Arthur Butz on: Rudolf, Iran, terror against Revisionists

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
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 10001
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Arthur Butz on: Rudolf, Iran, terror against Revisionists

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 4 years ago (Tue Feb 14, 2006 12:55 pm)

The author of the article below is Dr. Arthur Butz, well known for his book, 'The Hoax of the. Twentieth Century. The Case Against The Presumed. Extermination Of European Jewry.'
available here:
http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/thottc/
Image

Here's the news story printed in The Daily Northwestern:
http://www.dailynorthwestern.com/vnews/ ... 1778c0f7e0
Iran has the U.S.’s number
By Arthur R. Butz

February 14, 2006

I have been asked “why people are so reluctant to consider” the validity of “Holocaust” revisionism. I shall try to answer that, showing the relationship to Iranian President Ahmadinejad.

The principal obstacle to the propagation of revisionism is, simply, fear. At present, the entrenched legend is protected by a system of legal and extra-legal prohibitions (“taboos”). Nobody could dispute the truth of that statement in Europe, where laws in most countries specifically proscribe the expression of revisionist ideas as criminal offenses. For me, the most painful instance of that intellectual terror is the incarceration of my chemist friend Germar Rudolf, presently being held in solitary confinement in a maximum security prison near Stuttgart.

His heinous crime? As a chemistry graduate student he did a forensic analysis of the walls of the alleged gas chambers, didn’t find the cyanide residues that ought to have been there and concluded they weren’t gas chambers. The lack of such forensic evidence is well known in the field. For example, in the Wall Street Journal of July 7, 2004, Timothy Ryback wrote that “there is little forensic evidence proving homicidal intent” in the ruins of Auschwitz.

For Germar that was a 14 month rap in 1994, and he bolted rather than serve it. Last November he was finally deported back to Germany by the US government, despite his application for political asylum and his marriage to an American woman. For his subsequent writings the Germans are now charging Germar with a new 5-year rap, enacted into law after his original “crime.”

This is not a strictly European reign of terror. The U.S. is definitely complicit. How many Americans know that our foremost execution technologist declared the alleged gassings not possible at the alleged sites? That was Fred Leuchter, who actually preceded Germar in the cyanide residue investigations. Leuchter was considered foremost in the execution field until 1990, when his views were widely publicized, and his business ruined by the refusal of authorities to work with him. I doubt he has any work in the field now. Illinois barred the politically unclean Leuchter from servicing the lethal injection machine he had designed and built. During the execution of John Wayne Gacy, there was a hitch attributed to incompetent operation of Leuchter’s machine.

The terror exists in the U.S., but it is more subtle than in Europe. That brings us to President Ahmadinejad of Iran. For many years I ignored revisionism coming from Islamic countries, because I found it inept. With Ahmadinejad, I found something else; his statements were formidable in their perspicacity. My original statement on him has to be read to make the specifics clear. He understands the intellectual terror in the West. However, the best surprise came after I wrote my endorsement. British Prime Minister Tony Blair made a routine pompous suggestion to Ahmadinejad: Visit the camps and see for yourself. Ahmadinejad replied: Good idea, I’ll bring a scientific team. He knows about the forensic issues too.

The most recent Iranian development has come from Hamshahri, Iran’s largest newspaper. They will answer the offensive cartoons of Muhammad, defended in Europe in the name of freedom of expression, with a cartoon contest on the theme of the “Holocaust.” Let’s hear the Europeans preach “human rights” and “freedom” then! The cartoons will likely be criminal offenses throughout continental Europe and perhaps actionable in Britain as well. The hypocrisy is staggering.

In the present Iran, we have a formidable enemy of some Western trends that ought to be vigorously opposed by all who value “freedom” as more than a mere slogan. That, and not mere “denial,” was the basis of my involvement with Ahmadinejad’s statements. Beware. Present-day Iran has our number, and is giving it to others.

Arthur R. Butz is an associate professor of electrical engineering. He can be reached at [email protected].

- Hannover
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

Ratatosk
Member
Member
Posts: 43
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2005 7:42 am

Postby Ratatosk » 1 decade 4 years ago (Tue Feb 14, 2006 3:04 pm)

This is not a strictly European reign of terror. The U.S. is definitely complicit.


Butz is one of the most important revisionists. But, I'm a bit critical to this statemant. IMO, the U.S. are exclusivly guilty to the European reign of terror against the revisionists. The U.S. created all the political structures in Germany after the war, and they still have tousends of troops based in Germany.

Get these troops out of Germany and Europe and things will look a little bit brighter for us revisionists.

Laurentz Dahl
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 981
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 8:00 am
Location: Somewhere in Europe

Postby Laurentz Dahl » 1 decade 4 years ago (Tue Feb 14, 2006 3:38 pm)

Ratatosk wrote:IMO, the U.S. are exclusivly guilty to the European reign of terror against the revisionists.


Nevertheless, it is pleasing to see that an American mainstream newspaper (if a local one) grants Butz the right to reply. Surely no European mainstream newspaper would even think of publishing a letter from a revisionist.

If the American government had any honor at all and truly revered their Founding Fathers they would put pressure on the European governments to stop their inquisition of Holohoax dissidents. Instead, they silently show their appreciation and admiration of laws that could not be laws in their own country. Isn't it jealousy we see in the little cold eyes of Chertoff et al...? Blasted hypocrits! :evil:

The US troops should get of out Europe. Unfortunately, I don't think that would change much of the situation. The peoples of Europe have been turned into their own prisoners and gaolers, thanks to the brainwashing imposed on them.

Bergmann
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 382
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 4:29 pm

Postby Bergmann » 1 decade 4 years ago (Tue Feb 14, 2006 4:07 pm)

There are also numerous letters to the editor about the article by Butz, published below the article itself. Interesting reading. Don't close your eyes to the opinons of the opposition.

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 10001
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 4 years ago (Tue Feb 14, 2006 7:24 pm)

Right Bergmann, we even have the absurd Andrew Mathis of the discredited 'Holocau$t History Project' (he has been thoroughly spanked at this forum) chiming in.
Andy said:
This is what modern Holocaust denial has come to: Praising an oppressive theocracy where freedom of speech has no coin because it is also a regime that hates Jews. If only they could have Nazi Germany back.
Andrew Mathis

Notice his desperate & thread bare Nazi canard. Yawn. That's all he has left. Whenever he's tried debating the facts he's had his head handed to him. His views are here for all read. Of course, his support for the violent religious state of Israel, where there truly is no freedom of speech, says plenty about his values.

This one is choice:
Wow. Let's spew some more misinformation here. All anyone has to do is perform a simple internet search to find that such noted names as Germar Rudolf and Fred Leuchter's works have been fully discredited by the scientific community at large, based on Leuchtel having no scientific background and Rudolf having conducted his studies improperly. I support freedom of speech, but I don't support that freedom being used to dispense outright lies that reflect poorly on my university.
Dan

Poor Dan hasn't a clue. He's repeating a mantra without ever examining the facts. There is nothing at all "improper" about master chemist Germar Rudolf's work (notice Dan avoids specifics), and ... Rudolf's work supported Leuchter's conclusions.

and:
I believe Professor Butz and his revisionist cronies are using a disputable lack of evidence in one arena (the use of gas chambers) to ignore genocide. Suppose Prof. Butz is correct and the gas chambers were never used. Then what? Does that account for the substantial amount of deaths incurred...
Scott

Disputable? Well not if you believe in science and logic. Revisionists have utterly demolished the 'gas chambers' claims. No gas chambers = no holocau$t'. And of course, Scott can show us no evidence for "genocide" of Jews by any method.
So then: no mass graves = no 'holocau$t'

- Hannover
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

Bergmann
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 382
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 4:29 pm

Postby Bergmann » 1 decade 4 years ago (Tue Feb 14, 2006 8:35 pm)

Butz wrote:For me, the most painful instance of that intellectual terror is the incarceration of my chemist friend Germar Rudolf, presently being held in solitary confinement in a maximum security prison near Stuttgart.

His heinous crime? As a chemistry graduate student he did a forensic analysis of the walls of the alleged gas chambers, didn’t find the cyanide residues that ought to have been there and concluded they weren’t gas chambers.

Nobody said anything about this. Amazing.

According to the TV news recently, a man raped for four years a 6 year old girl. The judge sentenced him to 60 days in jail.

But if someone questions the Jewish gas chambers, takes some samples from the walls and has them chemically analyzed, now that is a fifferent matter! His professional carier will be ruined and he may have to spend years in the slammer.

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 10001
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 4 years ago (Tue Feb 14, 2006 10:30 pm)

I admire this man's demand that Revisionist research be examined and that attacks on Butz are mere hysteria. Too bad he thinks Lipstadt and Mayer have refuted Revisionists, boy is he in for a surprise if he were to visit or debate us here; he shows he really knows little about the totality of Revisionist endeavors. But hey, give the guy credit.

As for Hillel? Yikes! Hatemongering, uninformed judeo-supremacists are what they are.

- Hannover
When reason gives way to hysteria
http://www.dailynorthwestern.com/vnews/ ... 178656bf37

by Henry M. Bowles III

February 14, 2006

President Bienen’s tacky and melodramatic press release on Arthur Butz, the Northwestern engineering professor and Holocaust revisionist, succeeded only in brightening Butz’s spotlight. Giving a shout-out to those who would have Butz fired and his ideas shut out of the forum, Bienen labeled the offending views as “contemptible,” “odious,” and “reprehensible” and cited the university’s Holocaust credentials. In the end, of course, Bienen made the perfectly obvious point that a professor cannot be fired merely for voicing unpopular or absurd opinions.

From Bienen’s inflated indignation and laughable hyperbole to the embarrassing student movement to have Butz fired or at least, his Web site shut down, the Butz imbroglio is revealing: We are addicted to outrage.

The value of an idea, to botch an old Oscar Wilde, has nothing to do with the integrity of the man who expresses it. Butz may well be an anti-Semite, and anti-Semitism may well lurk behind his take on the Holocaust, but his views on Jews aren’t relevant to the merit of his arguments. Butz’s ideas, not Butz the man ,must be tackled in the public forum. His revisionism must be examined piecemeal. It is doubtful every claim he makes is absurd. It is true that Butz, as a conspiracy theorist, might make claims that are not falsifiable. But this must be explained to the public.

As it turns out, Butz’s arguments are articulate, initially persuasive, and mostly debunked by Deborah Lipstadt, a professor at Emory University who studies the Holocaust. Not that you have read that in The Daily. Butz’s critics rarely bother to explain what is wrong with his proposed revisions to the historical record. Hillel has waged a steady campaign to silence him altogether. Is it not obvious that the more outraged and insecure we behave in the face of Butz’s claims, the more we try to shut him up as opposed to countering him, the more we fuel questions about whether the Holocaust has been sensationalized?

There are serious objections to the dominant take on the Holocaust, just as there are serious objections to the dominant take on any historical event. The Holocaust should not, merely because of the magnitude of the tragedy, be shielded from rigorous historical review. Some of the lingering Holocaust questions include when extermination was ordered and what Hitler was thinking at the time, and most explosively, the number of Jews who died because of disease versus the number who died as a result of orchestrated murder. Butz’s take on the last point has been partly supported by Arno Mayer, a history professor at Princeton.

In their whiny reminders of their mortification of being associated with Butz and their unwillingness to tackle his claims, the faculty response has been particularly embarrassing. You only get to publicly skewer Butz, after publicly addressing his ideas.

Henry M. Bowles III is a Medill senior.

He can be reached at

[email protected].
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

Hyman
Member
Member
Posts: 48
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2002 2:42 am

Postby Hyman » 1 decade 4 years ago (Tue Feb 14, 2006 11:45 pm)

I thought Arthur Butz’s letter was excellent and any intelligent person reading it will understand he is no fool. When combined with responses from such as Scott and Mr. Bowles, an impetus is created for curious and free-thinking readers who are not yet apprised of the issues to become so.

Andrew Mathis writes:

“This is what modern Holocaust denial has come to:…”
As opposed to what, ancient Holocaust denial?

Saying “this is what it has come to” implies that it might have done better. Is that what the “gentleman” is putting forward?

Dr. Mathis shows us that nowadays it doesn’t take much to be called an antisemite or Nazi or to get a PhD.

friedrich braun
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 619
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2003 4:40 am

Postby friedrich braun » 1 decade 4 years ago (Wed Feb 15, 2006 12:41 pm)

I presume that since Germar Rudolf has been jailed, all those projects: volume 19, 21, 23, etc. are dead in the water. :(

One way to stop Revisionist scholarship is to put Revisionists in prison.

http://vho.org/GB/Books/HHS.html


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

Who is online

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