Hollywood's Revenge on Dissident Historian David Irving
August 16, 2016
On September 5, 1996, David Irving sued Deborah Lipstadt and Penguin Books for libel for characterizing him as a "Holocaust Denier" in her book Denying the Holocaust. The judge decided in Lipstadt's favor, ruling that her accusations were substantially true. Indeed Irving has never addressed the subject in an article or book but has stated in speeches that he cannot find a paper record for the official view, and he questioned the numbers. He represented himself at the trial. The controversy is now the stuff of Hollywood epic. Actually the trailer looks pretty good. It raises the issue of whether "free speech" includes the right to be wrong. (I believe it does.)
Disclaimer- I don't agree with Hoffman (below) or Irving about the Holocaust. I don't think the Nazis would round up Jews incapable of work just to provide free room and board, or demand a ransom of 10,000 trucks to exempt them from these benefits. (See also) My parents had to pass as non-Jews for a reason. Nevertheless, Irving should not be prevented from questioning the official narrative. Restrictions on free inquiry and free speech are the hallmarks of Communism.
The real scandal is Zionist exploitation of Jewish tragedy for political gain when they collaborated with the Nazis and were responsible for many Jewish deaths. Indeed, these scoundrels want to replace the Crucifixion with the holocaust as a sign of the Jews' God-like status. This tawdry political agenda is the main reason people question the Jewish holocaust. Finally, the holocaust creates the illusion that Jews were the primary victims of World War Two when in fact more than 60 million goyim died. The Masonic Jewish bankers were behind the war. The real target was humanity in general.
(abridged by henrymakow.com)
In late September the Zionists will once again advance their cartoon version of history by means of Hollywood, their "court" of first resort. Tinseltown is the ideal venue for projecting fantasies disguised as historical truth and trying and convicting heretics and dissidents. The target in question is English historian David Irving, author of more than 20 best-selling history books and the leading military historian of National Socialist Germany.
(left. rat-faced actor plays Irving)
In the year 2000 he brought a libel suit in London against Deborah Lipstadt, a dreary thought cop from Emory University in Georgia who has made it her life's work to dream up a new category of heretic ("Holocaust denier"), reflective of the hysteria and megalomania of the religion of Holocaustianity, of which she is high priestess. The hobby horse of one obscure professor soon became a marching order for the media of the entire western world. The story behind that chilling Orwellian perversity is itself deserving of a book-length study.
Thanks to Deborah, many writers and historians now bear the career-withering " holocaust denier" stigmata, branded both by new media (Google search engine, Wikipedia) and the senile print media. Imagine if every atheist who was a chemist, astronomer, geographer, novelist or sculptor, who did not believe that Jesus Christ rose from the dead, would have to endure going through life perpetually branded by the media as a "Resurrection-denier"?
Of course in our modern world one may deny the central tenet of Christendom all one likes. Hollywood director James Cameron lavishly funds the Resurrection denial of Israeli activist Simcha Jacobvici. In the Israeli state there is a tourist trade based on selling maps and taking tours of what the Israelis describe as the tomb where the bones of Jesus rot, but Cameron and co. bear no contumely for it.
Acting as his own attorney, Irving went it alone against Lipstadt and her team of lawyers and researchers in the Masonic courts of injustice, for which Britain is justly infamous. In spite of a few failings (chiefly in deciding not to call German-American chemist/historian Germar Rudolf as a witness), Irving mounted a magnificent defense against a legal team consisting of lawyers for England's aristocracy, funded by the bottomless pockets of movie mogul Steven Spielberg, and with the Israeli ambassador seated in the courtroom with his retinue of gun-toting bodyguards -- in case the presiding judge didn't get the message about which way the verdict should go.
Unfortunately, there is no revisionist book about the Irving trial as there is for the show trial of Ernst Zündel in Canada. In the breach, on September 30 Hollywood will tender "Denial," its mendacious spin on the ignominious Lipstadt, who was so cowardly she hid behind her high-priced lawyers and refused to take the stand and endure Mr. Irving's cross-examination (it will be interesting to see how the film will handle this embarrassing, self-indicting fact).
The part of the slim and good-looking Irving of that era is played by Timothy Spall, a chubby thespian with a flaccid jaw who typically portrays villains. The role of the plain-looking Prof. Lipstadt is undertaken by the glamorous Rachel Weisz, who is usually cast as a heroine.
This is a morality play in a shades-of-gray world. When Christians endeavour to slay a dragon we are told to lighten up, don't be a fanatic, embrace diverse viewpoints. When the Zionists prepare to slay a revisionist reptile, existential factors are banished and a pure struggle between cosmic good and evil takes center stage....
Michael Hoffman's Truth Mission is made possible by sales of his publications and broadcasts, and donations from benefactors
---------------------
Related- The Zionist View of David Irving
First Comment from Dan:
First, about the elephant in the room. The Holocaust narrative. Hitler ordered the systematic assembly line gassing of 6 million Jews in order to exterminate every Jews in Nazi occupied Europe.
Raise your hand if you always believed every word of this from the age of 3 or six or soon as you could understand television shows. I did. I heard the Zundel in the 80's and 90's but for years I didn't pay attention because he seemed to be a crank. It wasn't till several years into the Internet that I actually read what he said. Still I thought he was a crank.
But I kept hearing more about these trials for 'Holocaust Denial' and finally when someone I didn't consider a crank got ambushed on Swedish Television in 2008, and was charged in absentia with Holocaust Denial in Germany, and all the blatant persecution of the man for honestly giving his opinion when asked on television, THIS is when I began to research the history myself.
Thank you Michael for showing how the casting alone is a grotesque distortion of the real people in the case. When I saw the promo photo, I thought Timothy Spall was playing Richard 'Skunky' Evans. Spall resembles the rat-faced Evans*, not Irving. The choice of Rachel Weisz to play Deborah Lipstadt needs no comment. Just so everyone is one the same page about what Historical Revision is, here's the definition.
"Historical revisionism involves either the legitimate scholastic re-examination of existing knowledge about a historical event, or the illegitimate distortion of the historical record. For the former, i.e. the academic pursuit, see historical revisionism."
I say 'revisionism' can't mean both. One is in the interest of the truth, the other is about making up any narrative to suit political aims.
We need another word for Hollywood History. Let's call it HOLLYWOOD REINVENTIONSIM (ie, bullshit). Every history movie they've ever made is a distortion - and they never apologize for it. Now that the last of the generation eye witnesses of life in Europe during WWII are either dead, or in prison for Holocaust Denial I've seen a rash of articles announcing 'newly discovered documents' originating from the Daily Main, UK Guardian, picked up by the New York Times and the rest. How about this one:
Thus 'historical revisionists' are motivated to get the truth of what really happened to be the final history for posterity, what the 'enemys of the truth'; in Hollywood should not be called revisionism. Let's call it Historical Re-Invention.
As for the history of ethnic cleansing under Hitler's Lebensraum policy, you won't get anywhere analyzing it through your emotions. Historical research is an academic discipline which requires objectivity.
David Irving never denied ethnic cleansing occurred, that's documented.
What the 'Holocaust Deniers' question are Holocaust Industry narratives.
They raised valid questions, and for that they got thrown in prison, and had their careers and lives destroyed.
Merkel's government sentenced 87 year old Ursula Haverbeck to prison last year for openly challenging the German government to provide proof of 6 million Jews; extermination gas chambers; and a 'Final Solution' to genocide the Jews of Europe. We're still waiting for their answer to her challenge.
She said "The truth needs no laws."
JG Writes:
I feel for all the truthers like Irving who dwell in this present '1984 Age' where the lie is the truth and the truth is the lie.
The Holocaust has become the power engine for Modern Jewish Identity and it has become too powerful of a monster to revise or discredit the politicized authorized version.
I never understood the glory of victimization that goes along with the Holocaust narrative or why these Holocaust fact finders like Irving or Zundel are held in contempt for undercutting the numbers. You would think they would be relieved rather than disappointed to find that there was less bloodshed and not more. One of the reasons why there is no turning back from this present narrative now because there is way too much money involved. Germany has paid out billions and now they might soon be paying more billions to some of the 2nd generation of Jews who were related to the 1st generation of victims. There will be no end to this one.
The victors are writing this piece of history and you all better learn to accept it and enjoy it.
T said (August 18, 2016):
I never understood the glory of victimization that goes along with the Holocaust narrative or why these Holocaust fact finders like Irving or Zundel are held in contemptâ€â€¦â€¦ It might seem counterintuitive, but the masonic Zionists are the biggest WELFARE RECIPIENTS on the planet. That’s why. They are parasites that need to keep the illusion alive to keep getting sustenance from their host nation. They would not exist without banking bailouts, favourable loopholes, state funded expenses, illegal collusion with authorities, etc. Israel and monarchies/presidents are the biggest welfare claimants of all, and no coincidence they are the ones most censored that you cannot speak out against.
Here's the point: Most people on welfare get sneered at for being losers and encouraged to get off it and be productive for society, so to remain on all-expenses paid offices, these Zionists decided to flip everything upside down and make people feel guilty so ppl are acquiescent of paying their way bc they “are entitled to be paid reparations for being such innocent victimsâ€, even if its clear as day you're just supporting a conspiracy/rigged system.