Thursday, December 16, 2010

Sacred History and Copyright Violation

1243 West 7th Avenue
Vancouver, BC
V6H 1B7 Canada
Phone: 604.736.9401
Fax: 604.737.6021

16 December 2010

For Publication.

We read of the blacklisting of your magazine with a bitter sympathy. It is particularly ironic since the United Nations is spending $120,000,000 to: "... remind the world of the lessons to be learnt from the Holocaust in order to help to prevent future acts of genocide."

While your magazine has many thought provoking articles on the pernicious effects of advertising on our society, a cardinal point in the blacklisting campaign against Adbusters is that in this instance history itself has become a publicity stunt.

This blacklisting raises interesting questions about the role of history in society. History is a story we believe is true. Some history achieves the status of a political icon. Some history achieves a sacred status. Governments know this and manipulate history for their own benefit. As George Santayana noted – "History is always written wrong, and so always needs to be rewritten."

Your article on the Gaza Strip is what is called "Holocaust Inversion" by people who consider the orthodox Holocaust story as "sacred." People like Robert S Wistrich in his paper "Holocaust Denial and Inversion," and Esther Webman with her "Stealing the Holocaust from the Jews?" who spoke at the November HETI International Conference on Antisemitism and Holocaust Denial, partially funded by the United Nations Outreach Programme.

"Never Again," the article you published by Saeed David Mohammad and that precipitated this censorship issue, is a thoughtful piece that respects Holocaust history. There is no hate expressed in his article. The problem arises when it is viewed by those who view Holocaust history as "sacred," not to be questioned in any way. In short, Mr. Mohammad committed a "trespass" on the sacred history of others, a copyright violation if you will.

Revisionists have found that the first casualty of war is Truth. We have found that much of the history we are taught today about WWII was originally influenced by Soviet, British and American wartime propaganda which exaggerated and exploited the real tragedies of real people for propaganda purposes serving the State. This concerns not just Jews but Slavs, Roma, Jehovah’s Witnesses and, in some versions, Gays.

The point here is not to justify past crimes on the part of anyone, but to understand that special interests, including the State, manipulate the historical record to further their own interests. The manipulation of historical icons has gotten us into very deep trouble. George Bush's campaign against the "Axis of Evil" is only one recent example.

We have a choice. We can exploit what has become a rather cheap array of historical icons to judge the actions of others, or we can put our trust in a free exchange of ideas to reach an understanding of the historical situation in which we find ourselves.

History should be as accurate and as fair as humans can make it. At the same time, if there is one lesson in particular to be learned from the horrors of World War II, it is that our sympathies should be with the poor and the oppressed, and that we should struggle against censorship and oppression – realizing that censorship is itself oppression. In this we think that Adbusters got it right, and that the Canadian Jewish Committee got it very wrong.

Bradley Smith
Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust

Wednesday, December 8, 2010

An Epistle to the Iranians

NOTE: This letter was copied to: Iranian embassies in Ottawa and Dublin, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and the Institute for Political and International Studies

Bradley R. Smith
PO Box 439016
San Ysidro, CA 92143

08 December 2010

The Honorable Mohammad Khazaee,
Permanent Representative of the Mission of
The Islamic Republic of Iran to the United Nations
622 Third Ave.
New York, NY 10017
Tel: (212) 687-2020 / Fax: (212) 867-7086

As you are aware, on November 7 to 9 some 250 politicians and experts from 53 countries gathered in Ottawa for the 2010 Conference on Combating Antisemitism. Sponsored by the government of Canada and organized by the Inter-Parliamentary Coalition to Combat Anti-Semitism (ICCA), the conference was billed as the world’s largest gathering of delegates dedicated to eradicating "the age-old hatred."

The keynote speaker was Elie Wiesel. Wiesel pleaded that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad be arrested and charged with incitement for crimes against humanity. He argued that laws should be adopted in their respective parliaments declaring anti-Semitism a hate crime punishable by imprisonment, as well as laws declaring suicide bombing to be a crime against humanity.

Wiesel told the parliamentarians: "We need you to tell us by your actions and your behavior that my fear is unfounded and that our message [that of the survivor 'eyewitnesses'] has not gone unheeded."

Currently Iran is the target of a massive propaganda campaign in Ottawa, in Dublin, in New York. One goal appears to be to promote the destruction of the Iranian military and the Iranian economy. A primary tool used to morally legitimate these goals is the UN Holocaust Outreach Program. The original Program was created at the request of the United Nations General Assembly in its resolution 60/7, adopted on 1 November 2005.

Originally, the Program may have had a laudable purpose, but it has been twisted into a program to attack Islam, to attack Iran, and to promote the censorship, blacklisting and jailing of Holocaust revisionist scholars.

The plan is as simple as it is devious. Organize a conference on the politically popular topic of fighting anti-Semitism and Hate. Invite governmental officials to speak. Have the press ready to write a panegyric. Smear Islam. Agitate for aggressive measures against Iran. Promote censorship.

One example of all this is the Holocaust Education Trust of Ireland International "Conference on Antisemitism and Holocaust Denial" held in Dublin this November. It would have been a propaganda coup, except for Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust. Working with a very small staff of volunteers we did much to call attention to this showcase of propaganda.

The fundamental hypocrisy of holding a conference on Iran without a representative of Iran being invited to speak is breathtaking. Holding a conference on Holocaust “Denial” without a Holocaust revisionist being invited to speak, or even being allowed to attend as an audience member, is disgusting. The hypocrisy of publicly attacking Islam without allowing an Islamic voice to be heard is unconscionable. The question of an honest and open debate on Iran, Revisionism, and Islam is not what the organizers at HETI wanted, no matter that the Conference was sponsored by the United Nations itself.

I am the founder of Committee for Open Debate of the Holocaust. I spoke at the 2006 Tehran Conference to Review the Global Vision of the Holocaust. I asked permission to attend the HETI conference, to perhaps deliver a short paper comparing the Iranian and the Israeli attitudes toward the matter of intellectual freedom and a free exchange of ideas regarding the Holocaust question.

Unfortunately, the Conference organizers did not want to associate itself with any question that might possibly place Iran in a better light than Israel on the Holocaust question.

CODOH is reaching out to you on this important issue. We encourage a free exchange of ideas throughout the UN, not the suppression of such an exchange as occurred at the HETI Conference. We need your help to turn the United Nations Holocaust Outreach Program around, to make it a program that is dedicated to reaching out to all, not to those beholden only to special interests.

We encourage you to help now! Each day that hateful propaganda, such as that which was produced at the HETI Conference, is not responded to, the possibility increases that bombs will soon begin to fall on Iranian women and children And finally, it is damaging to the UN itself to be associated with, much less subsidize, this level of dishonest special pleading.

For the sake of peace in the Middle East, and to honor and fulfill the authentic intent of Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Rights --

Contact us.

Bradley Smith, Founder
Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust
PO Box 439016
San Ysidro, CA 92143

Telephone: 209 682 5327

Full text of my presentation at the 2006 Tehran Conference to Review the Global Vision of the Holocaust see:

Thursday, December 2, 2010

Joe Lieberman Channels Dov Hikind

Maybe the tendency to suppress information runs in "families."

Senator Joe Lieberman (?-Conn.) has proudly pressured to stop hosting a Web site of Wikileaks, now that Wikileaks has outed some 250,000 previously secret cables from and to the United States diplomatic apparatus.

Dov Hikind, Democrat New York State Assemblyman from Borough Park, Brooklyn has sought global notoriety in a number of ways, on this site most-notably for arranging to deny author and historian David Irving the means of accepting payments by credit card or PayPal last year.

I predict a joining of the evil forces of abuses of office displayed by the senator from Connecticut and the assemblyman from Borough Park. It is, of course, still possible to visit the Web site of Wikileaks, to read the diplomatic cables that Lieberman got Amazon to stop hosting, and to donate to Wikileaks by PayPal and an assortment of other on-line facilities (and I just did so, under my real name). For that matter, it's possible to do all this with David Irving, I'm glad to report.

Maybe Dov will show Joe how to thwart voluntary donations to Wikileaks, too. Maybe Joe will show Dov how to get Web sites that displease him de-hosted.

Unfortunately certain kinds of people are better than others at working together than the rest of us. It's why they're strong, and why we're weak.

Letter to the Irish Independent re the Dublin Holocaust Denial Conference

NOTE: This letter was copied to the Irish print and Online press.

The Irish Independent
Independent House
27 - 32 Talbot Street
Dublin 1. Ireland

Telephone: +353 (0)1 705 5333

Subject: Conference on Holocaust Denial

For Publication

01 December 2010

Hello from California-

I am writing in response to Ms. Hilary White's article Specter of Nazi death Camps Casts a Long Shadow published Sunday November 28 2010 in The Independent, treating with the Conference on Anti-Semitism and Holocaust Denial held at Trinity College. I am a Revisionist and asked to attend the conference. Unfortunately I, along with several other Revisionists, was denied permission to even attend to listen to the speakers at this Conference. Expressing Revisionist views is a felony in many countries and I wanted to learn more about why my views are treated as a new blasphemy punishable by up to 5 years in jail.

I would like to comment on Ms. White's statement that, "The conference 'Antisemitism and Holocaust Denial: New Perspectives' aimed to get minds moving through reasoned discourse."

Is Ms. White aware that Deniers were banned from this Conference on Denial and that several Conference speakers have themselves supported and even advocated criminalization of Denial as a thought crime? Would Ms. White argue that these are reasonable or even sane methods to get minds moving through a reasoned discourse?

Ms. White, conflating anti-Semitism with Holocaust denial, as does the Conference itself, writes that Holocaust denial is a "contaminant." Contaminant?

I beg Ms. White's pardon, but that doesn't sound like a desire for reasoned discourse to me. Holocaust revisionism is not about Israel or anti-Semitism. Revisionism is a process; one of reviewing the received history of the Holocaust in the routine way that all other historical issues are reviewed. George Santayana wrote -- History is always written wrong, and so always needs to be rewritten.

This is particularly true in times of war. Revisionists point out that Truth is oftentimes the first causality of war. For anyone who follows the history of the Holocaust it is plain that this history is being revised even as deniers are being imprisoned. Further scholarship and research on the Holocaust should be encouraged, not discouraged and repressed by taboo and the threat of imprisonment.

There were important questions to be discussed at this Conference relating to history, free speech, minority access to public forums, and peaceful relations with Iranian and other Islamic peoples. Unfortunately, it looks like the Conference deliberately missed an opportunity to get minds moving with new ideas or an honest discussion either one.

Sincerely yours,

David Merlin

Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust

For a Denier Blog on this subject-

Monday, November 22, 2010

Letter to Kimberly Mann, Editor, United Nations Outreach, New York

Kimberly Mann, Editor
United Nations Outreach
Department of Public Information • News and Media Division •
New York

Tel: 212 963 6835

22 November 2010

Hello Ms. Mann-

I am writing to you because I asked to attend the Conference in Dublin on "Denial" and was refused admission. Since I am a Revisionist, I wanted to hear what was being said about people like me. I understand that other Revisionists were refused attendance as well.

First I would like to protest the exclusion of decent, serious men and women from the Conference because of their position with regard to one historical question.

Secondly, I would like to comment on the statements of three politicians who addressed the Conference. From what I have heard second hand, it seems that much unpleasant and inaccurate misinformation was spread about Revisionists, Iranians, and Islam.

Minister for Foreign Affairs Micheál Martin said, "Denial of the Holocaust is a reprehensible effort to belittle the brave survivors of the brutal Nazi regime” I don't want to belittle anyone. Revisionists have demonstrated that much of the history of World War II that we are taught today was originally influenced by Soviet, British and American wartime propaganda which exaggerated and exploited real tragedies for self-serving propaganda purposes. This concerns not just Jews but Slavs, Roma, Jehovah’s Witnesses and, in some versions, Gays.

What belittles survivors is the propagandistic exploitation of their tragedies for self-gain. What would honor them would be the accurate and honest history of what they experienced. Revisionism is dedicated to that honorable work.

Minister of State for Equality and Human Rights, Mary White, is quoted as saying: “It is said that the measure of any democratic society can be seen through the way in which we treat our minority groups.” Yes, like not banning them from public conferences, or censoring their books, or imprisoning them for thought crimes.

Maybe Ms. White was unaware that "Deniers" were banned from this Conference on Denial
or that her fellow Conference speakers have advocated banning a free exchange of ideas, effectively burning books, and jailing scholars.

So I also suggest that Minister White add a few words to what she has already said about free speech. Free Speech is the cornerstone of other human rights. Is it not?

Finally, Under-Secretary-General Kiyo Akasaka, sent a message to the Conference stating,"Holocaust denial is anti-Semitism."

That is incorrect. Revisionism is a process; one of reviewing the tales that pass as "History" and correcting errors. George Santayana wrote that "History is always written wrong, and so always needs to be rewritten." This is particularly true in times of war. There is a Revisionist saying that Truth is the first causality of War. With all due respect, one wonders if Mr. Akasaka is suggesting that we are not allowed to review history.

He appears to be unaware of the profound changes in the orthodox history of the Holocaust that have taken place the last few years. Further scholarship and research should be encouraged, not discouraged and repressed by law and taboo.

There were important questions to be discussed at the Conference relating to history, free speech, minority access to public forums, and peaceful relations with Iran and Arab nations and peoples. All were missed, or replaced with biased platitudes. That was an unfortunate waste.

I hope that the next United Nations conference will not ban individuals who do not conform to whatever rigid historical and political orthodoxies, and that a wider, more representative group of speakers will be allowed to participate.

Thank you for your consideration of these questions.

David Merlin,

Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust
PO Box 439016
San Ysidro, CA 92143

Telephone: 209 682 5327

Saturday, November 20, 2010

Letter sent to Irish press following the HETI conference on "Anti-Semitism and Holocaust Denial"

Bradley R Smith
PO Box 439016
San Ysidro CA 92143

Telephone: 209 682 5327

For Publication

19 November 2010


The Holocaust Education Trust of Ireland has held what was supposedly a public conference on "Anti-Semitism and Holocaust Denial" on November 18th and 19th at Trinity College, Dublin. Not only did the organizers not invite any “Deniers” to participate in the conference on “Denial,” but they effectively banned Revisionists from attending the Conference. This from an assortment of individuals who claim to advocate “tolerance.”

This Conference appears to have been what other such get-togethers have proven to be, platforms for advocating the blacklisting and censorship of Revisionists. Revisionist views are consistently distorted and misrepresented in objectionable ways, but not those of Revisionists alone. Arabs, Islam, and Iranians are all sermonized about without a single representative of any of those groups being invited to speak.

To understand the tenor of this “Conference,” consider a couple of the speakers:

Mark Weitzman of the Simon Wiesenthal Center recently testified that “In Holland, the home of Anne Frank, a ceremony commemorating the Second World War was disrupted by students who chanted “Hamas, Hamas, Jews to the gas” . Weitzman cannot demonstrate that this charge is true. The Anne Frank House denies that it is true.

Professor Meir Litvak, famous for advocating an attack on Iraq in 2003 is quoted: "Litvak said a short war with and the quick removal of Saddam Hussein could greatly improve the peace process.” . There have been some 1,400,000 Iraqi war dead since the beginning of Litvak’s “short war and peace process.” Is Litvak going to advise us about a “short war” with Iran?

There were interesting and important topics to be discussed at this Conference, but an honest discussion of those topics was not invited, and one was not wanted, as the exclusion of Revisionist attendees on principle is a forthright example. This Conference appears to have been little more than a sacred Dog and Pony Show being carried out to demonize others, with Revisionism treated as a new blasphemy.

The organizers sought governmental involvement and scheduled the Minister for Foreign Affairs Micheál Martin T.D., to speak. If the Minister intended to act in good faith and in support of the ostensibly laudable purposes of the Conference, why would he cooperate with the banning of a free exchange of ideas on a historical question, rather than cooperate with those who support intellectual freedom on such matters?

Important issues were at stake at this International Conference on Anti-Semitism and Holocaust Denial. Please, we all need to speak out to the Irish government to promote peace and a truthful, multi-sided discussion of these historical and political questions.


Monday, November 15, 2010

OSI Is Dead! Long Live OSI!

Thirty-four years after the end of World War II, in 1979, the Office of Special Investigations was created in the Justice Department of the United States to find war criminals from countries that had lost wars against the United States, who had moved to the United States and established themselves there.

This article on a DOJ report on war criminals and the effort to locate, try, de-naturalize, and deport people who could be accused of being such a person mentions one of OSI's many failures, that of the prosecution of John Demjanjuk, although the reporter leaves it unstated whether that failure was a failure to convict Demjanjuk or rather having prosecuted him in the first place.

One of the many interesting items in the article is the mention that last March, OSI was folded into the new Human Rights and Special Prosecutions Section after 31 years of scandal-ridden existence higher up in DOJ's vast organization chart. The article contains a link to DOJ's effusively self-congratulatory announcement of this change.

Another link in the article goes to DOJ's own report, which appears (in its whole, unredacted form) to have been purloined somehow by the New York Times. It contains many revelations for those interested in the United States's post-war dealings with the racial policies and war measures of Nazi Germany in World War II.

Saturday, November 13, 2010

It's Not Just (about the) Holocaust

A Viennese woman with years of residence in the Middle East and extensive knowledge of the Koran faces charges of "hate speech" for conducting seminars on Islam.

The Austrian law under which Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff will be tried on November 23 is presumably the same as that under which David Irving was convicted and imprisoned in Austria a few years ago.

During his incarceration in Austria's jails, Irving reported finding his own works in a prison library. Perhaps Ms Sabaditsch-Wolff will have a turn in the same library after Austrian justice has had its way with her. If so, it will be yet another defeat for free speech and thought.

Thursday, November 11, 2010

Robert J. van Pelt -- Foolish is as Foolish does?

NOTE: Following is a letter addressed to persons assoicated with the HETI International Conference on Anti-Semitism and Holocaust Denial to take place in Dublin on 18 and 19 November.

CONTACT: Bradley R Smith

Desk: 209 682 5327

09 November 2010

Prof. Robert J. van Pelt -- Foolish is as Foolish does?

by Bradley R. Smith

In 1999 Prof. van Pelt wrote an expert report on behalf of Deborah Lipstadt’s defense during the libel trial which British historian David Irving initiated. Van Pelt subsequently testified during that trial as an expert witness, and some two years later he published a revised and expanded version of his expert report as a book: The Case for Auschwitz. All his major arguments follow perfunctorily the earlier publications by French researcher Jean-Claude Pressac – including all of Pressac’s errors, but without once referencing Pressac.

By education and profession, Prof. van Pelt is neither a technician nor an engineer. How he was allowed to pose as an expert in cremation technology and other engineering questions during the above-mentioned London trial is a mystery, or should be. Even though blissfully ignorant of these matters himself, he criticized Fred Leuchter for that limitation (p. 383).

Although cremation technology is one of the core issues of the Auschwitz problem, van Pelt quotes only one source about that issue (on his page 544)—but not to prove anything about the capacity of the Auschwitz, crematories! He uses that one source to distort the relevant issue. In short, to demonstrate that multiple corpses could be cremated in the Auschwitz ovens in 1943, van Pelt refers to a news report about multiple cremations in the 1990s! Who would try to claim that a two-liter diesel engine of 1943 could have 100 HP because such an engine could be found in 1994?

How foolish van Pelt really is becomes clear when reading the following passage of the London court transcript. Urged to explain why crematories usually need about 35 kg of coke per corpse, but in Auschwitz they are said to have needed only 3.5 kg, the following exchange ensued (9th day, Jan. 25, 2000, pp. 150f.):

Van Pelt: […] In Auschwitz, actually, the ovens – the difference between the ovens is that one element which is used in normal ovens is with a heat kind of regenerator in Auschwitz was replaced by compressed air which was blown into the oven. Now…

Irving: Would this account for the drop of normal coke usage from 35 kilograms in the crematorium Gusen concentration camp per body to 3.5 in Auschwitz, in your opinion?

Van Pelt: Yes […].”

To begin with, the “regenerator” van Pelt refers to is actually known as a recuperator. Its purpose is to recuperate the heat contained in the cremation exhaust gases. Dropping the recuperator, as was indeed done for the cheap Auschwitz ovens, inevitably must have led to an increase—not a decrease--in fuel consumption, since the heat losses were much bigger. The “compressed air” was a blower which was standard for the ovens at that time, although it was actually omitted in two of the four Auschwitz crematories. This blower fanned cold air into the oven, but had no effect on the coke consumption per cremated corpse.

It is a riddle how van Pelt came up with this technical nonsense. It is clear, however, why he came up with it. He had to explain the technically absurd claims by the witnesses he relies on.

Van Pelt does not criticize witness testimonies in the light of technical possibilities.

Van Pelt ignores the massive amount of technical literature available on the topic.

Van Pelt also ignores facts and opinions refuting his claims. He does not quote a single paper written by the foremost expert on the Auschwitz crematories, Carlo Mattogno.

Van Pelt invents things without any factual basis.

Finally, van Pelt distorts facts in order to support the claims of his witnesses.

In spite of all this, van Pelt is to speak at the HETI International Conference on Anti-Semitism and Holocaust Denial. Why?


Carlo Mattogno, Auschwitz: The Case for Sanity. A Historical and Technical Study of Jean-Claude Pressac’s “Criminal Traces” and Robert Jan van Pelt’s “Convergence of Evidence,”

See especially chapter 12.: “Van Pelt and the Crematorium Ovens of Auschwitz “, vol. 2, starting at p. 441. And see in particular sub-chapter 12.6., “Multiple Cremations,” pp. 459-468.

FOR YOUR REFERENCE, this book is available as a FREE PDF download at Your comments are invited.

Bradley R. Smith
PO Box 439016
San Ysidro CA 92143
Desk: 209 682 5327

Wednesday, November 10, 2010

Good News! Over $4.2 Billion Not Shown to Have Been Collected by Frauds.

Reports are today everywhere that the $42.5 Million lost to fraudsters is less than 1% of the amounts paid out from only two (of how many?) funds that channel the taxes collected from innocent Germans and Austrians to people who say they were threatened by alleged extermination policies of the Nazis over sixty years ago in Europe.

There's nothing wrong with the Reparations Giveaway policy that isn't wrong with any and every other government policy that gives to "victims" the fruits of the effort and ingenuity of the productive among us who are, for the most part, entirely innocent of whatever crimes are alleged to have been committed against . . . people whom the "victims" are skilled at appearing to be among.

The Holocaust "happened." Who "did" it, and why, and how, is a matter some of us insist upon discussing, at peril to our careers and reputations. Now, as for who pays for it, and who gets paid, that's yet another matter, posing still-greater threats to the existence and livelihood of those who would dare to comment on such matters.

UCLA Students -- ADL -- Daily Bruin

09 November 2010

To Students at UCLA

Ladies and Gentlemen:

The Jewish Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith has gloated publicly over the fact that it was able to pressure the staff of The Daily Bruin into removing an ad (a text link) I was running in the Online edition of the paper to introduce you to my book Confessions of a Holocaust Revisionist. The book is free. The entire text is there online for you to read.

With a single letter the ADL was able to convince the staff of The Daily Bruin that it should censor the ad, which was paid for, but which they censored anyway. No notice. No explanation. Nothing. Not to me, and not to you.

With a single letter the ADL was able to convince the staff of The Daily Bruin that my Confessions are so dangerous that every attempt is to be made to keep you in the dark about what I write. They have not told you why the book is so dangerous. Dangerous to whom? Dangerous to the Holocaust Marketing Industry perhaps?

You might wonder -- what is there in this simple little book that places UCLA students in so much danger that even the smallest ad (in this case five words) must be, has to be, will be, censored? What do you think the Bruin staff was counseled to do by its faculty advisors? And why?

Here is the You Tube link where I read Chapter One from Confessions.

Here is the link to the full manuscript:

Tell me what you think. Review the chapter if you wish. Review the book.

If you like, I’ll drive up to UCLA some afternoon and talk it over with you. The book, and the censorship of the book. Now there’s an idea. Eh?

Saturday, November 6, 2010

"Hamas, Hamas, Jews to the gas"

David Merlin writes:

One of the lectures to be given at the HETI Conference in Dublin is “Antisemitism, Catholic Traditionalists and the Vatican” by Mark Weitzman, Simon Wiesenthal Center, New York. I think I can guess what he is going to say about those matters, but let’s have a look at what Weitzman testified to the US Commission on Security:

“In Holland, the home of Anne Frank, a ceremony commemorating the Second World War was disrupted by students who chanted ‘Hamas, Hamas, Jews to the gas.’”

Do you believe Weitzman's tale? I don't. What does come to mind are the words "Ugly hate propaganda invented about Arabs/leftist protesters." Search the web. While there is at least one report of these words being used in a street demonstration reported on a Zionist Blog, I will apologize to Dr. Weitzman if you can find this anti-Arab hate propaganda having been reported taking place at the Anne Frank House.

I am waiting for a response on this matter from the Anne Frank House itself. The AF House has not gotten back to me. And it is unclear when Weitzman's testimony was given.

I would guess that the language including "a ceremony commemorating the Second World War" and “at the Anne Frank House" were just nice touches.

What is so brazen in this matter is that:

1. Weitzman gave the testimony as "Director - Task Force Against Hate"
2. to the US Commission on Security.

I believe that this is about the most hateful anti-Arab propaganda on the internet I have seen. I wonder if Weitzman has any evidence for the truth of the tale? And HETI is going to exclude other opinions -- like yours? What is even more amazing is that they have gotten the Foreign Affairs Minister to speak at the same venue.

Friday, November 5, 2010

Deceit in Dublin: Letter to the Holocaust Educational Trust of Ireland

November 2, 2010
posted by Gordon Duff

Holocaust Educational Trust of Ireland
Clifton House,
Lower Fitzwilliam Street
Dublin 2, Ireland.

I have just read media reports that an Australian Doctor Fredrick has been denied entry to the International Conference on Antisemitism and Holocaust Denial. This organisation has about as much credibility as the Irish banking sector and that is zilch.

After seventy years, The Holocaust Industry is really scraping the barrel of credibility, is this to divert attention from the use of phosphorus bombs on women and childred and the ethnic cleansing of Palestine and the conditions in GAZAWITZ; the world’s biggest concentration camp?

Will the discussion be centred on the only Gas Chamber in existence which, the Simon Wiesenthal Institute admits, was built ‘after the war’!

Sunday, October 31, 2010

A Letter to the Iranian Ambassador to Ireland

Embassy of Iran, Ireland
72 Mount Merrion Ave.,
Blackrock Co.
Dublin, Ireland

Phone: +353-1-2885881

30 October 2010

Esteemed Ambassador;

On November 18th and 19th the "International Conference on Anti-Semitism and Holocaust Denial" will be held in Dublin, organized by the Holocaust Educational Trust of Ireland.

One of the key speakers at the Conference will be Prof Meir Litvak, Center for Iranian Studies, Tel Aviv University. His speech is titled, "Antisemitism in Iran and Holocaust denial." Litvak is known for, among other things, his 2003 claim that, "a short war with and the quick removal of Saddam Hussein could greatly improve the peace process."

I am a Revisionist and Founder of Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust (CODOH). I spoke at the 2006 Iranian “International Conference to Review the Global Vision of the Holocaust” where I focused on the “Irrational Vocabulary of the American Professorial Class with Regard to the Holocaust Question.”

I have asked permission to attend the HETI Conference and perhaps deliver a short paper on comparing the Iranian and the Israeli attitudes toward the matter of intellectual freedom and a free exchange of ideas regarding the Holocaust question. Unfortunately, the Conference organizers do not want to associate itself with any question that might possibly place Iran in a better light than Israel on this specific issue.

I would hope to encourage the Iranian Mission to consider taking an interest in this matter, which certainly will focus a light on Iran that will not be focused on Israel or any of the dozen European nations which presently prosecute and imprison men and women for saying what I said openly and freely in Tehran four years ago.

My request to attend the HETI Conference can be seen at:
The text of the talk I gave at Tehran is here:

Respectfully yours,

Bradley Smith, Founder
Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust (CODOH)
PO Box 439016
San Ysidro, California
Telephone: 209 682 5327

Registration for International Conference on Antisemitism and Holocaust Denial is refused to Dr. Fredrick Toben

Sent: Saturday, 30 October 2010 1:45 AM
Subject: International Conference on Antisemitism and Holocaust Denial

Dear Dr Toben,
We are unable to accept your registration and we are returning your cheque.
Yours sincerely,

Lynn Jackson
Chief Executive
Holocaust Education Trust Ireland
Clifton House
Lower Fitzwilliam Street, Dublin 2
Tel: +353 1 6690593


From: "Fredrick Toben"
Date: 31 October 2010 06:34:30 GMT
To: "'HET Ireland'"
Cc: "Adelaide Institute"

Dear Chief Executive Lynn Jackson:

Please, I pray, advise me:

1. Why am I not permitted to attend your most interesting Holocaust conference in Dublin this month?

2. I see the conference theme emphasizes Denialism. Is it safe to presume there will also be academic papers presented that explore truth-content of what passes as Holocaust-Shoah narrative?

3. Will the conference also expose the many fanciful stories told by survivors, for example the notorious Herman Rosenblat story featured on the Oprah Winfrey Show? - see item below.

4. In view of the conference’s ‘antisemitic’ emphasis, will there also be a focus on the Talmud-generated hatred of things not Jewish? For example, will you focus on Jewish supremacism as recently expressed by Chief Rabbi Ovadia Josef of Jerusalem: ‘Gentiles exist only to serve Jews’?

5. I am interested in Professor Meir Litvak, Center for Iranian Studies, Tel Aviv University, who will speak on ‘Antisemitism in Iran and Holocaust denial’. Will there be scholars from Iran attending this International conference?

6. Of particular interest for me is Prof Robert Wistrich’s Holocaust denial and inversion’ because I have observed how Holocaust inversion has totally gripped the Holocaust-Shoah narrative, which makes it another form of nihilism. This would explain why in a number of countries individuals, who refuse to believe in its narrative, are labeled ‘deniers’, ‘haters’,‘antisemites’, ‘racists’, ‘neo-Nazis’, ‘xenophobes’, even ‘terrorists’ – and often imprisoned. It seems to me that an open discussion is thus feared by those who believe in the Holocaust- Shoah narrative on account of their personal Holocaust inversion problem, which then becomes a pathological lethal obsession fuelled by a self-serving victim mentality that cannot tolerate anyone asking questions. Hence the need to criminalize those individuals who refuse to adopt the Holocaust inversion mindset. Perhaps you can pass on my thoughts to Professor Wistrich for comment.

7. While I still have your attention, could you please ask Professor Robert Jan van Pelt whether he still stands by the statement he and Deborah Dwork made in their 1996 book: Auschwitz: From 1270 to the Present, where at pages 363-64 they state that Auschwitz I-Stammlager never had a homicidal gas chamber, and the one that is shown to visitors is merely a symbolic representation of the homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz II-Birkenau? Although I am saddened by the fact that I am not permitted to attend I wish you and your conference all the best.

Dr Fredrick Töben
Adelaide, Australia

Herman Rosenblat story featured on the Oprah Winfrey Show

Saturday, October 30, 2010

ADL Partners with CODOH?

Bradley R. Smith
Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust (CODOH)
Desk: 209 682 5327


29 October 2010

We never expected—who would have thought it?—that Abraham Foxman and the ADL would agree to partner with CODOH to demonstrate publicly how ADL is committed to the suppression and censorship of language which addresses issues that ADL does not want to be addressed?

When you read the ADL “Alert” below, you will be amazed. Who would ever have thought that CODOH and ADL could have collaborated in such a productive way?


College Newspaper Website Removes Holocaust Denial Ad
In Response to ADL Alert

Date: October 26, 2010

ADL asked a local college newspaper to remove an ad surreptitiously placed by Holocaust Denier Bradley Smith.

In a letter to the editor-in-chief, ADL explained that Holocaust denial is an anti-Semitic conspiracy theory that alleges that Jews invented a myth that six million Jews were killed by Nazis during World War II. The letter stated that while the campus newspaper has the right to publish any advertisement it wishes, it is not obligated to accept every ad it receives.

The editor-in-chief responded that the ad would be removed immediately and that the newspaper will do everything possible to prevent this type of ad from appearing in the future.
Fighting Holocaust Denial in Campus Newspaper Advertisements: A Manual for Action is provided to Hillels, student groups and campus newspapers.


For the record: this ADL Alert hides the name of the “college” in which our ad was running—University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA). ADL does not reveal the text of the ad. It reads in full: “Confessions of a Holocaust Revisionist.” ADL uses the word “surreptitiously” falsely. The ad was run with a signed contract and payment in full ($100).

There is not a word in this ADL Alert that addresses the text of Confessions itself. And one cannot understand from the ADL alert that the “Manual for Action” provided to Hillels, student groups and campus newspapers is obsessed with our Campus Campaign and dedicated to the mischaracterization, suppression, and censorship of revisionist arguments about one historical question.

Bradley R. Smith
PO Box 439016
San Ysidro CA 92143

Desk: 209 682 5327

Wednesday, October 27, 2010

News from the Jewish Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith

College Newspaper Website Removes Holocaust Denial Ad in Response to ADL Alert

Date: October 26, 2010

ADL asked a local college newspaper to removed an ad surreptitiously placed by Holocaust Denier Bradley Smith.

In a letter to the editor-in-chief, ADL explained that Holocaust denial is an anti-Semitic conspiracy theory that alleges that Jews invented a myth that six million Jews were killed by Nazis during World War II. The letter stated that while the campus newspaper has the right to publish any advertisement it wishes, it is not obligated to accept every ad it receives.

The editor-in-chief responded that the ad would be removed immediately and that the newspaper will do everything possible to prevent this type of ad from appearing in the future.

Fighting Holocaust Denial in Campus Newspaper Advertisements: A Manual for Action is provided to Hillels, student groups and campus newspapers.

Monday, October 25, 2010

Finally, a Chance to Thank Dov Hikind

New York State Assemblyman Dov Hikind made his appearance on this blog a bit less than a year ago when he spearheaded a successful effort to get American Express, MasterCard, Visa, and Paypal to deny their services to historian and author David Irving.

These last 28 years, Hikind has been a creature of the Zionist-oriented Brooklyn political machine such that he has not faced opposition in his re-election campaigns.

In the election 8 days from now, that changes. Brian Doherty, a retired NYC policeman, is opposing Hikind as the Republican nominee for the seat Hikind has warmed for far too long.

Donating to Doherty's worthy campaign is easy to do via Paypal and other means denied Irving by Hikind at Doherty's Web site I know - I just did it with some of the money I wanted to spend with our good friend David Irving.

There's still plenty of room, but little time, for the donations of others who wish to seize this opportunity to "thank" Dov Hikind for his many "contributions" to the spread of truth regarding the Holocaust.

Wednesday, October 13, 2010

Smith proposes that he be invited to participate in Holocaust Conference at Trinity College, Dublin

Ruairi Quinn TD, Chairperson
Holocaust Educational Trust of Ireland,
Clifton House, Lower Fitzwilliam Street, Dublin 2, Ireland.
Telephone: + 353-1-669 0593

14 October 2010

Dr. Quinn:

Greetings from California:

I would like to attend and participate in the International Conference on Anti-Semitism and Holocaust Denial, sponsored by HETI, to take place at Trinity College on November 18th and 19th. I am a Revisionist and Founder of Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust (CODOH). We are particularly concerned with issues of intellectual freedom and free speech.

When I read the Conference Program and the proposed speakers on the topic of “Denial” it appears, if past comments are a reasonable guide, that much misinformation about Revisionists and revisionist arguments will be presented at the Conference. Some of those who will speak have actually condoned and/or supported the imprisonment of anyone who expresses doubt in public about particular aspects of the orthodox history of the Holocaust. Because what is termed “Denial” is a charge that can lead to up to twenty years in prison, and because writers like myself are one of the subjects of this Conference, I believe it would be appropriate, and useful, that those who attend actually hear from a “Denier.”

I was a speaker at the 2006 Iranian International Conference to Review the Global Vision of the Holocaust and could provide some insight relative to Professor Litvak’s paper on Antisemitism in Iran and Holocaust Denial. Perhaps I could deliver a short paper in a manner that does not distract from your main program, or participate in a discussion panel.

Although it is standard practice to defame Revisionists as “anti-Semites who claim the Holocaust is just Jewish propaganda,” that is not what we at CODOH argue. Briefly, we believe that much of the history that we are taught today has been influenced by Soviet, British and American wartime propaganda which exaggerated and exploited real tragedies for propaganda purposes. This concerns not just Jews but Slavs, Roma, Jehovah’s Witnesses and, in some versions, Gays. It can be argued that there is considerable research that supports this point of view. It is inconceivable to me that I, or anyone, should be threatened with prison for stating in public that I doubt what I doubt.

The one-sided presentation of anti-Revisionist Conferences like this one have lead to Draconian laws against “Denial” that go against fundamental ideals of the university in the West. I would like to speak in support of the necessity, in a free society, of a free exchange of ideas in an environment of good will from the perspective of a Holocaust “Denier.”

Thank you for your consideration of this inquiry. I await your response.


Bradley R. Smith, Founder
Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust (CODOH)
PO Box 439016
San Ysidro, California
Telephone: 209 682 5327
Cell: 619 203 3151

Saturday, October 9, 2010

Eric Hunt on Spielbergs "The Last Days."

Eric Hunt writes that he is currently creating a documentary debunking Steven Spielberg's Oscar winning Hoax, The Last Days.

He notes that in 1998 when Steven Spielberg Released his documentary "The Last Days" it went on to win an Academy Award in 1999. Recently Holocaust Revisionists have caused some of the world's top "Holocaust Scholars" (PHDs) to admit that Spielberg's Film "The Last Days" is in large parts completely fictional. The primary focus has been on the star survivor, Irene Weisberg Zisblatt, who clims in this film to have swallowed and defecated four diamonds during the entire year and a half she was held by the Germans.

In addition, Hunt writes, “two survivors (out of five) featured in The Last Days claim to have escaped from inside a gas chamber (neither of their miraculous escapes are mentioned in the film, but apparently was filmed, and is included in the hardcover companion book).

“This site will comprehensively document the now definitively proven to be fictional survivor testimony featured in this fraudulent film.”

UC San Diego -- why?

Still haven’t been able to send the CODOH list the You Tube video I did addressing folk at UC San Diego about why The Guardian there was pressured into refusing to run my ad for Confessions of a Holocaust Revisionist. Looks like Topica is doing maintenance. However, the video is on You Tube if you want to take a look at it.

Trinity College Dublin and the HETI

On 18-19 November 2010 Trinity College, Dublin, will host an important conference sponsored by The Task Force for International Cooperation on Holocaust Education, Remembrance, and Research (HETI). HETI describes itself, accurately, as a conglomerate of representatives of government, governmental and non-governmental organizations. Its purpose: to place political and social leaders' support behind the need for Holocaust education, remembrance, and research both nationally and internationally.

This conference will address the core issues of antisemitism and Holocaust denial, but will also include some academic or research challenges on the themes of denial in general, the psychology of denial and also myth. The programme for the conference demonstrates the interdisciplinary nature of the conference: Antisemitism, Holocaust denial, History, Philosophy, Legal and Ethical Dimensions.

But especially Holocaust denial. Below are the titles of some of the papers to be delivered at the two-day conference. These folk are truly interested in what we are doing.

• Holocaust denial and inversion
• Antisemitism in Iran and Holocaust denial
• Different forms of denial, old and new forms of hatred of the Jews
• International Conference on Antisemitism and Holocaust Denial
• Holocaust denial and freedom of speech
• Stealing the Holocaust from the Jews? – The Holocaust as a metaphor in public discourse
• Soft denial in different political and social areas on the web
• Holocaust scholarship in the wake of Holocaust denial
• Contemporary forms of denial

It would appear only reasonable that there would be one revisionist invited to say a few words, ask a few questions, at an event that is obsessed with what revisionists do. Is such a thing on the table? Not that I know of.

Friday, October 8, 2010

UC San Diego, UC Los Angeles, and the allure of womens corsets

We were to upload the new UC San Diego video on You Tube today but when we got into the office there was no Internet and no telephone. Hernandez and I went to Telnor to find that the Mexicans had cut my internet service for lack of payment. I took a chance and paid the $234 bill using my debit card. It worked.

Back at the house I called AT&T. Service had been stopped for lack of payment. I had changed cards (lost the previous one) and had not updated my records. I wasn’t certain there was enough in the CODOH account to pay the $123. When I checked I discovered that a supporter who did not identify himself had made a wire transfer into the account for 500 euros—some $675. I was in. I paid AT&T and now we were ready to work. I later discovered that the contribution was from my favorite Dane.

I wasn’t through with getting things up and working. I called oncology at the La Jolla VA to find out if I have bone marrow cancer or not. The results of the bone marrow biopsy (autopsy) were to have been available this week, but now they won’t be ready until next week.

It’s not difficult to upload video to You Tube, but if you are sending it to several hundred or more email addresses it can take an hour, or ten hours, or overnight to get the list uploaded. Anyhow, I expect tomorrow that the video will be uploaded and distributed.

** We have a text link running as an advertisement at UC Los Angeles in The Daily Bruin. It’s a tiny thing, how could anyone object to it? There it is, nestled in among the text links advertising things that students really want:

Plus Size Corsets Lingerie
Los Angeles Personal Injury Attorney
Los Angeles DUI Attorney
CQC Outcomes
Phoenix Wrongful Death Lawyer
Debt Relief Options
Los Angeles Golf Courses
Los Angeles Criminal Defense Lawyer
Paramedic Courses
Promotional Products
Westwood Village Dining Shopping Entertainment
Free Credit Report
Confession of a Holocaust Revisionist
Online Education
Credit Card Application
Chase Credit Card
Auto Insurance Quotes
Free Credit Report
CD Rates

Is that cool, or what?

Thursday, October 7, 2010

You Tube, UC San Diego, the VA,

Today filmed my first You Tube video in close to two months. Addressed to Angela Chen, the editor of The Guardian at UC San Diego. We’ll upload it tomorrow. I feel a little awkward addressing a young lady journalist when I know perfectly well that The Guardian refused to publish the ad announcing my book, Confessions of a Holocaust Revisionist, under pressure from a lot of grown-ups in Administration, Faculty, and or the usual perps from ADL and Hillel. Maybe I’m wrong. Anyhow, tomorrow.

The new team that is moving in my direction these past few weeks has begun to work on CODOHWeb, its first efforts visible on the Contributions page, and in the fundraiser I sent out to CODOH Folk. I will need some infusion of cash presently in order to pay for ads in the campus press. If you’ve just come into an inheritance . . . .

Took care of my taxes for 2009 only yesterday. Couldn’t get around to it. Busy, busy.

And then there was the thing with the night sweats that began four weeks ago. I didn’t like them coming back as they are a common indication that the cancer is in there again. Night sweats are not all that unusual as any number of ladies will tell you, but mine were two, three, four times an hour day and night. Twenty-four hours a day. At the end of the first week I was on the other side running errands when I decided in the middle of a heavy sweat at the teller’s window in the San Ysidro Bank of America that something really was wrong and that I would drive up to La Jolla to the VA Hospital and check into emergency.

I didn’t know if they would take me. How often is sweating an emergency? But I was given a place in line and after a couple hours I was called in to be interviewed by a young Chinese doctor. He took my vitals, chatted me up a bit, looked me over and left. A nurse came in to take some blood and told me I’d be staying the night. I was not sent to oncology, but to what they called “medicine.” There they took a lot of blood, told me I might be there for ten days, and I spent a restless night. The next morning I was told there was nothing they could put their finger on and that I would be sent to oncology the next week. It was suggested in writing that I might be experiencing hypogonadism. I told the nurse it sounded like an insult. But I was given a packet of 5mg. testosterone patches and let go.

The following week, which was last week, I returned to oncology. The sweats had continued night and day. I was getting real tired of them. This time at oncology they did a lot of blood again, then performed a bone marrow biopsy and told me I would get the results this week. During the biopsy there were three uniquely painful spasms in the right buttock and leg. They do not expect to find cancer. So far they have not called. I’ll call them tomorrow. A couple times when I was telling someone I’d had the bone marrow biopsy I would use the term “autopsy” rather than biopsy. Didn’t mean to but it was a source of some happy laughter from my daughter and a couple friends.

I do not have the results from the biopsy, but the sweats have stopped. Three days now. Must be the testosterone patches. Could be a coincidence, but I think it’s the patches. I’ll have to look into the down side of using them. I was half afraid I might become a nuisance for my wife again, but so far that hasn’t happened. We’ll see.

Sunday, October 3, 2010

UC SAN DIEGO. Administration and The Guardian agree

We are informed that the editorial staff of The Guardian has decided to not run our ad promoting “Confessions of a Holocaust Revisionist.” My understanding is that the ad is refused because the content of the book is one UCSD administration does not want UCSD students exposed to, and that The Guardian staff agrees with its administration.

On 22 September I write Angela Chen, Editor in Chief of The Guardian, copying the letter to two of her editorial associates. I ask what there is in Confessions that the administration believes would be harmful to students. Is there a particular chapter, page, or passage in Confessions that is particularly outrageous? If so, which? I ask if anyone on The Guardian editorial staff has read Confessions. What does The Guardian find in Confessions that makes of it a text that would be dangerous for students to be exposed to?

I write that I do understand that The Guardian has the legal right to refuse any advertisement submitted to it. We are not speaking of legal issues here, but of cultural issues, those of a free press and a free exchange of ideas. Matters that go to the heart of The University in the West.”

That was a week ago.

Friday, October 1, 2010

Confessions of a Holocaust Revisionist -- a Further Note

** This academic year I’m going to direct the Campus Project to the attention of the student masses and “copy” to the university’s Ruling Class of academics and administrators. A small but possibly significant inversion of what I have done in the past.

This year we will not use the names of such great historical figures as Dwight D. Eisenhower and Winston Churchill and their grand books--figures and books that the Ruling Class has a vested interest in shielding from revisionist questions. This year we will recommend a small book by an all-but-unknown author, Confessions of a Holocaust Revisionist by Bradley R. Smith. Downgrading from a Churchill and an Eisenhower to a Smith, you ask? Well, yes.

“Confessions” of a Holocaust revisionist? What kind of guy would write anything like what this title suggests? A man the Ruling Class would charge has a bigoted brain? A dirty heart? A man who is willing to confess to having thoughts and feelings about the Holocaust story that are not kosher? With a simple click of her mouse the student will be able to access the full text of Confessions, chapter by chapter. She will find out for herself. And with a second click of her mouse of course, the full CODOH Website—the library, the Forum, the Founder’s page, and our new page focusing on the fraud surrounding the Elie Wiesel character.

With Confessions the student will learn that she is not alone in her fear of facing revisionist arguments about the Holocaust story, not alone in her fear of wanting to avoid the contempt of her peers and those in the Ruling Class at her university. With Confessions she will find a 50-year-old man who writes about how he, too, was afraid of discovering a forbidden truth. How he was ashamed of being seen with revisionist materials in his hand at a public event. How the only place where he was willing to look at something written about gas chambers by a “revisionist” was when he was alone, at night, walking in circles in his one-room apartment in Hollywood.

At any given university the Ruling Class will get its shorts (and panties) in a twist over finding that the student masses are being proselytized with a confession structured around simple stories, using a totally accessible language (not an academic note anywhere in it), to reveal how it is possible to question what the Ruling Class holds unquestionable, what it protects with taboo, and has been committed to publicly since the middle of the last century in the most shameful way.

How can someone like Smith get away with confessing his sins so openly, giving the impression that he believes he is doing work that should be done, work that will affect the culture, the politics, the future of Western culture? Students might like hearing about it. Their professors will not want their students hearing about it. And there you have the tension.

Thursday, September 30, 2010

“Confessions of a Holocaust Revisionist.”

** Hello again! Been under the weather, been busy, been distracted. I’m 80 years old. What can I say?

But here I am. A couple three, four things are happening. I’ll get to them one by one. If you tried to call and the telephones didn’t work, it’s because I didn’t pay the Mexican telephone bill. Telnor. If you wrote and I haven't answered, my apologies but ….

What else?

I will only note at this moment that we are submitting our new ad to student newspapers for the 2010/2011 Campus Project. It reads: “Confessions of a Holocaust Revisionist.” That’s the text. All of it. Beneath the simplicity of those few words lies a profound promotional concept. You think maybe not? We'll see.

It’s 11pm. Our house guest, Santiago, working on a table near mine, is listening to Neil Diamond. If I don’t listen too closely, Diamond is okay. Background music.

Tuesday, September 14, 2010

Chomsky condemns French Law used to justify the imprisonment of Vincent Reynouard

Rue89 12.09.2010 (France)

Under the heading "Chomsky dares to re-enter the cesspit of Holocaust denial", the online magazine reports on a open letter by the American linguist, philosopher and activist Noam Chomsky, in support of a petition to release the French engineer Vincent Reynouard who is currently in prison for denying the existence of Nazi gas chambers.

In 1979 Chomsky defended the French literary academic Robert Faurrison against the same charges, using the same argument: Holocaust deniers also have the right to freedom of opinion. Whereas the U.S. has no law against Holocaust denial, the French 'loi Gayssot', which has been in place since 1990, punishes not only genocide denial but also racist, anti-Semitic and xenophobic talk.

Chomsky writes: "I have been informed that Vincent Reynouard has been charged and imprisoned for violation of the loi Gayssot and that a petition for his release is in circulation. I know nothing about Monsieur Reynouard but I regard this law as an absolutely illegitimate in fringment of the principle of a free society, as it is been understood since the Enlightenment. As a consequence of this law the state has been granted the right to determine historical truth and to punish anyone who opposes its edicts. This is a principle that smacks of the sinister days of Stalinism and Nazism."

Friday, August 20, 2010

The Internet and Wikipedia: Their Turf

Much of what is "known" about the Holocaust is the product of the Zionist propaganda campaign that can realistically be reckoned at over a hundred years old - both as to who "knows" it, and what they "know."

The advent of the World Wide Web has radically altered the venues of information and its transmission, with Wikipedia forming a conspicuous and influential locus within those venues. In today's e-mail, Gilad Atzmon passes on an article in Britain's Guardian newspaper describing the recruitment and deployment of information guerrillas specifically trained to operate in the jungles of Wikipedia, the free, online, user-edited encyclopedia to which practically everyone who uses the Internet has occasion to refer at one time or another.

Here, as everywhere, beware Zionist saboteurs - they are well trained, well funded, and numerous, despite the deceptive (and plaintive) whining in the article about how badly they are outnumbered by their opponents. As an experienced Wikipedian in my own right, I can testify from brutal personal experience as to the pile-on that instantly occurs just as soon as anyone sets about correcting any distortion favoring Israel or the account of the Holocaust that sustains its depredations on the world.

Saturday, August 14, 2010

Greta Garbo, Julius Caesar, and Holocaust Revisionism

** Saturday afternoon, alone in the house. On the television Time Warner Classics is giving a preview of the upcoming movies that will be shown the coming week. Scene after scene taken from wonderful, now-classic movies from the 40s, 50s and 60s. Even a couple from the 30s. With all the wonderful movies that have been made, what reason is there to make more of them? Who needs more movies? If that’s true, who needs more paintings? More books?

At one place Greta Garbo is quoted: “Life would be such a wonderful thing if only we knew what to do with it.” Two things occur in the brain when I read that observation. The first is an image of the actor Walter Pidgeon sitting at a table with others in Musso Franks on Hollywood Boulevard. That was in the 60s. I grew up with Pidgeon in the films of the 40s and 50s maybe and was surprised to see him sitting there that night. Still, what the devil was the brain doing this afternoon?

The other thing was that the brain became aware that the word “more” had gotten my attention. The vastness of the history of the Chinese people. The endless conflict in the life of one man, Julius Caesar. I’d read a little in The Tweleve Caesars by Suetonius maybe twenty years ago and recently took another run at it. The Robert Graves translation. I found that after thirty or forty minutes I had become bored with Caesar’s endless politicking, struggling, betraying, threatening—the ceaseless ambition. It may have been Suetonius, but I didn’t want anymore and turned to the end of his account for the specific details Caesar’s death. A simpler drama. He was stabbed in the chest, just beneath the throat. “Twenty-three dagger thrusts went home as he stood there.” He was left where he fell until three of his household slaves carried him home in a litter, “one arm hanging over the side.”

Okay. I was finished with Suetonius. It was like reading about Democrats and Republicans infighting with swords. Boring. I was tired of the politics. It never ends, but how did these guys end up? How did they die?

Augustus died in bed at the age of 76. Tiberius died at 77, some thought by poison. Caligula was murdered at 29, his jawbone split by a sword, his genitals run through with swords. Claudius was poisoned, maybe a favorite eunuch, maybe his wife, at 64. Nero stabbed himself in the throat to evade being murdered. He died at 32 “with eyes glazed and bulging from their sockets, a sight which horrified everybody present.” Galba was murdered at poolside and decapitated by an ordinary soldier. He was 73. Otho killed himself at 37 to avoid being murdered. A dagger to his left side. Vitellius was murdered by soldiers with “the torture of the little cuts.” He was then dragged to the Tiber with a hook and thrown in it. He was 56. Vespasian died of fever and diarrhea in the arms of his attendants at 79. Titus died of fever at 42. Domitian was murdered with daggers at the age of 44.

It that was the way it was for those on top, we can only marvel at how it must have been for ordinary folk. And then, now that it's all over, what do we have?


At this moment hundreds of millions, billions, of human beings are in conflict with their wives, their husbands, their children, their neighbors. Numbers beyond the capacity of the brain to imagine. The numbers yes, I can write the numbers, but the facts embraced by the numbers, not possible. Going on year after year, century after century, tens of thousands of years. The reality of human life. Unimaginable.

How is it possible in the long run that anything is significant? Reading Suetonius I see it all playing out 2,000 years ago. Nothing has changed. Only the weapons. We are as the Romans were. As the Chinese of the Han were. We don’t even try to understand. Where is human relationship studied? What’s the name of that department at our universities? Cosmology is all the rage. Anything to confuse the issue. As if it’s out there somewhere. Go to the moon, to mars, to heaven, but don’t take the trouble to look around the neighborhood, to go next door.

I can only imagine how tiny the concept of Holocaust revisionism must be once it’s placed in its historical context. Of course we can let go of historical context if we choose. But if we do, so what?

Hikind Mandates Exterminations in Boro Park

Those of us not living in or near the Boro Park district of New York Assemblyman Dov Hikind may have been napping when word hit the street of the bedbug epidemic plaguing the population there.

The apparent concentration of outbreaks in this particular area is mystifying - one eventually is forced to fall back on improbable ideas such as that bedbugs are entering via the numerous Holocaust reparations payments Hikind's constituents are receiving (see previous post on this blog).

Anyway, in his efforts to further raise the costs of living and working in New York State, Hikind is reprising the laudable efforts of the Germans running concentration camps during World War II when they applied liberal amounts of Zyklon-B pesticide to the clothing, bedding, and quarters of inmates to control the typhus-bearing body lice that were continually being brought in by new admittees.

It would be ironic indeed if, after implementation of Hikind's legislation, someone uncovered a dastardly plot on his part to exterminate some human subpopulation through the administration of these disinfestations! There will, of course, be no written order.

Wednesday, August 11, 2010

Hollywood's Champion of Semitism (and Americanism)

Producer and entertainment financier Haim Saban has pronounced director Oliver Stone anti-Semitic and anti-American because Stone's treatment of Hitler in Stone's forthcoming Showtime series The Secret History of America is not totally condemnatory.

It seems to be a coincidence that the New Yorker magazine just last month fielded a long, detailed, and thoroughly researched profile of this very same Haim Saban, born a poor Jewish boy in Egypt some sixty-odd years ago.

He's come a long way. Those with a (morbid) curiosity as to what empowers a paragon of morality such as Saban to declare that Stone should be silenced will find the linked article very interesting.

Enough of Them to Swing an Election?

Our friend Dov Hikind, New York State Assemblyman from Boro Park, Brooklyn, has made life easier (and cheaper) for the uncounted thousands of his constituents who receive their Holocaust-reparation payments by wire each month. According to this announcement in Yeshiva World News, the banks that receive these wire transfers will no longer charge for them, the way they presumably do for those of their customers in whose behalf Hikind has not interceded.

Fortunately, the fees mentioned (as high as $30 per) probably amounted to only a very small percentage of the average payment amount in the first place. Banks that feel the need to make up for this reduction in revenues from the services they perform will have to turn to their other customers to make up the shortfall. Not you, I trust.

Thursday, July 22, 2010

Philosophy, Political Science, Digital Revolutionaries, and Holocaust Denial

“A new history of Face Book portrays the company's founder as an idealist devoted to the cause of total transparency. But the digital revolutionaries may not understand their own rhetoric,” writes Evgeny Morozov

Morozov argues that political science and public intellectuals are losing ground among the young, and not so young, to digital revolutionaries who hold that transparency is everything. Our society has become innovation-obsessed, more interested in business than in politics. Web sites such as Face Book are used for “all kinds of dubious purposes, from killing time with the numerous games that have sprung up on its platform to joining Holocaust denial groups.”

“… . Zuckerberg (Face Book’s founder) and his colleagues believe that neither human behavior nor the manner in which technology unfolds can be altered. It’s not surprising that there is no place for politics in the digital revolution: for its leaders, the state exists, if at all, merely to provide cheap broadband.”

“… . But even if the likes of Face book do believe in the social usefulness of what they are doing, societies need more than their blind faith to assess such claims. The promises and perils of innovation need to be assessed through a value-laden prism of ethics. As it happens, this has been the bread and butter of philosophy and political science, the two disciplines that digital revolutionaries were quick to discard in favour of computer science.”

What has proven more useless for human life than philosophy and political science? Thousands of years of both and we remain today what we were then. Violent, brutal, and selfish. Maybe it is precisely our philosophies and our politics that we should discard. Maybe transparency is the way to go. Particularly when we look in the mirror. Keeping in mind that the mirror is not transparent.

Tuesday, July 20, 2010

UNESCO for a Free Press – Always!

UNESCO promotes “freedom of expression and freedom of the press … by making governments, parliamentarians and other decision-makers aware of the need to guarantee free expression.” Okay.

Meanwhile Gerd Honsik stood by his claim in an Austrian court today that there were no gas chambers in Germany during World War II. Honsik was found guilty in April 2009 of denying the Holocaust and the existence of gas chambers in a number of publications between 1987 and 2003. He was imprisoned.

He served four years in prison in the 1960s on the same charge and was sentenced again to one and a half years in 1992 following the publication of his book Freispruch fuer Hitler? (Acquittal for Hitler?).

He’s in jail today.

“Empowering people through the free flow of ideas and by access to information and knowledge.” That’s UNESCO!

Memory recalls the old bumper sticker: “Get America out of the UN. Get the UN out of America.”

The Electric Intifada: More than one way to exploit the Holocaust story

In a column published by the Electronic Intifada titled “Liberate All Ghettos” we are told:

“The action that we recently undertook on the terrain of the old Warsaw Ghetto -- to spray the words ‘Liberate all ghettos’ in Hebrew and ‘Free Gaza and Palestine’ in English -- has been used by some commentators in Israel and the Jewish community in Poland to accuse us of anti-Semitism.

“Yad Vashem, the Holocaust museum in Jerusalem, called the action ‘a provocation that perverts the history both of the Holocaust and of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict,"’ and the graffiti as ‘tainted with anti-Semitism.

“Noah Flug, Chairman of the Center of Organizations of Holocaust Survivors, said ‘Those who compare the Warsaw Ghetto to the Gaza Strip are in the same category as Holocaust deniers.’

“Dr. Leah Nass, Israel's Deputy Minister for Pensioner Affairs, called the action a ‘vile act’ which ‘demonstrates how imperative commemoration is these days, in order to prevent Holocaust denial.’ He added that he planned "\’to contact the authorities in Poland to prosecute the law-breakers and anarchists.’

“Piotr Kadlik, Chairman of the Union of Jewish Religious Communities in Poland, also said, ‘The perpetrators of this hooliganistic escapade should be punished as ordinary vandals. Where will Jasiewicz leave her signings next? In Treblinka?’”

Here is where our favorite irony comes in.

The reader is told the obvious by the Electronic Intifada: “History as we well know can be co-opted and sanctified and instrumentalized to serve present-day agendas of colonization and repression.”

Then the reader is assured: “This wall cannot be compared to the memorial sites that are Treblinka and the other extermination camps in Poland.”

The “exterminations” did happen then. The Electronic Intifada says as much. If the exterminations happened, they were carried out by a (necessarily) monstrous people in homicidal gas chambers. The Electronic Intifada itself is co-opting history in its own way, by distancing itself from “monstrous” Germans, to morally justify its own campaign against Israeli Jews.

Whatever works in the moment.

Saturday, July 17, 2010

Chemical evidence relating to the ‘gas chambers’ at Auschwitz/ Birkenau.

By Nick Kollerstrom – 30th June 2010

I used to work at University College, London, getting by as a science historian.
Having written papers on various suitably obscure subjects - from Newton’s lunar theory to the discovery of Neptune - three years ago I made what in retrospect looks like a rather large mistake. I began to take an interest in the published chemical evidence relating to the ‘gas chambers’ at Auschwitz/ Birkenau.

Maybe it was foolish to imagine that hard scientific data was of relevance in this case. It strangely turned out that I was engaging with a predominantly religious issue, and I simply became damned as a heretic.

There is no disagreement that cyanide gas chambers existed at many WW2 concentration camps. These were delousing rooms built to kill the bugs that threatened the health of the camp inmates. They were designed to keep the prisoners healthy so that they could carry out their work effectively. Their purpose was hygienic.

We can nowadays agree that many tons of cyanide (in granular form as the insecticide Zyklon) was used during the WW2 for hygienic delousing technology. Before DDT was invented around 1945, Zyklon was the normal delousing method. Special gas chambers made by a firm called Degesch, 10m3 in volume, were installed in all the German labour-camps in 1942, the year when typhus hit the camps. That epidemic is spread by bugs, so all clothing and bedding had to go repeatedly into the delousing chambers. It was a procedure designed to be safe for regular use.

These chambers still exist at four WW2 labour camp ruins, Madjanek, Dachau, Auschwitz and Birkenau, and can be easily identified because their walls are mostly turquoise blue. There is iron in the walls of the old chambers at Auschwitz and Birkenau and this combined permanently with the cyanide then used, the brick walls being very porous to the cyanide gas. These walls are blue on the inside and on the outside, showing that the cyanide soaked right through them. The blue in the walls is ferrocyanide – just like the colour in a tube of turquoise oil paint.

In contrast to these real gas chambers, the walls of the alleged human gas chambers have no such blue colouring. This simple and obvious fact was one of the first causes of skepticism for some of those who visited the camps.

Read more >

Thursday, July 15, 2010

Revisionism is the means towards a better future

by Gilad Atzmon

At the moment our history books are sealed and cemented. We cannot engage in a real study of our most relevant past and we are therefore denied the right to consider its meaning.

Consequently, we have failed to encompass the real ethical meaning of world war II and the holocaust in particular. Similarly, we are silenced when it comes to the events that led towards the 2nd Iraq War. We are supposed to wait for the current Iraq Inquiry with the almost absurd hope that rabid Zionist Martin Gilbert will be kind enough to show us the truth.

With history being squashed it is hardly surprising that the same people who flattened Hamburg, Pforzheim, Dresden, Hiroshima and Nagasaki continued to do the same in Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq.

Similarly, the same lobbies that pushed Britain and America to a deadly confrontation with the Mulsim world are now pushing us to flatten Iran.
To save the world and to bring peace about, we must learn our past and we must be free to so. Revisionism is the means towards a better future.

Monday, July 12, 2010

Gilad Atzmon argues the ethical and logical need for history to be open to revision.

Gilad Atzmon, an Israeli Jew, tries to convince Michael Conniff, an Irish-American radio talk show host, that intellectual freedom is a good, even when addressing the Holocaust story. Conniff is good with the concept of intellectual freedom generally, like most Americans, but he’s got a degree in history so he’s appalled to hear that such a concept should include arguments critical of the orthodox Holocaust story. What would his history professors say?

Atzmon writes: “This set of six video clips covers an almost taboo controversy to do with freedom of speech. In the discussion, I stress the ethical and logical need for history to be open to revision.”

Wednesday, July 7, 2010

The State and other matters in "broad-brush" highlights

Got a message on Face Book from a Ben Leeds Carson responding to a request from us to become a “friend.” On Face Book I identify my political interests as Libertarian, “more or less.” Carson wrote in part: “ … since libertarianism is, to me, the belief that freedom consists primarily in leaving people alone (and is therefore antithetical to ideas like "the commons", the neighborhood, and to social justice in general), I cannot, unfortunately, begin there for our basis.

I replied: “Leaving people alone -- to conceptualize for themselves how they want to view the “the commons”, their own neighborhood, and the ideal of social justice (whatever that might be), rather than placing these high ideals in the hands of “Authority.”. The idea that conceptualizing these matters should be left to “Authority” is the time honored ideal of the Assyrians and Egyptians on down through the centuries to the Soviet Union and any number of present day nations and, increasingly, the U.S. of A. “Democratic Imperialism.” As a first thought.

Carson replied in part: “Beware of any notion ("authority," for example) that requires you to sweep across history with such a broad brush. The socialist critiques of capital are not nearly so monomaniacal. If tyranny were reducible to one handy principle we'd have defeated it by now.”

And it went on from there. I think it clear, upon reading our brief exchange (which you can see on Face Book), that Carson knows more about the “socialist critiques of capital” than I do. Occurs to me here to wonder what the socialist critiques of authority (power) are. If authority/power is used by the few for the greater good for the greatest number, then I would say it’s all for the best.

Ambrose Bierce wrote someplace: “Death -- the greatest good for the greatest number.”

Meanwhile, Carson has reminded me, with very little effort on his part, that if I am going to reply to any message on Face Book or anywhere else, that I should do so in thoughtful manner, not how I did it here.


I myself am the personal beneficiary of socialist programs run by the Federal Government. None of which I am refusing to participate in. Only recently the Veteran’s Administration, run by the State, put several tens of thousands of dollars into curing me of lymphatic cancer. It will be argued by some that I deserve this financial help because I am a wounded veteran who helped defend his country. That was Korea 60 years ago. This scenario is questionable, just as the righteousness of that brutal, murderous war are questionable.

And it is questionable because I did not volunteer for Korea to serve my country. At the time I was a corporal of the guard for the Army Security Agency in Carlisle Barracks in Pennsylvania. I volunteered to go to Korea as a rifleman (the only way you could get there) because I wanted an adventure, wanted to be in a place of danger, wanted to experience warfare. I was 20 years old.

All in all, it worked out pretty well. For me. Not for the masses of the murdered. Two, three, four millions? Is that irony? The greatest good? The greatest number? The greatest State?

Meanwhile, the State is not going to help me forward an environment of intellectual freedom for revisionist arguments about the Holocaust story. The Head of State himself, Barrack Hussein Obama, has condemned such an effort. At the same time, I expect him to encourage the U.S. Congress to participate in contributing millions of dollars toward preserving the Auschwitz Hoax for future generations.

The State in operation. A "broad-brush" notion?

Tuesday, July 6, 2010

Mises and Holocaust Controversies Update

Never mind! Yesterday, our old friend Jonathan Harrison of must have been drafting a post about Murray Rothbard and Lew Rockwell of the Ludwig von Mises Institute of Auburn, Alabama. This post replaces my post of yesterday about Harrison's post, which he apparently deleted after posting, possibly to extend, complete, or correct. I've done this, too, inadvertently.

So ignore my (now deleted, by me) post of yesterday, and enjoy Harrison's disquisition on the gang at LvMI, as it's called for short. Only about 10 percent of it concerns the Holocaust, and none refers back to Harrison's January attack (on the same blog) on N. Joseph Potts, the former writer with Smith's Report.

Another Friend, Tom Usher

I don't know if this is the first time Pastor Usher of the Real Liberal Christian Church has poked his head up above the trench, but if so, he may be surprised (haven't we all?) by the fire he draws for coming out in favor of not only spurned anti-Israel speaker Gilad Atzmon, but in ever-so-gentle a way, Holocaust revisionism, or at least everyone's right to engage in it without harassment.

The cancellation of Atzmon's scheduled talk in Rochester yesterday is news, and the value of the news is greatly amplified by Usher's linked (what's left of it) research on the nature and origins of the pressure that brought about the cancellation.

As Usher experiences the fallout from this fearless position he's taking, he'll be reminded - perhaps more than reminded - of the flak he has undoubtedly taken in his foursquare stand against every form of homosexuality and against capitalism. That's right - he's evidently a communist-with-a-small-c.

People have all kinds of reasons for standing up to oppression and threats, and thank God for that!

Saturday, July 3, 2010

Humus, Volkswagens, and dirty diamonds

Was on the other side with my wife doing errands, shopping and so on. At Henry’s Market I found a new brand of humus. I always buy humus when we shop at Henry’s. The brand name of the new humus is “Sabra.” Sabra Dipping Co LLC. A New York company. I hesitated. Did I want to support with my purchase folk who represent a folk who are foursquare against intellectual freedom? After a moment I put two of the little 10-ounce plastic containers in my basket.

Yesterday, while eating the humus with a tortilla, the brain recalled (it’s as if the brain has nothing really important to do) standing in the little kitchen of Merle Edelman and Joan Sitzer's house in Hollywood with half a dozen other guys drinking beer and talking about Volkswagens. That was in the early 60s. In the 50s and 60s the Volkswagen was all the rage in California. These guys, we were all Jews I think except me, were talking about how they would never buy a car manufactured by Germans. The Holocaust and so on. While I saw a certain lack of reason in the argument, I didn’t think much about it.

Today I was telling Hernandez about the humus this week and the Volkswagens of 50 years ago and his response was that not buying a product manufactured by folk who do things you do not approve of was a “civilized” way to protest. Sounds right. So far as Volkswagens and humus go, the Volkswagen is gone, while the Sabra humus is exceptionally creamy, just like it says on the lid.


Talking to Eric Hunt about his work with the Zisblatt lady and how she ate, defecated, and ate again her family diamonds at Auschwitz, and how in an email thread the story is defended by a Harvard PhD in history, Professor Kenneth Walzer, who is now director of Jewish Studies at Michigan State University.

Friday, July 2, 2010

Both Sides, Now

You don't look for the just-appointed Head Warrior of NATO's Forces of Justice to play both sides against the middle, but this post on the estimable site Mondoweiss displays in its full, weasel-worded complexity the switcho-changeo game undertaken by General David Petraeus with famed pro-Israel Commentary columnist Max Boot.

If it weren't so two-faced, if it didn't involve such a senior administration official, the pathetic passages of this purloined exchange would be funny. As it is, it offers clear, incontrovertible evidence of the terrible fix the United States is in with its fraudulent, failed wars, the foreign subversion driving America's involvement in those wars, and complicity of all the government's senior officials with agents of that foreign power in the never-ending, duplicitous effort to curry favor with Zionism while fooling the American people into supposing that their interests are somehow being advanced.

It's all verbatim - the accidentally leaked e-mails, the Congressional (written) testimony. Turn off the music, get a cup of coffee, and enjoy the twists and turns of our leaders in peace and war.

Thursday, July 1, 2010

Elie Wiesel pondering ( I wrote "pandering" and caught myself just in) time

Talking via telephone with Eric Hunt, the exceptional young man who made the egregiously exceptional error of judgment in waylaying Elie Wiesel, believing (egregiously) in the moment that it was a principled act, in a San Francisco Hotel elevator and got a year and a half in the jug for it. He actually thought, in the moment, that Elie would want to talk to him. Ahh . . . youth.

In any event, Eric Hunt is telling me his story and I am going to publish it. Which will give the Abraham Foxmans, the Sara J. Bloomfields and the rest of those folk, not to mention professors everywhere, new ammunition to use against me and CODOH. I’m going to have to live with it. Of course, I’ve been living with it for a long time now and I’m used to it.

And then there is the fact that Eric is more than a little on the bright side, as you can see by what he is posting on the CODOH Forum. He’s working on a concept for doing film. Concepts come and go, but I have a feeling that this one will go straight ahead. There is no timetable for this work yet, but I have a strong feeling that one will develop.

*** Ironically, a young lady named Carolyn Yeager is developing a Web site for CODOH that will focus on what may prove to be an identity crises for our friend Elie Wiesel. It won’t be a crisis for Elie, he will ignore it, but it may well become a crisis for those who exploit his nonsense for money and a crisis for the professors who sooner or later are going to have to face the fact that they have been unwilling to face the fraud of Elie Wiesel. I don’t know how far this will go, I don’t yet know how solid it is at the very bottom, but there is something there, there is considerable there, and we are going to try to find out how much.

For some reason, in this instant, the brain asks why I never hear anything about Elie Wiesel’s son. Looking around I see that in 2001 Time Magazine mentions that Shlomo Elisha Wiesel was 12 years old, making him about 21 now. I thought he was older. I thought that about this time he would be having perhaps some serious psychological issues re his parentage. What might he be thinking of his father? How was that going? But he’s still very young, younger than Eric Hunt even, though not by much, and I don’t think I want to be a bother for the young man.

In the Time piece, when the subject of Elie’s son is being addressed, Elie gazes down from his New York apartment at the bare trees in Central Park and ponders: "Frequently I ask myself, how can one bring a child into this dreadful world, where Holocaust is now preceded by the word nuclear? And then I answer: In a faithless time, what greater act of belief is there than the one of birth? And what better thing to do than prevent the greatest murder of all: the killing of time."

I sense that listening to Elie ponder might itself be the killing of time. Maybe the greatest murder of them all. Still, it’s good to know that Elie ponders this question along with Jim Crawford and me. As Crawford reminds us in his Confessions of an Antinatalist, and as any number of Chinese intellectuals would agree, and which is obvious in any case, “Procreation is both the initiator and the sustainer of illness, oppression, starvation, war and death.” Good luck to Shlomo Elisha then, and all other young men and women everywhere.

Monday, June 28, 2010

Holocaust: the burden of proof

Jo Fo, an anonymous “beginner” with the CODOH Forum asks a core question:

“I am a newcomer to this forum and a relative newcomer to this subject in general so if my comments or questions seem a bit academic, please indulge me. Where does the burden of proof in this debate lie? Many in the "exterminationist" camp scoff at the notion that they should have to further substantiate what they already consider established fact. Is it the revisionist's task to disprove their conclusions or could they be fairly required to offer more credible evidence in the first place?”

After a dozen posts replying to this interesting thread, Jo Fo writes:

“So philosophically the answer is fairly straight forward: The burden of proof should fall on those who make the initial claim of deliberate mass murder. But in practice, it doesn't seem to play out that way. That it should allegedly take place during a devastating world war doesn't simplify the matter!

“Kingfisher's idea of getting people to "step back" and re-examine the entire issue is constructive. I would hope that this could one day be treated solely as the murder investigation that it never was. Discard all previous conclusions and invite an unbiased, disinterested third party with sufficient technological prowess (the Chinese or Indians?) to conduct a thorough forensic and historical investigation. Focus on primary documentary evidence and use modern forensic science to find out what really happened. I understand that limited ventures toward this end have already been attempted in the past, but they always seem to run into issues of credibility and integrity.

“Considering the opposition to such an undertaking, this is all pie-in-the-sky wishful thinking; and even if it were to take place, it probably wouldn't put an end to the controversy. I am grateful to all who have commented so far.”

For my part, the burden of proof lies first with those who accuse another of a specific murder. That would be the American Way if we were to ask the Fox talkers and most everyone else in media and the university. Of course, there must be exceptions made here and there, depending on your political, religious, or ethnic identifications. These exceptions must be, and are, defended with every contrivance available.