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’!