* Benjamin Hubbard’s column attacking “Holocaust denial” unfairly characterizes the Institute for Historical Review and its work.
If the revisionist view of the Holocaust were really as “simplistic and naive” as Mr. Hubbard contends, it would not have gained the support of university professors such as Arthur Butz and Robert Faurisson, historians such as David Irving and Harry Elmer Barnes, and even some former concentration camp inmates such as Paul Rassinier. These individuals did not decide publicly to reject the orthodox Holocaust story--thereby risking public censure, and worse--because they are fools, or because their motives are evil, but rather on the basis of a sincere and thoughtful evaluation of the evidence.
Revisionist scholars do not “deny” the Holocaust. They acknowledge that many hundreds of thousands of Jews were killed and otherwise perished during the Second World War as direct and indirect result of the brutally anti-Jewish policies of Germany and its allies.
At the same time, IHR publications carefully document that numerous specific Holocaust claims have been quietly abandoned over the years as untrue.
In January 1995, the prestigious French weekly magazine L’Express acknowledged that the “gas chamber” at Auschwitz that has been shown for decades to tourists in its “original” state is actually a postwar reconstruction.
Hubbard’s claim that “Holocaust denial/revisionism” is “a form of anti-Semitic hatred of the most vile type” is a malicious smear. Since its founding in 1978, the IHR has steadfastly opposed bigotry of all kinds in its efforts to promote greater public understanding of key chapters of history.
Institute for Historical Review