The Holocaust and the Neo-Nazi Mythomania
© 1978, The Beate Klarsfeld Foundation
 
 
Previous Page Back  Contents  Contents Page 129 Home Page Home Page  Forward Next Page 
     
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
Previous Page  Back Page 129 Forward  Next Page