This document is part of the Journal of Historical Review periodical.
Use this menu to find more documents that are part of this periodical.
Passing on Info
Congrats on your excellent use of available technology on the Internet to counter our traditional enemies. I've been spending the last half-hour saving your info to read and pass on later. Carry on the good work.
Ray of Light
I just want to thank and congratulate you for your excellent [Internet] web page [... (see www.ihr.org)]. What a ray of bright light. I found it in making various searches on the Internet for people who share my views. So far I have not been able to find anything comparable to your page.
Having just had access to the Internet for a couple of months, I'm very excited about it. Because it is a truly free avenue of communication, it must be scaring the pants off both the politicians and pressure groups which have so far done such a thorough job of controlling public opinion. The Internet offers a revolutionary opportunity to bypass governments and private controllers of the publishing and broadcasting worlds, which is exactly why every effort is going to be made to control it.
Daytona Beach, Fla.
Irving Responds to Faurisson's Comment
Faurisson's letter [in the March-April 1995 Journal, pp. 46-47] is good and does not need much comment from me, other than that he and I will continue to disagree about the events of November 30, 1941, at Skiatowa, outside Riga [Latvia], which is when and where about a thousand Jews from a Judentransport aus Berlin ended up being liquidated despite Hitler's clear instructions to Himmler to the contrary.
As for the rest: yes, it is important to see each entry in Goebbels' diary in the overall context of all other entries on the same subject throughout the volumes. Only thus does a pattern emerge.
Remember: after 1936 the Goebbels' diary was being written specifically for publication 20 years after his death, that is, ad usum delphicus, though he states in one place that it will have to be sanitized first. Also remember that from July 1941 it is being dictated to a civil servant on a daily basis, not written personally in ink, which must have had an inhibiting, cramping effect on what Goebbels felt free to disclose.
Key West, Florida
David Irving has not done a service for historical revisionism with what he says about Dr. Goebbels in his Jan.-Feb. 1995 Journal presentation, which is based on his forthcoming biography.
In Irving's view, Goebbels was the man who was really responsible for the persecution of Jews and the alleged "extermination." Writes Irving:
If we're looking for a culprit, if we're looking for a criminal behind the "final solution" or the "Holocaust," whatever it was, for the man who started it in motion, then it was undoubtedly Dr. Goebbels first and foremost. Not Julius Streicher, not Adolf Hitler, nor any of the other Nazis. Goebbels was the moving force, and the brain behind it in every sense of the word.
Such talk is ammunition for our "traditional enemies" (to borrow Irving's apt phrase).
It is unfortunate that Irving has rejected – unfairly, I believe – the remarkable work of historian Ingrid Weckert in her study on the "Crystal Night," Flashpoint [published by the IHR, and available for $8.75, postpaid (check www.ihr.org for current availability and price; ed.)].
She presents impressive evidence to show that Irving is wrong, at least about his characterization of Goebbels' role with the infamous November 1938 "Crystal Night" anti-Jewish violence. She shows that Goebbels was genuinely enraged by the consequences of the "Crystal Night" outburst, and therefore certainly did not plan it, or at least did not incite what actually happened.
Friedrich Christian, Prince of Schaumburg-Lippe, was a close adjutant to Goebbels. In his 1963 memoir (quoted in the foreword to Weckert's book) he describes an important meeting in the aftermath of "Crystal Night," at which he witnessed Goebbels angrily and loudly berate Berlin Police Chief Count Helldorff for the destruction.
Among the things Goebbels said to Helldorff:
The whole business is outrageous. This is not the way to solve the Jewish problem, not by any means. Not this way. This only makes martyrs of them – and then? We have disgraced ourselves before the whole world, Helldorff ... and I? I am expected to bail us out of this idiocy, to iron everything out again with propaganda. An impossibility ...
We could not possibly have done the opposing propaganda a greater service. Our people have killed a dozen Jews, but for this dozen we may have to pay some day with a million German soldiers.
Wilfred von Oven – who worked with Goebbels constantly, and often very closely, during the final two years of the war – contributes an enlightening foreword to Weckert's book. While acknowledging that Goebbels hated Jews (as have so many others), he is absolutely convinced that Goebbels was sincere in what he said in fury to Helldorff.
Disturbing is Irving's use of such turns of phrase as "it's not difficult to imagine Dr. Goebbel's attitude," or "the way he may well have looked ... " Apart from the question of whether the conclusions that Irving draws from the diary are valid, one has the unpleasant feeling that Irving may be trying to ingratiate himself with our enemies.
I found the Twelfth IHR Conference deeply interesting, and hope to make a more positive contribution in future. I am so pleased to have met everyone there. I arrived back home with my batteries recharged, determined to redouble my efforts on behalf of revisionism.
I consider that the IHR's work on "Holocaustomania" to be the most important research currently underway anywhere. I was particularly moved by Professor Faurisson's appeal at the Conference to now go on the attack against those who have kept us on the defensive.
Scholarship and Class
Just a brief note to let you know how much I enjoyed the entire [Twelfth IHR] Conference. I am a seasoned "conventioneer" and have had my share of high caliber events, both as a speaker and as an attendee. I have never seen such scholarship and class.
San Diego, Calif
Mussolini and Pareto
In his fine article in the Sept.-Oct. 1994 Journal, James Alexander mentions that Mussolini attended lectures by Vilfredo Pareto at the University of Lausanne, during the time that the future Italian premier was living in Switzerland and working mainly as a bricklayer.
In My Autobiography (p. 14), published in New York in 1928, Mussolini recalled that time:
With a kind of passion, I studied social sciences. Pareto was giving a course of lectures in Lausanne on political economy. I looked forward to everyone. The mental exercise was a change from manual labor. My mind leaped toward this change and I found pleasure in learning. For here was a teacher who was outlining the fundamental economic philosophy of the future.
We should confront the nice words of Czech President Vaclav Havel in his Philadelphia speech, published in the Sept.-Oct. 1995 Journal.
Just a few weeks before he delivered that speech Havel declared that there would be no revision of the decrees of Eduard Benes, president of Czechoslovakia in the aftermath of World War II. Benes' decrees were the basis for the expropriation and brutal expulsion in 1945-1946 of more than three million ethnic Germans from the Sudetenland region (of whom more than 200,000 perished or were killed).
Thus, Havel's fine words are mere puffy rhetoric. I think it is a waste of time to mention them, or him.
According to the paid advertisement by "Americans for Equal Justice" (March-April 1994 Journal, p. 23), "during World War II, young German men were unwillingly taken from their homes and drafted into the German army."
This statement is not only erroneous, I think, but contemptuous. Along with many thousands of volunteers from other European countries, the young German men knew very well why they had to fight, and for what they were fighting. They tried to protect their homelands and all of Europe from the onslaught of Communism.
We can never right a wrong on false assumptions. Only the truth can set us free, and only if every nation admits its deplorable part in conflicts can we start to build for the future.
Hamilton, Onto Canada
Europe's Response to Soviet Communism
There was no "Holocaust" in the sense that it is usually portrayed – that is, a planned, systematic extermination of six million Jews. What did happen was explained by Princeton University professor Arno Mayer in his 1989 book Why Did The Heavens Not Darken?: The "Final Solution" in History. He shows that Nazi Germany's harsh repression of Europe's Jews arose from a mortal fear of Soviet Communism, and was based on the significant Jewish role in Communism. [See: M. Weber, "The Jewish Role in the Bolshevik Revolution and Russia's Early Soviet Regime," Jan.-Feb. 1994 Journal.]
With the introduction of Marxist Bolshevism onto the European continent, the nations of Europe were fighting for their very survival. Perceiving Bolshevism as an alien, largely Jewish import, these threatened nations felt the need to root out and expel the Jews.
Many of the evils afflicting our country today, including "multiculturalism" and "affirmative action," are simply Marxist policies under a different guise. Such socially destructive "progressive" polices are imposed on us without debate.
You must know that what you are saying can't be true.
My grandfather was at the concentration camp of Auschwitz-Birkenau [where] every day he saw the smog and smell from the crematorium ...
Why are you doing this? If you are a Nazi, be proud of what the Germans did. Stop being a hypocrite.
I am a Jew. I know Mein Kampf
... Whatever you do, whatever you say, we are ready to eliminate all neo-Nazis. We have Israel, we have the best army. We are going to get support from the Blacks, Muslims, homosexuals and Latinos, because we have something in common. We are all hated by your organization, and we are loosing are patience.
We are getting very angry, and if your people don't stop this attitude at once, we will show our power and we shall eliminate you.
You have no right to insult such people as the Jewish Defense League and the B'nai B'rith ... Someday my Jewish brothers will wake up, and we will kill you one by one ... If the government does not do it, if Israel does not, believe me, we will take the law in our hands and kill you nazi bastards.
Juden über alles!
R. Hershel [by Internet]
University of Miami
Enclosed is a special "Holocaust" issue of Israel My Glory, a bimonthly published by "The Friends of Israel Gospel Ministry." You will note the attack against the Institute for Historical Review and the Journal in the three-page article, "Denying the Dead: Holocaust Revisionism and a Response." This glossy magazine is a good example of the pro-Israel material put out some Christian organizations in the United States. I have stopped my support for this group because of its obvious bias and lack of interest in searching out the available truth.
Carneys Point, N.J.
We are making headway educating the world about what really happened, and are all doing a wonderful job of just that. Keep it up and never stop.
An article in the Nov.-Dec. 1993 Journal (p. 24) reports on Moshe Peer's statements about killings of prisoners in gas chambers at the Bergen-Belsen camp. I served in the US Army during World War II; I was wounded in Belgium and have the Purple Heart medal. I saw Bergen-Belsen, and can confirm that there were no gas chambers there.
I also saw Eisenhower's death camps for German prisoners of war, or as he called them, "disarmed enemy forces." These camps were as James Bacque describes them in his book, Other Losses.
Having just finished reading the IHR leaflet by Dr. Faurisson about Elie Wiesel ("A Prominent False Witness"), I would like to thank you for confirming my skepticism of this man.
I first heard of him in 1985 when then-President Reagan was planning to visit a German military cemetery at Bitburg. There were many protests when it was learned that some Waffen SS soldiers were also buried there. One of the most important voices of protest came from Wiesel, who was presented on the major American television networks as an expert on the wartime role of the Waffen SS.
He spoke about atrocities supposedly committed by SS troops during the December 1944 "Battle of the Bulge." Everything he said about this matter was false, but because he was a concentration camp survivor, what he said was never questioned.
Because of Wiesel's lies, the President spent only a few minutes at the Bitburg ceremony. Relations between Germany and the United States were strained because of the controversy created by Wiesel and others like him.
I was very upset about this entire affair, and I tried to explain to friends that Wiesel did not know what he was talking about. My friends did not believe me until I showed them proof. I believe that the American people would have also agreed, if they had all the facts.
Pseudo-knowledge is a great danger.
I have always disapproved of certain people posing as experts about matters of which they have only a vague knowledge. Wiesel qualifies for a place at the top of the list. It is about time that the world sees this man for what he really is: just another person with opinions.
Again, I would like to thank all of you at the Institute for Historical Review for taking a realistic view of Wiesel.
Garden City, Michigan
Everyone is entitled to my opinion, and mine is that you are doing an essential job. [Donation of $200 enclosed.] Best wishes!
You are on the right track with Holocaust revisionism. The Holocaust is the Number One revisionist issue of this century. It needs to be understood, dissected and exposed, so that its accompanying worldwide extortion racket can be broken.
Don't let up.
Sterling Heights, Mich.
We welcome letters from readers. We reserve the right to edit for style and space. Write: [... since defunct, don't write; ed.]
Additional information about this document
|Author(s):||David Irving , et al. , E. Svedlund , R. Hershel|
|Sources:||The Journal of Historical Review, vol. 15, no. 4 (July/August 1995), pp. 46-48|
|First posted on CODOH:||Dec. 21, 2012, 6 p.m.|