Genocide By Telepathy, Hilberg Explains

Dr. Robert Faurisson

Date: January/February 1999
Issue: Volume 18 number 1

Raul Hilberg, the most prestigious of the authors who defend the thesis of
the physical extermination of Jews by the Germans during the Second World War,
began his investigation of this subject in 1948.

In 1961, after more than a dozen years' labor, he published The Destruction
of the European Jews (Chicago: Quadrangle Books). In this work, he presents
"the destruction of the European Jews" as a vast undertaking personally
supervised by Hitler who, he says, gave two orders to this effect. Then, he continues,
various German administrative agencies, especially in the police and the
military, acted in conformity with these orders, duly coordinating their efforts to
prepare, organize, control and carry out this vast criminal enterprise.

In 1976 appeared The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, a work by the most
prestigious of revisionist authors, Arthur R. Butz, who teaches at Northwestern
University near Chicago. He shows that the alleged extermination of the Jews
constitutes "the hoax of the twentieth century."

In 1978-1979, I published two articles in the prominent Paris daily Le Monde
demonstrating that the alleged Nazi gas chambers could not have existed, and
this essentially for physical and chemical reasons.Note 1 These articles caused
something of a stir. Two well-known French intellectuals, Raymond Aron and
François Furet, announced that an international colloquium of experts would be
held to establish before the world that the extermination of Jews and the Nazi
gas chambers really existed. Among the experts who figured in this was Raul

Just before the start of the colloquium, a lengthy interview with Hilberg
appeared in the influential French magazine Le Nouvel Observateur, in which the
German-born Jewish historian expressed some astounding ideas.Note 2 Regarding
the destruction of the European Jews and the Nazi gas chambers, he basically
said that no documents exist that really prove these things, but rather only
some testimonies that "accord somewhat."

While Hilberg of course holds to his basic extermination thesis, this
explanation is radically different from the one he had previously given. It is
obvious that revisionism is responsible for this change. Hilberg more or less
conceded this, even if only indirectly. Specifically, he declared:Note 3

I will say that, in a certain way, Faurisson and others, without wanting to,
did us a favor. They raised questions which had the effect of engaging
historians in new research. They have obliged us to once again collect information,
to re-examine documents and to go further into the comprehension of what has
taken place.

The international colloquium took place as scheduled at the Sorbonne from
June 29 to July 2, 1982, but behind closed doors. Then, an account of its
discussions and conclusions was given at a press conference. But, to the surprise of
everyone present, only Raymond Aron and François Furet appeared at the press
conference, declaring, on the one hand, that "despite the most scholarly
research," no one had been able to find any order by Hitler for the extermination of
the Jews, and, on the other, that pursuing the revisionists in court was like
conducting a witch-hunt. Not one word was said about gas chambers.

Seven months later Hilberg summarized his new thesis before an audience of
nearly 2,700 at Avery Fischer Hall in New York City: the entire German policy
for the physical destruction of the Jews was to be explained by mind reading! No
document attesting to this criminal policy could be found, because no such
document existed. For several years, the entire German bureaucratic machinery
operated through a kind of telepathy. As Hilberg put it:Note 4

But what began in 1941 was a process of destruction not planned in advance,
not organized centrally by any agency. There was no blueprint and there was no
budget for destructive measures. They [these measures] were taken step by
step, one step at a time. Thus came about not so much a plan being carried out,
but an incredible meeting of minds, a consensus -- mind reading by a far-flung

Let us note again those final words: "an incredible meeting of minds, a
consensus -- mind reading by a far-flung bureaucracy."Note 5

Two years later, Hilberg confirmed those words and this explanation during
the first "Holocaust trial" of Ernst Zündel in Toronto. He did this under oath
during his cross-examination by Zündel's lawyer, Douglas Christie, whom I was
assisting.Note 6

That same year (1985) the "revised and definitive" edition of his book
appeared. In it, the University of Vermont professor did not use the expression
"consensus" or "mind reading." And yet he wrote:Note 7

In the final analysis, the destruction of the Jews was not so much a product
of laws and commands as it was a matter of spirit, of shared comprehension, of
consonance and synchronization.

He also wrote of "countless decision makers in a far-flung bureaucratic
machine" without "a basic plan." He mentioned "written directives not published,"
"oral directives and authorizations," and "basic understandings of officials
resulting in decisions not requiring orders or explanations." There had been "no
one agency," he wrote, and "no single organization directed or coordinated
the entire process." The destruction of the Jews, he concluded, was "the work of
a far-flung administrative machine," and "no special agency was created and
no special budget was devised to destroy the Jews of Europe. Each organization
was to play a specific role in the process, and each was to find the means to
carry out its task."Note 8

For me, this is like explaining what would have been a huge criminal
undertaking of industrial proportions based, in particular, on a weapon (a chemical
slaughterhouse using an insecticide), operating through the intervention of the
Holy Ghost, all of which had been conceived and created through a kind of
spontaneous generation.

I refuse to believe that which is not believable. I refuse to believe in the
incredible. I refuse to believe in what Hilberg himself calls "an incredible
meeting of minds." I refuse to believe in mind reading or telepathy, just as I
refuse to believe in the intervention of the Holy Ghost or in spontaneous
generation. I take exception to any historical thesis, any system of historical
explanation, based on such hare-brained notions.

On November 23, 1978, the French historian René Rémond declared to me: "As
for the [Nazi] gas chambers, I am ready to follow you; as for the genocide, I
have the deep conviction that Nazism in itself was sufficiently perverse so that
this genocide was part of its motivations and its actions, but I recognize
that I have no scientific evidence for this genocide."

This is indeed the least one might say when one is concerned about historical


1. "'Le problème des chambres à gaz' ou 'la rumeur d'Auschwitz'," Le Monde,
Dec. 29, 1978, and, "Une lettre de M. Faurisson," Le Monde, Jan. 16, 1979,
Reprinted in: R. Faurisson, Memoire en Defense (Paris: La Vieille Taupe, 1980),
pp. 71-75, 83-88, and in: R. Faurisson, Écrits Révisionnistes (1974-1998),
published in four volumes in 1999, vol. 1, pp. 122-124, 131-134.
2. "Les Archives de l'horreur," Le Nouvel Observateur, July 3-9, 1982, pp.
70-73, 75-76. The interview was conducted Guy Sitbon, regular correspondent in
the United States for Le Nouvel Observateur.
3. Le Nouvel Observateur, July 3-9, 1982, p. 71. Also quoted in the Summer
1985 Journal, p. 170.
4. Quoted in: George De Wan, "The Holocaust in Perspective," Newsday (Long
Island, New York), Feb. 23, 1983, p. II/3. Also quoted in the Summer 1985
Journal, pp. 170-171.
5. According to The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language,
"mind reading" is defined as "The faculty of discerning another's thoughts
through extrasensory means of communication; telepathy."
6. Hilberg testimony on Jan. 16, 1985 (Toronto). Trial transcript, pp.
7. Raul Hilberg, The Destruction of the European Jews (New York: Holmes and
Meier, 1985, 3 vols.), p. 55.
8. R. Hilberg, The Destruction of the European Jews (1985), pp. 53-55, 62.

About the Author

Dr. Robert Faurisson is Europe's foremost Holocaust revisionist scholar. Born
in 1929, he was educated at the Paris Sorbonne, and served as a professor at
the University of Lyon in France from 1974 until 1990. He was a specialist of
text and document analysis. His writings on the Holocaust issue have appeared
in several books and numerous scholarly articles, many of which have been
published in this Journal. This essay is an adaptation of a piece originally
written in 1988.

Peace is patriotic!
Michael Santomauro
Editorial Director
253 West 72nd street #1711
New York, NY 10023
Available for Talk-Radio interviews 24hours 212-787-7891

To subscribe and grow with knowledge or
to unsubscribe and Die Stupid?
Send an E-mail to: