A Portrait Of A “Holocaust Denier”


I Am A Holocaust Denier!  And Loving It!

Picture of Maxwell Smart added by BJW


A Portrait Of A “Holocaust Denier”


(GLARING Hypocrisy) Monika Schaefer is the latest in a growing line of courageous truth-seekers to be arrested, charged or imprisoned for “holocaust denial”. In Monika’s case it was because of her “holocaust denying” video, “Sorry Mom, I was wrong about the Holocaust” (due to communist censorship, you might need to use a VPN to view this).

But what exactly is a “holocaust denier”? What does a typical “holocaust denier” look like? And how does the principle of “holocaust denial” apply to each and every one of us?  The (((SPLC))) defines “holocaust denial” as:  Deniers of the Holocaust, the systematic murder of around 6 million Jews in World War II, either deny that such a genocide took place or minimize its extent. These groups (and individuals) often cloak themselves in the sober language of serious scholarship, call themselves “historical revisionists” instead of deniers, and accuse their critics of trying to squelch open-minded inquiries into historical truth.

Firstly, the statement reiterates the highly problematic six million figure as fact. As I wrote in “The Shoah Must Go On: The Holocaust Story vs. Christian & Other Genocides”:  The six million number was associated with Jews in various situations prior to the claim that 6 million were killed during World War II. For example, The New York Times ran a piece on October 31, 1869 stating that, according to The Hebrew National, there were 6,000,000 Jews in the world, half of whom lived in Europe. Between 1900-45 there were (at least) 200 allegations of six million jews being in peril, persecuted and/or eliminated.  The six million number persisting as fact, despite the total Auschwitz numbers — which includes both Jews (the vast majority) and non-Jews (the minority) — having been reduced over the years from four million to 1.1 million.

Secondly, unsuspecting members of the Matrix will likely read the SPLC definition while nodding their sheeple heads in agreement, yet it’s a thoroughly disparaging and downright defamatory description, designed to cast doubt on the integrity and credibility of anyone who has either done first-hand research into the subject or who has taken the time to dig into the many books, articles, films, etc., that are the result of the work of such researchers.

In response to Monika’s arrest, (((B’nai Brith Canada)))’s CEO Michael Moyston is quoted as saying:  German officials should be commended for taking action against Holocaust denial. Antisemitism has no place in Canadian politics or Canadian universities, and we will continue to work, even across borders, to ensure that racism and bigotry find no haven in Canada.

Ah, now we’re getting somewhere: “holocaust denial” equals “anti-Semitism”, two highly weaponised terms that serve to place barriers in the brain which the vast majority of folk are unable or unwilling to break through. Also, note the trend towards removing the hyphen and making lowercase the letter ‘s’, thus creating a new word that’s two steps removed from the literal definition of anti-Semitism: being opposed to or against Semitic peoples.

“Anti-Semitism” is a nonsensical slur and a great example of Orwellian doublespeak, taking something with meaning (Semitic) and turning it on its head (the vast majority of so-called Jews are not Semitic). The term “holocaust denier” is first and foremost a fabricated label to disparage the “deniers” and deter others from crossing the uncrossable line. Just as the CIA-created, weaponised term “conspiracy theorist” was devised to keep the masses firmly in their programmed box in the immediate aftermath of the JFK assassination, the term “holocaust denier” is designed to do likewise in regard to “THE Holocaust”.

Indeed, the (((Wikipedia))) entry on “holocaust denial” quotes psychiatrist and one-time director of the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, (((Walter Reich))), as directly attributing “holocaust denial” to so-called “anti-Semitism”:

The primary motivation for most deniers is anti-Semitism, and for them the Holocaust is an infuriatingly inconvenient fact of history. After all, the Holocaust has generally been recognized as one of the most terrible crimes that ever took place, and surely the very emblem of evil in the modern age. If that crime was a direct result of anti-Semitism taken to its logical end, then anti-Semitism itself, even when expressed in private conversation, is inevitably discredited among most people. What better way to rehabilitate anti-Semitism, make anti-Semitic arguments seem once again respectable in civilized discourse and even make it acceptable for governments to pursue anti-Semitic policies than by convincing the world that the great crime for which anti-Semitism was blamed simply never happened—indeed, that it was nothing more than a frame-up invented by the Jews, and propagated by them through their control of the media? What better way, in short, to make the world safe again for anti-Semitism than by denying the Holocaust?

The (((official))) bottom line, therefore, is that a “holocaust denier” is anyone who harnesses their inherent “anti-Semitism” to attack, without reason, the official holocaust narrative. Which is, of course, preposterous.

The reality is quite different. It’s a story of real men and women who’ve had the courage to look into that which is verboten — to ask legitimate questions, conduct extensive research and/or delve into the resulting research and, thereby, be in possession of highly inconvenient facts that stand in contrast to the official story.


Speaking of the official story, it’s crucial to be aware of the context in which it was formed — a combination of factors which included post-war atrocity propaganda and key “confessions” having been extracted by coercion and/or torture during both the Dachau and Nuremberg Trials.

Regarding atrocity propaganda, the British Ministry of Information sent the below letter to the higher British clergy and the BBC in February 1944. The letter was published in the 1958 book, Allied Wartime Diplomacy: A Pattern in Poland by Edward J. Rozek (bold emphasis mine).

Sir,  I am directed by the Ministry to send you the following circular letter:  It is often the duty of the good citizens and of the pious Christians to turn a blind eye on the peculiarities of those associated with us.  But the time comes when such peculiarities, while still denied in public, must be taken into account when action by us is called for.  We know the methods of rule employed by the Bolshevik dictator in Russia itself from, for example, the writing and speeches of the Prime Minister himself during the last twenty years. We know how the Red Army behaved in Poland in 1920 and in Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Galicia and Bessarabia only recently.  We must, therefore, take into account how the Red Army will certainly behave when it overruns Central Europe. Unless precautions are taken, the obviously inevitable horrors which will result will throw an undue strain on public opinion in this country.  We cannot reform the Bolsheviks but we can do our best to save them — and ourselves — from the consequences of their acts. The disclosures of the past quarter of a century will render mere denials unconvincing. The only alternative to denial is to distract public attention from the whole subject.  Experience has shown that the best distraction is atrocity propaganda directed against the enemy. Unfortunately the public is no longer so susceptible as in the days of the “Corpse Factory,” and the “Mutilated Belgian Babies,” and the “Crucified Canadians.”

Your cooperation is therefore earnestly sought to distract public attention from the doings of the Red Army by your wholehearted support of various charges against the Germans and Japanese which have been and will be put into circulation by the Ministry.  Your expression of belief in such may convince others.

I am, Sir, Your obedient servant,  (signed) H. HEWET, ASSISTANT SECRETARY

The Ministry can enter into no correspondence of any kind with regard to this communication which should only be disclosed to responsible persons.

As for the Nuremberg and Dachau “confessions”, these were foundational for the lasting success of the atrocity propaganda since they corroborated the official narrative. The Chief United States Prosecutor Robert H. Jackson stated that: “The Nuremberg Tribunal, as a military tribunal, is a continuation of the war effort of the Allied nations.” (Nuremberg Protocols, Vol. 19, p. 440)


While so-called “holocaust deniers” come from varying backgrounds with different areas of expertise, there are common threads of sensitivity, courage, intelligence, integrity and a thirst for truth — qualities that enabled prior adherents to the holocaust story to approach the subject with an open mind and let the results of their enquiries stand for themselves. In the case of more prominent “holocaust deniers” another significant common thread is that of being subjected to defamation and persecution. In the words of Karl Schlögel (writing in defense of Gabor Tamas Rittersporn, who was accused of having lent his support to Robert Faurisson in 1980):

“Holocaust denier,” “revisionist,” “negationist”: everyone knows what such an accusation means. It effectively means exclusion from civilized humanity. Anyone who is suspected of this is finished. His public life is destroyed, his academic reputation ruined.

The qualities of courage, integrity and a thirst for truth cannot be overstated. Such qualities drive a person to follow truth wherever it leads, however much it flies in the face of everything that was once understood as fact. As Jesus says in Luke 6:43-44: “For a good tree bringeth not forth corrupt fruit; neither doth a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. For every tree is known by his own fruit. For of thorns men do not gather figs, nor of a bramble bush gather they grapes.” Thus, the honest mind earnestly in search of truth will deal honestly with the results of any investigation.


More fundamental than disparaging and discrediting individuals, the “holocaust denial” label and associated laws are a brutal whack-a-mole style bludgeoning device designed to keep all future inquisitive moles firmly in their hole from fear of sudden death, as well as being a template for quashing dissent in any area deemed to be unacceptable to the prevailing powers-that-be that comprise the Jew World Order.

This tyrannical tool of oppression has been well used throughout history, especially against those living under the communist jackboot in the Soviet Union and China. Anyone coming close to crossing the party line, whether in thought or deed, was swiftly disposed of, resulting in up to 166 to 186 milliondeaths by torture, murder or deliberate starvation.

Thus, “holocaust denial” laws are at the forefront of the coming one world government, a system which will be headed up by the Antichrist as he rules from the third temple in the Jerusalem, declaring “peace and safety” while uniting all peoples of the world under a one world religion, as well as initiating and enforcing a one world currency.

But before we even get to that point of absolute tyranny, it’s clear that more and more bludgeoning devices will be wielded against those of us who refuse to blindly follow the dictates of our respective (wholly unlawful) governments.

Relatively few people are both aware of and care about every type of transgression being perpetrated against us. Thus, only those who understand the holocaust is not as reported will care to stand for those who have been bludgeoned by denial laws. Likewise, those who have a stake in one of the many other areas being subjected to societal disdain and, increasingly, tyrannical laws, are the only ones standing for others’ inherent right to think, speak and act in accordance with their understanding of that particular area.

This is hugely significant in clearing the way for the coming one world government. People are divided in their resistance — some are focused on the tyranny of compliance and others on the tyranny of “hate” crime, thought crime or some kind of “denial” crime.

The former includes but is not limited to: the push for mandatory vaccinations; compulsory education (homeschooling is illegal in approximately 30 countries); gun control (already achieved in many countries); forced medical “treatment” for children; and psychiatric “sectioning” (being committed against one’s will).

The latter includes but is not limited to: “holocaust denial”; 9/11 and 7/7 “conspiracy theories”; “climate change denial“; and “gender” theory denial; as well as standing firm to one’s beliefs about marriage by declining to bake a cakehost or photograph a “wedding” for a same-sex couple. And so on.

These transgressions against our inalienable right of autonomy are just the beginning. Which is why it’s important to see the larger picture — to understand that even when governmental or societal tyranny doesn’t directly affect us now, there will come a day when something we do or don’t do, something we say or don’t say, something we think or don’t think will be held against us — at which point we’ll be the one facing defamation, ostracisation, a fine, death threats, violent attacks on our person, our family and/or our home (essentially state-sanctioned terrorism and thuggery), a prison sentence, or even a death sentence.


Here are brief summaries of a handful of “holocaust deniers”, all of whom are neither haters nor bigots but are (or were) extraordinarily courageous, principled, intelligent and articulate human beings who have taken a stand for truth in the face of overwhelming lies and deceit.


Zündel was subsequently subjected to two lengthy trials (1985 and 1988). He was found guilty in 1985 but the appeals court ruled that the judge had given improper advice to the jury and excluded evidence for the defense. He was also found guilty in 1988, but his conviction was overturned by the Canadian Supreme Court on the grounds that the archaic “false news” law was a violation of Canada’s Charter of Rights.

After this, Zündel was brought before the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal on charges of promoting “hate” through his website “The Zundelsite” (now only available in archived form). Since the site was based in the United States the ruling that its content was unlawful was not enforceable in Canada.

Like Robert Faurisson, Zündel was subjected to violent attacks. In 1995, his house was attacked by arsonists calling themselves the “Jewish Armed Resistance Movement”, a group with affiliations to the Jewish Defence League (JDL), an FBI-listed terrorist organisation. A few days after the arson attack, Meir Weinstein (Toronto JDL leader) and Irv Rubin (American JDL leader) tried to break into his house; and a few weeks later a parcel bomb was sent to his Toronto home.

We the People
Constitutions are important! They are not promises made to be broken! Ernst Zündel, 2004

Subsequently, Zündel moved to the United States to live with his new wife, Ingrid Rimland, who created and lovingly maintained Zündelsite. He was then arrested in 2003 on spurious grounds of not complying with immigration laws, extraordinarily renditioned to Canada where he spent two years in solitary confinement without charge, before then being deported to Germany where he was imprisoned, tried and convicted of “holocaust denial”, specifically “popular incitement”.

After his release in 2010, he remained in Germany as he was banned from entering either Canada or the United States, and as a result was never able to live with his wife again. Ernst Zündel died on August 5, 2017. Ingrid died shortly after Ernst, on October 12, 2017.


The Zündel Trials (1985 and 1988) Robert Faurisson, The Journal of Historical Review, Winter 1988-89 (Vol. 8, No. 4), pages 417-431

My Role in the Zündel Trial Mark Weber, The Journal of Historical Review, Winter 1989-90 (Vol. 9, No. 4), pages 389-425

Off Your Knees, Germany! Zündel’s story from 1983 to 2003 (YouTube)

Ernst Zündel interviewed by an Israeli journalist Toronto, 1996 (YouTube)

Ernst Zündel Paintings and Drawings November 2013 (YouTube) [art created in six prisons, in three countries, on two continents]

Ernst Zundel Prisoner of Conscience Victim of Thought Crime (extensive compilation of links to articles about Zündel)


A man of exactitude, Robert Faurisson of Vichy, France, employed painstaking methods of investigation into the alleged gas chambers. After publicising his findings, he’s been subjected to numerous trials and has been fined various times over the years.

In 1979, a statement was issued by 34 leading French historians in response to Robert Faurisson’s technical counter-evidence against the existence of gas chambers, which concluded as follows:

It is not necessary to ask how technically such a mass murder was possible. It was technically possible, seeing that it took place. That is the required point of departure of every historical inquiry on this subject. This truth it behooves us to remember in simple terms there is not and there cannot be a debate about the existence of the gas chambers. Le Monde, February 21, 1979

Following Faurisson’s 1983 appeal against the verdict of his 1981 trial, the court made an astounding statement:

[…] the existence of the gas chambers, such as usually described since 1945, conflict with an absolute impossibility, which suffices by itself to invalidate all the existing testimonies or, at the least, to stamp them with suspicion.

Due to the results of his work, Faurisson and his wife have been threatened by court officials, his bank account has been frozen, he’s been physically assaulted by Jewish thugs no less than ten times (between November 1978 and May 1993), the worst of which, perpetrated by the so-called “The Sons of the Memory of the Jews” in September 1989, was nearly fatal.

Faurisson had a significant role to play in the Zündel trials of 1985 and 1988, not only providing testimony on the stand in both trials but also preparing many of the technical questions for Doug Christie, Zündel’s lawyer, during the 1985 trial, as well as securing Fred Leuchter as a gas chamber expert for the 1988 trial.


The Man, the Scientist, and his Method of ‘Exactitude’ Fredrick Töben, CODOH, 2004

Impact and Future of Holocaust Revisionism Robert Faurisson, Institute for Historical Review

The ‘False News’ Trial of Ernst Zündel, 1988 Witness for the Defense: Robert Faurisson

Witnesses to the Gas Chambers of Auschwitz Robert Faurisson, CODOH, 1993

Response to a Paper Historian Robert Faurisson, The Journal of Historical Review, Spring 1986 (Vol. 7, No. 1), pages 21-72

Robert Faurisson — A Most Honorable Man Anthony Lawson, March 2014 (YouTube)

Gilad Atzmon interview with Robert Faurisson June 2014 (YouTube)

Jim Rizoli interviews Robert Faurisson October 2015 (YouTube)


A German lawyer, Sylvia Stolz is a woman who has shown great courage in the face of a tyrannical legal system. For a short time, she was part of Ernst Zündel’s defence team during his 2005-2007 trial in Germany, before being barred from speaking and/or presenting evidence, and subsequently being criminally charged with contempt of court as well as inciting contempt. Stolz was charged and tried under the same section of the German Criminal Code as Ernst Zündel and received a three-and-a-half-year sentence, of which she served three years and three months. Stolz was also barred from practising law.

During the trial, Stolz witnessed the judge saying that evidence is irrelevant when it’s illegal to deny the holocaust. The Berlin newspaper, Die Tageszeitungreported the statement by Judge Ulrich Meinerzhagen as follows:  Towards the end and much to the shocking surprise of the anti-fascist groupings present the court dismissed all the petitions for evidence for the short and simple reason that it was completely irrelevant whether the holocaust really did happen or not. It is illegal to deny it in Germany and that is all that counts in court. (TAZ, 9 Feb 2007)

In 2012, Stolz gave a presentation at the Anti-Zensur-Koalition Conference in Switzerland and, as a result, is once more facing criminal charges. It was while attending a session at Stolz’s trial in January 2018 that Monika Schaefer was arrested.


Talk at the 8th Anti-Zensur-Koalition Conference Chur, Switzerland, November 2012 (YouTube)

Sylvia Stolz’s response to criticism of her AZK talk January 2013 (YouTube)

Sylvia Stolz Sent to Prison for Criticizing German Law Roberto Hernández, CODOH, September 2015

Sylvia Stolz Bio, Anti-Zionist League

Sylvia Stolz, The German Joan of Arc Carolyn Yaeger, 27 September 2011


A German chemist, Germar Rudolf is a man of precision and rationale. While attending Max Planck Institute for Solid State Research (1990-1993), Rudolf researched and wrote a report on the chemical and technical questions of the alleged gas chambers of Auschwitz. First published as The Rudolf Report, the revised and expanded version is now available as The Chemistry of Auschwitz—The Technology and Toxicology of Zyklon B and the Gas Chambers – A Crime-Scene Investigation.

In Germar’s own words, this is why he has dedicated his life to bringing forth holocaust truth:

Here then are the reasons I have dedicated myself to revisionism:  Because of my upbringing, I felt bad merely for doubting. I knew something was wrong with a society when it instills guilt-feelings in its members simply because they dissent. The Holocaust is the one area, and almost the only area, where one is admonished to accept facts blindly; not to think critically. But we are taught to question practically everything else, even that which is kept in high regard, such as the reality of God, or sexual intimacy. We are primed to be docile subjects and kept fearful of any transgressions with respect to the Holocaust. That angered me then and it angers me still.  Because of my doubts, my entire outlook on life became unstable. I was no longer certain what was correct or incorrect, who lied and who told the truth. The eternal conflict of good and evil was revived in me. The question where the truth could be found concerning the Holocaust was so important, that I knew I could only recover my peace of mind by finding out for myself, personally, where the truth lay. I wanted to rid myself of uncertainty one way or the other.  There is no scientific area in which those who hold dissident opinions are persecuted more mercilessly by the “ruling order” than that of revisionism. That is probably why most people don’t want to touch it, and most avoid it by convincing themselves that the subject is not relevant to current problems. But for me, this draconian persecution is the best proof there is that this is a crucial subject, because the powers that be regard it as most important that nobody touches this taboo. Comprehensive and critical research in this area is therefore very important for scientific, political and social reasons.  The treatment of revisionism and its proponents in areas of science, journalism, politics and law is a scandal worldwide — it demands redress.

Rudolf has had his home raided and his computer and papers seized. He has also lost three jobs and been ousted from his apartment on two occasions. He was subsequently tried for “holocaust denial” in 1994-1995 and found guilty of “stirring up the masses”, “inciting to hatred”, “libel” and “disparaging the remembrance of the dead”, which incurred a 14-month prison sentence.

In order to avoid incarceration, Rudolf fled first to England and then to the United States, however, he was arrested in 2005 and deported to Germany where he was imprisoned and subjected to further charges. In 2007, he received an additional two-and-a-half-year sentence.

While in England, Rudolf launched Castle Hill Publishers, now the foremost publisher of books on the subject of the holocaust.


What Made Me a Revisionist? Germar Rudolf

Resistance Is Obligatory Germar Rudolf, Summary of his 2012 book with the same title. The book’s subtitle is: Address to the Mannheim District Court 15 November 2006 to 29 January 2007

Jim Rizoli interviews Germar Rudolf November 2015 (YouTube)

Germar Rudolf — Persecution of Revisionists & Demographic Disaster (Part 1)Red Ice Interview, August 2016 (YouTube)

Germar Rudolf — Persecution of Revisionists & Demographic Disaster (Part 2)Red Ice Interview, August 2016 (YouTube)


Vincent Reynouard and here

Fred Leuchter

Mark Weber

Fredrick Töben

Bradley Smith


The Shoah Must Go On: The Holocaust Story vs. Christian & Other Genocides

Humanity, Rejoice! Sylvia Stolz Rings the Holocaust Myth’s Death Knell

Lionesses of Truth: Ursula Haverbeck, Sylvia Stolz & Monika Schaefer

Monika Schaefer Arrested & Indefinitely Detained in Germany

Amazon’s Virtual Burnt Offering to the Jew World Order: Truth-Telling Books Banned

Jewish Holocaust resources page (videos, pdf documents and links)

Jews and Judaism resources page (videos, pdf documents and links)

This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. You are welcome to republish it, as long as the author bio and this CC text are included, and all links remain intact. Thank you!

Mufidah Kassalias
Mufidah is co-founder and editor of GLARING Hypocrisy. She learned to connect dots at a young age when she mastered the Rubik’s Cube without instruction. In 2010 she unplugged her television and freed herself from brainwashing. As a result, she now sees dots everywhere and connects them in writing.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.