Your Voice in a World where Zionism, Steel, and Fire, have Turned Justice Mute



Faurisson's Cancelled Lecture in Beirut
R o b e r t   F A U R I S S O N   ( U K )
3 1   M a r c h   2 0 0 1
Written 22 March for 31 March 2001
For the Cancelled Beirut Conference on Revisionism and Zionism.


The Leaders of the Arab States should Quit their Silence
on the Imposture of the "Holocaust"
Five introductory remarks:

  1. I do mean "the leaders", and not: "the intellectuals, the
    academics, the journalists" some of whom have already expressed
    themselves on the matter;
  2. The word "Holocaust" (always to be placed in quotation marks)
    designates the triple myth of the alleged genocide of the Jews, the
    alleged Nazi gas chambers and the alleged number of six million
    Jewish victims of the Second World War. In the course of a history
    full of fury, blood and fire, humanity has known a hundred
    holocausts, that is, appalling losses of human life or bloody
    catastrophes (presented, at the origin of the word's use in this
    manner, as a sort of offering demanded by some superior forces); but
    our contemporaries have been conditioned to keep in mind only one
    holocaust, that of the Jews; it is written today with a capital
    letter, and has become unique: there is no longer the need to add
    "of the Jews". None of the other previous holocausts has given rise
    to any financial indemnity, reparation or compensation to match
    those which the Jews have claimed and obtained for a catastrophe or
    "Shoah" which they describe as unique and unprecedented, and which
    would, in effect, be so if its three components (genocide, Nazi gas
    chambers and six million victims) had been real. If many European
    Jews suffered and died during the war in question, without that
    suffering's amounting to what today's Jews mean by the term
    "Holocaust", many other peoples and communities, in particular the
    Germans, the Japanese, the Russians and the Chinese, suffered, in
    reality, a fate far worse than that of the Jews; let us but think of
    the phosphorous- or nuclear-fuelled firestorms in which at least a
    million Germans and Japanese met an atrocious death (and what of the
    wounded and mutilated?). It is, moreover, fitting to add that
    millions of European Jews survived this alleged policy of physical
    extermination to go on to enjoy, after the war, a power and a
    prosperity without precedent in their history. To privilege, as is
    thus done, the alleged "Holocaust" is to inflate Jewish suffering
    beyond all measure in both quality and quantity and to reduce, in
    direct proportion, the suffering of all others, none of whose
    ordeals receives even so much as a specific name;
  3. Imposture is an imposed lie; here it is a question of a
    historical lie, meaning that, forged by liars or fabricators of
    outlandish tales, it has subsequently been adopted by an
    ever-expanding number of people who, in good faith or bad, have
    peddled it; in the event, we are thus dealing with a tiny number of
    liars and a plethora of peddlers;
  4. The opposite of such a lie, fabricated or peddled, is the
    factual truth. Still, as the word "truth" is vague and overused, I
    prefer exactitude. Revisionism consists in trying to examine and
    correct what is generally accepted with a view to establishing with
    exactitude the nature of an object, the reality of a fact, the worth
    of a figure, the authenticity, the veracity and the import of a text
    or document;
  5. Zionism is an ideology whilst revisionism is a method. As a
    revisionist I shall be making a judgement less of Zionism itself (at
    the dawn of the 21st century) than on the use which it makes of the
    "Holocaust" imposture.
If the leaders of the Muslim states planned
to quit their silence on this imposture and if, in so doing, they
put a challenge to the Jewish and Zionist lobby, they would
obviously need first a) to make a proper sizing up of the adversary,
then b) to decide on an appropriate strategy and, finally, c) to
determine the exact area on which to concentrate their attacks. To
discuss these three points, I shall divide my talk into three parts.
In a first part, in order to avoid any mistakes as to the
opponents' identity and to ensure that they are correctly sized up,
I shall expound on what are, in my view, the seeming weak points of
the Jews and Zionists, then on their true weak points. In a second
part, concerning the strategy to adopt, I shall sum up certain
conclusions that I reached, in November 2000, during my visit to
Teheran, in the company of representatives of the Centre of
Strategic Studies of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Finally, in a
third part, I shall designate the precise target to hit: "the magic
Nazi gas chamber" (as Louis-Ferdinand Céline put it).

I. The Jewish and Zionist adversary

A deceitful adversary may display fears that he does not really
feel. He may expose to the view of all certain weak points which in
fact are not such and try to hide what it is that causes him real
disquiet. In so doing he will be attacked where it does not bother
him in the least and be spared an attack that would truly do him
harm. Here, the adversary is almost indifferently Jewish or Zionist.
The Jews are undeniably diverse ("Two Jews, three synagogues", says
the Yiddish proverb) and, politically speaking, they have never
formed a single bloc, not even against Hitler; but, without Jews,
there is no Zionism ("Zionism is to the Jew what the hammer is to
the carpenter", as Ahmed Rami thinks) and, except for some rare
instances, the Jew will feel solidarity with the Zionist and the
Zionist with the Jew if both notice that their common "Holocaust"
myth is in peril; this is why the distinction that usually deserves
to be made between the two hardly belongs here.
a) The adversary's false fears and seeming weak points:

  1. Despite their display of fear of a military attack on the state
    of Israel, the Zionists who rule that state and the Diaspora Jews
    who support them do not really dread the enemy's military strength,
    for they know that the enemy in question will always be outclassed
    by the Israeli army, thanks to the technology and money supplied
    from abroad, especially by the Americans and the Germans;
  2. They do not really fear the variety of anti- Judaism improperly
    called anti-semitism; on the contrary, they feed on it; they need
    to be able to cry out against anti-semitism, if only to collect
    more money in the Diaspora; in general, moaning is of vital necessity
    to them: "The more I sob, the more I get; the more I get, the more I sob";
  3. Jews and Zionists are not really afraid of the Jewish denunciations
    of "Shoah Business" and the "Holocaust Industry" made by the Peter
    Novicks, Tim Coles or Norman Finkelsteins for there it is a
    matter, paradoxically, of more or less kosher denunciations in
    which care is taken to show reverence for the "Holocaust" itself;
    it will be noted, moreover, that if the industrial or commercial
    exploitation of the real or supposed sufferings of the Jews
    constitutes a lucrative line of business, criticism of this
    exploitation has over the last few years become another such line;
    but, these two lines of business, especially the latter, happen to
    be strictly reserved to the Jews; they are "off limits", and a
    Gentile who ventured to imitate N. Finkelstein in his denunciation
    of the "Holocaust" mafia would immediately be set upon by a pack
    of its watchful henchmen;
  4. They do not really fear anti-Zionism as such; at times they even
    authorise its expression;
  5. In particular, they have not much cause to worry about a now
    commonplace form of anti-semitism which consists in attacking all
    of the founding myths of Israel except that which has become
    essential for them: the "Holocaust";
  6. They need not be anxious about accusations of racism, imperialism and
    Judeo-nazism since such accusations, even if at times founded,
    resemble ritual, mechanically uttered slogans, coined in outdated
    language. To see the Jews being compared to Hitler, then hear it
    said that the Zionists are, like the Nazis, carrying out a policy
    of "genocide" is not altogether disagreeable to the Jews and
    Zionists, for it serves to reinforce the images of Hitler and the
    Nazis that they themselves have succeeded in fabricating; this
    helps them to fix firmly in all minds the illusion, first and
    foremost, of a "genocide" of the Jews. In reality, Hitler was no
    more a monster, as his Jewish enemies claim, than was Napoleon an
    "ogre", as English propaganda used to have it. Although a
    racialist, and hostile to internationalist Jews (but not to
    Zionist ones), Hitler never ordered or allowed the killing of
    anyone on account of his or her race or religion; moreover, his
    military tribunals or courts martial meted out sentences -
    sometimes the death sentence - to German soldiers, officers or
    civil servants who had been found guilty of killing a single
    Jewish man or woman (even in regard to acts committed, during the
    war, in Poland, Russia or Hungary); here is a point of history
    that has been shrouded by the exterminationist historians and
    regrettably overlooked by revisionist authors. If Hitler had been
    such a monstrous racist as described, never would such a
    prestigious Arab and Muslim personality as the Grand Mufti of
    Jerusalem (the Palestinian Hadj Amin Al-Husseini) have remained on
    his side until the end. Despite the episode of the Germano-Soviet
    pact (August 1939-June 1941), Hitler was essentially hostile to
    Stalinism and to what he called, because of the Jews' decisive
    contribution to Bolshevism, "Judeo-Bolshevism". The German
    soldier, like the European, Russian, Asian or Muslim volunteer who
    fought beside him, had but Moscow-style Communism as his essential
  7. Although they pretend the contrary, the Jews and
    Zionists laugh - not without reason - at those who talk of a
    "Jewish plot" or a "conspiracy of Auschwitz", since there is no
    "Jewish plot" (any more than a Masonic, Jesuit, Papal, American or
    Communist plot) but a Jewish power or influence; in the same
    manner, there is no "Auschwitz conspiracy" but rather an Auschwitz
    lie; incidentally, ideas of plot or conspiracy, dear to the Jewish
    tradition, ought to remain the privilege of the latter; we should
    be wrong to turn to them.
b) The adversary's true fears and veritable weak points:

  1. In Israel-Palestine, Jews and Zionists truly fear the weapons
    of the poor (children's stones, their slingshots like that of David
    against the giant Goliath, the suicide attacks) and all that may
    endanger persons and business; they fear a demeaning of their brand
    image; they dread having to choose one day between the suitcase and the coffin;
  2. But they are above all apprehensive of "the poor man's atomic bomb",
    that is, the disintegration, by historical revisionism, of the lie of the
    gas chambers, the genocide and the six million; they dread this
    weapon that kills no- one but that would not fail, if properly
    used, to explode their Big Lie like a bag of hot air;
  3. They fear seeing revealed before the eyes of the world that it is
    the imposture of the "Holocaust" that permitted, in the wake of
    the Second World War, the creation in the land of Palestine of a
    Jewish colony called Israel, and this at a time when, throughout
    the globe (except in the Communist empire), a gigantic
    decolonisation movement was well under way;
  4. They know that to lose the "Holocaust" is to lose the sword and
    the shield of Israel as well as a formidable instrument of political and
    financial blackmail; Yad Vashem, which, in Jerusalem, is a
    "Holocaust" memorial and museum all in one (now undergoing
    expansion work), is still more precious to them than the Wailing
    Wall; every foreign personality on visit to Israel for political
    or financial dealings is, before all other business, obliged to
    call at this museum of horrors so as to be well imbued with a
    feeling of guilt which will render him more malleable; sometimes
    there is a dispensation from this formality for representatives of
    those rare nations which the Jews and Zionists, try as they might,
    cannot rebuke for an active or passive role in the alleged
    "Holocaust"; it is then amusing to notice the Israeli officials
    complaining about the difficulty in dealing with partners whom
    they have not been able to condition beforehand;
  5. They are aware that "were the Holocaust shown to be a hoax, the
    number one weapon in Israel's propaganda armoury disappears (sic)"
    (letter of W. D. Rubinstein, Professor at Deakin University,
    Melbourne, Australia, in Nation Review, 21 June 1979,
    p. 639);
  6. They know only too well of "the fact that, if the Holocaust can be
    shown to be a Zionist myth, the strongest of all weapons in Israel's
    propaganda armoury collapses" (the same academic in "The Left, the
    Right and the Jews",
    Quadrant, September 1979, p. 27);
  7. They nearly faint at the thought that the general public might
    finally learn of the sum of iniquities represented by all the purges,
    the cases brought in the style of the judicial masquerades of
    Nuremberg, the confessions extorted on the subject of gas chambers
    or gas vans which had, in fact, never existed or the further
    confessions about implausible killings imputed to the
    Einsatzgruppen, the hunting down of old men, be they patients in
    homes for the aged, more than half a century after their alleged
    crimes, the indoctrination of all minds, from primary school to
    university, in books, newspapers, on radio and television, on
    every continent, morning, noon, afternoon, evening, night; all
    this is accompanied by a fierce repression of the revisionists,
    carried on especially in a Germany subjugated to its conquerors
    (and with which no peace treaty has yet been signed); these
    revisionists have committed the awful crime of simply demanding
    the right to verify either staggering accusations devoid of proof
    or testimonies received as truthful, albeit in the absence of
    examination and cross- examination, concerning the material nature
    of the purported facts and without, beforehand, a single
    investigation of the alleged weapon of the alleged crime;
  8. To sum up, the nightmare of these Jews and Zionists
    would be to have to hear repeated all over a certain sixty-word
    sentence pronounced on the air more than twenty years ago on Radio
    Europe 1, before the journalist Yvan Leva', by a French
    revisionist, disciple of Paul Rassinier. Here is that sentence
    which, at the time, was to earn me a heavy fine in court:
    The alleged Hitlerite gas chambers and the alleged genocide
    of the Jews form one and the same historical lie, which has
    permitted a gigantic political and financial swindle, the main
    beneficiaries of which are the state of Israel and international
    Zionism and whose main victims are the German people - but not
    their leaders - and the Palestinian people in their entirety.

II. How to wage the fight to quit this silence

  1. In November 2000, I spent a week in Iran at the
    invitation of the Centre of Strategic Studies, a body directly
    attached to the office of the President of the Islamic Republic, Mr
    Mohammed Khatami. I had no contact with the country's press, radio
    or television but only with a few personalities who were
    well-informed about revisionism. I held no public conference but
    enjoyed an interview of several hours with the head of the Institute
    for Scientific Political Research, Professor Soroush-Nejad and a few
    of his colleagues. There again, I was struck by the knowledge of
    revisionism that certain Iranians could have. At about that time,
    the Swiss revisionist J¸rgen Graf made his appearance in Iran and I
    am indeed pleased that, some months later, thanks to his intense
    activity and to the contacts which I, at my end, had maintained with
    the Iranian authorities after returning to France, the Teheran Times
    undertook the publication of a series of revisionist articles, the
    first of which was to bear the signature of Professor Soroush-Nejad.
  2. In exchange for the information with which I had been able to
    provide him, I asked my main partner in discussion within the said
    body why, up to the present, revisionism seemed not to have found
    much of an echo in the Arab and Muslim countries. He willingly
    listed eight reasons. Some of these, in light of the quite recent
    events in Palestine, appeared to each of us, by and by, to be no
    longer valid; others seemed to be imputable to misunderstandings;
    other reasons, in the end, unhappily retained all of their force, in
    particular the following: in the Western countries, who ought to
    preach by example before complaining of the silence of others, there
    were but a laughably small number of revisionists who had resolutely
    committed themselves, in their own names and without any
    reservations or skillful manoeuvring, to following the road opened
    up by P. Rassinier;
  3. I attempted to explain that this deplorable record was largely
    due to what one must call the fear (metus Judaeorum) inspired
    everywhere by the groaning and threatening Jew (which Cicero felt in
    59 BC). I added that no political figure of today, be he Iranian,
    Lebanese, Chinese or Japanese, could avoid feeling this fear in the
    face of a community so rich and powerful in the Western world that
    its leaders have the means with which, at any moment, to invade the
    media with their grievances and recriminations in order to demand,
    in the end, the economic boycott of whatever nation's leaders failed
    to make a rapid enough act of "repentance" or resisted Jewish
  4. I then went over the reasons why the leaders of the Muslim
    states must nonetheless, as a proper policy, quit their silence and
    how, in my opinion, they could do so. I shall not expound on those
    reasons here but shall in the following words sum up my feelings as
    to the path to follow: one or more of these leaders should cross the
    Rubicon resolutely and, above all, without the least thought of
    turning back. My long experience (with) the Jews or Zionists in this
    regard has convinced me that the hoaxers are disconcerted by the
    hardiness of anyone who dares to confront them in the open. Just as
    the false witness, if one can catch his glance, must be questioned
    eye to eye, so must the Edgar Bronfmans, the Elie Wiesels, the Simon
    Wiesenthals (the latter two hate and envy one another more Judaico),
    or the rabbis Marvin Hier and Abraham Cooper be defied in direct
    proportion to their habitual threats;
  5. I warned my hosts against the temptation to resort, be it only
    at the first stages, to a form of bastardised revisionism; here
    again, experience has proved that wet-dog revisionism leads to
    whipping. One must also, in order to take a firmly revisionist
    stand, be well acquainted with the physical, chemical, documentary
    and historical argumentation of revisionism. I reminded them, for
    example, that the myth of the alleged Nazi gas chambers had already
    died on 21 February 1979 when, in the daily Le Monde,
    thirty-four French historians showed themselves to be unable to take
    up my challenge concerning the technical impossibilities of those
    absurd chemical slaughterhouses. The general public are unaware of
    that event, just as they are unaware of the succession of defeats
    and debacles suffered by the holocaustic historians'lobby since 1985
    (the date of the first Zündel trial in Toronto). It is now up to the
    leaders of the Muslim states to bring out into the light of day
    information like this, which is still being kept under a bushel;
  6. In these different countries, institutes of history, sociology
    or political studies ought to equip themselves with a section
    specialising in historical revisionism. Research resources and
    archives would enable scholars from around the world who have been
    chased out of their respective countries' universities, centres of
    research or libraries because of their revisionist opinions or
    tendencies to come to work at the side of their colleagues of the
    Muslim lands. The various ministries of education, research,
    culture, foreign affairs and information would collaborate on this
    project of international scope;
  7. If one takes into account the fact that the "Holocaust"
    religionists harbour and maintain not only lies but also hatred, it
    will seem appropriate to plan the establishment on an international
    level of a "Movement against the imposture of the 'Holocaust' and
    for friendship among peoples";
  8. It would be fitting to try to bring some equilibrium to the
    balance of forces in international relations by inviting the
    political or diplomatic personnel of the great powers to show more
    modesty; these people, who never spare the rest of the world their
    morality lessons, should be reminded that they themselves bow a bit
    too low before an international mafia specialising in lies, swindles
    and contempt for human rights; the so-called international
    community, which constantly invokes those rights, should re-
    establish them in the cases of revisionists before rebuking those
    Arab or Muslim countries for intolerance or obscurantism. Such
    accusations could easily be turned against the states which, not
    tolerating the calling into question of a legend turned official
    history and now protected by special laws, forbid their inhabitants
    from casting light on certain historical subjects;
  9. A new and powerful medium of information, the Internet, allows
    an accelerated spreading of revisionism (see, in particular, the
    sites attributed to Ahmed Rami, with their sections in Arabic); here
    is a chance for the Arab and Muslim intellectuals, overly influenced
    by the dominant ideology in the Western universities where they have
    often been educated, to get detoxified from the holocaustic drug;
  10. In sum, the feeling of grave disquiet shown by the Jewish and
    Zionist leaders in the face both of the Intifada of young
    Palestinians living in destitution and of the activities of
    revisionists possessing nothing at all like the economic or
    financial resources at the disposal of the Great Holocaustic Mafia
    reminds one of the ancestral fear that the rich feel in the face of
    the poor, the colonisers before the colonised and the masters at the
    sight of their slaves. The Jewish and Zionist leaders groan,
    threaten and strike. They see themselves as rich (never rich enough,
    of course), in possession of all sorts of weapons (those of brute
    force as well as those of blackmail and racketeering) and they know
    how to make themselves feared by all the leaders of the most
    privileged nations; they are, in particular, aware that the German
    leaders are devoted to them, willing to provide even the blood of
    German soldiers against the foes of Israel and ready to strengthen
    still more unmercifully their repression of revisionism. And yet,
    Jews and Zionists are haunted by the thought of having to confront
    the courage of those who no longer have anything to lose in the
    double Intifada, Palestinian or revisionist. The rich and mighty are
    enraged to see that they can be defied as they are by the
    Palestinians, bare-fisted with stones, and by the revisionists,
    barehanded with only their pens.

III. The main target: "the magical gas chamber" (Céline)

Let us learn to take aim. Let us not
scatter our efforts. Let us apply ourselves to setting our attention
on the centre of the adversary's operation. But, the centre of the
huge edifice forming the religion of the "Holocaust" is none other
than the Auschwitz lie. And the heart of the Auschwitz lie is, in
its turn, made up of the prodigious "gas chamber". That is where we
must aim. Placards waved by Palestinian or other Arab demonstrators
bearing the words "The 'Holocaust' of the Jews is a lie", or "The
six million are a lie" would of course worry the "extor-Zionists"
but those formulations remain still too vague; they are less vivid,
less precise and less striking than "The gas chambers are a lie".
No one is able to show us, at Auschwitz or anywhere else, a
single specimen of these chemical slaughterhouses. No one is capable
of describing to us their exact appearance and workings. Neither a
vestige nor a hint of their existence is to be found. Not one
document, not one study, not one drawing. Nothing. Nothing but some
occasional, pitiful "evidence", which, like a mirage, vanishes as
soon as one draws near and which the Jewish historians themselves,
in recent years, have finally been obliged to repudiate. Sometimes,
as at Auschwitz, tourists are shown around an alleged
"reconstituted" gas chamber but the historians, and the Auschwitz
museum authorities too, know quite well that, in the words of the
French antirevisionist historian Eric Conan, "EVERYTHING IN IT IS
FALSE" ("Auschwitz: la mémoire du mal", L'Express,
19-25 January 1995, p. 68). Still, the Jews are lucky. They are
believed on their word. Practically no-one asks to see the
technological prodigy that a Nazi gas chamber would have been, a
veritable large-scale chemical slaughterhouse. Imagine that someone
has told you about an aeroplane capable of transporting two or three
thousand passengers from Paris to New York in one half hour
(according to the exterminationist vulgate, in a single alleged gas
chamber at Auschwitz, a batch of two or three thousand Jews could be
killed in half an hour). Would you not, in order to begin to believe
it, demand to see at least an image of a thing which would
constitute a technological leap forward such as science has never
known? Are we not in the age of exact sciences and the audio-visual?
Why this sudden shyness when it comes to our gas chamber? The
peddlers have an easy game. They show you the equivalent of either
your garage or your shower and tell you: "Here is the place where
the Germans gassed the Jews in groups of a hundred or a thousand".
And you lend credence to this. You are shown human hair like that
which you could see at a barber's or a wig maker's and told, without
the least proof, that it is the hair of gassing victims. You are
offered shoes and they are stamped "shoes of gassing victims". You
are presented with photographs of dead bodies and you believe that
you see bodies of the slain. You are made to shudder at the sight of
crematory ovens which are in fact perfectly unexceptional. There
exists a very simple means by which to show that we are being fooled
as concerns the prodigious yields of German crematory ovens in the
1940s: this is simply to set them against the present-day yield of
the most modern crematoria of our cities for comparison. I also know
an unanswerable way to prove that the alleged gas chambers for the
killing of Jews with hydrogen cyanide gas could not have existed: it
entails visiting today, as I myself did in 1979, the execution gas
chamber of an American penitentiary, or otherwise acquainting
oneself with the so complex nature of the gas chamber, its so
complicated structure and the so draconian procedure of an execution
by gassing, in the 1940s or 50s, in the prisons of Carson City
(Nevada), Baltimore (Maryland) or Parchmann (Mississippi);
precisely, those executions were and are still carried out with
hydrogen cyanide gas. They are so dreadfully dangerous for the
executioners that the putting to death of one individual requires
drastic precautions and a most complex technology (setting aside the
recently achieved sophistication due either to scientific progress
or to a multitude of safety measures).
On the subject, let us listen to Céline!
I hold Louis-Ferdinand Céline (1894-1961) to be the loftiest
genius of French literature in the 20th century. His force, his
finesse, his clear-sightedness were incomparable. His existence,
unhappily, was largely one of hardship. From the day in 1937 when he
began to display the fear of seeing a new world war flare up, he
brought on his own doom. He had been seriously wounded during the
First World War and felt the apprehension of a new butchery with all
his body and soul. The Jews, from their end, did not see things that
way. Most of their leaders clamoured for a crusade against Hitler.
Céline then condemned this feverish desire to punish Germany, this
frantic warmongering. He foresaw the catastrophe, and later, when
Great Britain and France had taken it upon themselves to go to war
with Germany, he could only remark in what "fine bedsheets" France
was lying. In 1944, he narrowly escaped the summary justice then
being administered by, in particular, the Jews and the Communists.
He fled to Germany in its agony of the final months of the war, then
to Denmark, where for nearly a year and a half he was imprisoned in
the worst conditions. When he eventually returned to France, it was
to live the life of an outcast. France is a particularly cruel land
for its great writers. It is still the case today, sixty years after
their respective publication in 1937, 1938 and 1941, that three of
his works, masterly satires covered in scorn by the Jews, remain
prohibited de facto. No law, in principle, prevents their
republication but everyone knows that the Jewish organisations would
drum up the scalp dance should Céline's widow, still living,
authorise their appearance. Such is the unwritten law of the modern
Other examples of this Jewish privilege are well known; it is
thus, to cite the case of an academic guilty of having once written
a revisionist sentence, that Bernard Notin has, since 1990, not been
allowed to give any lectures at his Lyon faculty. No law, no
judicial or administrative decision has been made to serve notice of
such a prohibition. Today, in the same university, it is the turn of
Professor Jean-Paul Allard to be marked with the brand of Cain for
having, more than fifteen years ago, presided at the viva of a
revisionist thesis. A veritable manhunt has been mounted against
him. Formerly, if one remarked to the Jews that they tracked down
the revisionists like wild animals, they would protest. They would
dare claim that nothing of the sort was done. But times have
changed. The Jews no longer conceal this practice of theirs and
proudly assert responsibility for such violent actions. On 1 March
2001, the weekly Actualité Juive headed one of its
articles: "La chasse ل Jean-Paul Allard est ouverte" ("The hunt for
Jean-Paul Allard is on"), and the contents of the piece amounted to
an incitement to kill. The Jewish organisations cynically intend to
make themselves feared and it is correct to say, today more than
ever, "metus regnat Judaeorum". In J.-P. Allard's case they seem to
be reaching their goal: just recently, this professor, exhausted by
the chase, has been hospitalised for a stroke and has lost the
ability to speak normally. On another score, the Jews and their
friends have succeeded in attempts to have the revisionist Serge
Thion, sociologist and historian of merit, removed from his post at
the Centre national de la recherche scientifique (CNRS), and this by
means of a procedure so openly arbitrary in nature that the most
arrogant of employers would not use it against his humblest employee
lest he have to pay heavy damages. And I shall say nothing of the
suffering endured by the revisionists who have fought openly, in
their own name, the most admirable for his intelligence and his
heart being, in my view, the German Ernst Zündel. Having been
settled in Canada for forty years, he has waged a titanic struggle
against the international "Holocaust" lobby, aiming particularly to
obtain justice for his maligned homeland. Without him revisionism
would have continued to live in semidarkness. But one cannot swim up
the Niagara and, in the face of an almighty coalition of political,
financial and judicial forces, he has recently been obliged, in
spite of some brilliant victories, to leave Canada. In his new
exile, he continues, with the aid of his German-American wife,
Ingrid Rimland, to fight for a just cause.
If, towards the end of this talk, I have called to mind the lofty
figure of the author of Journey to the End of Night, it
is because Céline, by one of his customary strokes of genius, had
already suspected, just five years after the war, that the alleged
physical extermination of the Jews might be but a fable, a work of
trickery. It must be said that from 1945, floods of Jews from
Central Europe, who were thought to have been exterminated, had
headed for France, when they had not headed for other Western
countries or for Palestine; in France, they had just added their
number to a Jewish community of which four fifths were spared by the
wartime deportation measures. In November 1950, upon a reading of P.
Rassinier's first sizeable work, Le Mensonge d'Ulysse,
Céline wrote to his friend Albert Paraz:

Rassinier is certainly an honest man [...]. His
book, admirable, is going to cause quite a stir - AFTER ALL, it
tends to cast doubt on the magical gas chamber! no small matter! A
whole world of hatreds is going to be compelled to yelp at the
Iconoclast! It was everything, the gas chamber! It permitted
In our turn, let us admire this lucid and scintillating vision of
things, this foresight.
Yes, the gas chamber is really "magical". As I have said, no one,
in the end, has proved capable of showing or even of drawing one for
us in reply to my challenge "Show me or draw me a Nazi gas chamber!"
No one has been able to explain its operation to us. No one has been
able to tell us how, at Auschwitz, the Germans could pour pellets of
Zyklon B, a powerful hydrogen cyanide-based insecticide, into
alleged orifices made in the roof of the "gas chamber", considering
that this alleged gas chamber (in reality, a cold room for the
storage of corpses awaiting cremation) has, as a careful eye may
note amidst the ruins, never possessed even a single one of those
orifices, a fact which has permitted me to state the four-word
conclusion "No holes, no 'Holocaust'!" No-one has been able to
reveal to us the mystery, implied by the standard version, which
allowed the squads of Jews under the orders of the Germans (the
Sonderkommando) to enter that great gas chamber with impunity, so
soon after the alleged mass killings, to remove energetically, day
after day, the thousands of corpses lying in tangled heaps. Hydrogen
cyanide gas is difficult to remove by ventilation, a time- consuming
process; it penetrates and lingers within plaster, brick, concrete,
wood, paint and, above all, the skin and the mucous of humans; thus
one could not enter, move about and work in such a manner in what
would effectively be an ocean of deadly poison, handling corpses
which, infused with that poison, would poison whoever touched them.
It is, furthermore, well known to specialists in the field of
disinfection (or disinfestation) that it is essential, in such an
atmosphere, to avoid physical effort for, if such effort is made,
the breathing quickens and the gasmask filter will then allow the
poison to pass through, killing the wearer. Finally, no-one has been
able to instruct us as to how those amazing Jews of the
Sonderkommando, ever dragging out the corpses of their co-
religionists, could perform such exploits whilst eating and smoking
(in the version of the "confession" ascribed to Rudolf Hِك, the best
known of the successive Auschwitz commandants); for, if one
understands correctly, they did not even wear gasmasks and smoked
amidst the noxious fumes of an explosive gas. Like the imaginary
flower dreamt of by the French symbolist poet Stéphane Mallarm»
(1842-1898), who wrote of "the one missing from every bouquet", the
Nazi gas chamber, capable of astounding works, is "missing from all
reality"; it remains truly magical, but of a sinister and nauseating
magic; it is nothing other than a nightmare that dwells in Jewish
brains whilst, for their part, the high priests of the "Holocaust"
work to make this gruesome illusion come to haunt the world for
eternity, and to hold it in a state of near-hypnosis; their
livelihood depends on it.
Céline is right again to add, on the subject of the magical gas
chamber, that it is "no small matter!" In reality, as he says
further on, it is everything and it permits everything. Without it,
the holocaustic edifice would collapse totally. Pierre Vidal-Naquet,
sorry herald of the antirevisionist struggle, has himself
acknowledged as much when, remarking that some of his friends, grown
weary of the campaign, were decidedly tempted to dump these
cumbersome gas chambers without further ado, he entreated them not
to do so and voiced this cry of alarm: "I beg their pardon: that
would be to surrender in open country" ("Le Secret partag»",
Le Nouvel Observateur, 21 September 1984, p. 80). The
Nazi gas chamber is said to be the only tangible - but, in fact,
impossible to find - evidence of a physical extermination that never
took place and that is, moreover, brazenly described to us as being
concerted, planned, and of a monstrously industrial nature, with
production yields worthy of veritable "death factories".
Céline, finally, is right to conclude "A whole world of hatreds
is going to be compelled to yelp at the Iconoclast!" For my part, I
should add, more than half a century after that prognosis or
prophecy, that the yelps, now more and more deafening, have not
ceased for an instant against the iconoclasts who are the
revisionists. In France the latter are today christened with the
barbarous term "négationnistes" whereas they "negate" or deny
nothing but, at the end of their research, affirm that a gigantic
historical imposture holds sway.


The revisionists haunt the days and nights of the upholders of Jewish
law and of those who Céline - again - called "the martyrs' trust".
Against the revisionists who seek to protect themselves from it, the
said trust is merciless. It drives some to suicide, causes physical
injury and disfigurement, it kills or forces others into exile. It sets
fire to houses and burns books. It has the police, the judges, the prison
authorities do its bidding. It applies pressure, it extorts and
steals. It sets the dogs of the press on us, it throws us out of our
jobs, it heaps insults upon us. On our side, not one amongst us, to
my knowledge, has ever struck one of these perpetual law enforcers.
On 25 April 1995, in Munich, a German revisionist ended up killing
himself, burning himself alive. He meant this act to be a protest
against "the Niagra of lies" showered upon his people. In his
suicide letter, he stated his hope that the flames which consumed
his body would burn as a beacon for the generations to come. The
German police proceeded to arrest the persons who soon afterwards
came to leave a bouquet at the spot where Reinhold Elstner had
immolated himself. On 13 May 2000, the German political science
professor Werner Pfeiffenberger, aged 58, ended his own life after
having long endured a legal persecution launched against him by a
Jewish journalist in Vienna, one Karl Pfeifer, who had detected a
whiff of revisionism (called, of course, neo-Nazism) in the
academic's writings.
The revisionists live a life of hardship and the Palestinians are
living a tragedy. In particular, many Palestinian children are
destined for a sorrowful fate. Their Israeli killers are, on a
modest scale, the worthy successors of the US Air Force, the
military corps which, in all of a cruel human history, has
contributed to killing, mutilating, disfiguring or starving more
children than any other, first in Germany and elsewhere in Europe,
then in Japan, in Vietnam and in much of the rest of Asia, then in
the Near- and Middle East and, finally, in still many other places
in the world whenever the American soldier receives from his masters
the order to hunt down a new "Hitler" and to prevent a new
May the leaders of the Muslim states hear the Palestinians'and
the revisionists'appeals! Our ordeals are similar and our Intifadas
May those leaders finally quit their silence on the biggest
imposture of modern times: that of the "Holocaust"!
May they, especially, denounce the lie of the alleged Nazi gas
chambers! After all, not one of the leaders on the winning side of
the Second World War, despite their hatred of Hitler's Germany,
stooped so low as to claim that such gas chambers had existed.
During that war, in their speeches, as afterwards, in their memoirs,
never did Churchill, or de Gaulle, or Eisenhower once mention this
demonic horror which they well saw to have been laboriously peddled
during the war by propaganda agencies. Already a quarter of a
century ago, in a masterly book, the American professor Arthur
Robert Butz called the grand imposture "the Hoax of the Twentieth
Century". That century is over and as for its hoax, it must vanish
into the rubbish bins of history.
The tragedy of the Palestinians demands it, the ordeal of the
revisionists makes it essential and the cause of humanity as a whole
makes it our historical, political and moral duty: the Grand
Imposture must be denounced. It is a fomenter of hatred and war. It
is in the interest of all that the leaders of the Muslim states quit
their silence on the imposture of the "Holocaust".




FAV Editor: Ibrahim Alloush
Co-editors: Nabila Harb
  Muhammad Abu Nasr
FAV Home Page - > Please click on the logo above, and we'll FAV you there :)