Similar Posts

  • Letters

    Three Bravos for The Revisionist I got my copy of the first “Revisionist” yesterday and have read it from cover to cover. My conclusion: BRAVO, BRAVO, BRAVO! I hope you are able to sustain the high level of the first issue. I particularly commend you for continuing all articles on the very next page and…

  • Correspondence

    Dr. Howard Stein's letter of the 13th April (The Journal of Historical Review, Winter 1981) honors him and (pace Signor Maiolini) adds to the intellectual caliber of the great debate. To Stein's “tu quoque” in regard to sociobiology and in defense of psychohistory, I must ruefully concede (to change the language employed) “touché.” I am…

  • Letter to the Editor

    Working V1 Rocket Engine of Survival Research Laboratories (SRL), San Francisco Re.: G. Rudolf, “The Moon Landing: Fact or Fiction,” TR, 1(1) (2003), pp. 75-81. Dear Editor: In The Revisionist #1 you have an article which includes a tidbit about V1 rockets: “Mockup of a German WWII V1 Rocket at the Space and Rocket Museum…

  • Letters

    Charles E. Weber. I was utterly astonished to find the statement on page 3 of SR: “SOR’s first issue will feature . . . the first full review of Daniel Goldhagen’s Hitler’s Willing Executioners by a revisionist publication anywhere.” My rather long review not only appeared in Christian News of 8 July, but all 13…

  • A Holocaust Debate

    Only rarely do those who detest Doug Collins' audacious skepticism about the Holocaust story ever bother to respond to the substance ofhis arguments. Normally his detractors react with blind invective. In a rare exception, two University of British Columbia historians replied to Collins' August 18 column – reprinted in the Nov.-Dec. 1993 Journal (pp. 10-11)…