|
|
 |
The Holocaust and the Neo-Nazi Mythomania
© 1978, The
Beate Klarsfeld Foundation
| |
|
| |
 |
Back |
 |
Contents |
Page 129 |
|
Home
Page |
Forward |
 |
| |
| |
macabre, phantasmagoric" (41, P. 58) or "macabrely [sic] fantastic" (40, p. 227) or a "story absolutely incredible..." (41, pp. 64 65).
In his will to
discredit the terrible "Gerstein report" at all costs, Rassinier also affirms
that a part of his (Gerstein's) text or "the one attributed to him" (40, p. 255), is only a text which is
"apocryphal,' "falsified," "traffiked," [sic] "re-arranged" by "forgers"
seeking to heap abuse on the Nazis and that, moreover, it is full of
unlikelihoods.
What is scarcely credible is that the man who so often
vaunts his position of professor of history, his training as a historian, and
who writes pages and pages of "analyses" of the text of the "Gerstein report"
has never had either the curiosity or the professional honesty to procure it.
Nevertheless, this text, at least in photostat, is easy to find. It may be
procured, for example, in the archives of the Center of Contemporary Jewish
Documentation, which are accessible to everyone. It may also be found
elsewhere. This is typical of Rassinier and of his "working habits." What he
does is to judge the text of the "report" through the reading of the works of
different authors who cite it more or less abundantly according to what they
themselves esteem to be particulary [sic] interesting, significant or important
and therefore worthy of citation. Proceeding in this way, these authors are
doing what all historians from antiquity to the present day have done, and
without which it is not possible to write a book of history without rendering
it incredibly long and without making its reading indigestible. This is true
unless, of course, one is dealing with a "collection of complete texts" of
documents, which is quite a different problem. It is natural that, comparing
the pieces of the "report" cited by some with those cited by others, Rassinier
often "discovers" that such and such sentences are missing or, what amounts to
the same, that there are sentences "added on" from one author to another. The
stupidity of this "method" can give no other results than to everywhere find
"frauds" and "falsifications" imaginary and "evident." It is curious to note
that Rassinier and his likes do not at all seem troubled by the strangeness of
the fact that the "falsifiers" and the "forgers" who have the same goal in mind
– falsely condemn the Nazis – do not manage to agree and act
together, as would a gang of ill doers, to avoid the evident "contradictions."
Rassinier's ignorance of the Gerstein text is often anecdotal. For
example, he states: "As far as one can deduce from the writings of these
brilliant historians (it is a question of a series of authors), Kurt Gerstein
was a chemical engineer" (40, p.225). Now
then, the "Gerstein report" begins by a few details of his biography where he
says himself: Gerstein, Kurt, mining engineer (...), graduate engineer." No one
needs "brilliant historians" to learn it first hand and to notice by the same
occasion that Rassinier sticks onto a "mining engineer" the degree of "chemical
engineer".., in which he makes himself guilty of "falsification", "fraud",
"re-arrangement", in conformity with the terminology which he applies to
others.
The objective of Rassinier is to overwhelm the reader with a
flood
|
|
| |
| |
| |
The Holocaust and the Neo-Nazi Mythomania
© 1978, The
Beate Klarsfeld Foundation |
|
Back |
Page 129 |
Forward |
|
|
