"Dr." Rudolf?

Another point of similarity between evolution deniers and Holocaust deniers, though maybe not as strong as the others, is the use of fraudulent credentials.

Though it seems that this phenomenon is not as widespread among the "revisionists", there are two notable examples. The first is rather straightforward - Fred Leuchter misrepresented himself as an engineer.

The second is more interesting. Germar Rudolf did not manage to receive a doctorate from Max Planck Institute for Solid State Research. Apparently, the reason for not letting him defend his dissertation was political, but whatever it was, the fact is that he has no PhD.

It is well-known that Rudolf used many pseudonyms during his "revisionist" career. While the use of pseudonyms does not matter generally, he used pseudonyms with doctorates, later explaining it thus:

In spring and summer 1992 I was called by several defence lawyers as an expert witness in several trials imposed on Revisionists in Germany (see footnote 103 of the brochure mentioned). In these trials -- as in all trials against Revisionists -- the judges refused to accept any evidence presented by the defence, including all expert witnesses. I had to learn that a chemist (me) was being refused because he was neither a toxicologist nor a historian, an engineer (Leuchter) being refused because he was neither a chemist nor a historian, a historian (Prof. Haverbeck) being refused because he was neither a chemist nor an engineer. My conclusions were that one obviously had to be at the same time an engineer, a chemist, a toxicologist, a historian and a perhaps even an barrister to be accepted as an expert witness at a German court. The legal process being so perverted in Germany, we decided to mock it by inventing a person with all these features, but then we realized that this would be a bit unrealistic, so we split that person into many.

Hardly an excuse for such a fraudulent practice.

Anyway, if you google for "Dr Germar Rudolf" you will get quite lot a of hits. That this misrepresentation of Rudolf's credentials may be deliberate is clear from a recent Cesspit message (emphasis mine):

A institution I will not identify ( due to the fact anti revisionists read this board) is raising money and as part of the effort, they are selling bricks which people can have inscribed with a name or saying.

In honor of the great contributions to Revisionism that Germar Rudolf has provided to truth seekers everywhere, I have decide to buy and dedicate a brick to him.

Besides his name, I also have a few lines available where I can include a short saying.

Does anyone on the board have any ideas to pass along.

Also, would it be appropriate to use the word Dr. in the title.

I am also open to buying a brick for some other revisionist who has moved the cause along, living or dead.

This person obviously knows that Rudolf is not "Dr.", yet considers applying this title to him anyway.

Update: heh, they just can't stop digging.

"To Dr Germar Rudolf,
incarcerated for fighting against
the false dogmas of the new religion"

("called the 'holocau$t")

Update 2: and another one:

As for the Dr. title; it might not be legal to advertise him as a doctor for business, but I feel he very much deserves the title, so why not add the Dr. title. Plus, it might help remove suspicions.

How about:
Dr. Germar Rudolf – for your relentless search for the truth. Thank you!

Update 3: as is usual for the Cesspit, when a posting becomes too embarrassing, it disappears. The first quote is by "vincentferrer", the second - by "kk", the third - by "Sushicotto".

Dumbos try to tackle arguments, fail miserably.

CODOH gurus are being literally eviscerated at this blog. Pitiful Cesspit fauna cannot ignore this fact, but neither can it refute anything, so it has to do what it does best: lie or distort.

A notorious Cesspit clown "Carto's Cutlass Supreme" thinks he has me nailed down:

It's interesting because Romanov agrees that Pechersky's claims are not believable, and the way he tries to get around that is by saying the holocaust writers lied about what Pechersky said.

The problem is that Pechersky wrote his own book which had the problematic comments.

Hey, no big deal, it's just 10 men executed at a trial where Pechersky was lead prosecution witness. (1963 Kiev)

But of course, in the very posting which he cites, I never said that anybody lied or distorted Pechersky's text. That was a possibility offered by Mr. Blatt, based on his own bad experience with Miriam Novitch.

What is important in Mr. Blatt's reply is the point that Pechersky never claimed to have seen the process itself, indeed, that the Jewish Sobibor prisoners could have learned about the method only through hearsay. Only those people who operated the gas chambers could provide the reliable information about the methods used (and they did, after the war).

The second quote I provide - the quote from the book edited by Suhl - fully confirms Mr. Blatt's point about hearsay. Not only the method described is hearsay, it is second-hand hearsay, i.e. even Pechersky's source heard this from someone else. Witnesses' credibility is in no way impeached when they repeat hearsay, if they don't claim that this is what they have seen with their own eyes (and Pechersky did no such thing, of course), and especially if they explicitly identify hearsay as such (and this is what Pechersky did).

And Graf deceptively omitted the passages which identify Pechersky's information as second-hand hearsay.

This simple idea evidently flew right through CCS' empty head.

Finally, as a comic relief, you can read Jonnie "I am not Hannover" Hargis' hysterical argument-free "response" in the same thread. What can I say? Cesspit at its best!

Update: CCS continues to dig his grave even deeper.

Mazal has a whole library of holocaust books, but offers Romanov a book that he just discounted in the previous paragraph. The only way it could have been worse is if Mazal offered Romanov a Leon Uris book!

Romanov bolsters his position by quoting Mazal's email:

No Jew who was once inside the gas chamber in operation come out alive. The information about the gassing installation came from the accused Nazi testimonies in the court proceedings.

At the end of the day, CCS is even more clueless than he was in the beginning. It was Blatt who discounted the book, and it is Blatt whom CCS quotes - not Mazal. Reading skills of a kindergartner. Anyway, what is CCS' point in the first sentence? Is the imbecile unaware that it is the very same book that Graf quotes (just an English edition), and that's why it is this very book that had to be checked? CCS, why are you so dumb?

And then follows up with his own comment, "Makes sense, doesn't it."

Actually it doesn't make sense because Romanov is someone who has been posting daily for the holocaust cause for years, and who maybe is a second online persona of Andrew Mathis. Clearly he knows that most of the information about the gas chambers is from Jewish inmates.

This is obviously untrue in the case of Sobibor. What Sobibor Sonderkommandos survived?

So Romanov has never heard of Yankel Wiernik's Year in Treblinka? Or how about this book:

Filip Müller, Auschwitz Inferno: Testimony of a Sonderkommando, Routledge & Kegan Paul, London 1979.

So Romanov has never seen Shoah (1985) by Claude Lanzmann where Abraham Bomba talks about being inside the gas chamber on DVD disk 3 chapter 2?

Yes, Treblinka and Auschwitz to debunk a point about Sobibor. How clever! (A side note: in fact, the point is generally more or less true in case of all Aktion Reinhardt camps, even where Sonderkommandos survived. Because most of SKs were just dragging the bodies out of the gas chambers - which does not mean that they would have accurate information about the method itself, including all specifics. Many did get it right - that people were gassed with engine exhaust. But some of them (along even with several Nazis not directly involved in the procedure) (probably) incorrectly thought that the engine was diesel. Others thought that different methods (like sucking the air out of chamber or steaming) were used in the past. So, as I said, the point stands - as a rule, only the people most directly involved in the murder procedure would have non-hearsay, accurate information about the details).

Ah, these CODOH "gentlemen"... And NAFCASH.

Some CODOH puppet writes [copy here]:

I notice that the mentally retarded/ill cowards and liars at CODOH Watch have yet to make any comments on the NAFCASH site, much less accept any of the NAFCASH challenges. What does it say about an issue when the Jews give it the silent treatment?

By the way, if you haven't visited the - http://www.nafcash.com/ - site lately, The Treblinka CSI Challenge is up to $210,000.00 and the NAFCASH Forensic Challenge is up to $25,000.00.

I wonder what that idiot - loser Mathis is waiting for?

Just like evolution deniers, Holocaust deniers are fond of bogus challenges.

Let's see what this "NAFCASH" has to offer.

Read more!

A detailed FORENSIC EXAMINATION of the site of the wartime Treblinka camp, using sophisticated electronic ground radar, has found no evidence of mass graves there. For six days in October 1999, an Australian team headed by Richard Krege, a qualified electronics engineer, carried out an examination of the soil at the site of the former Treblinka II camp in Poland, where, Holocaust historians say, more than half a million Jews were put to death in gas chambers and then buried in mass graves.

According to the Encyclopedia of the Holocaust (1997), for example, "a total of 870,000 people" were killed and buried at Treblinka between July 1942 and April 1943. Then, between April and July 1943, the hundreds of thousands of corpses were allegedly dug up and burned in batches of 2,000 or 2,500 on large grids made of railway ties. Krege's team used an $80,000 GROUND PENETRATION RADAR (GPR) device, which sends out vertical radar signals that are visible on a computer monitor. GPR detects any large-scale disturbances in the soil structure to a normal effective depth of four or five meters, and sometimes up to ten meters (GPR devices are routinely used around the world by geologists, archeologists and police). In its Treblinka investigation, Krege's team also carried out visual soil inspections, and used an auger to take numerous soil core samples. The team carefully examined the entire Treblinka II site, especially the alleged "mass graves" portion, and carried out control examinations of the surrounding area. They found no soil disturbance consistent with the burial of hundreds of thousands of bodies, or even evidence that the ground had ever been disturbed. In addition, Krege and his team found no evidence of individual graves, bone remains, human ashes, or wood ashes.

They found no evidence that the ground had ever been disturbed? Um, hellooo? Wouldn't that mean that there was no camp at all, the claim that even most rabid deniers prefer not to make, because the evidence for camp's existence is undisputed? (But cf. this). This is akin to a 9/11 conspiracy theorist "investigating" whether the planes could have brought down the WTC towers, and concluding that the towers themselves never existed!

That is, either Krege used bogus methods OR he incorrectly interpreted the results.

Of course, we know that there were graves (before they were mostly obliterated by the Nazis themselves), and they were so big as to cause stench 20 km away from Treblinka! The remains were also found just after the war:

There are also other traces. For example, in the north-eastern part, over a surface covering about 2 ha. (5 acres), there are large quantities of ashes mixed with sand, among which are numerous human bones, often with the remains of decomposing tissues.

As a result of an examination made by an expert it was found that ashes were the remains of burnt human bones. The examination of numerous human skulls found in the camp has shown that they bear no traces of external injuries. Within a radius of several hundred yards from the camp site an unpleasant smell of burnt ash and decay is noticeable, growing stronger as one approaches.

You can read more about Krege's idiocy here and here. Some nifty details there.

It will suffice to say that it's been 7 years, and Krege still has not published any report about his alleged findings.

Now, to the challenge itself:

Locate the alleged “huge mass graves” of Treblinka. You must, SCIENTIFICALLY – FORENSICALLY prove the EXACT number of graves, their EXACT location, their EXACT dimensions and their EXACT volumetric density. The number of remains must total AT LEAST -

870,000

Actually, recent research indicates a lower number of ca. 800,000, but that's beside the point (although the challenge is already unanswerable because of that). The problem here is that no one claims that these bodies are still there. They have been burned in 1943. In fact, if we were to find the bodies of 800,000 people in Treblinka today, that would mean that what we think we knew about Treblinka would be patently false, because, to repeat, the bodies have been destroyed.

And of course one cannot quantify from the remaining ashes, pieces of bones and other remains which are still buried in Treblinka soil any meaningful number of the victims, even if one were to suppose that no ashes/remains were taken elsewhere.

I.e., the challenge cannot be met in principle, not unlike Kent Hovind's evolution challenge. It is totally bogus.

The same applies to their second, smaller challenge too. Actually, even if the rules were not so idiotic, one wouldn't be able to perform the excavations anyway, because, whether one likes it or not, the site is considered sacred, for an obvious reason. The only reason for some sort of excavation to be permitted by authorities would be to delineate the area of the graves themselves, for the construction of a monument (Jewish religious law forbids disturbing human remains). This is what was done by Prof. Andrzej Kola, who has found numerous graves in Belzec extermination camp area, and numerous human remains (see his report Belzec. The Nazi Camp for Jews in the Light of Archaeological Sources. Excavations 1997-1999.). But since there already is a monument in Treblinka (probably built without regard for religious sensibilities), this option is unavailable.

Finally, but most importanty, nobody is going to dance to the denier pigs' tune and disturb the remains of Treblinka mass graves just to appease them and meet their "challenge". Maybe these mental midgets don't know what dignity is, but we do.

Update: "vali" again [copy here]:

You are right Haldan, point taken. But it's just so hard to resist when the people we are talking about are in fact cowards, liars, idiots, losers, etc. The fact remains, the members of NAFCASH have put their money where their mouths are, and CODOH Watch gives them the silent treatment. How else can you describe that without using the word coward?

Yes, we're dealing with cowards, liars, idiots and losers, as is evident from the above comment.

Jonnie "Hannover" Hargis advertises our blog

Here.

Interestingly, he doesn't address a single argument, and only engages in ad hominem attacks on Andrew Mathis.

I understand - it's hard for Jonnie to argue with informed opponents when he can't edit, censor and delete their postings. Too bad!

Update: to clarify: "CODOH Watch" is our "meta blog" in which short announcements of our messages are posted for "Google" reasons, so to say. The links lead here. So it is funny that Jonnie did not choose to advertise the main blog.

Update 2: Poor Tommy Moron, deluded as always. Kudos to Obersto for being less cowardly/obtuse than the others and posting the link to the main blog. ;-)

Update 3: Two more deniers have chimed in with ad hominems. But where's the discussion of specific arguments? Why the dodging? And here I sit thinking that "revisionism", that intellectual adventure of the previous century, is all about debate... NOT!

Update 4: Here's Andrew's response.

The Cesspit Stirs

Never let it be said that our friends at The Cesspit are quick off the mark. Having noticed the existence of this blog on April 10, it's taken Johnny Hargis (57) and the gang until, what is it today? May 18 to realise that we have a mirror-site, which we deliberately called CODOH Watch in order to direct some Google traffic our way. All it consists of is Andrew placing links to every post on here and poking fun at Hannover et al in short one-liners. So now sit back and enjoy the overreaction:

-----------------------------------
Hannover
Thu May 18, 2006 11:37 am
Tinfoil Hat Mathis and The Nutjobs bring you CODOH Watch
-----------------------------------
Beautiful. A great indicator of the strength of our points.
You gotta see this wacko site. They're in a state of panic about the thorough debunking we're doing of the so called 'holocau$t'. Think of it, in their desperation they resort to building a site dedicated to attacking CODOH. Are they obsessed or what? You gotta love it.
see:CODOH Watch
Take note that Tinfoil Hat Mathis and The Nutjobs have been utterly demolished here at this forum.
- Hannover

In typical Hannover style, he then posts again, having pulled off his trusty list of links to past threads hallowing famous debating 'victories':

-----------------------------------
Hannover
Thu May 18, 2006 11:48 am
-----------------------------------
The CODOH Revisionist Forum has given Tinfoil Hat Mathis plenty of rope to hang himself and his 'holocau$t' lies. Take note that he is the same nutjob who specializes in threatening Revisionists.
Also remember, Tinfoil Hat Mathis is the premiere spokesman for the so called 'Holocau$t' History Project, talk about desperate. Read these and see just what a fool Mathis is.
- Hannover

'Holo. Hist. Proj. rep. attempts to intimidate Bradley Smith'

'Holo. Hist. Proj.'s Andrew Mathis humidity/gassing canard'

'holocaust' denial article by Andrew Mathis debunked here'

'Prof. Mc Nally dissects HHP's Andrew Mathis' bogus article'

'Holo. Hist. Proj.'s Andrew Mathis on Zyklon scent removal'

'Green, Mathis refuted / cyanide: lice, humans, & more'

'Believer org. spokesman, Andrew Mathis, demolished in debate'

'Holo. Hist. Proj.'s Andrew Mathis attempts damage control'

'Email from Andrew Mathis (The Holocaust History Project)'

'holocaust' History Project to unveil section on Treblinka'

This, by the way, is vintage Hargis: whereas deniers are allowed to reopen debates that have long been settled, everyone else is 'debunked' once and for all. The constant references to 'panic' and 'imminent shattering of the myth' are also vintage Hannover, betraying, as we've said before, a perhaps dim awareness of his own mortality (Johnny is 57) and the fact that though he rules supreme in the Führerbunker, aside from a handful of acolytes, no one takes him seriously. That's why we check in at his forum, so we can have a good laugh.

And then we have the comment of Friedrich Braun:

-----------------------------------
friedrich braun
Thu May 18, 2006 11:54 am
-----------------------------------
Andrew Mathis writes:
Wilhelm Stäglich Dies
CODOH hates it when I celebrate deaths of Holocaust deniers, but let me just say: This bastard should rot in hell.

Now, how psychologically twisted and morally depraved do you have to be to do a little dance while high-fiving each other and yelping with joy because someone died? Did Stäglich participate in some "war crimes"? NO. All he ever did is write books exposing the endless lies of the holocau$t industry...and that's enough to to earn him eternal enmity.
Mathis has always struck me as both a creep and an asshole.
What kind of a man hates with such blind passion?

And thank you for overreacting precisely in the way Andrew hoped for - poor ol' Herr Braun does not seem to realise he has been comprehensively wound up.

A short while later, another specimen of pond-life, Vali, chimes in wondering why CODOH Watch hasn't met the NAFCASH 'Treblinka Challenge':

-----------------------------------
vali
Thu May 18, 2006 12:51 pm
CODOH Watch and NAFCASH
-----------------------------------
I notice that the mentally retarded/ill cowards and liars at CODOH Watch have yet to make any comments on the NAFCASH site, much less accept any of the NAFCASH challenges. What does it say about an issue when the Jews give it the silent treatment?
By the way, if you haven't visited the - http://www.nafcash.com/ - site lately, The Treblinka CSI Challenge is up to $210,000.00 and the NAFCASH Forensic Challenge is up to $25,000.00.
I wonder what that idiot - loser Mathis is waiting for?

Such rage. Such coherence. Such a shame Vali is projecting so badly onto us that one might wonder whether he might not be a cousin of Celtic Patriot.

Denier-baiting: fun for all the family...

Update:
Friedrich Braun sneers:

Oops, I almost forgot. That would be Mathis "PhD" of course.
In the cognitively demanding field of... English lit. -- and from a second rate place. A trained, one-lobed monkey can get a grad. degree in English lit....it's not exactly particle physics.

We look forward to seeing Herr Braun's own qualifications. A Habilitation perhaps?
- Nick Terry, PhD in History, King's College London

What's with the IQ and stuff?

White supremacists are obsessed with IQ. Why, then, most of them are mumbling imbeciles, with apparent IQs of chimps?

Here's an excellent example from the Stormfront forum. Some "Celtic_Patriot" learns of the recent news about Germany updating the list of the German Jews killed in the Holocaust. His conclusion? Holocaust is a hoax, what else!

Being a Jew, you'd like only Jews to speak for the whole World, only problem is, China and Germany don't care about the Jews anymore, the 50 years of mourning is up and it's on with regular business, after all it was only, it turns out, 150,000 Jews, not 6,000,000. Oh well, time to shut down the Hoax museums, big deal.

When it is pointed out to him that the report speaks about the German Jews only, and thus even in principle cannot "disprove" the total accepted approximate figure of the Holocaust victims, this yahoo stubbornly goes on and on, digging himself even deeper into manure of his own making.


Celtic_Patriot, apparently an high-IQ specimen
Enjoy the thread!

PS: Later the freak says:

Whites are smarter than Jews.

Bwahahahaha!

Update: he's still at it. Please, tell me, where are such retards born? Surely near some nuclear plant?

The Eminently Fair CODOH Forum Moderator

In one of the more amusing moments over at the Jonnie Hargis-run CODOH Forum, a thread was begun by one of the members (all of whom are Holocaust deniers -- there is actually little or no debate going on over there), and it was deleted by the "moderator." Then it was reposted, with the "moderator" noting, "To avoid favoritism, I have left only the original post."

Of course, the original post was by Jonnie Hargis (Hannover). Personally, I'd think it was favoritism if I didn't know, thanks to CODOH founder Bradley Smith saying so, that Hargis is the moderator as well as a participant.

As our own Sergey Romanov noted earlier, despite claims of desire for "open debate." Smith's admission, which he quickly deleted from his own blog, can be found in Sergey's links.

As long as Smith continues to employ Hargis as his useful idiot moderator, only RODOH will remain as the open-debate Holocaust forum on the Internet.

Jews / vermin

While you're reading this illuminating CODOH thread, keep in mind that "revisionism" has nothing to do with antisemitism. Well, at least according to "revisionists" themselves.

Update: Also see this.

The first dirty foot in a rotten mouth

I said:

Let's see how the deniers react, though. Will they say that it makes up for "revisionists'" arrests?

Well, the first response is in.

A German neo-Nazi writes:

If he was arrested only because of his opinion or his scientific results - well then...

... this would be a hate crime against my nation and the German people. It is absolutely ok that hoaxters are arrested and sentenced because of hate speech.

Sicko doubts the Holocaust, hailed by the Cesspit slime.

Certain Bob Allen, a "cyber libertarian and advocate for the basic human rights of men", who thinks that rape does not hurt women ("... when a female refuses sex with a man, she's telling him that she has no respect for him as a man. She receives what she does to others.") also doubts the Holocaust.

Not surprisingly, his idiocy is re-published at the Cesspit. Birds of a feather...

Anyway, here's my very rude ;-) response to the schmuck. It hasn't been published by him yet (the comments there are moderated):

Sir, you're a gross ignoramus, nothing else. How about learning something about the topic (the basics, at least), before showing that you're a fool?

You write:

"Indeed there were gas chambers and crematoriums, but why build so many acres of barracks holding hundreds of thousands if the function of the place is just to exterminate them?"

But you're raising a strawman here. No, extermination was not the sole function of concentration camps. Moreover, most concentration camps didn't even have that function.

The Jews - and non-Jews - were used for labor. It were mainly the Jews who were not fit for labor who were immediately sent to the gas chambers.

Such a simple fact, and you could have learned it if you have just got off your lazy ass and read a book.

Here's my diagnosis: you are a moron.

I often respond quite rudely to the denier drivel, and sometimes maybe I go over the top. But in this case that's what was needed, wouldn't you agree? ;-)

Update: Some of his posts look like satire/black humor, Landover Baptist style. I'm not completely sure if this is a real person, all points still stand, though ;-)

Update 2: Bradley Smith chimes in:

You're experience of visceral doubt with regard to the Holocaust story, without substantial research into the matter, rings a bell for me. I had the same experience many years ago. Out of the blue.

CODOH is not antisemitic.

Even when one of their "finest" says things like:

It's all a matter of Jews playing 'good cop, bad cop.' Fake disagreements to make a record that Jews are not totally cohesive.

No Sirree! Not antisemitic at all.

Update: Also lookie here. No antisemitic agenda there, don't even think about it!

"CODOH" my ass - Bradley Smith's hypocrisy

"CODOH" stands for "Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust", the Holocaust denial organization founded by Bradley Smith.

Recently the so-called "Revisionist Forum" has become the official forum of CODOH's website. For several years the forum has been run by UCLA library assistant Jonnie Hargis ("Hannover"), though now several other persons may help to moderate it. The forum is known for its severe censorship of opposing viewpoints - many prominent online anti-deniers have been banned from it basically for effectively debunking deniers' arguments (though false excuses have been given for their banning). But not only anti-deniers are banned. For example "revisionist" Scott Smith, head of alternative forum "RODOH" ("Real Open Debate on the Holocaust") has also been banned.

Bans are not the only tools of censorship at CODOH forum. Many posts just do not make it there (if the poster is in pre-moderation mode), many are deleted, some are edited before appearing. I have experienced this myself, as did many other participants, whether "revisionists" or anti-"revisionists". Not a perfect "1984" emulation, but pretty close.

Recently a Portuguese denier AS Marques, who for some time has been participating in discussions at CODOH forum (and was initially welcome there) complained about Hargis' practices at Bradley Smith's blog. After several replies Smith has simply deleted the whole thread, but you can read most of it here.

So, what do we have here? A "revisionist" complains about Orwellian practices at a "revisionist" forum. Bradley Smith, this self-described libertarian, striving for the "Open Debate on the Holocaust", turns the blind eye on the complaint, dreams up excuses for Hargis' behavior, and then sends the complaint and the ensuing discussion to the Memory Hole.

That's Open Debate for you, folks.

Update: AS Marques says in the comments that his comments were deleted by his request.

Quick note

We have updated the posting about "k0nsl"-"Haldan" with even juicier quotes.

Just another poor, persecuted "revisionist" victim

Certain "Haldan" at the Cesspit writes:

I have been involved in several discussions lately and all I hear in response is how evil those who does not believe in the allegations that the Germans are supposed to have "gassed" people are, all they can come up with in response is that he or she is a "nazi", and my discsussion partners will even use the quote at the index of the NIZKOR organisation to prove that it is the aim of not believing in such absurdities to "white-wash" National Socialism. A quote from somebody who NIZKOR probably believes represents our thoughts and feelings--what else could they be thinking when they put such tripe so prominently; in any case people will use it to win the argument by labeling the non-Believer a "nazi" and somebody who wants to "white-wash", or as the quote alleges, make National Socialism an "acceptable political alternative again". I just shake my head. I don't know what to reply to such idiocy.

Instead of trying to prove how evil those who does not share their belief are, why can't they explain the procedure of burning one thousand or two thousand people in a swamp, each day and night? Perhaps they would be willing to explain the procedure required for maintaining and cleaning a "gas chamber" in which two thousand bodies has been "gassed" with a fumigant? Why do they not answer such questions. How does one cremate multiple bodies in mere minutes, when it is perfectly known, that it takes sometimes more than one hour to burn just one?

These are just three questions which I have never seen one answer for.

Ah, those evil "exterminationists"! Why would they call an honest seeker of Truth a Nazi?

Here's why.

This "Haldan" (also known as "k0nsl", "Franz Holtzhaeuser", "Micke Andersson", "Jonathan Andersson", "System33r"; "JackBQuick"; apparently he resides in Sweden) has left quite a "paper trail" of the quotes such as these:

Let us make a new beginning today so that we can annihilate the Jew[*]

the Jews are our misfortune. [meta tag at *]

Thanks for giving us such interesting insights of this ancient race of coprophiliacs, urolagniacs, menstruophobes, incest addicts, child rapists, child murderers, slavers, pimps, pornographers, con artists, genocide artists, bloodsuckers, extortioners, and purveryors of filth etc,. etc,. -- the JEW. [*]

[About the above quote:] Those were not insults but rather ambient facts. I need not insult the Jews, one may only note their behaviour; but doing so will earn you the well-known 'anti-Semite' label, which Jews are generous of handing out whenever they wish. [*]

Two thousand children rejoiced with Julius Streicher....

The Gauleiter [Streicher] told the little ones about the terrible times after the war, when the Devil dominated mankind. "Do you know who the Devil is," he asked his breathlessly listening audience. "The Jew, the Jew," resounded from a thousand children's voices.[*]

Obviously untrue and only a Jew would continue after being instructed that the claim is not true. [*]

It is true, isn't it, Mathis? Somebody instructs you that your claims has no basis in reality, that they lack merits and that there simply isn't any proof whatsoever for your claims - yet you continue in the same spirit. It is only possible in the mind of a Jew. They never get it, and when you tell them, they just deny the information, pretend they never saw it, and repeat their false claims. [*]

Maybe you two should ask the question why Jews lie so often and so much. It should prove interesting even for your low standards. [*]

Jews' are famous for arson.

:) [*]

It does make a difference to point out that you are a Jew, another one in the line, to make false and fictitious claims. This is what Jews are famous for and I don't understand why it should be considered 'anti-semitism' to point that out. [*]

Jewish logic is incredibly awkward. It is truly idiotic. [*]

No, Mathis, you're a Jew. A quick look in the mirror will certainly tell, those 'eyes of death' [yes; they truly look lifeless], the ugly shape of the thin cranium, those obscenely huge ears, lets not even mention the nose. The mouth looks like a small hole, lips are hard to tell, probably a puffy under-lip. Apart from that, it looks like your forehead is retreating. No manly traits, either.

You're a Jew. Be proud [*]

Dear Mr. Mathis,

Can you verify if it really is you on the below photograph or if it isn't?

andrew.mathis.net/mathis.jpg

The eyes of that person look very deceitful. You say you are a Jew and
I have seen this trait in other Jews aswell. I can give examples.

Faithfully,
-F. H [*]

Well, that at least proves that you're not an anti-Semite.

Exactly. I hope you mean it, because it is a well-known fact, that many Jews will write one thing and it will mean something entirely different. [*]

If there was a "holocaust" it must have been of insignificant and absolutely laughable proportions; if so, why are the Jews moaning about it so much, whenever they get a chance?
The German civilian population who was the victim of repeated fire-bombs are "holocaust" victims a hundred times more than the Jews who were just sent to concentration camps (safe-keeping), where they learned how to work, how to be somewhat decent.
There was no "jewish holocaust", no "gas chambers" and no "systematic extermination". A couple of them died in the end of the war because of the conditions imposed on Germany by the Allied bombers (the infrastructure broke down completely), and a couple of them died while trying to play soldiers without belonging to a proper army, and whilst not wearing a recognized uniform -- you know, terrorists or as it used to be called; partisans. Cowards who usually ambushed the victims, but never engaged the enemy in a honest way.
To hell with the "holocaust" lies and those who try to uphold them. [*]

Germany was forced into war. The jews declared war on Germany 1933[*]

I guess you have just verified that what I said in regards to Jews, making false claims whilst having been informed of their false nature, was true afterall. [*]

Bring every little Jud' with you from America and various European countries so that we might have some peace, decency and also a reinstatement of morals, values and such.
With your people at the controls there is nothing else to expect but a decline of what I just mentioned above. These are perfectly normal observations and is not "hatred", which I am sure you will probably "spew" out from the tip of the lip, its always like that, when confronted with something you cannot handle. [*]

Um. Why would anybody assume that such a nice guy is a Nazi?

Cesspit residents strike back!

They have finally noticed this blog and are starting to address our arguments!..

Not.

No comments necessary

Here are responses of "revisionists" to the arson attack on the Holocaust History Project office:
Official CODOH forum

Why would Revisionists want them silenced? Are they kidding? Their material is a blessing to Revisionists efforts. Their laughable 'documents' and the irrational material on their website have been utterly demolished by Revisionists, each and every one.
"a pair of military uniforms worn by a judge at the Dachau trials". What's up with that? Do these clowns run around in WWII uniforms?

There has been quite a lot of cases during the last years of "hate crimes" being perpetrated by the "victims", and I wouldn't put it past Mazal et.al in this case. I mean, their "evidence" and "refutations" are mainly made out of thin air, so they could easily replace the old ones.

Two thousand (2,000) books? I would imagine many of them would be Holocaust books. Holocaust books in the future will be the testament to the scope of the fraud. As things start to spiral downwards for the Holocaust community they will be making a effort to burn their own books. You know, attempts at erasing the record. Who knows, maybe the process is already in motion. They could even have mass burnings and then try to capitalize on it.

What if it was a group of Jewish lesbians imitating the hate crime at Claremont college in California.

Denier at RODOH

The truth is that the arsonists are Mazal, Keren et al.
This is their surrender. They found out that there is no prove for the h-cheese.

Another denier at RODOH

Jews' are famous for arson.
:)

What They Won't Tell You At CODOH

Somehow, I doubt Hargis/Hannover will ever link over CODOH to this particular story from the Middle East Times in his pro-Iranian Zeal.

Former Iranian president attacks Ahmadinejad over Holocaust
By Stefan Smith
AFP
Published March 1, 2006

Iran's former reformist president Mohammad Khatami has described the Holocaust as a "historical reality" - a stinging attack on his controversial and revisionist successor Mahmud Ahmadinejad.
"We should speak out if even a single Jew is killed. Don't forget that one of the crimes of Hitler, Nazism and German national socialism was the massacre of innocent people, among them many Jews," the cleric said in comments carried in the Iranian press on Wednesday. The Holocaust, he asserted, should be recognized "even if this historical reality has been misused and there is enormous pressure on the Palestinian people".

Ahmadinejad has caused international outrage by insisting that the Holocaust - the killing of an estimated 6 million Jews by the Nazis and their allies during World War II in death camps and elsewhere - was a myth used to justify the creation of Israel. He has also said that the Jewish state "must be wiped off the map" or moved as far away as Alaska - comments that have provoked anger in the West and even condemnation from the UN Security Council. Ahmadinejad's violent rhetoric has also served to increase tensions over Iran's atomic energy drive, seen in the West as a mask for weapons development.
Khatami served as Iran's president from 1997 to 2005, and attempted to open up Iran to the West and initiate a "dialogue among civilizations" - in stark contrast to the ultraconservative agenda of Ahmadinejad. The mild-mannered former president, who has shied away from the political limelight since leaving office, also asserted Muslims were not out to persecute Jews. "The persecution of Jews, just like Nazism, is a Western phenomenon. In the east, we have always lived side by side with them. And we follow a religion that states that the death of an innocent person is the death of all of humanity," Khatami said.
He also argued that it was of little importance "whether the number killed [during the Holocaust] was high or not" - but at the same time went on to accuse Israel's leaders as being "victims of fascism and practicing fascist policies today".
Ahmadinejad also came under attack from the prominent and centrist Shargh newspaper, which complained that "the Holocaust has, as wished for by the president, become a topic of our foreign policy".
"The Jewish question was never a problem for Iran or Islam, and is a Christian-European problem," the paper argued. "Don't we have enough with the nuclear question, human rights, free elections and political in-fighting, so do we need to add another problem to that?" it said, saying that Iran would be better off "thinking of the creation of a Palestinian state rather than the destruction of Israel". But an editorial in the ultra-hardline Kayhan newspaper, a firm supporter of Ahmadinejad, continued to champion Holocaust revisionism. The president's controversial remarks, the paper said, were "like a dagger in the side of the US and its allies".
Iran's top-selling daily, Hamshahri, is also running a contest for cartoons of the Holocaust in a tit-for-tat move over European newspaper publications of caricatures of the Prophet Mohammed that have angered Muslims worldwide. And Iran's foreign ministry is sticking by its plan to host a conference on the Holocaust - an idea that British Prime Minister Tony Blair has described as "shocking, ridiculous, stupid". Last month Iran's Ambassador to Portugal Mohammed Taheri also questioned the Holocaust, telling Portuguese public radio that "to incinerate 6 million people, you'd need around 15 years". Iran has nevertheless offered to send a team of "independent investigators" to the former Nazi death camps.

Meet Moonbat

Meet Moonbat. He's a typical Holocaust Denier. He has genuine learning difficulties and reading comprehension problems, since he's, you guessed it, from the Moon. Though some actually doubt the existence of the Moon and claim it's just another Hoax. But we know better, don't we?
You'll be seeing a lot of Moonbat in the coming weeks and months, so I wanted to get the introductions out the way early, since we're all friends round here (so far).

Told you we'd have fun.

[Addendum: just to clarify, "moonbat" is usually a word used by the far-right to describe the left. We began using it in 2006 to denote crazy Holocaust deniers, who are found among far-left and far-right extremists, certainly not meaning that Holocaust denial is somehow peculiar to the far-left (in fact, in our experience the far-right deny the Holocaust much more frequently). If anything, our dear Moonbat's surname is Wingnut. So, meet Moonbat the Wingnut!]

Intention and Explanation

This is where we begin.

To choose the title of a twenty-five-year-old essay by Tim Mason to headline the first post of this blog might at first glance seem obscure. But although Mason was writing a quarter of a century ago, his exposition of the debate been the rival intentionalist and structuralist or functionalist schools of interpretation of the Third Reich retains a power and impact which has rarely been bettered since. Moreover, this essay, to be found in the collection Nazism, Fascism and the Working Class, Cambridge, 1996, was one of the few occasions in which the leading historian of Nazi Germany of his era tackled the subject of the mass murder of European Jewry, the Holocaust. Like many historians of the 1960s generation that began to study the Third Reich intensively, Mason concentrated his efforts on the period leading up to the outbreak of the Second World War in 1939. He openly admitted that he was psychologically incapable of confronting the horrors of Nazism at war; a psychic block which some of his friends believe may have contributed to his tragic decision to take his own life in 1990.

Holocaust deniers would only snort at this tragedy. How could anyone be so affected by atrocities that never happened? To the doyens of 'historical revisionism', Mason's personal tragedy would become transmogrified into a far-right morality tale: look, see, the psychic damage that is being done because of this incessant propaganda about the Holocaust!

Yet they have reckoned without two things. The first is that the study of the Third Reich consists of much more than the forensics of the gas chambers at Auschwitz. I would almost wager that few leading 'revisionists' other than David Irving would even be aware of Mason's existence, let alone his writings. Holocaust denial fails not only as an account of the Holocaust, but of the Hitler era as a whole; it is a curious, stunted, impoverished freak-show of a history that has nothing to do with the rich historiography of Nazi Germany.

The second omission that 'historical revisionists' have made is to abstract their obsessions with the gas-chambers from the surrounding context of Nazi persecution and mass-murder of European Jews. They proffer interpretations of the death-camps and, more rarely, of Nazi Judenpolitik, that bear no resemblance to the reality of wie es eigentlich gewesen war, how it really happened. Time and time again one hears a litany from Holocaust deniers - it is alleged that six million Jews died in the gas chambers. Wrong. They confuse the 'Hollycaust' of media myth with the grubby reality of genocide; a reality that encompassed deliberately-induced starvation, epidemic diseases incubated inside ghettos and concentration camps; mass executions by rifles, machine-guns and the Genickschuss.

As a practising historian of the Third Reich and Stalinist Russia at war, I hope to dedicate some of my postings to this collective blog to discussing the genuine revisionist controversies that make my chosen profession and field so exciting. All historiography barring the first draft of history - the newspapers of the day - is by its very nature revisionist, challenging our previous interpretations of the past, and in the process hopefully forcing us to think through the events afresh. Since long before I began researching in this field, the study of the Third Reich and the Holocaust has proven especially controversial. Perhaps beginning with Hannah Arendt's Eichmann in Jerusalem in the 1960s, these controversies have come thicker and faster. From the intentionalist-functionalist debate of the late 1970s, the field moved on to disputing the tasks of the Einsatzgruppen five years later, and soon after to the Historikersteit of 1987. Before the end of the Cold War, German historians were tearing into Götz Aly and Susanne Heim for daring to highlight 'The Economics of the Final Solution'. They did so again after unification when Aly and Heim published Vordenker der Vernichtung in 1991, since translated into English as Architects of Annihilation. Five years later came the turn of Daniel Jonah Goldhagen and Hitler's Willing Executioners. This in turn generated a follow-on controversy over Norman Finkelstein's critique and subsequent publication of The Holocaust Industry. Finkelstein himself then intervened into the latest controversy, over Jan Tomas Gross's Neighbours and the pogrom of Jedwabne in eastern Poland scant weeks after the German invasion of the Soviet Union in 1941.

Holocaust Controversies was set up in part to discuss these debates between historians as well as news related to them. Since both myself and some of my fellow contributors have interests in similar controversies over the Stalinist regime in the Soviet Union, we will from time to time also discuss these debates, which offer so many remarkable parallels and sharp contrasts with the historiography of Nazi Germany.

But this blog has an additional, perhaps more important purpose, namely to confront the arguments of Holocaust Revisionism and 'historical revisionism' in general. It may come as no surprise to learn that professional, mainstream historians have paid relatively little attention to what they regard as the ramblings of cranks. I can testify to meeting expert witnesses for the defense in the David Irving libel trial, world-famous professors, who have never heard of the leading Italian Holocaust denier Carlo Mattogno.

Yet one only needs type in a concentration camp-related Google search to be met with a barrage of hits to 'Revisionist' websites. In this sense, professional historians have left the internet wide open for colonisation by deniers. Valiant efforts have been made by many, starting with the 1990s Nizkor project and the flame wars on alt.revisionism, to battle deniers online. We have linked to many such organisations, not least the explicit anti-denier site The Holocaust History Project as well as the implicit rebuttal of many a denier argument, the Aktion Reinhard Camps website. Some of the contributors to Holocaust Controversies are members of both organisations, yet this blog is independent of them both, and remains the expression of our personal views, not those of any corporate body.

The contributors here met online at the RODOH forum, the only place on the internet where there is Real Open Debate On the Holocaust. Other internet forums have either censored denial, or censor its rebuttal, but RODOH has allowed deniers and anti-deniers to argue with each other freely and openly.

The decision to set up Holocaust Controversies was a simple one: a blog allows forms of expression which a forum cannot; by its very nature, it demands more from the writers than even the best php-ed bulletin board can ever do. We are not, then, fleeing a denier onslaught; we can still be found hanging out over at RODOH. Rather, we hope that the medium of a blog will allow us to hone, refine and develop our arguments, and to present material that falls in between the quickfire postings of a forum, and longer essays that might find homes elsewhere.

In engaging with denier arguments, some might charge that we pay them too much respect. Yet this reckons without the insidiousness of what are otherwise absurd debating-points. Like it or not, Holocaust Denial must be confronted. In spite of the work done by web projects and academics to demolish Holocaust Denier arguments, 'revisionist' literature is mushrooming yearly and by no means all arguments have been deconstructed and exposed. We therefore will from time to time post reviews, critiques and ongoing debates about the 'classics' of 'Revisionist' literature, which we hope readers may find instructive, even perhaps enlightening as to the inadequacies of 'Revisionist' argumentation.

Yet we also intend to have fun here. So much of what is posted on the internet as 'Revisionism' is so ludicrously absurd that we will also respond with laughter. In part, we were compelled to set up this blog in order to maintain a record of the illogicalities, inanities and insanities to be found on the heavily censored, hyper-moderated circle-jerk known as The Revisionist Forum over at the Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust website. That we informally call this The Cesspit will persist so long as this forum remains censored and inaccessible for us. Most contributors here have either been banned from CODOH forum or have not even bothered trying to post there, knowing full well they would not survive much longer than.... well, you can probably guess.

'Revisionists' might charge that the playing-field is not level; that 'Revisionist' writers are hampered in their research efforts, persecuted, prosecuted and thrown into jail. Let it be stated from the outset that we do not endorse censorship of any kind; nor are we in favour of anti-Holocaust Denial laws being passed in Britain or the United States. We would prefer that continental countries such as Germany, Austria and France did not make martyrs out of Deniers. Yet it should not be forgotten that Holocaust Deniers are convicted and sentenced for hate-speech, not for 'revising history'. No functionalists can be found in jail, as much as some within my profession might like to lock up mavericks like Christian Gerlach or Götz Aly.

In Britain, the bar for incitement is set relatively high; as it should be. We will show no compunction or mercy towards revisionists who express what we feel are racist or antisemitic views; we will accuse and criticise them accordingly. It is however up to others to decide whether their racism has breached the laws of the land in question. As far as we are concerned, it is beyond proven that David Irving, for example, is a racist antisemite; yet he would not be convicted in a British court.

Therefore, we will state the following: we are paying Holocaust Denial the respect of engaging its arguments on a scientific, historiographical basis. No others. If we discuss history, comments from readers are welcome on the history, from all viewpoints. Should readers post tired old saws about how many 'revisionists' are jailed in their comments on history posts, their posts will be edited or deleted at the administrators' whim. This is editing and moderating, not censorship.

We will, however, also discuss the politics of Holocaust controversies and Holocaust Denial. Readers are welcome to comment on the proprieties of censorship, jail sentences and the International Conspiracy in response to those posts.

In similar fashion, we reserve the right to use the terms Holocaust Denial and 'Revisionism' interchangeably. This is our blog, after all.

With that, let the blogging begin.