Buried in a tedious article quibbling about the number of Jews who died at the Jasenovac camp in Croatia during WWII — published in the Jerusalem Post — Dejan Ristic, the acting director of the Museum of Genocide in Belgrade, Serbia, makes a rather remarkable and unqualified admission about the lack of evidence at Auschwitz:
…Following the ridiculous, pseudo-scientific, anti-civilization and shameful logic which in this revisionist article denies the number of victims in Jasenovac solely on the grounds that there are no adequate forensic data (except for 2,500 to 4,500 victims, as the author falsely claims), we could ask a question as to whether it is possible to deny in the same way the number of 1,200,000 to 1,500,000 killed in Auschwitz since there is no forensic evidence for that claim either…?
Of course, this “lack of evidence” has been corroborated by Ephraim Kaye — one of the directors at Israel’s Yad Vashem Museum — who claimed that the complete lack of physical evidence at Auschwitz is “proof” that millions of Jews were “murdered” there.
The “logic” here is that the lack of evidence is “proof” that the “Nazis” got rid of all the evidence otherwise there would be evidence because the Holocaust happened.
This is a textbook example of begging the question — which is the same technique of argumentation that rabbis engage in in the Talmud.
In fact, long before the war even ended and the camps were liberated, the Jewish press was already planning for the eventuality that there would be no mass graves to prove the Holocaust — so as early as 1943 they began warning the public ahead of time not to be alarmed when no mass graves were discovered.
The patron saint of the Holocaust — Eli Wiesel — also engaged in the same Jewish double-think when trying to explain how something that is true didn’t actually happen:
“The conversation became more relaxed. He asked me about my work. He wanted to know if the stories I told in my books were true, had they really happened. I answered not too convincingly: “In literature, Rebbe, certain things are true though they didn’t happen, while others are not, even if they did.”
—Eli Wiesel, autobiography
“About people you knew? “Yes, about people I might have known.” About things that happened? “Yes, about things that happened or could have happened.” But they did not? “No, not all of them did. In fact, some were invented from almost the beginning to almost the end.” The Rebbe leaned forward as if to measure me up and said with more sorrow than anger: That means you are writing lies! I did not answer immediately. The scolded child within me had nothing to say in his defense. Yet, I had to justify myself: “Things are not that simple, Rebbe. Some events do take place but are not true; others are—although they never occurred.”
—Eli Wiesel, “Legends of Our Time”
“In [my] book “One Generation After” there is a sentence which perhaps explains my idea: “Certain events happen, but they are not true. Others, on the other hand, are, but they never happen.” So! I undergo certain events and, starting from my experience, I describe incidents which may or may not have happened, but which are true. I do believe that it is very important that there be witnesses always and everywhere.”
—Eli Wiesel, “One Generation After”