CODOH Friends Bring Revisionism to Pages of Prominent D.C. Mideast Journal

While French intellectual Roger Garaudy was bringing the case for Holocaust revisionism to Arab audiences, American revisionists—with supporters and friends of the Committee on Open Debate of the Holocaust in the lead—have been debunking the Holocaust myth in the pages of a leading proponent of an even-handed U.S. policy in the Middle East.

The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs prides itself on being “the only kids on the block who make our own rules and then don’t back off” (July 1996, p. 102).

And to be sure, this influential monthly magazine (circulation 33,000) has been an informative and courageous voice in exposing the kowtowing of American politicians and policymakers to Zionist interests here and in the Middle East.

For a long time, however, The Washington Report's readiness to take on the Zionist lobby hasn't extended to questioning the historicity of the Holocaust story, despite the key function the Holocaust myth and taboo have played in making Western support for Israel's Blut und Boden policies seem a moral imperative since 1945.

That changed this July, when revisionist researcher Paul Grabach—a longtime friend and supporter of CODOH—succeeded, after numerous attempts, in publishing a letter in the WRMEA (as it styles itself), which chided the periodical for its previous censorship policy:

While Grubach was unable to present the revisionist case, and while the WRMEA responded with fairly standard exterminationist prose, the taboo had been broken.

Three issues later, the WRMEA (October, 1996, pp. 101-102) ran lengthy, informed, well-reasoned letters presenting the revisionist position, including Paul Grubach's, one by Josef and Judith Schuchmann, and a third by John Mortl—all friends of CODOH.

Perhaps most interesting was the Washington Report's admission (in the October issue) that the several letters it printed from Holocaust revisionists were “just the tip of the iceberg of letters and phone calls we've received on the subject of Holocaust Revisionism.” That surely must have provided much food for thought for the magazine's editors, as well as for the retired American diplomats and legislators (including former Senator Charles Percy, former chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee) who advise and serve the American Educational Trust, which publishes The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs.

A tip of the hat to Paul Grubach and our other revisionist friends, whose tireless persistence in prodding the editors at WRMEA has resulted in acquainting numerous well-connected anti-Zionists that yes, there is an intelligent case for Holocaust revisionism, and in reminding them that the Zionist lobby and the Holocaust lobby go hand in hand.

(Photocopies of these exchanges in WRMEA are available for the usual donation. 3pp.)