This document is part of a periodical (Smith's Report).
Use this menu to find more documents that are part of this periodical.
(Following are stories on the distribution of our video on Auschwitz, David Cole Interviews Dr. Franciszek Piper, the Radio Project, letters to the editor touching on Willis Carto, a correction from Arthur Butz, and a partial list of recent revisionist scholarship posted on CODOHWeb.)
SR34 reported Congresswoman Marcy Kaptur’s (D-OH) congratulatory reaction to having viewed our video on Auschwitz, David Cole Interviews Dr. Franciszek Piper. This video, which was produced by Cole and Smith, is the most widely distributed and most effective revisionist video produced to date.
Not only did it sell very well—it’s still selling—but due to the enthusiastic efforts of an independent Oregon man, the video has been distributed to the entire U.S. Congress, to members of the legislatures in many state governments, to the heads of state of most every nation in the world, to hundreds of celebrities, and is now reaching historians in many of the major universities around the country.
After first viewing this breakthrough video, in which American Jewish filmmaker David Cole recorded Auschwitz curator Dr. Franciszek Piper’s admission that Krematorium I at Auschwitz had been "restored" after the war to make it look like a "gassing chamber," the maverick Congresswoman wrote: "Mr. Cole has obviously invested a great deal in researching his subject and I admire his tenacious curiosity."
While this isn't exactly a proposal of marriage, it does suggest very strongly that Ms. Kaptur watched the video and had a reasonably good opinion of Mr. Cole. But then it came, I suppose it was brought, to Congresswoman Kaptur's attention that it's wrong to write encouraging notes, particularly on Congressional letterheads, about the work of nice Jewish Holocaust revisionists. On June 7th she wrote our Oregon man threatening prosecution if he continued to quote what she had written him. He, in turn, passed the note on to me, as he has the subsequent correspondence.
Two weeks later, after due deliberation. Oregon WTote Congresswoman Kaptur that he was surprised and disturbed by her letter. Pointing out that he had never represented that Kaptur had "endorsed" the video, he expressed his concern at her threat to prosecute, and inquired as to what law, if any, he might have inadvertently and unwillingly violated. He informed her that he was distributing Mr. Cole’s video at his own expense, as a public service, and asked that the Congresswoman provide him with any correspondence received "regarding myself or Mr. Cole."
In a letter dated 2 August, again on the stationery of the Congress of the United States, Ms. Kaptur addressed Oregon once more. She did not respond to his questions, but the tone of the letter was very different and considerably longer. This time the Congresswoman emphasized that she had always believed the Holocaust to be a fact, condemned those who would suggest otherwise, and emphasized that her views on the matter "are diametrically opposed to those espoused in your video." Quite a turnaround.
Kaptur noted that she is not attempting to interfere with the video's distribution, but doesn't want to be seen participating in its promotion. She went on to write that not removing her name from the cover letter that accompanies the video is "tantamount to false advertising by implication" [emphasis supplied].
The Congresswoman continued: "This is a simple matter of fairness, common sense and courtesy....” These are virtues I respect but have never been the beneficiary of since becoming a revisionist. Neither the Congress as a whole or even one of its members has yet to display such behavior toward revisionists. Oregon was not moved. Kaptur wrote, "I would not want any of my constituents or, indeed, any citizens of our nation to be deceived...." regarding her association with the video or its point of view. (I didn't realize it when I first read her letter, but now she was getting very close to the heart of the matter.) Finally, Congresswoman Kaptur asked that her office be “respected.”
Why would Ms. Kaptur change the tone of her correspondence from one of authority which expected to be obeyed to her reasonable and even touching request for “fairness” and “respect”? Is it possible that something was going on behind the scenes that we are not aware of? Can you doubt it?
On Sunday evening, 18 August 1996, I was in the living room with Mother feeding her supper. The routine is that Irene does Mother’s supper during the week and I do it on Sundays. Usually we watch reruns of Wheel of Fortune and Jeopardy. Mother has been watching them for 25 (250?) years. But this Sunday night the schedule had been superseded by the presidential nominating convention of the Reform Party. When we tuned in, Ross Perot was giving his acceptance speech. I enjoy listening to Perot talk so long as he keeps it to trade policy. It’s one one-liner after another. At least he’s alive.
Then the moment came when he excused himself to say he had only a few minutes to get ready to appear on the Larry King show. I switched to Channel 11 and pretty soon there was Larry and after another minute there was Ross. Larry wanted to know who Ross’s running mate was going to be and Ross said he wasn’t going to tell. Larry said the word around town was that Congresswoman Marcy Kaptur was on his short list.
Whoa! What was that? Larry asked about Congresswoman Kaptur a second time. I almost dropped my mother’s TV dinner. I could see it right away. The plot had thickened. The efforts to educate the U.S. Congress with regard to Auschwitz were threatening to slow down the upward mobility of the Congresswoman from Ohio! Now I understood her anguish about being identified with a Holocaust revisionist video. For a moment I felt an urge to call my friend in Oregon and ask him to give Marcy a break and drop her quote from the cover letter he enclosed with each copy of the video he mails out.
Then thought recalled House Resolution 316, passed on 20 December, deploring "the persistent, ongoing and malicious efforts by some persons in this country and abroad to deny the historical reality of the Holocaust...." I wondered if Congresswoman Kaptur had voted against this resolution. The fact is, no one voted against it. Who in Congress spoke up for intellectual freedom with regard to the Jewish holocaust controversy? Was there one member of Congress who put in a few words for guys like my friend in Oregon, or for me, or for any other revisionist? What did Congresswoman Marcy Kaptur have to say about us?
I didn’t call anyone. Our indefatigable ally and educator is still sending the Cole video to members of the U.S. and state governments, to academics and other important and self-important people around the nation. I’m going to place all the correspondence on CODOHWeb. My sense of things is that there are going to be a couple more chapters to this tale. You’ll be able to read about them here.
Additional information about this document
|Author(s):||Bradley R. Smith|
|Title:||Congresswoman Continues to Protest Use of Her Name in Connection with Cole/Piper Video|
|Sources:||Smith's Report, no. 35, September 1996, pp. 2, 6f.|
|First posted on CODOH:||Sept. 26, 2015, 6:51 a.m.|