse an ardent hatred against all the Germans and not only against the Nazi leaders."

These words proving controversial, Fadiman insisted :

"...the only way to make Germans understand is to kill them. And even then, I don't think they'll understand."

In April 1942, praising a book by De Sales, "The making of tomorrow", Fadiman developed his racist concept and wrote:

"Today's Nazi aggression is not the work of a group of gangsters, but rather the final expression of the deepest instincts of the German people. Hitler is the incarnation of greater forces than himself. The heresy he preaches is 2,000 years old. What is this heresy? Neither more nor less than the rebellion against Western civilization which began with Arminius...the dimensions of this war thus appear distinctly..."

He approved of Hemingway's suggestion :

"...the only ultimate settlement would be to sterilize the Nazis in the surgical meaning of the word. "

He ridiculed Dorothy Thomson, who made a distinction between the Nazis and other Germans.

His was not an isolated opinion. After Hitler's speech at the "Sportpalast", the "Daily Herald" in London published an article by the Reverend C.W. Wipp, declaring:

"The keynote must be : "to sweep them" and, to do that, to concentrate our science on the discovery of new and more terrifying explosives...A minister of the Gospel must perhaps not yield to such feelings, but I say frankly that if I could I would strike Germany off the map. It is a diabolical race which has been the curse of Europe for centuries."

Fortunately, there were protests against such aberrations in England where the people, not any more than the German people and its high degree of culture, could be confused with bloodthirsty leaders and individuals full of hatred and baying for blood.

As early as the month of January 1934, the Zionist leader, Wladimir Jabotinsky, declared to the Jewish newspaper "Natscha Retsch" :

"Our Jewish interests demand the definitive annihilation of Germany; the whole German people poses a threat for us."

As for Churchill, he wrote to Paul Reynaud on May 16th 1940 :

"We shall starve Germany. We shall destroy its cities. We shall burn its crops and its forests."

Source: Paul Baudouin, "Neuf mois au gouvernement". La Table Ronde, 1948, p.57.

In 1942, the British minister, Lord Vansittart, a true apostle of hatred, declared to justify the terror of British bombardments:

"The only good Germans are dead Germans; so let the bombs rain down ! "

In July 1944, Churchill sent his chief of staff, General Hastings Imay, a four-page memorandum in which he proposed the following project :

"I want you to think over this question of asphyxiating gases very seriously...

"It is absurd to take morality into account in this affair when everyone has already made use of them (asphyxiating gases) during the last war, without there being any protest on the part of moralists or of the church. On the other hand, the bombing of open cities was regarded as taboo at the time; today, everyone does it as a matter of fact. It is only a question of fashion, comparable to the evolution in the length of women's hemlines...

"I want the question of how much it would pay to use asphyxiating gases to be examined coolly...We must not allow our hands to be bound by foolish principles... We could flood the cities of the Ruhr and many other cities in Germany in such a way that the majority of the population would be in constant need of medical help...We may have to wait a few weeks or even a few months before I ask you to flood Germany with asphyxiating gases and, if we do it, let's do it thoroughly. Meanwhile, I would like this question to be examined coolly by sensible people and not by a team of killjoy psalm-singers in uniform of the sort one crosses now and again."

Source : "American heritage", August-September 1985.

Note : The United States produced almost 135,000 tons of toxic chemical agents during the war, Germany 70,000 tons, the United Kingdom 40,000 tons and Japan 7,500 tons.

Neither Churchill, nor Stalin, nor Truman had to face trial for war crimes at Nuremberg.

The Nuremberg court did not try some of the most ignoble calls to crime of which we can mention two of the wildest : one was a call to "genocide" (this time in the true meaning of the term) by an American Jew called Theodore Kaufman, who wrote a book entitled : "Germany must perish". In it, he put forward the following case:

"The Germans (whoever they are : anti-Nazis, Communists and even philo-Semites) do not deserve to live. Consequently, 20,000 doctors must be mobilized after the war to sterilize 25 Germans a day each. In this way,not one German able to breed will remain within three months, and the German race will be totally eliminated within 60 years."

This book, which came out in 1942, was a godsend for anti-Semites. Hitler had extracts from it read on all the radio-stations. Another work of the kind was the "Call to the Red Army" by the Soviet writer, Ilya Ehrenburg, published in October 1944 :

"Kill, kill ! There are no innocents among the Germans, either among the living or among those yet to be born! Carry out the instructions of Comrade Stalin by always crushing the Fascist beast in its lair. Break the pride of German women by violence; take them as legitimate booty. Kill, kill, valiant soldiers of the Red Army, in your irresistible assault." (quoted by Admiral Doenitz,"Dix ans et 20 jours", (pp.343-44).

Neither of the above-mentioned was tried at Nuremberg, any more than the heads of State which covered them.

Nor were tried the Anglo-American leaders who were responsible for the bombing of Dresden, which killed 200,000 civilians and which served no military purpose since the Soviet Army had already reached the Oder.

Nor was Truman tried, though he was responsible for the atomic apocalypse of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, in which 300,000 civilians perished, again uselessly since Japan's surrender had already been decided by the emperor.

Nor were Beria and Stalin tried for the massacre of thousands of Polish officers at Katyn, which was blamed on the Germans.

* * *

The methods of the procedure were based on the same principles (or rather absence of principles) as the choice of the accused among the vanquished only.

The status of the tribunal was defined as follows :

* Article 19 : The Court will not be bound by technical rules relating to the administration of proofs. It will adopt and apply as far as possible an expeditive and not a formalist procedure, will admit any means it considers to have conclusive value.

* Article 21 : The Court will not require proof of facts that are of public notoriety, but will take them as established. It also regards as authentic proofs the official documents and reports of the Allied governments.

This was the juridical monstrosity whose decisions were to be canonized and regarded as criteria of an untouchable historical truth, according to the Gayssot-Fabius law of May 2nd 1990.

This text inserts an article 24b in the 1981 law concerning the freedom of the press which says:

"Article 24b - whosoever contests the existence of crimes against humanity sanctioned by French or international jurisdiction will be punished by imprisonment of from one month to a year and of a fine of between 2,000 and 300,000 francs, or to one of these penalties only."

* * *

Such a procedure by the Nuremberg Court raised objections even amongst the top-level American jurists: those of the Supreme Court.

One of these was Judge Jackson. The English historian, David Irving, who admitted he had misjudged him earlier, was to say the following :

"Renowned jurists throughout the world were ashamed of the Nuremberg proceedings. Certainly, Judge Robert H. Jackson, the American president of the accusers, was ashamed of these proceedings ; this was obvious from his "personal diary", which I have read."

"I have had the privilege of having access to the "Memoirs" (of Judge Jackson) at the Library of Congress...Shortly after Robert H. Jackson was entrusted by President Truman with the task of leading the American judges at the Nuremberg Trial, he found out about American plans to use atomic bombs; he was uneasy about the task entrusted to him : to pursue in the name of a nation, acts which it had itself committed, for he was aware that the United States was going to commit an even greater crime." (33.9392 and 9394)

Referring to the book by Alpheus Thomas Mason on Harlan Fiske Stone: "Pillar of the Law" (Harlan Fiske Stone was Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States) the lawyer Christie quoted page 715 of this book, in which Stone wrote to the editor of "Fortune" magazine that not only did he disown such a procedure, but that he regarded the whole thing as "a high-grade lynching party in Nuremberg." (5.995-996) p.716.

Judge Wennerstrum, of the Supreme Court of the United States, President of one of the courts (23.5915-5916) was so disgusted by the procedure that he refused his nomination and went back to the United States, where he voiced his objections in the "Chicago Tribune" : 60% of the members of the board of the trial were Jewish ; so were the interpreters.

"As for the principal accused : Hoess, Streicher, Pohl, they have been tortured." (23.5919).

By virtue of the Nuremberg statutes accepting as proofs all declarations by the Allies, the Soviet report on Katyn accusing the Germans of the massacre of 11,000 Polish officers was accepted as an "authentic proof", irrefutable, on August 8th 1945 by the victors.

Source : USSR Document 54, in vol. 39 of the TMI (p.290.32)

The Soviet Prosecuting Attorney, General Rudenko, could have said according to article 21 of the Nuremberg Trial Statute, "...there could be no object of contestation." (XV,p.300)

On April 13 th 1990, the international press announced that the massacre had been ordered by Beria and the Soviet authorities. When Professor Naville, of Geneva University, had examined the bodies, he found 1940 documents in their pockets which proved that the executions had taken place at that date. In 1940, the Smolensk district was occupied by the Soviets.

* * *

To stick to our theme : "The founding myths of the State of Israel", we will examine one of the untruths which continue to wreak the most havoc after over half a century in today's world, and not only in Israel : "the myth of the 6 million Jews exterminated" that has become a dogma justifying, sacralizing (as the very term "Holocaust" implies) all the extortions of the State of Israel in Palestine, in the entire Middle-East, in the United States and, through the United States,in world politics, placing it above all international law.

The Nuremberg Court made this figure official; it has never ceased since then to be used to manipulate public opinion in the written and spoken press, in literature and the cinema, and even in schoolbooks.

In fact, this figure rests only on two accounts: that of Hoettl and that of Wisliceny.

This was what the former declared :

"In April 1944, as told to the Nuremberg judges, Dr.Wilhem Hoettl, Obersturmbannfrrher, of section IV of the Central security bureau of the Reich : the S.S. Obersturmbannfeurher Adolf Eichmann, whom I had known since 1938, had a talk with me in my apartment in Budapest... He knew he was considered as a war criminal by the Allied nations since he had thousands of Jewish lives on his conscience. I asked him how many there were, and he answered : although the number was a great secret, he would tell me because of his information he had reached the following conclusion : in the various extermination camps, some four million Jews had been killed and two million had died in other ways."

Source : Nuremberg Trial, vol. IV, p.657.

And the second :

"He (Eichmann) said that he would leap into his grave laughing, for the knowledge of having the lives of five million people on his conscience would be a source of extraordinary satisfaction for him." (op.cit.)

Of these two accounts, M. Poliakov himself said :

"It would be possible that a figure so imperfectly backed up, must be considered suspect."

Source : Revue d'histoire de la seconde guerre mondiale. October 1956.

Let us add that the principal testimony, the most complete and the and most precise, is by Hoett, an Intelligence Service officer.

Source : "Weekend" magazine,January 25th 1961, with on its cover a portrait of Hoett, with the caption :"History of a spy. Stranger than fiction : this friend of Nazi leaders, had a British Secret Service chief as a boss."

Confirming the objections of top jurists of the Supreme Court of the United States, and of many others, on the juridical anomalies of the "Nuremberg Court", we shall give the following examples of the violations of the rules that apply to the procedure of every genuine trial.

1 - The establishment and the verification of the authenticity of the texts produced.

2 - The analysis of the value of the testimony and the conditions in which they were obtained.

3 - The scientific examination of the weapon used to commit the crime in order to establish the way it functions and its effects.

* * *

a) The texts

The fundamental texts, which are decisive for establishing what the "final solution" must have been, are first of all the extermination orders attributed to the most highly-placed leaders : Hitler, Goering, Heydrich, Himmler, and the directives given for their execution.

First of all, Hitler's directive on the "extermination".

Despite the efforts of the theoreticians of the "genocide" and the "Holocaust", no trace was ever found of it. As Olga Wurmser-Migot wrote in 1968:

"Just as there exists no clear order of extermination by gas at Auschwitz, there exists no order to stop in November 1944. " She specifies : " neither at the Nuremberg trial, nor during the course of marginal trials, nor at the Hoess trial in Cracow, or of Eichmann in Israel, nor at the trial of the camp commanders, nor at the Frankfurt November 45-August 46 trial of secondary Auschwitz figures, was the famous order signed by Himmler on November 22nd 1944 on the end of the extermination of Jews by gas ever found, the order putting an end to the 'Final solution.'"

Source : Olga Wurmser-Migot. "Le systrme concentrationnaire nazi." P.U.F 1968, 544 and p. 13.

Doctor Kubovy, from the Tel Aviv "Documentation Center", admitted in 1960 :

"There is no document signed by Hitler, Himmler or Heydrich which speaks of exterminating the Jews...the word "extermination" does not appear in the letter from Goering to Heydrich concerning the final solution to the Jewish question."

Source: Lucy Dawidowicz, "The War against the Jews (1975) p.121.

After a conference held at the Sorbonne in Paris in February 1979 to fight against the critical works of the "revisionists", Raymond Aron and Jacques Furet had to declare during a press conference which had followed the meeting that :

"Despite the most erudite research, we have never been able to find an order by Hitler to exterminate the Jews."

In 1981, Laqueur admitted :

"Until now, we have never found Hitler's order to destroy the European Jewish community, and in all probability the order was never given."

Source : Walter Laqueur : "The terrible secret", Frankfort on the Main.Berlin. Vienna. 1981. p.190.

In spite of all this, there have been other historians who, at the instigation of Vidal Naquet and Leon Poliakov, signed the following declaration :

" (...) We must not ask ourselves how such a mass murder was technically possible. It was technically possible since it took place. This is the obligatory point of departure of any historical enquiry on this subject. It was our duty to simply remind people of this truth: there is not and there cannot be a debate on the existence of the gas chambers... "

We must not ask ourselves...
the obligatory point of departure....
there cannot be a debate....

Three prohibitions, three taboos, three definitive limitations to research.

Such a text does indeed make history in the history of history: the "fact" which must be established is posed before any research as an absolute and untouchable truth forbidden by three prohibitory imperatives, any research and critique of what was once and for all judged by the victors just after the victory.

Yet history must, if it means to respect a scientific status, be a perpetual search, questioning even what one considered as definitively established as the postulate of Euclid or the laws of Newton. The following is a notorious example:

"The Auschwitz International Committee intended in November 1990 to replace the commemorative plaque at Auschwitz which indicated 4 million dead by another bearing the words : "Over one million deaths". Doctor Maurice Goldstein, president of this committee, was opposed to this decision."

Source : "Le Soir", Brussels, 19-20th October l991, p.16.

In fact, Doctor Goldstein in no way challenged the need to change the old plaques, but he did not want the new plaque to carry a figure, knowing that it would probably be necessary to again reduce the figure now considered within a short while.

The plaque at the entrance of Birkenau therefore bore the following inscription until 1994:

"Here, from 1940 to 1945, four million men,women and children were tortured and assassinated by Hitlerian murderers."

Thanks to the activity of the State Museum of Auschwitz, whose president is the historian Wladislaw Bartoszewski and whose twenty six members are of all nationalities,the text has been modified in a manner more in keeping with the truth:

"May this place where the Nazis murdered one and a half million men,women and children, mostly Jews from different European countries, be forever for humanity a cry of despair and a warning."

Source: article by Luc Rosenzveig, in "Le Monde", January 27th 1995

This example shows that history, when it escapes intellectual terrorism by the predicators of hatred, demands a perpetual "revision". It is "revisionist" or else it is a disguised form of propaganda.

Let us go back therefore to history as such, of a critical, "revisionist" sort, in other words one based on the analysis of texts, the checking of accounts and the expertise regarding the crime weapon.

First of all, this is what concerns the Jews in the National Socialist Party program.

The problem of the Jews is considered in Point 4 of the National Socialist Party (NSDAP) Program:

"Only those who are fully citizens can possess German nationality. And those who are fully citizens are those who have German blood, regardless of religion. Therefore no Jew can fully be a citizen."

Staatsburger designated the citizen whereas Volkgenosse defined full citizenship as a member of a homogeneous community.

Further on, we come to point 5 :

"He who does not possess German nationality can only live in Germany as a guest (Gast) and will be submitted to the existing legislation regarding the sojourn of foreigners."

Then, point 7 raises the question of the prohibition of stay in the Reich, under certain conditions, of those who do not have German nationality; point 8 demands the stopping of all new immigration of non-Germans, as well as the immediate expulsion of non-Germans who have entered the Reich since August 2nd 1914. This last point is obviously directed against the Jews from the East, who had come to the Reich in large numbers during and after the First World War.

Point 23 also deals with this problem: it stipulates that Jews will not have the right to work in the press, while Point 24 asserts that the Party is struggling against the "Jewish materialistic spirit."