Polish-Jewish Relations: 1,300 Keyword-Phrase-Indexed Book Reviews (by Jan Peczkis)

Final Verdict: The Holocaust On Trial in the 21^st Century, by Tobias Buck. 2024. Hachette Books, New York

German Accomplice Farce: Phony German Repentance for Nazism

Nowadays, much is said about the so-called exemplary German repentance for Nazism. It was anything but. Consider the following:

250,000 GUILTY GERMANS: LONG-TERM GERMAN LENIENCY ON FORMER NAZIS

Citing a German-language source, author Buck writes, “For much of the post-war period, Nazi perpetrators had less to fear from the country’s prosecutors and judges than common thieves. Historians estimate that as many as a quarter of a million Germans were implicated in the Holocaust.” (p. 18).

GERMAN ACCOMPLICE FARCE: ALL ACCOMPLICES AND NO PERPETRATORS

Buck writes, “In German Holocaust trials, however, that necessary and logical distinction between perpetrator and accessory was stretched to the breaking point and beyond. From every early on, courts generally held that only the very top brass of the Nazi state–Hitler, Himmler, Goering, etc.–should be seen as perpetrators. Almost everyone else would be treated as a mere helper, even those who had a direct hand in the killings, and those who wielded enormous power as senior SS or military officers, or top-level government officials. The vast majority of post-war convictions in Holocaust cases were for aiding murder–not for murder itself.” (p. 128). “…the real perpetrators were not just few and far between, but conveniently dead.” (p. 131). Yes, indeed.

Citing another German-language source, Buck comments, “As one German law professor remarked sarcastically at the time: ‘One perpetrator and sixty million accessories, or: the German people, a people of accessories.'” (p. 26). Such is the German accomplice farce. For more on this, see:

https://www.jewsandpolesdatabase.org/2024/07/06/the-new-german-nazi-trying-shameless-courts/

ANOTHER HOLOCAUST FRAUD FOOLS EVEN THE EXPERTS

Author Tobias Buck discusses Moshe Peter Loth. He claimed to have been a Jewish inmate at Stuffhof, and, in a German court, had, with much theatrics and emotion, “forgiven” 97 year-old SS German defendant Bruno Dey (p. 138). Loth had declared that he had received a tattoo, when, in actuality, only Auschwitz inmates got tattoos. (p. 150).

As Loth’s fraudulent claims fell apart, the credibility of Holocaust survivors was potentially called into question. Buck writes, “It was ‘frightening’ that legal professionals with experience of dealing with Holocaust cases had failed to spot evident falsehoods, notably the claim of a prisoner tattoo…the damage done to the credibility of survivor testimonies in general: ‘Survivors of the Shoah who apply to become co-plaintiffs often have the problem that they have no documents to prove their story and their eligibility. This means courts in many cases simply have to trust their story. And that trust in the fact that co-plaintiffs who claim to be victims of the Shoah don’t lie, that trust has been called into question in this case.'” (p. 151).

This has broader implications. A real or phony Holocaust survivor can make up an anti-Polish story, and be automatically believed.

For another example of a Holocaust fraud, see:

https://www.jewsandpolesdatabase.org/2025/07/05/revealing-new-holocaust-frauds-even-at-auschwitz/