CCS refrained from posting the link to Dr. Neander's article, however.
Maybe he's concerned that his fellow posters, when reading the whole article, will painfully notice the difference between proper scholarship and "Revisionist" pseudo-scholarship.
Or discover that Dr. Neander, after citing "the most important researcher of all regarding this: Eric Hunt" (CCS), described how he used Hunt's document collection to reconstruct Mrs. Zisblatt's actual biography, which is nothing for "Revisionists" to be happy about:
My research clearly shows that Irene Weisberg Zisblatt is not only a survivor of Auschwitz and the Holocaust, but that she, indeed, has an interesting and instructive story to tell. A story of endless humiliations and extreme suffering, but also of survival against all odds. It would be similar to those that hundreds of survivors can tell or have already told. It certainly would be less adventurous than that which she tells. But it would be in accordance with the historically established facts. Irene Weisberg Zisblatt should tell her story about survival at Auschwitz without exaggerations and implausibilities. It then would be a really true story, worth to be told and retold and to be listened to.
A denier's document collection met a scholar who knew how to use it, and look what happened.