3 videos – a brief introduction on holocaust revisionism
I think this is the best video for a short introduction on the subject of Holocaust revisionism.
Another classic ‘David Cole in Auschwitz’:
Now some people defending the official holocaust narrative claim this guy David Cole retracted from holocaust denial by sending an apology letter to the JDL and was first posted on the JDL website.
This will push gullible people immediately into believing that the entire ‘holocaust revisionist’ movement is weak. And don’t feel any need to look at the case seriously.
However, David Cole was into hiding due to death threads (from the JDL) at the time this alledged ‘apology letter’ appeared. Nothing has been heard of him ever since.
And the writing style could not be more different from his other papers and speeches.
BTW, the person who was head of the JDL at this pediod,Irv Rubin ,later committed suicide in jail awaiting charges over an unrelated issue.
He was caught plotting to bomb some embassy or something like that and charged with conspiracy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irv_Rubin
Another documentary i highly recommend !!!:
It’s about ‘the great holocaust trail’ in Canada against Ernst Zundel.
Book about the trial:
Defenders of the official holocaust story love to refer to a law suit in UK against author David Irving as ‘The great holocaust trial’.
While ignoring this Real ‘great holocaust trial’ in Canada against Ernst Zundel.
What you always have to keep is David Irving insisted on doing his own defence, and he refused the help of any specialists even on certain technical topics. This because some suggest he was a little egoist and though he could do it alone.
While his opponent, Deborah Lipstadt, received help from universities on different specialities from around the world.
David Irving is mainly a historian and incompetent to handle some technical subjects on his own.
Defenders of the official holocaust story love to suggest that, because this man David Irving ‘obviously lost’ the holocaust trial over technical details, this would imply that there is some sort of a ‘scientific consensus’ over it.
Especially regarding and the ‘missing holes in crema 2 and crema 3′ issue. And regarding the ‘maximum number of bodies that could possibly have been burned’ issue.
Again, pushing gullible people immediately into believing that the entire ‘holocaust revisionist’ movement is weak.
But as i explained, there isn’t really a ‘consensus’. Many articles by specialists criticizing the official narrative appeared before and after this trial.