On the subject of "conspiracy theories, I think EH is basically right. He writes:
A key flaw is the intertwining of “Holocaust Denial” with other “Conspiracy theories”, some often quite absurd. To a large extent, those involved with believing gassings were a hoax also believe in a multitude of increasingly bizarre “conspiracy theories.” Not only minor figures or followers but more importantly leading figures.
This is correct about several revisionist authors. To give some main instances: Jürgen Graf in White World Awake (2016) accepts the 9/11 Truth theory that the WTO skyscrapers would not have collapsed after Muslim fanatics flew planes into them. Graf also criticizes Darwin's theory of evolution, but in a measured way, given that he is talking about education and not in a revisionist book. Gerard Menuhin in Tell the Truth and Shame the Devil (2015) also accepts some kind of 9/11 conspiracy, describing how the owner of the buildings was not in that day (insinuating prior knowledge on his part) and later claimed excessive insurance. Some of these passages are a diatribe. Nick Kollerstrom in Breaking the Spell (2015) puts his similar views on the 7/7 bombings in London into his book.
These books contain a good deal of accurate information and analysis, but the inclusion of the authors' other views detracts from my sense of their judgment. It seems like they are predisposed to doubt "official" stories. Often this is done in an inappropriately mocking tone. In the case of the latter two, this material has been introduced in the Holocaust Handbooks series, which is the leading source of authoritative revisionist writing in English. This has to count against holocaust revisionism in general.
EH writes about Jim Fetzer (who wrote a preface to Kollerstrom's book):
Here again, if this is true, it is a black mark against the Holocaust Handbooks series and its editorial policies. Not everything EH says is beyond criticism. He writes:One would be hard pressed to find someone, anyone, especially as outspoken, in a leadership role in the “truther” community, that believes in more conspiracy theories than James Fetzer. You have the standard and minor ones – 9/11, JFK, Moon Landing – hoax, Sandy Hook, even Senator Paul Wellstone – assassinated. It’s hard to find a conspiracy theory this guy doesn’t believe. Incredibly, Fetzer even still actually promotes the obviously untrue psychedelic-era urban legend that The Beatles’s Paul McCartney died in a car crash and was replaced by a body double.
Here I think EH simply leaves no room for humor and overstates his case. His remarks about Fred Leuchter are also inconsequential.Ernst Zundel also wrote about Nazi UFOs, secret Nazi polar bases and Hollow Earth theories. It appears he came to the wrong conclusions about all of these things. His methods regarding all of these subjects were and are faulty. Zundel claims he did the esoteric stuff for fun, but this is rightly used as a mark against him being a pure truth teller.
The problem affects both the merit of the scholarship and creates a problem in disseminating it, as it can be discredited by association.
This sort of thing seems to be mainly an American/English problem. As far as I know, it is not so prevalent in French or Italian revisionist works, or German ones (though Germar Rudolf who edits the Holocaust Handbooks, is German). It sometimes happens that people from one culture cannot assess the credibility of people from another, through cultural unfamiliarity. Perhaps that is a contributing factor.
EH's original article ("The End of the Line") is here:
There is an archived copy here: