Yes, indeed--boycott Irving but add Mark Weber and the IHR also until Weber is replaced by someone who represents the anti-holocaust views of Holocaust Revisionists. Why is Irving any worse than Mark Weber? Irving is no more of a shameless, duplicitous fraud than Mark Weber is.

In case anyone is unaware of what Mark Weber did--Weber appeared on the Hannity & Colmes TV show early this year and told the world that "we do not deny the holocaust." Weber explains his cowardly position on the IHR website under the heading "The Holocaust Issue" on the separate page entitled: "About Us," See for yourself, folks. Weber was riding on the publicity generated by the revisionist conference in Teheran shortly before the TV show but then stabbed all revisionists in the back, especially those who took considerable risks to be at the conference in Teheran.
 

Save your money for a worthwhile cause--the IHR ain't it! At least Irving has produced many interesting books and did jail time for his revisionism. Weber does next to nothing--except undercut revisionists using the good name and salary derived from the many supporters of holocaust revisionism over more than twenty-five years.

Friedrich Paul Berg

Hannover States
 
Subject: Boycott David Irving, No donations, no purchases !!

!! Boycott David Irving !! No donations, no purchases !!
I suggest that all donations to David Irving cease
immediately. All book purchases should be stopped until he
comes clean. He refuses to speak truthfully and openly about
his absurd assertions.

Irving's behavior is unethical and distorts Revisionist
efforts. Irving has become a fraud.

see:
http://forum.codoh.info/viewtopic.php?t=4567

 

Paul Grubach's Public Challenge to David Irving on His Change of Mind on Holocaust--To be widely circulated

Dear David,

You are clearly evading the issue, which is very unacceptable and is not appreciated by those of us who provided you with all types of support throughout the years for your Revisionist activities. You owe us a detailed explanation in regard to your claim that there is documentary evidence that refutes the Holocaust revisionist position.

I represent a considerable number of your supporters who loaned you and gave you money outright throughout the years. Indeed, Paul Grubach loaned you $2000 back in 2004, and I donated the interest that I was suppose to receive right back to David Irving. That means you held my money for over a year to do as you please with it, and then the interest that I was suppose to receive was put right back into your pocket.

 

Since over the years you received money and overall support from the Revisionist community, it is your duty to give that same community a detailed response to the following question. You took our money and support, now show some decency and respect for us by giving a thorough explanation of yourself. You gave the Revisionist community's ideological enemy support for their viewpoint, now be so kind to give your supporters an explanation of your bewildering statements.

Here is the issue. You told the anti-revisionist, Jewish-Zionist Forward that: "If the document is genuine, it refutes the view of the revisionists that nothing happened."

You told me the document in question, the one that changed your mind about the about the Holocaust, is the Hoefle document, at http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/docs/decode150143_Hofle.html

Presumably, this is an accurate and complete English translation of this piece of evidence. http://www.fpp.co.uk/History/General/Korherr/Heim311242.html

Based upon my preliminary analysis of the document, I believe it only speaks of large scale deportations. There is no mention of any mass murder or homicidal gas chambers. Thus, the document seems to be entirely consistent with the Holocaust revisionist position. Please correct me if I am mistaken.

So my question for you is this: Let us assume the document is 100% authentic and genuine. If this is so, how does it refute the Holocaust revisionist position? Please give a detailed and straightforward response.

All of us do appreciate much of the outstanding work you have done and wish you and your family well being and good fortune. In addition, we would be willing to offer you our support again in the future. We would like to see this rift healed.

However, I and a number of your other supporters just want from you what is rightfully due us. That is, a forthright response to our question.

The Revisionist Community Awaits Your Response,
Paul Grubach

Paul Grubach's Rebuttal to David Irving on his reply to the Public Challenge to produce the "evidence" that allegedly refutes Holocaust revisionism. To be circulated far and wide.

Dear David,

I am afraid that your open letter email reply (October 7) to my first public challenge was very disappointing and unacceptable. Herewith.

You have publicly claimed that you may have evidence that "refutes" the Holocaust revisionist position. So, I asked you to post on your web site the "evidence" and "reasons" that changed your mind on the Holocaust.

You replied: "Conducting a raucous debate by Open Letter is much the same as that hollering through the cell windows. I listen sometimes with half an ear, and with less than half an interest, but I shall not join in the hubbub. Whatever I say is twisted a thousand times by a thousand hands, some well meaning, others not. Wait till the book comes out."

In other words, all your Revisionist supporters, who gave you or loaned you money throughout the years, will have to buy your book to see the alleged "evidence" that "refutes" our Holocaust revisionism. You will not show it to us; we have to spend money to purchase your book. This immediately raises the suspicion that you made said public claim in order to sell more of your forthcoming books and get more money from the Revisionist community.

In order to lay to rest these suspicions about your scholarly and moral integrity, you should post the "evidence" that "refutes" Holocaust revisionism on your web site so all of your supporters, such as Paul Grubach, can view the evidence free of charge. You owe us this, David.

After all, Paul Grubach and many, many others have already loaned you or given you thousands of dollars. You have already made enough money off of me and other well meaning patriots and Holocaust revisionists. For example, in 2004 I loaned you $2000. You had a year to do as you please with my money, and then I donated the interest right back to you. Because I wanted to help you, I incurred a big financial loss. My financial advisor, who is following this debate from "behind the scenes," told me that if I would have let him invest my $2000 in certain stocks, instead of giving it to you, he could have made me a handsome profit.

Get the picture? Paul Grubach took a considerable financial loss to help David Irving. And there are many other people just like me. We have already given you enough of our money. Now show us some respect and reciprocate. Let us view your evidence immediately!

So, in view of the above facts, you should let us view the "evidence" and "reasons" that "refutes" our Holocaust revisionism on your web site free of charge.

And, directly contradicting what you say, the debate need not be "raucous" and chaotic. Simply post your "evidence" and "reasons" that allegedly refutes our Holocaust revisionism, and then I will reply in a respectful and scholarly fashion--no name calling, no snide remarks, and no hostile rhetoric. I will just give you a scholarly discussion. Then, this problem can be totally alleviated and worked out.

So how about this, David??

Paul Grubach