The psychology and epistemology of ‘Holocaust’ newspeakMichael A. Hoffman II
“Holocaust” is a Newspeak word whose exact definition exists, in the society of the spectacle, as a bundle of images. It is recognized on the visceral rather than the rational plane by its targeted audience. It does not exist in the public mind as a specific event, but as a command phrase summoning a sensory overload of images of piles of naked bodies and persons with stars of David on their coats being force-marched by gun-toting German soldiers. How can any person say it didn’t happen?
When Abba Eban’s Civilization and the Jews TV series installment on the “Holocaust” omitted any mention of homicidal gas chambering — the central event of the history of Exterminationism — there was no apparent notice or comment among critics or the public. It was as if NASA had produced a mini-series on the moon flights without mentioning the rockets that carried the astronauts, and no one even noticed.
The spectacular “Holocaust” has the quality of a myth because it has an existence independent of its history.
Specific descriptions of a variety of actions, events and principals having tremendous diversity in significance and meaning have been absorbed into a single, narrow category. Prior to the imposition of “Holocaust” Newspeak, precise allusions and direct references were made to the allegations at issue, as for example, the claim of six million slaughtered Jews, mass murder by means of poison gas, soap manufactured from human fat and so forth.
Now, under the aegis of “Holocaust” Newspeak, the preceding allegations are combined into an aggregate which includes the reality of National Socialist internment of Jews in concentration camps, the “Kristallnacht,” an officially enshrined policy of anti-Semitism and the displacement and death of hundreds of thousands of Jews as a result of war-related combat, typhus and privation. Which are upheld and which are denied when one is accused of saying “the ‘Holocaust’ didn’t happen”?
The masterstroke of the “Holocaust” cultists was to imposea Newspeak slogan upon a combination of historical realities and historical impostures, thereby achieving a psychological and epismological device for condemning researchers skepticalof homicidal gas chambering accounts or human skin lampshades as deniers of the existence of concentration camps, Hitlerian anti-Semitism and persecutions; and the death and displacement of hundreds of thousands of European Jews.
By exploiting this confusion, the Exterminationists can depict persons who question even the wildest flights of “Holocaust” S&M fantasy as lunatic nay-sayers to the spectacular, overwhelming enormity of an entire era’s history when conveniently grouped under the Newspeak heading.
The utility of Newspeak for the maintenance of an indoctrinated mindset is glimpsed in the intriguingly stubborn affinity many journalists have for the “Holocaust” Newspeak agenda. With comical monotony, reporters refuse to describe revisionists in terms of the specific question they have about a specific event. Instead, both the event and the questioner are located within the artificial agenda of “Holocaust” Newspeak. By continually refer ring to a researcher who doubts the technology described for the Nazi gas chambers, for example, as one who “says the ‘Holocaust’ didn’t happen,” the doubter is cleverly saddled with the enormous connotations which are summoned in the public mind by the invocation of a Newspeak buzz word. Suggesting that gas chamber accounts might have been faked requires the logical defense of that particular assertion. Being presented to a conditioned audience as someone who says the “Holocaust” is a fake, is tantamount to being announced as one who proclaims a flat earth. As in any cult, the doubting Thomas is not addressed in terms of his specific doubts but as one who negates an entire cosmology.
Newspeak obscurantism produces an iconic mental state among the “Holocaust” cult’s true believers which is indistinguishable from that of the hypnotic because, “Newspeak was designed not to extend but to diminish the range of thought. “ (George Orwell, 1984 ).
The imposition of “Holocaust” Newspeak as the officially prop er academic and journalistic term for German-Jewish relations for the period from 1933-1945 is a recentinnovation. As late as 1977, the “Holocaust” word was written in the lower case, within quotation marks ("holocaust"), when used as an optional reference to the experience of Jews in the Third Reich. In the middle of the decade of the 1970s, dictionaries, encyclopedias, textbooks and newspaper indexes were altered to incorporate Newspeak, without any qualifiers, in accordance with the demands of the Big Brother Exterminationist party.
Webster’s Dictionary and Encyclopedia and the Funkand Wagnall’s Dictionary of the 1960’s define holocaust as a burnt offering on the part of pagans and Jews. By 1975, however, “minitrue” has entered the New Columbia Encyclopedia, which now defines holocaust as “a name given to the period of persecution and extermination of European Jews by the National Socialists, or Nazis.”
A name given by whom? By whose authority was the fact of persecution mixed together with the notion of “extermination"? Who decided on this word’s authoritative application? How did it enter popular usage? Why “Holocaust” with its nebulous reference to reality (anti-Semitic persecution) as well as disputed claims (extermination)? Why wasn’t the word “Exterminationism” chosen for official, dictionary-definition recognition? The latter term accurately denotes a specific allegation, that the Jewish people were “exterminated” during World War II. Such a word does not depend upon ambiguous connotations or confusing allusions to disparate events for its utilityand validity. To be accused of denying Exterminationism does not place the denier in the position of a flat earthist nonsensically denouncing the massive evidence of concentration camp internment and Jewish casualties. To deny Exterminationism is to deny that Jews were in fact exterminated. This is not much of a denial since millions of Jews were alive at the end of the war.
The novocaine of the media ensures that no one asks these reasonable and obvious questions. Linguists of the caliber of Noam Chomsky and Orwell pontificators of the stature of Cronkite and Moyers, accepted and even endorsed the issuance of a license akin to the ecclesiastical imprimatur for useas the exclusive referrent of one nation of people.
Was World War Two itself a holocaust over-all, or does the term have a proprietary relationship with Jews alone? How is it that the atomic and thermite incineration of approximately one million helpless German and Japanese civilians, mostly women and children, in deliberate mass murder firebombings by the Allied air forces, does not rate as a holocaust?
Revisionists are forced to endure from the Exterminationists a particularly chilling and grotesque example of self-aggrandizement when revisionists are accused of denyinga World War Two holocaust.
The overwhelming holocaust of the modern era, for which there is all of the forensic proof the Jewish “Holocaust” is supposedto contain and from which it is also intended to distract, is the merci less Allied fire-bombing holocaust against Hamburg, Berlin, Dresden, Tokyo, Hiroshima, Nagasaki and dozens of other major civilian centers.
The racism of the ethnocentric “Holocaust” cult is confronted full force in the special criterion established for the phrase “Holocaust survivor. “ Such people are always the victims of the National Socialists and are mostly Jews. Human perception has been so impaired by this cult category that Germans and Japanese who escaped death in the unprecedented firestorms which transformed their cities into pits of mass human incineration, are not referred to as holocaust survivors.
A media-certified Jewish “survivor” of the one and only “Holocaust” with a capital H symbolizes the pathetic partisanship with which the entire epoch of the holocaust that was World War Two as a whole is invested.
Revisionists do not deny the holocaust in the fully human sense of that word. Let the TV cameramen and the professors focus their attention on the mass burning of hundreds of thousands of women and children in deliberate Allied slaughters, and they too will come to realize the degree to which Zionist racism and hatred of gentiles has suppressed this holocaust to such a degree that it is totally dismissed from discussion of the history of the Second World War.
Hence, when revisionists question this or that aspect of the Sho’ah theologian’s theory about an expiational Jewishinferno, it signals to the cultist that “the ‘Holocaust’ didn’t happen. “ The logic of the “Holocaust” zealot permits the visualization of only Jewish suffering; only Jews burning. If one says the gas chamber canon is questionable, contradictory, possibly false, it must then signify that one is saying the war was a picnic! The cultist is incapable of understanding that German and Japanese civilians suffered an unparalleled holocaust in World War Two which is not being denied when revisionists investigate Jewish claims; on the contrary, it is freed for the first time from an imposed silence.
It is from a desperate need to take world attention away from the authentic “burnt offerings” of that horrid war that the traumatizing monomania of Jewish “Holocaust” preoccupation has warped the conscience of the West.
Mt. Zion decrees, “The ‘Holocaust’ cannot be debated” and in a sense this theological fiat is quite true. In free and open debate, linguistic mystification would no longer shield partisan generalizations and falsehoods. Charges and assertions would have to stand on scientific and forensic evidence alone. The diminishment of thought Orwell pointed to with regard to Newspeak is noted in the current circumstances surrounding investigation into the numerous contradictions, discrepancies and outright absurd ities in the claims made about homicidal gas chambers. There are many aspects of the gas chamber claims which deserve — even demand — critical, scholarly analysis. Authentically sound historiography does not shrink from such scrutiny but assists it with all the resources available. Truth need not be protected beneath a shower of fascist-baiting expletives and left-wing McCarthyist smears about “anti-Semitism.” Truth welcomes every investigation and every manifestation of curiousity. In so vast a study as the Jewish “Holocaust” claims can it really be truthfully asserted that everyone troubled by contradictions or questionable methods and testimony is ipso facto a fiendish Jew-hater?
“Holocaust” Newspeak offers ample protection for hoaxes through its suppressive linguistic mechanism. “Holocaust” belief diminishes critical thinking because its authority is not derived from having stood the traditional tests of point-counterpoint debate and rigorously critical exegesis, but from a ruling class monopoly-consensus possessed of the ability to propound dogmatically before large captive audiences.
The remarkable fact about the attack on revisionism by the Exterminationist historians is that it has had very little to do thusfar with history, but everything to do with angry invective and Jewish moralizing.
Those who possess the authority to impose upon our discourse partisan jargon disguised as objective historical description havea tremendous impact on the shaping of human perception, an impact thus far overlooked in the study of the evolution of our beliefs about the history of the Second World War.
In modern democracies we are supposedly encouraged to question everything, from traditional religions revered by our grandparents to the infinite themes of space and time, but no “respect able” person is permitted by the establishment to question how this “Holocaust” buzz-word came to be applied, in its capitalized form, uniquely to the situation of Jews in the Third Reich.
The West, in its penultimate secular-consumer phase, wishes to uphold the concept that it alone among contemporary and historical social and cultural models, has no sacred dogmas or theology and therefore no forbidden domains of intellectual inquiry and no heretics.
As we shall see, Exterminationism (an accurate description for the ubiquitous conspiracy theory regarding Jews and National Socialists), is as much of a sacred cow in North America and Europe as Islam in Iran, Marxism-Leninism in Albania or the Holy Ghost revival in Skunk Hollow, Tennessee.
Just as atheists and pagans were executed for denying the existence of the devil in the 17th century, revisionists are candidates for burning in the 20th century for denying the devil theory of modern European history, Exterminationism.
Menachem Begin and other Israeli government officials have described the popular supermarket-tabloid fiend known by the generic brand-name, “Nazi war criminal,” as “satanic. “ This notion of the diabolic presupposes the angelic. The one can do no right, the other can do no wrong. All such witch crazes carry along with their vapeurs histeriques the whiff of solicited murder.
The murder of the modern supermarket-satanist, the brand name Nazi war criminal, is a hallmark of “Holocaust” cultism taken to its illogical, but inevitable, conclusion. In February,1973 Israeli agents beat to death a former German soldier in the mistaken belief he was Dr. Mengele, the witch of Auschwitz and convenient fantasy projection for extant psychoses about Dr. Frankenstein. 1
In 1982, French witchfinder general Serge Klarsfeld paid a Boliv ian assassin $5,000 to murder Klaus Barbie. 2 Despite this “peccadillo,” Mr. Klarsfeld continues to receive numerous encomiums from the “humane” and “democratic” media establishment as a noble battler against fascist barbarity. If the thoughtof nobility somehow clashes in the reader’s mind with the barbarous fact of hiring assassins, and the repercussions possible from encouraging this fellow’s example by heaping lavish public praise upon him, banish the thought. To do otherwise is to flirt dangerously toward Jew-hating and neo-Nazism. Keep in mind instead that we are dealing here with angels who are above the law and demons to whom we owe nothing; certainly not the rights of man that must always be extended to Zionists under all circumstances.
Witchfinder Klarsfeld has adopted for his personal motto an adage from the Ku Klux Klan. Rather than have a satanist like Barbie walk free, Klarsfeld declared “It is better to have an illegal resolution. “
The degree of fervor exhibited in the crusade against devil-Nazis is that of almost total rage. It should come as no surprise thata special category of fiend has been reserved in the Israeli hell for an even worse species of cretin. The lowest rung on the ladder of demonism is occupied by revisionists. Speaking in what the Associated Press described as a rare interview on Israeli army radio, former Prime Minister Begin announced:
There is an attempt — and even the word satanic cannot describe its evilness — to deny that six million Jews, men, women, and children, were led by Nazi Germany and its partners to the pits, to the poison-spewing trucks, to the gas chambers, to the crematoriums. 3
If assassination and death by beating are reserved for satanic Nazis, what fate do the holy people have in store for those for whom “even the word satanic” cannot describe their evilness — the revisionists?
Like the promulgation of a Papal Bull anathematizing apostate deniers of the existence of the devil — which carried with it threats of execution — the kingdom of the “Holocaust” is upheld by dogmatic Israeli declaration in the authoritative media monopoly, and woe to those who fail to heed it.
Just as there was no material, scientific proof for the existence of the devil, there is no material, scientific proof for the existence of Nazi homicidal gas chambers. There are no autopsies available from any source showing that even one Jew died as a result of Zyklon B (hydrocyanic acid) poisoning, among the millions who are alleged to have been killed in this manner, an esoteric but revolutionary fact clumsily ad mitted by the prestigious Exterminationist genie, Dr. Raul Hilberg. 4
The “Holocaust” cult’s “proof” of gas chambers depends upon precisely what the medieval witch cult depended upon for its “proof” of the devil: confessions and “eyewitnesses. “
These cults do differ in one respect, however. To augment the accounts of the witnesses who smelled the smoke and saw the fire and brimstone of satan, the holy fungus of the rye ergot was administered to create the necessary hallucinatory vision. In our modern, spectacular society the witnesses do not need drugs to report about the “smoke” and the “flames” emitted by the satanic furnaces. They have the marvelous fungus of television to augment their visions.
For example, in the movie The Wall giant crematorium “smokestacks” belch massive clouds of evil-looking black smoke and ash. It was scientifically impossible for the crematoria in Auschwitz to emit smoke or ash, according to the builder’s patent by Topf and Son. In fact, no crematoria produce these emissions. Cremation technology was devised in the late 19th century specifically for the purpose of suppressing the emissions which accompany open-pit burning. There are no such things as crematorium “smokestacks. “ Cremation uses heat, not flame for reduction of the corpse into ash and crematorium chimneys emit heat and not smoke or flames.
Because there is no business like sho’ah business,these technical facts have not had any influence on the cinematic promoters of the myth. Since cultic true believers do not permit scientific facts to get in the way of religious “truth,” and since the majority of Americans are members of the “Holocaust” cult, there is very little impetus for challenging movies like The Wall.
These fantasies about giant smoking furnaces are shown repeatedly in 70 mm and Dolby stereo constituting an intensely hallucinogenic experience.
“You are there, in Auschwitz!” — rather like the increasingly sophisticated video simulators which let us imagine we are piloting a starship past Orion.
The illusion is exceedingly slick. In the case of Exterminationism, repeated exposure to falsified portrayals of the concentration camps shape the “memories” of former internees who did not witness what was depicted in The Wall, but afterforty years cannot be too greatly faulted for perhaps imagining that they did, after sitting through a lifetime of graphic cinematic retellingsof what they should have seen, according to the demandsof Exterminationist theology.
The Jewish “Holocaust” has all the substance of a Grade B horror flick recalling Swift:
Methinks when you expose the Scene, Down the ill-organ’d Engines fall; Off fly the Vizards and discover all, How plain I see thro’ the Deceit! How shallow! and how gross the cheat … 5
The benandante were agrarian mystics whose sorghum and fennel agricultural rites had no connection to the episcopal satan. Their ecstatic shamanism pre-dated the advent of JudeoChristianity in Europe by several centuries. When, in 1580, the activities of the benandante were reported to the witchfinders of Friuli, Italy it was decreed that benandante had to havebeen satanists because there was no mention in the inquisitors manuals, such as the Malleus Maleficarum, of a category of benign nature-worshippers. 6
In the modern witchfinder’s manuals such as Charles Higham’s American Swastika or the appropriately named Hammer (of Heretics) magazine published in association with the Zionist Shmate society, Searchlight in England, the intelligence sheets of the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith (ADL) and the Simon Wiesenthal Center, revisionists are never perceived as independent thinkers or skeptical inquirers researching “Holocaust” anomalies out of concern for historical integrity, but as satanists, butchers, terrorists, anti-Semites, neo-Nazis and perverts. For example, Lucy S. Dawidowicz, author of The War Against the Jews, labels revisionists as “rabid,” “neo-Nazi,” “crackpot,” “paranoid” and “oddball." 7 Elie Wiesel, chairman of the U.S. Holocaust Commission, adds the invectives “spiritually perverted” and “morally deranged” to the list. 8
Because the benandante had no way of presenting theirviews to the official circles of the Church andliterate establishment elite, they were depicted solely from the point of view of their accusers.
The best presentation of the case against the Exterminationist theory, as of this writing, is Dr. Arthur R. Butz’s The Hoax of the 20th Century, a brilliant tour de force of research and critical analysis. Importing or possessing the book in Canada, the Federal Republic of Germany, Israel and South Africa may result in arrest and imprisonment. In the U.S., it is informally banned from college course work, bookstores and most libraries. Those libraries which do stock it usually keep it off the shelves in inter-library loan.
Those who dare to read the book or make it available to students and the public on the civil libertarian basis of the people’s right to know and judge for themselves, will be smeared as Nazi sympathizers and persons spreading poison in the community. This argumentum ad hominem will be given by bourgeois journalists and academics who have not even read the book, but who are content to accept the infallible word of the “Holocaust” cult’s popes and popesses that the book is profoundly demonic.
Without recourse to a fair hearing before the episcopate and aristocracy, the indigenous benandante were transformed into the classic Biblical image of satan. Similarly, in the face of modern censorship and repression, grotesque distortions and patent stupidities are presented to 20th century audiences as “what revisionists say. “ Lucy S. Dawidowicz:
Butz — anassociate professor of electrical engineering and computer sciences — was convinced that all the Jews said to have been murdered were still alive and he undertook to prove it, his expertise in computers no doubt standing him in good stead. 9
This is what Dr. Butz actually wrote:
The Jews of Europe suffered during the war by being deported to the East, by having had much of their property confiscated and, more importantly, by suffering cruelly in the circumstances surrounding Germany’s defeat. They may have even lost a million dead … Himmler was given the power to “act independentlyupon his own responsibility. “ Everybody knew that that meant executions of partisans and persons collaborating with partisans. The dirt y task was assigned to four Einsatzgruppen ofthe SD … the Einsatzgruppen must have shot many Jews, althoughwe do not know whether “many” means 5,000, 25,000 or 100,000. 10
Miss Dawidowicz had apparentlynot even read the book by the man she is bashing, and does not expect that her readers have or will either.
If we are to believesome morally deranged and spiritually perverted pseudo-historians, the Holocaust never took place … The Nuremberg trials, the Einsatzkommandotrials, the Frankfurt trials were never held … There was no Treblinka,there was no Majdanek, there was no Birkenau … NorthwesternProfessor Arthur Butz calls it: “The hoax of the century." 11
Dr. Butz on Nuremberg:
First there was the “big trial” conducted by the “International Military Tribunal” (IMT) at Nuernberg immediately after the war. This was the trial of top Nazis Göring, Hess, Ribbentrop et al. which ran from November 1945 to October 1946. 12
Dr. Butz on Birkenau:
Thus, on the basis ofseniority and also on account of quartering the Auschwitz SS administrative offices, Auschwitz I was indeed the “main camp,” but Birkenau, designed for the specific requirements of the Auschwitz operations, was clearly intended as the “principal camp” in terms of inmate accomodating functions. 13
This skewing of revisionismon the part of “Holocaust” zealots is intended to make it impossible for otherwise intelligent people to break out of one-track, Newspeak-imposed cognition about World War Two. Orwell:
The purpose of Newspeak was not only to provide a medium of expression for the world-view and mental habits proper to the devotees … but to make all other modes of thought impossible. (1984).
The quality of demonic heresy projected onto the revisionist witch is a product of the linguistic technology of Newspeak which creates a deliberate blurring of lines of distinction separatingthe literal from the metaphoric.
The adoption of a brand name mass-marketing sobriquet as the official, literal-academic, as well as Pop-metaphoric descriptionof German-Jewish relations during the National Socialist reign,was a clever psychological and epistemological coup on the part of the Exterminationists. By this ruse, the critical faculties of both the masses as well as the intelligentsia have been occluded. In considering the subject of German-Jewish relations from 1933 to 1945, it has become difficult — if not impossible as, Orwell warned — to perform the basic requirement which ensures the integrity of language and perception, the ability to make distinctions.
The Exterminationists exploit the confusion “Holocaust” Newspeak has engendered in its denotative and connotative aspects.
When revisionist studies make specific challenges about, for example, the number of Jews who perished or the technical impossibility of gassings having taken place in the unsealed, wooden door-latched “chambers” on display in Auschwitz as of this writing, they are defended against in terms of the linguistic and visual agenda of the Pop-metaphor of “Holocaust. “ Investigating any cherished axiom is cleverly interpreted to the public as an across-the-board, flat-earthist negation of a thousand conjured images of body piles, goose-steppers and concentration camp privatio n.
It is crucial to the Exterminationists that the public failsto grasp the distinction that the Pop-metaphors of the “Holocaust” are capable of interpretation. No revisionist of even minimal standing denies concentration camps, anti-Semitism or the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Jews from disease, hunger and combat.
The objective of the “Holocaust” cult is to ensure that thepublic does not learn that revisionist research does not deny the Pop imagery but seeks to discover whether the constantly repeated photographs of body piles and other images of Jewish suffering were the result of mass murder by poison gas and deliberate starvation or failed policies of preventive detention and deportation stemming from Germany’s defeat in war.
Dr. Thomas Szasz excavates the underpinnings of the confusion between the literal and the metaphoric when he writes: “ … where the true believer speaks metaphorically butclaims that he asserts literal truths … heresy may consist in no more than insisting that a metaphorical truth may be a literal falsehood. “ (Heresies).
As a religious metaphor on a par with the mystical utterancesof the Talmud, the 20th century Jewish “Holocaust” has significance as an article of pious Jewish faith. Recall that equally audacious recitals are a fixture of Jewish religious fervor. In the sacred Hebrew scripture Talmud, it is stated that the Romansslaughtered 40 million Jews during the siege of the Israelite fortress of Bar Kokhba.
The Talmudic story, like the gas chamber story, makes for good de laude martyrum apocrypha, but bad history. It is nota matter for the public to debate the literal truth of Jewish beliefs. Every religion has a right to its own story. It only becomes a public matter when Jews attempt to establish as criteria for human decency, good citizenship and public morals, the demand that non-Jews must believe Jewish fables and accept them as a matter of scientific historiography.
It is a telling commentary on the modern era that the apocryphal and expiational langauge and agenda of partisan religious dogma has been enthusiastically embraced as the objective description of an entire epoch of world history in public newspapers and airwaves and the lecture halls of secular universities.
It is an apparent, though not widely admitted fact, that Judaism, through the “Holocaust” cult, has become the informal state religion of the West, with the distinction of being the last truly believed religion in the otherwise agnostic West; the end-result of this reactionary hegemony being the same as that of the Big Brother party in Orwell’s 1984, “to extinguish once and for all the possibility of independent thought. “
Judaism is of course not unique in this endeavor. “Churchianity” and Islam have mounted similarly ambitious undertakings, which did not prevent certain high-spirited human beings from casting off the mental shackles of those cruelly oppressive hoaxes. It remains to be seen if the especially authoritative superstitions of the Church of the “Holy Hoax” — wedded as they are to the formidable and unprecedented indoctrinating abilities of modern communications technology — will defeat or will be defeated by the empirical investigations and doubts of the infidels of our time, who dare to blaspheme against the sacred logos of “Holocaust” Newspeak.
- The Gazette (Montreal), March 2, 1985, p. B-5.
- NY Times, Jan. 24, 1985, “Lawyer tells of plot on Barbie. “ On Feb. 26 Barbie was administered poison by the prison physician. The NY Times described the assassination attempt as “medication that was apparently given him by mistake” (NY Times, Feb. 27,1985; also cf. The Spotlight, March 11, 1985).
- Israeli army radio broadcast of April 18, 1985.
- The Sault Star (Canada), Jan. 18, 1985, p. A-11.
- Ode to the Honourable Sir William Temple.
- Cf. Night Battles: Witchcraft and Agrarian Cultsin the 16th and 17th Centuries.
- Lucy S. Dawidowicz, “Lies About the Holocaust,” Commentary, December, 1980.
- Elie Wiesel, “What Did Happen to the Six Million?” Jewish Chronicle, Nov. 4, 1977.
- Dawidowicz, op. cit., p. 34.
- Arthur R. Butz, The Hoax of the 20th Century, Institute for Historical Review, 1985, pp. 239 and 197.
- Wiesel, op. cit., p. 19.
- Butz, op. cit., p. 18.
- Ibid., p. 52.
|Title:||The psychology and epistemology of ‘Holocaust’ newspeak|
|Source:||The Journal for Historical Review|
|Issue:||Volume 6 number 4|
|Attribution:||“Reprinted from The Journal of Historical Review, PO Box 2739, Newport Beach, CA 92659, USA.”|
|Please send a copy of all reprints to the Editor.|