Home  News Latest White Nationalist Staffing US Immigration Reform PAC |
December 16, 2004 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Posted on 12/15/2004 11:22:09 PM PST by yonif
(IsraelNN.com) A former senior aide to talk show host and one-time presidential candidate Pat Buchanan spoke at a meeting of Holocaust-deniers earlier this year, according to this year’s annual report on Holocaust-denial activity around the world.
The year-end report, Holocaust Denial: A Global Survey - 2004, has been issued by The David S. Wyman Institute for Holocaust Studies, which is located on the campus of Gratz College, near Philadelphia. The report’s co-authors are Holocaust scholars Dr. Alex Grobman (author of a recent book on Holocaust denial) and Dr. Rafael Medoff (director of the Wyman Institute).
(The complete text of the Wyman Institute’s report may be viewed on the Wyman Institute’s website).
The report notes that Peter Gemma, a senior staff member of Pat Buchanan’s 2000 presidential campaign, spoke at a February 19, 2004 meeting in Virginia of the Institute for Historical Review, the leading Holocaust-denial organization in the United States. Gemma introduced the evening’s keynote speaker, IHR director Mark Weber.
The association of a former Buchanan aide with Holocaust-deniers is particularly noteworthy in view of Buchanan’s own troubling positions concerning Hitler and the Holocaust. He has written that 850,000 Jews could not have been gassed in Treblinka because “diesel engines do not emit enough carbon dioxide to kill anybody”; he spoke out on behalf of accused Nazi war criminals Karl Linnas and Arthur Rudolph; he wrote columns defending Nazi death camp guard John Demjanjuk; he described Hitler as “an individual of great courage”; and he mocked Holocaust survivors’ memories as “group fantasies of martyrdom and heroics.” (The New Republic, Oct.15 and Oct.22, 1990) In his 1999 book, A Republic, Not an Empire, Buchanan argued that the U.S. should not have gone to war against Nazi Germany.
Other highlights of this year’s report:
* Holocaust-deniers in the United States continued their efforts to gain a measure of respectability in 2004, and benefited from the willingness of several individuals of prominence to associate with them. In addition to the aforementioned Peter Gemma, a newsletter edited by pundit Alexander Cockburn defended imprisoned Holocaust-denier Ernst Zundel. Also, Hutton Gibson again publicly denied the Holocaust, while his son, actor Mel Gibson, declined to clearly dissociate himself from his father’s views.
* Some Arab governments continued to actively promote Holocaust-denial in 2004, and a Holocaust-denier emerged as the leading candidate for chairmanship of the Palestinian Authority.
* A number of Western governments and other institutions took important steps against Holocaust-deniers. The Canadian government sought to deport Ernst Zundel; the government of New Zealand denied entry to David Irving; the French government brought charges against Bruno Gollnisch; Harvard University returned a gift from an Arab leader who promoted Holocaust-denial; and The Nation magazine said it would no longer accept advertisements from Holocaust-deniers. Most notably, U.S. intervention brought about the first-ever public disavowal of Holocaust-denial by an Egyptian government official.
To change the subject slightly, I think that this association between Buchanan-type conservatives and the anti-Semitic far right is one of the most important answers to the question "Why do Jews vote for Democrats in such overwhelming numbers?" Jewish Americans who lived through WW2 (in their 70's today) remember the flirtation between isolationists on the far-right at the time and those who actually supported the Nazis at the time like the Bund outfits on the Upper East Side of NYC in Yorkville.
Philip Roth has written a paranoid fantasy about what might have happened if Charles Lindbergh had been nominated for the Republican Party instead of Wendell Willkie in 1940. Its very revealing of how much fear there was among the Jews of the time regarding the isolationist America First types of the time that Roth is still freaked out about it 60 odd years later.
You're right, though Pat's been gone from the party long enough that no one should associate him with Republicans.
Yes, among other things.
Actually, he's not very conservative, especially on economic matters. More of a leftist/populist there.
Hell, YEAH!
Do you have some links to quotes from him on these things? I'd *love* to show them to some people who have their heads up their asses when it comes to this prick.
I'll FR mail you some this afternoon.
I think you've really hit on something here.
Thanks -- but no rush on that. :)
surprise, surprise. (/s)
i've never been comfortable with pat buchanan.
it's not so much what he says, as the smell afterwards.
Gee, Pat's aides sure get around, don't they?
And he always seems to be whining about stuff.
| Home News Latest White Nationalist Staffing US Immigration Reform PAC |
December 16, 2004 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
and no these are not photoshopped pictures
Thanks much. The Jewish Holocaust was real as was the Armenian Holocaust/Jihad by Turkey. There have been other genocides thru history. The Killing Fields of Cambodia are also reality.
Tried it yoursefl, have you?
except when it is not politically correct to state such physical exercise so it is no longer correct to allow such calculations to interfere with the political statements because actual political density of correct think does not allow un-think to achieve imperfect correct think. You right, no doubt.
You are denying the words of all the Americans soldiers that entered western German concentration camps in 1945. They were all liars, of course, and you are right! Or comments alleged to have come from them are all faked!
The little problem with that is that you've never even talked to a vet that went into one of those camps.
Don't have another orgasism over all this attention, you really aren't worth the trouble of ridiculing. You deny the words of thousands of American soldiers who saw it first-hand. Call them liars, and believe what you will because their testimony of the truth doesn't matter to you.
Krup=Krupps
I'm so glad your mom has gotten over her slave labor camp experience for a damn good cup of Joe. Does your point have anything to do with denying the existence of the holocaust? Does your point have anything to do with denying 6 million Jews were murdered?
No.
Regarding your pictures:
The Germans were PROUD. Some Nazi sympathizers in Britain and America (Joe Kennedy and Henry Ford) were absolutely elated by Hitler's regime and the Final Solution to the Jewish Problem. So, it wouldn't surprise some that these pictures were taken as tokens of achievement.
What you are looking at is a 20th century version of a medievel tapestries that celebrated the massacre at Beziers, or the burning of Erasmus and Tyndale.
Although it is wrong to arbitrarily assign blame to Pat Buchanan for the whatever one of his associates may say some years later, one could say that Pat has brought some questions to the table by his words over the past few years.
Personally I think what we see in Buchanan is the slow accretion of latent biases coming out as the man ages. Haven't you all seen something like this in your own families or acquaintances.
The problem is not so much Pat himself, but the fact that the existence of nutbags like Pat serves to perpetuate the paranoia of Jewish voters who remember, or whose parents remember, a time when Pat-type thinking was a pretty big part of the Republican party.
Pat is like the Archetypal devil for people who lived through a really difficult time, when national leaders like Henry Ford or Charles Lindbergh were openly sympathetic to the Nazi party and willing to say that the Jews were trying to get America into an unneeded war with a fine man like Hitler for commercial or financial reasons. Its probably no coincidence that the mainstream media has made Buchanan and Novak into the ideal "Republicans" for the public to see, when in fact neither of them actually is.
I mean by the same token of letting the fringe scare one away from the mainstream, the reason I don't vote for Democrats is that I believe that they have not really come to terms with the evils of Socialism. Likewise, there is a big part of the left in the US who are pretty reasonable on many issues, but who think that the Republicans still harbor sympathies with the Birchers and America Firsters. And in fact to whatever extent that (in my opinion) ugly segment of American politics does exist it probably is basically Republican.
Buchanan's roots go right to Father Coughlin. Political parties exist on a spectrum, and the spectrum of the Republican party is more likely to include Buchananite logic that the Democrats are.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
