Remarkable Public Admission by Jan Van Pelt

[Inquisitive]

I do not believe that anyone had ever denied Roman battles, or Roman atrocities in battle, until physical proof was shown.

Also, the article you cite would fail several 'revisionist' standards; many of you would demand scientific dating of the bones, the location of weapons, proof of a nearby battle, proof of other such massacres, and on, and on, and on, and on...

Did you miss this sentence:

The skeletons will be taken to Oxford for further analysis before being offered to a Dorset museum.

Further analysis...........the revisionist argument is being conducted on the skeletons. No taboos on Rome?

Provide us with proof of gassings and atrocities in Auschwitz or anywhere else from 60 years ago.

[holographic]

I now feel like Elie Wiesel did after being ripped-off by Madoff....spiritually and mentally naked....I really feel for the believers. Are we now witnessing the "ascension" of the chosen son? Consecrating the event as an act of pure faith? The "holocaust" remained in a "tomb" for much longer than 3 days as there was really no discussion of it until the Eichmann trial. Then came numerous "witnesses" to the event and they began to spread the "good news", form "churches", pilgramages,museums, etc....and eventually, some branches of the sect formed an inquisition.

How is the average believer able to reconcile Van Pelt's statement? "average" believers being the ones who learned all they needed to know about God at Sunday school.Those who have never read any "bibles" about the "holocaust", yet naively considered it to be one the most documented events of the 20th century. They never asked for physical proof, and felt no need to. Why would "god's people" lie? Now...they are too conditioned to question their faith and are aware of being ostracized for breaking with the church.

You're creating a schism Mr. Van Pelt...and I really can't thank you enough.

I wonder what Michael Shermer would say to me. Probably something assinine like, "I'm sure he was exaggerating! He MUST have meant 96.2%...or something like that...."

[holographic]

Mr. Van Pelt? THANK YOU my friend! Your recent comment has served to fuel an interest in revisionism amongst two of my skeptical friends who took it for granted that 99% of the 'holocaust' did indeed have supporting physical evidence. They assumed that revisionists were clinging tenaciously to the missing 1% as the basis for their argument. As I have previously stated....it was my father (who lived in Germany as a boy during WWII) and Ernst Zundel who fueled my interest in the 'holocaust'; but it was reading orthodox texts on the holocaust that made me a revisionist! BRAVO!!!

[holographic]

Herr Van Pelt, I'm trying to corroborate the 1% that you DO indeed know. Again, I will cite from that old 'reliable' tome known as The Holocaust in History by Michael R Marrus. In speaking of the day that the Allies landed in Normandy,

the Gestapo also bothered to round up 1,795 Jews on the island of Corfu, in the Adriatic.
The deportees went directly to Auschwitz, where 1,500 were immediately gassed. We usually know know about such events, it should be noted, because the Nazis tell us about them, through the careful records they kept, the punctilious bookkeeping of the Final Solution that chronicled details of the 'radical solution.' In contrast with other massacres of our time, including those that approach the scale of the Nazi Holocaust, the perpetrators convinced themselves that they were participating in a decisive, historic enterprise. Although their program was cloaked in secrecy, they ponderously counted the millions of dead, even assigning an SS actuary to the task in order to record a momentous accomplishment of the Nazi regime.

-The Holocaust in History, chap.2 Holocaust in Perspective, p.29

Ya' know, those Germans make quality stuff!! Stuff that really lasts! Never mind those mindless Bolsheviks, they just murdered out of boredom and bloodlust. I fail to see how the meticulous documentation of an SS actuary constitutes "inherited knowledge." Are you speculating on same vague document you recall reading or can you corroborate the "punctlious bookkeeping"? IF you CAN validate the punctilous bookkeeping, then I would assume this constitutes more than a paltry 1%

Perhaps I have misread Prof. Marrus, and that they actually hired an actuary to chronicle the deaths of 1,500. Who knew!? That would be more in line with your thesis i.e. 1,500 = 6,000,000

Help a brother out here!!!

[holographic]

Van Pelt of course adheres to the Weisel doctrine that, "Auschwitz defies imagination and perception; it submits only to memory. I write to denounce writing. I tell the impossibility one stumbles upon in trying to tell the tale."
Weisel, "Does The Holocaust Lie Beyond The Reach of Art?" April 17 1983

fair enough. since 99% of it can't be proven, its only source of alleged validation is in memory.

"We now have a vast literature on the Holocaust. Indeed, the field is by now far too vast for any one scholar to master. A recent, select bibliography lists close to two thousand book entries in many languages and notes over ten thousand publications on Auschwitz alone."
-The Holocaust in History, p 5-6 citing Vera Laska, Nazism, Resistance and Holocaust in WWII: A Bibiliography

[holographic]

Mr Van Pelt, you know as well as I do that if revisionist literature was as readily accesible in mainstream bookstores as comparitive religious, gay/straight, theist/atheist, liberal/conserative etc studies are that a shift in consiousness would take place. I can't forgive you Van Pelt...not yet at least. You're a professed expert in a field that is too difficult for any one scholar to master....so don't be so hasty with your conclusions. Think of the day Mr Van Pelt, when this temporary ideological stranglehold is no longer enforced! When future readers will look back in astonishment at the neanderthals who enforced holocaust laws, and the pretenders who exploited it for financial gain. That day is coming....slowly but surely that day is coming.

[holographic]

The hypocritical nature of holocaust dogma will of course be exposed; think of a suspension bridge with inherent oversights in engineering. A critical mass will eventually be reached that will exceed its capabilities and.....SNAP!! That the "holocaust" is a dogma is quite apparent to those with 'eyes to see' and its inherent flaws are being revealed, or rather, exposing themselves. The critical mass is accelerating daily....

"Holokaustos, we are reminded, comes from the third century B.C. Greek translation of the Old Testament, signifying 'the burnt sacrificial offering dedicated exclusively to God'. As such, the designation of the massacre of European Jewry connoted an event of theological significance and perhaps as well an event whose mysteries were not meant to be understood."
-The Holocaust in History, Introduction p.3

that's a nice Sunday school answer to the inquisitive child who inquires why he can't see God..."well my child, there are certain mysteries of God that we are perhaps not meant to understand...just read your Bible and stop asking questions"

"...it is well to remember how recent is the beginning of professional study of the Holocaust and how short a period of time the enterprise has had to establish itself. Up to the time of the Eichmann trial in Jerusalem, in 1961, there was relatively little discussion of the massacre of European Jewry."
-ibid, Introduction p.4

"Based on a masterful reading of German documents, Raul Hillberg's 'The Destruction of the European Jews appeared in 1961 - a landmark synthesis that remains unsurpassed as a survey of the destruction process.
-ibid, introduction p.4

and thus spoke Raul....the Bible was complete!! Unsurpassed! Tried and true! A veritable island of hope in a world of lies!

Mr Van Pelt? I'm trying to help you!!! Do you question your theology and dogma? Certainly Raul's "synthesis" (an interesting description to say the least) must provide us with more than a mere paltry 1%.

Yet, you desire that nature reclaims Auschwitz!! Oh ye of little faith!!

"As the number of surviving eyewitnesses to the period diminishes, the more freely will human imagination range in its attempts to achieve understanding. All of this will have to be met in a spirit of patience and openness. The horror of the events and the suffering of the victims will not rob the new attempts - including new emotional and moral judgements - of legitimacy. The freedom of man's spirit suffers no restriction. Hence we must be aware that further study is liable to inflict new pain and will sometimes require that generally accepted views, which, it seemed, were firmly and solidly established, be abandoned."
-ibid. Intro. p.7, citing A. B. Yehoshua, Between Right and Right, trans. Arnold Schwartz (Garden City, N.Y., 1981), 5-6

It might appear to some readers that I'm inadvertently backing myself into a corner or that I'm attempting to sway Van Pelt's views. i.e. that gradually "generally accepted views" (99% of what we know we do not have the physical evidence to prove) be abandoned. Abandoned in favour of an eventual 97%, and then perhaps 87% etc. I hope the preceeding is clear.

NO,it's you Mr Van Pelt who tacitly endosres the incarceration of individuals whose "spirit suffers no restriction." Individuals who inherently know that "generally accepted views" NEED to be abandoned.

[holographic]

I don't know about you dear reader, but outside of a small circle of friends; I'm uncomfortable discussing revisionism, let alone "denial". In an Orwellian world where war is peace, freedom is slavery, and honesty inquiry is hatred; I'm well aware of the tacit agreement to not break certain taboos. The dogma runs on auto-pilot.

In the following quotation I ask you to substitute revisionists for Jews; zionists for nazis; Holocaust/Zionist industry for German bureaucracy.

"Faced with the enormous task, to do away with the Jews, the Nazis discovered a remarkable new administrative process that set the machinery of destruction on its track of self-assertion. At a certain point, the machine needed no operator. It required no master plan or blueprint. In the final analysis the destruction of the Jews was not so much a product of laws and commands as it was a matter of spirit, of shared comprehension, of consonance and synchronization. This human machine generated its own momentum, operating with accelerating speed and an ever widening destructive effect. Efficiency was its hallmark. With an unfailing sense of direction and with an uncanny pathfinding ability, the German bureacracy found the shortest path to the final goal."
-The Holocaust in History, chapter 3, p. 49, The Final Solution; also citing Hilberg, The Destruction of the European Jews; and Fred E. Katz, "Implementation of the Holocaust: The Behavior of Nazi Officials," Comparitive Studies in Society and History 24 (1982), 510-29

[Bankdraft]

I fail to see the big deal about Van Pelt's admission. He's simply putting the Holocaust into its historic context. No one demands to see the teeth of millions of Native Americans, who died from various ways during the European entrance to the New World. Are we supposed to doubt that this occurred as well?

American Indians who died aren't holding the world hostage and exhorting billions of dollars either. Further, no one is claiming that millions of Jews didn't die "from various ways" (along with about 50 million others) during the war. It's just the "various ways" that's in dispute.

[holographic]

Ok, so we have Hilberg's "masterful synthesis", subsequently republished in a revised and definitive edition in 1985...do you hear an echo? republished in a REvised and DEfinitive, REVised and DEFinitive, REVISED AND DEFINITIVE!! forgive me for that! it was a revised echo whose amplitude GROWS as opposed to diminishing. In some circles, revisionism has stood unchallenged for 25 years now!

"The Holocaust took the lives of between 5 million and 6 million people - about two thirds of the European Jews and one-third of the world's Jewish population. This conclusion comes from the Nazis' own accounts, with historians differing somewhat in computing portions of the record and extrapolating from various statistical reports prepared by German agencies."
-The Holocaust in History, chap. 9, p. 199, The End of the Holocaust

Here comes the dogma police!

"Not everyone is happy,of course. To some, the academic tone adopted by some who have written on the Holocaust is itself a violation. They fear that the use of professional historical discourse will turn the Holocaust into a subject like any other, robbing it of its historic uniqueness. While opposing "mystification around the Holocaust," Yehuda Bauer has also warned of "the growing tendency of immersing tears and suffering in oceans of footnotes,of coming up with a remote quasi-scientific approach which would be as inhuman as that of those who committed the crime or of those who stood by and watched indifferently."
-ibid, chap.9 p. 201-2

more mysticism to follow...

[holographic]

"Wiesel's self-proclaimed task has been a literary homage to those who were murdered. And from this point of view, much depends on how worthy is the author in question. 'Any writer may, if he so chooses, deal with the subject of the Holocaust,' he complains in a recent article. His apparent conclusion: only the survivors, or perhaps those who are totally honest with themselves about the limitations of their powers, had better try."
-The Holocaust in History, Intro. p.3

ANY writer? what nonsense. Only those who repeat the orthodox dogma are given any alleged credibility. This prejudiced, narrow minded, orthodoxy IS too easy to see through. Cowards posing as historians; content with tenure, to parrot what they're told. Hence, "THE LIMITATIONS OF THEIR POWERS..."

I'm feeling that bridge starting to give way more and more each day. It's inherent flaws will lead to its inevitable demise....
I can hear Wiesel now, amongst a host of others saying, "NEIN, NEIN, NEIN, NEIN, NEIN!!!!"

well, ah...YES, YES, YES, YES, YES!!!!

Also, "The Limitations of Their Powers" is the current working title for a novel I'm nurturing.

[Rollo the Ganger]

Look at it this way; we build Disney Worlds everywhere and they are based on fairy tales, etc. and no one screams "fraud!!!" These places make money and everyone but some small children believe any of it as real. Disney logos are everywhere! Statues and memorials in Denmark are built to commemorate fairy tales of the Brothers Grimm and no one screams "It's a fraud!" All pro sports are nothing but exercises in "fantasy" but we invest millions, if not billions in the industry. Pro-Sports are a totally useless expenditure of human energy but there is money to be made. Pro-Wrestling? Fraudulent but FUN!!!! And only the ignorant really believe it's true wrestling. Religions certainly have their share of "questionable" stories (let's be PC here) which get shoved in everyone's faces. Unbelievers politely nod and then roll their eyes when they turn away. Would anyone have a right to demand these places be expunged from the world because they are fraudulent or based on myths? So look at the "Holocaust" from this point of view. Admittedly it has it's sinister side but hey, it's a money-maker. And like all the rest, only small children and the ignorant really believe it. Remember the words of that great American philosopher, W.C. Fields; "Never give a sucker an even break and never wise up a chump". If you don't like the Holohoax Racket, go make up your own.

[holographic]

according to some, an event of theological importance occurred in WWII; a "holokaustos" - a burnt sacrifical offering dedicated exclusively to God. Despite the awesome conflagration that WWII was, this "holokaustos" happened to one group of people only as they were allegedly targeted for systematic execution based upon their ethnicity. They, the "Jews" are also considered by some to be God's "chosen people".

"Ninety-nine per cent of what we know we do not actually have the physical evidence to prove . . . it has become part of our inherited knowledge.

I don't think that the Holocaust is an exceptional case in that sense. We in the future – remembering the Holocaust – will operate in the same way that we remember most things from the past. We will know about it from literature and eyewitness testimony. . . . We are very successful in remembering the past in that manner. That's how we know that Cesar was killed on the Ides of March. To put the holocaust in some separate category and to demand that it be there – to demand that we have more material evidence – is actually us somehow giving in to the Holocaust deniers by providing some sort of special evidence."

Robert Jan Van Pelt, an "expert", Toronto Star, Dec. 27, 2009

hold on a minute bub!! No need to jump back in time to 44 BC, a century hasn't even passed and Van Pelt is ready to just let it slide as the event is already committed to posterity via unassailable holy writ. NO REVISION REQUIRED. ?

To satisfy Van Pelt's time frame let's jump ahead to perhaps either before 4 BC (when Herod the Great died) or was it in 6 AD (when the historical Census of Quirinius was undertaken because as we all "know" from "literature" and "eye witness testimony" that the birth of Jesus wasn't The traditional date, 25 December 1 BC which is a combination between a symbolic choice (for the day of the year) and a calculation of Dionysius Exiguus (for the year itself).

We have yet to get to the ministry of Jesus and his subsequent crucifixion and ressurection, but we all know how well that turned out.

IT'S A MATTER OF FAITH!

anyway, Robert...may I call you Bob? SHOW ME THE FUEL!!!!

[Hektor]

...
The point was more related to the overall approach to history, and how the 'revisionist' game does not jive with the traditional approach. The same holds true for other alleged genocides, as well. Physical evidence (mass graves) is not the primary factor behind such history, but it only represents a part (if that).

That rather shows you that there is a general lack of thoroughness amongst academic historians, when it comes to "document" or establish history.
As for more recent examples of Genocide there is no lack of evidence in Rwanda or Cambodia they can show. Despite the fact that the events in question got far less attention.

...
One does not demand teeth to determine the veracity of historic events, whilst ignoring/not accepting any other form of evidence. We do not scour battlefields for remains to verify that a battle has occurred; there are other ways to go about it.

You should add that the other evidence you are referring to is absent for the Holocaust as well. Not only that, there is lot's of evidence present that contradicts the Holocaust claims. And you are wrong with your statement as well: Battlefield remains are investigated on a frequent basis to reconstruct the battle and the absence of remains is often enough a reason to revise history on that matter. It's just the Holocaust were this seems to be not allowable.

The type of events you are referring to is also from an era when psyops weren't common practice. You are are not denying that the Holocaust or facets of it were actually part of atrocity propaganda Wahrheit or are you.

...
BTW, isn't Treblinka the only death camp which was NOT subjected to fairly recent forensic/archaelogical/chemical studies? IOW, Sobibor, Belzec, Chelmno, and Auschwitz-Birkenau have all been researched, to some degree or another, on the physical grounds.

And it should be noted that whenever such research has been conducted it revealed what had to be expected from the Revisionist perspective.

[Balsamo]

I fail to see the big deal about Van Pelt's admission. He's simply putting the Holocaust into its historic context. No one demands to see the teeth of millions of Native Americans, who died from various ways during the European entrance to the New World. Are we supposed to doubt that this occurred as well?

American Indians who died aren't holding the world hostage and exhorting billions of dollars either. Further, no one is claiming that millions of Jews didn't die "from various ways" (along with about 50 million others) during the war. It's just the "various ways" that's in dispute.

A quick remark concerning those extortions or refunds or reparations, whatever one calls it.

I would like to remind you that is a common practise once the idea that the expropriation were done in violation of rights is accepted or when a former regime is considered as outlaw or criminal by a given State. It happened in France during the restauration if monarchy which did not recognize the first Republic. And of course, Germany who today considers its former nazi regime as criminal.
IT happened also, more recentlyt, in the "liberated" eastern europeans States who are considering their former communist regimes as criminals.

Most of the aristocrats or other expropriated persons were given back their properties (forest, castle, palaces, etc). The former king of Bulgaria is now of the richest man in his country. A american Habsbourg recieved the famous "Dracula castle" (the Castle of Bran) in Romania (worth many millions), The prince of Lobkowitz got his palace in ¨Prague back, etc...
Only exception, the German aristocrats cannot be pretenders.

Anyway, just to point out that the practise is not Holocaust specific.
In some cases, a jewish pretenders are less well treated. One example : A belgian Jew whose family had been deported and saw its real estate confiscated, was granted by a belgian court (who recognized the prejudice) to a reparation of...500 euros (680$)...a kind of belgian sense of humour...
Dominique of Habsbourg is trying to sell his given Caslte for 80.000.000$...The Romanian State is proposing 35.000.000$...The Prince can wait, as the Castle attracts every year 500.000 visitors and generates an income of 1.300.000 USD...