is based in the
United Kingdom and devoted to free inquiry into
site exists to promote an open scientific,
evidenced-based approach to historical
enquiry. We do not believe or reject
anything, though naturally we do form
opinions. However, they are just that:
opinions based on our current understanding
of the facts. We are not emotionally
attached to them and we would have no
problem with changing our current positions
on any subject if the evidence suggested we
We are mainly, though not exclusively, interested in the Second World War and the German treatment of Jews during that conflict, since this is the area where free enquiry is most actively and efficiently suppressed by force of law and imprisonment in some countries and by taboo in all. The topic is protected from any objective investigation by an electric fence of emotion and insult, with the result that few other than those with a political axe to grind dare question the received story. We have no such axe. We have looked at the orthodox story and at the arguments brought against it by Revisionists, and we find that, at the very least, the Revisionists have raised questions which so far have not been satisfactorily answered. They are met with insults and ad hominem accusations of political bias, which, even if they are true (they are in some cases but not in others) are irrelevant, since the historical facts of what happened in the 1940s cannot be influenced by anyone's views today on anything. The reality is that those who promote the orthodox story are themselves also largely driven by emotion and political bias. On the whole, whatever their motives, it is the Revisionists, not the proponents of orthodoxy, who have looked for material evidence and applied scientific methodolgy.
We don't like the term Holocaust; we think it represents a dishonest approach used to impose a narrative and to suppress enquiry, rather than encourage actual study of what happened. It has entered the vocabulary relatively recently, promoting a politically-motivated, anti-intellectual, emotional and manipulative memorialism, which was analysed by Dr Norman Finkelstein (a Jewish-American university professor) in his best-selling book The Holocaust Industry.
We are not neo-Nazis; we are not so-called "White Nationalists" or any other kind of racist; we do not believe "it was all a Jewish conspiracy", but we do have genuine and sincere doubts, based on our reading of the historical record and the arguments of both sides, most of which is completely absent from the mass media which serve a hysterical diet of tear-jerking accusations but very few verified facts.
individuals behind the site have differing personal
views, the one thing we are unanimous on is the right
to investigate freely.
We will also point you to
aspects of history that, although indisputably
true, are almost entirely absent from the
mainstream media. For example, take a look at
a map of pre-war Germany and compare it with a
map of Germany today. The
15 million Germans in that "missing" area, as
well as the Sudetenland and other areas, were
driven out with extreme
brutality, including mass rape and murder, by
Russians, Poles, Czechs, Serbs and others, with hundreds of thousands,
perhaps as many as two million deaths. They too were
transported in "cattle trucks"
(which were actually goods
vans, but that doesn't have the same
emotive ring). It was the
largest of many deportations
and expulsions in Eastern Europe. They have fallen into
history's memory hole. How much
have they received in reparations?
When did you last see a TV
programme, a film or a newspaper
article about any of them? The present writer knows
of only one: Shadow
Over Europe made by Charles
Wheeler for BBC4 in 2002. It has
only recently become available on
We welcome views that differ from our own, provided always that they are presented objectively, calmly and courteously without resort to rudeness or invective, and we promise to do our best to show similar courtesy to others. We are looking for historical evidence and dialogue, not polemic and confrontation. We don't seek to demonise, sanctify or whitewash anyone. Not Hitler, not Stalin, not Churchill or anyone else...
Do we deny the Holocaust?
Like "Do we still beat our wives
(or husbands)?" the question is impossible to answer
as it is based on a false assumption. "Holocaust
denial" is a simplistic Newspeak term, designed to
shut down discussion by falsely
presenting the issue as black or white, all or
implying that anyone questioning any
part of it must have malicious motives.
The truth is more complex.
Much of what is called the Holocaust did beyond question take place:
We in no way dispute these component parts of the
larger event which since about 1980 has become
labelled as the Holocaust.
other main components are far from "proven beyond
last point should not be at issue. All historians and
other knowledgeable people now accept that
that these horrific
scenes were caused by epidemics and starvation in
the total collapse of infrastructure at the end of the war and by massive
overcrowding as inmates of the camps in Poland
were moved to camps in Germany that had no space
for them, but little effort has been made to
communicate this knowledge to the general public
and photographs taken at these camps are regularly
and falsely presented in
the media as "proof of the Holocaust".
The accusations of mass killing in gas chambers rely entirely on:
gas chambers and extermination were regarded by
the Nuremberg Tribunals and the later SS trials in
Germany as "facts of common knowledge" and
therefore unquestionable. For a defendant
to dispute them was a sure way to the hangman's
noose or a very long time in prison. The only
possible defence or mitigation was to say that
these things happened but to deny or play down
your own role in them. Some received lighter
sentences for confessing or for testifying against
others (plea bargaining). The Commandant of
Auschwitz, Rudolf Hoess, said at Nuremberg that
3 million had died in the camp of whom 2.5
million were murdered. The official figure today
is just over 1 million, with no attempt to
distinguish, the public being left to assume that
all were gassed. So even if we accept the official
figure, we know that Hoess was forced to
No actual homicidal gas
chambers have ever been found
The alleged gas
chamber at Auschwitz 1, shown to tourists,
was "reconstructed" by the Russians in 1947 on
the site of a crematorium and
morgue, later used as an air raid shelter (with
door). Until the mid-nineties, it
was presented to visitors as "original". Even today the
public are encouraged to believe it is in
its original state and you will only be
told it is a "reconstruction" if you
actually ask, or go to a
very obscure corner of their web site
(last paragraph on that page). At
Auschwitz 2 there are only ruins of
buildings whose plans and specifications
in the Auschwitz Construction Office are
for crematoria and morgues, with nothing
to identify them as gas chambers; the
ovens are standard
crematorium design for individual
bodies and their capacity
is far too low for the mass murderous use
claimed for them. Majdanek has gas
chambers used to kill lice in clothing and
bedding, using Zyklon B, which it is
alleged, without evidence, were also used
to kill people.
This comes as a great surprise to most people, who have been taught that the Holocaust is "the most documented event in history" and that it is beyond dispute that six million Jews were killed. In reality, the deportations, the camps and the crematoria are thoroughly documented, but that is all.
Since the universal image of
the Nazis as unique symbols of evil incarnate is
based on these beliefs, we no longer accept this
extreme view of the German Hitlerite regime,
though we are certainly are in no way apologists
for it: we see it as probably a good deal less
murderous than the brutal Stalinist regime in
Russia, our ally to whom we handed over half of
Europe, turning it into a world superpower. We
look at the historical record and try to get an
objective picture of what happened and to understand
why individuals, groups and nations acted as
they did. What are viewed as war crimes
in comfortable armchair retrospection must be seen
in the context both of brutal total war and of
similar or comparable actions by our own side.
If there really is so little evidence to support these allegations of deliberate mass murder, how can it be that they are near-universally believed?
This is a complex issue, but in
That there were gas chambers in Germany is no longer
believed since as long ago as 1960. An extraordinary
admission. Only the camps in Poland, then conveniently
unavailable for inspection behind the Iron Curtain,
continued to be considered "death camps". Since they
became accessible, Auschwitz 1 has been
acknowledged to be a fake by the Auschwitz Museum
authorities and ground surveys at Treblinka and Belzec
have produced little of substance.
Since the late 70s:
|Here is an outline of the Holocaust
Revisionist position by Bradley Smith
and Mark Weber.
For those with a little more time we recommend Joel Hayward's thesis.
Hayward, who has some Jewish ancestry, never identified as a Revisionist; he simply wrote an MA thesis comparing the Revisionist and orthodox arguments. He was attacked with the full force of the New Zealand Jewish establishment, who demanded his degree be withdrawn and he be fired from his lecturer position. They brought in Richard Evans (who had appeared against David Irving in his libel suit against Deborah Lipstadt).
Hayward had a nervous breakdown and was almost driven out of academia. He only managed to survive by leaving his native New Zealand for Britain and abandoning any work connected with the Holocaust. He specialised in air power and has had a brilliant career becoming Dean of the RAF College at Cranwell. He is now Chair of the Department of Humanities and Social Sciences at Khalifa University in Abu Dhabi.