The Most Anti-Semitic Book of 2011: Debating the Holocaust: A New Look At Both Sides

Review

DEBATING THE HOLOCAUST A NEW LOOK AT BOTH SIDES By Thomas Dalton, Ph.D THE CONTROVERSY THAT WON’T GO AWAY NOW, THE TRUTH BEHIND THE HOLOCAUST DENIAL DEBATE There was no budget. There was no plan. There was no extermination order from Hitler. Preeminent Holocaust expert Raul Hilberg said: {What began in 1941 was a process of destruction not planned in advance, not organized centrally by any agency. There was no blueprint and there was no budget for destructive measures. [These measures] were taken step by step, one step at a time. Thus came about not so much a plan being carried out, but an incredible meeting of minds, a consensus mind reading by a far-flung bureaucracy.} Is this really a comprehensible explanation? Key camps have all but vanished. So too the human remains. Material evidence is astonishingly absent. The alleged gassing procedure has serious, unanswered questions. And the famous six million number has an amazing history. Revisionists claim that the public has been seriously misled by traditional historians. Are they right? IF WE COULD BE MISTAKEN ABOUT THE HOLOCAUST,WHAT ELSE COULD WE BE WRONG ABOUT? –World War Two Books

Product Description

For the past few decades there has been raging a kind of subterranean debate, one of monumental importance. It is a debate about the Holocaust — not whether or not it “happened” (this is a meaningless claim), but rather, HOW it happened, through what MEANS, and to what EXTENT. On the one hand we have the traditional, orthodox view: the six million Jewish casualties, the gas chambers, the cremation ovens and mass graves. On the other hand there is a small, renegade band of writers and researchers who refuse to accept large parts of this story. These revisionists, as they call themselves, present counter-evidence and ask tough questions. Among the issues they raise are these: (1) there is no trace of a ‘Hitler order’ to exterminate the Jews; (2) key witnesses have either falsified or greatly exaggerated important aspects of their stories; (3) major death camps — Belzec, Chelmno, Sobibor, and Treblinka — have all but vanished; (4) we find little evidence of disturbed earth for mass graves; (5) we find few remains of the millions of alleged victims — neither bones nor ash; (6) mass-gassing with Zyklon-B would be nearly impossible without ventilators and ceiling holes; (7) mass-gassing with diesel engine exhaust is practically impossible, given the low level of carbon monoxide; (8) wartime air photos of Auschwitz show none of the alleged mass-burnings or cremations; (9) the ‘6 million’ number has no basis in fact, and actually traces back decades before the war; (10) trends in Jewish world population strongly suggest less than 6 million lost; and (11) the present number of “survivors” — currently over 1 million — implies few wartime deaths. The revisionists arrive a different account. Hitler, they say, wanted to expel the Jews, not kill them. The ghettos and concentration camps served primarily for ethnic cleansing and forced labor, not mass murder. The Zyklon gas chambers did in fact exist, but were used for delousing and sanitary purposes. And most important, the Jewish death toll was much lower than commonly assumed — on the order of 500,000. In this book, for the FIRST TIME EVER, the reader can now judge for himself. Arguments and counter-arguments for both sides are presented, and all relevant facts are laid out in a clear and concise manner. The entire debate is presented in a scholarly and non-polemical fashion. Citations are marked, and facts are checked. READ, and JUDGE FOR YOURSELF.

About the Author

My goal is to remedy this shortcoming. I intend to present an objective, impartial look at this debate. I will discuss the latest and strongest arguments on both sides, examine the replies, and offer an unbiased assessment. This is a challenging task, to say the least, but I believe that I am reasonably well suited for it. Unlike the vast majority of writers on the Holocaust, I am not Jewish either by religion or ethnicity; nor are any of my family members. I am not of German descent. No one in my immediate family suffered or died in World War II. I am neither Muslim nor fundamentalist Christian, so I have no religious bias. My background is as a scholar and academic, having taught humanities at a prominent American university for several years now. I have a long-standing interest in World War II, and in the present conflict in the Middle East. In the end, whether I have succeeded in offering an objective analysis of this debate will be for the reader to judge.

Related Post

July 10, 2011   Posted in: Anti-Semitism, Anti-Semitism News, Ashkenazi, Holocaust, Holocaust Denial, Holocaust Revisionism, Jewish, Jewish American Heritage Month, Jewish Heritage, Jewish History, Jews, Judaism |

Fair Use Disclaimer

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

Under the 'fair use' rule of copyright law, an author may make limited use of another author's work without asking permission. Fair use is based on the belief that the public is entitled to freely use portions of copyrighted materials for purposes of commentary and criticism. The fair use privilege is perhaps the most significant limitation on a copyright owner's exclusive rights.

Fair use as described at 17 U.S.C. Section 107:

"Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phono-records or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.

In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:

  • (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for or nonprofit educational purposes,
  • (2) the nature of the copyrighted work,
  • (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole, and
  • (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work."