Copyright (c) 1997 - Ingrid
A. Rimland
February 15, 1998
Good Morning from the Zundelsite:
This is the final segment on the "David Cole Defection."
A major strike was needed to stop Revisionism from gaining an intellectual
foothold on college campuses, even if it meant a brazen threat of "eliminating"
a gifted Revisionist speaker and writer who just happened to be a Jew.
In what looks like several position paper summary posted on the Anti-Defamation's
web page, http://www.adl.org, we learn some astonishing statistics. We also
get a strong sense of the Holocaust Promoters' feeling of embattlement or
even encirclement. What has happened to David Cole and David Bradley must
be evaluated in that light.
In a paper titled "ADL reports Holocaust Denial Ad Campaign targets
college newspapers," dated December 10, 1997, we are given a neat summary
of where, precisely, the shoe is pinching badly:
"A renewed effort by a veteran Holocaust denier to target
college students was reported by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL). According
to ADL, Bradley Smith has inundated campus newspapers with requests to place
anti-Semitic and Holocaust denial ads. The League is alerting campus editors
and advertising managers to Smith's background, tactics, and motives, and
urging them to take a strong stand against promoting Holocaust denial by
refusing to run his material.
"The First Amendment is not an issue here," said Abraham H. Foxman,
ADL National Director. "There is no moral or legal obligation to present
anti-Semitic, hateful propaganda. Rejecting these ads does not violate freedom
of expression. They deny the reality of the Holocaust and perpetuate blatant
lies about the near-extinction of European Jewry. Would a campus newspaper
run an ad that denies slavery in America?"
Some argument, that! Would an insurance company, forced to pay huge damages
at point of bayonet, buy into that kind of flimsy rhetoric and grandstanding?
The post goes on to say:
"With this recent activity, ads have appeared in newspapers
at the University of Nebraska, Colgate, Cleveland State, Pace, MIT, University
of Denver, Farleigh Dickenson, Villanova, Rice, University of New Haven,
SUNY New Paltz, SUNY Fredonia, and University of Delaware. 'ADL has been
in contact with college leadership on each affected campus, providing guidance
and exhaustive documentary materials on Holocaust denial. We have been instrumental
in urging college presidents to speak out on this issue,' said Jeffrey Ross,
ADL Director of Campus Affairs and Higher Education.
"Smith's new tactic is to offer a large monetary incentive to readers.
A quarter-page ad offers ($)50,000 to the one individual instrumental in
arranging a 90-minute presentation on National Network Television, in prime-time,
of the 'Video of the Century,' a video produced by Holocaust deniers. 'The
offer is just a hook to draw attention to the information in the ad and
lure readers to Smith's Holocaust denial web site,' said Mr. Ross. 'There
is also a smaller ad that attempts to attract people to the web site by
promising to reveal mis-representations in an exhibit at the U.S. Holocaust
Museum,' he added, 'and, an op-ed piece that is a slickly-worded attempt
to deny the existence of mass gassing at Nazi death camps by arguing that
the doors leading into the gas chambers are really standard-issue doors
made for bomb shelters.'
"Smith, who heads the so-called Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust
(CODOH), has been attempting to infiltrate campus press for almost 8 years.
In 1991, he published a full-page paid advertisement in The Daily Northwestern
of Northwestern University. The ad, which looked like a news article, carried
the headline, 'The Holocaust Story: How Much is False? The Case for Open
Debate.' Since then, Smith has managed to place Holocaust denial ads in
papers on nearly 80 campuses."
So is Revisionism still 'a small movement of the lunatic fringe', as has
so often argued? Evidently the ADL does not seem to think so and has come
out swinging in blatant censorship moves. Instead of ignoring it, the ADL
has moved into high gear, having admitted elsewhere that 80% of their resources
are devoted to getting a handle on the Internet.
Furthermore, the ADL is summarizing the state of the art of Revisionism
in a half-smarmy, half-panicky way:
"As revealed by a November 1990 poll, commissioned by
the ADL Braun Center for Holocaust Studies and the United States Holocaust
Memorial Council, the public generally views the Holocaust with concern
and understanding, rather than smugness and flippancy. Nonetheless, there
remains a movement of hard-core anti-Semites still attempting to sway popular
opinion by whitewashing Hitler's regime and denying or trivializing the
crimes committed in its name.
"The 1990 survey, conducted by the polling firm Yankelovich Clancy
Shulman among 885 individuals across the nation 97.5 percent of whom were
non-Jews, indicated that 64 percent of the respondents saw a fair or great
amount of relevance in the Holocaust when dealing with current moral issues.
. . Seventy-three percent believed it was very important or essential that
it be incorporated into American education, and 90 percent felt that everyone,
not just Jews, should be concerned about this event. In light of the vigilance
which the Jewish community has applied to maintain awareness of the Holocaust,
it is reassuring to note that 85 percent of those polled believed in the
importance of exposure to the Holocaust to prevent it from ever happening
again."
Sounds exactly like the ever more desperate-sounding mantra that is shoveled
into the brains of the breast-beating Germans. And here comes the core of
the problem, as neatly summarized by the ADL post:
"Considering the overwhelming awareness and compassion
with which these Americans view the Holocaust, why is it necessary to focus
a report on small groups . . . who seek to malign and deny the enormous
reality of this event? The answer lies partly among the survey's 19 percent
who felt the Holocaust was something Americans heard too much about, and
the 26 percent -- more than one in four -- who thought it was relatively
unimportant to incorporate the Holocaust into American education; this is
the segment of the population potentially most susceptible to the lies of
Holocaust 'revisionism.'
"Moreover, there are substantial numbers of people who apparently are
unaware of the event entirely. In a 1985 Yankelovich poll conducted with
Time magazine, 22 percent of those questioned admitted not knowing what
the Holocaust was, and an additional 10 percent identified the event incorrectly.
"Although the present ADL survey reflects progress in public understanding
and sensitivity toward the subject, it also indicates that awareness of
the Holocaust diminishes among respondents who never attended college and
among respondents between 18 and 30 years of age, regardless of education.
"Furthermore, the results of the poll do not reflect attitudes in other
countries, or fluctuations of opinion that have occurred recently in the
United States. The German public, for obvious reasons, demonstrates greater
ambivalence toward the Holocaust than Americans. A 1992 Der Spiegel poll
indicated that 62 percent of the Germans questioned wanted an end to the
focus on the Nazi regime. Forty-four percent believed Hitler's leadership
had both good and bad traits. And 32 percent felt that Jews were at least
partly to blame for the persecution they had experienced.
"A Roper Organization poll conducted after President Ronald Reagan's
controversial 1985 visit to the Bitburg cemetery revealed some American
attitudes similar to present-day Germany's. At that time, forty percent
of those polled wanted Jews to stop calling attention to Nazi atrocities.
Forty-nine percent wanted to forgo the search for Nazi war criminals in
the U.S."
That's one in two! That is an enormously powerful undertow that could knock
many a Holocaust promoter off his feet!
Hence we get this, still from the ADL:
"Thus, although current American attitudes toward the
significance of the Holocaust seem generally sympathetic and well informed,
there is no guarantee that they will remain so. As Holocaust 'revisionists'
become increasingly sophisticated in their tactics, the relatively small
segment of the population indifferent to or ignorant of the Holocaust is
increasingly vulnerable to their falsehoods. Becoming informed of the contentions
and tactics of the 'revisionists' is therefore vital to limiting and countering
their impact.
(...)
When Holocaust 'revisionists' dispute the events of the Nazi regime, such
as the genocide policy known as the 'Final Solution' or the presence of
gas chambers at Auschwitz, or the documentation supporting these facts,
they are attacking what they assert is the Jewish stranglehold on academia,
the media, and international politics. As veteran 'revisionist' Bradley
Smith has written, 'The primary interest of the author [Smith himself] is
not what happened in Europe 45 years ago, but in how history and historic
lies affect the lives of individuals living today.' For the Holocaust 'revisionist,'
the gas chambers -- as the leader of France's radical right, Jean-Marie
Le Pen, has said -- are merely 'a point of detail.'
(...)
"Holocaust 'revisionism' has appeared in the United States, Canada,
and throughout Europe to deny Germany's atrocities during World War II.
Moreover, this propaganda has been used by some Arab figures -- such as
Luai Abdo, a PLO magazine editor who has published articles claiming 'Nazi
camps were more 'civilized' than Israeli prisons' -- and their fellow travellers
to attack and undermine the legitimacy of the State of Israel. Indeed, 'revisionists'
have often referred to the Holocaust specifically as Zionist propaganda.
(...)
"Clearly, however, to condemn mass murder is not a 'moralizing judgment.'
With their attempts to explain away the death count, and their distortions
of the use of Zyklon B gas and other features of the concentration camps,
'revisionists' deliberately seek to erase the fact that millions died in
a project of industrialized racial annihilation. Like the Nazis themselves,
they efface the humanity of the victims by reducing them to items on a ledger,
to be deleted at will.
"In addition to blatant neo-Nazism and outright denial of the Holocaust,
however, is a notable trend in legitimate historical scholarship which relativizes
the genocide of the Jews. Such scholars as Arno J. Mayer at Princeton and
Ernst Nolte at Berlin's Free University have argued, with no apparent anti-Semitic
motivation, that though millions of Jews were killed during WWII, there
was actually no premeditated policy for this destruction. This theory ignores
the blatant hatred Hitler long expressed toward Jews, and implies that the
Holocaust ultimately is comparable to other historical events, particularly
the Stalinist purges."
I say that here is where the shoe is pinching: The Holocaust Myth has prevented
people from asking legitimate questions, such as: "Who was behind those
purges?" This is one of the weightiest questions urgently needed to
be asked, and the answers will not please the Holocaust Promoters.
One last summary by the ADL:
"Holocaust scholar Deborah Lipstadt has called these
ideas the 'yes but' syndrome: Yes, there was a Holocaust, but it was a by-product
of the campaign against the Soviet Union. Yes, there was a Holocaust, but
some Jews died of starvation and disease (like German refugees after the
war). Lipstadt concludes: 'With enough latitude, the 'yes but' approach
robs the Holocaust of its uniqueness and its capacity to offer the world
ethical, moral, and political lessons. It reduces the Holocaust to a merely
relatively evil.'
"At its most extreme, this kind of relativism obscures the horror of
Nazi genocide completely. One telling example of this trend is that of the
linguistics professor and political activist Noam Chomsky, who wrote an
introduction to a Holocaust-denial book by French 'revisionist' Robert Faurisson.
In his essay Chomsky saw concerted opposition to Holocaust 'revisionism'
as censorship, arguing that scholars' ideas should not be suppressed no
matter how distasteful they may be. For Chomsky, the French author's misrepresentation
and historical fraud were merely an exercise in free speech. But to describe
legitimate opposition to Faurisson and widespread public condemnation of
his views as 'suppression' is to confuse the democratic exercise of free
speech with a tyrannical insistence on conformity of thought. Indeed, Alfred
Kazin has characterized Chomsky's argument as reflecting an incapability
'of making distinctions between totalitarian and democratic societies, between
oppressors and victims.'
"Such distinctions are crucial to recognizing the tactics of extremists
who in general are employing greater subtlety and dissimulation to reach
wider audiences. As the Institute for Historical Review publishes a journal
and holds conventions to mimic the formalities of legitimate scholarship,
and as Bradley Smith buys space in college newspapers to promote an 'open
debate' on the Holocaust, so other racists and anti-Semites around the world
have used sanitized political campaigns and exploited controversial social
issues to gain access to national debates and to attempt to influence the
general public.
"This report has been issued to expose and counter those who deny and
distort the Holocaust, and to illustrate the continuing need for effective
education on the subject. For it is crucial to preserve the memory of these
events, even as they recede into the past, in order to inform the moral
challenges that humankind still faces -- as in the recurrent neo-Nazi violence
in Germany, as well as reports of atrocities and 'ethnic cleansing' in Bosnia
-- and to prevent any such horror from occurring ever again."
With this well-known Holocaust Promotion mantra the Zundelsite assigns the
"David Cole Video Campaign" to the annals of the Internet Freedom
of Speech struggle.
One thing is clear: The enemy has bared its teeth. The doleful Elie Wiesel
smile has all but disappeared.
When I asked Ernst to summarize in one small paragraph what happened, in
the context of the last few months and weeks, he said:
"There is no way to stop Revisionism. In the David Cole Affair, Revisionism
lost one Jew through Jewish terror. In the Garaudy Affair, thanks to attempted
Jewish censorship, Revisionism gained 900 million Arabs/Muslims who have
been exposed to our findings."
Ingrid
Thought for the Day:
'Smooth runs the water where the brook is deep."
(William Shakespeare)
Comments? E-Mail: irimland@cts.com
Back to Table of Contents of the Feb. 1998 ZGrams