Susan Cohen
2024-07-31 04:22:03 UTC
THE HOLOCAUST CONTROVERSY
The Case for Open Debate
THE CONTEMPORARY ISSUE
Is asking questions a crime? If you develop doubts about the
Holocaust, isnt the only way to get rid of these doubts by asking
questions? A lot of individuals and groups are enraged by those
who ask critical questions about the Holocaust.
Every other historical issue is debated as a matter of course,
but influential pressure groups have made the Holocaust story an
exception. Anyone should be encouraged to investigate critically
the Holocaust narrative in the same way they are encouraged to
investigate every other historical event. This is not a radical point
of view. It is just plain reason.
THE HISTORICAL ISSUE
National Socialists saw Jews as being an influential force behind
international communism and finance. During World War II, Jews
were considered to be enemies of the German State and a po
tential danger to its war efforts, much like the Germans, Italians,
and Japanese were viewed in the U.S. Consequently, Jews were
stripped of their rights, forced to live in ghettos, conscripted for
labor, deprived of their property, deported, and otherwise mis
treated. Many tragically perished.
In contrast to establishment historians, revisionists claim that
the German State had NO policy to exterminate the Jewish people
(or anyone else) in homicidal gas chambers or by killing them
through abuse or neglect. Revisionists also maintain that the fig
ure of six million Jewish deaths is an irresponsible exaggeration,
and that no execution gas chambers existed in any camp in Europe
which was under German control. Fumigation gas chambers, both
stationary and mobile, did exist to delouse clothing and equip
ment in order to prevent disease at POW, labor, and concentra
tion camps and at the fighting front. It is highly likely that it was
from this life-saving procedure that the myth of extermination gas
chambers emerged.
Revisionists generally hold that the Allied governments, and
in particular the Soviets, decided to carry their wartime black
propaganda of German monstrosities over into the postwar pe
riod. This was done for essentially three reasons. 1. The Allies felt
it necessary to continue to justify the great sacrifices that were
made in fighting two world wars. 2. The Allies wanted to divert
attention from their own crimes against humanity. Soviet atroci
ties caused the death of millions in eastern and central Europe.
American and British saturation bombings causing over a million
civilians to be burned alive. 3. The Allies needed justification for
their postwar dismantling of German industry, a policy of starva
tion causing the deaths of millions of Germans, and the annexa
tion of large parts of Germany into Poland and the USSR (20% of
the entire German territory). Twelve million Germans were bru
tally expelled. More than two millions perished.
Today, the Holocaust story, which is perceived as a crime of
a right-wing regime, plays an important role for leftist-interna
tionalist groups, for Zionist organizations, and for groups within
Jewish communities. It is the leaders of these political and propa
ganda organizations who continue to work to sustain the orthodox
Holocaust narrative and the myth of German monstrosity.
For those who believe that the Nuremberg Trials revealed the
truth about German war crimes, it is a terrible shock to discover
that then Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court Harlan Fiske
Stone described the Nuremberg court as a high-grade lynching
party for Germans.
The Photographs
Weve all seen The Photographs, especially the awful scenes at
Dachau, Buchenwald, and Bergen-Belsen camps. But even main
stream historians admit that there was no German policy at any
of those camps to kill the internees. In the last months of the war,
while Soviet armies were invading Germany from the east, British
and U.S. bombers were destroying every major city in Germany
with saturation bombing. Transportation, the food distribution
system, medical, and sanitation services all broke down. That was
the purpose of these air raids, which was the most barbaric form
of warfare in Europe since the Mongol invasion.
Millions of refugees fleeing the Soviet armies were pouring
into central and western Germany. As a result of the ongoing war,
of starvation, and epidemics, millions of civilians were dying all
over Germany. The camps were not exempted from this tragedy.
By early 1945, these inmates suffered from malnutrition and epi
demics like typhus and cholera, to which many succumbed. When
the press entered the camps with British and U.S. soldiers, they
found the results of that. They took The Photographs.
Still, at camps such as Buchenwald, Dachau, and Bergen
Belsen tens of thousands of relatively healthy internees were lib
erated. They were there in the camps when The Photographs
were taken.
Documents
In response to challenges to show documents proving the Jewish
genocide, only a handful of documents are produced, the authen
ticity or interpretation of which is highly questionable. If pressed
for clear evidence, it is claimed that the Germans destroyed the
documents to hide their evil deeds, or the absurd claim is made
that the Germans used code language, whispered verbal orders, or
conveyed orders through a meeting of minds.
All available evidence indicates that there was no order for a
mass murder of Jews, no plan, no budget, no weaponthat is, no gas
chamberand no victimthat is, not a single autopsied body has
been shown to have been gassed.
Eyewitness Testimony
During medieval witch trials, many witnesses told about broom
riding witches and the devil. Since most statements were made in
dependently and without pressure, this was taken as evidence that
the stories must be true; material evidence was never produced.
Common knowledge and social pressure were the basis of these
tales, not the truth.
Today we again face common knowledge produced by 70
years of one-sided mass-media propaganda and massive social and
legal pressure. To support their theories, anti-revisionists depend al
most exclusively on eyewitness testimony produced in this poi
soned atmosphere.
During the war-crimes trials many eyewitnesses testified that
Germans made soap out of human fat. For decades, highly respected
scholars sanctioned these stories. But in 1990, Yehuda Bauer, direc
tor of Holocaust studies at Hebrew University, Jerusalem, admitted:
The Nazis never made soap from Jews
Bruno Baum, a former communist inmate in Auschwitz, was al
lowed to brag in summer 1945 in a Soviet newspaper: The whole
propaganda which started about Auschwitz abroad was initiated by
us [German communist inmates] with the help of our Polish com
rades. During several post-war trials it emerged that the testimonies
of witnesses from eastern Europe had been orchestrated by commu
nist authorities.
The only two witnesses who were ever cross-examined had to
admit in 1985 that their accounts were not true: Arnold Friedman
confessed to never having experienced what he had claimed, and
Rudolf Vrba, one of the most famous Auschwitz witnesses, admitted
to having used poetic license to embellish his statements. Once
asked by a fellow survivor if all his claims were true, Vrba replied:
I do not know. I was just an actor and I recited my text.
During and after the war there were eyewitnesses to mass gas
sings at Buchenwald, Bergen-Belsen, Dachau, and other camps in
Germany proper. Today, virtually all recognized scholars dismiss
this testimony as false.
Establishment historians, however, still claim that mass gassings
happened at several camps in Poland. But the evidence for this is of
the same nature as the evidence falsely claiming mass gassings in
other camps in Germany.
With regard to confessions by Germans at war-crimes trials, it
is now well documented that many of the earlier testimonies were
obtained through coercion, intimidation, and even physical torture,
just like during the medieval witch trials.
Auschwitz
In 1990, the Auschwitz State Museum revised the old propaganda
claim of four million murdered humans down to one millionbased
not upon facts, but upon estimates! In 1994, a French scholar re
duced this figure further down to less than 700,000, and in 2002,
another mainstream Holocaust scholar reduced the Auschwitz death
toll to 500,000again not based on facts, but on estimates.
The Auschwitz Museum has put on display piles of hair, boots,
and eyeglasses, etc., but there is neither evidence for the origin of
these items nor for the fate of their former owners. While such
displays are effective propaganda, they are worthless as historical
evidence.
In a videotaped interview, the Auschwitz Museum authorities
admitted that the gas chamber shown to tourists is a reconstruc
tion, again not based on facts, but only on eyewitness claims,
which contradict wartime documents. The museum guides, how
ever, have told visitors for decades that all that they see is genu
ine
Whereas some mainstream scholars claim that the Auschwitz
crematories, whose morgues supposedly served as gas chambers,
were the absolute center in the geography of atrocities, other
mainstream scholars claim that the mass murder did not take place
in those crematories, but elsewhere. Revisionists, however, want
certainty, not speculations and estimates.
Majdanek
When the Soviets captured the Majdanek Camp near Lublin,
Poland, in 1944, they claimed that 2 million inmates were killed
there in seven gas chambers. Shortly after the war, Polish re
searchers reduced the death toll to some 360,000. After the col
lapse of the Soviet Union, that number went down to 235,000,
and in 2005, the Majdanek Museum reduced it further to 78,000,
with only a few of them being victims of now merely two gas
chambers. So what is with the other 1,922,000 victims and with
the other five gas chambers? Were they errors or lies? And why
should anyone believe what they tell us now? If they were that
terribly wrong here, where else are they wrong?
Jewish Population Losses during World War II
Two monographs were written on the question of Jewish losses
during World War II. The first concluded that some 300,000 per
ished. The second claimed that some six million died. Whereas
the first book takes into consideration demographic changes of the
Jewish population in all countries, the second book compiles its
figures by simply subtracting the number of Jews alive in Europe
a few years after the war from those alive in Europe several years
before the war. It ignores that the Jewish population in America,
Israel, and other countries outside of Europe had increased by
almost six million in this period of time, as a result of a new
Exodus. Thus, those who had left Europe were simply declared
to be Holocaust victims.
The Hidden Genocide
It is true that during WWII, the world responded with indifference
to what happened to the Jews. But it is also certain that if there had
been killing factories in Poland murdering millions of civilians,
then the Red Cross, the pope, humanitarian agencies, the Allied
governments, neutral governments, and prominent figures such as
Roosevelt, de Gaulle, Truman, Churchill, Eisenhower, and many
others would have known about it and would have often and un
ambiguously mentioned it, and condemned it. They did not! Not
even in their autobiographies and war memoirs!
Examples of Propaganda
Starting in the late 1800s, and climaxing during and after the
First(!) World War, mainly American Jewish organizations were
claiming that six million Jews(!) would suffer terribly in Eastern
Europe, even stating they were being exterminated in a holocaust.
With such propaganda, millions of dollars were raised in the U.S.,
which at the end were mainly used to support the Soviet revolu
tion in Russia.
On 22 March 1916, that is during the First World War, the
British newspaper The Daily Telegraph published an article false
ly claiming that the Germans had murdered 700,000 Serbs in gas
chambers. On 25 May 1942, that is during the Second World War,
the same newspaper reported that the Germans had murdered
700,000 Jews in Poland in gas chambers. In 1944, the British
Government asked the British media and churches to help spread
anti-German propaganda, which it had been putting out already
for a while, in order to distract from the atrocities it expected to
be committed by the Soviets as soon as they invaded Germany. In
its circular, the British government expressed its regret that, after
the exposure of WWI propaganda lies, greater efforts would be
necessary to make people believe it.
POLITICAL CORRECTNESS AND REVISIONISM
Many people are bewildered when they first hear Holocaust
revisionist arguments. The arguments appear to make sense, but
How is it possible? After all, the whole world believes the or
thodox Holocaust narrative. Its just not plausible that the truth
could have been suppressed for so many decades.
To understand how it could have happened, one needs only
to reflect on the intellectual and political dogmas of medieval
Europe, of National Socialist Germany, or of the Communist-bloc
countries. In these societies, the great majority of scholars were
caught up in the existing political culture. Committed to a pre
vailing ideology, these scholars and intellectuals felt it was their
right and duty to protect that ideology. They did so by oppressing
evil dissidents who expressed offensive or dangerous ideas.
In those societies, scholars became the Thought Police.
In our own society, in the debate over the question of political
correctness, there are those who deliberately attempt to trivialize
the issues. They claim that there is no real problem with freedom
of speech in our society, and that all that is involved with politi
cal correctness are a few rules which allegedly protect minorities
from those who would otherwise hurt their feelings. There is, of
course, a more serious aspect to the problem. In American society
today, there is a wide range of ideas and viewpoints which the
mass media will not allow to be discussed openly. Even obvious
facts and realities, when they are politically unacceptable, are de
nied and suppressed. One can learn much about the psychology
and methods of the Thought Police by watching how they react
when just one of their taboos is broken, and Holocaust revision
ism is given a public forum.
First they express outrage that such offensive and danger
ous ideas were allowed to be expressed publicly. They avoid
answering or debating these ideas, claiming that to do so would
give the revisionists a forum and legitimacy. Then they make
vicious personal attacks against the revisionist heretics, calling
them political names such as hater or denier, even suggesting
that they are potential mass murderers. They publicly accuse the
revisionists of lying, but they dont allow these dissidents to face
their accusers so that they can answer this slander.
Revisionists are frequently accused of being hate-filled peo
ple who are promoting a doctrine of hatred. But revisionism is a
scholarly process, not a doctrine or an ideology. If the Holocaust pro
moters really want to expose hatred, they should take a second look
at their own doctrines, and a long look at themselves in the mirror.
Anyone who invites a revisionist to speak publicly is himself at
tacked for being insensitive. When revisionists do speak publicly,
they are regularly shouted down and threatened. Libraries and book
stores such as Amazon face threats and intimidation when they offer
Holocaust revisionist materials. All this goes on while the majority
of library, media, college, and university administrators stand
silently
by, allowing political activists to determine what can be said in the
media and read in libraries.
Next, the Thought Police set out to destroy the transgressors pro
fessionally and financially by getting them at their jobs or concoct
ing lawsuits against them. It is sometimes often deceptively claimed
that revisionist scholarship has been proven false during a trial,
though courts of law can never decide any scholarly debates; they
can only impose dogmas.
Finally, the Thought Police will inevitably straighten out that
segment of academia or the media that allowed the revisionists a fo
rum in the first place.
Some administrators in academia hold that university administra
tions should take action to rid the campus of ideas which are disrup
tive. This is an open invitation to tyranny. It means that any
militant
group with troops at the ready can rid the campus of ideas it op
poses. Timorous administrators might find it much easier and safer
to rid the campus of controversial ideas than to face down a group of
screaming militants. But it is the duty of university administrators
to
insure that our universities remain a free marketplace of ideas. When
ideas cause disruptions, it is the disrupters who must be subdued, not
the ideas.
CONCLUSION
The influence of Holocaust revisionism is growing steadily both here
and abroad. In the United States, revisionism was launched in earnest
in 1976 with the publication of the book The Hoax of the Twentieth
Century by Prof. Dr. Arthur R. Butz. Today, revisionism is presented
in many university-style studies of serious scholarship. Those who
take up the revisionist cause, represent a wide spectrum of political
and philosophical positions. They are certainly not the scoundrels,
liars and demons the anti-revisionists try to make them out to be.
The fact is, there are no demons in the real world. People are at
their
worst when they begin to see their opponents as an embodiment of
evil, and then begin to demonize them. Such people are quite pre
pared to harm their opponents. The logic of their argument is that
you can do anything you want to a demon. We should not allow such
a logic to prevail.
Those wishing to verify the truthfulness of the statements made
here are invited to visit our website www.HolocaustHandbooks.
com where you can watch thoroughly researched documentaries and
download free of charge most of our (soon) 50 meticulously docu
mented studies on various aspects of the Holocaust
https://holocausthandbooks.com/wp-content/uploads/FlyerLetterSize.pdf
The Case for Open Debate
THE CONTEMPORARY ISSUE
Is asking questions a crime? If you develop doubts about the
Holocaust, isnt the only way to get rid of these doubts by asking
questions? A lot of individuals and groups are enraged by those
who ask critical questions about the Holocaust.
Every other historical issue is debated as a matter of course,
but influential pressure groups have made the Holocaust story an
exception. Anyone should be encouraged to investigate critically
the Holocaust narrative in the same way they are encouraged to
investigate every other historical event. This is not a radical point
of view. It is just plain reason.
THE HISTORICAL ISSUE
National Socialists saw Jews as being an influential force behind
international communism and finance. During World War II, Jews
were considered to be enemies of the German State and a po
tential danger to its war efforts, much like the Germans, Italians,
and Japanese were viewed in the U.S. Consequently, Jews were
stripped of their rights, forced to live in ghettos, conscripted for
labor, deprived of their property, deported, and otherwise mis
treated. Many tragically perished.
In contrast to establishment historians, revisionists claim that
the German State had NO policy to exterminate the Jewish people
(or anyone else) in homicidal gas chambers or by killing them
through abuse or neglect. Revisionists also maintain that the fig
ure of six million Jewish deaths is an irresponsible exaggeration,
and that no execution gas chambers existed in any camp in Europe
which was under German control. Fumigation gas chambers, both
stationary and mobile, did exist to delouse clothing and equip
ment in order to prevent disease at POW, labor, and concentra
tion camps and at the fighting front. It is highly likely that it was
from this life-saving procedure that the myth of extermination gas
chambers emerged.
Revisionists generally hold that the Allied governments, and
in particular the Soviets, decided to carry their wartime black
propaganda of German monstrosities over into the postwar pe
riod. This was done for essentially three reasons. 1. The Allies felt
it necessary to continue to justify the great sacrifices that were
made in fighting two world wars. 2. The Allies wanted to divert
attention from their own crimes against humanity. Soviet atroci
ties caused the death of millions in eastern and central Europe.
American and British saturation bombings causing over a million
civilians to be burned alive. 3. The Allies needed justification for
their postwar dismantling of German industry, a policy of starva
tion causing the deaths of millions of Germans, and the annexa
tion of large parts of Germany into Poland and the USSR (20% of
the entire German territory). Twelve million Germans were bru
tally expelled. More than two millions perished.
Today, the Holocaust story, which is perceived as a crime of
a right-wing regime, plays an important role for leftist-interna
tionalist groups, for Zionist organizations, and for groups within
Jewish communities. It is the leaders of these political and propa
ganda organizations who continue to work to sustain the orthodox
Holocaust narrative and the myth of German monstrosity.
For those who believe that the Nuremberg Trials revealed the
truth about German war crimes, it is a terrible shock to discover
that then Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court Harlan Fiske
Stone described the Nuremberg court as a high-grade lynching
party for Germans.
The Photographs
Weve all seen The Photographs, especially the awful scenes at
Dachau, Buchenwald, and Bergen-Belsen camps. But even main
stream historians admit that there was no German policy at any
of those camps to kill the internees. In the last months of the war,
while Soviet armies were invading Germany from the east, British
and U.S. bombers were destroying every major city in Germany
with saturation bombing. Transportation, the food distribution
system, medical, and sanitation services all broke down. That was
the purpose of these air raids, which was the most barbaric form
of warfare in Europe since the Mongol invasion.
Millions of refugees fleeing the Soviet armies were pouring
into central and western Germany. As a result of the ongoing war,
of starvation, and epidemics, millions of civilians were dying all
over Germany. The camps were not exempted from this tragedy.
By early 1945, these inmates suffered from malnutrition and epi
demics like typhus and cholera, to which many succumbed. When
the press entered the camps with British and U.S. soldiers, they
found the results of that. They took The Photographs.
Still, at camps such as Buchenwald, Dachau, and Bergen
Belsen tens of thousands of relatively healthy internees were lib
erated. They were there in the camps when The Photographs
were taken.
Documents
In response to challenges to show documents proving the Jewish
genocide, only a handful of documents are produced, the authen
ticity or interpretation of which is highly questionable. If pressed
for clear evidence, it is claimed that the Germans destroyed the
documents to hide their evil deeds, or the absurd claim is made
that the Germans used code language, whispered verbal orders, or
conveyed orders through a meeting of minds.
All available evidence indicates that there was no order for a
mass murder of Jews, no plan, no budget, no weaponthat is, no gas
chamberand no victimthat is, not a single autopsied body has
been shown to have been gassed.
Eyewitness Testimony
During medieval witch trials, many witnesses told about broom
riding witches and the devil. Since most statements were made in
dependently and without pressure, this was taken as evidence that
the stories must be true; material evidence was never produced.
Common knowledge and social pressure were the basis of these
tales, not the truth.
Today we again face common knowledge produced by 70
years of one-sided mass-media propaganda and massive social and
legal pressure. To support their theories, anti-revisionists depend al
most exclusively on eyewitness testimony produced in this poi
soned atmosphere.
During the war-crimes trials many eyewitnesses testified that
Germans made soap out of human fat. For decades, highly respected
scholars sanctioned these stories. But in 1990, Yehuda Bauer, direc
tor of Holocaust studies at Hebrew University, Jerusalem, admitted:
The Nazis never made soap from Jews
Bruno Baum, a former communist inmate in Auschwitz, was al
lowed to brag in summer 1945 in a Soviet newspaper: The whole
propaganda which started about Auschwitz abroad was initiated by
us [German communist inmates] with the help of our Polish com
rades. During several post-war trials it emerged that the testimonies
of witnesses from eastern Europe had been orchestrated by commu
nist authorities.
The only two witnesses who were ever cross-examined had to
admit in 1985 that their accounts were not true: Arnold Friedman
confessed to never having experienced what he had claimed, and
Rudolf Vrba, one of the most famous Auschwitz witnesses, admitted
to having used poetic license to embellish his statements. Once
asked by a fellow survivor if all his claims were true, Vrba replied:
I do not know. I was just an actor and I recited my text.
During and after the war there were eyewitnesses to mass gas
sings at Buchenwald, Bergen-Belsen, Dachau, and other camps in
Germany proper. Today, virtually all recognized scholars dismiss
this testimony as false.
Establishment historians, however, still claim that mass gassings
happened at several camps in Poland. But the evidence for this is of
the same nature as the evidence falsely claiming mass gassings in
other camps in Germany.
With regard to confessions by Germans at war-crimes trials, it
is now well documented that many of the earlier testimonies were
obtained through coercion, intimidation, and even physical torture,
just like during the medieval witch trials.
Auschwitz
In 1990, the Auschwitz State Museum revised the old propaganda
claim of four million murdered humans down to one millionbased
not upon facts, but upon estimates! In 1994, a French scholar re
duced this figure further down to less than 700,000, and in 2002,
another mainstream Holocaust scholar reduced the Auschwitz death
toll to 500,000again not based on facts, but on estimates.
The Auschwitz Museum has put on display piles of hair, boots,
and eyeglasses, etc., but there is neither evidence for the origin of
these items nor for the fate of their former owners. While such
displays are effective propaganda, they are worthless as historical
evidence.
In a videotaped interview, the Auschwitz Museum authorities
admitted that the gas chamber shown to tourists is a reconstruc
tion, again not based on facts, but only on eyewitness claims,
which contradict wartime documents. The museum guides, how
ever, have told visitors for decades that all that they see is genu
ine
Whereas some mainstream scholars claim that the Auschwitz
crematories, whose morgues supposedly served as gas chambers,
were the absolute center in the geography of atrocities, other
mainstream scholars claim that the mass murder did not take place
in those crematories, but elsewhere. Revisionists, however, want
certainty, not speculations and estimates.
Majdanek
When the Soviets captured the Majdanek Camp near Lublin,
Poland, in 1944, they claimed that 2 million inmates were killed
there in seven gas chambers. Shortly after the war, Polish re
searchers reduced the death toll to some 360,000. After the col
lapse of the Soviet Union, that number went down to 235,000,
and in 2005, the Majdanek Museum reduced it further to 78,000,
with only a few of them being victims of now merely two gas
chambers. So what is with the other 1,922,000 victims and with
the other five gas chambers? Were they errors or lies? And why
should anyone believe what they tell us now? If they were that
terribly wrong here, where else are they wrong?
Jewish Population Losses during World War II
Two monographs were written on the question of Jewish losses
during World War II. The first concluded that some 300,000 per
ished. The second claimed that some six million died. Whereas
the first book takes into consideration demographic changes of the
Jewish population in all countries, the second book compiles its
figures by simply subtracting the number of Jews alive in Europe
a few years after the war from those alive in Europe several years
before the war. It ignores that the Jewish population in America,
Israel, and other countries outside of Europe had increased by
almost six million in this period of time, as a result of a new
Exodus. Thus, those who had left Europe were simply declared
to be Holocaust victims.
The Hidden Genocide
It is true that during WWII, the world responded with indifference
to what happened to the Jews. But it is also certain that if there had
been killing factories in Poland murdering millions of civilians,
then the Red Cross, the pope, humanitarian agencies, the Allied
governments, neutral governments, and prominent figures such as
Roosevelt, de Gaulle, Truman, Churchill, Eisenhower, and many
others would have known about it and would have often and un
ambiguously mentioned it, and condemned it. They did not! Not
even in their autobiographies and war memoirs!
Examples of Propaganda
Starting in the late 1800s, and climaxing during and after the
First(!) World War, mainly American Jewish organizations were
claiming that six million Jews(!) would suffer terribly in Eastern
Europe, even stating they were being exterminated in a holocaust.
With such propaganda, millions of dollars were raised in the U.S.,
which at the end were mainly used to support the Soviet revolu
tion in Russia.
On 22 March 1916, that is during the First World War, the
British newspaper The Daily Telegraph published an article false
ly claiming that the Germans had murdered 700,000 Serbs in gas
chambers. On 25 May 1942, that is during the Second World War,
the same newspaper reported that the Germans had murdered
700,000 Jews in Poland in gas chambers. In 1944, the British
Government asked the British media and churches to help spread
anti-German propaganda, which it had been putting out already
for a while, in order to distract from the atrocities it expected to
be committed by the Soviets as soon as they invaded Germany. In
its circular, the British government expressed its regret that, after
the exposure of WWI propaganda lies, greater efforts would be
necessary to make people believe it.
POLITICAL CORRECTNESS AND REVISIONISM
Many people are bewildered when they first hear Holocaust
revisionist arguments. The arguments appear to make sense, but
How is it possible? After all, the whole world believes the or
thodox Holocaust narrative. Its just not plausible that the truth
could have been suppressed for so many decades.
To understand how it could have happened, one needs only
to reflect on the intellectual and political dogmas of medieval
Europe, of National Socialist Germany, or of the Communist-bloc
countries. In these societies, the great majority of scholars were
caught up in the existing political culture. Committed to a pre
vailing ideology, these scholars and intellectuals felt it was their
right and duty to protect that ideology. They did so by oppressing
evil dissidents who expressed offensive or dangerous ideas.
In those societies, scholars became the Thought Police.
In our own society, in the debate over the question of political
correctness, there are those who deliberately attempt to trivialize
the issues. They claim that there is no real problem with freedom
of speech in our society, and that all that is involved with politi
cal correctness are a few rules which allegedly protect minorities
from those who would otherwise hurt their feelings. There is, of
course, a more serious aspect to the problem. In American society
today, there is a wide range of ideas and viewpoints which the
mass media will not allow to be discussed openly. Even obvious
facts and realities, when they are politically unacceptable, are de
nied and suppressed. One can learn much about the psychology
and methods of the Thought Police by watching how they react
when just one of their taboos is broken, and Holocaust revision
ism is given a public forum.
First they express outrage that such offensive and danger
ous ideas were allowed to be expressed publicly. They avoid
answering or debating these ideas, claiming that to do so would
give the revisionists a forum and legitimacy. Then they make
vicious personal attacks against the revisionist heretics, calling
them political names such as hater or denier, even suggesting
that they are potential mass murderers. They publicly accuse the
revisionists of lying, but they dont allow these dissidents to face
their accusers so that they can answer this slander.
Revisionists are frequently accused of being hate-filled peo
ple who are promoting a doctrine of hatred. But revisionism is a
scholarly process, not a doctrine or an ideology. If the Holocaust pro
moters really want to expose hatred, they should take a second look
at their own doctrines, and a long look at themselves in the mirror.
Anyone who invites a revisionist to speak publicly is himself at
tacked for being insensitive. When revisionists do speak publicly,
they are regularly shouted down and threatened. Libraries and book
stores such as Amazon face threats and intimidation when they offer
Holocaust revisionist materials. All this goes on while the majority
of library, media, college, and university administrators stand
silently
by, allowing political activists to determine what can be said in the
media and read in libraries.
Next, the Thought Police set out to destroy the transgressors pro
fessionally and financially by getting them at their jobs or concoct
ing lawsuits against them. It is sometimes often deceptively claimed
that revisionist scholarship has been proven false during a trial,
though courts of law can never decide any scholarly debates; they
can only impose dogmas.
Finally, the Thought Police will inevitably straighten out that
segment of academia or the media that allowed the revisionists a fo
rum in the first place.
Some administrators in academia hold that university administra
tions should take action to rid the campus of ideas which are disrup
tive. This is an open invitation to tyranny. It means that any
militant
group with troops at the ready can rid the campus of ideas it op
poses. Timorous administrators might find it much easier and safer
to rid the campus of controversial ideas than to face down a group of
screaming militants. But it is the duty of university administrators
to
insure that our universities remain a free marketplace of ideas. When
ideas cause disruptions, it is the disrupters who must be subdued, not
the ideas.
CONCLUSION
The influence of Holocaust revisionism is growing steadily both here
and abroad. In the United States, revisionism was launched in earnest
in 1976 with the publication of the book The Hoax of the Twentieth
Century by Prof. Dr. Arthur R. Butz. Today, revisionism is presented
in many university-style studies of serious scholarship. Those who
take up the revisionist cause, represent a wide spectrum of political
and philosophical positions. They are certainly not the scoundrels,
liars and demons the anti-revisionists try to make them out to be.
The fact is, there are no demons in the real world. People are at
their
worst when they begin to see their opponents as an embodiment of
evil, and then begin to demonize them. Such people are quite pre
pared to harm their opponents. The logic of their argument is that
you can do anything you want to a demon. We should not allow such
a logic to prevail.
Those wishing to verify the truthfulness of the statements made
here are invited to visit our website www.HolocaustHandbooks.
com where you can watch thoroughly researched documentaries and
download free of charge most of our (soon) 50 meticulously docu
mented studies on various aspects of the Holocaust
https://holocausthandbooks.com/wp-content/uploads/FlyerLetterSize.pdf