Was Pressac undercover?

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
Tommo
Member
Member
Posts: 66
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2016 10:45 pm

Re: Was Pressac undercover?

Postby Tommo » 2 years 4 months ago (Mon Jun 05, 2017 11:05 am)

hermod wrote:
Tommo wrote:Yes I considered that as a possibility.

Except knowing people, it seems that it is also possible that Faurisson told a "white lie". The motivation for which, he was very pissed off with Pressac for his treachery.


Possible.

Kind of like Homer Simpson with Santa's Little Helper at the race track.. Quote "I have no dog!" LOL


Yes, I remember that episode.

"Kent, let me make this perfectly clear. I have no dog !"

^^That's the most plausible expalnation for me, purely conjectual of course.

I can see some plausibility in your argument as well.


Purely conjectural indeed.

Germar does not seem like he has it in him to tell a lie in a professional sense to me.


If all the people telling a lie seemed like they have it in them to tell a lie, nobody would ever be deceived by them.

It's just funny how PRessac kind of did in the end, advance the Revisionist cause by opposing it and failing.

Which begs the question, did he do that deliberately? By openly debating revisionists, he did give it the needed platform. That is important. And made a piecemeal concession baulked at by his contempory's, for which they in turn dropped him quietly.


Funny. But true? Perhaps a deeper analysis of his writings could confirm or infirm this elegant theory...


The last point interested me Hermod.. Please- I'm doing alright for an 11 month struggle from fiction to fact...

Throw me (and any potential onlooker) a bone. What passages of Pressac's writings shed light on this topic? I'm interested because I don't know and want to. :) But I also need to devote my time to reading real books too at this time.
What are you angry about? By proving the gas chambers a lie, I just knocked off half the holocaust and SAVED 3 million Jew's for you!

I just saved more Jew's than Oskar Schindler allegedly ever did! :lol:

User avatar
hermod
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2076
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 10:52 am

Re: Was Pressac undercover?

Postby hermod » 2 years 4 months ago (Mon Jun 05, 2017 6:27 pm)

Tommo wrote:
It's just funny how PRessac kind of did in the end, advance the Revisionist cause by opposing it and failing.

Which begs the question, did he do that deliberately? By openly debating revisionists, he did give it the needed platform. That is important. And made a piecemeal concession baulked at by his contempory's, for which they in turn dropped him quietly.


Funny. But true? Perhaps a deeper analysis of his writings could confirm or infirm this elegant theory...


The last point interested me Hermod.. Please- I'm doing alright for an 11 month struggle from fiction to fact...

Throw me (and any potential onlooker) a bone. What passages of Pressac's writings shed light on this topic? I'm interested because I don't know and want to. :) But I also need to devote my time to reading real books too at this time.


In the video you posted previously, Germar Rudolf says that Pressac reduced the number of victims more and more in his publications and that Pressac even published papers under pen names in revisionist magazines. I don't know if Rudolf or another revisionist wrote a paper about that, but maybe you could start your search from there.
"But, however the world pretends to divide itself, there are ony two divisions in the world to-day - human beings and Germans. – Rudyard Kipling, The Morning Post (London), June 22, 1915

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9864
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: Was Pressac undercover?

Postby Hannover » 2 years 4 months ago (Mon Jun 05, 2017 7:47 pm)

I spoke to Germar Rudolf about this and he recommended the following article, originally published in The Revisionist.
http://codoh.com/library/categories/1198/
scroll down

Copied below, have a look.

- Hannover

http://codoh.com/library/document/1510/?lang=en
The Double Agent
By Germar Rudolf

In May of 1993 great doings were afoot at Max-Planck Institute for Solid State Physics in Stuttgart. One of the young PhD candidates there had become involved in a scandal, which was making news throughout Germany. The name of the PdD candidate was Germar Rudolf, the author of these lines. My scandalous activity consisted of having prepared, at the request of the legal defense of Major General Otto Ernst Remer, an expert report on the so-called 'gas chambers' of Auschwitz, in which I arrived at the conclusion that it was physically impossible for mass gassings to have taken place as reported by eyewitnesses. Shortly after Easter of 1993, Gen. Remer had sent thousands of copies of this report to prominent politicians, jurists, historians, chemists and the various media in Germany. As a result of this, every lobbyist and pressure group imaginable demanded that my activities as expert witness be suppressed by every means available. In that memorable springtime I received a number of telephone calls from various news media at my worksite, which displeased the business office of the Institute. The identities of the various callers and contents of conversations are of no interest here, with one exception: when the gentleman on the other end identified himself as Jean-Claude Pressac. He asked for my private telephone number, which I politely declined to give him.

I suggest that he communicate with me in writing. To this he replied that, for reasons of security, he preferred to not communicate with me in writing, because it would be dangerous for him to do so. Then he warned me that I too should be on guard. Concerning the 'Holocaust' in particular, he advised me to avoid challenging every aspect of it at one time. He said that in dealing with 'Holocaust' the only hope for success without risking personal danger was to attack it piecemeal, one aspect at a time.

Since that telephone conversation, I have been convinced that Jean- Claude Pressac believed that we revisionists are correct in principle. In view of the overwhelming might of the exterminationists, however, he arrived early at the conclusion that the 'system' had to be fought from within. His apparent defection to the ranks of 'the enemy' and service to the cause of exterminationism was his version of salami tactics. His plan was to use the 'system' in order to extract one concession after another.

If we consider his publications in chronological order, it is obvious that with each publication, Pressac came closer to one or another aspect of revisionism. His first step was simply to make public discussion of the subject possible; his second, to make the 'system' acknowledge the priority of scientific evidence over eyewitness testimony; his third, to force it to acknowledge the contradictions inherent in such testimony. With every new publication he also reduced the number of victims, while his evaluation of eyewitness testimony grew more critical. Finally, after attacking the very foundations of the 'Auschwitz Myth,' he turned upon the other so-called 'extermination camps' (see page 431.)

After the publication of his second book in 1993, he must have gradually grown frightened, since subsequent revisions of the book made him many enemies. His telephone conversation with me was not the only place where he revealed his fears. Carlo Mattogno reports that he broke off all contacts with him at that time. Prof. Faurisson reports that he suffered a near collapse during Faurisson's trial in 1995, begging the judge to excuse him from answering Faurisson's questions:[1]

"You must understand that I have only one life. You must understand that I am alone in my battle."

He refused to testify because he clearly saw that he was completely isolated and his life was in danger. The only explanation for this is the fact that a candid statement before the French court would have had severe consequences since it would have been revisionist in nature.

And so, even though his writings are scientifically suspect, Pressac was without doubt the most politically successful revisionist to date. He was in fact our double agent.

Many thanks, Jean-Claude!
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

User avatar
hermod
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2076
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 10:52 am

Re: Was Pressac undercover?

Postby hermod » 2 years 4 months ago (Tue Jun 06, 2017 7:52 pm)

The host of the meetings between Faurisson and Pressac was French publisher Pierre Guillaume. In his book Droit et Histoire, Pierre Guillaume talked about the meetings between Faurisson and Pressac (pp. 51-78). He depicted Pressac as a far-right exterminationist pharmacist fascinated by Nazi mass murderers (& war in general) and having visited Auschwitz to document an exterminationist novel he was writing at that time. At Auschwitz, Pierre Guillaume wrote, Pressac had realized the inanity of the exterminationist thesis and so he wanted to meet Faurisson in order to talk to him about Auschwitz. About Pressac, Pierre Guillaume concluded:

"Jean-Claude Pressac's article in The Jewish World refutes the thesis of the [converted] unbeliever defended by Pierre Vidal-Naquet. On the contrary, it is obviously the text of someone who believed in the idea of a planned mass extermination in gas chambers designed for this purpose and that on-site material findings forced to fall back on the thesis of artisanal gassings in buildings designed for other purposes and inconsistently cobbled."


l'article de J.-C. Pressac dans Le Monde Juif réfute le thèse de l'incrédule soutenue par M. Pierre Vidal-Naquet. C'est au contraire manifestement le texte de quelqu'un qui croyait en la thèse de l'extermination massive planifiée dans des chambres à gaz conçues à cet effet et que les constatations matérielles sur place contraignent à se rabattre sur la thèse de gazages artisanaux (ou "gazouillages") dans des bâtiments conçus à d'autres fins et bricolés de façon incohérente.


Droit et Histoire (Pierre Guillaume): http://www.vho.org/aaargh/fran/livres5/pgdeth2.pdf
"But, however the world pretends to divide itself, there are ony two divisions in the world to-day - human beings and Germans. – Rudyard Kipling, The Morning Post (London), June 22, 1915


Return to “'Holocaust' Debate / Controversies / Comments / News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: MSN [Bot] and 4 guests