Steam or Gas? That is the Question

Human doubts are punishable in democratic Germany

The above definition shows clearly that the law does not lay down the number of Jews killed, nor does it depict "the killing method", the Germans must mention and believe in public in order not to "doubt the general portrayal" of the holocaust. According to the German definition of its holocaust denial law (only the idea of such a law is perverse) shows, one could only commit a crime if he had said that not even one Jew was murdered during the Hitler era. But the victims of German Holocaust-Heresy-Trials have not even denied the so-called Jewish genocide in principal. They only countered biased mainstream holocaust depictions. According to the letters of the law these accused and convicted people were and are innocent. These researchers, scientists, lawyers are convicted because the Holocaust Industry demands such politically motivated verdicts, keeping the businesses of their industry flourish.

The second flexibly molded interpretation of the German holocaust-doubting-law is paraphrased with the word "trivialization". How can someone belittle the holocaust if the law does neither stipulate a minimum number of victims nor define the killing methods? The judges of such Heresy Trials are not able to inform the condemned what the precise definition of the political holocaust concept is. But they should, in order to prevent the convicted disbelievers from future "crimes" by "doubting" the holocaust narrative.

At any rate, democratic Germany has won another world record in the race of strange persecution crazes by punishing human doubts. There is no other country on this planet that resorts to the imprisonment of people if they doubt what they are told.

1. Is it generally accepted that "gassing was really epiphenomenal (minor) to the German's slaughter of Jews" or was the slaughter in gas chambers the principal method according to the general portrayal of the holocaust?

If Professor Goldhagen is correct in his theses that Jews were not killed "chiefly" by mass gassings, but by means not known to us yet, the convicted teacher (Günter Deckert) would certainly have been grateful to be told how the Jews were killed. But the condemning judges are not able to educate the accused on this vital issue. This is especially tragic since Goldhagen was awarded with the German "Democracy Price" by the then Kohl government on March 10, 1997 for stating in his book that "gassing was really epiphenomenal (minor)". Goldhagen's book became a world bestseller.

2. Is it generally accepted that the Jews were steamed to death at Treblinka or that they were gassed? The Nuremberg Tribunal concluded steaming whilst the Düsseldorf Treblinka-Trial attested gassing.

The presiding judges of Holoaust-Heresy-Trials are unable to tell the condemned which verdict was right and which of the two they must believe in order not to commit the crime of doubting or trivializing the holocaust. The convicted find themselves in a very unpleasant situation. Should they believe that the Jews were steamed to death or should they believe that they were gassed? Despite the brutal sentences imposed on them, the judges are in no position to answer these simple questions!

3. Is it generally accepted that Maidanek was a death camp with gas chambers or did Maidanek not have such facilities and therefore gassings did not occur there?

The presiding judges of Holocaust-Heresy-Trials are unable to tell the accused which verdict was right and why. They can't even tell them which of the two verdicts they must believe in order not to commit the crime of doubting or trivializing the holocaust. Both verdicts are legally valid and therefore right although human logic concludes that only one can be true.

4. Is it generally accepted that the final solution, by gassing the Jews, was mapped out at the Wannsee-Conference or is this claim nothing but "a silly story"?

Whom should the convicted holocaust protestants believe? Should they believe the political German historiography, the German Wannsee-Exhibition and its claim that at Wannsee the final solution of the Jews was arrived at (by the means of gassing the Jews) or should they believe the late Jewish holocaust scholar, Yehuda Bauer, who asserted that this claim is nothing but a "silly story"? The condemning judges can't give an answer to that.

The convicted holocaust scientists are accused of having doubted and belittled the holocaust. But the judges who pronounce these verdicts on them could not tell them whether the chief-rabbi of Poland, Joskowicz, is right when he states that "6 million Jews were murdered in Auschwitz" [1]. This figure is contradicted by †Heinz Galinski, former leader of the Jews in Germany, who made clear that "4 million were murdered in Auschwitz" [2], only to revise himself two years later, that the "correct" number is more like "1.5 million" [3]. More-over, J.C. Pressac, former French Holocaust-Expert, commissioned by the Jewish Beate Klarsfeld Foundation, concluded that in Auschwitz approximately "470 000" [4] Jews were gassed. The International Missing Persons Division of the Red Cross in Arolsen, Germany, came up with "66.206" fatalities, of all causes, for Auschwitz (all nationalities combined).

How can the convicted holocaust-researchers belittle the holocaust when the German holocaust-law does not stipulate a minimum figure of victims, which everybody must refer to, in order not to belittle? Which figure must the condemned in future mention in order not to doubt or trivialize the holocaust anymore? Unfortunately the judges are not able to tell them.