Revisionism is Jewish

Robert Frenz


One of the more noticeable things about the blight-wing is their propensity for imitating those whom they criticize. In addition, the blight-wing has its own version of a politically correct vocabulary. Part of this is the rule which forbids one blight-winger from criticizing another. Any such criticism is supposed to cause disunity in the battle against the embodiment of all evil, the Jew. Disunity? How can you disunite something which was never united in the first place? Essentially, the blight-wing is a collection of mail-order operators whose life-blood is a mailing list.

Mailing lists are survival lists which are guarded closer than a pimp polices his whores. If the blight-wing was truly interested in the overall welfare of the Aryan, then there would be a sharing of resources and a “let the best man emerge” atmosphere. This is not the case and never will be since the “leaders” are, to the last man, only mediocre personalities who earn their living from the non-existent “movement”. I have met a good share of them and I have yet to be impressed by a single one. Basically, I have little use, or regard, for anyone who privately espouses opinions which are diametrically opposed to the views they vomit into their “newsletters” or from a podium. If we believe that Adolf Hitler was the epitome of Aryan leaders, then we must ask ourselves what assumed name he wrote under. Did Adolf ever use party (supporters) money to finance vacations with his girlfriend? When did he use supporter’s money to buy himself a new automobile? When did he ever mouth personal opinions about the German people which he voiced publicly, in the opposite, in order to increase the donations? The blight-wing is an absolute impediment to any resurrection of Aryan attributes and the quicker anyone, or any group, even the Jews, hastens its disappearance, the better.

I always have, and always will, value simple honesty and will not, in spite of the “advice” I get from people, cater to anyone as a means of enhancing donations or gathering support. “You must use honey to catch flies” I am advised. Hell, what would anyone who is not a revisionist want with a mess of messy flies? Over and over, I listen to blight-wingers who complain that the Jews are using pretense, and outright lying, as bridge-heads for their assault upon Aryan values. Out of these very same mouths comes the recommendation that Aryans engage in identical subterfuge so that, when the time comes, they can assert whatever it is they think they should assert. If the Jews do this, then it is dirty. If Aryans do it, then it is justified. What hypocrisy! It all reminds me of the criminal group, who after obtaining illegal wealth, suddenly decides to go “legit with a dry cleaning business and a cigar shop. A crook is a crook is a crook. He can change his socks but the stench is still there. One correspondent even apologized for the “wiggers” who engaged in hooliganism. Wiggers are usually degenerate white misfits (who no self-respecting black-face would ever associate with) and decidedly are not nice Aryan fellows “feeling their oats.” We may excuse a Black for acting like a nigger, but an Aryan? Never! I will not agree with the person who views vandalism as merely an expression of youthful Aryan “energy” and that “sporting” slaughter has something to do with the Aryan psyche.

Revisionists, of course, firmly believe in the “talking cure”. This has been the hallmark of every Jewish psychiatrist from cocaine-snorting Freud to the quack Spock who both managed to sire additional misfits. If you engage in the right kind of talk, for the right length of time without belching, then any sociopath can be “cured” of whatever it is that turns him on. The talking cure nonsense has permeated every level of American thinking. Just say “no” to drugs. Just say “no” to crime. Education, which is the code word for the ultimate talking cure, is supposed to be the answer to everything from jock-itch to typhoons. We can supposedly educate people out of poverty. We can supposedly educate people out of their stupidity. The fact is that the more people are “educated”, the worse everything becomes. According to Earl Bauby, “I cut off a piece three times now, but it is still too damned short.”

We are near the end of fifty years of the holocaust talking cure and the revisionists are still talking. Nevertheless, the talking is still inviting and with that in mind, I fired up my rusty 1977 Ford and drove to Niagara Falls where David Irving was going to do some more talking.

I arrived at Days Inn where I stumbled upon Ernst Zündel who was generous enough to pay my admission. Prior to having Mr. Irving talk down to us, we sat and sipped some coffee. A tall and slender fellow came in and sat beside Ernst. The conversation indicated that this person was Michael Hoffman who, I believe, writes a paper called the Revisionist Researcher. I remained somewhat perplexed because a few years ago a “Michael Hoffman” was pointed out to me, at Ernst’s home, but that person was short, swarthy, and accompanied by a woman who looked like an escapee from the Tonawanda Indian Reservation. Oh well. Time moves on. I introduced myself and I moved on. Ernst and Michael appeared to be collaborating on the writing of another book. Another book? The Great Holocaust Trial Revisited? How Jewish!

Prior to taking my seat, I introduced myself to Jack Wikoff, a mild-mannered person who looked like he just arrived fresh from a Kansas farm. Jack publishes a paper called Remarks which I read whenever I can secure a free copy, which is hardly ever. Revisionists are as terrified of “free” as the Jews are of shower rooms.

Among the other wholesome looking people in that collection of about 70 was what I assumed to be the immediate family of Mr. Hoffman. From the smallest tot on up, they were a fine looking set of white people although a little too sober for my liking. Corpses don’t smile either.

I sat down next to some old acquaintances from Buffalo NY who were engaged in eating some kind of cattle feed called “granola”. I nodded and they munched. I flexed my beef-fed muscles while they sighed feebly and tried to adjust their bony posteriors to fit the curve of the chairs.

Mr. Zündel introduced Mr. Hoffman who, in turn, introduced Mr. Irving who then began to talk about Mr. Irving. This followed Mr. Hoffman’s talking about Mr. Irving. My opinion that if you heard Mr. Irving once then you’ve heard Mr. Irving twice, was still valid. David Irving talked and talked and reinforced my opinion that Revisionism is Jewish. Revisionist gatherings are like the Jewish academy awards. Everyone is busy patting each other on the back. “What a fine job we are doing.” Smile. This propitious moment is being captured on video tape.

Jewish science always starts with a conclusion and then selects whatever facts seem to fit. Mr. Irving, although keen to discredit Jewish “eye witnesses” to the Auschwitz line dancing affair, was very keen to credit a German who was an “eye witness” to some mass execution on the Eastern Front. How Jewish! Wars are hell; politicians tell lies; and no one knows for sure the details of much of anything in times of chaos. Prolific David churns out tons of written material demonstrating what we all guessed before he ever sharpened his first pencil.

Revisionists, it seems, are also very fond of reinventing the wheel. One revisionist, to Mr. Irving’s exuberant acceptance, is writing a paper on the durability of ferric ferrocyanide (Prussian Blue). This is in reference to the stuff called Leuchter’s Blue which was not found in the non-existent Auschwitz non-gas chambers. Where has this researcher-revisionist fellow been? Prussian Blue, and its bed companion Turnbull’s Blue, have been used as paint pigments for centuries. Old tombs are plastered with it. The history of the past will never be settled to anyone’s satisfaction so Revisionism will continue to be a treadmill exercise – lots of motion but going nowhere. Revisionism is a verbal Nordic-Track. We’re on the right track, track, track, track…

Revisionists, in typical Jewish fashion, also find hidden meanings in what people say. An example was given by Mr. Irving. According to an “eye witness” (gad!, not another?) Adolf Hitler voiced that he felt as clean as a babe after taking a bath. How unusual! Since Adolf took this bath, or shower, after the “night of the elongated machetes” then his remark had to be decoded according to Freud. This, of course, meant that Adolf didn’t feel “clean” following the execution of all of those Brown Shirts who plotted and moved against him. Adolf, according to corpse mind-reader Irving, “knew he did something dirty.” The lesson we can all learn here is that whenever you take a personal hand in rounding up your enemies for execution, you should refrain from using soap and water until the whole episode becomes a dim memory. Otherwise, any astute lad will immediately know that you are using the soap on your body in order to cleanse your mind. Do religious people take showers after they watch porno movies? Should I brush my teeth after I see a Burger King commercial?

Revisionism, following another Jewish fashion, becomes more believable according to the number of Jews involved. Mr. Irving acknowledged the efforts of the Jew David Cole when Cole visited the Auschwitz theme park. Cole saw nothing more than any goy ever saw, but if you wear a yarmulke while seeing it, you can apparently “see” more (Jewish voodoo!). David Irving announced that more and more Jews are now getting on the revisionist bandwagon, which, and this is Jewish also, enhances the whole shebang. You see, if it comes from a Jew then it must be true.

Revisionists are also very Jewish in their examinations of what it is they examine. “Revisionism is nit-picking,” says Robert Faurisson, who is a well-known revisionist. Rabbis are also nit-pickers which leads me to believe that Revisionism should be immediately turned over to the rabbis who have centuries of experience in nit-picking to draw upon. Whenever a batch of revisionists ponder the symbols on a document, you almost can hear the rabbinical questions concerning the meaning of an “i” where the dot is placed to the left. Was it an ink dot or merely fly shit?

Mr. Irving, as well as Jewish-looking, Jewish-acting Freddie, spends an inordinate amount of time showing how the Germans “might have” and “probably did” snuff out thousands of innocent Jew choir boys. It is all part of the “revisionist shuffle”. When one pokes about the imaginary ash-piles of Auschwitz, a raft of noise is heard. To quiet the noise, one does the shuffle, that is, stick to your position that the Nazis didn’t gas the entire world synagogue in an Auschwitz clothes drier, but did manage to get rid of them in other ways. I suggest a college course called “2001 Ways to Kill Jews Without Using Cyanide.” I would like to see a collection of American G.I. tales covering the different ways our troops settled the “German question”. Dick Wilkes, a childhood friend of mine who fought in WWII, even had photos of what two German civilians looked like with only their feet sticking out from under a tank tread. Chuck Prospero enjoyed the game of “watch the Kraut crawl” which preceded “target practice.” Gene Elmore finally settled the question of whether a starving German will eat piss-soaked bread.

The “revisionist waltz” goes like this: They pick up on some Jew sob story and busy themselves by trying to convince the uninterested that the story could not be factual. The Jews respond with another story and the revisionists get dancing to another tune. Back and forth it goes, and goes, and goes, only serving to keep the goyim detracted while, behind their backs, their country is being dismantled and plundered.

Holocaust talking, pro or con, and whether in print, on some dumb computer network, or on short-wave radio, is not going to be a cure for anything. In fact, the more the revisionists yap about the holocaust, the more the Jews yap about the holocaust. One yap deserves another. Since most Americans are “up to here” with the holocaust nonsense, is it little wonder that they are also getting fed up with the revisionist arguments as well. It is over, my friends, and Jewish money and influence have established yet another bit of nonsense as “fact”. It is to the credit of the Jew that this was accomplished with little bloodshed. Contrast this to the establishment of Christianity among otherwise content savages by means of torture, terror, and bribes.

The Holocaust fable has no future. Time will bury it as it did the St. Bartholomew’s Day Massacre, and the Inquisition, which remain only as scribbles upon the pages of books no one ever bothers to read. Revisionism is only a reactionary exercise in history which remains parasitical in its relation to the “survivor” moaning business. David Irving thinks the Holocaust, as it is currently presented, will have gone bye-bye by 1996. If that becomes true (and it won’t) then will the revisionists finally go out and get a decent job? Will the Blacks stop pushing drugs and the Mestizos return with their stolen cars to Mejico? Do chickens have lips?

The notion, as I see it, is that the country is in a “fine mess” because the naughty Jews have so much power. Do you remember the posters which told you to always remove the keys from your auto so as to prevent “a good boy from going bad?” If some s.o.b. steals your car then it was because you turned him into a criminal by forgetting your keys. If some bastard burglarizes your home, then you are at fault for not installing an expensive alarm system. This same odd attitude dumps the blame for the actions of our Aryan garbage upon the Jew. Get rid of the Holocaust, since it is the mainstay of Jewish power (it ain’t – the Jews were powerful long before the Holocaust), and the Jews will no longer be “corrupting the minds of our brain-dead, hedonist, young wiggers. Crap!

Revisionists also employ another Jew tactic. Create a problem and then offer a solution. The revisionists created the minuscule “debate” in the first place. They now offer a solution which always involves sending them money. A few more court fracases, a few more books, a few more short-wave broadcasts, a few more blah-blahs, and then the vapors of cyanide will have all blown away. Kosher sausage! Lies have short legs but the revisionists keep them alive, and promote the manufacture of more, by giving this nonsense a reason for being. Spielberg’s latest delusion is viewed by David Irving as a revisionist success since it indicates that Revisionism is “winning.” The only thing that Swanzler’s List demonstrates is that the Jews can lie faster than the revisionists can refute them. It’s all a game of “can you top this?” where the Jews can afford the larger pile or betting chips.

Holocaust revisionism is on its last legs and most of the revisionists are as goofy as the Jews they debate with. As the ranks of revisionism fill with Jews, it will die all that much faster. Willis Carto, who worried more about a dollar than he did about the quality of the people he hired, is now engaged in a battle with his former underlings at the Institute of Historical Review. Down is the future direction. It is interesting, also, that once a Jew becomes a revisionist, he moves from holocaust lying to revisionist truth-telling. It’s a “born again” episode without all of that magic water.

Schindler’s List is the latest whopper that gets the revisionists all flustered. I have often wondered why the revisionists never got excited about Hollywood’s “The Ten Commandments”, or “The Robe”, which contain far more meat for “making history fit the facts” than does any “I’ve been gassed a dozen times” type of fiction. After all, every one of Hollywood’s religious film spectacles were Jew-produced, Jew-financed, and involved stories about Jews as told by Jews. What a strange discrimination these revisionists practice!

Revisionists are doing something valuable and needed. This is the opinion of many. In a way, I agree. I suppose that while the country is dying of a cancer, it is better to do it with the accompaniment of revisionist music so that we can go to the Happy Hunting Ground with smiles upon our faces. As for myself, I’d rather shoot the distracting music players and get on with the business of fighting the cancer. It is time to get off the pot.

SOURCE: Liberty Bell, December 1994

Blog Contents


This entry was posted in History, National Socialism and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s