David Icke New Age Neo Nazi Guru

This commercially available pesticide was widely used before, during and after the Second World War by private companies, governmental agencies and military forces throughout Europe. It was frequently used by the German armed forces, including the SS, to delouse clothing and other effects, and to kill insects and rodents in buildings.

It is commonly believed that SS men used Zyklon to kill millions of Jews in gas chambers at Auschwitz and other German camps. But in fact SS men used Zyklon to help prevent camp inmates' deaths. They deployed it in very large quantities at Auschwitz and other wartime concentration camps by fumigating barracks, by delousing clothing in special gas chambers, and so forth, to destroy disease-bearing vermin.note 7
Combatting Typhus at Auschwitz

WEBER, MARK

Mark Weber works for the Institute for Historical Review
(Costa Mesa, California), one of several antisemitic
organizations founded by Willis A. Carto. The I.H.R. devotes
most of its time to spreading the bizarre notion that the
Holocaust is wildly exaggerated and that the gas chambers of
Hitler's death camps are a myth. In 1978, Weber was identified
as the news editor of the National Vanguard, the publication of
William Pierce's neo-Nazi group, the National Alliance.

Weber's name came up in several conversations with German
neo-Nazis, including Wolfgang Kempkens and Roy Godenau. As part
of Ron Furey's cover, a "cold" phone line at the Simon Wiesenthal
Center was attached to an answering machine informing the caller
that he/she had reached The Right Way. That phone number was
known only to the Center's senior research staff, Ron Furey, and
the neo-Nazis to whom it was given.

The Institute for Historical Review was founded in 1979 by Lewis Brandon, who also served as the first director. (Lewis Brandon is an alias for William David McCalden, a British neo-fascist who in 1975 had founded Britain's National Party, a break-away from the notorious neo-Nazi National Front.)

The IHR operates under the umbrella of the Legion for Survival of Freedom, a registered non-profit corporation in the State of Texas.

The Institute for Historical Review is the moving force in the movement to deny the Holocaust. Its initial meeting was opened by Willis Carto, who also funds the organization, and whom some (including Dennis King, author of the 1989 work "Lyndon LaRouche and the New American Fascism") credit with starting it. No matter - with McCalden out of the way (he left the IHR, and has since died), the IHR was Carto's mouthpiece, until his forced ouster in late 1994.

Among the speakers at the 1980 convention were the Swede, Ditlieb Felderer, convicted and institutionalised in his country, and the Frenchman, Robert Faurisson, convicted in his country of libel and promoting racism and expelled from his University (though he still misrepresents himself as member of its faculty)................................

Although the Institute for Historical Review comments on a variety of subjects, it is most noted (and criticized) for its Holocaust denial.[2] Critics have accused the Institute of antisemitism and having links to neo-Nazi organizations, and assert that its primary focus is denying key facts of Nazism and the genocide of Jews and others.[3][4][5]

The United Kingdom's Channel 4 describes the IHR as a "pseudo-academic body based in the United States which is dedicated to denying that the Holocaust happened,"[6] while the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette called the IHR a "blatantly anti-Semitic assortment of pseudo-scholars".[17] The Daily Star, the leading English language paper in Lebanon, in response to a planned IHR meeting in the country called the IHR "loathsome pseudo-historians" and an "international hate group," and reported "as one former PLO official has put it, 'with friends like that, we don't need enemies'."[18].....................................Criticism of methods

The IHR is not regarded as conducting historical research by mainstream historians and academics, but rather as conducting pseudo-science aimed at proving that the Holocaust did not happen. The editorial board of one of the leading historical journals, the Journal of American History, wrote, "We all abhor, on both moral and scholarly grounds, the substantive arguments of the Institute for Historical Review. We reject their claims to be taken seriously as historians."[23]

In 2001, Eric Owens, a former employee, alleged that Mark Weber and Greg Raven from the IHR's staff had been planning to sell their mailing lists to either the Anti-Defamation League or the Church of Scientology.[24]

In April 2004, following a complaint by the David S. Wyman Institute for Holocaust Studies, The Nation magazine refused to accept advertising from the IHR, stating "[T]here is a strong presumption against censoring any advertisement, especially if we disagree with its politics. This case, however, is different. Their arguments are 'patently fraudulent.'"[25].....................Journal of Historical Review
The IHR published the non-peer reviewed Journal of Historical Review, which its critics (including the ADL, the Danish Center for Holocaust and Genocide studies, and other scholars, such as Robert Hanyok, a National Security Agency historian,[26]) accused of being pseudo-scientific.[27] When Noam Chomsky defended an author who wrote articles for the journal (Dr. Robert Faurisson), it led to great controversy, though Chomsky insisted he was defending Faurisson's right to free speech rather than any specific claims made in his articles.

The journal, History Teacher, wrote of the Journal of Historical Review that the "magazine is shockingly racist and antisemitic: articles on 'America's Failed Racial Policy' and anti-Israel pieces accompany those about gas chambers... They clearly have no business claiming to be a continuation of the revisionist tradition, and should be referred to as 'Holocaust Deniers'." [28]

The journal commenced publication in the spring of 1980 as a quarterly periodical. Publication was suspended in 1986-87, and thereafter continued until 2002. Publication of the journal was halted in 2002 due to "lack of staff and funding", according to the organization's website
..............................

IHR has also maintained relationships with Nazi officers from World War II. When he died in 1994, the Belgian Nazi Leon Degrelle, who commanded an SS Division during World War II, was memorialized as a "friend of IHR" by Mark Weber. Indeed, until he died, the unrepentant Degrelle published long essays lauding Hitler in the Journal of Historical Review. The Journal also published articles admiring Hitler by Nazi General Otto Ernst Remer, who was instrumental in keeping der Führer in power after the failed assassination attempt against him in 1944, and who was a featured speaker at the eighth IHR conference in 1987. The Journal has featured articles by other, lesser-known Nazis as well.

These efforts, and many others, at justifying Hitler's actions, turn moral and historical judgments inside out. IHR portrays Hitler as a man of peace who was attacked by Allied powers jealous of the new nation he was building; it recasts Hitler's racism as a justified response to the purported hostility Jews and other minorities felt towards Germany; it glorifies Nazi war actions while decrying Allied operations as barbarous and criminal. It is as if Hitler's propaganda war was being re-fought; the speeches at IHR conferences, in fact, have often been larded with Goebbels' slogans.

Given its support for Nazism, IHR's hatred of Jews is hardly suprising.2 Speakers at conferences and writers in the Journal have alleged that Jews and Zionists, in de facto control of the U.S. government, dragged the U.S. into World War II against Germany and ever since have sought to enrich themselves and strengthen Israel at the expense of their gentile hosts. A 1982 JHR article attempted to persuade President Ronald Reagan that Judaism was a religion of "fanaticism, prejudice and discrimination."

An important component of JHR writings -- before the journal ceased publication in 2002 -- was anti-Israel propaganda. A common topic for JHR articles, for instance, was the mistaken Israeli attack on the USS Liberty during the Six Day War: IHR authors frequently alleged that the attack was deliberate, and concocted a variety of conspiracy theories to explain why Israel would have purposely attacked its American ally and patron..................Weber gave the keynote address. Though he frequently writes dry, academic-sounding articles attempting to prove that the Holocaust never occurred, in his speech Weber dispelled any doubt that he is truly motivated by hatred of Jews and Judaism. Claiming that the Holocaust "story" is forced on society by "Jewish Zionist power," Weber went on to explain his views on Judaism, and described his vision of a "worldwide conflict" with Jews:

Many people have this idea [that] Judaism is sort of like Christianity or Islam or Buddhism. That's a tremendous fallacy…it's a religion unlike any other religion. Because [Judaism is] a religion without a universal ethic. It's a religion the purpose of which is almost the deification of the Jewish people. The Jewish people are the end and purpose of the religion….

In fact Jews are very vague when it comes to the question of what's the purpose of being a Jew. For Christians it's salvation or for a Muslim or it's nirvana for other religions. For a Jew the purpose of the Jewish religion is the maintenance, the furtherance, the increasing of power of the Jewish people….

Jewish Zionist power….manifests itself in our society, in our cultural life, and especially in how we learn history, across the board, in every way, it affects our lives and affects our understanding of the past….

[W]hat is happening is a worldwide conflict now, a global conflict that involves all of humanity….[W]hether you are a conservative, or a liberal, whether your primary loyalties are to your religion, to your ethnic group, to your country, to your heritage in whatever form, you will come up inevitably against this great Jewish Zionist power…[W]hat we are involved in, is a global struggle…and what is important is to come out of this conference today…not merely more aware, with greater understanding, but more determined to act, to do something, to be active, in a struggle that is not merely for…abstractions like justice or truth, but it's truly a struggle for the interests of us all and the interests of humanity.

-Mark Weber, April 24, 2004
...............

Main article: Criticism of Holocaust denial

The key claims which cause Holocaust denial to differ from established fact are:[3][4]
The Nazis had no official policy or intention of exterminating Jews.
Nazis did not use gas chambers to mass murder Jews.
The figure of 5 to 6 million Jewish deaths is a gross exaggeration, and the actual number is an order of magnitude lower.

Other claims include the following:
Stories of the Holocaust were a myth initially created by the Allies of World War II to demonize Germans.[4] Jews spread this myth as part of a grander plot intended to enable the creation of a Jewish homeland in Palestine, and now to garner continuing support for the state of Israel.[15]
Documentary evidence of the Holocaust, from photographs to the Diary of Anne Frank, is fabricated.[4]
Survivor testimonies are filled with errors and inconsistencies, and are thus unreliable.[4]
Interrogators obtained Nazi prisoners' confessions of war crimes through the use of torture.[4]
The Nazi treatment of Jews was no different from what the Allies did to their enemies in World War II.[16]

Holocaust denial is widely viewed as failing to adhere to rules for the treatment of evidence, principles that mainstream historians (as well as scholars in other fields) regard as basic to rational inquiry.[17]

The Holocaust was well documented by the bureaucracy of the Nazi government itself.[18][19] It was further witnessed by the Allied forces who entered Germany and its associated Axis states towards the end of World War II.[20][21][22]

According to researchers Michael Shermer and Alex Grobman, there is a "convergence of evidence" that proves that the Holocaust happened. This evidence includes:[23]


1.Written documents—hundreds of thousands of letters, memos, blueprints, orders, bills, speeches, articles, memoirs, and confessions.
2.Eyewitness testimony—accounts from survivors, Jewish Sonderkommandos (who helped load bodies from the gas chambers into the crematoria in exchange for a chance of survival), SS guards, commandants, local townspeople, and even high-ranking Nazis who spoke openly about the mass murder of the Jews.
3.Photographs—including official military and press photographs, civilian photographs, secret photographs taken by survivors, aerial photographs, German and Allied film footage, and unofficial photographs taken by the German military.
4.The camps themselves—concentration camps, work camps, and extermination camps that still exist in varying degrees of originality and reconstruction.
5.Inferential evidence—population demographics, reconstructed from the pre–World War II era; if six million Jews were not killed, what happened to them?

Much of the controversy surrounding the claims of Holocaust deniers centers on the methods used to present arguments that the Holocaust allegedly never happened as commonly accepted. Numerous accounts have been given by Holocaust deniers (including evidence presented in court cases) of claimed facts and evidence; however, independent research has shown these claims to be based upon flawed research, biased statements, or even deliberately falsified evidence. Opponents of Holocaust denial have documented numerous instances in which such evidence was altered or manufactured (see Nizkor Project and David Irving). According to Pierre Vidal-Naquet, "in our society of image and spectacle, extermination on paper leads to extermination in reality."[24].....................................Holocaust denial and antisemitism

Holocaust denial is generally viewed as antisemitic.[9] The Encyclopedia of Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity, for example, defines Holocaust denial as "a new form of anti-Semitism, but one that hinges on age-old motifs".[175] The Anti-Defamation League has stated that "Holocaust denial is a contemporary form of the classic anti-Semitic doctrine of the evil, manipulative and threatening world Jewish conspiracy"[176] and French historian Valérie Igounet has written that "Holocaust denial is a convenient polemical substitute for anti-semitism."[177] In 2005, the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia (now the Fundamental Rights Agency) published a "working definition" of antisemitism which gave as an example of the way that antisemitism might manifest itself, "denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust)".[178]
..........

Denying History takes a bold and in-depth look at those who say the Holocaust never happened and explores the motivations behind such claims. While most commentators have dismissed the Holocaust deniers as antisemitic neo-Nazi thugs who do not deserve a response, historians Michael Shermer and Alex Grobman have immersed themselves in the minds and culture of these Holocaust “revisionists.” They have conducted personal interviews with the deniers, read their literature, monitored their Web sites, attended their conferences, engaged them in debate, and even traveled around Europe to conduct research at the Nazi extermination camps. Uncovering a complex social movement, the authors go much deeper than ever before in not only trying to understand the motives of the Holocaust deniers, but also refuting their points one by one. In the process, they show how we can be certain that the Holocaust happened and, for that matter, how we can confirm any historical event.