A Footnote of Irony
By Germar Rudolf
The Revisionist · 2004 · Volume 2 · No. 2 · p. 122
A few weeks ago I met Dietmar Munier in Chicago, owner of the
medium-sized publishing company Arndt in Kiel, northern Germany.
He was hunting original color photographs of the Third Reich era
for his many upcoming book projects, and while visiting archives
in the United States, he decided to stop by and meet me so that
we could discuss several future book publishing projects. Since
Munier published several very interesting and important books on
the history of the Second World War in particular as well as the
years preceding, I hope to be able to publish English language
editions of some of these books shortly.
One series of some five books addresses several aspects of the
German-Russian war between 1941-1945. Another series features a
collection of great color photos of various theaters of the
Second World War; yet another series contains heavily illustrated
books focusing on peacetime Germany before the war. As you can
imagine, publishing such a large number of fine books requires
some financial backing, which is why things may progress only
slowly initially. But with a little luck, I may acquire an
investor willing to put his money where his mouth is, so that
these fine books can be offered to the English-speaking world
soon.
During dinner, Herr Munier casually talked about various of his
past, present, and future projects. While so doing, he touched
briefly upon a project he had carried out several years ago: a
Festschrift on the occasion of David Irving’s 60th birthday.
Subtitled Historians in Handcuffs (see illustration) and
recounting David Irving’s own painful experience, this 1998
book included contributions from a long list of highly renowned
German scholars. One personality, however, whose article was
originally planned to be included as well, was finally not
represented: Ralf Hochhuth, author of the (in)famous play Der
Stellvertreter (The Deputy). In this play, Hochhuth had turned
the so-called confessions of Kurt Gerstein about his alleged
activities at the purported extermination camp Belzec into a
worldwide theater success, popularizing one of the most
outrageous pieces of evidentiary nonsense on the
‘Holocaust’.
The reason Hochhuth’s article was not printed was that it
contained many statements about Irving that were closer to
unfounded ad hominem attacks than to the kind of statements one
would expect in a Festschrift. One of Hochhuth’s statements
about Irving piqued the publisher’s interest most intensely,
and that was his claim that Irving’s mother was Jewish. Herr
Munier inquired about this in disbelief, but David Irving happily
confirmed it: yes, his mother was Jewish, but he was never
interested in this fact, nor was he raised within the Jewish
tradition. He therefore never considered it to have any
relevance. Thus, according to orthodox Jewish tradition, David
Irving is a Jew, plain and simple.
The interesting questions arising from this are: Why did Ralf
Hochhuth want to blow the whistle on Irving in this regard? Had
he an interest in undermining Irving’s financial basis by
hoping to cut him off from some of his supporters who are
anti-Semitic to the point where they would reject Irving because
of this? And why was this fact never mentioned by anybody? Why
was it not raised during Irving’s libel case against
Lipstadt? I bet all sides knew that an atheist Jew (Irving) was
fighting against orthodox Jews (Lipstadt, van Pelt, and others).
It was, and continues to be, a case of Jewish in-fighting, if you
wish to label it that way.
Of course, Holocaust promoters can have no interest in
advertising that the “main exponent” of “Holocaust
Denial” is a Jew. Oy vey, what a publicity disaster that
would be! (Even though Irving is, strictly seen, not even a
Holocaust revisionist, but merely a benevolent observer.)
At the end of the day, one can argue that it doesn’t matter
what heritage Irving’s mother had, at least not in regard to
where the historical truth is to be found. But for many
individuals it might make a difference in their personal attitude
toward revisionism.
For me personally, this is only an interesting, curious, ironic
footnote, the most interesting aspect being the reactions of
others to this revelation.
>> *********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********
> >>
> >> On 7/12/04 at 4:50 AM m.f@zoomtown.com wrote:
> >>
> >> >From: RePorterNoteBook@aol.com
> >> >Date: 2004/07/12 Mon AM 03:15:59 GMT
> >> >To: undisclosed-recipients:;
> >> >Subject: David Irving says-"That is
rubbish, my mom wasn't [Jewish]! "
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >Dear Michael:
> >> >
> >> >That is rubbish, she wasn't!
> >> >
> >> >David Irving (now writing in Key West, Florida)
> >> >pp Focal Point Publications
> >> >
> >> >USA cellphone: 305 923 6259; or tollfree: 1 877
447 5678 -- email:
> >> >focalp@aol.com
> >> >==============
> >> >
> >> >Dear David:
> >> >
> >> >It may be "rubbish", but it still
begs the question of where the info
> >came
> >> >from and why someone like Germar, who is noted
for his precision and
> >> >accuracy,
> >> >would go to the trouble to circulate it.
> >> >
> >> >Peace.
> >> >Michael Santomauro
YOUR DONATION = OUR SURVIVAL!
Please contribute today - buy our books - and spread the word to all your friends!
* * * Back to the Home Page of John "Birdman" Bryant, the World's Most Controversial Author * * *