I agree with Davkakach.
There is a case for opening up the debate as much as possible. I think that Chaim has proved this by exposing the truth about what the Marxists in Israel did to the Jews of Europe, and of course the British shame.
The holocaust deniers/revisionists claims rest on the fact that there is no forensic evidence of gas chambers.
They dispute the use of gas chambers, and the number of people who died. However, the story keeps on changing. Irving keeps on revising his story.
Who or what are we to believe? Let the historians get to work, get them debating, stop locking up the Nutzis and expose the truth and the lies.
I think that the main truth is that the allies, American and Israeli Jewry and others do not want the truth about their complicity with the Nazi regime/Holocaust to be exposed, they just want to use the story for their own political purposes.
How many Israeli children know about British and Israeli Marxist complicity in the holocaust? This is a serious matter which has political implications. That the ideological descendents of these criminals are still in power in Britain and Israel is an absolute disgrace!
Didn't George Bush's grandfather fund the Thyssen company through a subsidiary bank? There must be countless other stories like this which have yet to surface.
I think that the historians are hand-picked by the elites who want history to be favourable to them. Well, that is hardly fresh news is it?
The last century saw perhaps unprecendented levels of barbarity and gross immorality, but it is easy to forget that, behind that, there was a subtle barbarity and immorality which made what happened possible. Greed, bad government and moral decline were responsible for much of what happened last century. The purpose of good government is to avert the danger which has not yet come.
I am British and a nationalist, but I do not believe that Winston Churchill was perfect etc.
I will add to this later.