Saturday Afternoon with Carolyn: Revisionists' Treblinka dispute gets personal

Published by carolyn on Sat, 2014-07-26 18:48

July 26, 2014

Front row, far left: Robert Faurisson; third and fourth from left: Ernst Zundel and David Cole; three at far right: Mark Weber, David Irving (in back row), Juergen Graf at an IHR Conference in California.

Fredrick Töben joins Carolyn in the 2nd hour as she looks at the current controversy surrounding David Cole and his Treblinka article which was posted on the Feral House Facebook page. Among the points covered:

  • Why are articles favorable to David Cole published at White Nationalist websites?
  • The need among White people to believe in "the good Jew" is what allows the David Coles to prosper within the Revisionist movement and within White society itself;
  • Cole presents only two documents as complete proof for his gassing claims, disregarding lack of physical evidence;
  • Cole has shown himself capable of biting criticism of every revisionist who differs with him or who has questioned his conclusions;
  • Dr. Töben is bothered by Cole's reliance on a rabbi, Dr. Carlos Huerta, as an advisor for his revisionist work;
  • Can we now have the all out, much-needed debate over the Aktion Reinhardt "extermination" camps free of the fear of being seen as anti-Jewish?
  • Carl Nordling recommends the scientific method in his article "Scientists against Science" on page 28.


It's unfortunate that Cole resurfaced. What I really liked about recommending his Auschwitz video wasn't about a genuine care for how anti-Jewish I'd come across in recommending a holocaust revisionism video. It's really about just getting people to watch it, and in recommending one by a Jew, it removes the excuse for the other person to not listen to my recommendation or to write off the words of the revisionist on account of perceived irrational anti-Jewish bias. Such a video being made by a Jew also gives it a higher curiousity factor, particularly to the uninitiated. For these reasons, and (this is no small factor either) the fact that I see it as the most incisive, informative (going beyond just Auschwitz as well), and even most entertaining (another aid in getting people to sit through the whole thing...not just narrating, but walking through the place and showing things as he makes his points, speaking with various lying employees on camera, the list goes on...) 60 minutes of truth about the so-called holocaust, the Auschwitz video is practically perfect for exposing people to this information for the first time. I heard what you said about how pretty much, if not everything Cole revealed in the Auschwitz video had already been covered by Dr. Faurisson. I didn't know that, but again, presentation can go a long way with pulling people in and between Cole's heritage, on-location video, and the fact it's in English made it more effective than a video of Faurisson going over the info with English subtitles, or the "Introduction to Holocaust Revisionism" video where he's at a desk talking for two hours. The length doesn't bother me personally and of course it's not excessive for a documentary, but again I'm just giving reasons I feel it falls short of Cole's in regards to the purpose of introducing someone (particularly an averagely or merely somewhat above-averagely freethinking/intelligent person) to the information.
That's what I see as the great utility of Cole's Auschwitz video, and why I have some trouble letting it go as something to serve the purpose I speak of. I still think exposure to the full video is more likely to lead someone to check out other, legit revisionists than to fall in line with David Cole's new school of thought, but with each passing week he sounds more and more caustic to the cause of proving the fallacy of the so-called holocaust. I'm quite convinced he is of no further use to that cause, I only care about said video, whether it should be more or less discarded, and if so, with what to take it's place.
My frontrunners would be Judea Declares War on Germany ;) (that's a great title for piquing interest as well), The Great Holocaust Trial of 1985 (aside from being entertaining and informative, no Gentile likes speech laws), the last two parts of Zundel's "Holocaust Facts vs. Fiction" (it's out there in roughly three ten minute segments, so you're just asking someone to spend 20 minutes, and it's quite hard-hitting), and last but not least there's Sylvia Stolz. One can go for the full 45 minutes of the speech at AZK (one copy out there has the nice title "Holocaust: when truth is outlawed", which of course is relevant when in many if not most places you can't simply comment a web address so you tell people "Search for this"), the 15 minute "Reply to holocaust denial accusations" which is a nice synopsis of the main points, or "Holocaust freedom of speech conference gets speaker arrested", which is a snippet of the most poignant 15 minutes of the full speech, including the important piece on Nuremberg. I suppose you can mix and match, recommend one of the short videos and also a long one for them look into afterward if they have enough of a pulse to be roused by the short video.
One could also recommend the great new site holocausthoaxmuseum (I like to just type it as one word, as it sort of implies the .com and is nonetheless equally useful as a search term) in addition, I see that explains things very well. I'm just focusing mainly on videos here because videos do a better job of engaging people and people simply seem most open to taking in new information that way.
After looking over those fine options, I'm optimistic that people should be able to move on and introduce others to what really happened and didn't happen 90%, if not just as well without Colestein.

Long known half truther and fantasy-reality mixer David Icke has linked to The Greatest Story, fyi.

I respectfully disagree with Carolyn that the motive for revisionists to embrace David Cole is that they have a psychological "need to protect individual jews".
I suggest that the more likely explanation is that they embrace Cole to shield themselves against charges of being anti-jew both because they feel that to be painted as anti-jew diminishes their credibility as a revisionist by implying their conclusions are tained by a motive of irrational hatred rather than a pursuit of objective truth, as well as the general idea that those who are anti-jew are bad evil people, or so the jew media machine has convinced us.
So it's an example of how we need to get out the jew-created paradigm that has us afraid of being tarred as anti-jew. Instead, we should proclaim it proudly, and give the good reasons for it. I am proudly, virulently, anti-jew, and would personally make it my life's work to scrub the earth of their presence if it were in my power.

I just read that hissy fit of Cole's yesterday afternoon, and he really seems troubled and delusional. For as much as he talks about how irrelevent Faurisson supposedly is, the Dr.'s words clearly got to him in a big way. I couldn't help but laugh when Dave talked about how Bradley Smith's contemporaries are old and don't have much time left, and that Smith will be left on an island after blowing the chance to jump on board with Colestein and Weber. The reason I found it so funny was my impression that Cole was saying this was a poor business/financial move by Smith (what else would he be saying, claiming he'd have no friends?), that the money is in being with Team Coleweberstein. After the novelty of the David Cole return wears off (fast approaching) and it becomes blatantly clear that he is now out to save the hoax (won't be long), who on Earth is going to be supporting that operation? Obviously no one who knows the holocaust is a sham will support them, and obviously the Jews who will continue to dislike Cole for his stance on Auschwitz and some other camps will not support him and his guys either, so why joining them be a good idea for Bradley Smith? Maybe Mr. Jew-voice Par Excellence knows something I don't know, 'cause I don't see it at all.
And the paragraph where he's talking about Fred Leuchter adding him on Facebook like it was some bizarre thing when they'd met each other three times and presumably gotten along well, came off extremely childish. "I’d rather be Weber’s real-life friend than Leuchter’s Facebook friend." Wow, how profound. In any event, I think Davey is again in a minority there.