Part V of mark Weber's testimony of "The Importance of the Zundel Hearing in Toronto" addresses the question of "Just who are these people called 'Revisionists"?.
[start]
"Big Tent" Revisionism
After Rosen's bout, it was Freiman's turn to question me. His main point was to get me to say that Norman Finkelstein is not a Holocaust revisionist. However valid Finkelstein's points may be, he suggested, they should not be compared with the parallel remarks cited in the supposedly hateful Zundelsite documents. I readily acknowledged that Finkelstein apparently accepts the standard Holocaust extermination story, and holds views about specifics of World War II history that differ from those expressed by such revisionists as Robert Faurisson, Arthur Butz and myself.
All the same, I defined Holocaust revisionism rather broadly, saying that it includes not only a skeptical or critical look at the role and treatment of Europe's Jews during the Second World War, but also the social, political and cultural impact of those events in society today. On this basis, I said, Finkelstein may "arguably" be regarded as a Holocaust revisionist. Not surprisingly, I pointed, some Jewish critics of his work have denounced him as a Holocaust revisionist or denier. (For example, Rabbi Irving Greenberg, Chairman of the US Holocaust Memorial Council, a US federal government agency, calls Finkelstein’s book "a form of Holocaust denial" [New York Jewish Week, Sept. 8, 2000].)
Holocaust revisionism, I repeatedly pointed out, is a "big tent" that includes writers, scholars and activists who sometimes disagree among themselves about specific historical issues. In this regard, I mentioned disagreements (aired in this Journal) between, for example, Jürgen Graf and Arthur Butz, and between Robert Faurisson and David Irving. I also pointed out that prominent revisionists have, over the years, modified their views about specific issues, in somewhat the way that Raul Hilberg, perhaps the most prominent "establishment" Holocaust historian, has strikingly modified his views over time.
Double Standard
An important early witness against Zundel in this case was Gary D. Prideaux, a Professor of Linguistics at the University of Edmonton. In his testimony about the "complained of" documents downloaded from the Zundelsite, he said that "the epithet "Holocaust lobby’" is used "to refer to Jews," and that "the term Holocaust lobbyists is used as a negative epithet for Jews."
This is simply not true, as any open-minded person can readily grasp, especially taking into account the entirety of the site's postings. Contrary to the claims of the anti-Zundel side, the "complained of" Zundelsite documents do not attack "Jews, but instead take aim at "the worldwide Holocaust lobby," "Holocaust lobbyists,"and "the Jewish lobby -- or the Israeli lobby, as some like to call it."
This important distinction is obvious, for example, in one of the allegedly "hateful" passages carefully culled by Canadian officials from the vast Zundelsite. In this "complained of" document ("tab"22), taken from a March 1997 issue of Zundel's Power newsletter, he expresses concern, not "hatred or contempt," for the mass of Jews. Zundel writes: "I fear for the "little Jew" who has no voice and no say in this matter, but ultimately will have to suffer the fallout!"
As was brought out during Christie's examination of me, a number of Jewish writers have made this same point in recent years. In The Holocaust Industry, Prof. Finkelstein stresses that major Jewish organizations carry out a "shakedown" that cheats authentic Jewish wartime victims of reparations payments that Jewish leaders have "extorted" in their names.
By the standard that Canadian authorities are applying to Zundel, Internet communications even by established news services should be subject to prosecution. For example, on February 1, 2000, the renowned British news service BBC distributed through the Internet, and without comment, an editorial published the day before in a major Syrian daily paper, Tishrin. The editorial, which Jewish groups vehemently denounced as anti-Semitic, told readers:
» ...Zionist organizations are trying, as usual, to revive their own distorted view of history and exploit it in deceiving the world public, winning its sympathy and then blackmailing it... Zionism has invented the Holocaust myth to blackmail the world and terrorize its intellectuals and statesmen. It is applying the Holocaust method in dealing with the Arabs. «
[end]
Tomorrow's Conclusion: An Orwellian Concept of Rights
Comments: -- Mark Weber / weber@ihr.org
Thought for the Day:
"It is ... the Holocaust industry's falsification of history that fosters Holocaust denial."
(Prof. N. Finkelstein in the very influential German daily "Süddeutsche Zeitung" on Sep. 9, 2000, p. 17 )