Grubach challenge: debate 'gas chambers' in The Revisionist

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: 9922
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Grubach challenge: debate 'gas chambers' in The Revisionist

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 5 years ago (Sat Dec 20, 2003 5:20 am)

Paul Grubach is a potent and active American Revisionist who has just issued an open challenge to any credible individual to debate him in 'The Revisionst' journal on the topic of the alleged German WWII homicidal gas chambers.

If anyone here is interested, then say so and I will forward your acceptance for consideration.

Paul Grubach's challenge in a nutshell:
As a Holocaust revisionist of many years, I hereby challenge any credible intellectual who believes that homicidal gas chambers existed--or believes they may have existed--in Nazi concentration camps to a debate in the pages of Germar Rudolf's The Revisionist. Germar is a very fair editor, and I am sure he will give anyone who has good reasons and evidence that shows that the "Nazi gas chambers" existed ample space to prove his case in the pages of The Revisionist. If my Holocaust revisionist beliefs are proven beyond a reasonable doubt to be in error, then I will publicly recant my position and loudly proclaim throughout the whole world that the "Nazi gas chambers existed."

.... This challenge also applies to anyone who believes that "maybe" the "Nazi gas chambers" existed. We Holocaust revisionists only want the TRUTH, and we have nothing to fear about debating our position.

Waiting for responses,
Paul Grubach


Any takers?

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

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9922
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 5 years ago (Sun Dec 21, 2003 4:08 pm)

From what I now understand, a spokesman from so called 'holocau$t' History Project has said he would debate Grubach, but wanted money; knowing full well the 'offer' would be rejected as The Revisionist journal has scant financial resources to begin with.

This spokesman was told he could publish the debate in any other publication he wanted, free & clear, and could keep the profits from what would be Believer, judeo-supremacist magazines with much greater circulations. Ofcourse that was rejected as it appears the intention was to avoid debate, in the first place.

So, once again the Believers throw up hurdles to debate on the absurd 'gas chambers'. Too bad, but understandable, as this spokesman's evidence for 'gas chambers' is non-existence and has been demonstrated as such in the past...which it can only be, since there is no evidence.

So once again the Believers dodge debating the 'gas chambers'. More on this later.

Grubach's challenge remains unanswered.

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

Hebden
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 467
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2002 11:17 am
Location: Here and there, mostly there

Re: Grubach challenge: debate 'gas chambers' in The Revision

Postby Hebden » 1 decade 5 years ago (Sun Dec 21, 2003 6:04 pm)

Hannover wrote:Paul Grubach's challenge in a nutshell:
As a Holocaust revisionist of many years, I hereby challenge any credible intellectual who believes that homicidal gas chambers existed--or believes they may have existed--in Nazi concentration camps to a debate in the pages of Germar Rudolf's The Revisionist.


As an incredible intellectual, we find ourself disqualified from taking Mr. Grubach up on his challenge. However, we may have identified a suitable candidate in the person of Mr. Mark Weber. :

Faurisson Letter Alleges IHR Resignation
Faurisson Says Weber Not Hard Core Enough

12/18/2003 4:40:03 PM
Discuss this story in the forum
Robert Faurisson

Commentary -- [Bill: I have seen a lot of phony correspondance alleged to have been sent between revisionists lately, thus until I see a confirmation of this, this is just something I received.
Also, in the continuing RevPatrick / my ex-girlfriend circus: Note to prominent white nationalists with distinctively squeaky voices: Men with distinctively squeaky voices should not make threatening phone calls.]

Robert Faurisson to Mark Weber, editor of the Journal of Historical Review,

December 17, 2003

On December 10, I sent you a message in which, inter alia, I wrote: "Tell me whether or not you say, as I myself have so clearly stated for so many years, that the alleged Nazi gas chambers and the alleged Nazi gas vans never existed." You soon replied to all the other parts of my message but not to that one.

I had to repeat my question three or four times over three or four days before getting your answer, which is now: "I do not like to say that 'the Nazi gas chambers never existed', in part because I do not regard myself as any kind of specialist of 'gas chambers', and in part because I avoid making such categorical statements (on any subject)".

This brings us back to your April 1993 position when, at a dinner in Washington, I asked our guests to say YES, NO or I DO NOT KNOW to the sentence: "The Nazi gas chambers existed". Your own answer was "MAYBE". The next day or so I told you how ashamed I had felt of you with that answer. You told me you had been wrong and that you would never give such an answer again. But look: ten years later, you are doing it again.

People who accuse Adolf Hitler and Germany of having conceived, invented and used such Weapons of Mass Destruction as "the gas chambers or gas vans" have been unable, in more than half a century, to substantiate their formidable accusation; finally, those WMDs were never to be found, never to be seen, never to be shown or even drawn. But you, Mark Weber, a supposed revisionist, you keep on saying that you "do not like to say" that the abominable accusation is so obviously false!

Mark Weber has had a friend and collaborator, Robert Faurisson, who, already in the very first issue (Volume 1, Number 1) (Spring 1980) of the Journal of Historical Review, published a short essay on "The Mechanics of Gassings" and, in Volume 2, Number 4 (Winter 1981), published another short piece entitled: "The Gas Chambers of Auschwitz Appear to be Physically Inconceivable". In more than twenty years, the Liars and Defamers of Germany have been unable to refute either of those essays, particularly the latter, which, in the words of Barbara Kulaszka, as early as 1981 put forth so clearly and briefly all of the subsequent revisionist argumentation on the alleged Nazi gas chambers.

Recently, Mark, you have stated on an American radio talk show: "I do not deny the Holocaust happened but..." I immediately told you how deadly wrong it was to make such a concession to The Big Lie and Defamation. And you agreed, promising you would not do it again. The trouble is that I no longer trust your promises in such matters. I could cite you another recent example of a possible disquieting concession on your part but will refrain from doing so.

In any case, if the Editor of the Journal of Historical Review "does not like to say" that the abominable accusation against Germany is clearly a lie, a calumny, a slander, an act of defamation, I am ill at ease being on his Editorial Advisory Committee. So, Mark, please take my name off your Committee roster. I am afraid some of your personal enemies among the revisionists will take the opportunity of this letter to criticize you even more. I warn those people that they may do so on the sole condition that they have, for their part, already clearly stated that the alleged Nazi gas chambers or gas vans never existed not only in such or such camp or place but nowhere else either.

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9922
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 5 years ago (Sun Dec 21, 2003 6:18 pm)

Weber has clarified his position completely in a discussion this week with Grubach. Grubach confronted him on this alleged 'may have been' statement and Weber stated without reservations that he does NOT believe the 'gas chambers' existed. Grubach was thoroughly satisfied with his response.

That's that.

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

User avatar
Braveheart
Member
Member
Posts: 29
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2003 12:00 am

Postby Braveheart » 1 decade 5 years ago (Fri Dec 26, 2003 5:53 pm)

Holocaust theologians routinely advise each other not to debate revisionsists. The supposed reason for this shunning is that "debating revsionists will only give them credibility and provide them with air time to spread their vile beliefs".

Of course, the real reason is that they do not want to be made fools of in front of any audience that might be paying attention.

Click below to see what happens to Holocaust believers when they run into sound revisionist arguments:

http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?p=2428

Pay special attention to his response that is contained in my post in that thread, which is the fourth one down.

Hebden
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 467
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2002 11:17 am
Location: Here and there, mostly there

Postby Hebden » 1 decade 5 years ago (Sat Dec 27, 2003 7:47 am)

Hannover wrote:Weber has clarified his position completely in a discussion this week with Grubach. Grubach confronted him on this alleged 'may have been' statement and Weber stated without reservations that he does NOT believe the 'gas chambers' existed. Grubach was thoroughly satisfied with his response.

That's that.

- Hannover


Mr. Faurisson wasn't:

http://www.adelaideinstitute.org/Confer ... mento4.htm

User avatar
Blue 88
Member
Member
Posts: 11
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2003 7:20 pm

Postby Blue 88 » 1 decade 5 years ago (Sat Dec 27, 2003 4:58 pm)

Hebden wrote:
Hannover wrote:Weber has clarified his position completely in a discussion this week with Grubach. Grubach confronted him on this alleged 'may have been' statement and Weber stated without reservations that he does NOT believe the 'gas chambers' existed. Grubach was thoroughly satisfied with his response.

That's that.

- Hannover


Mr. Faurisson wasn't:

http://www.adelaideinstitute.org/Confer ... mento4.htm

Neither was F. P. Berg - according to an open letter sent to all Revisionists.
"My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together."

~ Archbishop Desmond Tutu

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9922
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 5 years ago (Sat Dec 27, 2003 5:22 pm)

If Mr. Hebden or Blue 88 believe in the gas chambers then they are hereby challenged to debate that belief here, under a separate thread, ofcourse. You will be asked for evidence, however.

Mr. Hebden,
Paul Grubach has in informed me he is seeking someone to debate him in The Revisionist journal who has published material in support of the storyline about gas chambers and/or is part of an organization which openly markets the 'holocaust' story as alleged. Sorry, you just don't rate. :)

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

Hebden
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 467
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2002 11:17 am
Location: Here and there, mostly there

Postby Hebden » 1 decade 5 years ago (Sun Dec 28, 2003 4:44 am)

Hannover wrote:If Mr. Hebden or Blue 88 believe in the gas chambers then they are hereby challenged to debate that belief here, under a separate thread, ofcourse. You will be asked for evidence, however.

Mr. Hebden,
Paul Grubach has in informed me he is seeking someone to debate him in The Revisionist journal who has published material in support of the storyline about gas chambers and/or is part of an organization which openly markets the 'holocaust' story as alleged. Sorry, you just don't rate. :)

- Hannover


We claim victory by default! We're invincible.


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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests