Pyrrhic Victory over Revisionism
The International Revisionist Conference in Sacramento was not permitted to take place
By Claus Nordbruch, Ph.D.
In April 2004 the European-American Culture Council (EACC) had planned to hold a conference in Sacramento, the capital of California. It was going to be the most impressive conference of recent years. The gathering was sponsored by the Australian Adelaide Institute, conducted by Dr. Fredrick Toben. Aside from some well-known historians, all of whom were representatives of historical revisionism, some notable figures from politics, law, journalism, and economics were announced. The courageous as well as prestigious assembly of speakers promised a release from fixed and inflexible mental attitudes and a new way of thinking. In total, no fewer than 16 speakers from all over the world had been invited. Among them were Dr. Fredrick Toben (Australia), attorney-at-law Horst Mahler (Germany), author Gerhoch Reisegger (Austria), historian Dr. Dariusz Ratajszak (Poland), leading German revisionist Germar Rudolf (USA), director of the Institute for Historical Review Mark Weber (USA), politician Dr. Tom Sunic (Croatia), author Barry Chamish (Israel), and the writer of this article from South Africa. The presentations' breadth of topic was promising: the latest discoveries and developments in research on the so-called Holocaust; historiography of German colonialism; the putative and real global danger of terrorism; the circumstances of the attacks on the World Trade Center in September 2001; and legal action against thought crimes in the alleged "free world." Furthermore, a charity auction was scheduled to take place in order to raise funds for political prisoner Ernst Zündel, who has been detained in a Canadian prison for more than 15 months at the time of this writing.
From the very beginning the responsible organizers did not work in secret, but indeed made their planning of this international scientific assembly public, above all via the internet. In doing so, they were, however, so conscientious in updating their webpage and releasing newsletters they even announced some internal information not really meant for the eyes of the general public. This slip delighted both envious colleagues and bitter opponents of the conference. Among the latter, the infamous Jewish Defense League (JDL) needs to be mentioned. This organization left no doubt about its intentions and methods of action. As early as November 25, 2003 the conference organizers informed their readership:
"The JDL is considered a terrorist organization, after two of its leaders were arrested for conspiracy to bomb Muslim mosques and the offices of California congressman Darrell Issa."
One might have expected this in the Federal Republic of Germany, but definitely not in the "country of unlimited possibilities," the haven of free speech Shortly before the conference actually began, it had to be canceled! The organizers then had the sad obligation of informing as quickly as possible the invited speakers and guests, many of them already on their way to Sacramento, that the lessor of the book conference site unconditionally gave in to the demands of Jewish agitators. He simply withdrew the rental contract on short notice, leaving the organizers without the necessary location to hold the conference:
"The Sacramento Turnverein caved in to the massive pressure of the Jewish community and cancelled our facility."
The historic German Turnverein in Sacramento is one of the oldest buildings in the town. In a press release signed by an Ira L. Jacobson on April 19, he claims in a politically correct manner of supposed civil courage:
"We are relieved that we were able to act in time to thwart this unseemly attempt to use our space as a platform for hate. Hate and historical 'revisionism' have no place in our community, our State, or our Country."
According to the press release, the reason for this abrupt decision was that the organizers had hidden their "genuine identity." This allegation, however, quickly proved to be just a cowardly protective statement since the organizers, in fact, did everything but hide and pretend. They mentioned who they were, whom they invited, and what subjects they were supposed to talk about. In fact, the organizers from the EACC were honest and frank from the very beginning. In various announcements and interviews, they left no doubt about what they intended to hold And since the American press was tremendously interested in the event, a couple of forthcoming press conferences had been planned, too.
Furthermore, the pathetic statement by the Turnverein was also shown to be a lie in a "confession" by the Jewish Defense League. On April 20, in a malicious letter to the organizer of the conference, the chairman of the JDL, Bill Maniaci, acknowledged:
[...] Just to let you know, we had been diligently working behind the scenes to facilitate just such an event. Today has been a very good day for the Jewish Community of Sacramento who will not be forced to live with your insults during Yom Ha Shoah, and for the Jewish Defense League who can add another battle star to our banner. Once again, good has triumphed over evil."
"I cannot describe the joy that I felt in my heart when I read today's press release from the Sacramento Turn Verein advising that they had canceled your meeting.
Quod erat demonstrandum.
No doubt exists that the conference would have been a highly interesting mental contention led by international intellectuals. Barry Chamish, Israeli journalist and author of Who Murdered Yitzhak Rabin and The Last Days Of Israel, for instance, admitted:
"I was supposed to be flying in two days to the Sacramento Holocaust Deniers' Conference. I was going to deny the deniers and maybe do my little part in stanching the phenomenon."
According to Chamish, neither the financial loss nor the waste of time was the biggest tragedy caused by the cancellation, but rather the missed chance to argue with philosophical opponents:
"But the biggest loss of all was the off chance that I could contribute to the diminishing of anti-Semitism. It was a tricky act but it was worth trying."
Without considering here whether it is reasonable to assume "anti-Semitism" would have had a chance to sprout during a scientific gathering, it is a fact that the Adelaide Institute, which was sponsoring the conference, had been publishing Chamish's contrary points of view on their internet site for many years. This is especially worth mentioning because Chamish represents a viewpoint "which totally undermines the beliefs of the deniers," as he claims. The Institute's head, Dr. Frederick Toben, considered Chamish's findings challenging and invited the Israeli to speak at the conference in Sacramento. Dr. Toben insisted that dialogue is the only way to approach truth and knowledge (Erkenntnis). It is hard to cast serious doubt on this perspective, especially if one keeps in mind that Dr. Toben means what he says. Owing to his intellectual convictions, Dr. Toben was persecuted by the Federal German authorities a couple of years ago. He held, and still holds, a different opinion of the criminal yet legally-secure German laws claiming that certain "historical facts" are considered to be self-evident (offenkundig) and, thus, need not be proven any longer. In fact, to achieve the elementary aim of truth and knowledge, the only viable approach is to follow the scholastic axiom of audiatur et altera pars. This is exactly what the conference was going to do.
To the advocates of censorship and the apologists of thought prohibition (Denkverbote), this attitude is obviously much too elaborate. Not so for the Israeli author Chamish, who clearly understood the profound meaning of this basic assumption and consequently admitted:
"The organizers of the Sacramento conference, Frederick Toben and Walter Mueller, were honest to me. They invited me because they believe in dialog. They invited a proud Jew and Israeli to address their people knowing I would be giving a message of opposition."
This circumstance very nicely demonstrates that both the organizers and this orator evinced the courage of their convictions in the true meaning of Zivilcourage. In times dominated by political correctness, however, this term is permanently misused and reversed to an opposite meaning.
Finally, what is the effect of the conference's cancellation, beside the tremendous financial loss for guests and speakers, sponsors and organizers? Well, at least one question emerges: What influence do Jewish organizations, or rather, organizations pretending to represent Jewish interests, actually enjoy? If it is possible for an organization with a questionable reputation, like the Jewish Defense League, to terminate an academic conference that was scheduled in a sovereign nation, and to do so just on the grounds that it does not like the participants or the assumed content of the scheduled speeches, what could those people achieve who possess real power? There are many organizations who belong to this powerful category. It is not hard to imagine a list as diverse as Jewish Central Councils, Committees, and Leagues, not to forget B'nai B'rith, Shin Beth, and Mossad.
And still another question comes to mind: How many people now ponder to what extent the conference must have threatened the powers that be? What was wrong, i.e., dangerous, in the accomplishments and arguments of those - mainly academic! - speakers who were prohibited to speak? Factually, there is no doubt that the cancellation of the conference turns out to be only a Pyrrhic victory for the opponents of freedom of speech and freedom of research. Just like the campaign against Mel Gibson's movie epic, The Passion of the Christ(which campaign, by the way, was also led by another influential Jewish organization, the Anti-Defamation League), sooner or later their actions and their methods of will ultimately backfire on these opponents. And this will be for freedom's sake.
© 6/2004 www.nordbruch.org
|||To read the planned speech by Dr. Claus Nordbruch, please consult www.nordbruch.org/artikel/Sacramento.pdf|
|||Newsletter by the organizers April 20, 2004.|
|||Consider Claus Nordbruch, Sind Gedanken noch frei? Zensur in Deutschland, Munich, 2nd ed. 2001, pp. 279.|
Source: The Revisionist 2(3) (2004), pp. 322f.
Back to the Table of Contents