The Website of Carlos Whitlock Porter



[Quick responses to someone with a few specific questions about John Zimmerman's magnum opus HOLOCAUST DENIAL, another "definitive response to the deniers" which is almost impossible to obtain at any reasonable price (45-60 dollars new or used).]

…I object to the term "denier". To me it just proves that the Jews are not serious. This is not a theocracy and the Jews are not God. Revisionism is not religious heresy and I refuse to debate on that level.

This appears to be an entire book rehashing everything Nizkor ever wrote about everything the revisionists ever wrote, and to answer it properly you would have to repeat everything the revisionists ever wrote, and even then you would have nothing original.

If you want an answer to these questions read the original transcript and the original revisionist books. Is it "denial" to say it is ridiculous to claim that somebody was not gassed six times or that there were no bicycle races in the gas chamber between gassings? No? Well, then it isn't "denial" to say there were no gassings or gas chambers either. The Jews are nuts and I can't be bothered with all of this.

You might as well say the Confederates had two kinds of slave plantations in 1861-65: one, where they worked, so the Confederates could feed themselves and win the war, and another, where they murdered all the blacks, because they hated them all so much they wanted them to become extinct. But if they became extinct, how were they going to win the war?

One argument (like so many) can be turned against him. He says the defendants "didn't the deny the existence of the gas chambers or the extermination program", therefore they existed. They didn't "deny" the existence of the steam chambers, either, or the electrical chambers, or the pedal driven brain machine, nothing. They were obviously intimidated, inhibited by their lawyers. That's one reason I don't like lawyers. Does this prove the steam chambers existed? 22 original defendants, at least 22 defense lawyers, nobody said, look 6 weeks ago it was 10 steam chambers, now it's 10 (or 13) gas chambers, which is it?

Even Streicher didn't "deny" the existence of electrical chambers at Belzec (IMT XII 369)
(third page down in the graphic link). Does that prove they existed?

Streicher, with friend, in his palmier days

If you want to make up your mind by comparing different points of view, perhaps there is some validity in Zimmermann, but it's 20 years out of date. Van Pelt's magnum opus is good, it contributes something new, even if it's basically wrong.

In court, you usually assume or pretend to assume that the prosecution knows things you don't. Every defendant said "I knew nothing about it until I heard about it in this courtroom". If that's not a "denying there was a Holocaust", what is?...

...what strikes me is his refusal to discuss anything honestly: the capacity of the ovens, the population of the camps, the fact that typhus has always been endemic in Eastern Europe, the fact that typhus causes heart trouble (frequently listed as cause of death). He confuses cyanide with ferricferrocyanide, which he claims can be leached out or washed away, which is a lie. He relies blindly on Soviet documents without any reference to reality, for example, when they describe facilities and infrastructures at Auschwitz which never existed: anybody can see that there were no airtight doors, and that those structures can never be hermetically sealed. But no, a document says so, so that's it. It's like saying "I've got a document here that says there's a sign on the Empire State Building that says 'Drink Coke'". You can go and look at the building; but no, the document takes precedence! He seems to avoid giving primary sources and deliberately hides them. He makes sensational claims without giving any sources. He never discusses the origin or authenticity of the documents, the actual infrastructures, the mendacity of the eyewitnesses and war crimes reports, the evaporation rate of Zyklon, the cremation times, etc. He compares Gusen and Auschwitz but without stating the populations of the two camps. Obviously you get a lot more disease in Eastern Europe than in Austria.

In short, it's a sleight of hand job. He never mentions the problem of the elevator in Auschwitz II. He never mentions the ammonia required to neutralize the HCN in American gas chambers. He claims that cyanide gas can be washed away with water immediately after a gassing. He doesn't consider the humidity and increased precipitation rate and slowed evaporation rate caused by this. He doesn't consider how the capos got the bodies out.

In short he takes all his Communist propaganda, fake documents and eyewitnesses at face value without discussing any of the serious problems.

…It gets more complicated, with a lot of confusion. He makes a few superficially valid points, but basically it is all very crude. He explicitly believes in the "burning pits", says that using human fat to make the corpses burn faster or with less fuel is all perfectly normal and natural (the fat is the first thing that burns, so there wouldn't be any fat left to use for fuel), and he believes that smoke issues from crematoria. He says the revisionists admit or claim that the 52 ovens at Auschwitz (which never all existed or were in operation simultaneously), were capable of incinerating 30,000 [!!] bodies a MONTH, he quotes all the fake eyewitness while deleting the crudest absurdities.

At the same time he demolishes his own arguments, by describing the same "confession tactics" alleged by the revisionists: he mentions Katyn, and claims the charges were dropped (which is not even true), which he claims  proves Nuremberg was a fair trial, and claims, falsely, that no German ever confessed to killing the people at Katyn, he claims there is no Communist content to any of this, except a line or two in one eyewitness statement, he mentions Jan Karski, but forgets to tell us about the quicklime, etc (or doesn't emphasize it), he mentions electricity but not steam, etc. In other words, he makes enough concessions to demolish most of his own claims. He mentions witnesses quoted in Soviet propaganda, but deletes most of the impossibilities. He doesn't tell us that Vaillant Couturier was a Communist. etc. etc. I wonder why not. He says ALL JEWS WITHOUT EXCEPTION were to be killed, but mentions hundreds or thousands or millions who survived, he mentions only 75,000 Jews deported from France. How is this compatible with extermination? You see how crude it is. Personally I don't think Dr. Kremer's diary proves anything one way or another. Anybody who's ever seen a backyard barbecue knows that fat is the first thing that burns and nobody can burn anything in a pit. Even using gasoline. He admits that gas, inmate labour and train capacity were all needed for the war effort, but says the Nazis were “irrational”. They were certainly “irrational” to exterminate only 75,000 of 225,000 Jews in France, etc.

…Zimmermann gives the game away on many points. He wants to explain away all the contradictions in eyewitness testimony by claiming that they testified truthfully but made mistakes. He doesn't want to admit that eyewitness testimony is the most unreliable form of evidence, but he wants to derive any benefit he can from that fact. Charles Bendel claimed the gas chambers were ventilated into the corridor where the SS were waiting, and that there was blue vapour over the bodies, Hendryk Tauber said the gas chamber was a wooden barracks, and then when he said it was Auschwitz II or one of the other concrete crematoria, he described a chicken wire Zyklon B introduction chute in a hollow pillar which never existed, Dr. Nyzisli said the gas chamber was 200 feet long but doesn't give the width, and says that the Zyklon was no problem, the only reason they wore gas masks was because the irritant in the gas gave them an “irritating cough”. They've got tender tonsils! He claimed the gas travelled horizontally, then vertically, and that people climbed on top of each other to escape, etc. I've always wondered what colour the gas was, in this case. 

Pery Broad's original confession has never been found and J.-C. Pressac says he thinks it was written by Polish communists.

He says, “why would the defendants more or less admit their role in the gassings?”, then later he goes and tells you exactly why. You're just not supposed to put 2 and 2 together. He asks whether Stäglich or Christophersen “ever tried to interview any of the convicted defendants”? But they were writing 15 or 20 years later, in any case, it doesn't seem likely that this would have been fruitful, if these same people had been willing to confess just to get lighter sentences, etc.

He says “why wouldn't Dr. Kremer tell the truth when he was a pensioner, 80 years old and had just spent 10 years in prison”? Well, maybe that's the answer right there. Not everybody wants to be a hero after they've lost the war, they did their bit, they lost, and now they want to be left alone. You could raise the same question about the witchcraft trials.

He dismisses the Communist role in all of this, uses GERMAN CRIMES IN POLAND as a source, yet describes Soviet mendacity relating to Katyn as if it helped his case instead of weakening it! That's the secret of the Jews at all times: bluff. Germans did confess to committing the murders at Katyn and were hanged for it, but in Russia. This is very well known. But no, all other Communist evidence is credible. None of the documents are forgeries.

It's crazy to rely on a Communist photocopy to prove crematory capacity when you can ask any funeral director or anybody who's ever had a cremation done in the family. And in pits, yet... with gasoline???? It takes at least 50 gallons of gas to burn one body, done properly, on a pile of wood or something. So for millions of people, that's 50 x X million.... in a hole? What about the water table? What about the weather?  

Zimmermann is nuts. But in some ways it's a good propaganda job.  

Zimmermann also takes seriously the story of carbon monoxide in steel bottles at Mauthausen. Carbon monoxide has never been used by any country in gas warfare for a variety of reasons, one of them being that the vapour pressure is so high that any shells (or steel bottles) filled with the stuff would be so heavy that it just wouldn't be worth it, in view of the slight toxicity of the gas (1/ 70th of HCN on the Haber Scale of Toxicity).

Lüftl has pointed out that if anybody needed any carbon monoxide it would be generated on the spot. To Zimmermann, eyewitnesses are sacred. Regardless.

Zimmermann also thinks it's possible to burn several corpses in one crematory oven. On capacity, he quotes French literature from the 19th century, but there's no question of consulting a modern funeral home director.

Zim-Zim also says that you can cremate bodies a lot faster if you open the oven door and stick a new body in before the first one is entirely burnt. That is, if you don't mind burning your face off and probably burning down the building.

Huge complicated calculations about wheelbarrow loads, but never a thought of asking how crematory ovens really operate. That would be too scientific.

Zim-Zim always wants everything his own way. When he thinks he can prove the "burning pits" he admits that the crematory capacity was “insufficient”. He quotes facts against him as if they were for him. He claims John Ball is a big liar because there was a barbed wire fence around the crematoria. But that's the whole point: anybody could see what was going on! He says Mattogno believes in the crematory pits, which is a lie. He says multiple cremations were possible because the Japanese supposedly did something in 1911, but you can design a crematory oven to burn tons of household trash, dead horses, anything, if you want to, the technology is the same, no odour, no smoke, it's just called something else, a DESTRUCTOR or something, of course it's a lot bigger. There's a whole article on them in the 1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica (notice the sentence "Combustion is complete, and the destructor may be installed in populous districts without nuisance to the inhabitants"). He never discusses the sizes.

If you had a chicken that filled your entire oven at home, do you think it would cook slower, or faster, than a ordinary sized chicken? Ovens are designed to work in a certain way.

He's got all the fakers in there, Filip Mueller, with his jumping buckets, all the Communists, Zloma Dragon, etc.. He says the Germans destroyed all the incriminating documents. If you had 80,000 documents and wanted to destroy the incriminating ones, would you read them all and do just that, only destroy the incriminating ones, or just destroy them all? It's not like with the I.R.S. when they can imprison you simply for destroying documents. It was the end of the war. Everything was getting burnt and blown up, but no, they save 80,000 documents. What happens if they make a mistake and there's one paragraph in just one document? Of course you'd destroy them all.

He says he thinks multiple cremations might account for the "black smoke" [from the crematoria chimneys]. But there will never be black smoke under any circumstances. The only thing that goes up the chimney is gas and hot air. There's a flue and reburner, no organic matter remains in the hot air and gas that exits the chimney.

He says open cremation in pits is a "very efficient" way to destroy bodies and quotes the usual crazy story about the Franco-Prussian War. I've written about this yarn, it's on the website. There are least 2 or 3 different versions of this tale, but by Créteur's own account it didn't work. It only scorched the upper 25% of the bodies. I think the whole story is basically a fake. I can't imagine a civilized nation treating bodies in that manner in the 19th century.  

In short, we get all the usual clichés and evasions of fact. It's very obvious from John Ball's work that somebody drew crowds, fences, people, etc on those photographs. If Zim-Zim thinks there were holes in the roof at Auschwitz II, why can't he tell us where the holes in the roof are today? Even Van Pelt can't do that. Van Pelt says, they aren't there, but does that mean they were never there? Sic transit gloria...

What did they do when it was raining? What about the water table?

He says coal was stored inside the crematoria, so no need for a coal pile same size as at Monowitz. 150 tons of coal a day, inside the crematorium? Enough to cremate thousands of people? And so on.

Like all Nizkoprophagists, he is adept at creating confusion and some it is very difficult, usually when he's discussing something irrelevant. Of course all documents are authentic. "He doesn't say who he thinks might have forged it", he says. But it's obvious: all the evidence is of Communist origin, Soviet or Polish. Do we really need to know the name of the Commissar responsible?

He says Auschwitz I had 6 ovens as if that were proof of murder. But he never discusses the capacity of a crematory oven. Then he says they ordered more. More proof of murder. No discussion of capacity. And so on. First gassings in 2 buildings in the woods. The buildings don't exist any more, but PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE EXISTS OF THEIR EXISTENCE. And so on. It is very well written, but it is just there to fool people who want an excuse not to think, school teacher do-gooders and so on.

Then he talks about typhus as if it weren't really a threat. We "now know" that prisoners in Russia somewhere were REALLY killed by German "extermination through work". The footnote listed is: Christian Gerlach, "Failure of Plans for an SS Extermination Camp In Mogilev, Belorussia", 11 Holocaust and Genocide Studies No. 1 (Spring 1997), 61-62; Gotz Aly, Final Solution: Nazi Population Policy and the Murder of the European Jews (NY: 1999), 224

This is the proof of the "extermination through work" program. OK. Let's say we kill ourselves to obtain the article and book referred to in the footnote, to see what THEIR source is. I'll bet you money it will be a Communist "war crimes report". Note the neat way in which the whole problem of crematory capacity and typhus is dodged by sending the reader off to Russia on a wild goose chase about Mogilev! This is typical of Nizkor. What does Mogilev have to do with it?  

[Update: I was right. The source is a Soviet War Crimes Report, to wit, the "Soviet War Crimes Commission Investigating German Crimes at Mogilev", see Christian Gerlach and the "Extermination Camp" at Mogilev, by Carlo Mattogno, translated by C. Porter.
Mattogno remarks, "Here as well, there is not the slightest trace of real documents". The actual capacity was about 80 bodies a day, or even less.
-- .CP, 10 June 2012 ]

Where are there any GERMAN documents about "extermination through work"? Why "enslave" millions of people because their labour is indispensable to winning the war, and simultaneously "exterminate" millions of them, the same people? 

The first question I ask people when I hear this kind of thing is "do you know how it takes to cremate a body, even in a modern oven?". A lot of people know, you know. One person told me immediately, "2 hours". They have relatives who were cremated.

Typhus has been endemic in Eastern Europe for centuries. But no, it's not a threat because of a footnote. Thanks. I'm busy. Sorry.  

With 6 coke fired ovens, you could burn about 24 bodies a day, total (maybe more, but you'd damage the ovens). But no, possession of ovens is proof of a mass gassing of millions…

Ever try to burn anything in a hole? You have to be masochistic to bother with this kind of thing. Typical Nizkor. Sorry. 

…it’s all bluff. For example he quotes and even reproduces the Markiewicz Report, saying it "found traces of deadly cyanide" in the gas chambers. He doesn't tell you that it confirms the findings of the Leuchter Report and Rudolf Report, that there are 1000 times as much ferricferrocyanide in the disinfestation chambers, despite the fact that their test discriminated against finding ferricferrocyanide, they took their samples from where there was whitewashing, and they said they didn't understand how the ferricferrocyanide got there, so they would more or less ignore it. But no, he mentions it and reproduces it as if proved his case. It appears to be like this all the time. Just bluff.

He mentions Document 501-PS, which I reproduce, and he takes it seriously. If it's all true, why don’t they open the archives (Arolsen, for example)? There are thousands of tons of German documents, there ought to be millions of documents to prove there were gassings and a program of mass murder.

It's a form of mysticism. He doesn't  look at the documents or the actual infrastructures.

…He's nuts. In places, though, he does a good job of raising questions to which there is probably an answer. Probably one that would make him look like a liar, but not necessarily. People like this could serve a useful purpose if they were honest, by showing where we are unconvincing or where there are certain weaknesses or have failed to make ourselves clear. He claims “no revisionist has ever shown that the Nuremberg documents are forgeries”. Well, I reproduced a hell of a lot of them. He just ignores it all. Essentially he attempts to intimidate the reader by a 57 page bibliography and the names of lots of witnesses. Not hard to do with billions of dollars invested in a whole industry producing tons of profitable junk every year, not to mention the disastrous "publish or perish" racket (which might as well be called a "publish the truth and perish" racket) practised by all American universities...

Vaillant Couturier, a Communist, also says the gas chamber was a wooden barracks. And so on. Etc.

He would "deny" there was a sun in the sky if he had to, but he calls the revisionists "deniers". Typical Jew. That's just for starters.

Zimmermann never discusses the flimsy wooden doors, keyholes, windows, spaces around the doors, lack of holes in the roof, lack of door between gas chamber and oven at Auschwitz I, etc, preferring to rely on "documents" and eyewitness testimony describing things which never existed, massive airtight doors, mushroom-shaped introduction ports on the roof (as "proven" by air photos taken from 30,000 feet up), but when you go there and see that any holes in the roof were made after the buildings were blown up, otherwise there would be cracks extending from the corners, and they are VERY crude holes, probably broken through by souvenir collectors.  

…All they do is make the same assertions over and over again and state conclusions which are simply confusing, not backed up by evidence at all, while simply ignoring everything the revisionists have ever written. As I say, I quit reading Nizkor 7 or 8 years ago. What is "proven", for example, by the Nizkor file on the atomic bomb? Or the human soap

Two things Nizkor never discuss: the authenticity and origin of the documents, and the evaporation rate of Zyklon. They are very cagey about crematory capacity and typhus as well; even things obviously impossible are "proven" by obvious forgeries from Pressac. One lousy forgery, and five triple muffle ovens have a capacity of 5,000 per day or something. An obvious forgery, produced by the Soviets.  

Zimmermann takes single sentences out of context, and does everything he accuses the "deniers" of doing. He would "deny" there is a sun in the sky if he thought he had to.

…From what I see it is full of the usual cheap Nizkor debating points. For example, he says, the "deniers" say that if a defendant admits there was a gas chamber, he's been tortured, but if he denies it, that's the truth, the "deniers" want it both ways. Well, sorry, but maybe that's the way it is.

I can't be bothered to get into all these discussions about whether Vernichtung and Ausrottung and Umsiedlung and Auswanderung mean physical murder in gas chambers. I can't repeat everything I've ever written, not to mention everything everybody else has ever written, every time somebody writes to me. If Zimbo believes people were gassed let him name ONE person gassed in a gas chamber, supported by an autopsy and the German orders and documents...

It should be noted that Zimmerman has no knowledge of German, and has all his translations done for him. He cannot even evaluate their correctness. When he quotes German words, he spells them correctly, but his capitalization is often incorrect (always a dead give-away that a person doesn't know the language). This is not to say that Zimmerman's translations are necessarily wrong, just that Zimmerman cannot tell the difference. For example, he would be unable to tell that the word "beispielsweise" has been deleted from the translation of the "Just Vermerk" quoted in Letter 12. These things make a difference.

What this means is that Zimmerman cannot do any original research. If somebody else mistranslates something, or translates a single paragraph out of context -- or both -- Zimmerman is simply stuck with it. This is a serious disability.

If Robert Wolfe of the National Archives says "Seuchenabwehr" ("prevention of epidemics") means "extermination", then Zimbo just has to take his word for it.

At the same time, he sets out to "refute" people who can read German!

Carlo Mattogno points out that Zimmerman is an
accountant by trade. As an accountant, perhaps Zimmerman can explain how you subtract 2.5 from 6 and still get 6 [official reduction in the death toll at Auschwitz from 4 million to 1.5 or even 600,000, while the figure of "Six Million Killed" remains unchanged].

Accountants go to prison for this kind of thing.

The best place for a discussion of this kind is the forum. I don't wish to be impolite, but I'm very busy. For one thing, I've got a 670-page book to translate, mostly autopsy reports and court martial records in German. Of course, I don't go to prison if I get something wrong, but I don't publish books like Zimmerman's either.

Thank you for contacting me.

(edited from series of messages, late 2005-early 2006)

See also (in no particular order):
National Archives Head Fakes Captions to Hoaxoco$t Poster Exhibit by C.W.Porter
Sauckel's "Exploitation Speech" (translation by C.W. Porter)
Sedan by C.W.Porter (from the Nizkoprophagists) (a.k.a. "THE SEDAN HOAX")
Sedan Hoax Updated - Possible Solution to the Conundrum by C.W. Porter (with assistance from Carlo Mattogno)
Use of "Austrottung" in German Film "Kolberg" by C.W. Porter"
Use of "Ausrottung" in 1938 Hitler Speech on the Sudetenland by C.W. Porter
Use of "Sonderbehandlung" by President von Hindenburg by C.W. Porter
"Sonderbehandlung" at Cologne-Bonn Airport (2001) by C.W. Porter

Special action in the Grocery Store (by C.W. Porter)
Document 3012-PS ["Sonderbehandlung"] (translated by C.W. Porter)
Document 3040-PS ["Sonderbehandlung"] (translated by C.W. Porter)
The Unreliability of Documents used by Jean-Claude Pressac by C. W. Porter
Graphic of Document BW/30/42
Graphics of "Vergasungskeller" Document
Polish [Jewish?] Liar-Lie-Champion Jan Karski Warns World of Incredible 1944 "Quicklime Train Hoaxoco$t" AND IS BELIEVED (with graphics)
Selected Lies from the "Black Book" (1946)
KATYN: How the Soviets Manufactured 'War Crime' Documents (translation of USSR-54) by C.W.Porter
Translation of USSR-8 (Soviet "War Crimes Report" on Auschwitz, May 1945) by C. W. Porter
Graphics of Document 501-PS ("Gas Vans")
J.M. Beard on the Gas Vans and Cremations
Show Me or Draw Me a Nazi "Tattooing Machine" by C.W. Porter
Short List of Hoaxoco$t Absurdities (Anonymous)
Germany vs Porter Part VII by C.W.Porter
Nizkoprophagists Refute Porter on Human Soap
Anatomy of a Nuremberg Liar by C.W.Porter (with graphic links)
National Archives Head Fakes Captions to Hoaxoco$t Poster Exhibit by C.W.Porter (with graphic links)
NOT GUILTY AT NUREMBERG by C.W. Porter (with graphic links)
"Blood and Honor" Interviews Carlos Porter

Jeff Davis - Exterminator of Six Million Blacks during Southern War for Survival
(according to the "logic" of the Hoaxoco$t con-artists)
See also:

Germ Warfare, Rebel Style -- (from the "Lincoln Conspiracy Trial")

The 1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica is available on CD-ROM with 1922 and 1926 supplements, graphically scanned at 300 dpi, for about 10-20 jewbuckniks, from eBAY.
Very good value for money.

The OCR-scanned HTML version available free on-line at
is not reliable (innumerable typographical errors rendering the text incomprehensible in places; texts incomplete; many articles missing (for example, "Infanticide"; the article on "Cannibalism" is not only incomplete, but is mixed up with another article halfway through); a thoroughly sloppy job.

etc., etc.
(If Zim-Zim can have a 57-page bibliography, why can't I?)