Holocaust revisionism is the Western World’s biggest taboo. Hence there is an almost complete blackout about revisionism, except when it comes to maligning revisionists and misrepresenting their views. Hence, reaching out to the misinformed public is of primary importance. This part of our website deals with our various efforts to break through the walls of silence.
By Bradley R. Smith ∙ January 8, 1998
“…the fanatic hides from true debate… He knows how to speak in monologues only, so debate is superfluous to him.”—Elie Wiesel $250,000 Offer Every historical controversy can be debated on national television except one–the Jewish holocaust story. Why? Who benefits? Open debate, nothing else, will expose the facts behind this taboo. To this end Committee…
By Bradley R. Smith ∙ January 1, 1998
This article does not claim “the Holocaust never happened.” Those who say it does want to muddy the issue. This is what the ad does claim: The U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum displays no convincing proof whatsoever of homicidal gas chambers, and no proof that even one individual was “gassed” in a German program of “genocide.”…
By Bradley R. Smith ∙ January 1, 1998
When the staff of the Georgetown Voice decided to run the CODOH advertisement titled, “A Revisionist's View of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum,” it was perfectly aware that the ad would cause controversy and bruise the sensibilities of some. The Voice moved deliberately. After substantial preliminary discussion, it placed the issue before the newspaper's general…
By Bradley R. Smith ∙ January 1, 1998
Details for Entrants The Offer: CODOH will award $100,000 cash to the one individual instrumental in arranging a 90-minute presentation on National Network Television, in prime time, of the Video of the Century, our documentary on Auschwitz, David Cole Interviews Dr. Francizek Piper. One individual: CODOH will award the benefits of the Offer tot he…
By Bradley R. Smith ∙ February 20, 1998
The Phoenix reports that President Bloom (“himself Jewish”) states that I wrote my article “The Holocaust Controversy: The Case for Open Debate” to “express [my] personal prejudices,” and that I have an “anti-Semitic agenda,” a small-minded ad hominum assault that I dismiss out of hand. It's the kind of thing you overhear in your local…
By Kenneth Lasson ∙ January 6, 1998
The recent debate at Johns Hopkins University over whether the student newspaper should have published an advertisement denying the existence of Nazi death camps is more than just an academic flap. At stake are profound questions of how a free society learns the lessons of history and, unique to America, the effect of constitutionally protecting…
By American-Statesman, Austin,18. Dec. 1997 ∙ December 18, 1997
HOUSTON — A Holocaust museum has rejected the donation of an advertising fee from Rice University's student newspaper after it printed an ad from a group that doubts the Holocaust occurred. “This money is tainted and its purpose is to deny the murder of millions of human beings, Jews and non-Jews alike, and aims to…
By Fredric U. Dicker, Gregg Birnbaum ∙ November 30, 1997
On Sunday, November 23, 1997, The New York Post printed an article concerning the Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust (CODOH). This libelous and misleading article was immediately responded to by CODOH. Our response which has been sent to The New York Post can be found below. Reponse to the New York Post, November…
By Paula Brook ∙ January 11, 1997
For saying 6-million didn't die. How did an extremist B.C. Columnist end up a martyr? “Give me a break.” Peter Speck is pacing briskly between a window and couch in his office at the North Shore News, self-described “Voice of North and West Vancouver since 1969.” The paper that Speck launched and still runs is…
By James Najarian ∙ January 9, 1997
In the late nineteen-eighties considerable popular attention began to be focused on a small group of anti-Semites who denied that the Holocaust ever existed. These writers called themselves “Revisionist” historians. Deborah Lipstadt, in her comprehensive study of these writers, takes issue with the very title “Revisionist,” and prefers, rightly, to call these people Holocaust deniers:…
End of content
End of content
