Wednesday, February 16, 2011

A good review of "Debating the Holocaust"

I think the latest one-star review of "Debating the Holocaust", transcribed below, deserves a hat's tip.

On January 27, 2011, the reader "Rhomphaia" wrote the following:

While this book definitely raises a few interesting points, the problem with it starts right on the cover:

Thomas Dalton does not exist, and thus, has no verifiable Ph.D. or teaching record in any university.

In fact, the evidence suggests that Michael Santomauro, the editorial director of Thesis and Dissertations Press, is probably the author (and he has no Ph.D, meaning the entire description of Thomas Dalton's "career" is a fabrication). Thesis and Dissertations Press is owned by Castle Hill Publishers, which was founded by a long time Holocaust opponent, Germar Rudolf. So in the interest of full disclosure, when you buy this book, 1/3 of the profits go to Germar Rudolf, whose FULL TIME agenda is to refute the holocaust by any means necessary (an "agitator" in the parlance of this book).

No one can read the things Michael Santomauro has written and believe for a minute that he is a neutral observer simply examining all side of the issue. Mr. Santomauro is the publisher, and probably the author, of this book, and yet, if you go to the last page of reviews, you will find him reviewing his own book without disclosing any of this information (under the title: "Banned in 15 countries"). This, at the very least, is intellectual dishonesty, and should cast serious doubt on the "neutral analysis" claim of the book.

So be forewarned, a book with this much deception on the cover is NOT going to present all sides of the issue fairly. In my opinion, this is a very carefully constructed attack on the holocaust which presents carefully constructed arguments for the holocaust, then skillfully, craftily and systematically takes them apart. The problem is that it does NOT present all of the evidence for the holocaust, it carefully slants claims about the holocaust, leaves out critical bits of information (such as the fact that over three million of the "six million" Jews who died in WWII concentration camps have been identified by name, and more names are being tracked down and verified each year), and builds very careful straw men (Hitler issued a written order to exterminate the Jews), then knocks them down (can't find the written order), all while ignoring evidence from mouths of Hitler's own men that such a program, with or without written orders from Hitler, did exist.

Another example of the "neutrality" of this book: Zyklon B is a pesticide used to kill lice, not to exterminate people. True, but then what are we to make of the statements of Rudolf Hoss*, the director of Auschwitz, when he told how they used the Zylkon B to kill people, paraphrased here:

There were 2 bunkers, and between them they held about 2000 people. The doors were screwed shut and solid pellets of Zyklon-B were dropped into the chambers through vents, releasing the Zylkon B gas. About one third of the victims died immediately (presumably those closest to the vents), and everyone within was dead in about 20 minutes.

If Zyklon B was not used to kill people, then why did the director of Auschwitz give a very detailed account of how they DID use it to kill people? Was he also conspiring to promote the "myth" of the holocaust?

It is true that there are some problems with some of the things said about the holocaust, but the problems are NOT a glaring as this book makes out. It is possible, for example that only 4 or 5 million Jews died, not 6 million (as 3 million are already documented), but would that REALLY make this less of a holocaust if Hitler and his regime only succeeded in hunting down and murdering 4 or 5 million? While there may be some over-estimates on the part of the Holocaust survivors (not actually proven, btw), there is extreme UNDER estimates taking place in this book.

Just beware, as this book is not even remotely as fair and balanced as the 5 star reviews here would lead us to believe. Only those who don't actually KNOW the facts of the holocaust will be swayed by this book. To those aware of the independent research, filmed and photographic evidence, and the true historical record found in hundreds, maybe thousands of well researched reports, this comes off as nothing more than one of the most carefully crafted attacks on the holocaust ever to make it into print.

Although I'm not sure this book deserves it, it will be interesting to see if anyone takes the time to do a thorough rebuttal. I, for one, would love to see that, if only to eliminate, once and for all, the idea that this book is even remotely neutral, balanced or fair.

*His last name is actually spelled with the German letter that looks like a capitol "B", but is roughly equivalent to "ss" in English.

I disagree with the reviewer's opinion that "Dalton"'s propaganda pamphlet "raises a few interesting points", but then the reviewer obviously hasn't looked into "Revisionist" falsehoods as we have and therefore cannot know that "Dalton" essentially parrots the arguments of other, more capable "Revisionists", which are accordingly our priority. However, we have also dedicated some blogs to Mr. "Dalton", which I hope the reviewer will like to read.


shipoffools said...

Roberto, when are you going to give the Little Grey Rabbit blog a good old fashion debunking?
I have a new post, could do with a few finishing touches, on Treblinka as top post now. It ought to be right up your alley.

Just because we are friends, it doesn't mean you need to pull your punches.

Julian Fitzgibbon

Roberto Muehlenkamp said...

I didn't have the rabbit in mind when I mentioned priorities. He's last on the list.