That is an erroneous assumption.
If you proceed based upon that error, your following conclusions will also be in error.
A good example is the fact no homicidal gas chambers existed at the Auschwitz concentration camp. Ask 100 random people on the street if there were, and I estimate 99 would be absolutely certain there were. Why? Because that lie is perpetuated endlessly by mainstream media outlets like NPR, ABC, CBS, History, Disney, Fox, CNN, BBC, et al.
Just because "The World Establishment" believes a thing does not make that thing true.
Well it's been over a month since I posted and in that time I've managed to see why there are arguments. At first I couldn't understand why there were skeptics because, well, I had done no research. So I found out a few things that are causing controversy.
1. There's been no forensic investigation on the mass graves to prove cause of death was by gassing. In camps such as Triblinka, a camp which has a 2.7 million or 700,000 death count depending on who you go with, which was also alleged to be a gas camp using a stolen soviet tank engine, no forensic investigation was ever carried out to determine cause of death or the real numbers. It is assumed who is in the graves, how many and how they died. It's also assumed how many grave pits there are, the technique they used is ' we found some, so there must be more ' and they've left it at that, taking only samples using a tool to extract layers of soil. They will not dig up any bodies because it's against the Jewish religion unless it's to solve a crime. Overall it's very unscientific and flimsy to base 100% conclusions on.
2. The exterminationists claim there there is no blue staining which Zyklon B leaves behind when in heavy use, because the chambers were washed down after every gassing. However, water actually makes it more absorbent and would have the opposite effect they were trying to accomplish. But they say the burden of proof is up to the skeptics and that they would have to recreate the chambers in the exact same conditions they were in 70 years ago, which obviously can't to happen.
3. Lack of eye witnesses on the gassings and lines of people. There are roughly just over a dozen eye witnesses who claim to have worked in, been gassed or seen, of which only 2 have testified under oath. The other tens of thousands of people are not asked about the gassings, it is a very clever trick. They only ask for opinions on the chambers from what I call ' celebrity ' survivors - people who have become known amongst the survivor lectures and tours etc. If you go to Spielberg's Shoah Foundation website you can browse through the videos of ordinary people and you'll get endless amounts of talk about what the conditions were like in the camp, what they did in their spare time, ate etc. But they are not asked if they saw the chambers. There is a clear deception going on and just one of the things I've noticed.
4. The witnesses who claimed to have seen, worked in or been gassed, have strange stories. One man who claims to have been gassed 6 times was asked 'How did you survive?' and his reply was 'maybe children are more resistant'. Another claims she also survived in the chambers, twice, she also claims she was personally experimented on by Mengele himself, she also claims they removed her tattoo which is why she doesn't have one (nor a scar) which is strange because generally only workers got tattoos, exterminationists believe people who were going to be gassed went straight to the chamber. While a Sonderkommando (someone who works in the Crematoriums) claims the SS guards would bayonet anyone still alive after a gassing, even babies(how did the other kids survive to tell their tale?). This man also claims every 3-6 months they would kill off Sonderkommandos to make sure none of what they had seen were to ever be known to the public but of course he survived, and also his 3 Sonderkommando relatives. There's so much more too. These witnesses make up the bulk of the story that mainstream historians use. They don't find a problem with their claims and are willing to use their information in holocaust education classes without question.
5. Documentation. Originally it was claimed, by the Soviets, all paperwork relating to the camps was destroyed so the Nazi's involved could avoid war crime charges. However, when the Soviet archives opened to Western historians the Auschwitz blueprints were found along with death certificates and inmate counts. The buildings that are claimed to be gas chambers by the Soviets were called ' morgues ' on the blueprint, which would explain the architecture and why they were underground. The exterminationsts then claimed the Nazis were using double speak and that they were trying to cover up that they were chambers, which again is one of those claims you can't refute due to circumstance.
6. The euthanasia program. Mercy killings - i.e the killing of those too weak to work or even in some cases the killing of badly wounded soldiers coming back from the front. Exterminationists claim this is clear evidence of the brutality of the Nazis and that there would be no reason not to believe they would carry out the gassings in the 6 camps. Skeptics say that because the Nazis were relatively open about this why would they go through such lengths to cover up the chambers? Indeed, if they couldn't cover up the euthanasia program how did they do it for the biggest mass killing operation of all time?
7. The signed statements of the SS guards. People say this is conclusive proof that the gassings occurred. But we know the camp kommandant of Auschwitz was tortured and that torture happened. How can all the signed statements be trusted? The fact torture was used just in a few known cases should taint and bring doubt unto the others rather than be taken as complete fact. But no caution is taken and all statements are used in education classes.
8. The holocaust relies heavily on the Soviets. At the end of the war the West were claiming they had found death camps, slowly but surely they were all debunked and only the 6 remaining camps which were in Soviet territory are labeled as death camps. We know the Soviets reconstructed buildings inside the camps because allegedly the Nazis blew everything related to the gassings up to avoid being found guilty(although there's no way to stop a forensic investigation from finding out if gassings did indeed occur by simply blowing in the roof and walls). The Soviets didn't rebuild everything only a few chambers and the 'wall of death' in Auschwitz which is shown to tourists. How much can we trust the Soviets? They lied about the documentation, why? They also claimed 4 million died at Auschwitz, then the number got lowered to 1.1 million once the Soviets were found to have exaggerated the count. Everything we first learned about the camps came from the Soviets or witnesses and thus stories were born without solid confirmation.
9. Logistics. The mathematics don't support the death count given, the architecture of the chambers, the amount of furnaces. Among some of the claims that up to 5 bodies at a time were being squashed into an oven that could barely fit 2 bodies and have nothing but ash in 30-40 minutes, there is also the claim that 2500 bodies were being gassed every 30 minutes to an hour per chamber, all one has to do is look at the architecture to see how that would be impossible to herd and remove that amount of bodies into those tight spaces in that time frame. Take into account the 'washing down the chamber' claim to remove traces of Zyklon B and it makes it more absurd. There is just no way that can support itself, the only reason that claim exists is because no one in a position of authority wants to doubt the eye witness who made that claim in fear of being called an anti-jewish holocaust denier.
10. For the 6 million figure to be correct in the time frame given by eye witnesses and the Soviets, thousands of people would be lining up day and night waiting for their turn to enter the chamber. In the case of Auschwitz Birkenau, the chambers were a mere 100 feet away from the football field inside the camp in clear view. That means, anyone in the camp could stand by the wire and wonder where all those people go once they disappear underground. Football games were a regular occurance, even the British POW football team played at Birkenau while camp guards joined in. Tournaments were held. Yet, 100 feet away, the holocaust was happening. Why are there no reports of thousands of people lining up waiting to enter the chamber? It just seems to bizarre, coupled with the fact the Nazis were meant to be keeping this so secret no evidence survived after the war, why have it in clear view of everyone?
11. Judging by the gassing survivors, there seems to be no criteria for being gassed. The few people who claimed to have been gassed had no disabilities and there were thousands of children in the camps, why were these few selected for gassing while others of their age not? That also brings into question the validity of a 10 to 12 year old's experience from 70 years ago. Was there exaggeration?
12. The Nazis relied heavily on slave labour, which is why there was the killing of those that could not work. The claim that the Nazis would kill off their slave work force seems highly suspicious.
----------------------
Those are generally the arguments made. There's of course types of fuel, strange inefficiency on behalf of the Nazis, the fact you can do prison time for trying to investigate the sites yourself etc.
In my opinion it serves all 3 factions to promote the holocaust.
1. The West. During the end of the war Germany's infrastructure was nearly obliterated, according to the Red Cross little food or medicine was getting to the camps. Any food that did make it through surely went to the guards. Millions throughout Europe also died from disease, mainly Typhus. The peak death rate in Birkenua was 8,000 in 1 month believe, which is around the right number for the amount of ovens in place and morgue space, there is also evidence of planned expanture of the camp and another crematorium to go with the expected loss of life. I reckon the West knew the camp inmates would be collateral damage. It doesn't help that after 1 month of the allies reaching the camp they kept them quarantined for a month, creating further loss of life. The holocaust takes any blame away from the allies and soley focuses attention on the crimes of the Nazis.
2. The Soviets. The Soviets, who invaded Poland the same time as Hitler, were also ruthless in their occupation. Sending their opponents off to slave labour camps. They were desperate to project the image of glorious liberators and making people believe the tyranny of the Nazi regime was all over. We know of course what happened to the Polish people when they were liberated. It benefits the Soviets greatly to have the Nazis look worse than themselves.
3. The Zionists. After reading a book called 'The Transfer Agreement - the pact between the Third Reich and Jewish Palestine' by Edwin Black, I found out a group of leading Zionists who were desperate to create a state of Israel, made a deal to help lift the world-wide Jewish boycott of German goods in exchange for 50,000 Jews to be sent to Palestine along with $100 million of their assets. It also talks about a meeting which took place in Geneva pre-WW2 between Zionist factions who agreed if any tradegy were to occur they would make the most of it to get sympathy for their cause. They wanted a high death count. There's also the matter of the religious connection. The Shoah(holocaust) is in the old testament and talks of a holocaust occurring before the state of Israel is conceived. During World War One a claim was made by the International Zionist Movement that a holocaust would occur in Germany if money was not donated to said group. Incidentally that money never went to starving families but to Bolsheviks in Russia. But any who, the holocaust claim has been made by religious groups throughout history and should be treated with caution.
I believe the motive for lies is there, coupled with next to no scientific investigation and persecution of those that try to investigate it who are not associated with the establishment, I just don't know how anyone could accept the entire thing for 100% fact without any doubt whatsoever unless you haven't looked into it.