This is in reply to your communique of October 7, 1995.
In a previous letter to Nizkor I stated that I did not wish to be engagedin
a lengthy, largely unproductive one-to-one correspondence, and I am nothappy
having to go back on my own rules. I really do not have the time tokeep
on doing this, and from your letter I can sense that you, too, seemto feel
that the discussion between the "Holocaust Promoters"and "Holocaust
Deniers" must go on, and that we should not wasteour time berating
each other's shortcomings.
So let us try. I read your letter carefully and with great interest, andI
believe that we have something with which we both can live. Let's hammerout
the ground rules - but then let's get on with the task.
My main reaction to your "offer" is that I am wary. I think itis
not intellectually honest when you claim, as you did in your last letter,that
you have not referred to my site as a "hate mongering site"or
spoken of me as a "hate-mongering man." You may not have doneso
on the Nizkor Project per se, but that is the raison d'etre ofNizkor's
campaign against me - isn't it?
What am I to make of statements such as the ones below, for example, whenI
read in the draft of "Nizkor Objectives and Funding," retrievedfrom
the FTP archives, that Nizkor has been set up to
". . . attempt to buttress democratic institutions against the campaigns of destruction and disinformation being waged by hate mongers in electronic forums (principally on the worldwide Internet). . . .
To work to foster a critical frame of mind which will help to protect the unwary from the deceit of hate propaganda . . .
To seek, solicit and archive - for world-wide access electronically - materials dealing with the phenomenon and history of hate (especially of the Holocaust) and with methods for combatting hate . . .
To provide students and researchers throughout the world with both primary and secondary materials dealing with the phenomenon of hate and of antidemocratic movements.
To maintain a free online library - accessible throughout the world - of materials dealing with hate, with materials that expose that hate, and with methods of combatting hate.
To lecture to schools, to teachers, to church groups, to fraternal organizations, to police forces etc. about the phenomenon of the dissemination of hate through computer networks, and the methods and the tools available to combat that hate."
With the above, Nizkor defined and character-assassinated all the Holocaustskeptics
and Holocaust Revisionists in blanket statements as "haters"and
as anti-democratic subversives - without giving hard evidence or prooffor
the negative characterization. "Hate" on our part is youra
priori assumption. Is Nizkor not, therefore, in the businessof finishing
off the "hate mongers" - simply by labeling anyonewho questions
anything pertaining to the "Holocaust" as a "hater"or
"hate monger"?
So what's all this schmalzing that you are all for free speech and for
afair and open dialogue? You list me as ". . . one of the most prominentHolocaust
Revisionists," referring to the Skeptic write-upas "Giving
the Devil His Due" - is that not to demonizeme? What else would
you call it?
My original point was merely that what you can do with impunity at Nizkor,I
cannot do to you. Just take the above and read it as though I had writtenit,
with Nizkor as the target. Do you see my point? Were the Canadian "hatelaws"
not breathing down my neck, I could easily call you people atNizkor "hate
mongers" with far more justification - for what manyof the authors
and sources that are paraded on the Nizkor site do with greatimpunity is
to spread lies and rumors which create hate for and dislikeof Germans!
(After all, the "Nazis" have not been aroundfor fifty years!)
So, yes - there definitely operates a form of ethic censorship in that
somegroups have Free Speech privileges over others. Could I call Jews "kikes"and
Blacks "niggers" because some members of these ethnic groupsmight
have behaved abonimably? You can call me a "Nazi" anytimeand
get away with it. It may come as a surprise to you, but the word isoffensive
to me.
And, not too incidentally: Nizkor is supported by a synagogue,is
it not? Under the sub-heading "Funding," in the above-mentioneddocument,
we read:
"Victoria, B.C.s Congregation Emmanu-El has agreed to assist the Nizkor Project in accomplishing these objectives by accepting donations, for a six month period, and providing Canadian tax receipts for donors."
Synagogues are churches, and churches are tax exempt institutions inthat
donations to projects like Nizkor can be subtracted from income taxesdue.
In other words, the public underwrites your work, at least in part.This
is not true of the supporters of the Zündelsite.
Is it, in light of the above, any wonder that I ask: Do you mean what
yousay when you claim that you want an open dialogue? Or do you just want
tosmear me while having some fun doing so? To quote from a recent articlethat
ran in Australia featuring you and Ken McVay as the fearless warriorsand
me (quoting McVay) as one of the "hardcore hate monger(s). . .who
are really only fooling 'folks with low self-esteem. . . " whatam
I to infer? You, by contrast, are swimmingly described as ". . .another
one of the loose band of net surfers to balance the hate. . .""Objective"
journalistic slanting?
To quote additionally from the Sydney Morning Herald, "DarkSide
of the Net", 4/9/95:
"McCarthy says that confronting and exposing haters is the only way to deal with them on the Net. Many people, he says, argue that extremists should be ignored, that paying attention gives them publicity. He disagrees, although he thinks academics and professionals should not waste their time. (my emphasis)
'For professional historians to debate the deniers, or even discuss the Holocaust with them, would be like Carl Sagan debating whether the earth is flat. It would be undignified at best, and would lend the wackos credibility at worst.
But on the Net, we're exclusively amateurs. We have no dignity and no credibility to lend. (emphasis mine) When the deniers get their asses kicked by a bunch of computer programmers (you?) and a service station manager, ( McVay?), it doesn't do much for their cause."
So is that the agenda? How would it then be possible for usto
work together and do meaningful linking with reasoned and civilized arguments?Are
you truly interested in arriving at truth through discourse? If not,and
taking you by your own words above, why should I waste my time?
Which brings me to another point you keep on advertising unctuously: ThatI
have chosen the unwieldy Web as a platform for debate because I cannothandle
Usenet. In your own words,
". . . alt.revisionism, and all newsgroups, are like a crowded cocktail party.
At a party, you may be engaged in a serious conversation about weighty matters with the four or five people standing near you. Others, possibly in the next room or possibly just ten feet from you, may be arguing about something which you find uninteresting, offensive, or inane. They may even be yelling, or running around with lampshades on their heads."
Would you go to a "party" with people ". . . running
aroundwith lampshades on their heads" if you had memories, as I do,
of peoplebeing hanged at Nuremberg after kangaroo trials for "crimes"
thatwere never committed - by them or by others? (The former US Chief JusticeHarlan
Fiske Stone referred to Justice Jackson at Nuremberg as ". .. running
a high grade lynching party. . . ")
Via news groups, we get gems like this (by one LMarcus126@aol.com):
"Face it . . . the world views Germany as a worthless, barbaric nation. You've never won a war. All culture and success in Germany before the war was due to the Jewish influence. Now Germany is a puppet . . . a slave of the United States. Your Holocaust revision shit is a joke. it's actually, truly laughable.
Anyway, nobody believes it because you don't substantiate any of your ridiculous claims. Quoting a bunch of racist professors doesn't impress anyone with a brain . . . just people who follow you!
It's sad that you've never gotten over Dresden, Normandy, or the resurgence of Jewry around the world. You're a sick, twisted, tortured, unhappy man, and that makes me glad. Say high (sic) to the fuhrer (sic) for me in hell."
Is that the level of "scholarship" over which I should getexcited?
You know perfectly well why I chose the Web at this time as a platform:because
it requires at least a minimum of grace, good manners, scholarshipand reasoning.
The readers of the Zundelsite are for themost part young men and
women from many universities world-wide. I willtake my chances with them.
So this is my bottom line: If Nizkor wants to conduct itself in a civilizedfashion,
we'll try to link with you. If that is not a possibility, we'llwork alone.
We have so far. We don't need Nizkor. I'd like to find a middleway to start
some dialogue, but I won't link to nonsense.