Tuesday, January 22, 2008

When No Doubt Is Left

When I first made the discovery that "Hannover" of CODOH Forum fame is actually Jonnie Allen Hargis of Pacific Palisades, Calif., I phoned Bradley Smith and challenged him on this point. He neither confirmed nor denied what I had discovered. However, when I said that a few weeks (maybe months) later that Smith had confirmed my suspicions, he vociferously defended himself, stating that he had said nothing to reveal Hargis's identity.

Read more!
I left it alone, but the issue came up again over the past weekend, when a prominent Holocaust denier (more on him in a few weeks) outed Hargis in a mass e-mailing. I felt it incumbent upon myself to e-mail Bradley Smith, which I did:
Bradley,

Are you still going to exist that "Hannover" isn't Jonnie Hargis with this latest from [name deleted]?

a.m.
Bradley stonewalled me in return:
Dear Mathis: I do not expect to "exist," unfortunately, long enough to see you let go of this one. --B
Well, he's right. And indeed, why should I? After nine years of my going round and round with Hargis, he continues the very same behavior that inspired me to track him down in "real life" to begin with. I rejoindered:
Bradley,

All I've ever asked for from Hargis is an apology. That's all I've ever asked for to "let go of this one." But the bastard is just too hard-headed.

As for your refusal to admit what is now so painfully obvious, I don't even know what to say.

a.m.
To which the old man responded:
Andrew: that's a start. You don't know what to say. When that happens, it's ususally a good idea to remain silent. --B
So Bradley will go to his grave protecting Hargis. That much seems obvious.

The question that remains for me is, frankly, why. I can't think of any person who has done more damage to the "revisionist" cause than Hargis, essentially eviscerating the idea of "open debate" that Smith has ostensibly been championing for three decades now. All of which makes one wonder whether Bradley Smith was ever really interested in an open debate at all.

Maybe all of this simply confirms what I've always suspected: That Smith, a failed writer, got into Holocaust denial because he knew he'd become famous for it, and he wouldn't suffer the consequences from saying what he says and doing what he does that so many of his colleagues (Zündel, Frölich, Rudolf, et al.) have. That makes Bradley Smith an opportunist, and a coward to boot.

An opportunist and coward: It strikes me these are two good words to describe Jonnie Hargis.

Well, birds of a feather

Wednesday, January 09, 2008

How Deniers Distort Quotes

A classic denial strategy is to take a quote from a historian and pretend that the historian is saying what the denier wants him to say. It's a subtle form of lying that we define as quote-mining. Here's an example.

Read more!

Germar Rudolf wants us to believe that historians have doubts about gas chambers, so he quote-mines Arno J. Mayer as follows:
The tendency in recent historiography seems to be more and more to abandon the gas chambers, for which the sources are "at once rare and unreliable", as Prof. Arno J. Mayer put it.
Was Mayer really abandoning the gas chambers, as Rudolf claimed? Rudolf clearly knew that he wasn't, because Mayer's full passage stated this:
Sources for the study of the gas chambers are at once rare and unreliable.. .there is no denying the many contradictions, and ambiguities in the existing sources. These cannot be ignored, although it must be emphasized strongly that such defects are altogether insufficient to put in question the use of gas chambers in the mass murder of Jews at Auschwitz.
This same quote-mine was employed by the late, but not lamented, Canadian denier, Doug Collins in 1993-1994, as part of a series of articles that led to a complaint being made to the British Columbia Press Council. On the issue of Collins' quote-mining of Mayer, the Council adjudicated:
The Press Council upholds the complaint on these points and finds that they breach the Code of Practice, Article One, in that they mislead the reader and misrepresent the original authors.
Quote-mining by deniers was thus exposed over a decade ago by a public authority, but deniers continue to practice the vice.