Following part --- Preceding Part
Third and Last Part of this Chapter
"The Tribunal shall not be bound by technical rules of evidence [...]"
(Article 19 of the Statutes of the International Military Tribunal.) [In reality: the Inter-Allied Military Tribunal) at Nürnberg.]
"The Tribunal shall not require proof of facts of common knowledge, but shall take judicial notice thereof [...]" (Article 21 of the Statutes.)
No one, not even among those individuals who regard the Third Reich with nostalgia, denies the existence of concentration campsunder Hitler. Everyone recognizes also that certain camps were equipped with crematory ovens. Instead of being buried, corpses were reduced to ashes. The repeated occurrence of epidemics made cremation necessary, especially for those who had died of typhus (see the photos of mass graves at Belsen et cetera). What is, however disputed, by nuùerous French, English, American and German authors is the existence of "extermination camps" in Hitler's Germany. This expression is used by history writers to refer top those camps which are supposed to have been equipped with "gas chambers." These "gas chambers" were different from the American gas chambers in that thjey were allegedly used to kill masses. The victims were allegedly men, women and children that Hitler who were exterminated because of their race or religion. This is called "genocide." The principal means for carrying out this "genocide" were slaughterhouses for humans called "gas chambers" and the gas employed for this purpose would have been generally Zyklon B (a pesticide based upon prussic acid or hydrocyanide acid.)
The authors who contest the "genocide" claim and the existence of the "gas chambers" are called "Revisionists." Their argument runs approximately as follows:
"It suffices for both of these problems "genocide" and "gas chambres") to apply the customary methods of historical criticism, to see that one is confronted here by two myths which are inseparable. The criminal intentions which are attributed to Hitler have never been proven. As far as the weapon for this crime is concerned, no oney has actually seen it. Here one is confronted by an extraordinarily successful war and hate propaganda campaign. History is full of frauds of this kind, begining with the religious fables of sorcery and witchcraft. What distinguishes our time from earlier epochs, is the frightening power of the media and the propaganda ad nauseam which is made for what must be called "the hoax of the century." Let him beware, whoever might after 30 years get the idea to try and expose this hoax. He will learn -- depending upon the situation -- through imprisonment, fines, assaults and insults. His career can be shattered or endangered. He will be denounced as "Nazi." Either his thesis will be ignored,, or else it will be distorted. No country will be more unrelentingly ruthless toward him than West Germany.
Today however, the silence is about to be broken about those men who have dared to write responsibly that Hitler's "gas chambers," (including those of Auschwitz and Majdanek) are onlyt a historical lie (c). That is a great advance.
But what insults and distortions an Exterminationist historian such as Georges Wellers allowed himself when, more than ten years after Paul Rassinier's death, he decided to "expose" the minutest part of the arguments of this ex-inmate of a concentration camp who had had the courage to reveal the lie of the "gas chambers"in his writings!
[A whole literature and press, of sex-shop Nazism (even a newspaper like le Monde (d)) was used to spread the idea that the new Nazis would dare deny the existence of cremation ovens. Better: these neo-Nazis would dare pretend that no Jew was gassed. This last formula is clever. It leads one to believe that the new Nazis, without contesting the existence of "gas chambers," push the cynicism to the point of pretending that only the Jews benefited from the privilege of going to the "gas chamber (e)"!] [This paragraph is missing in the JHR. Ed.]
The best way in which a historian may inform hismself regarding the actual claims of the disciples of Paul Rassinier is to refer to the work of the American A. R. Butz entitledThe Hoax of the Twentieth Century (f).
For my part, I take the liberty of making only a few observations specifically for the serious research-oriented historians.
I call their attention to a paradox. Although the "gas chambers" are, in the view of the official historians, absolutely central to a picture of the Nazi concentration camp system (and furthermore, as proof for the totally perverse and devilish character of the German concentration camps -- in comparison to all previous and more receny concentration camps -- it ought to be meticulously shown how the Nazis proceeded to invent, construct and operate these fearsome slaughterhouses for humans), one must be thoroughly astonished that in the impressive bibliography of the concentration camp literature there is not a single book, not a single brochure, not a single article on the "gas chambers" themselves! One must not be misled by some very promising titles; rather one must ascertain the contents of thesewritings for oneself. I regard as "official historical writing" those publications which are written about the concentration camps by institutions or foundations with are partly or wholly financed from public funds, such as, for example, in France: the Committee of the History of the Second World War, or the Center of Contemporary Jewish Documentation and, in Germany, the Institute of Contemporary History of Munich.
One must wait until page 541 of the thesis by Olga Wormser-Migot on the system of Nazi concentration camps, before one finds a passage about the "gas chambers." However, for the reader there are still three other surprises:
-- The passage in question covers only three pages.
-- It carries the title: "The Problem of the Gas Chambers";
-- This "problem" consists of trying to determine whether the "gas chambers" at Ravensbruck (in Germany) and of Mauthausen (in Austria) really existed; the author comes to the conclusion that they did not exist; however she does not examine the problem of the "gas chambers" of Auschwitz or any of the other camps, probably because in her mind they do not represent a "problem".
At this point, the reader probably wants to know why an analysis which concludes that "gas chambers" did not exist in certain camps is suddenly discontinued as soon as, for example, Auschwitz is discussed. Why, on one hand, is the critical spirit awakened here, and then, on the other hand, it is allowed to collapse into lethargy there? After all, as far as the "gas chamber" of Ravensbruck is concerned, we have available lots of points of "evidence" and "undeniable eyewitness accounts", beginning with repeated and extensive ayewitness accounts by Marie-Claude Vaillant-Courturier, or Germaine Tillion. It gets even better. Several years after the war, before both British and French tribunals, camps officials of Ravensbruck (Suhren, Schwarzhuber, Dr. Treite) repeatedly confessed tio the existence of a "gas chamber" in their camp! They even vaguely described its operation! Eventually they were hanged because of this alleged "gas chamber," or else they committed suicide. The same confessions were given prior to their death by Ziereis for Mauthausen (Austria) and by Kramer for Struthof (Alsace). Today, one can see the alleged "gas chamber" of Struthof and in the same place one can also read the unbelievable confession of Kramer. This "gas chamber" which is designated as an "historical monument" is a complete fraud. The slightest amount of critical spirit will be sufficient to convince onself that a gassing in this small room, without any sealing whatsoever, would have been a catastrophe for the executioner as well as for the people in the vicinity. In order to make this "gas chamber" (which is guaranteed to be in its "original condition") believable, someone has gone so far as to clumsily knock a hole into the thin wall with a chisel, and thereby break four tiles. The hole was so arranged that Joseph Kramer would have dumped through it the mysterious "salts" (about which he could give no further details and which, when mixed with a little water, killed within one minute!). How could salts and water make gas? How could Kramer have prevented the gas from coming back out of the hole? How could he see his victims from a hole which would have let him see no more than half the room? How did he ventilate the room before opening the rudimentary door, made from rough-cut lumber? Perhaps one must ask the civil engineering firm in Saint Michel sur Meurthe (Vosges), which after the war altered the place which today is presented to visitors "in its original condition"?
Even long after the war, prelates, university professors, and some ordinary citizens, gave eyewitness descriptions regarding the terribnle reality of the "gas chambers" of Buchenwald and Dachau. With regards to Buchenwald, the "gas chamber" gradually disappeared from the mind of the people who had previously maintained there was one in this camp.
With regard to Dachau, the situation is different. After it has been firmly established -- for example by His Eminence Bishop Piguet, the bishop of Clermont-Ferrand -- that the "gas chamber" had been especially useful in gassing Polish priest (g), eventually the following official explanation came to pass:
This gas chamber whose contruction had been started in 1943, was still not completed in 1945 when the camps was liberated. No one could have been gassed in it.
The small place presented to visitors as "gas chamber" is, in reality, perfectly harmless, and while all imaginable architectural plans for the construction of `Baracke X" are available, it is hard to see which document or which technical report would indicate our `unfinished gas chamber.'(?)"
No official historical institute has done more to accredit the myth of "gas chambers" than the Institute of Contemporary History of Munich. The director, since 1972, is Mr. Martin Broszat. Collaborator of this institute since 1955, Mr. Broszat would become a celebrity through the (partial) publication of the supposed memories of Rudolf Hoess in 1958. Yet, on August 19, 1960, this historian announced to his astounded compatriots that after all is said and done, there has never existed any "gas chamber" in all the Old Reich but only in some "selected places," first of all (?) in some places in Poland, including Auschwitz-Birkenau. He announced this surprising news in a simple letter to the weekly Die Zeit (p. 16). The title of his letter was oddly restrictive: "Keine Vergasung in Dachau" (no gassing in Dachau). Mr. Broszat gave no proof to support his affirmations. Today, close to eighteen years after his letter, neither he nor his collaborators have yet furnished the least explanation of this mystery. It would, however, be most interesting to know:
-- How does Mr. Broszat prove that the "gas chambers" of the Old Reich are fakes;
-- How does he prove that the "gas chambers" of Poland were real;
-- Why the "proofs," the "certainties," and the "testimonies" assembled about the camps that are geographically near us, suddenly have no more value, while the "proofs," the "certainties" and the "testimonies," assembled about the camps in Poland remain true.
Through some kind of tacit agreement, no official historian has publicly raised these questions. How many times in "the history of history," the pure and simple affirmation of a single historian is accepted?
But let's consider the "gas chambers" of Poland. The existence of "gas chambers" at Belzec and Treblinka is essentially based on the "Gerstein" report. This document of an S.S. who succumbed to "suicide"(?) in 1945 at the Cherche-Midi prison(h) swarms with such absurdities that it has long been discredited by historians. Yet, this report has never been published, even in the Nuremberg Military Tribunal documents, except in inadmissible forms (with truncations, adulterations, rewritings). It has never been published with its aberrant annexes (the "rough draft" in French, the "Erganzungen" or "complements" in German).
Concerning Majdanek, a visit is in order. It is, we might say, even more conclusive than that of Struthof. I shall publish a file on the question.
For Auschwitz and Birkenau, we essentially have the memories(i) of R. Hoess, written under the surveillance of his Polish jailers. Only a "rekonstruiert" place and ruins are found on the scene. An execution by gas has nothing to do with an accidental or suicidal asphyxiation. In the case of an execution, the gas operator and his encourage have to avoid all risks. Americans use a sophisticated gas for their executions, which take place in a small airtight space. After its use, the gas is aspirated and neutralized. The guards have to wait more than an hour to enter the small space.
One wonders how at Aushwitz-Birkenau, for example, 2000 men could be put in a 210 square meter room(!), then pour (?) on them granules of the very potent insecticide Zyklon B; then instantly after the victims' death, send a team, without gas masks, into this place saturated with cyanide acid, to extract the gassed corpses. Two documents(j) of the German industrial archives listed by the Americans at Nuremberg tell us that Zyklon B adheres to surfaces, could not be ventilated by forced ventilation, and needed 24 hours of airing, etc. Other documents found on the scene, kept in the archives of the Oswiecim State museum(k) and which were described nowhere, show that this 210 square meter room, in a state of ruins today, was nothing but a rudimentary morgue ("Leichenkeller"), buried (to protect it from heat), and provided with one modest entry and exist door.
There is an overabundance of documents on the Auschwitz crematoria (as there is, in general, on all the camp), including bills, up to the Pfennig. In contrast, there is nothing on the "gas chambers": no construction order, no study, no command, no plan, no bills, no photograph. In a hundred trials, nothing of this kind could be produced.
"I was at Auschwitz and I can assure you that there is no `gas chamber' there." Defense witnesses who have the courage to pronounce this phrase are barely heard. They are taken to court(l). Even today, in Germany, whoever testifies in favor of Thies Christophersen, who wrote The Auschwitz Lie(m), risks a sentence for "outrage to the memory of the dead."
Right after the war, the Germans, the International Red Cross, the Vatican (which is very well informed on Poland) all declared piously, with many others "The `gas chambers'? We knew nothing."
But, I would ask today, how can one know about things that did not exist?
There has not existed one single "gas chamber" in one single German concentration camp. This is the truth.
This nonexistence of "gas chambers" is to be welcomed as good news that would be wrong to keep hidden. To denounce "Fatima" as a hoax, is not to attack religion; so too, to denounce the "gas chambers" as a historical lie, is not to take it out on the deportees. It is the duty to be true.
Robert Faurisson followed this article by a photocopied "complement" that he sent with the text to different personalities.
A. Conclusions (of thirty years of research) by revisionist authors.
1. The Hitlerian "gas chambers" have never existed.
2. The "genocide" (or, the "attempt of genocide") of the Jews has never taken place, never did Hitler give any order (nor admitted) that anybody be killed because of his race or of his religion.
3. The alleged "gas chambers" and the alleged "genocide" are one and the same lie.
4. This lie, which is essentially of Zionist origin, has allowed a gigantic political financial swindle whose main beneficiary is the State of Israel.
5. The main victims are the German people and the Palestinian people.
6. The colossal power of the official media has, so far, assured the success of the lie and censured the freedom of expression of those who denounce this lie.
7. The followers of the lie know now that their lie is in its final years; they deform the meaning and the nature of revisionist research; they call "resurgence of Nazism" or "falsification of history" that which is nothing but a legitimate return to the concern for historical truth.
B. My publications and an official lecture.
1. A letter to Historama (Nov. 1975, p. 10) on the expression "N.N." (which does not mean "Nacht und Nebel" = "Night and fog," but "Nomen Nescio" = "Anonymous," in practice, a ban, imposed on some deportees, to send or receive mail).
2. Fragments of a letter to Historia (August 1977, p. 132): "L'imposture du genocide."
3. On January 1978 at the "Colloque national de Lyon sur: Eglises et chretiens de France dans la Deuxieme Guerre Mondiale," lecture on the hoax of the "gas chambers" (see Rivarol, Feb. 16, 1978, p. 5).
C. Some of my technical files.
1. Bibliography of the "problem of gas chambers."
2. My inquiries at Struthof (1974), at Majdanek (1975) and at Auschwitz (1975 and 1976): 120 photographs.
3. Years of research at the Center of Contemporary Jewish Documentation in Paris.
4. Consultations of specialized historians.
5. Trials of "war criminals." Stenography minutes of the "Eichmann trial."
6. The "Zyklon B" insecticide.
7. The "Wannsee Protocol."
8. "Final Solution" means "pushing back to the East."
9. A visit in September 1944 to the Auschwitz camp by the representative of the International Red Cross: distortions of all kinds of the original report.
10. The "Gerstein report," and Leon Poliakov or Georges Wellers.
11. The Memories of R. Hoess: "Oeuvre" by J. Sehn, reviewed and corrected by Martin Broszat.
12. The "gas chambers" visible at Majdanek: A "crime weapon" never appraised (idem for all the visitable "gas chambers").
13. The "confessions."
14. "Six million assassinated or "five hundred thousand war dead"? The Comite d'historie de la Deuxieme Guerre mondiale (Henri Michel and Claude Levy) refuses to publish the global results of its own inquiry on the deportees of France, "for fear of the associations of deportees."
15. The Memorial de la deportation des Juifs de France by Serge Klarsfeld: a belated work, hasty and devoid of scientific guarantee; one quarter of the Jews of France were "deported" or "pushed" toward the East, the author did not seriously try to determine the number of deaths. He dares declare "dead" or "gassed" all the deportees of France (most came from the East) who did not return since 1945(!) to declare that they are alive either to our services (the figure of the veterans ministry is "unofficial"), or to the official Belgian services!!! The newspapers present this "memorial" as a "directory of death," a "monument to the dead." The author did whatever is needed to maintain the ambiguity...
16.The political-financial fallout of the "genocide".
17. The French press in the face of the right to doubt and research.
18. How Pierre Viansson-Ponte, the journalist at le Monde works.
19. The "genocide" on French Television.
20. The French university and the tradition of witchcraft trials.
Reading these pages, some might interpret my ideas as an apology for National Socialism.
In reality -- for reasons that I do not have to go into here -- Hitler's personality, ideas or politics seduce me as much as those of Napoleon Bonaparte. I simply refuse to believe the winners' propaganda to whom Napoleon was "the ogre," while Hitler was "Satan" or "Amalec."
It must be clear to everybody that, in my research, I am only driven by the truth. I call truth the opposite of error and lie.
I consider a defamation any accusation or insinuation of Nazism.
Consequently, any physical or moral person, in a public or private capacity, through statements, lectures, writings or actions, is requested to think before compelling me to have recourse to the law.
Copies of these pages will be sent to judges, administrators, newspapers, groups and associations.
June 16, 1978
The famous phrase "Hitler has never given an order," written by Faurisson on several occasions, has created an undeniable malaise in many readers. It was blown out of proportion and serve to reject all of Faurisson's arguments. It has, of course, sparks off passionate discussions including discussions by those who were ready to take Faurisson's arguments into consideration, but it remained unacceptable to many of them. In 1979, Faurisson sent an explanation to some of them:
"Hitler never ordered nor admitted that anyone was to be killed because of his race or his religion(a)."
Explanation of this phrase:
Hitler has always considered the Jews as his enemies, and he treated them accordingly.
Hitler and the Nazis said: "the Allies and the Jews want our annihilation, but it is they who will be annihilated."
Similarly, the Allies and the Jews said: "Hitler and the Nazis want our annihilation, but it is they who will be annihilated."
For one side as for the other, what mattered first was to win the war, at the same time against the military and against the civilians (men, women, the old, children all together).
Even though the winners' camps of the last war, took a series of coercive measures against German or Japanese minorities (considered dangerous during the war or undesirable after the war), even though the winners undertook mass internments, legal (according to laws of the winners) or arbitrary executions, criminal and administrative proceedings against the losers and this for 34 years after the armistice of 1945, even though they proceeded with huge deportations or "displacements" of civilian populations in horrible conditions, yet never did the Allies order or admit that anyone was killed because of his belonging to these enemy minorities, deemed dangerous or hated(b).
Having said this, people who believe that in history, one can pass judgment on the responsibilities of one or the other, are justified to say this: In the eyes of morality and history, both Hitler and the Allies bear the entire responsibility of all the wrongs, all the persecutions, all the deaths sustained by civilian minorities in all the countries at war from 1939 to 1945.
This sentence seems awkward to me because it is ambiguous. Even if it can be proved that it conceals a certain formal truth, it nonetheless remains more than probable that Hitler, together with other political and military leaders, must easily admit that Jews and other non-hostile and non-belligerent minorities such as gypsies and homosexuals, died in great numbers due to persecutions. This type of cynicism is obviously not the prerogative of one type of regime. People continue to die every day because of racial, religious, sexual and political persecutions. In my opinion, more could be done to prevent such deaths.
But, let's go back to the Faurisson affair.
Is the nail riveted? Certainly not. The medium is not good. The extreme right offers no credibility as to research, doubt or concern for the truth. In the fall, Pierre Viansson-Ponte, in his program "Au fil de la semaine" (week in review), resumes his attacks against the school called "revisionist": "It is surprising that those responsible for these infamies are not identified and pursued: they fall under the law that punishes incitement to racial hatred (17)." One can certainly wonder what legal confusion led to this connection, and even wonder whether it is the duty of the journalist to call for the denunciation of whoever holds views opposite to his; but one must admit that not knowing much about Faurisson's writings, he doesn't dare denounce him by name (18).
(11) S.N.E. Sup, conflict commission, deliberation of October 4, 1975.
(12) Le Monde, January 16, 1979.
(a) Presented to tourists as being in its original state.
(13) "The writer, Charlotte Delbo, has published four narratives on the deportation: Aucun de nous ne reviendra, Une connaissance inutile, Mesure de nos jours, Le Convoi du 24 Janvier (ed. de Minuit) and one play: "Qui rapportera ces paroles?" (Oswald)
(14) Charlotte Delbo, le Monde, 11-12 August, 1974.
(15) Autopsy of Auschwitz, for the use of future generations. This is: Hommes et femmes a Auschwitz, Fayard, 537 p., Le Monde, May 19, 1975.
(16) There, Faurisson makes a mistake, a mistake that he will not pick up again in the Diary of Anne Frank.
(a) [We reproduce here the English translation that appeared in the Journal of Historical Review, 1, 2, Summer 1980, p. 103-114. Ed.] Expression used by Olga Wormser-Migot (le Systeme concentrationnaire nazi, 1933-1945) thesis, P.U.F., 1968, p. 541.
(b) Associate professor of the University of Lyon 2 (critique of texts and documents). Mr. Faurisson warns us that he obviously does not support the political opinions of his publishers.
(c) See several press articles uniformly hostile or insulting. A study by Hermann Langbein appeared in le Monde Juif of April-June 1975 (" Coup d'oeil sur la litterature neo-nazie," pp. 8-20). Hermann Langbein was interned in Auschwitz camp. He has testified at several trials. He holds high positions of responsibility in the world of former deportees. One of his recent works has the French title, Hommes et femmes a Auschwitz (Men and Women in Auschwitz) (Fayard, 1975, v II, 529 pp.) Not one of the thirty chapters of this book is devoted to the "gas chambers"! On the contrary, there is always the question of "selection for the gas chamber," of "hair of the gassed," and "survivors of the gas chamber," etc. See also a study by Georges Wellers in le Monde juif of April-June 1977 ("La ''solution finale de la question juive'' et la mythomanie neo-nazie," pp. 41-84). Also see a study by Ino Arndt and Wolfgang Scheffler in Vierteljahrshefte fuer Zeitgeschichte (a publication of the Institute of Contemporary History in Munich, director Martin Broszat), April 1976 ("Organisierter Massenmord an Juden in Nazi Vernichtungslagen," pp. 105-135).
(d) See Le Monde of 16-17 October 1977, p. 3. "Des centaines de tracts neo-nazis..."
(e) The worst distortions in this respect seem to have been reached in a report by M. Pierre Viansson-Ponte. See in le Monde of 17-18 July, 1977, p. 13, his article on the French translation of Did Six Million Really Die? (by R. Harwood, H.R.P. Richmond, Surrey, TW10 6AA [G.B.] Address at Richmond: 23 Ellerker Gardens [Historical Review Press]. First edition in 1975, 28 pp. [dble. col.]) Those who have vindicated or justified the assassination of F. Duprat, distributor of this brochure, have adopted the false accusations of M. Viansson-Ponte (see le Monde, March 23, 1978, p. 7 and April 26, p. 9).
(f) Same editor as for R. Harwood. First edition in 1976, 315 pp. Price 2 pounds, 50 pence. The book has an exceptional scientific value.
(g) Prison et deportation, edition Spes, 1947, p. 77.
(h) See the reflection of the coroner related by Pierre Joffroy in l'Espion de Dieu-la Passion de Kurt Gerstein, p. 262, Grasset, 1969.
(i) Kommandant in Auschwitz, Autobiographische Aufzeichnungen, von Rudolf Hoess. Eingeleitet und kommentiert von Martin Broszat, Deutsche Verlag Anstalt, Stuttgart, 1958, 184 pp. See on gassings, pp. 126 and 166. The entrance of the team in the "gas chamber" is done "sofort " i.e. "immediately" (p. 166).
(j) These two long documents, of major importance, were not used, it seems, during the trial of Gerhardt Peters (director of Degesch), are labeled NI-9098 and NI-9912. They completely demolish the "confessions" of Hoess on the "gas chambers."
(k) Photos neg. 6228 sq.
(l) The case of Wilhelm Staeglich, for example (see the book by Butz s.v.)
(m) "Die Auschwitz-Luege" No. 23 of Kritik, 2341 Kalberhagen; Post Mohrkirch (RFA), 1974, followed by "Der Auschwitz Betrug," no. 27 (Das Echo auf die Auschwitz Lege.)
(a) I think this shocking sentence conforms to the truth. I call truth the opposite of error or lie. I believe that the truth must be accepted by each one of us, irrespective of the opinion of whoever professes it. Scientific history neither professes opinions, nor supports principles. Principles are the personal business of each one of us. In this domain, let us not hide behind scientific history and make it talk: it is speechless.
(b) September 5, 1939, the president of the World Jewish Congress, Chaim Weizmann, declared war on Germany. For Hitler, the Jews were representatives of a hostile, belligerent nation.
(17) "Le Mensonge (suite)" September 3-4, 1979. On this occasion, Viansson-Ponte questions "this falsifier of Rassinier," the result of which was the entry on the scene of Rassinier's followers on the extreme left. See later, p. 128.
(18) If I am strict toward a journalist whose disappearance I deplore, it is because of the high esteem I have for his writings. I considered him the best journalist on internal French politics. To me, the passion he showed in this affair is perfectly comprehensible. I have shared in it for a long time and find it honorable. One, however, may try to see beyond the often narrow limits of an irrational passion.
END OF SECOND PART -- CHAPTER TWO
Preceding --- Following
This text is the second chapter (3/3) of the second part of the unpublished English translation of Verite historique ou verite politique / Le dossier de l'affaire Faurisson / La question des chambres à gaz, published in Paris in April 1980 by the publishing house La Vieille Taupe (= the Old Mole). ISBN 2-903279-02-0. Copyright © 1978 by La Vieille Taupe. The book is still on sale and may be ordered from the publisher, BP 98-05, 75224 Paris cedex 05, France. We believe it costs 150 F (around 30-35 US$)
The original French text is available at <http:///aaargh-international.org/fran/histo/SF/SF3.html>
This text has been displayed on the Net, and forwarded to you as a tool for educational purpose, further research, on a non commercial and fair use basis, by the International Secretariat of the Association des Anciens Amateurs de Recits de Guerre et d'Holocaustes (AAARGH). The E-mail of the Secretariat is <aaarghinternational-at-hotmail.com. Mail can be sent at PO Box 81475, Chicago, IL 60681-0475, USA..
We see the act of displaying a written document on Internet as the equivalent to displaying it on the shelves of a public library. It costs us a modicum of labor and money. The only benefit accrues to the reader who, we surmise, thinks by himself. A reader looks for a document on the Web at his or her own risks. As for the author, there is no reason to suppose that he or she shares any responsibilty for other writings displayed on this Site. Because laws enforcing a specific censorship on some historical question apply in various countries (Germany, France, Israel, Switzerland, Canada, and others) we do not ask their permission from authors living in thoses places: they wouldn't have the freedom to consent.
We believe we are protected by the Human Rights Charter:
ARTICLE 19. <Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.>The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on December 10, 1948, in Paris.