Critique and counter-critique is one of the hallmarks of a scholarly attitude, so it goes without saying that revisionists are taking their opponents’ arguments and responses seriously. Hence, this section addresses the theses of several orthodox scholars on the Holocaust which have evoked revisionist responses. Although most orthodox scholars insist that revisionist arguments are not even worth looking at, a number of them have in fact breached the taboo and have not only looked at revisionist arguments, but have actually deigned to criticize them in one way or other. The revisionist responses and rebuttals can be found here as well.
By A.S. Marques â™ January 1, 2003
No, this is not a what-if scenario exploring the outcome of Mexico or Spain attacking Pearl Harbor. Rather, it is an example of what is produced when the illogical grow frustrated and take a penultimate defensive stand, which is to fall back on ridicule. (The ultimate is plain old ugly invective.) An early tactic, if…
By John Weir â™ October 1, 2002
“We are the shoes, we are the last witnesses.”—caption attached to a photo of a heap of shoes by U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum (See: http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v17/v17n5p29_Faurisson.html) It should come as no surprise to anyone over the age of twelve with an average intelligence that governments lie. Not just other governments, but the government that collects taxes…
By Paul Grubach â™ October 1, 2002
Dr. Robert Jan van Pelt, a professor of architecture at the University of Waterloo (Canada), has undoubtedly written one of the most important anti-Holocaust revisionist tomes ever penned.[1] Revisionist academic Samuel Crowell put his finger on the reasons as to why The Case for Auschwitz: Evidence from the Irving Trial is such an important work:…
By Paul Grubach â™ October 1, 2002
Lying About Hitler: History, Holocaust, and the David Irving Trials, Richard J. Evans, New York, 2001 As most visitors to this site already know, from January to April 2000 the high-profile libel case brought by British historian David Irving against Jewish American historian Deborah Lipstadt and her publisher, Penguin Books, was tried in the British…
By Samuel Crowell â™ August 1, 2002
The Case For Auschwitz: Evidence From The Irving Trial, by Robert Jan van Pelt. Indiana UP, Bloomington & Indianapolis, 2002. 1. Introduction When the British historian David Irving brought Deborah Lipstadt and Penguin Books to court for libel in early 2000, the defense submitted a number of expert opinions by historians in order to buttress…
By Paul Grubach â™ August 1, 2002
In his regular column of the February 2002 issue of Scientific American, Dr. Michael Shermer, one of Holocaust revisionism’s most dedicated opponents, claimed that Holocaust revisionism (or, as he labels it, “Holocaust denial”) is on par with and in the same league with Creationism (or, as he labels it, “evolution denial”). As we shall soon…
By Paul Grubach â™ June 1, 2002
Dr. Michael Shermer, Editor-in-Chief of Skeptic magazine and the Director of Skeptics Society, has emerged as the one of Holocaust revisionism's most dedicated opponents. His 2000 book (coauthored with Alex Grobman), Denying History: Who Says the Holocaust Never Happened and Why do they say it?, is considered by the establishment media to be one of…
By Paul Grubach â™ November 1, 2001
Dear Dr. Lipstadt: I have just finished reading D.D. Guttenplan's The Holocaust on Trial. There is one passage in the book that really struck me. On page 209, Guttenplan wrote: “..it was hard not to feel queasy listening to Rampton quiz Irving about his attitude to 'intermarriage between the races'—on behalf of a defendant [Dr….
By John Weir â™ November 1, 2001
Recently John Sack and Michael Shermer have addressed the topic of Holocaust revisionism in mainstream publications, Sack in Esquire magazine and Shermer in his book, Denying History. Publicly, both Shermer and Sack are critical of revisionism. This is rather typical for those who want to be able to publish their works through major publishing houses….
By Paul Grubach â™ November 1, 2001
One of the most damaging, oft-repeated and false accusations leveled against Holocaust revisionism is that it is part of an extremist neo-Nazi movement, the ultimate purpose of which is to destroy democratic political systems and reintroduce Nazi totalitarianism. Expressing this widely held sentiment, a major opponent of Holocaust revisionism, Dr. Michael Shermer, described Holocaust revisionists…
End of content
End of content
