I. The Thesis
As this book projects a most unusual thesis, it thus deserves an unusual prologue. I had doubts bringing the thesis to paper because it sounds unbelievable and because of its horrific implications. It seems fully absurd, but it is - in my honest opinion -true and can be proven!
This thesis deals with one of the terrible processes of contemporary history, with the so-called final solution of the Jewish problem. I maintain that 1. the final solution consisted of the re-settlement of the Jews in an area in Belorussia and that 2. they are still being kept there as prisoners of the USSR today. I know that this sounds fantastic and I don´t expect anybody to simply believe this theory. But I do expect from persons, particularly those interested in the historic truth, that they scrutinize it, by beginning to read the first few -short- chapters to decide if the allegation is as absurd as it seems. I hope to induce the conscientious reader to continue reading the ensuing, longer chapters as I am convinced that those analysing the theory will be convinced of its correctness. I am sure that all arguments speaking against this theory will, in the end, benefit the reader because he will be confronted with facts possibly unknown to him but which are discussed by historians albeit in an isolationistic manner. I must make a point however, that all proof is circumstantial, thus coupled with all assets and liabilities of such evidence.
Before I come to the point, I want to describe how I came to stipulate such a contradicting theory. I feel that this is important for the reader for better comprehension. I am a mathematician and my profession is data processing. My spare time is committed to contemporary history. Due to personal cicumstance - I come from Dresden - this history was the so-called »DDR Forschung« (Investigations on the German Democratic Republic) and I have published various essays on this subject. The sphere »Third Reich« did not interest me at all. As far as the final solution of the Jewish question was concerned, I shared the public opinion of my fellow politically interested compatriots that the Jews were killed at Auschwitz. This opinion was based more on general impressions and less on detailed facts.
In 1978 I began to study the theories of totalitarism, as my opinion deviated from the general accepted theory. I wanted to connect the final solution as proof to a certain theory. Responsible for the murder of millions of Jews was the philosophy of the national socialistic movement.
Eichmann, the organizer of this extermination, must have justified himself on these grounds, when he was on trial in Jerusalem. I searched for and found proof of this assumption in the public library, or so I thought. A book documenting the crimes of national socialism was quickly procured, along with a chapter reading in effect: »Eichmann and the final solution«. At home I began to browse over this chapter as I was searching for evidence of the above mentioned and was surprised. The text was shocking in it´s simplicity. Terrible crimes were mentioned, but nothing over Auschwitz, nothing over the mass murder of the Jews. Another minute analysis produced an understatement to the effect »...that was in the east, that´s where the murder took place.« No exclamation, no energetic inquiry, the discussion continued as though nothing significant was said. At first I was irritated, then outraged because I could not finish my work. I had not found the desired passage.
How was I to continue? I pondered and remembered an article written in the weekly newspaper Das Parlament. Although this edition discussed the role of the »ewig Gestrige« (German for revisionists: literally permanent yesteryears) who refused to acknowledge the mass murders, I hoped to find some evidence in the references. I discoverd the works of Georges Wellers Die Zahlen der Opfer der Endlösung und der Korherr-Bericht (The number of victims of the final solution and the Korherr report). Wellers analysis was committed to the book of Paul Rassinier Was ist Wahrheit (What is truth?). I was impressed by his clear and logical statements, and astounded that the central theme was not Eichmann or Hoess or anybody else, but that the main argument concentrated around statistics of the Soviet census. Wellers compared the results of the census before and after the war and came to the following solution: millions of Soviet Jews had disappeared. He then addressed Paul Rassinier with the rhetorical question »where were they hidden that nobody could find them anymore?« I found this question appropiate, but why was it postulated in the first place? Was the mass murder not an absolutely proven fact? The theme seemed more complicated and different than I had thought. I felt that the logical ascertainment of the mass murder began to melt down. And I became curious of what those dubious books had to say.
Per chance I acquired two such books. One was the already mentioned »What is truth« the other from Arthur R. Butz The hoax of the twentieth century. Rassinier´s book was not that spectacular but I was surprized to learn that Rassinier was an inmate at the Buchenwald concentration camp and that he was French. He wrote his book after he had read the testimony of fellow inmates minutely describing the existence of gas chambers at Buchenwald, gas chambers he had never heard of or seen, when at Buchenwald. The analysis of Butz was more substancial. He compared many documents on the mass murder of Jews, and raised objections. This seemed plausible. As all sources were cited, it was no problem to prove his allegations, quite unusual for a dubious piece of work. To answer the question »where they were hidden« Butz´s answer was (simplified) that all Jews survived and in an act of collective agreement, decided to disappear, so that financial retribution could be claimed on Germany.
This seemed quite rediculous but I will raise logical objections, since many of my readers may find my postulations just as inappropiate. If, as the theory implies, all Jews remained in the east, then they were liberated by the red army in 1944/45. Furthermore, since the Federal Republic of Germany pays financial retribution mostly to the state of Israel, the implications are that all these people would have to postpone their claims, so that a yet non-existing state (Israel) would benefit from a conquered Germany, which in 1945 needed more help than it would ever be able to give. Neither a worker nor a professor, the sibling or the aged had any grounds to foresee either the founding of the state of Israel or coming of the German »Wirtschaftswunder« (economic wonder). (note the word wonder!). In other words: why should a Jewish owner of an appartement store relinquish his claim for the sake of a non-existing state of Israel. Or why should a mother- and not only one - choose to disappear, leaving her child behind? There are plenty of Jewish children looking for their mothers.
Having had these thoughts, I decided to scrutinize this theory at a later date and to compare Butz´s text with his authentic material, so that, should Butz´s objections prevail, I could find an answer to the question »what happened to the Jews«? So the answer was postponed because this is a typical theme were one can easily run against brick walls. The central question however, what happend to the Jews, lingered in my mind. Doesn´t this question imply that all governments, including the Third Reich, tried to obstruct the answer? How could this be overcome? Where could one even begin to find an appropiate answer. Was this not hopeless, not impudent? At first it seemed impossible. How I did find a beginning and what I dicovered is subject of the next chapter. I have made extinsive inquiries which are introduced in facts I and II.
Back to Table of Contents
Back to Archive