A Second Open Letter To Deb Lipstadt
One must analyze horrific events and information while maintaining a requisite scholarly distance. Allowing emotions to intrude only distorts one’s scholarship.
Before I tackle a review of your The Trial Of Adolf Eichmann, Deb, I’d like to comment on your Tablet Ezine article of 3/24/11: Trial And Error.
Would you were capable of following your own injuction as quoted above. Few of us do get that involved in historical events that occurred neary a hundred years ago as you do. You are so involved in your religion, nationality, what have you, that it distorts your ability to interpret history accurately; anti-Semites are living bogey men to you while for most of us they have no more existence than medieval witches. You seem to be walkng around in perpetual terror shakes; one starts trembling as one reads your work. You take something puerile like ‘holocaust denial’ as a serious arch-criminal offence meriting long term imprisonment if not the death sentence. That strike the reader as insane. Don’t you realize that that makes you as big a nutter as the deniers? You should be more worried about the nutters who say: ‘Yeah, let’s do it again.’
But; the comments to your article were much more interesting than your article. Bear in mind I think you are dissociated from reality. One couldn’t write the quote at the head of this article and do the things you do which contradict your actions completely. That doesn’t mean that I don’t like you, because I do. Ditso girls appeal to me. One Joachim Martillo writes in your comments:
Deborah Libstadt is worse than a holocaust denier. The holocaust of Zionist myth has few points of contact with the historical reality and is naturally subject to question and doubt.
You probably consider that holocaust denial, it’s not. Martillo grants the holocaust to you but has a more subtle and valid argument that can’t be ignored He raises the issue of dissociated Zionist nutters. I don’t know whether you’re a Zionist, Deb, but you definitely are off balance allowing your emotions to control your analysis, although I might stop at nutter. Martillo’s argument must be fairly met not merely denounced. He then goes on to say:
In contrast Lipstadt commits a vast sin of omission by never discussing the context of ethnic Ashkenazic violence, sabotage, assassination, mass murder, ethnic cleansing, white slavery, economic exploitation, financial crime, and revolutionary subversion without limitation to which non-Jews (and also sometimes Karaite Jews) throughout Europe were reacting.
And you and your Jews are undeniably guilty of that Debbie. An evaluation of Martillo as ‘an unrepentant bigot’ would be valid only if what he said were untrue. It isn’t, Debbie, and you know it isn’t. So why lie? Knowing it is true which, while you look and do not see, does make you worse than holocaust deniers. As you must be fully aware your fellow Jew, Nick Sarkozy, in France, is seeking a Soft Holocaust against the Aryans of France. As you must be fully aware he is seeking a law to compel Aryan women to mate only with African men. The result will be the elimination of Aryans in France, a genocide of tens of millions. You are complicit in this Soft Holocaust, Deb, an enabler. Nicky plays Wolf Hitler and in this instance you function as his Adolf Eichmann. Live with it, Deb, you are the Jewish Eichmann. Strange your identification to him would lead to your book at this precise time that Nicky announces his Holocaust.
Remember that FDR announced to the mothers of Pittsburgh that he would never send their sons to fight in a foreign war. A year later he was shipping us around the world while he had to return to Pittsburgh to face the irate mothers he had lied to. Wringing his hands he turned to his wise old Jewish advisor, Sam Rosenman, and pleaded: ‘Oh dear, Sam, what shall I do? Just last year I pledged to these mothers that I would never send their sons to war.’ ‘Well, Frank,’ that wise old Sam replied, ‘just deny that you have been in Pittsburgh.’ That wise old Jew spoke truly, Deb, and I’m going to take his advice with you: There never was a holocaust, Debbie, because Hitler never lived and there never was a WWII, nor for that matter was Charles Lindbergh ever President of the US. Clears the air on that one, doesn’t it?
So put your mind to rest, Debbie. You don’t have to take responsibility for Old Nick’s, your’s and your fellow Jews’ holocaust agains Aryans either. Just deny it You won’t have to go to jail in the bargain.
R. E. Prindle
An addendum: Debbie: I’m going to append another open letter to you from Paul Grubach of 7/27/98 that illustrates your problem as a so-called historian. In commenting on your Irving trial he brings to the fore your credibility problem; Your mouth goes one way and your feet go the other. I am convinced that you are oblivious to the contradiction between our speech and actions. You have been so conditioned to view the world through the eyes of a justified sinner that you can’t perceive the similarity of Old Nick’s and your genocide of Aryan with Wolf Hitler’s genocide of Jews. What makes Wolf’s genocide reprehensible in your eyes is only that he killed Jews. If he had been as successful with other peoples no peep would have come from your lips just as no peep came when Stalin liquidated eight separate nations. The only objection the Jews made was t the ninth when Stalin came for them.
Do you understand why it is impossible for an unbiased person to take your claim to be an historian seriously? Emory University should be ashamed to have you on their faculty. You should be fired. While not one now, I raised a Methodist and I’m ashamed of Emory for granting you a postion.
Mr. Grubach’s letter:
Dear Dr. Lipstadt:
I have just finished reading D.D. Guttenplan’s The Holocaust On Trial.
There is one passage in the book that really struck me. On page 209, Guttenplan wrote: “…it was hard not to feel queasy listening to Rampton quiz Irving about his attitude to ‘intermarriage between the races’–on behalf of a defendant (Dr. Lipstadt) who has written, ‘We know what we fight against: anti-Semitism, and assimilation [of Jews and non-Jews], intermarraige [between Jews and non-Jews] and Israel-bashing.”
In your book, Denying The Holocaust (pp.106, 107 142, 144, 146, passim). you condemned white revisionists who oppose white racial integration and intermarriage with non-whites. Yet, you- Deb Lipstadt- oppose Jewish assimilation and intermarriage with non-Jews [which would include Negroes]. Guttenplan has pointed out that you wished you could have gone down to the Southern United States in the 1960s to march and facilitate the integration of Blacks and whites in the South (p. 61-62). In 1964 or 1965, you participated in a civil rights march in Harlem. Yet, you are an ardent supporter of the Jewish State of Israel where racial segregation between Jews and Arabs is a fact of life, and the civil rights of Arabs are violated as a matter of course. You push for racial equality and racial integration here in America–but you ardently support Israel where racial inequality is an established part of the social order. Please read the book, Israel: An Apartheid State, by Israeli academic Uri Davis.
As the expert on extremism, Laird Wilcox, has pointed out, one of the characteristics of an extremist is that he/she promotes hypocritical double standards and feels no guilt for so doing. I am afraid, Dr. Libstadt, that this applies to you. You appear to have no qualms about promoting a racial double standard in regard to Jews and non-Jews.
Really Dr. Lipstadt, you should sit down and engage in some self-examination.
Mr. Grubach doesn’t understand Pavlovian conditioning Deb. He doesn’t understand the Haman shriek. You’re a justified sinner and can’t tell the difference between right and wrong. That means an unwitting criminal, Deb.