[Ad submitted by Bradley Smith to US campus newspapers. Feel free to copy...]
Let's agree that one ideal of the university is to promote
freedom, and one ideal of the professorial class is to teach students to
honor it. Yet this is not true in Holocaust Studies. There, if students
express doubt about "eye witness" testimony, for example, even if it is
demonstrably false, dishonorable, or both, they understand they run the
danger of being accused of being "hateful."
Consider eyewitness testimony given by Nobel laureate Elie Wiesel:
Elie Wiesel as an "eyewitness" authority
EW claims he was "liberated" from Dachau (Jewish
Telegraphic Agency, 11
April 1983), "liberated" from Buchenwald (NYT, 2 Nov. 1986), and
"liberated" from Auschwitz (NY Post, 23 Oct. 1986 and NYT, 4 Jan. 1987).
One of these claims may be true. The others are false. Do the professors
believe it matters?
EW claims in All Rivers Run to the Sea (NY, 1995): "I
Kant's) The Critique of Pure Reason in Yiddish." Kant's Critique has not
been translated into Yiddish. Here, again, EW did not tell the truth.
Does it matter?
EW claims that after Jews were executed at Babi Yar in the
"geysers of blood" spurted from their grave for "months" afterward (See
Paroles d'etranger, 1982, p. 86). Impossible? Yes, it is. Do the
professors believe it matters?
When Holocaust Studies professors are too fearful to condemn
and those who make them, what are their students to do?
Elie Wiesel as an authority on "hate"
Elie Wiesel has won the hearts and minds of Holocaust Studies
with his counsel on how to perpetuate a loathing of Germans:
"Every Jew, somewhere in his being, should set apart a
zone of hate -
healthy, virile hate - for what the German personifies and for what
persists in the German." (Legends of Our Time, "Appointment with Hate, NY,
Avon, 1968, pp. 177-178).
Students understand the implications of this statement when
their attention, while their professors appear not to. Perhaps if we
change (two words) in Elie Wiesel's sage advice, it will focus their
attention: "Every Palestinian, somewhere in his being, should set apart a
zone of hate - healthy, virile hate - for what the Jew personifies and for
what persists in the Jew." Does this help?
How is EW perceived in Holocaust Studies? He is esteemed as
authority. Chairs are created in his honor. Students are taught to
Holocaust Studies and the exploitation of Hate
In Holocaust Studies, hate is all the rage. To merely note
Spielberg based his "factual" movie Schindler's List on a cheap novel - is
hate. To suggest that the "Diary" of Anne Frank is not an authentic
personal diary (and should not be taught as such), but a "literary
production" crafted by Anne, and after the war by others, from a cache of
miscellaneous writings and inventions - that's hate. Exposing false
eyewitness testimony is hate. Exposing forged Nuremberg documents is hate.
Exposing faked photographs and the use of torture by the Allies to produce
confessions by Germans is hate. Asking for proof that one (one!) Jew was
gassed in any German camp as part of a program of "genocide" is hate.
Asking what "crimes against humanity" National Socialists committed during
World War II that Republicans and Democrats did not commit is hate. To
note that the story is immensely profitable for those who administer it is
hate. Arguing for intellectual freedom regarding any of this - that's
hate, too. That is, commenting on the record is hate. Telling the truth
about the record is hate. Having an open mind is hate.
The unspoken ethical and intellectual scandal in Holocaust
Studies is that
key material used in these programs are soaked through with fraud and
falsehood - led by the use of false and ignoble eyewitness testimony. Here
we have highlighted the hapless Elie Wiesel, but the literature is full of
"eyewitnesses" who gave false testimony about gas chambers and a great many
For more information on Elie Wiesel and other problematic eyewitnesses
such as Simon Wiesenthal, Dr. Hadassah Bimko (Rosensaft) Filip Mueller,
Rudolf Vrba, Kurt Gerstein, Mel Mermelstein, go to our side on the Web and
follow "revisionism." For background on myself, follow my name.
Bradley R. Smith, Director
Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust (CODOH)
Fax 858 309 4385
San Diego, CA 92143
This text has been displayed on the Net, and forwarded to you as a tool for educational purpose, further research, on a non commercial and fair use basis, by the International Secretariat of the Association des Anciens Amateurs de Recits de Guerres et d'Holocaustes (AAARGH). The E-mail of the Secretariat is <[email protected]. Mail can be sent at PO Box 81475, Chicago, IL 60681-0475, USA..
We see the act of displaying a written document on Internet as the equivalent to displaying it on the shelves of a public library. It costs us a modicum of labor and money. The only benefit accrues to the reader who, we surmise, thinks by himself. A reader looks for a document on the Web at his or her own risks. As for the author, there is no reason to suppose that he or she shares any responsibilty for other writings displayed on this Site. Because laws enforcing a specific censorship on some historical question apply in various countries (Germany, France, Israel, Switzerland, Canada, and others) we do not ask their permission from authors living in thoses places: they wouldn't have the freedom to consent.
We believe we are protected by the Human Rights Charter:
ARTICLE 19. <Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.>The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on December 10, 1948, in Paris.
You downloaded this document from <http://aaargh-international.org/engl/BSad.html>