Defamation lawsuit against man who claimed Sandy Hook hoax. Meaning for US Holocaust revisionism?

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
User avatar
Lamprecht
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1065
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 6:32 pm

Defamation lawsuit against man who claimed Sandy Hook hoax. Meaning for US Holocaust revisionism?

Postby Lamprecht » 3 months 3 days ago (Wed Jun 19, 2019 8:27 pm)

Although this is not about the "Holocaust" per se, I will remind everyone that "Sandy Hook denial" has been specifically equated with Holocaust skepticism. In fact, during the "Big YouTube Purge" where CODOH's account was deleted, YouTube's official blog stated (see discussion: viewtopic.php?t=12504) that they: "will remove content denying that well-documented violent events, like the Holocaust or the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary, took place."


https://www.cbsnews.com/news/sandy-hook ... tion-suit/
"Nobody Died at Sandy Hook" publisher apologizes to dad of murdered boy

Updated on: June 18, 2019 / 3:21 PM / AP

The father of a victim of the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre has won a defamation lawsuit against the authors of a book that claimed the shooting never happened — the latest victory for victims’ relatives who have been taking a more aggressive stance against conspiracy theorists.


The book, “Nobody Died at Sandy Hook,” has also been pulled to settle claims against its publisher filed by Lenny Pozner, whose 6-year-old son Noah was killed in the shooting.

“My face-to-face interactions with Mr. Pozner have led me to believe that Mr. Pozner is telling the truth about the death of his son,” Dave Gahary, the principal officer at publisher Moon Rock Books, said Monday. “I extend my most heartfelt and sincere apology to the Pozner family.”


There's no reason to discuss here whether or not Sandy Hook happened exactly as claimed by the media; that's not really the issue here. Whether it happened is irrelevant to our right to believe whether it did, according to the First Amendment.

This could set a precedent for Holocaust revisionism. If someone can be sued by the father of a kid who died in a mass shooting for saying "It didn't happen" -- then why couldn't someone be sued by someone whose parent or grandparent died at Auschwitz, presumably from a gas chamber?
"There is a principal which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance -- that principal is contempt prior to investigation."
-- Herbert Spencer

User avatar
JLAD Prove Me Wrong
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 325
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2018 8:35 pm

Re: Defamation lawsuit against man who claimed Sandy Hook hoax. Meaning for US Holocaust revisionism?

Postby JLAD Prove Me Wrong » 3 months 3 days ago (Wed Jun 19, 2019 8:37 pm)

Lamprecht wrote:If someone can be sued by the father of a kid who died in a mass shooting for saying "It didn't happen" -- then why couldn't someone be sued by someone whose parent or grandparent died at Auschwitz, presumably from a gas chamber?


Anyone can be sued. It's the fact that the judge in this example allowed the case to move forward to a higher judge that is the issue. Hopefully the other judge will rule in his favor.

If he doesn't... say adios to the 1st Amendment and Holocaust revisionism!
If your beliefs cannot stand up to your own sincere scrutiny and skeptical evaluation, they are not worth having.

https://freespeechmonika.wordpress.com/ ... t-details/

User avatar
borjastick
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2486
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2011 5:52 am
Location: Europe

Re: Defamation lawsuit against man who claimed Sandy Hook hoax. Meaning for US Holocaust revisionism?

Postby borjastick » 3 months 3 days ago (Thu Jun 20, 2019 2:03 am)

Holocaust survivors and or their off spring and the organisations behind it all don't want to go to court that's the answer. If they did the whole holocaust hoax as a proposition would be opened up and the revisionists case would be made well and clear. The real issue would be that gassings and mass murder cannot be proven in a court of law.

Also there remains the fact that the 'common plan' system means that the holocaust happened and that's that.

As for Sandy Hook I don't doubt something bad happened there but there was always doubt in my mind about what actually took place there.
'Of the four million Jews under Nazi control in WW2, six million died and alas only five million survived.'

'We don't need evidence, we have survivors' - israeli politician

User avatar
Hektor
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 3325
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 7:59 am

Re: Defamation lawsuit against man who claimed Sandy Hook hoax. Meaning for US Holocaust revisionism?

Postby Hektor » 3 months 1 day ago (Fri Jun 21, 2019 8:10 am)

I think there was a similar case where the IHR was sued and had to settle several decades ago.

User avatar
Lamprecht
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1065
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 6:32 pm

Re: Defamation lawsuit against man who claimed Sandy Hook hoax. Meaning for US Holocaust revisionism?

Postby Lamprecht » 3 months 1 day ago (Fri Jun 21, 2019 3:46 pm)

Hektor wrote:I think there was a similar case where the IHR was sued and had to settle several decades ago.

Check my post about that:

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=12443&p=92245#p92307

Lamprecht wrote:
The Mermelstein Trials
As the distribution of the Journal of Historical Review to actual academics underscored, IHR's ambition to establish a broader audience for its brand of history was not likely to be satisfied. Another early publicity gimmick soon backfired even more spectacularly than the JHR distribution.

At IHR's first conference in 1979, the group offered $50,000 to anyone "who could prove that the Nazis operated gas-chambers to exterminate Jews during World War II."
At IHR's first conference in 1979, the group offered $50,000 to anyone "who could prove that the Nazis operated gas-chambers to exterminate Jews during World War II." Not content with announcing the "reward" among its own ranks, IHR also notified well-known Holocaust survivors and Jewish organizations. A California businessman, Mel Mermelstein, who was 17 when he was interned with his family at Auschwitz in 1944 (his mother and two sisters did not survive), and who later founded the Auschwitz Study Foundation, received the notice, signed by Lewis Brandon - one of the pseudonyms used by David McCalden, IHR's first director. Mermelstein remitted a notarized statement describing his internment at Auschwitz and his own observation, on May 22, 1944, of his mother and two sisters being driven by Nazi guards toward what he later learned was gas chamber number five. He received no clear response to either his initial or follow-up inquiries, but started getting Holocaust-denying hate literature in his mail and was described as a "racist" in leaflets that were distributed in his neighborhood. He filed suit against IHR for breach of contract, libel, and intentional infliction of emotional distress early in 1981.

In a pre-trial determination, the court took judicial notice - i.e., accepted as a well-known and indisputable fact - that Jews were gassed at Auschwitz [See box: "Judicial Notice"], and in July 1985 the lawsuit was settled in Mermelstein's favor. IHR was forced to pay the $50,000 reward as well as an additional $40,000 for pain and suffering. Under the terms of their agreement, IHR also issued Mermelstein a letter of apology.


This is incorrect, except the part about "Judicial Notice" -- the court simply assumed that the gassing of Jews was indisputable fact, there was no trial proving such a thing.

See also:

The Mermelstein Lie
https://codoh.com/library/document/1740/

Final Victory in the Mermelstein Case
https://codoh.com/library/document/2402/

About the IHR/Mermelstein Settlement
https://codoh.com/library/document/2490/

From above:
With so many wild rumors still being circulated about the IHR/Mermelstein settlement, we want to remind our readers that, contrary to what has gone out through the press and media:

1. The settlement agreement did not include any provision for a payment of any reward offer, and in fact was not such a payment.
2. The IHR did not accept or in any way agree with Judge Johnson’s ridiculous 1981 “judicial notice” that Jews were “in fact” exterminated in “gas chambers” at Auschwitz.
3. The IHR has not retreated one inch from its well-known position that there is no credible evidence to support the theory that Germans allegedly used homicidal poison gas chambers to exterminate the Jews of Europe.
4. The letter of apology addressed the “suffering” some Jews said they experienced around the $50,000 award offer. It did not apologize for revisionist theory or revisionist literature in any way.

Following is the complete text of the letter our lawyers signed:

Each of the answering defendants do hereby officially and formally apologize to Mr. Mel Mermelstein, a survivor of Auschwitz-Birkenau and Buchenwald, and all other survivors of Auschwitz for the pain, anguish, and suffering he and all other Auschwitz survivors have sustained relating to the $50,000 reward offer for proof that ‘Jews were gassed in gas chambers at Auschwitz’."

Any person or organization that claims our lawyers signed any apology other than these few lines is either mistaken or knowingly distributing false information.
"There is a principal which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance -- that principal is contempt prior to investigation."
-- Herbert Spencer

Stephen Cohen
Member
Member
Posts: 21
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2019 12:29 pm

Re: Defamation lawsuit against man who claimed Sandy Hook hoax. Meaning for US Holocaust revisionism?

Postby Stephen Cohen » 2 days 23 hours ago (Thu Sep 19, 2019 12:16 pm)

Lamprecht:

There's no reason to discuss here whether or not Sandy Hook happened exactly as claimed by the media; that's not really the issue here. Whether it happened is irrelevant to our right to believe whether it did, according to the First Amendment.


I agree completely, but for what it's worth, I honestly believe Sandy Hook was a fraud. But that is not why I'm posting in this thread.

Lamprecht:

This could set a precedent for Holocaust revisionism. If someone can be sued by the father of a kid who died in a mass shooting for saying "It didn't happen" -- then why couldn't someone be sued by someone whose parent or grandparent died at Auschwitz, presumably from a gas chamber?


That is a good point. Though I don't know the details of the Sandy Hook book, my gut feeling is it's not what the author said, but how he said it. Which brings up a point I have been thinking about lately, and thus why I'm posting in this thread:

Why didn't Eli Weasel ever sue Carolyn Yeager? Why hasn't Michael Shermer sued Greg Gerdes?

It reminds me of a thread I read here recently but am unable to currently locate it. (A little help please!) It was a post or thread about a principle that got fired over the holocaust "education" in his school. In my opinion, the whole legal issue is something that should be discussed a lot more than it is.

Perhaps I'll start a new thread so the whole Sandy Hook thing doesn't get dragged into it.

Stephen Cohen
Member
Member
Posts: 21
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2019 12:29 pm

Re: Defamation lawsuit against man who claimed Sandy Hook hoax. Meaning for US Holocaust revisionism?

Postby Stephen Cohen » 2 days 23 hours ago (Thu Sep 19, 2019 12:20 pm)

JLAD Prove Me Wrong:

Anyone can be sued.


My point exactly. So why are some people sued, like the IHR, the author mentioned above, and others, yet Yeager and Gerdes do not get sued? It's obviously not what they're saying, but how they are saying it.

I guess what I'm trying to get at hear is: What makes their strategy successful?

After all, if the IHR was forced to do this:

4. The letter of apology addressed the “suffering” some Jews said they experienced around the $50,000 award offer. It did not apologize for revisionist theory or revisionist literature in any way.

Following is the complete text of the letter our lawyers signed:

Each of the answering defendants do hereby officially and formally apologize to Mr. Mel Mermelstein, a survivor of Auschwitz-Birkenau and Buchenwald, and all other survivors of Auschwitz for the pain, anguish, and suffering he and all other Auschwitz survivors have sustained relating to the $50,000 reward offer for proof that ‘Jews were gassed in gas chambers at Auschwitz’."


Then why hasn't nafcash.com been sued for offering this:

THE HOLOCAUST ARCHAEOLOGY HOAX CHALLENGE

$100,000.00 REWARD For proving - just 1 / 1,000 of 1% - of the criminally fraudulent buried remains allegations

http://www.nafcash.com/


The nafcash.com site also makes specific accusations against Michael Shermer:

Enter the spurious “skeptic” - Even though the orthodox tall-tales about the alleged Belzec, Chelmno, Ponary, Sobibor and Treblinka II “holocausts” are classic big-lies replete with absurd physical impossibilities, the charlatan MICHAEL SHERMER wants you to believe the fraudulent - cognitive illusion - that they have actually been scientifically proven to be true. To illustrate the immoral machinations that Shermer has gone through in support of this guise, look at these quotes from his deluding book - Denying History: “The purpose of this book is to… show precisely, with solid evidence… how historians know that it happened as it did… we must obey the rules of reason and apply the tools of science… This process is practiced by all scientists… historical scientists, geologists, paleontologists and archaeologists, to prove that anything in the past happened… We must review the physical evidence.”

Shermer furthers this glaringly transparent charade with these additional duplicitous claims in - Denying History: “To debunk the deniers, can’t we just go there and see for ourselves? The answer, of course, is “yes.” We can no longer ignore the deniers… We cannot remain silent anymore. It’s time to respond… We went to Europe to conduct research at… Treblinka, Sobibor, Belzec… We wanted to see for ourselves just what evidence there is at the camps and to take the opportunity to examine firsthand the claims… How is it that so much physical evidence can come to be doubted?”

WHAT PHYSICAL EVIDENCE? - Shermer is intentionally ignoring the inconvenient fact that, over the years, there have been no less than five claimed so-called “crime scene investigations” of Treblinka II, and a number of claimed investigations at the other four sites as well - yet to date, it can still be categorically stated that; archaeologists / forensic investigators have not proven the existence of even one mass grave at Belzec, Chelmno, Ponary, Sobibor or Treblinka II that contains so-much-as - 1 / 1,000 of 1% - of the alleged buried remains - NOT ONE!

Ironically, Michael Shermer has unwittingly revealed who the real deniers / liars are, as his unethical dissimulation turned out to be an easily documented epic FAIL: “Shermer’s Denying History is… an implicit denial of the existence of opposing facts, evidence and arguments.… he cannot seriously claim to be a scholar. He is an ignorant fool at best. Or else he knows what he is omitting, and then he is merely a liar, an obfuscator and a fraud.”

So now you know how invested Shermer is in this hoax and why he shamelessly ignores the fact that his deceitful allegations / insinuations have been thoroughly DEBUNKED: “That is the only way to understand this subject. It has to be studied carefully. If you slow down and look at the logic, his illusion doesn’t work. Shermer has set up his argument in such a way that the ordinary methods of logic do not apply… This is like a shell game: you have to watch what he’s doing… The Shermer principle is not logic… The jumping together phenomenon is how illusionists produce their illusions.”


So why is Shermer so afraid of suing Mr. Gerdes?


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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest