( Part 1 of 9 )
Foreword to the new edition
You have before you the most expensive little publication printed inthe English
language in modern times.
Millions of words have been spoken and written about this publication asa result of the
two Zündel Trials.
Many hours of television news reports were broadcast about the content ofthis publication
and the surrounding controversy and trial.
The Canadian government, its various branches like the police, the AttorneyGeneral's
office, the Canadian Department of Immigration, the courts withstaff, clerks,
stenographers, court reporters and security personnel spentmillions of dollars for
research, staff and courtroom space.
Ernst Zündel, the man at the centre of this controversy, did not writethis booklet. He
merely supplied the four words on the original cover, stating"Truth at last
exposed." He supplied the photos and news clippingson the inside cover of the
publication, plus one sentence under his youthfulphoto on page two. He wrote and supplied
the text on page three headed:"To all Canadian Lawyers and Media
representatives" and signedit himself. That was his foreword to the publication.
Nothing whatsoever has been changed - not a single word of the text whichwas written by an
Englishman called Richard Harwood who, Zündel thoughtuntil his trial, was teaching at the
University of London. During the trial,the witness Mark Weber revealed the real name of
the author as the formerhonours student of the University of London, Richard Verrall -
alias RichardHarwood. Ernst Zündel did not know this at the time of publication.
The original English publishers did not permit Ernst Zündel to changea single line or
sentence in the Canadian "publication," whichis what you now have in your hands.
The Court records reveal that ErnstZündel reluctantly agreed to this, adding only an
order coupon on page30, and two pages of an afterword (or some closing remarks). This came
asa response to the article reproduced on the top right of page 31, which,at the time,
appeared in many Canadian newspapers from coast to coast. ErnstZündel merely reprinted
Did Six Million Really Die? by a photo-offsetmethod - an exact duplicate, plus the already
mentioned additions. In Court,he said he felt safe doing that because the publication had
already beentranslated into 12 languages, and was being sold without any legal problemsin
18 countries. The only exception was South Africa, where the publicationwas forbidden at
the instigation of the Jewish lobby. A booklet entitledSix Million Did Die was also
published in South Africa; this booklet figuredprominently in the Zündel trial in 1988.
Ernst Zündel became a household word in Canada, beginning with his1985 trial, which
lasted seven weeks, and his marathon 1988 trial whichlasted for almost four months. The
booklet made Ernst Zündel and hisrevisionist viewpoint famous across the globe.
The Zündel case is now, for the second time in 10 years, before theSupreme Court of
Canada, because the defence feels that the False News sectionof the Criminal Code in
Canada, under which Ernst Zündel was chargedand convicted twice, is unconstitutional, in
that it offends against Canada's"Charter of Rights and Freedoms" (a watered-down
version of theAmerican Bill of Rights).
Ernst Zündel now awaits the verdict of the highest court in the land- will it be freedom,
exoneration or jail?
You can be Judge and Jury! Read the booklet, and then ask yourself: shoulda man be beaten,
spat upon, terrorized, beset upon by frenzied mobs, bombedand charged with a criminal
offence, dragged through lengthy court casesand terribly expensive legal costs, because of
the few errors, made by awriter ten years previous? What do you think? Was this
persecution of ErnstZündel, through prosecution by the state, just to punish him for
hisbeliefs? "Persons who would spread hate in this community in orderto foster
right-wing beliefs which attack the delicate balance of racialand social harmony in our
community must be punished" (Judge Thomas'very own words on the day he sentenced
Ernst Zündel, Transcript 10575)
What do you think?
Did this German resident of Canada not do the natural thing by attemptingto answer all of
the nasty accusations and smears about his own people (inthe media, on television, in
school books etc.) by using an Englishman'swritings to rebut these often outrageous claims
If somebody said similar things about your own ethnic group, would you notwant to respond?
You be the judge. Read this and pass it on.
TO ALL CANADIAN LAWYERS AND MEDIA REPRESENTATIVES:
This booklet is the type of material that the Attorney General of BritishColumbia
considers 'racist'. The Attorney General of Ontario, at the behestof his B.C. colleague,
is purportedly conducting an investigation of SamisdatPublishers preparatory to the laying
of a criminal charge of "promotinghatred against an identifiable group."
Samisdat intends to use this opportunity, however, unwelcome, to test thedefinition and
hence, the validity of the so-called 'Hate Law' section ofthe Canadian Criminal Code. What
is now becoming clear to all of us, evento those who enacted the so-called 'Hate Law', is
that we enacted not somuch an instrument against hate as an instrument against truth.
Canada was a civilised country before the passage of the 'Hate Law'. Wealready had laws
against the incitement to riot, to murder, to arson, tothe commission of assault and
bodily harm. Our laws protected and stillprotect every citizen from libel, slander and
defamation. But the outlawingof 'hate' does not thereby abolish feelings of hate, as we
all know. Toprohibit expressions of hatred may even cause such feelings to go
unventeduntil they become explosive and take the form of violence. Prior to the'Hate Law',
we Canadians behaved with mature composure when encounteringhateful expressions. We simply
shunned the haters and left them to spewout their ire, unsupported and alone. In most
cases, a cold dose of healthypublic ridicule would quench the more volcanic vituperators
and reason wouldbe restored. But something happened to us, for as we have grown older asa
country, we have become less mature and less secure. Our passage of the'Hate Law' was a
grave reflection upon ourselves. It revealed a sudden loseof confidence in our own wisdom
and judgement and in the wisdom and judgementof the great majority of Canadian voters and
citizens. Suddenly, we hadto be protected from ourselves and just as suddenly, we became
refugeesfrom freedom. No democracy that so distrusts the majority can long remaina
democracy; it becomes a police state in the worst tradition of policestates.
Unfortunately, only a few clearsighted and courageous individuals protestedthe enactment
of the 'Hate Law'. So thick were the clouds of hysteria andhalf-truth over the matter that
only these few perceived the dangers inherentin a statute which could be used at the
discretion of a public officialto suppress the freedom of enquiry and discussion in regard
to relevantpublic issues. Among these few protesters, I proudly number myself, forI spoke
out then and I speak out now, on behalf of our basic freedom toact as thinking human
As we stumble along the road to the 1984 of George Orwell, we sometimesreceive a taste of
his dismal future-fantasy well ahead of schedule. Pernicious'thought-crime' legislation
like the 'Hate Law' has brought us 1984 already.It has not outlawed hate, but it has
outlawed truth on behalf of those predatoryvested interests whose archenemy is truth!
This booklet has been sent to you free of charge as a public service. Afterreading it, you
are perfectly free to agree or to disagree with its content.You may even ignore it and
leave it unread. Truth has no need of coercion.Those who choose to ignore the truth are
not punished by law--they punishthemselves. We of Samisdat Publishers do not believe that
you should beforced to read something, any more than we believe that you should be
forcedto read something, any more than we believe that you should be forced notto read
something. Obviously, we have much more faith in your soundnessof mind and good judgement
than do the enactors and enforcers of the 'HateLaw'! Whether you agree or disagree with
the facts presented in this booklet,we invite you to assist us in reclaiming and
safeguarding the freedoms wehave all so long enjoyed, until now, in Canada.
Help us remove this shameful stain of tyranny from our otherwise brightand shining land.
Help us strike the terrible sword of censorship from thehands of those who would slay
truth in pursuit of their dubious aims. Withoutfreedom of enquiry and freedom of access to
information we cannot have freedomof thought and without freedom of thought, we cannot be
a free people. Thematter is urgent. Can you help us restore and protect the freedom of
You can help decisively by sending your contribution to the Samisdat DefenseFund. Legal
fees are costly in the extreme. We anticipate daily expendituresof $1,000.00 in attorneys'
fees and in the reimbursement of witnesses whomust be flown in from Australia, Israel,
Europe and from both American continents.Whatever help you can provide will make 1984 a
much better year for yourchildren and grandchildren-a year in which freedom of thought
will not bea memory, but a beautiful reality!
Ernst Zundel, Publisher
SAMISDAT PUBLISHERS LTD.
Of course, atrocity propaganda is nothing new. It has accompanied everyconflict of the
20th century and doubtless will continue to do so. Duringthe First World War, the Germans
were actually accused of eating Belgianbabies, as well as delighting to throw them in the
air and transfix themon bayonets. The British also alleged that the German forces were
operatinga "Corpse Factory", in which they boiled down the bodies of theirown
dead in order to obtain glycerine and other commodities, a calculatedinsult to the honour
of an Imperial army. After the war, however, came theretractions; indeed, a public
statement was made by the Foreign Secretaryin the House of Commons apologising for the
insults to German honour, whichwere admitted to be war-time propaganda.
No such statements have been made after the Second World War. In fact, ratherthan diminish
with the passage of years, the atrocity propaganda concerningthe German occupation, and in
particular their treatment of the Jews, hasdone nothing but increase its virulence, and
elaborate its catalogue ofhorrors. Gruesome paperback books with lurid covers continue to
roll fromthe presses, adding continuously to a growing mythology of the concentrationcamps
and especially to the story that no less than Six Million Jews wereexterminated in them.
The ensuing pages will reveal this claim to be themost colossal piece of fiction and the
most successful of deceptions; buthere an attempt may be made to answer an important
question: What has renderedthe atrocity stories of the Second World War so uniquely
different fromthose of the First? Why were the latter retracted while the former are
reiteratedlouder than ever? Is it possible that the story of the Six Million Jewsis
serving a political purpose, even that it is a form of political blackmail?
So far as the Jewish people themselves are concerned, the deception hasbeen an
incalculable benefit. Every conceivable race and nationality hadits share of suffering in
the Second World War, but none has so successfullyelaborated it and turned it to such
great advantage. The alleged extentof their persecution quickly aroused sympathy for the
Jewish national homelandthey had sought for so long; after the War the British Government
did littleto prevent Jewish emigration to Palestine which they had declared illegal,and it
was not long afterwards that the Zionists wrested ftom the Governmentthe land of Palestine
and created their haven from persecution, the Stateof Israel. Indeed, it is a remarkable
fact that the Jewish people emergedfrom the Second World War as nothing less than a
triumphant minority. Dr.Max Nussbaum, the former chief rabbi of the Jewish community in
Berlin,stated on April 11, 1953: "The position the Jewish people occupy todayin the
world - despite the enormous losses - is ten times stronger thanwhat it was twenty years
ago." It should be added, if one is to behonest, that this strength has been much
consolidated financially by thesupposed massacre of the Six Million, undoubtedly the most
profitable atrocityallegation of all time. To date, the staggering figure of six thousand
millionpounds has been paid out in compensation by the Federal Government of WestGermany,
mostly to the State of Israel (which did not even exist duringthe Second World War), as
well as to individual Jewish claimants.
DISCOURAGEMENT OF NATIONALISM
In terms of political blackmail, however, the allegation that Six MillionJews died during
the Second World War has much more far-reaching implicationsfor the people of Britain and
Europe than simply the advantages it has gainedfor the Jewish nation. And here one comes
to the crux of the question: Whythe Big Lie? What is its purpose? In the first place, it
has been used quiteunscrupulously to discourage any form of nationalism. Should the
peopleof Britain or any other European country attempt to assert their patriotismand
preserve their national integrity in an age when the very existenceof nation-states is
threatened, they are immediately branded as "neo-Nazis".Because, of course,
Nazism was nationalism, and we all know what happenedthen - Six Million Jews were
exterminated! So long as the myth is perpetuated,peoples everywhere will remain in bondage
to it; the need for internationaltolerance and understanding will be hammered home by the
United Nationsuntil nationhood itself, the very guarantee of freedom, is abolished.
A classic example of the use of the 'Six Million' as an anti-national weaponappears in
Manvell and Frankl's book, The Incomparable Crime (London, 1967),which deals with
'Genocide in the Twentieth Century'. Anyone with a pridein being British will be somewhat
surprised by the vicious attack made onthe British Empire in this book. The authors quote
Pandit Nehru, who wrotethe following while in a British prison in India: "Since
Hitler emergedfrom obscurity and became the Führer of Germany, we have heard a greatdeal
about racialism and the Nazi theory of the "Herrenvolk" .. . But we in India
have known racialism in all its forms ever since thecommencement of British rule. The
whole ideology of this rule was that ofthe "Herrenvolk" and the master race . .
. India as a nation andIndians as individuals were subjected to insult, humiliation and
contemptuoustreatment. The English were an imperial race, we were told, with the
God-givenright to govern us and keep us in subjection; if we protested we were remindedof
the 'tiger qualities of an imperial race'." The authors Manvelland Frankl then go on
to make the point perfectly clear for us: "Thewhite races of Europe and
America," they write, "have become usedduring centuries to regarding themselves
as a "Herrenvolk". Thetwentieth century, the century of Auschwitz, has also
achieved the firststage in the recognition of multi-racial partnership" (ibid., p
THE RACE PROBLEM SUPPRESSED
One could scarcely miss the object of this diatribe, with its insiduoushint about
"multi-racial partnership". Thus the accusation ofthe Six Million is not only
used to undermine the principle of nationhoodand national pride, but it threatens the
survival of the Race itself. Itis wielded over the heads of the populace, rather as the
threat of hellfireand damnation was in the Middle Ages. Many countries of the
Anglo-Saxonworld, notably Britain and America, are today facing the gravest dangerin their
history, the danger posed by the alien races in their midst. Unlesssomething is done in
Britain to halt the immigration and assimilation ofAfricans and Asians into our country,
we are faced in the near future, quiteapart from the bloodshed of racial conflict, with
the biological alterationand destruction of the British people as they have existed here
since thecoming of the Saxons. In short, we are threatened with the irrecoverableloss of
our European culture and racial heritage. But what happens if aman dares to speak of the
race problem, of its biological and politicalimplications? He is branded as that most
heinous of creatures, a "racialist".And what is racialism:,of course, but the
very hallmark of the Nazi! They(so everyone is told, anyway) murdered Six Million Jews
because of racialism,so it must be a very evil thing indeed. When Enoch Powell drew
attentionto the dangers posed by coloured immigration into Britain in one of hisearly
speeches, a certain prominent Socialist raised the spectre of Dachauand Auschwitz to
silence his presumption.
Thus any rational discussion of the problems of Race and the effort to preserveracial
integrity is effectively discouraged. No one could have anythingbut admiration for the way
in which the Jews have sought to preserve theirrace through so many centuries, and
continue to do so today. In this effortthey have frankly been assisted by the story of the
Six .Million, which,almost like a religious myth, has stressed the need for greater Jewish
racialsolidarity. Unfortunately, it has worked in quite the opposite way for allother
peoples, rendering them impotent in the struggle for self-preservation.
The aim in the following pages is quite simply to tell the Truth. The
distinguishedAmerican historian Harry Elmer Barnes once wrote that "An attempt tomake
a competent, objective and truthful investigation of the exterminationquestion . . . is
surely the most precarious venture that an historian ordemographer could undertake
today." In attempting this precarious task,it is hoped to make some contribution, not
only to historical truth, buttowards lifting the burden of a lie from our own shoulders,
so that we mayfreely confront the dangers which threaten us all.
Richard E. Harwood
1. GERMAN POLICY TOWARDS THE JEWS PRIOR TO THE WAR
Rightly or wrongly, the Germany of Adolf Hitler considered the Jews to bea disloyal and
avaricious element within the national community, as wellas a force of decadence in
Germany's cultural life. This was held to beparticularly unhealthy since, during the
Weimar period, the Jews had risento a position of remarkable strength and influence in the
nation, particularlyin law, finance and the mass media, even though they constituted only
5per cent of the population. The fact that Karl Marx was a Jew and that Jewssuch as Rosa
Luxembourg and Karl Liebknecht were disproportionately prominentin the leadership of
revolutionary movements in Germany, also tended toconvince the Nazis of the powerful
internationalist and Communist tendenciesof the Jewish people themselves.
It is no part of the discussion here to argue whether the German attitudeto the Jews was
right or not, or to judge whether its legislative measuresagainst them were just or
unjust. Our concern is simply with the fact that,believing of the Jews as they did, the
Nazis' solution to the problem wasto deprive them of their influence within the nation by
various legislativeacts, and most important of all, to encounge their emigration from the
countryaltogether. By 1939, the great majority of German Jews had emigrated, allof them
with a sizeable proportion of their assets. Never at any time hadthe Nazi leadership even
contemplated a policy of genocide towards them.
JEWS CALLED EMIGRATION 'EXTERMINATION'
It is very significant, however, that certain Jews were quick to interpretthese policies
of internal discrimination as equivalent to exterminationitself. A 1936 anti-German
propaganda book by Leon Feuchtwanger and othersentitled Der Gelbe Fleck: Die Austrotung
von 500,000 deutschen Juden (TheYellow Spot: The Extermination of 500,000 German Jews,
Paris, 1936), presentsa typical example. Despite its baselessness in fact, the
annihilation ofthe Jews is discussed from the first pages - straightforward
emigrationbeing regarded as the physical "extermination" of German Jewry.The
Nazi concentration camps for political prisoners are also seen as potentialinstruments of
genocide, and special reference is made to the 100 Jews stilldetained in Dachau in 1936,
of whom 60 had been there since 1933. A furtherexample was the sensational book by the
German-Jewish Communist, Hans Beimler,called Four Weeks in the Hands of Hitler's
Hell-Hounds: The Nazi MurderCamp of Dachau, which was published in New York as eady as
1933. Detainedfor his Marxist affiliations, he claimed that Dachau was a death camp,
thoughby his own admission he was released after only a month there. The presentregime in
East Germany now issues a Hans Beimler Award for services to Communism.
The fact that anti-Nazi genocide propaganda was being disseminated at thisimpossibly early
date, therefore, by people biased on racial or politicalgrounds, should suggest extreme
caution to the independent-minded observerwhen approaching similar stories of the war
The encouragement of Jewish emigration should not be confused with the purposeof
concentration camps in pre-war Germany. These were used for the detentionof political
opponents and subversives - principally liberals, Social Democratsand Communists of all
kinds, of whom a proportion were Jews such as HansBeimler. Unlike the millions enslaved in
the Soviet Union, the German concentrationcamp population was always small; Reitinger
admits that between 1934 and1938 it seldom exceeded 20,000 throughout the whole of
Germany, and thenumber of Jews was never more than 3,000. (The S.S.: Alibi of a
Nation,London, 1956, p. 253).
ZIONIST POLICY STUDIED
The Nazi view of Jewish emigration was not Iimited to a negative policyof simple
expulsion, but was formulated along the lines of modern Zionism.The founder of political
Zionism in the 19th century, Theodore Herzl, inhis work The Jewish State, had originally
conceived of Madagascar as a nationalhomeland for the Jews, and this possibility was
seriously studied by theNazis. It had been a main plank of the National Socialist party
platformbefore 1933 and was published by the party in pamphlet form. This statedthat the
revival of Israel as a Jewish state was much less acceptable sinceit would result in
perpetual war and disruption in the Arab world, whichhas indeed been the case. The Germans
were not original in proposing Jewishemigration to Madagascar; the Polish Government had
already considered thescheme in respect of their own Jewish population, and in 1937 they
sentthe Michael Lepecki expedition to Madagascar, accompanied by Jewish representatives,to
investigate the problems involved.
The first Nazi proposals for a Madagascar solution were made in associationwith the
Schacht Plan of 1938. On the advice of Goering, Hitler agreed tosend the President of the
Reichsbank, Dr. Hjaimar Schacht, to London fordiscussions with Jewish representatives Lord
Bearsted and Mr. Rublee ofNew York (cf. Reitlinger, The Final Solution, London, 1953, p.
20). Theplan was that German Jewish assets would be frozen as security for an
internationalloan to finance Jewish emigration to Palestine, and Schacht reported onthese
negotiations to Hitler at Berchtesgaden on January 2, 1939. The plan,which failed due to
British refusal to accept the financial terms, was firstput forward on November 12, 1938
at a conference convened by Goering, whorevealed that Hitler was already considering the
emigration of Jews to asettlement in Madagascar (ibid., p. 21). Later, in December,
Ribbentropwas told by M. Georges Bonnet, the French Foreign Secretary, that the
FrenchGovernment itself was planning the evacuation of 10,000 Jews to Madagascar.
Prior to the Schacht Palestine proposals of 1938, which were essentiallya protraction of
discussions that had begun as early as 1935, numerous attemptshad been made to secure
Jewish emigration to other European nations, andthese efforts culminated in the Evian
Conference of July, 1938. However,by 1939 the scheme of Jewish emigration to Madagascar
had gained the mostfavour in German circles. It is true that in London Helmuth Wohltat of
theGerman Foreign Office discussed limited Jewish emigration to Rhodesia andBritish Guiana
as late as April 1939; but by January 24th, when Goeringwrote to Interior Minister Frick
ordering the creation of a Central EmigrationOffice for Jews, and commissioned Heydrich of
the Reich Security Head Officeto solve the Jewish problem "by means of emigration and
evacuation",the Madagascar Plan was being studied in earnest.
By 1939, the consistent efforts of the German Government to secure the departureof Jews
from the Reich had resulted in the emigration of 400,000 GermanJews from a total
population of about 600,000, and an additional 480,000emigrants from Austria and
Czechoslovakia, which constituted almost theirentire Jewish populations. This was
accomplished through Offices of JewishEmigration in Berlin, Vienna and Prague established
by Adolf Eichmann, thehead of the Jewish Investigation Office of the Gestapo. So eager
were theGermans to secure this emigration that Eichmann even established a trainingcentre
in Austria, where young Jews could learn farming in anticipationof being smuggled
illegally to Palestine (Manvell & Frankl, S.S. and Gestapo,p. 60). Had Hitler
cherished any intention of exterminating the Jews, itis inconceivable that he would have
allowed more than 800,000 to leave Reichterritory with the bulk of their wealth, much less
considered plans fortheir mass emigration to Palestine or Madagascar. What is more, we
shallsee that the policy of emigration from Europe was still under considerationwell into
the war period, notably the Madagascar Plan, which Eichmann discussedin 1940 with French
Colonial Office experts after the defeat of France hadmade the surrender of the colony a
Continue to Part 2 http://www.lebensraum.org/english/harwood/Didsix02.html