Media Project to Question How the Holocaust Story Is Exploited

As some of you may recall, I dreamed up the Media Project in January 1986. My attention had been caught by the fact that while a little revisionist literature was being distributed with some success, revisionists themselves were hard to find. There was something of a common understanding in those days that it wasn’t wise to express doubt about the gas chambers and make yourself a public target as well—Professor Arthur Butz was one of the few exceptions. My idea was a simple one. I would go public in a way that revisionists had not up to that time. I would offer media a face and a body to identify revisionism with.

So I put my mug shot on everything and made the revisionist part of my life an open book. It was a good idea, and it was very successful. Over the years I grew tired of saying the same thing over and over again to one radio personality after another. I dreamed up the Campus Project and that one was so successful I didn’t have time, literally, to do media interviews unless they were on national TV. At the same time I knew I was leaving a gaping hole in what needed to be done to elevate the Holocaust controversy to a public debate. And then along came Tom Reveille (see SM33).

I thought I would have the first solicitation out to radio and TV talk producers by now and that we would already have a few interview dates penciled in. Not so. As is often the case, I’m a couple weeks behind schedule with this one. This time it’s all for the best. As it turns out, when Reveille saw the proposal I had worked up he thought it needed a little editing. We began working on it, playing Ping-Pong by fax as he put it, and before long I realized that he was rewriting the proposal from beginning to end. And all for the best. He’s a good editor for me on this project, he knows exactly what he wants to say to media, and since it’s going to be largely his ball game, I’m going to follow his lead.

The solicitation we’ve worked up has two pages, the first a cover letter, the second a list of questions the host can make use of or not, as he or she sees fit. There isn’t room here to print the full solicitation, but following is the list of questions Tom is going to be dealing with under a lead that reads: “Is the Holocaust Controversy About History — Or About Religion? Does It Matter?” We may still do a little work on these before they’re distributed, but this is pretty much what hundreds of producers of radio and TV talk shows will receive. We think they promise some interesting conversations.

• What is the significance of the Congressional Resolution passed 420 – 0 “deploring” those “who deny the historical reality of the Holocaust”?
• What difference is there between “denying the historical reality” and “doubting the official version” of the Holocaust?
• Have there been any other “Holocausts” in history?
• Is there an official U.S. Congress version of any other historical event?
• Where else in history has absolute good confronted absolute evil?
• How does the official version of the Holocaust function as the dogma of a state religion?
• Why is there no museum in Washington D.C. commemorating the genocide of Native Americans, the mass killing and enslavement of African Blacks, or the victims of Hiroshima & Nagasaki?
• Is it possible that the House Resolution—and the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum—violate the Constitutional separation of church and state?
• Holocaust revisionism has been criminalized throughout the West. Are there other such “thought crimes”?
• What do such acts of Congress suggest about Jewish influence over the American Government?
• What role does the official version, or dogma, of the Holocaust play in American foreign policy?
• What does the media blackout of revisionist research suggest about Jewish influence over media in America and other Western nations?
• Is the official version of Nazi crimes against Jews used to justify Israeli crimes against Palestinians?
• Who profits from official Holocaust dogma? Who pays?

Wish us well.