The Hungarian far right and David Irving

For those who don't know who David Irving is, here's a brief bio. Although he is often called a British historian, the fact is that he never finished college, and the couple of years he spent at two different universities had nothing to do with the study of history. However, he was fascinated with military history, especially German military history during World War II. Professional historians were not too taken with his work even when he stuck to military history, but they were especially critical when he began rewriting the political/social history of the war with a decidedly German slant. When he became a Holocaust denier that was too much for most countries: he was deported and barred from Germany, he was kicked out of Canada, and finally he was arrested in Austria and sentenced to three years in 2006. He spent a year in jail.

David Irving made several trips to Hungary where there are no laws against those who deny the Holocaust. Loránt Hegedüs, a Hungarian Reformed minister, was his host, and it was in Hegedüs's church that he spread his ideas.

David Irving has not been in Hungary recently, but he's once again in the Hungarian media. Irving is on a lecture tour in the United States. According to my information, an organization called Anti-Racist Action (ARA) managed to prevent Irving from giving a lecture in Washington, D.C. So he moved on to New York. Irving was obviously playing a cat and mouse game with ARA. He announced that he would speak at the Primavera Restaurant, 1578 First Avenue. That was a false address. But two people directed the arriving guests to the real site of the lecture, St. Stephen of Hungary Parish on 82nd Street.

The "small group of people" who asked one of the parish priests to allow the use of a meeting room in the church apparently didn't tell him who the speaker would be. They simply said that "they wanted the space to discuss a book." Well, in a way, that was true. According to the New York Sun (a neoconservative, pro-Israel daily) a journalist, Max Blumenthal, attended the event for a documentary he is making on Irving. According to him, Irving refused "to even use the term 'Holocaust'" in his lecture. However, he did say a few things that would be illegal in certain countries.

St. Stephen of Hungary is a church shared by Hungarians and Italians. It seems that in the past extreme right-wing Hungarians used the church for events the priests found inappropriate. And they continue their bad behavior. The ARA (who, tipped off, showed up at the restaurant and were duly directed to the church) in no time organized a sizeable group of protestors in the currently heavily Jewish neighborhood outside the church.

Now comes the question of the link between New York and Budapest. New York Hungarians claim that an extreme right-wing Hungarian group headed by Ernő Hóka often uses the church for some of his gatherings and that Hóka has close relations with Ákos Szilágyi, the founder of the New York Polgári Kör, part of the network of civic circles of right-minded people who were supposed to rally when the call came from Viktor Orbán. These civic cells at one point seemed to be critically important vehicles of Orbán's political strategy. Orbán put Csaba Hende, formerly an MDF member of parliament, in charge of the network of  cells. Hende by now is so far to the right that only a few days ago he shocked the country by suggesting that when Fidesz takes over the government they will fire all 45,000 policemen and build the force from scratch. Obviously, only those who share the values of Fidesz will be rehired. The establishment of the New York civic cell was inspired by Hende during one of his visits to New York. From the beginning the cell espoused extreme right-wing ideas and had close ties to kuruc.info.hu, a notorious neo-Nazi site advocating the overthrow of the Hungarian government. Recently the American server hosting both of these sites shut them down.

This morning Zoltán Szabó, an MSZP member of parliament, responding to the news from New York had a few choice words about Fidesz's cozy relations with extreme right-wing groups. What Szabó wanted to know was how far Fidesz is willing to go. How long can a so-called "moderate" right of center party maintain close ties with the extreme right? Szabó said that he understands that hard-core right-wing voters are important to Fidesz since they make up between 8% and 10% of the electorate, but surely, he continued, a serious party can't afford such nefarious association with neo-Nazis.

On György Bolgár's call-in show this morning Zoltán Szabó reiterated his assessment of the situation. A split second after the conversation with Szabó ended, Ákos Szilágyi, straight from New York, phoned in. He denied that he had anything to do with the invitation. That, he alleged, is the figment of the imagination of László Bartus, editor-in-chief of the Amerikai-Magyar Népszava Szabadság, who, according to Szilágyi, is a liar whom he is suing because of another article he wrote. I checked Amerikai-Magyar Népszava and there was no mention of either Szilágyi or the New York Polgári Kör. It simply said that "according to many people, the St. Stephen Parish of New York has long been a meeting place of people with Nazi sympathies." Szilágyi, by the way, also claimed that it wasn't even Hungarians who invited Irving. That is hard to believe. I became especially suspicious when ARA supporters were described as homosexuals and communists. It sounded all too familiar.

Comments

[Stan]

"did say a few things that would be illegal in certain countries".

What does this mean? What did he say? Why is it illegal to speak? How is it possible that you can deny any part of history except for one? Who's responsible for that?

[Michael Santomauro]

We should re-think the Holocaust.

While the late Raul Hilberg of course holds to his basic extermination thesis, this explanation is radically different from the one he had previously given. It is obvious that revisionism is responsible for this change. Hilberg more or less conceded this, even if only indirectly. Specifically, he declared:

“I will say that, in a certain way, Faurisson and others, without wanting to, did us a favor. They raised questions which had the effect of engaging historians in new research. They have obliged us to once again collect information, to re-examine documents and to go further into the comprehension of what has taken place.”

Hilberg summarized his new thesis before an audience of nearly 2,700 at Avery Fischer Hall in New York City: the entire German policy for the physical destruction of the Jews was to be explained by mind reading! No document attesting to this criminal policy could be found, because no such document existed. For several years, the entire German bureaucratic machinery operated through a kind of telepathy. As Hilberg put it:

“But what began in 1941 was a process of destruction not planned in advance, not organized centrally by any agency. There was no blueprint and there was no budget for destructive measures. They [these measures] were taken step by step, one step at a time. Thus came about not so much a plan being carried out, but an incredible meeting of minds, a consensus—mind reading by a far-flung bureaucracy.”

[[sic]]

Michael Santomauro pedigree can be seen one his websites, the main one being:
http://reportersnotebook.com/

[Odin's lost eye]

If those who deny the Holocaust had met with folk like Cyril ‘S’, John ‘B’,Keith ‘K’ and ‘Old Shad’ would soon have their minds changed. These men were part of the 11th Armoured, which liberated Bergan-Belsen. They were part of the crew, of, I think, a Bren Carrier with tank with a flamethrower. It was used to burn the buildings etc in Bergan-Belsen because of the horrendous typhoid outbreak there. I knew them as a boy because we lived in the same village. Even in the 60’s they were never very nice to German Tourists in the nearby University City. I will say no more!

[Eva S. Balogh]

Sic: Michael Santomauro pedigree can be seen one his websites"

I also checked out Santomauro and found out what kinds of books he is promoting and selling. I would prefer if he didn't advertise his ware, even indirectly, on this blog.

[Balder]

Actually Irving is of the most knowledgeable historians on the subject of WWII, and a hero of free speech..

One may not agree with his interpretations or political views, but his factual research has been approved by many credible historians and institutions. I got a whole list of quotes somewhere by such people who have daid these things. Irving has even contributed with accounts of atrocities against Jews hithertho not known or proven.

He was held in high esteem for many years by many of his contemporaries, until representatives of the Jewish community and More and he Zionist allies who also have interests in keeping up the one sided version of victors’ history, started their slanderous campaign against him. Ok. Irving is provocative. But I like that spirit in people.

The truth is slowly coming through despite all the efforts to hide it.

'Holocaust denial', what a stupid term, has crept into even the politically correct circles of anti-revisionist government sponsored institutions.

Look here at the statements of the Danish holocaust archeologist Anders Otte Stensager, who recently published a biography of Josef Mengele:

No evidence that six million Jews were killed

"The real figure probably is ca. 4 million", says holocaust archeologist Anders Otte Stensager, who is associated with the government financed 'Department for Holocaust and Genocide Studies' of The Danish Institute for International Studies (DIIS).

His statement is all the more surprising, since it comes from a researcher who is connected with an institute which sees it as one of it's priorities to counter historical revisionism (commonly referred to in a derogatory way as 'holocaust denial'), to 'fight racism' and to actively promote multicultural ideology.

More and documentation:

http://balder.org/zed/holo-victims

Now you see? Even credited non revisionist historians ('the good guys') are now essentiallay saying what revisionists have said for a long time: the holocaust has been exagerated quite a bit.

Only when free speech is restored, we will eventually get closer to the truth, the sober numbers and credible accounts. The fear of the PC community, and the zionists is of course, that the damage will be to big and they'll lose some of their profits, economically and politically.

[Tom]

I get the feeling that there is no real commitment to free speech in Hungary, or at least at Hungairan Spectrum.

Interesting.

[Caratacus]

Since when did geting a university degree qualify anyone to be a historian? Most Phd theses are not worth the paper they're written on. Irving's books should stand or fall by their research. What exactly is it that so frightens people about him? Why should anyone be imprisoned for any views no matter however outlandish on history? This question goes to the heart of the matter. The truth is that anyone who threatens what the courageous Norman Finkelstein (son of concentration camp survivors) aptly dubbed the 'holocaust industry' (and a multi billion dollar industry at that), is very dangerous. And, by the way, Odin's lost Eye, no one now pretends that Berge-Belsen was a 'death camp'. The 'gas chamber' was actually put up by the Americans after the war - why? Yes plenty of peple died of typhus (as did thousands of native Germans in Allied camps AFTER the war ended), but there are photographs of other liberated inmates looking amazingly healthy. How do you explain that? I only ask because I want to know - should I be jailed for asking?

[[sic]]

@Balder: "...their slanderous campaign..."

You mean libelous. In tort laws and even in educated speech, there is as much a difference between slander and libel as between borrow and lend.

p.s. this was just a vocabulary/conceptual correction, nothing else is implied or could/should be inferred.

[Richard Mallett]

It should also be noted that David Irving also wrote an excellent book on the 1956 Hungarian uprising, called 'Uprising - One Nation's Nightmare: Hungary 1956' which was described by Ferenc Kunszabo, editor, Hunnia magazine. Budapest, as 'the best work on the 1956 uprising in the English language'

[Eva S. Balogh]

Richard Mallett: "It should also be noted that David Irving also wrote an excellent book on the 1956 Hungarian uprising, called 'Uprising - One Nation's Nightmare: Hungary 1956' which was described by Ferenc Kunszabo, editor, Hunnia magazine. Budapest, as 'the best work on the 1956 uprising in the English language'"

The only problem with this book review that it appeared in a far-right magazine and that the book in question is useless. I who took part in that revolution can attest from personal experience that it was not a revolution against the Jews as Irving claims. It tells a lot about Kunszabo that he finds this the best book on the revolution. Trash it is.

[Hon. Robert Lynch]

Europe Awake! Can't you see what is happening to your culture? You are being destroyed from within. WHO ran Hungary under Communism? If you even today you are lost.
Look who is destroying Serbia and Croatia. Christian nations have been and still are the targets.
AWAKE AMERICA! AWAKE EUROPE!
The enemy is inside the gates!

[whodareswigs]

David Irving has written aproximately 30 books, but not one of them is about the holocaust. He was jailed in Austria for a year because of comments he'd made at a lecture delivered to a group of conservative university students 16 years previously. To jail a man for a lecture that long ago means there is no statute of limitations on politically incorrect speech in Austria, anyway. Irving is persona non gratis in Australia, Canada, Austria, Germany and New Zealand. He'll be arrested, detained, and deported if he tries to enter these countries. This is because he's expressed skepticism about the received history of the holocaust, a subject he readily admits is not his metier. Where I live in America, a gang of black teenagers kicked a young white man to death in front of 160 witnesses and not one of these murderers was ever jailed. Yet, when David Irving visits this city he must sneak in and sneak out to avoid violent confrontations with bat wielding Jews and anti-fascists. There is something very sick about societies where savages saunter about enjoying more freedom than certain authors.

[Stan]

How did Jews manage to have such world-wide influence?
That's scary.
Too much anti-defamation can drive people to anti-semitism.
It's just natural self defense.

[R.]

. . . and the cockroaches come crawling out of the woodwork.

[Eva S. Balogh]

R: "and the cockroaches come crawling out of the woodwork."

And how many! Hundreds and hundreds. Mostly from the same site.

[[sic]]

@stan: "How did Jews manage to have such world-wide influence? That's scary."

Assuming you are right [ridiculous, but this is a thought experiment], then in a democracy doesn't that just mean that given equal opportunity [a big assumption given existing prejudices] you and your kind have shown yourselves to be inferior losers?

Really, you want to 'balance' out the perceived power relationships, go contribute something decent to society and the economy. Invent something, create something, generate wealth, good will etc...

You kind of poison is unproductive nonsense and the very reason you need to cling on to your own miserable kind for supportive sustenance. Loser.

[forthurst]

"Although he is often called a British historian, the fact is that he never finished college"

That is a non sequitur. There no affiliated body of historians for which a qualification is necessary before one can be an accredited historian.

Irving however has an excellent command of written and spoken German, unlike many of the 'historians' of the Nazi era, which he has put to very good use in his interviews of members of the Nazi regime and in reading original documents; these researches brought to light facts which had remained unknown by 'historians' whose endeavours consisted solely of passing off tomes full of hearsay without verification to an original source as 'history'.

Irving is what an historian should be - someone who writes nothing that cannot be traced to an original source; that is why he was not able to provide a chapter about how the Wannsee Conference was about murdering all Jews and that six million Jews were gassed at Auschwitz.
He has never said there were no concentration camps or that Jews were not murdered. There is no verifiable source to support the major tenets of the Holocaust and laws and prosecutions do not substantiate it either any more than that the activities of the Spanish Inquisition proved the existence of God.

[Laszlo Bardos]

Article 19 of the UN Human Rights Charter explicitly states:
"Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without
interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers."

[Adrian]

There is too much emphasis here on the plight of the Jews. The evil of the Third Reich is not to be measured by the fact that it killed innocent jews, or by how many, or by what means; but because it killed innocent human beings as a matter of policy. Adam Tooze, puts this in persepctive:

" The full extent of the SS's genocidal ambition is staggering and for obvious reasons it has held the historical centre stage. However, what is less widely appreciated is that the Wehrmacht entered the Soviet Union intent up on not one, but two programmes of mass murder. Whereas the Final Solution and the Generalplan Ost were secrets closely guarded by the SS, for fear, amongst other things, of antagonizing the local population, the second programme, which openly envisioned the killing of tens of millions of people within the first twelve months of the German occupation, was agreed between the Wehrmacht, all the key civilian Ministries and the Nazi political leadership as early as the spring of 1941. Nor can the so-called 'Hunger Plan' be described as secret. It was referred to in official instructions issued to thousands of subordinates. And, perhaps most importantly, no effort was made to hide the wider rationale of the individual acts of brutality that the programme required. On the contrary, all German soldiers and occupation administrators in Soviet territory were enjoined to understand and to commit themselves to its strategic logic. This genocidal plan commanded such wide-ranging support because it concerned a practical issue, the importance of which, following Germany's experience in World War 1, was obvious to all: the need to secure the food supply of the German population, if necessary at the expense of the population of the Soviet Union."

The Wages of Destruction, 476-7

I suspect the reason the final solution was more materially successful than the hunger plan was, as in Hungary, through the comparative lack of resistance of the occupied populations. The Judaeocide is significant because it reflects not just Nazi, but European moral failure. No amount of historical revisionism is going to change this fact.

[Stan]

"and the cockroaches come crawling out of the woodwork".

The kind of arrogance that makes Jews so popular.
Keep pushing your luck, but don't complain when bad things happen to your people. You're asking for it.

[Eva S. Balogh]

Stan: "The kind of arrogance that makes Jews so popular. Keep pushing your luck, but don't complain when bad things happen to your people. You're asking for it."

I'm warning you, if you don't stop that kind of talk you will not be able to post a comment on this blog

[mannstein]

@Adrian: My uncle fought in the German Wehrmacht on the Eastern Front for the entire duration of the war. Not once did he hear or was party to the plan that you speak of. Please provide references to back up your wild and unsubstantiated statements.

As for wiping out populations the perhaps you should take a look at the Kaufman Plan and the Morgenthau Plan which certain influential American Jews envisioned to for Germany after the War. Morgenthau a Jew was US Treasury Secretatary. The details of his plan were worked out by Harry Dexter White who just happened to have been a Soviet Agent. Morgenthau's plan later became JCS1067 which directly caused the death of several million Germans during the occupation. I'll be glad to provide references.

Since you brought up moral failure then let us not forget that Stalin's willing executioners were primarily ethnic Jews. We have the names in our files and will be glad to publish them.

[bayou]

Quote:

"here's a brief bio. Although he is often called a British historian, the fact is that he never finished college, and the couple of years he spent at two different universities had nothing to do with the study of history."

ROTFL

That says it all about the author.

I guess, in author's view, that makes Lipstadt a better SOURCE historian.

[Adrian]

Mannstein,

The reference to the Hunger plan is cited in my post, the edition of Adam Tooze's book I cited from is the Penguin edition, 2007. Without being prejudicial to your uncle, until you provide me with more details of his research into this question, I'm going to run with the Cambridge Historian. Tooze's footnote for this passage is as follows

47 We owe our awareness of this remarkable fact first to R.-D. Mueller's contribution to DRZW 4. 184-93, originally published in 1982, and more recently to work by Aly and Heim, Vordenker der Vernichtung, 365-93, C. Gerlach, Kalkulierte Morde: Die deutsche Wirtschafts- und Vernichtungspolitik in Weissrusslalld 1941 bis 1944 (Hamburg, 1999) and C. Gerlach, Krieg, Ernaehrung, Voelkermord: Deutsche Vernichtungspolitik im Zweiten Weltkrieg (Zurich, 2nd edn., 2001).

I don't read German, but would be curious to hear your comments on Tooze's sources.

Yes, I am familiar with the Morgenthau plan, my understanding is that Churchill and Stalin used it primarily as a negotiating tool against Stalin. It was never implemented as the need to maintain West Germany as a bulwark against Stalin was more important than returning Germany to the middle ages. Please provide a reference to something I could read about JCS1067.

"Stalin's willing executioners were primarily ethnic Jews"

This is where I lose my patience with anti-semites. So what? I believe you should punish the guilty not the innocent. The British have done many evil things, the slave trade, massacres and famines in their colonies, right up to the wrongful imprisionment of Irish people during my lifetime. I don't want to be punished for the sins of my fathers, why should I want innocent jews vilified for the sins of their's?

[Eva S. Balogh]

Forthurst: "'Although he is often called a British historian, the fact is that he never finished college That is a non sequitur. There no affiliated body of historians for which a qualification is necessary before one can be an accredited historian."

Oh, yes, some people think that no qualification, no training is necessary to analyze events of the past. Anyone can just sit down and write history. That's a fallacy. It is a profession like any other. I don't think that it is a coincidence that none of the revisionist "historians" had any formal schooling in the subject. Another history "expert" among the commenters mentions Lipstadt who, according to him, although has an advanced degree in history is surely less of a historian than his idol, Irving. Well, the British courts found it otherwise.

[R.]

@ Stan

You said to me:

***The kind of arrogance that makes Jews so popular.
Keep pushing your luck, but don't complain when bad things happen to your people. You're asking for it.***

My people? I'm not Jewish.

As far as pushing my luck goes, Stan, let me say that I think you're a pathetic bigot. A small, sad man wrestling with big ideas.

To tell you the truth, comparing you to a cockroach is unfair to cockroaches.

[Eva S. Balogh]

R: "My people? I'm not Jewish."

According to these guys everybody is Jewish who doesn't agree with them or who is not an anti-Semite.

[whodareswigs]

Convicted robbers, rapist, crooked corporate executives, drug pushers, pornographers, pedophiles, arsonists, arms dealers, drunk drivers, corrupt politicians and even murders often get lighter sentences than holocaust "deniers." There is not one human rights organization in the world that will defend their right to express dissenting opinions about the details of this lone historical event. Not one!

Ernst Zündel
J.V.A. Mannheim
Herzogenried Str. 111
D - 68169 Mannheim
F.R.G./BRD
GERMANY

Germar Rudolf
Schloss 1
D-72108 Rottenburg
GERMANY

Horst Mahler
Pfarrer-Grabmeier-Allee 10
D 85560 Ebersberg
Fernruf 08092-24418
GERMANY

Gerd Honsik
Justizanstalt Wien-Josefstadt
Wickenburggasse 18-22
1082Vienna,
AUSTRIA

Attorney Sylvia Stolz
JVA
Oberer Fauler Pelz 1
D- 69117 Heidelberg
GERMANY

Wolfgang Fröhlich
JVA
Josefs Str./Wikenburggasse 18-22
A-1082 Wien
AUSTRIA

Whittle, Stephen
0800006408
c/o Santa Ana Jail
P.O. Box 22003
Santa Ana, CA 92701
U.S.A.

Sheppard, Simon
0800006404
c/o Santa Ana Jail
P.O. Box 22003
Santa Ana, CA 92701
U.S.A.

At large but currently under indictment:

Vincent Reynouard
107, Chausée de Vleurgat
B-1000 Brussels,
BELGIUM

Georges Theil
6 Rue Gallice
F-38100
Grenoble
FRANCE

[Stan]

R says: " I'm not Jewish".

Well, if your just a dumb Goj, what are you doing here?

[New World Order]

Mannstein

What is your point? That there were evil Jews complicit in Communism's crime? This is not in issue. Nor is it in issue that there were evil gentiles doing the work of the Communist regime's as well!

What you seem to think is in issue is that the fact that there were Jewish communists in high positions who undertook evil acts either justified ex post the holocaust or currently justifies modern forms of anti-semitism. The logic of that fails me. Not that people like you are concerned by logically consistent argumentation. Most Jews were not guilty of committing crimes in support of communism. There is also no proof that most Jews supported Communism. I think it clear that on a per capita basis in much of Europe and America, Jews (I should mention only ethnic and not religious ones) were more sympathetic to communism than gentiles, but gentiles were more sympathetic to fascisim or other forms of totalitarianism than Jews. And thoughout history, Jews have been threatened more by gentiles than the other way around. So what?

We can all agree, I assume, that the various forms of totalitarianism that inflicted the 20th Century in Europe and Asia were evil and caused great horror and pain.

And tell me, why does this justify today's and your anti-semitism? You make no rationale response and cannot to this question.

[Eva S. Balogh]

Stan: "R says: " I'm not Jewish". Well, if your just a dumb Goj, what are you doing here?"

That's it!

[GDF]

"This is where I lose my patience with anti-semites."

Oh, you are much too patient. They behave like the bugs and crawlers you find under a rock that you just lifted.

Hey, nazis, you lost! I understand it hurts, but it seems that the majority of the human race disagrees with your sick ideas and acts.

Go back under your rocks, enjoy the darkness and stop stinking up the air here!

[Heney Barth]

Winston Churchill was awarded the 1953 Nobel Prize for his six-volume HISTORY OF THE SECOND WORLD WAR.

You will not find a single word in any volume about the “Holocaust” against the Jews. No “gas chambers” and people being tossed alive into crematory fires.

You will find that a great many people, Jews and non-Jews, died on all sides, from all causes.

[Sandor]

David Irving did not go to jail because of what he said, but because he broke the law.
He, by the way, is not a historian, but a chemist as far as education is concerned, and an amateur as far as history is concerned.
His idea of sucking it to the Jews is that he denies, or belittles the Holocaust.
Now the problem with denying the Holocaust is that several countries and their courts, such as Canada, the US, Germany, Austria and probably several more, has taken "judicial notice" that the Holocaust is a fact. Therefore, since this judicial notices are part of the case law, there is no need to prove time and again whether it happened.
So, when the holocaust-denier is in front of the Judge, the issue is not free speech, not the Holocaust, but the breach of the law. This is how Irving, the amateur historian, too daft to understand this, too blindly Jew-hating to realize this, went to jail for his own stupidity.
For you, Jew-haters and anti-Semitic imbeciles, I may also add that yes, there is plenty of documentary evidence of the Holocaust, but you don't have the time to read them, because you are too busy reading the garbage that Irving is putting out. But the joke is on you.
The Jews have no reason to withdraw and quake in fear because they may have offended some idiots like you. Nothing bad will happen to them. They are stronger and more numerous than ever. Better educated, better equipped and more determined than ever to survive and thrive. And thrive they do.
When the whole world is looking in doubt at Iran, fearing its increasing belligerence, the only hope of stopping them is Israel.
So, you just deny all you want, find excuses to blame the Jews for everything, they pay no attention to any of that. While you huddle into those little conspiracies, trying to make some hay at Holocaust-denying, the world needs and wants the Jews for their intrinsic value. This is the real punishment for your idiocy.
Who wants you?

[Sandor]

My usual "second coming:"

I am so happy to see Ernest Zundel appearing amongst us!
I didn't want to mention him in my previous posting, because he is the mascot, the poster boy of the imbecile anti-Semite. But I didn't mention him, because didn't expect you happy others to be familiar with his name.
This idiot spent a large part of his life in Canada, fighting the good fight against the World Jewish Conspiracy, until Canada had enough of him and he had to flee to the US.
He renewed his idiotic crusade there until the americans expelled him back to Canada, where he spent years in jail fighting his extradition to Germany. He lost, he is back in Germany where he started from and where the denial of the Holocaust is contrary to law. Soon he will be in jail again.
So, how much greater idiot can one be than this?
Anti-Semites of the world unite! Join Ernest Zundel the biggest dolt, the asshole of the world so you all can become like him! (If you are not like him already, that is.)

[Sandor]

Eva, I sent two contributions, they both disappeared.
Have you moderated them out?

[Sandor]

They are back. A mystery!

[Adrian]

Heney Barth,

"Winston Churchill was awarded the 1953 Nobel Prize for his six-volume HISTORY OF THE SECOND WORLD WAR. You will not find a single word in any volume about the “Holocaust” against the Jews. No “gas chambers” and people being tossed alive into crematory fires."

I checked, you're right: no "Holocaust", no "gas chambers". But I did find this:

"Prime Minister to Foreign Secretary II July 44

There is no doubt that this [persecution of Jews in Hungary and their expulsion from enemy territory] is probably the greatest and most horrible crime ever committed in the whole history of the world, and it has been done by scientific machinery by nominally civilised men in the name of a great State and one of the leading races of Europe. It is quite clear that all concerned in this crime who may fall into our hands, including the people who only obeyed orders by carrying out the butcheries, should be put to death after their association with the murders has been proved." Appendix C, pg 597

I always find your kind of "forensic" argument - about the form of words used rather than the meaning intended, disingenuous; but given the topic, and your misrepresentation of one of the world's greatest moral leaders, your argument is simply repulsive.

I suppose the moral repulsion I feel is what lies behind most holocaust denial legislation, I don't agree with it but I can sympathise with it.

[Eva S. Balogh]

Sandor: "Eva, I sent two contributions, they both disappeared. Have you moderated them out?"

Why should I do such a thing? They are there.

[New World Order]

whodareswigs-

BTW, there is one organization, and it is called the American Civil Liberties Union. It also has defended the rights of neo-Nazis to march in largely Jewish neighbourhoods in the USA. The ACLU, however, is hated, I am sure, by present day Nazi lovers, because it is liberal and it defends real liberty and not the BS kind you are protesting for.

[Stanley Wertheim]

David Irving is not an historian. He has absolutely no credentials, not even a college degree. Irving also has not displayed great interest in freedom of speech. In 1998 he filed a libel suit against American historian Deborah Lipstedt, who had chronicled Irving’s racism and anti-Semitism in her book Denying the Holocaust, and Penguin books. During the trial, an English court under Lord Gray ruled that Irving was an “active Holocaust denier” as well as an “anti-Semite and racist.” The judge also ruled that Irving had “for his own ideological reasons persistently and deliberately misrepresented and manipulated historical evidence.” Lord Gray cited dozens of examples of Irving’s fabrications and distortions. One of the most important witnesses at this trial was Sir Richard Evans, Professor of Modern European History at Oxford, who testified that Irving lacked either the credentials or knowledge of historiography to be considered a historian, and who cited hundreds of errors and deliberate falsifications in Irving’s books. Professor Evans summarized these in his book Lying about Hitler.

I am a citizen of the Federal Republic of Germany. It is sheer nonsense to maintain that there is any attempt to suppress controversy over the essential facts of the Holocaust in Germany or elsewhere in the European Union. In fact, no historical event has ever been more fully documented. There are many thousands of books, articles, films, and other media studies of the Holocaust readily available to German students and serious inquiry is encouraged. However, Germany does not have a First Amendment, and it is recognized by the Bundestag that the underlying purpose of Holocaust revisionism is to promote anti-Semitism, not historical investigation. It is against the law in Germany and other countries of the European Union to propigate lies for the purpose of promoting racism. The American Historical Association also has declared unequivocally that Holocaust denial or Revisionism is “not a legitimate subject for academic inquiry” and that “No serious historian questions that the Holocaust took place.”

[Suslov]

Population genetics and millenia of indoctrination preordain Jewish persons to support other Jewish persons and to favor social conditions and political measures that are favorable to Jews. Jews have been in conflict with non-Jews since the beginning of recorded history, as is well-documented in the Old Testament, Akkadian and Sumerian Sources, Ancient Egyptian sources, Ancient Greek sources, Ptolemaic Greek language sources, Roman historians, Church fathers, and mediaeval sources in all European languages. Jews were forcibly expelled from all European countries during the middle ages. Jewish presence is not beneficial for non-Jews, as Jews seek to enrich themselves and to bring about conditions favorable for Jews. These facts have been clear since the 19th century at the latest.
As far as Stalin's executioners being Jewish is concerned, it seems reasonable to suggest that Jewish persons were interested in the overthrow of the Tsarist empire and the establishment of communism for ethnocentric reasons, and that Stalin was a savvy manipulator of jewish ambition - this interpretation is not new, and the fact that Stalin "turned against the Jews" after the war, as manifested in the 1952 "doctor's plot", shows only that Stalin had correctly percieved the Jewish influence in internal Soviet affairs as having been excessive.

[GDF]

Suslov: "Population genetics and millenia of indoctrination preordain Jewish persons to support other Jewish persons and to favor social conditions and political measures that are favorable to Jews."

These Jews, they are really unbelievable. They even invented Christianity, to get all the social conditions that favor Jews, such as the Crusades, the blood libel, the the massacres, the expulsions, the Inquisition and finally, the Holocaust.

Please, go back under the rock! And you and your ilk can stay there for millennia, not for millenia, as illiterate Nazis spell it ...

[Sandor]

About Churchill and his Nobel Prize.

When Churchill published his opus, the understanding of the Holocaust was before even its infancy.
In fact the word itself was not yet applied to what happened until Eli Wiesel suggested it first, some twenty years later. Nor was the actual design of the Holocaust known until the minutes of the Wannsee Conference became known.
Anyone, not blind enough to be a nazi, can see and understand how the entire enterprise was plotted out from step one. Some details are evailable on Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wannsee_Conference

Now, of course, Ernest Zundel would probably say that it was planted there by the World Jewish Conspiracy, but the fact is, that what the Germans have planned at the conference, they went on and realized it with their well-known thoroughness.
But back to Churchill!
At the publication of the book he couldn't have any idea about the enormity of the damage. Therefore, this book is not a point of reference about the Holocaust.
For those nazis who can read, it would be well advised to find the works of Randolph Braham, Primo Levi, Eli Wiesel and Kertesz Imre, just to mention a few.
I am also a bit bored by now with the constant carping about the bad behaviour of Jews everywhere. They indeed behave badly, are stupid and greedy, just like everybody else.
But when it comes to accomplishments, they win a large portion of Nobel Prizes, produce artists, scientists and intellectuals, like nobody else.
It is by no means an accident that the Holocaust was organized by the nice friendly Europeans to get rid of the Jews and not the other way around. And even if there were Jews amongst the executioners of communism, as it is often claimed in defense of nazism, the nazis, if they were "sincere" about their intent, should have let them act in piece to destroy their own countries. But in fact, there was a far overwhelming number of non-Jewish perpetrators in the communist system and Stalin and Berija and all that other scum on the top were not Jewish. They also pursued and destroyed a large number of Jewish victims. Proof: in the penitentiary of political prisoners, Vac, among the victims buried in the jail cemetery around 30% was the number of Jews.
So, let the imbeciles cry foul all they want, the facts, as Mr. Lenin so aptly observed, are stubborn things.

[Sandor]

Second coming:
Just to show you what an orbital dick-head Ernest Zundel is, let me direct your attention to two of his co-religionists on the list he offered:

Whittle, Stephen
0800006408
c/o Santa Ana Jail
P.O. Box 22003
Santa Ana, CA 92701
U.S.A.

Sheppard, Simon
0800006404
c/o Santa Ana Jail
P.O. Box 22003
Santa Ana, CA 92701
U.S.A.

This Stephen and Simon, like two apostles, are keeping the faith in the Santa Ana Jail. That should learn you!

[Stanley Wertheim]

As someone with a Ph.D. I continue to be bitterly amused by the reiterated statement that one does not need to be an historian to write history. This is equivalent to saying that one doesn't really need a law degree to practice law, nor an M.D. to practice medicine, except that legal restrictions will somewhat limit one's practice, because society values doctors and lawyers a great deal more than historians. While there is no single accrediting agency for historians, no university is likely to hire someone without a doctorate to teach history, any more than a law firm would hire a "lawyer" without a reputable legal degree.

That said, David Irving is (or was) an historical writer. He has virtually no formal education His early works had the typical deficiencies of amateur historical writing: no understanding of historiography; an inability to determine the reliability of sources; and a lack of knowledge of the subject background of the field. His later books add malicious falsification and distortion to the more or less innocent deficiencies of the early works.

[Eva S. Balogh]

Stanley Wertheim: "As someone with a Ph.D. I continue to be bitterly amused by the reiterated statement that one does not need to be an historian to write history. This is equivalent to saying that one doesn't really need a law degree to practice law, nor an M.D. to practice medicine,"

Everybody is an expert on history. At least in Hungary. Moreover, they know everything better than historians do. You have no idea how futile to have a discussion with these guys. Especially the right-wingers have the oddest ideas about Hungarian history from St. Stephen on to Kádár. There is also a movement, again on the right, that "researches" tradition. Sometime these defenders of tradition can come up with some very strange "traditions." A high school history teacher, for example, donned a Wehrmacht uniform and showed himself on the internet so clad. He lost his job but, never mind, he was hired elsewhere. This time as principal.

[Stanley Wertheim]

As a person who does hold a Ph.D. I am bitterly amused by the reiterated comments that one does not need formal training to be an historian. It's unlikely that the prople who make such statements would accept treatment by a doctor who had no M.D or would allow themselves to be defended by a lawyer without an LL. B, but that's because our society values health and money above truth about the past that shapes our present. Mr. Irving is not an historian. He has absolutely no credentials, not even a college degree. Nor does he have even an elemental understanding of historiography and the methodology of evaluating source materials. Irving also has not displayed great interest in freedom of speech. In 1998 he filed a libel suit against American historian Deborah Lipstedt, who had chronicled Irving’s racism and anti-Semitism in her book Denying the Holocaust, and Penguin books. During the trial, an English court under Lord Gray ruled that Irving was an “active Holocaust denier” as well as an “anti-Semite and racist.” The judge also ruled that Irving had “for his own ideological reasons persistently and deliberately misrepresented and manipulated historical evidence.” Lord Gray cited dozens of examples of Irving’s fabrications and distortions. One of the most important witnesses at this trial was Sir Richard Evans, Professor of Modern European History at Oxford, who testified that Irving lacked either the credentials or knowledge of historiography to be considered a historian, and who cited hundreds of errors and deliberate falsifications in Irving’s books. Professor Evans summarized these in his book Lying about Hitler.

I am a citizen of the Federal Republic of Germany. It is sheer nonsense to maintain, as Irving and other neo-Nazis do, that there is any attempt to suppress controversy over the essential facts of the Holocaust in Germany or elsewhere in the European Union. In fact, no historical event has ever been more fully documented. There are many thousands of books, articles, films, and other media studies of the Holocaust readily available to German students and serious inquiry is encouraged. However, Germany does not have a First Amendment, and it is recognized by the Bundestag that the underlying purpose of Holocaust revisionism is to promote anti-Semitism, not historical investigation. It is against the law in Germany and other countries of the European Union to propagate lies for the purpose of promoting racism. The American Historical Association also has declared unequivocally that Holocaust denial or Revisionism is “not a legitimate subject for academic inquiry” and that “No serious historian questions that the Holocaust took place.” Enough substance?

[Michael]

Edward Black who is Jewish wrote a book named "The Transfer Agreement" which puts forth the evidence that the Nazis met top Zionists in the early 1930's to plan the emigration of European Jewry to Palestine. They also wanted an orderly transfer of Jewish wealth to Palestine to avoid crashing the stock markets.

So the real truth is the Holocaust came about as a result of COLLUSION between Nazis and Zionists.

We will not have peace while the truth is suppressed. David Irving was arrested for a THOUGHT crime which runs contrary to America's free speech beliefs.

[Adrian]

Michael,

It seems sensible Zionists would want an orderly transfer of Jewish population and wealth to Palestine, but do you think the Holocaust was a orderly transfer of population and wealth?