Robert Faurisson vs. Mikkel Andersson (2002)

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
Vlad
Member
Member
Posts: 111
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 6:25 am

Robert Faurisson vs. Mikkel Andersson (2002)

Postby Vlad » 1 decade 8 months ago (Mon Feb 23, 2009 9:09 pm)

(This has been mentioned before, but the link has since gone dead.)
A tape recording of a lively debate in Copenhagen (2 1/2 hours!):
http://member.newsguy.com/~kreiberg/fdebat1.ram
Judging from his abandoned website, hapless Mikkel Andersson seems to have given up his anti-revisionist activities:
http://holocaust-info.dk/

User avatar
Occam's Razor
Member
Member
Posts: 85
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 7:45 pm

Postby Occam's Razor » 1 decade 7 months ago (Sat Mar 21, 2009 5:39 pm)

This is an excellent debate. It's a textbook-example of what happens when a good revisionist debates a holocaust believer and a good example why they always try to avoid a public debate. The first minutes are a little bit boring but after 17 minutes it gets really interesting. It's a contant back and forth between Andersson and Faurisson. I found it very instructive how Faurisson responds to all of Anderssons claims and how he nails him down, and how Andersson tries to evade Faurissons precise questions. I sometimes wondered why so many other revisionists always called Faurisson one of the most important revisionists and one of their most influential mentors, since there are other revisionists who have produced much more literature. But after listening to this debate I know why. It's obvious how much he knows about the topic, he never evades a question, and he has always a very convincing answer. It's amazing how he corners his opponent with precise and strategic questions, almost like a chess-player. And both Faurisson and Andersson are always fair during the whole debate. I encourage everyone to carefully listen to and study this debate. I think learned a lot from it how to debate a believer.

I reencoded the file into a more useful format so that everyone can download it. The filesize of the mp3-file is 35MB ,22kHz, 32kbps. I uploaded it to 5 alternative websites to make it harder for the censors. Perhaps CODOH can prevent the file from disappearing into the memory hole and give it a place in the CODOH library.

Here are the 5 alternative download-links:

Faurisson_vs_Andersson_2002.mp3 (34.70 MB)

Faurisson_vs_Andersson_2002.mp3 (34.70 MB)

Faurisson_vs_Andersson_2002.mp3 (34.70 MB)

Faurisson_vs_Andersson_2002.mp3 (34.70 MB)

Faurisson_vs_Andersson_2002.mp3 (34.70 MB)

Liberty
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 7:17 pm

Postby Liberty » 1 decade 7 months ago (Sun Mar 22, 2009 1:37 am)

Thank you for posting this, it is very informative. I had been wondering exactly who Faurisson is.
Best regards
Steve

Vlad
Member
Member
Posts: 111
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 6:25 am

Postby Vlad » 1 decade 7 months ago (Sun Mar 22, 2009 2:08 pm)

Who is Robert Faurisson? (Guillaume Fabien, 1998)

KostasL
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 320
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 12:27 am

Postby KostasL » 1 decade 7 months ago (Mon Mar 23, 2009 3:39 am)

Vlad wrote:Who is Robert Faurisson? (Guillaume Fabien, 1998)


Thank you for posting. :)
Last edited by KostasL on Mon Mar 23, 2009 11:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.
When you realize that the Holocaust is a LIE, then all of a sudden, ALL your questions, ALL bizarre and strange things, disappear, and ALL things make sense, at last.

Thesaint
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 201
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 4:34 pm
Location: England

Postby Thesaint » 1 decade 7 months ago (Mon Mar 23, 2009 6:25 pm)

Occam's Razor wrote:This is an excellent debate. It's a textbook-example of what happens when a good revisionist debates a holocaust believer and a good example why they always try to avoid a public debate. The first minutes are a little bit boring but after 17 minutes it gets really interesting. It's a contant back and forth between Andersson and Faurisson. I found it very instructive how Faurisson responds to all of Anderssons claims and how he nails him down, and how Andersson tries to evade Faurissons precise questions. I sometimes wondered why so many other revisionists always called Faurisson one of the most important revisionists and one of their most influential mentors, since there are other revisionists who have produced much more literature. But after listening to this debate I know why. It's obvious how much he knows about the topic, he never evades a question, and he has always a very convincing answer. It's amazing how he corners his opponent with precise and strategic questions, almost like a chess-player. And both Faurisson and Andersson are always fair during the whole debate. I encourage everyone to carefully listen to and study this debate. I think learned a lot from it how to debate a believer.

I reencoded the file into a more useful format so that everyone can download it. The filesize of the mp3-file is 35MB ,22kHz, 32kbps. I uploaded it to 5 alternative websites to make it harder for the censors. Perhaps CODOH can prevent the file from disappearing into the memory hole and give it a place in the CODOH library.

Here are the 5 alternative download-links:

Faurisson_vs_Andersson_2002.mp3 (34.70 MB)

Faurisson_vs_Andersson_2002.mp3 (34.70 MB)

Faurisson_vs_Andersson_2002.mp3 (34.70 MB)

Faurisson_vs_Andersson_2002.mp3 (34.70 MB)

Faurisson_vs_Andersson_2002.mp3 (34.70 MB)
Thank you for sharing this with us,Occam`s razor.It was a delight to hear Mr Faurisson hold Mr Andersson to account.His English pronunciation may not be perfect,but his debating style certainly made up for that!!!
Poor old Mr Andersson.What an unfortunate thing it is to labor needlessly for the sake of a tawdry and squalid fraud.Assuming,of course, that he does not defend the indefensible merely for personal profit.

Barrington James
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 362
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 8:26 pm

Postby Barrington James » 1 decade 7 months ago (Sat Mar 28, 2009 7:44 pm)

Dear Occam's Razor-

Thanks very much for the debate video. It was a thrill to hear it and most importantly I also learned how to be a better debater: to be more specific, to be more exact and unrelenting in my questioning of believers- without losing their friendship.

I thought both debaters did an excellent job: Faurisson, because he knows so much and more importantly because he would not let Andersson get away with his vague believer holocaust foolishness such as “everyone knows” and; “the most documented event in history” and other such nonsense, and Andersson because he did the best he could with so few real facts and, most importantly, he did not resort to the name calling that most believers sink to when their theories are destroyed.

Andersson’s question of “where did they all go then?” was at one time a difficult question for any denier to answer, despite the work of Sanning and Butz, although that is no longer the case, but it was interesting to hear Faurisson’s answer nevertheless. Also Andersson’s attempt to flip the “paper trail” theory of the deniers into his own “paper trail” theory against the deniers was a neat trick, although Faurisson would not fall for it. I will comment on these below.

The moderator also did a good job of keeping the debate rolling with some humor by mocking the believers a few times. For example he lumped them in with the thousands of eye witnesses and the confessions of the accused in the witch trials of several hundred years ago in which the tens of thousands of so-called witches were forced to confess to the eye witness reports of their riding broom sticks and/or their having sex with the devil before being thus found “guilty” of these crimes and burned at the stake, something that the Nazis at the Nuremberg show trials could identify with I am sure.

I think perhaps the moderator stepped out of bounds by this gentle mocking, but his mocking could also have included the lumping of the holocaust believer witnesses in with the thousands of werewolf, lock ness monster, big foot, and UFO witnesses as well and he resisted doing so. But I also think he did mention, more to the point, the lamp shade, gas chamber stories of Germany, which have long been discredited, as an indication of the long, tortured, unraveling of the holocaust myths which a more formal moderator would not have done.

In my opinion the most difficult question Faurisson had to answer was “where did the six million go then if they were not killed”- which, of course, is the favorite question of most believers. At that time, 2002, Faurisson did not have the Vad Yashim reports that told us that as many as a million holocaust survivors were still alive in 2003,which would have indicated, as I have mentioned on this site before, that approximately 6 million so called holocaust victims must have been alive just after the war. Nevertheless Faurisson did a good job explaining “where did they all go” in his own way.

Andersson’s attempt to trap Faurisson by trying to get him to agree that the holocaust hoax was a scam was a good try by Andersson. As most of us know, one of the huge problems for the believers to explain is the total lack of a paper trail for the gassing holocaust. As most of us know, who have ever worked for a living, the world moves on paper and no paper trail means no gassing. It is a simple as that. It is unconceivable that the Nazis could possibly have created the holocaust without meetings, a budget, minutes, orders, timetables, a hierarchy of command, written instructions, a protocol, blue prints of gas chambers, training manuals and training and on and on, and yet nothing of the above exists. Nudge nudge, wink wink and cute code words simply will not do. Even the Mein Kampf, the so called Nazi blue print for destruction, contains not a single word of such a future crime.

Therefore Andersson’s attempt to get Faurisson to agree that the Holocaust was a giant hoax, a huge scam, would have thereby placed Faurisson in the same trap that the believers have been in for 60 years; for if Faurisson had agreed that a scam or hoax had started the gassing holocaust, he then would have had to explain how such a scam could have possible been done without a huge budget, orders, minutes of meeting, chain of command and so on. Sound familiar? And everyone knows that without the tortured testimony of the Nazis and the diseased bodies of thousands of dead internees the gassing holocaust has nothing.

However Faurisson knew too much. He knew that the major problem with the holocaust hoax is that it was not a scam originally. The hoax was not organized until many years later and then not very well, when the Zionists finally realized just how credulous most of us really were/are and just how much they could distort the truth with the help of Hollywood, the press and so on. That is why they have given us for all these years such a never ending, always changing, story of gas chambers in Germany, then no gas chambers in Germany, death by steam, by diesel engine fumes, by electricity, by Zyklon B and stories such as the cremation of hundreds of bodies without fuel in minutes, of gassing in minutes followed by the immediate removal of these bodies from the gas rooms by men while they smoked, ate their dinners and without the use of gas masks or any other protection, of stories of children living with wolves, of children passing food through a fence, and so on and so forth, and so many other stories that make no sense scientifically, logically, or mathematically as their stories continue to come from everywhere to the embarrassment
of any Zionist with a conscience.

So although Faurisson easily destroyed Anderssen’s best two points, the debate was fun to listen to. However I think the main lesson from this debate was that although the debate was carried on by two men with wildly different points of view on the gassing holocaust, the debate was carried on in an intelligent manner without violence.

Now if we could just get our so-called world leaders to act accordingly.

Barrington James
You can fool too many of the people most of the time.

Halo
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 145
Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2009 6:34 am

Postby Halo » 1 decade 7 months ago (Sat Mar 28, 2009 8:25 pm)

Downloading the mp3 =D
Thanks a lot!!

User avatar
blake121666
Member
Member
Posts: 100
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 9:04 pm

Re: Robert Faurisson vs. Mikkel Andersson (2002)

Postby blake121666 » 5 years 9 months ago (Wed Feb 05, 2014 7:24 pm)

I uploaded this to youtube at

http://youtu.be/fDtwwuet5rg

The OP link doesn't appear to work and I don't see it anywhere else. I had it on my hard drive though.

User avatar
fountainhead
Member
Member
Posts: 87
Joined: Thu May 19, 2011 8:46 pm

Re: Robert Faurisson vs. Mikkel Andersson (2002)

Postby fountainhead » 5 years 9 months ago (Sun Feb 09, 2014 2:08 am)

Thanks for uploading. I'm only a few minutes in and I can already tell that Andersson doesn't know what he's talking about, even by exterminationist camp standards. He implies that Hitler's speeches prove the Holocaust, presumably because he believes Hitler was actually telling people he's going to kill the Jews. Well, wasn't the Holocaust such an uber top secret program such that every document/transmission related to it had to be in a 'coded language' with all kinds of euphemisms and innuendos? If so, then why was Hitler up there on the podium telling the world about it, eh?! The minute they use HItler's speeches as proof, they contradict themselves.

[edit]Andersson does improve a bit later on, but to lead off with saying Hitler's speeches are proof did not impress me.

I'm also wondering about Andersson's question about the existence of camp inmates who say there were no gas chambers. I know Rassinier says he didn't see anything like that and I'm sure more exist, but I can't seem to find any using the search function, particularly at Auschwitz, which is what Andersson was referring to. Do we have a thread here at CODOH on camp inmates who 'deny' the extermination story?
Who controls the past controls the future.
Who controls the present controls the past.

User avatar
Hektor
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 3361
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 7:59 am

Re: Robert Faurisson vs. Mikkel Andersson (2002)

Postby Hektor » 5 years 9 months ago (Sun Feb 09, 2014 3:03 pm)

blake121666 wrote:I uploaded this to youtube at

http://youtu.be/fDtwwuet5rg

The OP link doesn't appear to work and I don't see it anywhere else. I had it on my hard drive though.

Now we still need one on https://archive.org/
Then it will be perfect!

User avatar
blake121666
Member
Member
Posts: 100
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 9:04 pm

Re: Robert Faurisson vs. Mikkel Andersson (2002)

Postby blake121666 » 5 years 9 months ago (Sun Feb 09, 2014 9:08 pm)

Hektor wrote:
blake121666 wrote:I uploaded this to youtube at

http://youtu.be/fDtwwuet5rg

The OP link doesn't appear to work and I don't see it anywhere else. I had it on my hard drive though.

Now we still need one on https://archive.org/
Then it will be perfect!


I thought that was where I got the mp3 (which I made into a wmv to be able to upload to youtube). Must not have been though because I don't see it there now. I forget where I got it: the date on my current version is 2010, but I copied to where it is now and have since deleted it from where it was; so I've had it since at least 2010.

EDIT: Oh Gheesh, I must have gotten it from this very thread, I didn't notice the dates of that posting above with the mp3 links!

User avatar
Zulu
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 456
Joined: Mon May 11, 2009 9:44 am

Re: Robert Faurisson vs. Mikkel Andersson (2002)

Postby Zulu » 5 years 9 months ago (Tue Feb 11, 2014 3:00 pm)

Vlad wrote:(This has been mentioned before, but the link has since gone dead.)
A tape recording of a lively debate in Copenhagen (2 1/2 hours!):
http://member.newsguy.com/~kreiberg/fdebat1.ram
Judging from his abandoned website, hapless Mikkel Andersson seems to have given up his anti-revisionist activities:
http://holocaust-info.dk/

Thanks for that finding. However, I would like to know more about that debate.
- Who is Mikkel Andersson?
- Where did that debate take place? In which circumstances? Details, please

BTW, the first publication of the Andersson's webpage can be retrieved at
https://web.archive.org/web/19990218143 ... t-info.dk/

More videos of Robert Faurisson can be found on the net. Additional material, including in French, can be downloaded at archive.org

1984, Ernst Zündel - Robert Faurisson
https://archive.org/details/1984-Ernst- ... -Faurisson

1986, Robert Faurisson - The Gas Chambers Problem, English subtitles.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KV6OcLCDL-g

1986, Robert Faurisson - Das Problem der Gaskammern, German subtitles.
https://archive.org/details/1981-Robert ... Gaskammern

1992, Robert Faurisson in Sweden invited by Ahmed Rami
https://archive.org/details/1992RobertFaurissonInSweden

1992, Robert Faurisson speaks at the 11th IHR-Conference in California on the topic "The Revisionist Struggle against Bigotry and Holocaust Cultism"
https://archive.org/details/Prof.Dr.Rob ... erence1992

2002, Robert Faurisson - 14th IHR-Conference - "Germans Punished in World War II for Mistreating Jews".
https://archive.org/details/2002-Robert ... Conference

I am interested in finding the text of that presentation in order to know the sources of the cases exposed by Robert Faurisson. It seems that it was not published in the The Journal of Historical Review despite the 14th IHR Conference Report is in the Volume 21 Nr 3 & 4 which is the last Nr I have.

2011, Robert Faurisson interviewed by Carolyn Yeager, 'The Heretics Hour', May 9,
https://archive.org/details/RobertFauri ... csHourMay9

Other interesting stuff, unfortunately not yet available:
On Tuesday, April 17, 1979 , TV Lugano (Switzerland) recorded a 3 hours program on the following topic: "The Nazi crimes, what historical truth? "
This issue was fully aired Friday, April 19, 1979 under the supervision of a bailiff noting the absence of any interruption or insertion. The show was directed by Leandro Manfrini and Willy Baggi .

The thesis of the imposture ( revisionist theory ) was defended by :

- Robert Faurisson, a lecturer at the University of Lyon -II ( specialty : Review text and documents);
- Pierre Guillaume , publisher and bookseller in Paris "La Vieille Taupe " ( revolutionary ) ( specialty : Works by Paul Rassinier ) ;

The thesis of the reality of "gas chambers " and " genocide" (Exterminationist thesis) was defended by :

- L. Rolfi , former deportee to Ravensbrück ;
- Ms. Tedeschi, a former Jewish deportee to Auschwitz -Birkenau ,
- Mr. Enzo Collotti , author of Germania nazista ( editions Einaudi, Turin ) ;
- Dr. Wolfgang Scheffler , Berlin , collaborator of Contemporary History Institute of Munich, expert on the issue of " Nazi crimes " in the courts of the FRG.

This issue, quite exceptional , aroused such interest that it was broadcast again on Sunday, May 6, 1979 at 9 am .

Work shown at the beginning of this show: "Der Auschwitz Mythos ( Legende oder Wirklichkeit ? )" By Wilhelm Stäglich .

Source: http://robertfaurisson.blogspot.com.es/ ... ienne.html

I asked Yvonne Schleiter, one of Faurisson's sisters, about the availability of that debate on video. She answered to me that Faurisson obtained the tape recording from the TV Lugano at the only condition that it would not be made public. Until now, RF is repecting his promise.
A comment was done by Arthur Butz about that debate in his article "The International "Holocaust"
Controversy"
(The Journal of Historical Review Vol 01, Nº1, 1980)
As a consequence of the publicity in France, Faurisson was able to participate in a three hour debate on Italian language Swiss TV on 17 April 1979. I am told that the program generated enormous interest, that most impartial observers thought Faurisson had won the debate, and that the whole thing was rebroadcast on 6 May. As a result of the TV debate,
a long interview with Faurisson was published in the August issue of the Italian magazine Storia Illustrata; this interview is by far the most instructive material on the "Holocaust" subject to be published, to date, in an "Establishment" magazine or newspaper. (p.17)

The text of that interview is available in French at
Interview de Robert Faurisson à "Storia Illustrata" (Italie), août 1979, n° 261
http://robertfaurisson.blogspot.com.es/ ... toria.html

User avatar
ginger
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 301
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 11:52 am

Re: Robert Faurisson vs. Mikkel Andersson (2002)

Postby ginger » 5 years 9 months ago (Fri Feb 14, 2014 2:26 pm)

I was able to listen to the debate between Andersson and Faurison on you tube. Andersson's problem is that he has no grasp of the scientific method, which is one of the crowning achievements of Western civilization. He can't understand the difference between testimony and evidence, and is willing to explain away the absence of direct evidence, such as the murder weapon and the corpse(s).

He has no understanding of the rule of law, another great achievement of Western civilization. He accepts as evidence an artist's rendition of the gas chambers; he expects the accused to present evidence of his innocence.

He has more respect for the achievement of Jewish culture - storytelling, and of Soviet culture - the show trial. 

User avatar
Zulu
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 456
Joined: Mon May 11, 2009 9:44 am

Re: Robert Faurisson vs. Mikkel Andersson (2002)

Postby Zulu » 5 years 8 months ago (Sun Mar 02, 2014 11:37 am)

Zulu wrote:A comment was done by Arthur Butz about that debate in his article "The International "Holocaust"
Controversy"
(The Journal of Historical Review Vol 01, Nº1, 1980)
As a consequence of the publicity in France, Faurisson was able to participate in a three hour debate on Italian language Swiss TV on 17 April 1979. I am told that the program generated enormous interest, that most impartial observers thought Faurisson had won the debate, and that the whole thing was rebroadcast on 6 May. As a result of the TV debate,
a long interview with Faurisson was published in the August issue of the Italian magazine Storia Illustrata; this interview is by far the most instructive material on the "Holocaust" subject to be published, to date, in an "Establishment" magazine or newspaper. (p.17)

The text of that interview is available in French at
Interview de Robert Faurisson à "Storia Illustrata" (Italie), août 1979, n° 261
http://robertfaurisson.blogspot.com.es/ ... toria.html

The cover of that Nr 261 issue wich is on sale at eBay
http://www.ebay.com/itm/STORIA-ILLUSTRA ... 0436087021

Exclusive!
Interview with the historian Faurisson
The gas chambers truth or lie?

Faurisson, Storia Ilustrata nº 261 August 1979.JPG


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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: MSN [Bot] and 5 guests