It will be interesting to see if Mr. Mathis will respond by posting his own Open Letter on his 'holocaust' History Project website.
Dear Dr. Mathis,
Since this is an open letter, I will give the readership some background about our correspondence. I believe that you, Dr. A.E. Mathis, are an intellectual that is associated with the Holocaust History Project, an organization that attempts to disprove Holocaust revisionism. I, Holocaust revisionist Paul Grubach, issued an open challenge to any intellectual/scholar to debate me on the Holocaust/gas chamber issue in the pages of Germar Rudolf's The Revisionist. Dr. Mathis responded by saying it was announced "last night that you are looking to debate someone in the pages of The Revisionist. While I will not debate in the pages of a for-sale publication, I would like to debate you in an online [forum] upon which we can both agree. Please contact me if you are interested."
Paul Grubach responded by saying: "As I said, I will gladly debate in the pages of The Revisionist. In general, I don't debate in these online forums because they really don't reach a wide audience and they end up being name-calling contests. In my opinion, it really is a waste of time to put all this work into an online debate that will reach a very, very limited audience and ends up as a name-calling contest. If I debate in The Revisionist, then I can rest assured that the debate will be academic, intellectual, name-calling will be eliminated, and both of us will be guaranteed of equal time and space. Furthermore, and most importantly, the debate will reach a very, very wide audience of thousands upon thousands of people, as it will be broadcast around the world in a magazine and then it will be posted online; it may even be translated into German and reach a German speaking audience. So my original offer still stands. I will debate any intellectual/scholar in the pages of Germar Rudolf's The Revisionist on the Holocaust issue."
Dr. Mathis then responded to the above: "As a matter of principle, I do not make it a habit of earning money for my ideological enemies [Germar Rudolf's journal]. A debate between Mr. Grubach and myself would undoubtedly sell many copies of The Revisionist, and I would be loath to be a party to that."
Paul Grubach offered his rebuttal to this: "This is not totally accurate. You could also publish the debate in your Holocaust publications and make money to support your anti-Revisionist cause. So, as a matter of principle, you could use our debate to sell copies of your anti-revisionist, Holocaust journals. What is good for the goose is good for the gander. Just as Germar Rudolf could use our debate to sell copies of The Revisionist, so too, you could publish our debate in ADL, World Jewish Congress, and other anti-revisionist publications. In fact, by doing this Dr. Mathias, you could probably sell far more anti-revisionist publications than Germar Rudolf could sell of The Revisionist."
Dr. Mathis then added that he would like any possible monetary proceeds from our debate to be devoted to the Holocaust History Project: "Specifically, my request would be that a set percentage of your income on sales from the issue of The Revisionist be apportioned instead to the Holocaust History Project. I would suggest a percentage amounting to the ratio of pages dedicated to the debate to the total pages of that issue. This percentage would be divided by two and then multiplied by your gross profits."
Paul Grubach then rebutted this by writing: "This is totally unacceptable. If you want to devote proceeds from our debate to the Holocaust History project, then you will have our permission to publish our debate in your own anti-revisionist publications. This will give you the opportunity to raise money to support the Holocaust History Project. Once again, what is good for the goose is good for gander. Just as you have the right to use our debate to raise money to support your Holocaust History Project, so too does Germar Rudolf have the right to use our debate to sell copies of his journal. And just for the record. I have not received any monetary payment whatsoever for writing for The Revisionist. I have written for The Revisionist free of charge. And I have no complaints about this. 'All that glitters is not gold.' I write for The Revisionist for reasons other than money. And I disdain to hide my motives. I want the world to know the truth about the Holocaust."
Dr. Mathis also stated that he could not agree to any debate without the consent of officials at the Holocaust History Project. Dr. Mathis then had an angry exchange of emails with my comrade, Germar Rudolf, the editor of The Revisionist.
Paul Grubach and Dr. Mathis then ended the email exchange by respecting each other's positions as to why the debate will not take place at this time. Paul Grubach stated that he is very busy with a mountain of work, and since this correspondence is not going anywhere, he suggested that it should end. We were simply wasting time.
In my email to Dr. Mathis of 12/20/03 at 11:23 P.M., Paul Grubach said that this would be his last email. Well, I had to change my mind. I felt obliged to send this open letter to ensure that everyone knows the truth about our correspondence, and to make certain that no false claims circulate about our proposed debate. If Dr. Mathis wants to make certain the recipients of this open letter read his side of the story, then he should create his own open letter and circulate it to the appropriate parties. Let it suffice to say that I have saved all of the Mathis/Grubach correspondence to back up my story.
I will close by issuing this challenge. Paul Grubach will debate any intellectual/scholar on the Holocaust/gas chamber issue--but the debate must take place in The Revisionist.
Happy Holidays to everyone,