Wednesday, October 17, 2007

Hargis and Grubach: The Laurel and Hardy of Holocaust Denial

You may be wondering why Holocaust Denial has less credibility these days than Lord Haw Haw, Tokyo Rose or Comical Ali. Part of the answer is that its intellectual cupboard, which was already thinly populated, has been all-but-deserted, and is now being guarded by two charlatans whose embarassing antics have even caused that paragon of honesty, David Irving, to complain about their behaviour.

Read more!

A survey of their recent exchanges with Irving suggests that entrusting the defence of revisionism to these clowns was the equivalent of asking a man with two broken arms to catch someone jumping from a burning building.

The first of these jokers, Jonnie "Hannover" Hargis, is described by Irving as "not the most cerebral of my supporters". The dim-witted Hargis once sent Irving a doctored photo that offended even this veteran denier:
The photo had two identical columns of smoke, obviously created in Photoshop; I recall that that gentleman, also called Hannover, admitted later, when I exposed the fakery to him, that yes, he was responsible, hoping to prove how easily photos could be faked.
Hargis 'moderates' the CODOH forum with a lack of subtlety that would have made the editor of Pravda blush. Andrew Mathis and Nick Terry have both had posts on CODOH censored. Moreover, Hargis carries out this censorship in the name of 'free speech'. This is Orwellian doublethink at its finest: an advocate of open debate who refuses to tolerate open debate.

Just in case the he hypocrisy meter has not already shot through the roof, Paul Grubach has come along to reinforce the point that revisionism is being defended by arguments that are as sturdy as a chocolate kettle. Grubach has made a public nuisance of himself over the last few years by sending open letters to notable writers challenging them to debate. Having exhausted the list of notable writers, Grubach has recently turned his attention towards a notorious one: the aforementioned D. Irving. However, when RODOH forum member Steve Mock challenged Grubach to a debate on the RODOH site, Grubach suddenly adopted the evasions and excuses that he normally accuses the reluctant recipients of his illiterate ramblings of deploying.

In conclusion, therefore, if history really does repeat itself first as tragedy then as farce, Hargis and Grubach are actors in the latter.

1 comment:

  1. Paul Grubach, in his piece "The Final Solution: A response to Christopher Browning" argues that
    any inacuracies in the Holocaust narative cast doubt on the veracity of the narative as a whole. Specifically, he states that: "Browning is wrong! His claim that--without exception all witnesses concur on the vital issue that Jews were murdered in gas chambers using carbon monoxide from engine exhaust—is demonstrably false. There are “eyewitnesses” who claimed that Jews were murdered en masse in “electrocution chambers” at Belzec, and not with the use of “gas chambers.” Browning failed to inform his readers of the serious problems such false eyewitness testimony raises."

    Browning's assertion that all witnesses agree on the use of carbon monoxide as the tool for murder is based on the sworn testimony of 29 perpetrators
    tried in post war West Germany and
    the testimonies of Eichmann, Gerstein, Pfannenstiel and the Jews who had escaped during revolts at Treblinka and Sobibor.
    Can Grubach honestly believe that
    early rumours, during the time that
    Belzec and other death camps were in operation, attributing mass murder to "electrocution chambers"
    (can Grubach name one "eyewitness"
    who was present in Belzec and alledged the use of electrocution chambers?) constitute a parallel and equivalent knowledge of Nazi crime with the body of testimony that Browning sites? Rather, it appears that Grubach is a sociopathic liar manipulating the
    vulnerable minds of his cognitively impaired following.


Please read our Comments Policy