Podcast appearances and mentions of David Irving

This spring marks the 25th anniversary of the landmark judgment in the infamous Irving v Lipstadt Holocaust denial case. David Irving sued American academic Deborah Lipstadt after she had described him as a Holocaust denier in her 1994 book, for his claims that Jews had not been systematically exterminated by the Nazis. Given the burden of proof in English libel law being on the defence, it was up to Lipstadt and her publisher Penguin to prove her claims were true that Irving had deliberately misrepresented evidence. In 2000, the Judge found in her favour.Deborah Lipstadt and the lawyers that represented her, Anthony Julius and James Libson, join Michael Gove for this special edition of Coffee House Shots to provide their reflections: on the trial, on what it's like to go to court over something that's widely accepted as settled historical truth, and to discuss why they think antisemitism flourishes in so many forms. They also talk about why the principles of the case are ever more important today as they were 25 years ago.Produced by Patrick Gibbons. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This spring marks the 25th anniversary of the landmark judgment in the infamous Irving v Lipstadt Holocaust denial case. David Irving sued American academic Deborah Lipstadt after she had described him as a Holocaust denier in her 1994 book, for his claims that Jews had not been systematically exterminated by the Nazis. Given the burden of proof in English libel law being on the defence, it was up to Lipstadt and her publisher Penguin to prove her claims were true that Irving had deliberately misrepresented evidence. In 2000, the Judge found in her favour. Deborah Lipstadt and the lawyers that represented her, Anthony Julius and James Libson, join Michael Gove for this special edition of Coffee House Shots to provide their reflections: on the trial, on what it's like to go to court over something that's widely accepted as settled historical truth, and to discuss why they think antisemitism flourishes in so many forms. They also talk about why the principles of the case are ever more important today as they were 25 years ago. Produced by Patrick Gibbons.

Next week marks 80 years since VE Day — the end of the Second World War and the defeat of Nazi Germany. But in the shadow of that anniversary, and in the wake of the October 7th attacks, Holocaust denial is on the rise once again — fuelled by misinformation and conspiracy theories spreading online.Today on The Daily T, we look back at a landmark legal battle that confronted those lies head-on. It's been 25 years since David Irving sued historian Deborah Lipstadt for libel — and lost. The trial exposed him as a Holocaust denier and neo-Nazi sympathiser, in a courtroom showdown that made headlines around the world.Camilla and Kamal are joined in the studio by Lipstadt and the lawyer who helped her win the case, Anthony Julius, to reflect on what was at stake then, and what's at stake now.Producer: Georgia CoanPlanning Editor: Venetia RaineyExecutive Producer: Louisa WellsSocial Media Producer: Rachel DuffyStudio Operator: Meghan SearleVideo Editor: Andy MackenizeOriginal music by Goss Studio Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Unlock the secrets of successful trademark mediation with insights from our esteemed guest, David Tyer. Discover how mediation in intellectual property disputes, especially those involving trademarks, can be a game-changer for businesses seeking to maintain valuable relationships and achieve innovative solutions. David, a seasoned attorney and certified mediator, shares his expert strategies for overcoming common trademark registration hurdles, such as avoiding conflicts and ensuring distinctiveness. Learn how strategic approaches like conducting meticulous prior rights searches and crafting effective agreements can help businesses confidently navigate the trademark maze.Explore the world of alternative dispute resolution, where David elaborates on the benefits of mediation. We dive into real-life examples like cross-licensing agreements that showcase mediation's power to foster collaboration without the adversarial atmosphere of a courtroom. These stories highlight how businesses can resolve disputes amicably and leverage each other's strengths for mutual benefit. Through compelling narratives, we demonstrate how mediation can be a therapeutic process, allowing parties to express emotions and reach a deeper understanding, ultimately leading to creative outcomes not possible through litigation.Finally, we emphasize the vital role of protecting and valuing intellectual property as key business assets. Our discussion covers the importance of maintaining active IP rights across territories and addressing modern challenges posed by digital platforms and technology advancements such as artificial intelligence and the metaverse. David sheds light on the proactive measures businesses can take to safeguard their IP assets, ensuring they remain valuable and relevant in today's rapidly evolving landscape. Join us for an enlightening conversation that equips you with the knowledge to maximize your intellectual property's potential and navigate disputes with a collaborative spirit.Send us a text

A new MP3 sermon from Woodland Presbyterian Church is now available on SermonAudio with the following details: Title: Look to Jesus 6. Despising the Shame Subtitle: Look to Jesus Speaker: David Irving Broadcaster: Woodland Presbyterian Church Event: Sunday - PM Date: 7/28/2024 Bible: Hebrews 12:1-2 Length: 35 min.

A new MP3 sermon from First Presbyterian Church is now available on SermonAudio with the following details: Title: Pentecost and Beyond: Prophecy and Miracles in the Modern Age Subtitle: Summer Lectures Speaker: David Irving Broadcaster: First Presbyterian Church Event: Sunday School Date: 6/16/2024 Length: 44 min.

Will Storr is a Journalist and Award-Winning Author of The Status Game, Selfie, The Heretics and the Science of Story Telling. If you are low-status, you are more 4x more likely to die early. Status is proven to be more important than diet or exercise for health outcomes.. Status is not just a modern phenomenon; it's a fundamental part of the human experience, existing long before our current society. As writer Will Storr explains, the need for status and respect from others is not merely a luxury—it's an essential psychological and biological requirement for humans to thrive. He calls it the original currency. Throughout history, status hierarchies have existed in animal societies, serving as a means to organise social life and prevent constant conflict. From our tribal ancestors to modern civilization, the desire for status has deeply shaped human behavior and social structures. But despite its importance, the topic of status often makes people feel uneasy. While discussions about connection and belonging are more comfortable, status remains a somewhat taboo subject. It's this discomfort that has perhaps led to fewer books being written about this universal human drive. However, Storr's work aims to shed light on this fundamental aspect of the human condition, unraveling its complexities and unveiling its significance in our lives. Also, join us to hear about the psychology of cults, why architechts are the most illusive modern day cult, Will's experience from going undercover following Neo-Nazi's to understand the madness of groupthink and his experiences of David Irving the infamous holocaust denier. Will's books: The Status Game: On Human Life and How to Play It https://amzn.to/41R6rsL Selfie: How the West Became Self-Obsessed https://amzn.to/41cJ2BL The Science of Storytelling: Why Stories Make Us Human, and How to Tell Them Better https://amzn.to/3ohtxKo Signup to my Patreon: ⁠https://www.patreon.com/developmentbydavid⁠ SPONSORS: Vybey (code DBYD for 15%) - https://vybey.co.uk/?shpxid=fd5d5aab-fd5f-48d9-bf37-b58aa4317f25West Coast Motors - https://www.wcmotors.co.uk/

Extracts from Adolf Hitler's long-lost diaries were brought to the world's attention on 22nd April, 1983, provoking an international sensation - until they were quickly exposed for being a hoax.  Respected World War Two historian Hugh Trevor Roper had authenticated the diaries, leading Rupert Murdoch to personally negotiate a $1.2 million serialisation in The Sunday Times, which went to press as Roper changed his mind. In this episode, Arion, Rebecca and Olly reveal the true author of the ‘diaries'; explain why Murdoch was unrepentant, despite having splashed on perhaps the biggest fake news of the century; and appraise the chaotic atmosphere at the Stern magazine press conference, where punches were thrown, and David Irving started shouting about ink… Further Reading: • ‘Hitler Diaries hoax exposed in full for first time' (The Times, 2023): https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/hitler-diaries-released-full-text-public-hoax-forged-journals-w9jfcmrld • ‘Murdoch's bravado forced through the publication of the Hitler diaries' (The Guardian, 2012): https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/apr/25/rupert-murdoch-bravado-publication-hitler-diaries • ‘Robert Harris on Selling Hitler' (The Guardian, 2012): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wV_TpAkL6Q4 Love the show? Join

A new MP3 sermon from Woodland Presbyterian Church is now available on SermonAudio with the following details: Title: He Restores My Soul Subtitle: Psalm 23 Speaker: David Irving Broadcaster: Woodland Presbyterian Church Event: Sunday - AM Date: 4/5/2020 Bible: Psalm 23:3 Length: 35 min.

A new MP3 sermon from Woodland Presbyterian Church is now available on SermonAudio with the following details: Title: The Valley of the Shadow of Death Subtitle: Psalm 23 Speaker: David Irving Broadcaster: Woodland Presbyterian Church Event: Sunday - AM Date: 4/26/2020 Bible: Psalm 23:4 Length: 36 min.

Episode 17 tells the tale of when the United Kingdom's most notorious Holocaust denier brought his book tour to Winnipeg in 1986. David Irving, an unhinged military historian, finally died this week but many of the same lies he spread in his books and speeches have been heard from Hamas supporters since October 7. You'll hear audio of the vile revisionist history David Irving told a Winnipeg audience about Hitler's genocide of Europe's Jews, from TV news reports that Marty has preserved for decades. To send in story tips, sponsor podcasts, or donate towards our expenses by Interac: Email - martygoldlive@gmail.com 7:42 Part 2 - The history of David Irving and his path to Winnipeg is recounted: From his college days printing an article calling Hitler the "greatest unifying force Europe has known since Charlemagne", to claiming the Diary of Anne Frank was a forgery, to telling a famous British TV host there was no evidence Hitler knew of the systematic slaughter of Jews by his regime. David Irving became an ally of the National Front and of Canada's convicted and deported Holocaust denier Ernst Zundel. 20.15- Under the leadership of Yoram Hamizrachi, the Manitoba Intercultural Alliance forged a unique standing in the Charter of Rights era. Ethnic community trailblazers like Ken Babb and Strini Reddy were part of the group and Marty became secretary. After the Jewish council convinced a hotel to cancel Irving's speech, MIA learned another hotel in Fort Garry picked up the booking, and were determined to bear witness to the proceedings- regardless of the personal risk. 22.30- You'll hear the report of CBC's Brian Yasui in 1986, his description of the books, the audience, and his questions for David Irving. The audio includes a clip of the defence of Hitler which you will not believe. Marty tells of a close call that night when he was followed, and why his experiences in that era establish him as the top reporter exposing antisemitism in our city 28.00 - Brief audio of the CBC report the next day, with the voices of Jim Compton, Sandra Lewis- and a very young Marty. A few years later Irving told audiences "The gas chambers that are shown to the tourists in Auschwitz are fakes," that only 30,000 died there and the Jews "had it coming" and told followers "to treat these little legends with the ridicule and bad taste that they deserve." After work on the second Zündel trial, Irving declared he'd be a "one-man intifada" against the idea that there had been a Holocaust. Irving got what he deserved with a massive and financially ruinous court loss that was the subject of the motion picture Denial. Winnipeg needs to remember this dark chapter when Mayor Norrie and Premier Pawley were silent as a Hitler-loving "moderate fascist" spread antisemitic conspiracy theories in our community. 32:04 Part 3- The encounter with David Irving was a challenge for Marty Gold at age 26 to implement the lessons he learned from his family and at Joseph Wolinsky Collegiate. To this day, there are antisemitic elements in Winnipeg who emulate David Irving. While the local media and elected officials silent about those Jew-haters, ActionLine.ca and our podcast will continue to expose them. Coming up on TGCTS: Your tips about union fights, crime, cop shootings and the City budget; listener feedback; and more about our $3800 fundraising campaign launched this week. Click to donate today- Winnipeg's Public Affairs Watchdog – Funded by You! ********** ALL OUR PODCASTS AND STORIES ABOUT ANTISEMITISM ARE AT https://actionline.ca/blog/hate-crime-watch/ JOIN OUR FACEBOOK GROUP ⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.facebook.com/groups/TGCTS⁠⁠⁠⁠ 

This week, Mark Weitzman from the World Jewish Restitution Organization, joins us to discuss the links between the October 7 Hamas attack on Israel and the Holocaust, and how Holocaust museums worldwide and in Israel are grappling with the aftermath. As International Holocaust Remembrance Day approaches, we also delve into the direct connection between Holocaust denial and distortion to the denial and distortion of October 7 events, and how both are rooted in antisemitism. *The views and opinions expressed by guests do not necessarily reflect the views or position of AJC.  Episode Lineup:  (0:40) Mark Weitzman Show Notes: Learn: AJC's Translate Hate Glossary: See why Holocaust denial / distortion is antisemitic. Listen – People of the Pod on the Israel-Hamas War: A Spider Web of Terror: How Iran's Axis of Houthis, Hezbollah, and Hamas Threaten Israel and America Unpacking South Africa's Baseless Genocide Charge Against Israel Countering the Denial and Distortion of the 10/7 Hamas Attack 4-Year-Old Hostage Abigail Idan is Free–Her Family is On a Mission to #BringThemAllHome Follow People of the Pod on your favorite podcast app, and learn more at AJC.org/PeopleofthePod You can reach us at: peopleofthepod@ajc.org If you've appreciated this episode, please be sure to tell your friends, and rate and review us on Apple Podcasts. Transcript of Interview with Mark Weitzman: Manya Brachear Pashman:   One could easily say the October 7 Hamas invasion and massacre in Israel is one of the most well-documented terrorist attacks in history. Dozens of smartphone cameras and GoPros filmed Hamas terrorists crossing the border between Gaza and southern Israel murdered more than 1000 soldiers and civilians and kidnapped more than 200 others, the deadliest antisemitic attack since the Holocaust. But just like the scourge of Holocaust denial, October 7th denial is growing. Mark Weitzman is the chief operating officer of the World Jewish Restitution Organization, a nonprofit that pursues claims for the recovery of Jewish properties lost during World War Two.  He's also the lead author of the working definition of Holocaust denial and distortion for the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance known as IHRA, and chairs the IHRA Working Group on museums and memorials.  As we approach International Holocaust Remembrance Day, Mark has joined us to discuss how we can make sure the world does not forget or deny any atrocities committed against Jews.  Mark, welcome to People of the Pod. Mark Weitzman: Thank you very much for the invitation to be here. Manya Brachear Pashman:   Mark, you are an expert on Holocaust denial and distortion. What does it have in common with the denial we're seeing around October 7?  Mark Weitzman: I think there are clear connections between people who are downplaying or distorting the events of October 7, and those that engage in Holocaust distortion or hardcore Holocaust denial, because both are linked by an attempt to try to explain what is for them an uncomfortable historical reality that targeted Jews, whether the Holocaust or the events of October seventh, to justify their preconceived political agenda, which often includes an antisemitic conspiracy theory, either as its base or as its method to achieve their goals.  One of the root causes of Holocaust denial distortion, from the antisemitic perspective, is the attempt to say that since the Holocaust, there is a certain sympathy for Jews as victims, and sometimes that turns into political sympathy or support for the State of Israel. Sometimes it turns into actions that are pro-democracy or anti-racist in terms of society and saying that we've seen what happened in Auschwitz, we don't want our society to go in that direction. So we're going to take certain positive steps. Those people who want to turn the clock back to a world where people could still be judged by their religion, their race or whatever signifier, often have to grasp with the Holocaust. It's the paradigm of what can happen when society turns evil.  The same thing in the sense is at the root of October 7 denial. It's the attempt to say that, Oh, no, we don't want to allow any sympathy to Jews or Israelis, we have to justify it or explain it away in a way that allows us to accept the reality of what it happened, because denying it puts you in a really sort of cuckoo cage of denying what's obvious to everyone what happened there.  So in this sense, in a particular sense, it can be by saying that, Oh, yeah, it happened there. The Israelis were killed, but they were killed by the Government of Israel. The hostages were not really taking the Gaza, they're actually hidden in Israeli buildings or holdings. That, you know, this is all part of a plot by Israel and the US government, aimed at undermining the Palestinian narrative and drive for freedom. But the goal there is similar, it's to grapple with a reality that most people would find repugnant. An anti semitic reality. The latest poll in the US shows 80% of the US population support Israel versus Hamas. And in an attempt to justify their stance, their pure antisemitic stance, they have to deal with that reality. And so you can't ignore it, you can say it didn't happen. Since as you pointed out, it's one of the most photographed and verified actions in recent memory. So you try to twist it away, and turn it on its head. Manya Brachear Pashman:   But how do people wrap their heads around this fantasy fiction? Mark Weitzman: These conspiracy theories are linked. And I don't think enough people have realized this or paid attention to it, that Hamas's original charter, 1988, actually quoted, literally quoted the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which is, as we all know, the Bible of antisemitic conspiracy theories.  And they literally based their charter, it's the only western document quoted in their charter, their original charter. And it links the events of October 7, with the history of antisemitic conspiracy theories. This is not an anti-Zionist document, the protocols, it's an anti-Jewish, antisemitic document. So there's a direct connection there.  The Holocaust is the most documented event in human history. There are films, there are millions and millions of pages of documents. There are so many archival records of survivors, of perpetrators, of war crimes tribunals that have, you know, judged and and entered into evidence, the effects of the Holocaust, the reality of the Holocaust, not just in the United States.  But look at the David Irving trial, the famous David Irving trial. But all the war crimes trials in Europe as well, to say that it did not happen, or to twist, it requires an effort of will. And it's not just on the individual level.  In our work at the WJRO, we see governments today that do not want to deal with restitution, and use manipulation of the Holocaust, to try to get out of it by claiming that it was all the Germans, the local collaborators had nothing to do with it, or that the numbers were inflated or that we don't know what the value was, what was really owned by by Jews at that time.  All sorts of methods used to evade trying to make some payment, some form of restitution, and then to survivors and part of our mission is to set forth and ensure that the historical record, even in terms of the theft of Jewish property, is well established.  So when we get to the events of October 7, particularly in an era where fake news, where people claim to believe all sorts of conspiracy theories, whether it's related to COVID, whether it's related to American election results, and a lot of these people kind of bond together. The underground of election denial and some of the anti-COVID extremists, and some of the Hamas or some of the October 7 deniers or distorters. Very often, they live in the same atmosphere, in the same basement, they imbibe the same fumes, they're in touch with each other. Very often they're cooperating or believe in similar conspiracy theories.  And this is one of the problems that we have as a society, amplified by social media, is to separate the real from the fake, and to try to limit and minimize the impact that the fake has on real life, on mainstream society, and politics, and culture, and so on. Manya Brachear Pashman:   So as I mentioned in the introduction, International Holocaust Remembrance is January 27. You just returned from a meeting with representatives of Holocaust institutions around the world. How did these museums come to be? I mean, was it a bricks and mortar movement to counter Holocaust denial, was it seen more broadly as a tool to fight antisemitism or something else entirely? Mark Weitzman: Well, I think that most of these came to be, first of all, through the efforts of survivors. In so many cases, it was the survivor community that were the driving force behind it. And yes, it was in response to antisemitism and to Holocaust denial. But those movements were not, in a sense, the dominant factors that we may think today.  It was a sense, I think, more of trying to pass on what they went through, both to the Jewish community, their children and grandchildren, and so on, but more importantly, to the community writ large, meaning that to the world at large, whether it's the US or the UK or Canada. They wanted people to learn the lessons from what they had gone through and survived. They wanted people to not to have to deal with the same things that they dealt with.  And it's fascinating to me, one of the most interesting things that I find in the field is that today, and not only a majority of visitors to Holocaust museums, the vast majority, are not Jewish. But the majority of people who work in these institutions are not Jewish either. There are people who have dedicated their lives to some second career, some it's, you know, a career long commitment to both studying and teaching and passing on lessons of the Holocaust.  So what began sometimes within the Jewish community, as a survivor-led effort, at this point, there are very few survivors still actively involved in this, especially, you know, on that level, and it's evolved into something that is broader and larger than just the Jewish community. Manya Brachear Pashman:   We had your colleague Rob Williams at the USC Shoah Foundation join us at the end of last year, and the Shoah Foundation is collecting testimonies from October 7 now. And I'm curious, are other Holocaust Memorial institutions developing programs or adding evidence from October 7, to their collections? Mark Weitzman: I think one of the things that came out at the meeting, which was at the Holocaust Museum in Washington about a month ago, was that these institutions are grappling with October 7, and it was very clear. And part of it is that most of these institutions had not tried to be politically based. In other words, they did not conceive of themselves as taking a political stance one way or the other. And the supercharged atmosphere of October 7, the events of October 7, the atmosphere post October 7, caught them, I think, by surprise, and they're still grappling with how to respond and how to react to it. There has been a tremendous amount of interest, of support. USC is leading the way with a tremendous effort of taping the survivor accounts and making them available. But I saw conversations, we had conversations from certain speakers in how to address October 7, how to deal with antisemitism in the wake of October 7. Because again, these are people who are not necessarily the the you're an expert in the Holocaust is that's really mean you're an expert in what's happening with Israel and Hamas and the Middle East, and, and so on. And it's a very different field, a very volatile field. And they're in a position that they had not anticipated. So I think that there was a shock. There's a strong sense of moral support, moral based support for Israel and the victims there, there is a strong commitment to, I think, keeping the message of releasing the hostages first and foremost in people's minds.  But how exactly to go about it, what the best way to achieve those goals is still something I think some of them are wrestling with. Some are doing even little things like one museum that I know of, has in their gift shop, a sort of small section of Israeli objects for sale, that the proceeds will go back to, you know, to some of the communities or some of the people in Israel who have been evacuated or need support. So it can be a small thing like that could be educational programs. It can be public statements that could be hosting events, it could be showing the testimony. It could be learning more about the background that led up to it. There are a lot of potential paths and ways that they're engaging with. And I think each of them are finding their own path right now. But they were in the process of grappling with something that they had not anticipated. And this is somewhat novel, for them to have to deal with. Manya Brachear Pashman:   Generally, do Holocaust institutions try to avoid Israel or kind of leave Israel out of their exhibitions, their collections, and really focus on the Jewish communities of their particular country? Mark Weitzman: I think it varies. I think that, you know, in a broad sense, they're not necessarily want to be seen up till now at least, as partisans in a political struggle or political battle. But there was clear recognition in so many of them you that you can't leave Israel out of the story, because you had survivors going to Israel. You had the Zionist youth groups, let's say in the Warsaw ghetto, and other places that It helps spearhead some of the revolts you, if you ignore those parts of the story of the narrative of the Holocaust, then, you know, you're not being true to the history of it. Would you show where survivors ended up after the war? Certainly, you know, a huge number of them, percentage wise ended up in Israel is one of the, you know, the prime spots for survivors to go to. You have many of them worked with Yad Vashem, for example, and have a relationship there. You have the righteous among the Gentiles, which is a story that almost all Holocaust museums wanted to have some focus on, because it's a prime example of non Jews responding in a positive way in the most dire circumstances, but the certification of who is a righteous Gentile came from Yad Vashem, in Israel. So there are, you know, inextricably linked to it, but you went, you didn't, and what they try to avoid, was taking a, you know, sort of a partisan position, should Israel do this action? Should this Israeli Government be supported against that Israeli government or, you know, so on and so forth.  But the broad idea of Israel's right to exist of Israel as a place of refuge for the survivors as Israel, a change in the narrative of the history of the Jewish people in the 20th and 21st centuries, all those had to be part of the story and are dealt with, but in different ways in in many of these institutions. Manya Brachear Pashman:   So you also traveled to Israel at the end of last year. And I'm curious up until now, how have Israelis talked about the Holocaust? Is it a cornerstone of their history as a modern nation, maybe not so much for the younger generations, and could October 7, connect some dots and change that? Mark Weitzman: Well, I led a small mission for the WJRO, and went down south to Kfar Aza. And also met with evacuees. And it was an incredibly moving experience. And the reality of what happened there, going to the exhibition on Nova, music festival is something that I don't think any of us who participated will ever forget.  And it was interesting, because we had two guides, from the Israeli army, from the spokespersons office from the Israeli army, two young women who were with us in Kfar Aza down at the border, one of the worst hit places. And they made the connection. And we had a Holocaust survivor with us, as well. And she made the connection.  And there was a resolve that, you know, this is something that we didn't think we would ever have to face firsthand. This kind of targeted destruction of Jewish civilian life. I don't think Israelis have fully come to grasp and understandably, with the implications of what happened, I think it may take even a generation or two, to kind of work this through in some ways, and I don't think…it may be premature to make judgments.  But I think that there's no question that hearing over and over again, the worst act of violence since the Holocaust, gives a frame and a context that is going to keep the Holocaust as part of the conversation about this. Israel prior to this, there have been a lot of efforts. I mentioned Yad Vashem earlier, it's certainly one of the cornerstones of a historical, cultural life in Israel. But it wasn't the only place, there were other kibbutzim, such as up north, Beit Lohamei Ha-Getaot, the ghetto fighters kibbutz that had the same similar mission of educating about the Holocaust. The Israeli government that no matter which party the Prime Minister belongs to, has always been very strongly supportive of Holocaust education. Has been a partner key partner of WJRO, and its work on restitution issues and efforts.  So the Holocaust has been, I think, part of the Israeli consciousness. But I think it was viewed as historical in many ways, this is what our grandparents went through. This is what happened over there in Europe. And now that reality is shifted a little bit, that, Oh, something that can be spoken about in the same sentence, not the same, not comparable in many ways. But it's here, and it's now.  Manya Brachear Pashman:   So how do the events of October 7 alter this year's observance of International Holocaust Remembrance Day? Mark Weitzman: Throughout the world, I think you're going to hear a lot of linkage in a way of people saying that, we can't forget that, you know, what happened, the victims. So many places are involved, for example, in the reading of names of victims names. And yet, for many of us on a weekly basis, or whenever we can, we still read the names of the hostages, and try to get them returned in those efforts. So there are going to be you know, connections like that connections made about the threat, the ongoing threat to the Jewish people. The fact that since the Holocaust 80 years ago, we haven't faced anything like this, like we're facing today. Um, certainly in the West, the in the United States, the conversation is certainly going to include the fact that Jews are in an unprecedented situation in this country in terms of anti semitism.  The questions of the people trying to erode support for the existence and legitimacy of Israel take on much more significance, especially as they become much more high profile, the attempts. I'm sure there'll be part of, they are part of the political landscape for the forthcoming elections.  Manya Brachear Pashman:   AJC often cautions against comparing tragic events to the Holocaust because it risks trivializing the genocide of 6 million Jews. But I have heard well-meaning people make that comparison. In this case, is it a legitimate analogy? Mark Weitzman: Israel as a state, was able to strike back and respond in a way that Jews could not do during World War Two. Governments in the West–the UK, France, Germany, and so on the United States, of course, first and foremost, have responded forcefully defending Jews align themselves with Israel. Whereas governments in the West prior to World War Two, basically ignored, accepted or complicit in the Nazi actions. You know, those kinds of differences are significant. And the fact that as I said public opinion in the United States is firmly on the side of Israel compared to on the side of Hamas is also significant.  So I think we have to be careful about making kind of glib historical comparisons. We're not powerless today. We were powerless in the 1930s. But that doesn't mean that our situation is not problematic and dangerous for us today it is. And we have to recognize that. But we need to do that, factually and calmly and realistically, we need to find our allies. And they're our allies, in many places, and to work together with them. Because the threat to us, particularly today, from Hamas, and allied groups like that, and their supporters, whether from the extreme left, the so called progressives, or the extreme right, is a threat to liberal society, in general. And that's something that we need to be able to share, and to work with our allies to turn that thread back. Manya Brachear Pashman:   Mark, thank you for sharing your expertise and cautionary advice.  Mark Weitzman: Thank you very much. Manya Brachear Pashman:   If you missed last week's episode, be sure to tune in for my conversation with Dr. Matthew Levitt of the Washington Institute as he helped us make sense of the renewed terror threat, how Iran's terror proxies Hezbollah, Hamas and the Houthis are coordinating their strategy and attacks, and what the U.S., Israel, and its allies are doing to fight back.  

Deborah Lipstadt is a well-known scholar of modern Jewish history, antisemitism, and Holocaust denial. She has written many books. In the 1990s, she was involved in a famous trial against David Irving, the notorious English Holocaust-denier. (She won.) The case was depicted in a 2016 movie, “Denial,” in which Prof. Lipstadt was portrayed by Rachel […]

Deborah Lipstadt is a well-known scholar of modern Jewish history, antisemitism, and Holocaust denial. She has written many books. In the 1990s, she was involved in a famous trial against David Irving, the notorious English Holocaust-denier. (She won.) The case was depicted in a 2016 movie, “Denial,” in which Prof. Lipstadt was portrayed by Rachel Weisz. Today, Prof. Lipstadt works in the State... Source

Deborah Lipstadt is a well-known scholar of modern Jewish history, antisemitism, and Holocaust denial. She has written many books. In the 1990s, she was involved in a famous trial against David Irving, the notorious English Holocaust-denier. (She won.) The case was depicted in a 2016 movie, “Denial,” in which Prof. Lipstadt was portrayed by Rachel Weisz. Today, Prof. Lipstadt works in the State Department: as the U.S. special envoy for monitoring and combating antisemitism. She has a lot to say, as you can imagine—very important things to say.

Most pastors understand that prayer is an essential element of pastoral calling. Yet, many struggle to devote consistent time and affection to this sacred means of grace. David Irving sits down with James and Jonathan to discuss his new book, Devote Yourself to Prayer: A Call to Pastors, in which he seeks to motivate his fellow pastors to pray more for their people and their labors and delight in this vital discipline. To support this ministry financially, visit: https://www.oneplace.com/donate/581/29

Most pastors understand that prayer is an essential element of pastoral calling. Yet, many struggle to devote consistent time and affection to this sacred means of grace. David Irving sits down with James and Jonathan to discuss his new book, Devote Yourself to Prayer: A Call to Pastors, in which he seeks to motivate his fellow pastors to pray more for their people and their labors and delight in this vital discipline.  Register here for the opportunity to win a copy of David's book, thanks to our friends at Reformation Heritage Books.  

Matthew Bannister on Peter Betts, who was the UK's lead negotiator at international climate change summits. Audrey Salkeld, the mountaineering historian best known for her work on the ill-fated Mallory and Irvine expedition. Heather Rogers KC, the lawyer who championed freedom of speech in many high profile cases Louise Meriwether, the author and journalist whose acclaimed novel “Daddy was a Number Runner” told the story of her childhood during the depression in Harlem. Interviewee: Fiona MacGregor Interviewee: Caoilfhionn Gallagher KC Interviewee: Geoffrey Robertson KC Interviewee: Adam Salkeld Interviewee: Ed Douglas Interviewee: Cheryl Hill Reading extract by: Susan Abebe Producer: Gareth Nelson-Davies Archive used: News report following 2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference, Copenhagen, BBC News, 12/19/2009; News report, The Paris Agreement, UN Climate Change Conference (COP21), BBC News, 13/12/2015; Pete Betts interview, 194: Making a Difference, Outrage + Optimism podcast, Outrage + Optimism Ltd, uploaded 30/03/2023; Spycatcher ruling, Newsnight, BBC Two, 13/10/1988; David Irving, HardTalk, BBC News, 28/04/2000; Denial - official movie promo, IMDB, uploaded 2016; Louise Meriwether Lecture, Lectures to the Black Experience in the Arts course, University of Connecticut 14/03/1972;

Thirty-one years ago we took on an emergency family project -- we wrote a point for point rebuttal of a full page newspaper ad placed by Holocaust denier Bradley Smith in the Ohio State Lantern. In this podcast, I read the article we wrote, which was also published at the University of Michigan and other places where Smith had spread his lies.  Objective truth is often the only way to challenge lies -- especially when the lies are bold, outrageous, and dangerous. After a summer break, this episode marks the first in a new series of episodes that will explore significant areas of disagreement about what is true. We will try to avoid the common pitfall of painting those who disagree with us as the ones who are liars or believing falsehoods. But we will discuss all the tools we have for determining the truth of a claim. We will call in question what Christians have been doing lately, and attempt to contrast our cultural norms with what the Bible says in its writings about law, ethics, character, and prophecy. It is Near focuses on the alarming and the hopeful; the frightful and the forgotten; the blinding glare of giant problems, and the dark secrets that lurk even more menacingly in the shadows of global trends. "Amazing Grace" may have taught our hearts to fear, but for most Christians and non-Christians alike, divine grace as commonly conceptualized does not those fears relieve. It is Near will be informative, accessible, comforting, and challenging to every thinking person. It will call Christians to account and provide a breath of fresh air for secularists who, for once, would like to hear a conciliatory and intellectually honest message from a thoughtful Christian voice. Owen Kindig of Sitka, Alaska is your host, and is responsible for the content."Even the bad news is good news."

This week Alex & Ryan conclude their talk with NYU film professor David Irving, in the second episode of a two-part series where they discuss Tod Browning's 1932 film "Freaks." David Irving is a director whose professional film credits include Night of the Cyclone (1990) with Kris Kristofferson and Marisa Berenson; C.H.U.D. II (1988) with Robert Vaughn and Gerrit Graham; The Emperor's New Clothes (1987) with Sid Caesar and Robert Morse; Sleeping Beauty (1987) with Morgan Fairchild, Tawnee Welch, and Sylvia Miles; Rumpelstiltskin (1987) with Amy Irving and Billy Barty; Goodbye, Cruel World (1983) with Dick Shawn and Cynthia Sikes. His documentary credits include Romare Bearden: Visual Jazz (1995); Jacob Lawrence: The Glory of Expression (1993); Dr. Lorraine Hale: Alive with Love (1992); and Faith Ringgold: The Last Story Quilt (1991). His theatre directing credits include The Man Who Killed the Buddha (1981) by Martin Epstein for the Los Angeles Odyssey Theater; and The Skin of Our Teeth (1981) by Thornton Wilder for the Beverly Hills Playhouse. His credits as producer in film include Home Free All (1982) with Alan Nicholls and The Great Texas Dynamite Chase (1975) with Claudia Jennings for New World Pictures. He has won numerous awards including the Bronze Chris Award for Jacob Lawrence; the Cine Golden Eagle for Faith Ringgold; the L.A. Weekly Award for Direction for The Man Who Killed the Buddha, and the Writers Guild of America Award for The Secret of the Lost Valley (1980). David has also written the award-winning textbook "Producing and Directing the Short Film and Video" and "Fundamentals of Film Directing." He is currently an associate professor at NYU's Tisch School of the Arts. David Irving IMDB Alex Keledjian Alex Keledjian is the creator of Project Greenlight, a documentary television series where executive producers Matt Damon and Ben Affleck gave first-time filmmakers a chance to direct their first feature film.   In 2018, Alex wrote and directed the film High Voltage starring David Arquette and Luke Wilson. Ryan Gibson Ryan Gibson is an Emmy-award winning producer of such films as the critically acclaimed Woe and the upcoming film Slotherhouse. He has worked for over twenty years in all aspects of film development and production. MAX launched the latest season of the Emmy-nominated TV series Project Greenlight from executive producer Issa Rae and Miramax Television in July 2023. How I Got Greenlit Instagram X Podlink Credits Alex Keledjian, Host Ryan Gibson, Host Pete Musto, Producer/Editor Jeremiah Tittle, Producer Experience more of How I Got Greenlit via ncpodcasts.com For guest inquiries, sponsorships, and all other magnificent concerns, please reach How I Got Greenlit via howIgotgreenlit@gmail.com For inquiries and more information on Next Chapter Podcasts info@ncpodcasts.com New episodes go live every Tuesday. Please subscribe, rate & review on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Stitcher, wherever you listen to podcasts. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This week Alex & Ryan talk with NYU film professor and author David Irving, in the first episode of a two-part series. David Irving is a director whose professional film credits include Night of the Cyclone (1990) with Kris Kristofferson and Marisa Berenson; C.H.U.D. II (1988) with Robert Vaughn and Gerrit Graham; The Emperor's New Clothes (1987) with Sid Caesar and Robert Morse; Sleeping Beauty (1987) with Morgan Fairchild, Tawnee Welch, and Sylvia Miles; Rumpelstiltskin (1987) with Amy Irving and Billy Barty; Goodbye, Cruel World (1983) with Dick Shawn and Cynthia Sikes. His documentary credits include Romare Bearden: Visual Jazz (1995); Jacob Lawrence: The Glory of Expression (1993); Dr. Lorraine Hale: Alive with Love (1992); and Faith Ringgold: The Last Story Quilt (1991). His theatre directing credits include The Man Who Killed the Buddha (1981) by Martin Epstein for the Los Angeles Odyssey Theater; and The Skin of Our Teeth (1981) by Thornton Wilder for the Beverly Hills Playhouse. His credits as producer in film include Home Free All (1982) with Alan Nicholls and The Great Texas Dynamite Chase (1975) with Claudia Jennings for New World Pictures. He has won numerous awards including the Bronze Chris Award for Jacob Lawrence; the Cine Golden Eagle for Faith Ringgold; the L.A. Weekly Award for Direction for The Man Who Killed the Buddha, and the Writers Guild of America Award for The Secret of the Lost Valley (1980). David has also written the award-winning textbook "Producing and Directing the Short Film and Video" and "Fundamentals of Film Directing." He is currently an associate professor at NYU's Tisch School of the Arts. David Irving IMDB Alex Keledjian Alex Keledjian is the creator of Project Greenlight, a documentary television series where executive producers Matt Damon and Ben Affleck gave first-time filmmakers a chance to direct their first feature film.   In 2018, Alex wrote and directed the film High Voltage starring David Arquette and Luke Wilson. Ryan Gibson Ryan Gibson is an Emmy-award winning producer of such films as the critically acclaimed Woe and the upcoming film Slotherhouse. He has worked for over twenty years in all aspects of film development and production. MAX launched the latest season of the Emmy-nominated TV series Project Greenlight from executive producer Issa Rae and Miramax Television in July 2023. How I Got Greenlit Instagram X Podlink Credits Alex Keledjian, Host Ryan Gibson, Host Pete Musto, Producer/Editor Jeremiah Tittle, Producer Experience more of How I Got Greenlit via ncpodcasts.com For guest inquiries, sponsorships, and all other magnificent concerns, please reach How I Got Greenlit via howIgotgreenlit@gmail.com For inquiries and more information on Next Chapter Podcasts info@ncpodcasts.com New episodes go live every Tuesday. Please subscribe, rate & review on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Stitcher, wherever you listen to podcasts. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Will Storr (award-winning UK journalist and author) writes about humans in fun ways, and goes to lengths to do this, including joining holocaust denier David Irving (undercover) on holiday. His books The Heretics, and Selfie, are about how self-obsession changed the culture.Will's latest book is The Status Game and it argues that “Everyone alive is playing a game whose hidden rules are built into us and that silently directs our thoughts, beliefs and actions. This game is inside us. It is us.” Will chats through how his thesis can explain the rise of Nazi Germany, how the world might deal with dangerous humiliated men (Putin, Trump, gun massacrists) and how it can produce more empathy in the world.​I mention my WILD episode with Mary Ann Sieghart, author of The Authority Gap which you can listen to here.The Status Game is available to purchase now.Join Will on Twitter and read more about his work via his website.If you need to know a bit more about me… head to my "about" page.For more such conversations subscribe to my Substack newsletter, it's where I interact the most!Get your copy of my book, This One Wild and Precious LifeLet's connect on Instagram Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Today we welcome back a guest who has lived two lives in boxing – firstly as an amateur and then a pro fighter, and for the last 34 years as a referee and judgeLast time we spoke with David Irving, we discussed his career as a fighter but today we'll be hearing about his three and a half decades as an official, with the Boxing Union of Ireland and also the WBCHis first fight as a ref was back 1989, Ray Close beating Seamus Casey at Ulster Hall. New Kids on the Block were top of the pops Don't Know Much by Linda Rondstat was No2, All Around the World by Lisa Stansfield was No3 but soon this new kid on the block knew quite a lot and was travelling around the world in his chosen profession.He's been the man in the middle for Irish fights of the year including Reynolds v Trainor (2013) and Carroll v Geraghty (2014) as well as the fairly controversial Fury v Rogan battle in Belfast back in 2012, when there was actually an attempt by the British board to remove him in advance of the event.Here he also tells us about receiving abuse and even threats during his time working as a referee, still finding a way to be fitter than some fighters 40 years on from his heyday as a boxer himself, and the fouls most favoured by your average Irish puncher. Spoiler alert: some fighters don't need to be told to hit the other guy 'in the ballix'. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Deborah Lipstadt is an Award-Winning Author & a Professor of Modern Jewish and Holocaust Studies at Emory University. Originally part I of a special series on confronting antisemitism, please join us as we revisit this timely episode of On All-Inclusive with Jay Ruderman. And, we'll be back in two weeks with a brand new episode.  For decades, Deborah Lipstadt has been a leading figure in writing about and combating antisemitism. She is most well-known for defeating Holocaust denier David Irving when he sued her for defamation. However, Deborah's accomplishments span far beyond the trial that made her infamous. She is currently the Dorot Professor of Modern Jewish History and Holocaust Studies at Emory University and recently received a nomination by President Biden as Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Antisemitism.  In conversation with Jay, they discuss the history of antisemitism, why there has been an uprise in hate recently, and what we can do to combat it. Please find a transcription of this episode:  https://allaboutchangepodcast.com/podcast-episode/deborah-lipstatSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

David Irving is the special guest for this week's episode. The Belfast man charts his rise through both the amateur and professional ranks from the early days of the Holy Trinity Boxing Club through to his decision to hang up the gloves and become a referee. (This is part one of a two-part interview). Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

"Czy Hitler wiedział o Holocauście?" To pytanie na pierwszy rzut oka brzmi absurdalnie i faktycznie jest absurdalne. Hitler nie tylko wiedział o Holocauście, czyli wymordowaniu 6 milionów europejskich Żydów, ale był inicjatorem tego przerażającego ludobójstwa. Skąd zatem w przestrzeni publicznej co jakiś czas to pytanie się pojawia? To efekt działań negacjonistów i neonazistów, którzy zwłaszcza w latach. 70. XX wieku stawiali taką tezę, powołując się na brak zachowanych dokumentów z podpisem Hitlera w sprawie masowego mordowania Żydów. Taką tezę rozpropagował zwłaszcza David Irving, brytyjski kontrowersyjny historyk. Istnieje jednak ogromna liczba dowodów pośrednich oraz stenogramów z rozmów Hitlera, by nie mieć wątpliwości, że nazistowski dyktator wiedział o wszystkim. Jeżeli podoba Ci się odcinek możesz nas wesprzeć w serwisie Patronite.pl:

On today's show we discuss the book Conjuring Hitler: How Britain and America Made the Third Reich. A key focus will be on a) how events have unfolded since the book was written; b) relating the substance of our discussion to what's unfolding in the here and now, and how the “great game” is being played today. GUEST OVERVIEW: Guido Preparata is notable in particular for his revisionist work on the received Western official narrative of World War II. It demonstrates that Anglo-American geo-political objectives between the wars were aimed squarely at the destruction of Germany and Soviet Russia as aspiring competitors in the pursuit of world hegemony, with the the UK and America very far from the heroic injured innocents of the official narrative. Unlike others, Preparata's revisionism has not concentrated on the Jewish Holocaust. He has thus been spared the "beyond the pale" opprobrium of authors such as David Irving, Norman Finkelstein, Robert Faurisson, Germar Rudolf and others but has nonetheless had to deal with the sort of routine establishment nastiness that such iconoclasm inevitably generates (see Conjuring Hitler - Four years on for a flavour of these attacks) His subsequent cogent analyses of the post-9/11 'War on Terror' and its roots in post-war Western culture, especially that of the USA builds on the Work of Peter Dale Scott and others. This interview ranges over these subjects in a readable and thoroughly illuminating manner. It is a good introduction to his two major books Conjuring Hitler and The Ideology of Tyranny.

A new VIDEO from Independent Presbyterian Church is now available on SermonAudio with the following details: Title: Love that Compels Subtitle: Communion Season Speaker: David Irving Broadcaster: Independent Presbyterian Church Event: Sunday - PM Date: 8/7/2022 Bible: 2 Corinthians 5:14-15 Length: 39 min.

A new VIDEO from Independent Presbyterian Church is now available on SermonAudio with the following details: Title: Love that Gives Subtitle: Communion Season Speaker: David Irving Broadcaster: Independent Presbyterian Church Event: Sunday - AM Date: 8/7/2022 Bible: Galatians 2:20 Length: 33 min.

A new VIDEO from Independent Presbyterian Church is now available on SermonAudio with the following details: Title: Love You Can "See" Subtitle: Communion Season Speaker: David Irving Broadcaster: Independent Presbyterian Church Event: Sunday School Date: 8/7/2022 Bible: John 14:21 Length: 31 min.

A new VIDEO from Independent Presbyterian Church is now available on SermonAudio with the following details: Title: Love that Doesn't Break Subtitle: Communion Season Speaker: David Irving Broadcaster: Independent Presbyterian Church Event: Midweek Service Date: 8/6/2022 Bible: Romans 8:35-39 Length: 42 min.

A new VIDEO from Independent Presbyterian Church is now available on SermonAudio with the following details: Title: Love that Surpasses Knowledge Subtitle: Communion Season Speaker: David Irving Broadcaster: Independent Presbyterian Church Event: Midweek Service Date: 8/5/2022 Bible: Ephesians 3:19 Length: 35 min.

This is the third part of an eight-part series about American movie ratings. Part 1 focused on Prano Baily-Bond's "Censor". Part 2 focused on Mike Nichols's "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?".Future episodes will focus on Gordon Flemyng's "The Split" (1968), Steven Spielberg's "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom" (1984), Garry Marshall's "The Flamingo Kid" (1984), John McNaughton's "Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer" (1986), and Philip Kaufmans's "Henry & June" (1990).***Referenced media:"Who's Afraid of Virgina Woolf?" (Mike Nichols, 1966)"Red Dawn" (John Milius, 1984)"This Savage Land" (Vincent McEveety, 1969)"Assignment to Kill" (Sheldon Reynolds, 1968)"Payment in Blood" (Enzo G. Castellari, 1968)"Birds in Peru" (Romain Gary, 1968)"Planet of the Apes" (Franklin J. Schaffner, 1968)"2001: A Space Odyssey" (Stanley Kubrick, 1968)"Night of the Living Dead" (George A. Romero, 1968)"Barbarella" (Roger Vadim, 1968)"The Girl on a Motorcycle" (Jack Cardiff, 1968)"Head" (Bob Rafelson, 1968)"Yellow Submarine" (George Dunning, 1968)"Faces" (John Cassavetes, 1968)"The Great Silence" (Sergio Corbucci, 1968)"Sympathy for the Devil" (Jean-Luc Godard, 1968)"Candy" (Christian Marquand, 1968)"The Night They Raided Minsky's" (William Friedkin, 1968)"The Wrecking Crew" (Phil Karlson, 1968)"Once Upon a Time in Hollywood" (Quentin Tarantino, 2019)"Three in the Attic" (Richard Wilson, 1968)"Pumping Iron" (George Butler and Robert Fiore, 1977)"Blowup" (Michelangelo Antonioni, 1966)"Mean Streets" (Martin Scorsese, 1973)"Hi, Mom!" (Brian DePalma, 1970)"C.H.U.D. II: Bud the C.H.U.D." (David Irving, 1989)"Phantom of the Paradise" (Brian DePalma, 1974)"Shadows" (John Cassavetes, 1959)"Fritz the Cat" (Ralph Bakshi, 1972)"Beverly Hills Cop II" (Tony Scott, 1987)"Breathless" (Jean-Luc Godard, 1960)"Laugh-In" (George Schlatter, 1968-1973)"Saturday Night Live" (Lorne Michaels, 1975-now)"Deep Throat" (Gerard Damiano, 1972)"Behind the Green Door" (Artie Mitchell and Jim Mitchell, 1972)"Midnight Cowboy" (John Schlesinger, 1969)"Superfly" (Gordon Parks, Jr., 1972)"Across 110th Street" (Barry Shear, 1972)"Sweet Sweetback's Baadasssss Song" (Melvin Van Peebles, 1971)

Apologies for my weak voice today! Remnant of a second bout with Covid. Had to drink several cups of hot tea and honey, and take numerous breaks to at least sound somewhat understandable. Today, we look into how Germany dealt with the Holocaust once it was over. And how occupying powers, including the US and the Soviet Union, dealt with it as well. Who do you punish when millions have been complicit in some way(s) in committing one of the greatest atrocities in human history? We also look at holocaust denial. What evidence can deniers possibly point to to prove their claims that the holocaust either never happened, or didn't happen to the degree that mainstream (actual) historian's claim? Bad Magic Productions Monthly Patreon Donation:  The Bad Magic Charity for May is the HALO Dental Network. Founded by Dr. Brady Smith, HALO Dental Network is a coalition of dental professionals who donate their services to the dental underserved. Services include dental implants, veneers, fillings and crowns. If you want to learn more, please visit halodentalnetwork.orgNot only can you donate, you can also nominate someone you know who is in need. Thanks to those who helped us donate $14,300 this month! TICKETS FOR HOT WET BAD MAGIC SUMMER CAMP!  Go to www.badmagicmerch.comWatch the Suck on YouTube: https://youtu.be/_2ekzi0R9pEMerch: https://www.badmagicmerch.comDiscord! https://discord.gg/tqzH89vWant to join the Cult of the Curious private Facebook Group? Go directly to Facebook and search for "Cult of the Curious" in order to locate whatever happens to be our most current page :)For all merch related questions/problems: store@badmagicproductions.com (copy and paste)Please rate and subscribe on iTunes and elsewhere and follow the suck on social media!! @timesuckpodcast on IG and http://www.facebook.com/timesuckpodcastWanna become a Space Lizard?  Click here: https://www.patreon.com/timesuckpodcastSign up through Patreon and for $5 a month you get to listen to the Secret Suck, which will drop Thursdays at Noon, PST. You'll also get 20% off of all regular Timesuck merch PLUS access to exclusive Space Lizard merch. You get to vote on two Monday topics each month via the app. And you get the download link for my new comedy album, Feel the Heat. Check the Patreon posts to find out how to download the new album and take advantage of other benefits.

In 1996, British author and Holocaust denier David Irving filed a libel case against American historian Deborah Lipstadt, stating that she had defamed him in her book Denying the Holocaust. In what became the case, David Irving versus Penguin Books and Deborah Lipstadt, architectural historian Robert Jan Van Pelt was brought in as the defense's expert witness owing to his work on the history of Auschwitz. Robert Jan Van Pelt has taught at the University of Waterloo School of Architecture since 1987. His book, ‘Auschwitz: 1270 to the Present' with Deborah Dwork and subsequent report ‘The Case for Auschwitz' generated The Evidence Room at the 2016 Venice Biennale. He is also the Chief Curator of the traveling exhibition ‘Auschwitz. Not Far Away. Not Long Ago'. More on Robert: https://uwaterloo.ca/architecture/people-profiles/robert-jan-van-pelt

Richard Cohen begins his new book Making History: The Storytellers Who Shaped the Past with two particularly appropriate epigrams. First, from the historian E.H. Carr: “Before you study history, study the historian.” Second, the historical novelist Hilary Mantel: “Beneath every history, there is another history—there is, at least, the life of the historian.”  The life of historians is the subject of Cohen's book, and he ranges from Herodotus and Thucydides in the Very Long Ago, to Ibram X. Kendi and the 1619 Project of Just Yesterday. Since this is a book about how historians make make history, it is therefore a book about how historians see the past, and think about it.   Richard Cohen is the author of By the Sword,Chasing the Sun, and How to Write Like Tolstoy. The former publishing director of two leading London publishing houses, he has edited numerous prize-winning and bestselling books, and written for most UK quality newspapers. He is a Fellowof the Royal Society of Literature.   For Further Investigation The podcast now has several conversations devoted to the subject of "Historians and Their Histories". To mention two historians of Rome who were also men of action, here's one with Adrian Goldsworthy on Julius Caesar, and another with Steele Brand on Polybius, onetime soldier, Greek, and historian of the Roman Republic. A site devoted to Shakespeare and history, which is suitably named shakespeareandhistory.com Sir Walter Scott's Abbotsford: the house that historical novels built David Irving, mentioned in the podcast conversation, became notorious as Holocaust denier. In turn denying this charge, he sued historian Deborah Lipstadt for libel, the stakes of which were "not only Irving's contention that his reputation and livelihood had been harmed, but also a bitter argument about the nature of historical evidence and its interpretation." You can read more about the result of the trial in a contemporary source here.

Ready for a good villain episode? This week the subject is David Irving: pseudo historian, Holocaust denier and Hitler apologist. Join the guys as they rip apart this truly horrid human being. Hilarity ensues!

00:00 What is fascism? PhD student Matthew Ghobrial Cockerill joins intoxicated, https://twitter.com/GhobrialMatthew 01:00 Fascism: The Career Of A Concept, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=129495 02:45 Are Republicans fascist? 06:00 Is Richard Spencer fascist? 10:00 Are lockdowns fascist? 11:00 Is socialized medicine fascist? 11:30 Italian fascism & Nazism 17:30 Are your children fascists? 19:00 Warning signs your kids might be Nazis 21:00 Is Richard Spencer a neo-nazi? 23:00 There are no nazis today, only larpers 23:30 Fascism & violence 24:15 Warning signs your kids might be groypers, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groypers 26:00 National Justice Party, https://www.adl.org/resources/backgrounders/national-justice-party 42:30 Antifascism: The Course of a Crusade, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=142799 54:00 David Irving accepts the Holocaust in 2016 video, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R8FWUgdtlM0 1:04:00 Matt's visit to Turkey 1:10:00 The Russian-Ukraine crisis 1:12:00 A freewheeling conversation with Denying History (anti-Holocaust denial researcher), https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=104LlxvJ49c 1:14:00 The Super Bowl 1:15:00 Detroit Lions 1:17:00 Aftermath: Life in the Fallout of the Third Reich, https://www.amazon.com/Aftermath-Fallout-Third-Reich-1945-1955/dp/B093NL3C3Z/ 1:25:00 How Nazi was Nazi Germany? 1:33:00 Not Born Yesterday: The Science of Who We Trust and What We Believe, https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691178707/not-born-yesterday 1:39:00 Social acceptance of gay marriage 1:41:00 The American Conservative, https://www.theamericanconservative.com/author/matthew-cockerill/ 1:42:45 What happened to Ron Unz? 1:45:00 Alan Grayson, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Grayson 1:47:50 Matt's worldview: Conservative liberal 1:50:00 What does Matt like about living in England? 2:00:00 Jewish conspiracy theories 2:06:00 Overcoming selfishness 2:07:30 Overcoming OCD, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obsessive%E2%80%93compulsive_disorder Matt's Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC9z6CwgycPjUbOLElkLuHjQ Join this channel to get access to perks: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCSFVD7Xfhn7sJY8LAIQmH8Q/join https://odysee.com/@LukeFordLive, https://lbry.tv/@LukeFord, https://rumble.com/lukeford https://dlive.tv/lukefordlivestreams Listener Call In #: 1-310-997-4596 Superchat: https://entropystream.live/app/lukefordlive Bitchute: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/lukeford/ Soundcloud MP3s: https://soundcloud.com/luke-ford-666431593 Code of Conduct: https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=125692 https://www.patreon.com/lukeford http://lukeford.net Email me: lukeisback@gmail.com or DM me on Twitter.com/lukeford Support the show | https://www.streamlabs.com/lukeford, https://patreon.com/lukeford, https://PayPal.Me/lukeisback Facebook: http://facebook.com/lukecford Feel free to clip my videos. It's nice when you link back to the original.

In 2000, renowned Holocaust scholar Dr. Deborah Lipstadt was sued by David Irving for defamation, because she called Irving a Holocaust denier and falsifier of history in her 1994 book Denying the Holocaust: The Growing Assault on Truth and Memory. Expert witnesses combed through Irving's research since the 1980s and found that Lipstadt was correct - Irving had deliberately manipulated the historical record, to support his ludicrous claims that most of the evidence of the Holocaust had been invented after the war. Listen to AJC CEO David Harris discuss the impact of the trial, and the quiet, global, multi-year effort he led to generate support for Lipstadt's trial defense, making sure the world never forgets the murder of six million Jews – a historical fact. ___ Episode Lineup: (0:40) David Harris ___ Show Notes: Take action.  Join AJC in calling for the White House to convene a taskforce that will develop a national action plan to fight anti-Jewish hate.  Urge the Senate to confirm Deborah Lipstadt as the Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Antisemitism.  Listen to our most recent episode: Inside the Colleyville, Texas Synagogue Hostage Crisis: Hear from 3 Local Jewish and Muslim Leaders on What It Was Like on the Ground Don't forget to subscribe to People of the Pod on your favorite podcast app, and learn more at AJC.org/PeopleofthePod Keep an eye out for our next episode marking International Holocaust Remembrance, in which we learn about the lost Jewish community of Monastir from Ladino singer and songwriter Sarah Aroeste.  You can reach us at: peopleofthepod@ajc.org If you've enjoyed this episode, please be sure to tell your friends, tag us on social media with #PeopleofthePod, and hop onto Apple Podcasts to rate us and write a review, to help more listeners find us.

Mike Isaacson: The holes! The holes! The holes! [Theme song] Nazi SS UFOsLizards wearing human clothesHinduism's secret codesThese are nazi lies Race and IQ are in genesWarfare keeps the nation cleanWhiteness is an AIDS vaccineThese are nazi lies Hollow earth, white genocideMuslim's rampant femicideShooting suspects named Sam HydeHiter lived and no Jews died Army, navy, and the copsSecret service, special opsThey protect us, not sweatshopsThese are nazi lies Mike Isaacson: Welcome back to The Nazi Lies Podcast. This episode, we're lucky enough to have Robert Jan Van Pelt, Architectural Historian at the University of Waterloo and chief curator of the traveling Holocaust exhibit Auschwitz: Not Long Ago, Not Far Away. He's the author of several books including Auschwitz: 1270 to the Present and The Case for Auschwitz where he specifically takes on Holocaust deniers or as he calls them negationists. Thanks for coming on the podcast Dr. Van Pelt. Robert Jan Van Pelt: Thank you very much. It's a pleasure to be here with you today. Mike Isaacson: Thank you. So today, we're lucky enough to have a guest who's actually familiar with the Nazi lies he's debunking. So his book, The Case for Auschwitz, documents the testimony in the David Irving libel trial. So before we discuss who they are, why do you call them negationists? Robert Jan Van Pelt: The term was actually coined in the mid-19th century by a Scottish philosopher, his name is Patrick Edward Dove, in a book called The Logic of the Christian Faith. And basically, he refers to negationist as a German idealist like Immanuel Kant or Wilhelm Fried Hegel, who basically said that physical reality doesn't exist, or at least it's not relevant, that everything is in the mind. And so he talks about them as people who are negating, who are denying, actually the existence of the world as we experience it every day. And so, the term has a philosophical background, but in the 19, late 1980s, early 1990s, it became to be applied by a number of philosophers both in France and also in the United States-- Thomas Nagel is one-- to people who we normally call Holocaust deniers. Now, when I got involved in the struggle against Holocaust denier, so negationist, I was intrigued by, let's call it the philosophical aspects of this whole thing. You can of course say, these are all crazy people or they're bad people, they're anti Semite, blah, blah, blah. All of these guys passed judgment on it. But I was always fascinated by what it takes to actually deny reality. And of course, today, when we're in the middle of many denials that are around; from vaccine denial to COVID denial to climate denial and so on, I think that one of the interesting aspects of Holocaust denial is that it was a trial run that occurred in the 1980s 1990s of actually what we're seeing today. Trial, almost like a laboratory experiment, of how do people deny, what does it take to deny, what actually does it take to actually establish reality in a narrative? And so when I was asked to join the case, the defense team of Deborah Lipstadt who was being sued by David Irving, a English Holocaust denier, for libel in a British court, I basically took a year off of sabbatical to basically research this phenomenon. I very much went back also to the great what we might call epistemological questions, the questions of how do we know what we know? And going back to 17th century philosophers who talk about skepticism, can we have radical skepticism, under what conditions can we actually challenge a particular motion, when is it okay to accept something going back to legal theory? When actually do we have enough certainty to convict a man or a woman and chop his or her head off? Questions about negotiating a world in which in principle, we can always say, I don't believe this, I don't believe that. But then if we never have any certainty about anything, that we really cannot move forward, either individually or collectively. So I was interested in those questions. So in my choice of the term negationist, I in some way, try to show that larger context in which I was operating. And also, I wanted to connect back to a discourse, an argument that had been made first in the 1950s, by the Jewish German and later American philosopher, Hannah Arendt, who in 1941, ends up in New York after having fled from a German concentration camp or a French concentration camp controlled by Germans. And in a very famous book called The Origins of Totalitarianism, she basically says that one of the central characteristics of fascism, that is also national socialism, and she also puts it totalitarian communism in the statement, is that they basically attempt to acquire control over people and are successful in it for a considerable time, at least, they were in the 1920s and 30s, and 40s, by shaking the belief of people that they actually can understand reality to make everything into a question mark. And of course, in English, we have the term gaslighting for that. This idea is that nothing is sorted anymore. And so when people are put in a position in which everything might be a lie, ever say might be just a fiction, then in some way they become, as she said, the perfect raw material for a fascist state. And so again, by moving the focus a little bit away from the denial of the Holocaust, per se, to denial of reality, I thought that my work might have a somewhat larger relevance. Mike Isaacson: Okay, so now on to the negationists, who are these people that we're talking about? Robert Jan Van Pelt: Now, they're not the people who one would expect. If we talk about common parlance Holocaust about negationists who denied the Holocaust, one would first expect that the people who would have denied the Holocaust were Germans who were involved in the Holocaust, and who found themselves in front of allied courts after the war, and who were pleading for their lives. Now, they did plead for their lives, of course, but they didn't say that the Holocaust didn't happen, and hence, they were not guilty of any involvement in the Holocaust, like the shooting of two civilians, or putting them on transports to death camps, and so on. What they said, yes, it happened but that I only had a very minor role in it, or I wasn't there, or you really got the wrong man. So generally in the 1940s, and the 1950s, when these trials happened, and even later, the 1960s, the general statement of these perpetrators was, yes, it happened but it happens to be that I had no role in it or that my role was not that important. When we talk about Holocaust deniers, we have a different phenomenon. They actually say that it never happened, that it's all a fiction, that it is all basically created, in the case of Irving by the British Secret Service as a piece of war propaganda in the 1940s, during the war, and that it was basically a piece of atrocity propaganda, and that this atrocity propaganda got a second life after the war. Now, then the question is, who are the people who basically are carrying that message? And it's a very kind of motley crew, they are people from different backgrounds and I've always found this very interesting. When we look at the 1950s at the first Holocaust deniers, they actually come from the extreme left. And they come out of a particular French situation, many of them are Frenchmen. And the denial itself in the beginning isn't that much related to the Holocaust, but it is actually related to the Soviet concentration camps. The Soviet Union was in the 1930s, the 1920s and 30s, and also the 1940s. Of course, for many communists in France, and also elsewhere, it was utopia realized, especially after 1941, when the Red Army had an incredibly important role in ultimately crushing the Third Reich and defeating Marxism. In 1945, the Soviet Union was seen by many in the West as a heroic nation, a nation that that could be credited, and rightly so, with an incredible contribution to the defeat of Hitler. Many people say that around 90% of all of the soldiers who died in the second world war on the Allied side were Soviet soldiers. And so in 1945, and 46, in France, communism was a very popular political choice. It was a choice that expressed gratitude of people who were anti fascists, and rightly so, for the achievement of the Soviet Union. And it showed the promise of a new world. What happened was that, in the late 1940s, stories started to circulate about the good luck. That, in fact, the old system of camps that had existed at Sarris times and then also later in the 1930s, had not disappeared. And a Soviet defector came to the United States and started basically giving an account of all the Soviet camps, his name was Kravchenko. And many communists, especially in France, said, this is all made up, they don't exist, these concentration camps don't exist. They are a piece of CIA propaganda, because of course, it took place during the Cold War. And it very much served American propaganda interests to show that the Soviet Union, especially Europe, that the Soviet Union was a horrible state that nobody ever should vote communist. And so the discourse of a concentration camp system being a complete fiction, created, in this case by a malicious agent, that is the CIA, began in France. And then it didn't take that much at a certain moment for in hindsight, or in a second interpretation of this discourse for the concentration camp system to become the German concentration camp system, that this was as much a fiction as the Gulag was, or had been as much of fiction that the survivors were liars, so that had been created by Allied propaganda. And once that was set in motion, that idea, you get a number of people who, for different reasons, start to become members of that in-group, members of a group of people who are interested in working out in some way that narrative that denies first a concentration camp system. And a number of them were actually concentration camp survivors, interestingly enough, most important one, French Michael [unintelligible 13:45:12], who had been in a concentration camp as an inmate, but he had never seen anything that resembled gas chambers and crematoria. And he said, "The camps were bad, but certainly they were not extermination machines, they were not factories of death, of murder." And then you've get a sociological phenomenon of groups of people who bond over this common course, and attract then, in the 1970s, what I would call the intellectuals, a number of people who could join this movement, especially in France again. So it doesn't start in Germany, it starts in France. And the most important of men who in some way then starts to supply a theory and a whole body of work is a professor of literature, whose name is Robert Faurisson and who teaches literary theory at the University of Lille in France. Mike Isaacson: There were some other names in your book that you gave, you gave Arthur Butz. Who else? There was a guy...Staglich? Robert Jan Van Pelt: I would say there are many people who will start to make a contribution. I worked with Errol Morris on a movie, Mr. Death: The Rise and Fall of Fred Leuchter, Jr. and we were discussing and making the movie, and actually I'm quoted in the movie, how do these people get together? What is their motivation? And I said, "Some way it is like a club because like the rotary club or the Freemasonry, you get into it, you don't really know what you're getting into it. But once you get into it, you get really committed to it because it becomes part of your social life." Arthur Butz, professor of electrical engineering at Northwestern University, got interested. People get interested in the argument, they get interested in the nuts and bolts of the series. You have many buffs, you have many people who are interested in history, and their history buffs. And what makes a history buff, at a certain moment, different from a historian, is that a history buff always focuses on the detail and gets completely fascinated by the detail. And that can be a detail of the uniform, of the correct uniform of a civil war and actor. And of course, there are many of them in the United States, and that's all perfectly innocent. But sometimes there are history buffs who get focused on a detail like Sherlock Holmes. They see themselves as a Sherlock Holmes, and they think that there is a hidden reality that is not being stated, that is being hidden from the world. And that by focusing on the detail in the way that Sherlock Holmes does that in his of course, fictional investigations, that is, in some way, the way to the truth. And it has to do to with the CSI effect, which is idea of the fact that history can be recovered, can be, in some way, unveiled by the study of a detail. And of course, that makes incredibly good television. So a person like Butz, I think, gets interested in all kinds of what seemed to be very obscure details of the accounts of for example, the gas chambers or the crematoria is very suspicious, doesn't believe that the reality as told is really reality as it happened. And then gets interested in analyzing these details in such a way that this whole new world in some way is revealed once the detail is unmasked as a lie. And so it takes a certain mindset of people who in some way fall for the myth of Sherlock Holmes, or want to be Sherlock Holmes, but of course that is not normally the way that reality can be discovered even not, I would say in a criminal investigation. Mike Isaacson: Okay, so now let's talk about Auschwitz. Why Auschwitz? What about Auschwitz makes it command some attention? Robert Jan Van Pelt: So it commands a lot of attention, both for Holocaust deniers, they focus most of their attacks on the evidence of Auschwitz. But also, they do that because in some way many Holocaust story and some people who think about the Holocaust, if you hear the word Holocaust, and you ask an ordinary person in the street, does any name come to mind when you hear the word Holocaust of the place? Most people will say Auschwitz. In 1945, in the west, in Europe, they probably would have said American Belton. But since the 1970s, that is certainly Auschwitz. And there are very legitimate reasons for that. And I can just name a few of them. The first is that Auschwitz is the single largest place where Jews were massacred not only Jews, but also separatists normally, or Soviet prisoners of war. Also, other victims group in the Holocaust, one could say, and of course, also Polish non-Jewish patriots who were murdered there. Now, if we just accept for a moment to rough estimate of 6 million Jews victims of the Holocaust, then 1 million of them were murdered in Auschwitz. So that's the first thing. It is the largest of the extermination camps, the second largest Treblinka had a death toll of around 850,000, and then it goes down. So it is the biggest. The second, which is very important, is that Auschwitz is a place for which victims came from all over Europe. So, quite often, extermination camps that were very important in the Holocaust, and I give one example, Belzec that had 550,000 victims, but Belzec which was at that time in eastern Poland, it's still in eastern Poland today, it had a reasonable function. The victims came from around 200 miles 150 miles from around Belzec. It was a very densely settled area with Jews. Traditionally, it was the heartland of the Jews, around Lviv today in the Ukraine. But Auschwitz had victims coming from all over Europe, from Greece, from France, from the Netherlands, from Germany, from Italy, from Poland, and so on. So basically, when we talk about the Holocaust as a pan-European phenomenon, something that touched almost every European nation, that was either occupied or ruled by Germany. Then Auschwitz talks about that pan-European dimension of the Holocaust. The third thing is that Auschwitz is unique in that it doesn't have only gas chambers, and the word homicidal or genocidal gas chambers in Belzec, in Treblinka and Sobibor, in Majdanek and Kamno, but the gas chambers were actually part of crematoria. There were buildings in which the victims were brought into the building, they were then murdered in the gas chamber and their corpses were incinerated in that very same building. And you did not have that combination in the other camps, that is that if you have gas chambers in Treblinka, then after the murder, the corpses of the victims were taken out of those gas chambers and originally they were buried to mass graves, and later the bodies were incinerated on open pyres. So, what happens when you get a gas chamber that is in a building that has very complicated ovens, I mean ovens in the case of crematoria two and three that have the incineration capacity of almost 1500 corpses per day, you get actually a very complex building. Architects get involved, engineers get involved, a lot of money gets involved, because the buildings need to be constructed. Which means also that there is going to be a lot of evidence. We have no designs for the gas chambers in Treblinka, they didn't survive, they probably were drawn up on the proverbial back of an envelope or on a napkin. This is how architects quite conceive of their projects. But in the case of Auschwitz, because these were expensive buildings, it took time to build, they took resources, financial and also in building materials, there's a lot of evidence about that. And in this case, also, that's important, because when you have to commit a lot of resources in a crime, the crime of genocide, then it becomes very clear that it's intentional. And just to go back for a moment, in 1941 or 42, around 2 million Russian Jews were murdered in the then occupied Soviet Union, that would be today's Ukraine, Belarus, and the Baltic countries mainly, and a little bit of today's Russia also. They were murdered with men having rifles, by execution platoons, and so on. But those machine guns and those rifles had not been created to murder civilians, they had been created to be used in battle. So in that case, if you go to the smoking gun in those massacres, those killings, like the one in BabynYa in Kiev, that 80th anniversary will be happening in two months in the beginning of October, then you have the smoking gun, so to speak, you never can say this gun was actually made for the purpose of killing civilians. But if you go to a homicidal gas chamber in Auschwitz, and then you basically see it in relationship to the crematoriums that are in the same building, it's very easy to move the corpses from the gas chambers to that crematorium often, then basically, you have an installation that can only make sense in terms of a genocide, in terms of killing innocent civilians, civilians who cannot resist. Those gas chambers have no possible imaginable role in a battle. Now, you cannot, in some way, trick armed soldiers to go into a gas chamber and then you close the door and you bring in the gas. So in the case of Auschwitz, the fact that we have these very sophisticated expensive buildings that basically can only be explained from the perspective of genocide, actually, of which there were two is very important because the Auschwitz crematory and gas chambers are undeniable in that sense, as tools of genocide. And then the last reason is that actually, there's still a lot of stuff left enough. It's not only in terms of ruins, the ruins of this crematoria, but also there is a lot of paperwork preserved in the archives. And then finally, unlike these other camps, these extermination camps, Treblinka, Sobibor, and Belzec, Belzec had only two survivors, extremely effective extermination camp. Sobibor around 250, Treblinka around 200, but around 100,000, people actually left Auschwitz alive. Because Auschwitz was not only an extermination camp, but it was also a slave labor camp. And so this is why you have in Auschwitz, these selections upon arrival of the Jews where basically those who can't work are sent immediately to the gas chambers. And those who can work are basically worked to death or until they are moved somewhere else. And so what you have in the case of Auschwitz is enormous amount of eyewitness evidence. Not necessarily what happens right inside the gas chamber, it's impossible to have eyewitness evidence of that in a squared nature of the killing in the gas chamber, but eyewitness evidence of these buildings, the chimneys, the smoke. And then also in the case of the two slave workers that worked in the crematoria. A lot of eyewitness evidence was produced by them after the war, there were enough survivors of them to give evidence immediately after the war. And even a number of them had some good abilities to draw what they had seen. So there's also drawn evidence. So all in all, Auschwitz is in some way the crown jewel, in a sense, in the case that the Holocaust did happen, because of the nature of the evidence and the amount of the evidence that we have about the place. And that is exactly the reason that Holocaust deniers or negationists attack Auschwitz, because they want to attack that evidence. Mike Isaacson: So Irving's principle claim is that far fewer people die at Auschwitz in the Holocaust in general, than is the general consensus among historians. So you mentioned that a million people died at Auschwitz. How did we arrive at that number? Robert Jan Van Pelt: The number has evolved over time. And that actually is one of the reasons that in about 1990, the Holocaust deniers said you can never trust any number. When the Soviet, the Red Army, arrived on the 27th of January 1945 in Auschwitz, they had to make an informed guess immediately about a number of people that had been murdered in Auschwitz. And their first guess was around 5 million. And they didn't define who these people were. These were citizens of European nationals, they said. The Soviets were always very hesitant to actually divide the victims into groups. These were 5 million troops or 1 million troops, whatever like that, they never really wanted to go in there. They didn't want to separate the troops out. Then, the first forensic committee that was working there, reduced it to 4 million on the basis of almost no extra evidence, basically talking about the cremation capacity of the ovens. And said the ovens would have cremated so many bodies per day, these ovens existed in these four buildings for so many days, we assume that they were in operation 80% of the time, so they came to 4 million. Already at that time, basically, Jewish demographer said this is impossible. And they basically put the number closer to 1.5 million. They said, "Where would all those people have come from?" And in 1946, Rudolf Hoess, the commandant of Auschwitz from 1940 to 1943, he was then relieved of his duty, was arrested and ultimately tried. He testified first in Nuremberg as a witness and then was tried in Poland. And he wrote his memoirs while he was in prison before he was executed. And he also testified, he said, "The 4 million figure is absolutely obtainable. My calculations are that we murdered around 1.1 million people in Auschwitz during my reign as commandant." So he didn't have the whole period, but he had long enough. And by implication, if we then also take the murder rates during the time of his successor, this would have meant that the total number that he would agree to as a commandant, as a witness, as a person around the place, around 1.6 million. And he gave a detailed accounting of where those victims would have come from. He said, "The only way that you can really look at it, is to look at the transports. Which transports of Jews arrived in Auschwitz, at what time, how many people were in each transport, and how many of the transport were killed on arrival. And so there were really two numbers by, let's say, 1950. The first number was based on Hoess' testimony. And that was somewhere one and a half million. And then the second number was the official number that was fixed by the Russians. It was the Cold War. Of course Auschwitz was in Poland, it was being ruled by the communists. That was the official number of 4 million, but it didn't give any details of where those 4 million people would have come from. And so at the memorial in Auschwitz in the 1950s 60s 70s, and 80s, that said, 4 million people were murdered here, but it didn't give a breakdown of that number. However, at the Auschwitz Museum, which was a very professional Museum, it is basically the organization, the institution that preserves the Auschwitz site, it's a Poland State Museum, the historical department had already started to work on a detailed analysis of transports, and of course, the Germans had destroyed much of the evidence, and they had to come to the conclusion that the total number of people who had been deported to Auschwitz was 1.3 million. And the total of number of people that had been murdered in Auschwitz was 1.1 million. And that number still stands, by and large. When they used to say murdered in Auschwitz, the question is how? Because even if you were to say, "Okay, we accept the figure, 1.1 million people died in Auschwitz." then the question, of course, remains did they die of natural deaths or that were they actually murdered? People died in Auschwitz in all different ways. People were murdered in gas chambers. Majority of people were murdered as they did slave labor, they were beaten to death on the site by overseers. People were murdered during torture sessions in the camp, the [unintelligible 33:37:22], people were murdered when they were ill, when they were seen that they could work anymore, they were given an injection in the heart, which was poison. But also people died as a result of infectious diseases, for example, typhus, or they died as a result of starvation. And so the question now is, how did people die? And can we "blame" the Germans for all of those deaths? So one of the things that deniers like Irving did early on, is to say, "Okay, we accept that Auschwitz and also other camps are really deadly places. But almost everyone died as a result of typhus, as infectious diseases." And we might say that the Germans were not acting wisely by bringing so many people together in the place. But ultimately, typhus happens also in other places. So we can't really say that the deaths as a result of typhus are part of a genocidal programme. They might be more part of mismanagement by the camp, or they are the result and this is actually blaming the allies now, turning the finger to the allies, they are the result of the terrible conditions created in Germany as the result of the Allied bombings. And in that case, the deniers point actually to Bergen-Belsen, which in 1945 was liberated by the British Army. And that became the symbol of the German death camps because of a lot of news, men arrived to the British troops in Bergen-Belsen on the 15th of April 1945. And what you saw in Bergen-Belsen, that camp had never had any gas chambers, they had never had any crematoria. It was, for most of its history, a relatively good camp to be. If you look at all of the options in the German concentration camp system, it was one of the better camps. But what the Allied soldiers saw in 1945 was the result of the typhus epidemic. And the typhus epidemic, according to Holocaust deniers, was the result basically the disintegration of the German economy and the German system to supply the camps with food and so on. And they ultimately decided if you have to blame anyone for the situation in Bergen-Belsen, these are the Allied bombardments which have destroyed the food and other infrastructure of Germany. And so, this is where many deniers are. They are in this grey zone. What they will say is that, "Okay, we agree that people died, they didn't die because a number of SS men put them in a gas chamber, and then supplied the chamber with cyanide, they died as a result of typhus." And this is in that discourse in the early 1990s, when actually an American historian at Princeton, basically endorsed this vision, his name was Arno Mayer in a book Why did the heavens not darken? that man like Irving was very much encouraged to take the position which he took, which he said, "This is all a big misunderstanding really. Auschwitz was not a good place to be but blame the bacteria, don't blame the Germans." Mike Isaacson: Okay, so moving along. Robert Faurisson has an infamous line, “No holes, no Holocaust.” So, what does that line mean, and what is the significance of the holes? Robert Jan Van Pelt: Yeah. So this goes back to the idea of show me the smoking gun, show me the evidence. Now, the two of the major gas chambers in Auschwitz, two of the crematoriums, which were the largest factories of deaths, they were underground gas chambers. And so now the question is, how did the gas enter into the gas chambers? Was it removed after the gassing, but also how did it enter? Now, people hear the word gas, they think that gas would have been pumped into a gas chamber through a system of pipes. But that actually was not the case in these Auschwitz crematoria. The gas that was used in Auschwitz was actually a delousing product, a cyanide delousing project that came in a tip. And it was really to use in ships of the Navy, it was also to use to kill vermin in grain silos because of course, all kinds of vermins would be eating the grain, it would be used on the front in the battlefield to delouse the uniforms of soldiers. Lice is everywhere where we have a lot of people who are camped wash and spent a lot of time together. So, what happened was that in the First World War, the German army had developed a delousing agent, that basically consisted of cyanide and that was commercially marketed since the 1920s. It was liquid cyanide that is soaked in either gypsum like substance or in paper discs. That happens in factory conditions. And then these paper discs or this gypsum full of cyanide is then packed in a tin, ordinary tin like canned tomatoes or something like that. In that tin, the cyanide has a shelf life of over six months. And so those tins can be shipped to whoever ultimately needs delousing job. And then what happens is that if you need to delouse, let's say a tom of clothing, then you put this in a room, seal the room, the windows and so on, and the doors, but keep one door that you can open and close, go into the room with a gas mask, open the tin with an ordinary tin opener, and then throw the contents on the floor, in this case the gypsum or the paper discs with the cyanide in it. What happens is that the cyanide will start to de-gas from the substance in it with a soak. And it will do so for around 24 hours. It de-gases very slowly because it needs not only to destroy the vermin, but also their eggs. And that takes a long time, it takes 24 hours. And immediately after the soldier or the medic has put all of that stuff on the floor, he walks out of the room and then closes the door, tapes the door so that it is sealed, takes off his gas mask and then you have to wait for 24 hours until the degassing has stopped and all of the vermin and the eggs basically are destroyed. This was the way that in Auschwitz, lethal gas was used gas chambers. Now, the problem with homicidal gas chamber is that you cannot simply put people in a room and then have a medic come in with a gas chamber with a gas mask, and then open a couple of tins, throw the contents on the floor and then walk out. That's not going to work. You need to introduce the gas in a different way. So the construction that the Germans used was that they had holes in the roof. In the case of those crematorium two and three, they had four holes in the roof. And in the first incarnation of a gas chamber, now if it was a crematorium two, they had to open the cover and then they dumped the contents of the tin inside the room. So that fell on top of the people who were crowded in tight room and then they closed the cover again and waited for 24 hours. And then opened the doors and started airing the place until people could come in and take the corpses out. That worked well until daily transport started to arrive of which people needed to be murdered. Now, the problem was the cyclone B as it was being shipped to Auschwitz, that it had this 24 degassing cycle. The degassing is very slow from the material in which the cyanide soaked. And if you're in a hurry, and the SS was formed late 1942 in Auschwitz in a hurry because of the daily arrival of train, so you needed to have the gas chamber available relatively quickly after it had been used and you needed to burn the corpses of the people who had been killed basically within the next 24 hours before the next train arrives with victims, you couldn't afford any more to wait for the 24 hours for the degassing to stop. The moment that everyone was murdered, and that mostly happened after 10 15 minutes, you wanted to basically be able to enter the gas chamber and then start cleaning up the gas chamber. Taking out the corpses you take out the gold off the teeth and so on, and then bring the corpses to the ovens. So the key to that operation was that you now had to remove the still degassing cyclone from the room 15 minutes after you had introduced it. That was the technical problem. And the technical solution was to actually lower now with let's call it a little basket. Put all of the contents of the tin in the basket, lower that basket into the room, basically murder everyone within the first 15 minutes because that's the time it takes with that cyanide concentration, and then hoists the basket out of the room through that same hole in which you have lowered it and discard the still degassing cyclone on the roof of the building. The problem of course, is that if you simply have a dive basket going down into a room, the victims can interfere with it. So the solution to prevent the interference of the victims with that lowering of the cyclone into the room was to create a wire mesh column, a cage around it, so it is lowered in the center of a cage. And the victims can see it. And through the cage, all of the cyclone material, the cyanide can drift into the room, but they cannot actually interfere with it. And so four of those cages existed in crematorium two and the gas chamber in four and crematorium three. The problem in terms of evidence is that we have a lot of eyewitness evidence of these cages, these columns as they're called, these gas columns. We have evidence of the man who made it in 1942, we have evidence of people who worked in those gas chambers, cleaning it up afterwards, and who survived the war. We have evidence even by Rudolf Hoess, but none of these cages survived because they were taken out before the destruction of the crematoria at the time that Auschwitz was evacuated at the end of the war. So first of all, we don't have those cages anymore, those columns. Second of all, we don't have drawings, we don't have original drawings, we don't have blueprints, because they were added into the building after the building was almost completed. And so Holocaust deniers, and especially Robert Faurisson, have said, "Because you cannot show me those cages, because you cannot show me the original blueprints, they'd never existed." And on top of that, those cages connected to the outside world through a hole because at the top of the cage was a hole and the cyclone was lowered through that hole in the cage. So they said, "If you cannot show me those holes in the concrete roof of the gas chamber, if there are no holes there at the alleged place where they were, then you can never say that actually there was any means of introducing the cyclone into those underground spaces." The problem with such roofs is that they were dynamited at the end of the war by the SS. And so they were destroyed, they're basically in pieces. So, how do you now show into a dynamited concrete slab in which there are many holes? No, the whole steps were purposely created to allow for the introduction of the cyclone. And a friend of mine, the late Harry Marcel, actually solved that problem in the year 2000 at a time of the Irving trial when he went to some forensic archaeological expedition to Auschwitz, and actually was in the case of crematory two, able to locate three of the four holes by looking actually at an important design detail. They said when you create a hole in the concrete slab, you have to do something with the rebar because if a rebar would probably run through that hole in some way, you cannot have that, otherwise the hole doesn't function. So what you do before you pour the concrete, you cut the rebar at the point and you bend to the end of the rebar back 180 degrees. And those kinds of details are still visible in the slab of that covered gas chamber of crematorium two. So in that sense, we have the forensic evidence, the physical material forensic evidence for the existence of those holes. Mike Isaacson: Okay, another thing I've seen negationists take aim at is the lack of insulation on the lights in the gas chambers. So, according to them cyanide is explosive and would have ignited in such a room. So, why is this a lie? Robert Jan Van Pelt: This the argument might be right, cyanide can be explosive, but the question is what concentration? Chemical substances behave very differently and behave at different concentrations. And the Auschwitz cyanide gas chambers operated at a very low concentration, it doesn't take that much to murder people. It takes around 500 600 parts per million and then you will be dead in 10 minutes. So the argument is derived from high concentration of cyanide into gas chambers. I certainly have not replicated the thing in a lab, so I must say that in this case, I need to lean on the authority of others. But basically, I have been taught that this can be all explained because of the low concentration of cyanide used in the Auschwitz gas chambers. Mike Isaacson: Right. So one of the strongest pieces of supposed evidence comes from Fred Leuchter, who claimed to have illegally taken a brick from Auschwitz to run some forensic tests. So, what can we say about Leuchter's tests? Robert Jan Van Pelt: Now, of course, the strongest piece of supposed evidence that the Auschwitz gas chambers would never use these gas chambers. In 1988, he went to Auschwitz to take samples of the walls of the homicidal gas chambers, and also of the walls of delousing chambers, that used cyclones. And so he did a compare and contrast method. One of the big differences, and in the case of the walls of the homicidal gas chambers, he said there's very little cyanide in there. And in the case of the level of cyanide in the delousing chambers, he said, "When we take samples, there's a very high concentration of cyanide." Now, there were many different problems. First of all, there were problems, this is basic assumptions. And if you go into delousing chambers, you see actually that the walls are blue, that these are originally whitewash walls that became blue. And this is Prussian blue, and it actually indicates the pigment is the result of binding of cyanide molecules with iron, basically the result is ferro ferricyanide, and that creates a blue pigment. Now, why do you get that cyanide deposit in the wall that creates this blue stain? The first reason is typically, in these delousing chambers, cyanide could be used in high concentration, it would be used over a long period of time, that is typically 24 hours at a time and this were also used continuously. And in order for Prussian blue, for ferro ferricyanide to form, it can only form when there is actually a low level of carbon dioxide in the room. And this actually has been replicated forensic labs in Poland. However, when you have a relatively high level of carbon dioxide in the room, as when you have also the cyclone material, the carbon dioxide prevents the formation of this pigment, prevents the binding of the cyanide with the iron atom. And this is why in homicidal gas chambers, you typically will not find this blue pigment, unless that homicidal gas chamber was also used for delousing. So this is one line of explanation. The second thing has to do with the fact that the homicidal gas chambers were basically destroyed. What Leuchter did was take samples of bricks that had been exposed to the elements by the time he came there for 35 years. The plaster that had covered the brick didn't exist anymore. It was very few samples, so that he took actually, the samples from the brick. That brick had not been exposed to cyanide at all because it had been covered by plaster. So the problem is his samples that he took from the homicidal gas chambers is that we actually do not know if they were ever exposed to cyanide because they would have been covered. And also then he took samples, we don't really know how much of the dilution of the sample material. We don't know how deep he went. So none of these things was ever recorded. So ultimately, chemists who have looked at his methods say this has no value whatsoever. This is the most amateurist forensic investigation. And certainly, the argument also of the complete different chemical conditions that exist in a homicidal gas chamber. That is especially because of the high level of carbon dioxide, the results of the breathing of the victims before they die, and the absence of a heightened level of carbon dioxide in delousing gas chambers provide enough evidence to show that Leuchter's results are worse. Mike Isaacson: Okay, so like I mentioned earlier in the show, you're the chief curator of Auschwitz: Not Long Ago, Not Far Away. What does Auschwitz have to teach the public today? Robert Jan Van Pelt: Yeah, there's no simple lesson. Some people will say what hatred can do. I'm a professor in an architecture school, for me, when I talk with my students about places like Auschwitz, I like to look at the macro level, at the role of professionals, of architects of people who get involved in creating these places, and who do this without really asking themselves any questions of what they're making. Or if they ask those questions, who do not really care how things are going to be used. Nowadays, bureaucrats, engineers, all of us, many of us have an incredible amount of power of ability to influence the lives of other people for good or for evil. And, of course, we find it very much right now on a very individual level when we're talking about vaccines, and masking and so on. And, in many ways, for me Auschwitz, it's not a story of a number of evil geniuses who are plotting to create hell on earth, certainly, that was a part of it. Certainly, there are moments in the history of that camp where you can say, "This is one of the major crimes in history that is being planned here." But it's also a story of a hell of a lot of people who with great thoughtlessness get themselves involved in this, and then at a certain moment, don't have the backbone to pull out. And, as a historian, I went into the research of this camp because so much evidence is there, in order to find in some way that diabolical dimension. And in the end, yes, the result is diabolical. But for the rest, I became actually fascinated by the incredible importance of mediocrity, of lies, of people lying to themselves, of where they are and what they're doing. And in that sense, I think that Auschwitz is in many ways, also a good metaphor of the situation we find ourselves in today. Mike Isaacson: Yeah, I believe Arendt called it the banality of evil, right? Robert Jan Van Pelt: Evil is not banal. Obviously, evil is not banal, but it's banal dimension to evil. And very few people do bad things because they want to do bad things. But most of us end up doing bad things because we're lazy, because we're intellectually lazy, because we do not basically ask for the truth. Because we're willing to basically make empty slogans into a convenient truth for ourselves so that we do not have to look in the mirror and do have to face very inconvenient facts. And we are right now clearly in many different ways, both climatalogically but also socially and politically on the crossroads. And when you have to make decision on what road you want to go, you have to ask tough questions to yourself. And certainly none of the people who were involved with Auschwitz between 1940 and 45 asked any of those tough questions. Mike Isaacson: All right, Dr. Van Pelt, thank you so much for coming on the podcast to debunk the Holocaust negationists. To learn more about Auschwitz and its detractors, check out The Case for Auschwitz: Evidence from the Irving Trial. Thanks again. Robert Jan Van Pelt: Thanks very much. It was wonderful to be with you. Mike Isaacson: If you liked what you heard and want to contribute to making this podcast, consider subscribing to our Patreon. Patrons get early access to episodes and free merch. You can also make a one-time donation to our PayPal or Cash App with the username NaziLies. Include your mailing address to get some swag. [Theme song]

After updating the latest Raiders news, the crew takes a deep dive into some past free agents and a few past "what if" draft picks.Show Notes:https://www.onlynationpod.com/ep-59-what-was-and-what-might-have-been/

Your Boy Q gives you News and Nuggets collected over the weekend including Pre season schedule finalized and DL David Irving released. Segment 2 Q talks all things David Irving and what a wasted opportunity (again) then calls and text close out the show. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The Only Nation Podcast crew updates some current Raiders news then takes a closer look at the new defensive line.Show Notes:https://www.onlynationpod.com/ep-58-a-closer-look-at-the-new-defensive-line/

This episode features Coalition for Human Dignity activists Steve Wasserstrom, Jonathan Mozzochi and Abby Layton. In this bonus episode we look at how the meticulous collection of data mined for opposition research contributed to a world-famous trial to debunk fascist Holocaust denier David Irving. Transcript Show Notes credits Producers: Celina Flores, Erin Yanke, Mic Crenshaw Editors: Erin Yanke and Icky A. Interviewer for this episode: Claire Rischiotto and Celina Flores Story editors: Celina Flores, Erin Yanke, Icky A., Mic Crenshaw, Moe Bowstern Visual archivist: Julie Perini Mastering: Colin Casserd Music: Kai Engel, the fucked up beat, and silicone transmitter, all from the Free Music Archive --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/idhh/support

Your Boy Q gives you the brief News and Notes collected over the weekend including thoughts on a couple key members of the Raiders Offensive Line, and reports of $$ that Free Agent JJ Watt is receiving so far, in Segment 2 you will hear a few sound bites from a really good interview done by JT The Brick with Raiders DE David Irving (check out the whole interview on Raiders.com) about what it means to be a member of the Silver N' Black and what he needs to do to become a difference maker for the team. Your calls and text and a tweet close out the show. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Homer, Heidi and T3 check out some current Raider news and then take a closer look at the Raiders in free agency.Show Notes:https://www.onlynationpod.com/ep-48-raider-updates-look-at-free-agency/

Your Boy Q gives you the News and Notes including the addition of David Irving and what that could potentially mean for the Raiders D-line rotation, talks about the Raiders sitting at 3-2 as they prepare for this weeks game with Tampa Bay and the fact that each and every week in the NFL is a dog fight, don't pencil the Raiders in the playoffs because of 1 win over Kansas City, then your calls and text close out the show. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Your Boy Q gives you News and Notes including another Raider on the Covid-19 Reserve list, thoughts from a Cowboys Beat Writer on David Irving and the Raiders Record following a bye week. In Segment 2 Q talks the Trenches and how the game can be won or lost among the Offensive and Defensive lines. Your Calls and Text close out the show Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

David Ja Rodd Irving is a former American football defensive tackle who played for the Dallas Cowboys and Kansas City Chiefs of the National Football League. He played college football at Iowa State University. On March 1, 2019, Irving was indefinitely suspended by the NFL for again violating the league's policy on substances of abuse. A few days later, he announced live on social media that he was quitting football because he was opposed to the NFL's drug policy, specifically with regards to marijuana. Following this incident Irving became an activist for cannabis. He opened a cannabis business with a focus on CBD-related products. Irving co-founded his own cannabis advocacy magazine called Cannabis Passport. He is now reinstated and playing for the Las Vegas Raiders. @david_irving95 @faded_truth

AB shocked the NFL world, turning an offseason full of antics into a massive guaranteed contract. "Mr. Raider", Tim Brown, joined the show to talk about his conversation with AB after the trade, his thoughts on the Gruden-AB relationship and whether he'd be AB's chaperone in Las Vegas. Lefkoe delivers his 15 AB observations that no one else is talking about and broke down all the major Free Agency news. Lefkoe also took a deep dive into David Irving's IG Live retirement and how it raises large questions about the NFL's relationship with marijuana. Share and Subscribe, Homies!See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.