O,Sung,
No, you're a rational person, does your last post seem rational when you read it back?
If you recited that post in public in Germany, France, Austria or Sweden and someone reported you to the Police you could find yourself in court. You can't minimise or speculate about the numbers, it's written in stone.

In the late 1940's holocaust denial by an accused person was pretty much an automatic death sentence and people made up these wild stories to save their own necks, for profit, for revenge or simply for notoriety.
Look at it this way, in the 15th century when a person was accused of witchcraft if they said that it was impossible that they'd consorted with the Devil because the Devil didn't exist then they'd be executed, the existence of the Devil is written in stone right?
So to stay alive the accused witch might say, "Well I was spying on the coven and I'm sure I saw the Devil, but only from a distance!".
So it is with Holocaust testimonials, "Well I was only at Treblinka for a short time your honour but I saw mountains of luggage in the yard and glimpsed the smoking pyres through a gap in the fence", or "Well I was responsible for building a gas chamber but I never saw it in operation", or "Well I have been accused of being a collaborator in the ghetto, that is true but as many Jews as I rounded up for deportation I let tens more escape".

G'evening to you PAUL1405...

I could be wrong but I was always under the impression, if one were to compare the two monsters at their blood thirsty worst, Stalin accounted for more murders, than did Hitler ? What's a few hundred thousand innocent deaths between these two barbarian's ?

I think it was you who asked another herein, about his honest opinion of Hitler ? In his earlier days, he did some reasonable things for his people ? He commissioned the design and mfg. of the VW. He built the country's first Autobahns. Then something strange occurred ? Hitler went mad, and became a monster, a murderer, a war monger, and in time he turned into a total tyrant, if that was possible ?

Otherwise he was quite a reasonable bloke, and his behaviour could well have been improved, had he had the benefit of meeting a Mr SMITH and Mr WESSON, two well regarded practitioners of curing mad bastards ? Oh well I guess we'll never know, eh PAUL, given he received early retirement, from the job of dictator ?

Paul,
I was born in 1967, Hitler had already been dead for 22 years, when I was a kid the Swastika was a sign of rebellion like a safety pin through the ear, bikies and punks wore Swastika patches and had them as tattoos back then.
I've read a lot about Fascism and expressed admiration of it's forms and aspirations but that's as far as it goes, as Jim Saleam said in the piece I posted earlier, Fascism never developed into a European revolution and German National Socialism was put to the test and found wanting.
The people I admire and whose articles I link are a diverse mix of Eurasianists, White Nationalists, Ethno Nationalists and Identitarians from many ethnic groups and schools of thought. Some are Slavs, some are Jews, homosexuals, women, Asians, Muslims, Orthodox Christians, Atheists, Anarchists, Libertarians and all sorts, Hitler will be foaming at the mouth if he's looking down on us from Valhalla.

No Jay, he is looking up from Hell, and thank you for that answer, but it does not give an opinion, good, bad or indifferent. I'll take it you are ambivalent towards the monster Hitler. I too was born after Hitler died but not before Stalin so I should have an opinion of one, and not the other, monster?
Being a person of facts can you expand on this statement;
"In the late 1940's holocaust denial by an accused person was pretty much an automatic death sentence and people made up these wild stories to save their own necks, for profit, for revenge or simply for notoriety."
Can you lists persons who we executed for the crime of "holocaust denial" after WWII, other than Nazi's who were executed for war crimes.

AND. Those statements that followed "Well I was only at Treblinka for a short time your honour...etc, etc,etc" Who made these statements, Names, or are they just made ups to justify your thinking? After WWII the Allies were very careful to conduct war trials in a civilized and judicial manner. not wanting to be seen as barbarians like the Nazi's. You are inferring people (witnesses) could say what they liked, and it was taken as gospel. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Paul,
http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/wars/witness2history/25.html

"Then why, one might ask, were U.S. citizens and government officials serving as prosecutors and judges, and why has the U.S. Government participated in and endorsed an alien tribunal which does not accord to defendants the same rights which American defendants would receive before U.S. courts at home?" - H.K Thompson and Henry Strutz,M.A. Doenitz at Nuremberg: A re-Appraisal. N.Y., 1976

"The Nuremberg process in itself was not a judicial process, but an act of vengeance against the defeated. Nuremberg was particularly profaned by the fact that the Russians were among the judges and themselves guilty of many crimes and atrocities . . . Being a jurist myself, and a Christian, I abhor the justice of Nuremberg." - Most Reverend. Bishop Vincentas Brizgys, Bishop of Lithuania

"Hearsay evidence was admitted indiscriminately and sworn statements of witnesses were admissible regardless of whether anybody knew the person who made the statement or the individual who took the statement." - George McDonough, American Lawyer, New York Times

At the Dachau U.S Military Tribunals, interrogators poised as priests to extract confessions. The American judge, Edward L. Van Roden, one of the three members of an American Army Commission set up to investigate claims of maltreatment found:

"Posturing as priests to hear confessions and give absolution; torture with burning matches driven under the prisoners' fingernails; knocking out of teeth and breaking jaws; solitary confinement and near-starvation rations. The statements which were admitted as evidence were obtained from men who had first been kept in solitary confinement for three, four, and five months . . .

"the investigators would put a black hood over the head of the accused and then punch him in the face with brass knuckles, kick him and beat him with rubber hoses . . .

"all but two of the Germans, in the 139 cases investigated, had been kicked in the testicles beyond repair. This was standard operation procedure with our American investigators."

cont
"... a fantastic desecration of the ideals of Western Civilisation, and appalling miscarriage of justice... a misuse of evidence for vicious ends, all of which will someday be exposed as a shocking travesty of high legal and moral principles." - Henry M. Adams, Ph.D. Professor of History, University of California

"I have heard evidence and read documentary proofs to the effect that the accused persons were beaten up, maltreated and physically tortured by methods which could only be conceived by sick brains. They were subjected to mock trials and pretended executions, they were told that their families would be deprived of their ration cards. All these things were carried out with the approval of the Public Prosecutor to secure the psychological atmosphere necessary for the extortion of the required confessions. If the United States lets such acts committed by a few people go unpunished, then the whole world can rightly criticize us severely and forever doubt the correctness of our motives and our moral integrity." - Senator McCarthy, American Press, May 20th 1949

The circus aspect of these show trials was such that when a certain gentleman of the name Einstein tearfully accused a German named Menzel of murdering his brother, the defendant pointed out that his brother was alive and well, and sitting in the court. The presiding investigator scolded Einstein.

"How can we bring this pig to the gallows if you are so stupid as to bring your brother into court?