Faurisson comments on David Cole's antics

Published by carolyn on Tue, 2014-07-29 12:59

David Cole is back

by Robert Faurisson (pictured)

July 28, 2014

David Cole, an American Jew born in 1968, once took to revisionism but as an amateur and without much concern for research or accuracy. Some of his fellow Jews were quick to make life hard for him and, finally, to treat him like a Palestinian. He took fright, signed a retraction, then decided to change his name and his existence. 

So it was that, concealing his past and taking on the identity of “David Stein”, he went and offered his services to his Republican friends in Los Angeles as an organiser of gatherings and parties. As fine a way as any to earn a good living and make a spectacle of oneself. 

Later, at a third stage, he put an end to his existence of professional reveller to reappear under his original name and publish a book in which he claims to reveal today the ignominy of revisionists like that Faurisson who, after having amiably welcomed him, lost no time in describing him as a prankster. Cole’s book is entitled Republican Party Animal

To get an idea of its quality and of the author’s personality see, in particular, how he deals with the “Nutty nutbag denier Robert Faurisson” and, curiously, with the French, about whom he generalises as follows: “Ah, the French... you could smell the hypocrisy if not for the fact that their disdain for bathing produces an even worse stank [sic for stink]”. The photographic section in the middle of the book shows him in exhibitionist poses, the first image being that of a half-naked David Cole, with a red clown-nose, introducing himself as “Jewpiter the Clown.”1  (Right). To those who might find fault with me for insulting him I’ll point out that it is Cole in person who calls himself a “clown”. 

English-speaking revisionists have asked me whether I’ve written anything in the past about the individual. In response, I’ve recently sent them three texts, only the second and third of which have been published in French 2. I intend to write, in French and English, a piece devoted to what “Jewpiter the Clown” has had the gall to write about the alleged Struthof “gas chamber”. Finally, if there’s still time, perhaps I shall write an account of his book, which I am currently struggling to continue reading; in fact I find it so amateurish and so tedious that I wonder whether I might just drop it, for the letter that Fred Leuchter has sent to Cole may be the best possible answer to our clown 3.

Notes:

1. A photo  containing the caption “Jewpiter the Clown.” Because who wouldn’t trust this guy as a Holocaust historian?

2. First text: my letter of January 9, 1993 to Bradley Smith and David Cole, on line at http://robertfaurisson.blogspot.it/1993/01/letter-to-bradley-smith-and-d... then, an extract (note 8) from the Introduction to my Ecrits révisionnistes (1974-1998), at http://robertfaurisson.blogspot.it/1998/12/introduction-to-ecrits-revisi... finally, a paragraph from the May 8, 2000 presentation to my three letters to Le Monde of 1978-1979, at http://robertfaurisson.blogspot.it/2009/09/three-letters-from-professor-....

3. Online at http://vnnforum.com/showthread.php?p=1716184, very bottom of the page, after its French translation. I would entitle it “Fred Leuchter briskly puts David Cole in his place”.

Comments

I thought Cole-Stein was imputing to himself way too much credit when he said most recently that he felt partially responsible for the revisionist "fetish" for material evidence.
 
It is Faurisson of course who said that when an accusation of murder is made, the prosecution must show solid evidence that this murder actually occurred. It is necessary to show a murder-weapon and a body of a murdered person, neither of which can be shown in regard to the gas-chamber story. Hearsay is not adequate evidence. The fact that somebody cannot be located is in itself no evidence at all of murder. These are the kinds of "evidence" that the Holocaustians use. To endorse an accusation of murder against the German nation without better evidence than that, as Cole-Stein now does, is simply irresponsible. It is the demand for physical evidence that embarrasses someone like Cole-Stein engaged in such irresponsibility.
 
How about the fact that killing people with diesel-exhaust as alleged in the Aktion Reinhardt camps is impractical because such exhaust is not toxic? The claim that mass-killing went on in the Aktion Reinhardt camps, with no physical evidence to support it, has working against it (1) the fact that this kind of story has already been shown to be a lie in every other place where it was alleged, (2) the fact that personal accounts supposed to support the story (e.g. Yankel Wiernik's A Year in Treblinka) contain ridiculous elements, and (3) the fact that the alleged method of killing, with diesel-exhaust, is absurd.
 
Cole-Stein is not properly important. He is a redundant latecomer to revisionism, arriving after all the important discoveries had been made, who I believe would have gotten very little notice if he had not been a Jew.
 
At this point, the Aktion Reinhardt camps are looking like the last refuge of the Holohoax, and so-called revisionists who concede mass-killing in those places are unfortunately making that refuge more secure.

173 words spent on the execrable bedbug colestein.  Professor Faurrison remains a most gracious champion.  Long may he Live!  Thank you, Sir!

This is what happens when we look for a token jew to the cause of the truth. It will always burn us in the end. Yet we dont learn from the experience.
 

I guess I partially agree that seeking a token Jew is a bad idea, but there have been some Jews, Roger Dommergue, Josef Ginsburg, and Ditlieb Felderer, who -- for whatever reasons -- made real contributions.
Faurisson could tell early on from his behavior that Cole-Stein was not very serious, without having to prejudge his motives based on his being a Jew. I think that bad motives are usually evident in behavior and statements, although most people most of the time may not be discerning enough to recognize those clues.
I think Cole-Stein even as a self-congratulating attention-hog still has been a net plus for revisionism so long as the people who actually know something about the matter don't accord him the importance that he accords himself.

I thought Deitlib Felderer was a Jehova's Witness. In any event, his contributions to revisionism have always been delivered with accompanying embarassments like getting arrested in Switzerland (I believe it was) for mailing feces to his enemies and railing against Deborah Lipstat at two homoerotic websites he had, or maybe still maintains. They were so disturbing to me that I didn't bookmark them and have forgotten now how I even found them. I'm afraid he has more than just one  screw loose.   

I read recently that Ditetleb Felderer was "part Jewish." I had not known that, but he was smart. Maybe he was just very much like David Cole -- making a contribution but at a price. It's too bad if he was homosexual.

Add new comment