Respectful Insolence

A couple of weeks ago, I mentioned how Holocaust denier extraordinaire David Irving had gotten into some trouble with his former fellow travelers in the world of Holocaust denial. Apparently they didn’t like the fact that he now concedes that the mass slaughter of Jews “may have” occurred. Of course he still denies that Auschwitz was a death camp (actually, it was both a work camp and a death camp) or that Hitler knew anything about the killings, but he’s conceded more than his fellow Holocaust deniers would have liked him to concede, namely that as many as 2.4 million Jews may have been killed.

Now Holocaust denier Paul Grubach has expressed his displeasure with Irving by circulating an open letter to his fellow Holocaust deniers castigating Irving:

Paul Grubach’s Public Challenge to David Irving on His Change of Mind on Holocaust–To be widely circulated

Dear David,

You are clearly evading the issue, which is very unacceptable and is not appreciated by those of us who provided you with all types of support throughout the years for your Revisionist activities. You owe us a detailed explanation in regard to your claim that there is documentary evidence that refutes the Holocaust revisionist position.

I represent a considerable number of your supporters who loaned you and gave you money outright throughout the years. Indeed, Paul Grubach loaned you $2000 back in 2004, and I donated the interest that I was suppose to receive right back to David Irving. That means you held my money for over a year to do as you please with it, and then the interest that I was suppose to receive was put right back into your pocket.

Since over the years you received money and overall support from the Revisionist community, it is your duty to give that same community a detailed response to the following question. You took our money and support, now show some decency and respect for us by giving a thorough explanation of yourself. You gave the Revisionist community’s ideological enemy support for their viewpoint, now be so kind to give your supporters an explanation of your bewildering statements.

Here is the issue. You told the anti-revisionist, Jewish-Zionist Forward that: “If the document is genuine, it refutes the view of the revisionists that nothing happened.”

You told me the document in question, the one that changed your mind about the about the Holocaust, is the Hoefle document, at http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/docs/decode150143_Hofle.html

Presumably, this is an accurate and complete English translation of this piece of evidence. http://www.fpp.co.uk/History/General/Korherr/Heim311242.html

Based upon my preliminary analysis of the document, I believe it only speaks of large scale deportations. There is no mention of any mass murder or homicidal gas chambers. Thus, the document seems to be entirely consistent with the Holocaust revisionist position. Please correct me if I am mistaken.

So my question for you is this: Let us assume the document is 100% authentic and genuine. If this is so, how does it refute the Holocaust revisionist position? Please give a detailed and straightforward response.

All of us do appreciate much of the outstanding work you have done and wish you and your family well being and good fortune. In addition, we would be willing to offer you our support again in the future. We would like to see this rift healed.

However, I and a number of your other supporters just want from you what is rightfully due us. That is, a forthright response to our question.

The Revisionist Community Awaits Your Response,
Paul Grubach

It’s a beautiful thing to see the jackals turn on one of their own, as others pile on. One wonders if Irving will be able to count on the same people to buy his books. Of course, perhaps by stirring up this publicity, no doubt Irving hopes to sell more books, perhaps beyond his usual pathetic base of White supremacists, anti-Semites, and Holocaust deniers.

Fat chance.

In the meantime we are treated to the spectacle of Irving being invited to Oxford University to talk about “freedom of speech” (and later turning down the invitation), while he himself, like all good cranks, tries to stifle criticism with threats of legal action against publications that simply state the truth and call him a Holocaust denier (provoking this absolutely priceless retort from The Jewish Chronicle, which published the contact information for the law firm that represents it), as he publishes his self-serving accounts of his time in prison in Austria for Holocaust denial.

Comments

  1. #1 Ms. Littella
    October 22, 2007

    Are you sure they “castigated” him with a letter? I mean, sure, a paper cut can be nasty; but doesn’t it take a blade (or shears) to send a person into the soprano section?

    Never mind …

  2. #2 viggen
    October 22, 2007

    Are you sure they “castigated” him with a letter? I mean, sure, a paper cut can be nasty; but doesn’t it take a blade (or shears) to send a person into the soprano section?

    Never mind …

    “Castigate” means to reprimand, or to criticize. The word you’re thinking of is “castrate,” which is totally different;-)

  3. #3 Uncle Dave
    October 22, 2007

    “It’s a beautiful thing to see the jackals turn on one of their own.”

    Beautiful indeed.
    Another “Night of the Long Knives” perhaps?

  4. #4 Jamie
    October 22, 2007

    “Are you sure they “castigated” him with a letter? I mean, sure, a paper cut can be nasty; but doesn’t it take a blade (or shears) to send a person into the soprano section?

    Never mind …”

    A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

  5. #5 Uncle Dave
    October 22, 2007

    Am I not gettin it, or is everyone else way to serious for the Emily Littella joke?

  6. #6 Orac
    October 22, 2007

    More like everyone else is way too young to get the Emily Littella joke…

    Not me, though. Unfortunately, I’m not (too young, that is).

  7. #7 Uncle Dave
    October 22, 2007

    I have been outed as a mid to late boomer.
    Eventually I will be fully profiled based my responses to this site.

  8. #8 Marya
    October 23, 2007

    With Holocaust deniers, I always wonder: what exactly do they think happened to the millions of Jews who disappeared during World War II? Did they all just suddenly go on a really long vacation to Tahiti or something?

  9. #9 Thony C.
    October 23, 2007

    With Holocaust deniers, I always wonder: what exactly do they think happened to the millions of Jews who disappeared during World War II? Did they all just suddenly go on a really long vacation to Tahiti or something?

    A fairly standard but extremely stupid answer to this is that they didn’t disappear, its all lies to make the Nazis look bad. That’s why its called denial!

  10. #10 DLC
    October 23, 2007

    I’ve always found it odd how so many neo-nazis and other anti-semitic groups can simultaneously deny that the holocaust happened and bemoan that Hitler did not kill enough Jews.
    Talking out both sides of the mouth is one thing, but saying, and believing two different things at once?

    Bizarre.

  11. #11 Commius
    October 23, 2007

    …though, of course, Irving maintains that everything that happened to the Jews was their own fault, and moreover that they are responsible for all the wars of the last century. Odious little man…

  12. #12 Ian Thal
    October 23, 2007

    Talking out both sides of the mouth is one thing, but saying, and believing two different things at once?

    Doublethink: It’s how ideological extremists cope with reality’s inability to match up with their beliefs.

    More nefariously, the deniers use the claim of the hoax to further evangelize their anti-Semitic hatred, and to justify any means necessary to be liberated from “the hoax” and the “hoaxers.” It’s one of the newer innovations in Antisemitism, after all, the Deicide, and blood libel charges are many centuries, even millenia old.

  13. #13 tim gueguen
    October 24, 2007

    A common denier tactic is to claim that the numbers supposedly killed in the Holocaust, which of course didn’t happen anyways, cannot be accurate because more Jews were killed than actually lived in all of Europe in 1939. Then there’s “the supposed victims all moved to New York” gambit.

  14. #14 Gingerbaker
    October 25, 2007

    A Final Solution to the problem of Holocaust deniers, is simply to round them all up and kill them.

    I’m not sure I don’t mean it.

The site is currently under maintenance and will be back shortly. New comments have been disabled during this time, please check back soon.