ISSN 1440-9828
                                                                  No 364


Fredrick Töben wishes you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year

The following article – as the Jeremy Jones article in Newsletter No 363 – was published in Without Prejudice, No 4, December 1991, i.e., two years before its author, Joel Stuart Hayward, submitted his controversial MA thesis on Revisionism wherein he stated that there was no evidence of homicidal gas chambers existing at Auschwitz. Hayward had sent me his original 1993 thesis, which I duly copied and submitted to the HREOC enquiry that Jeremy Jones had begun against me in 1996. The thesis was to substantiate my held views that there were no homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz – something I also substantiated by physically visiting the alleged gassing site in April 1997 and 1999. The MA thesis was also to defeat the claim made by Jones that no reputable university in the world has made Holocaust Revisionism an object of study, a serious subject.

Hayward had embargoed the thesis for five years and in effect by 1999 it became accessible for anyone who bothered looking for it at Christchurch’s University of Canterbury library. From memory I recall that someone either removed or copied the Hayward thesis at Canterbury, thereby further distributing its contents.

The HREOC enquiry stalled, especially because of my 7-month 1999 imprisonment at Mannheim, Germany, and only at the end of 2000 did Commissioner McEvoy hand down her findings, but by that time the Hayward Working Party Report had also handed down its verdict. The Report’s recommendations did not lead to Hayward having his MA degree revoked and replaced with a BA, as New Zealand’s Jewish community leaders demanded. The University report conceded that deficiencies abounded in the thesis but that its author had not been dishonest. The Report could have revoked the degree as the German University of Göttingen did in 1983 in a shameful exercise against one of its former students whom it awarded a doctorate during the 1950s, Judge Wilhelm Stäglich.

Hayward, who had received death threats duly recanted and apologized to New Zealand’s Jewish community for having “stuffed up” when writing his thesis. He claimed that the 2000 London defamation action by David Irving against Professor Deborah Lipstadt had offered new information. I asked Hayward to detail for me this new information – he never did, but detailed the pressure under which he was living. It lead to a nervous breakdown and a two-year spell from academia. A Google search will bring you to his website where these details are kept on the public record.

The 1991 written article can be seen as Hayward’s attempt to soften up his Jewish audience for the consequences that would doubtlessly flow from his thesis’ conclusion that there were no homicidal gassings at Auschwitz. Revisionists had had a major victory in Ernst Zündel’s 1988 Toronto Holocaust trial where famed Holocaust scholar Raul Hilberg had to admit that there is no written Hitler order that began the Final Solution, the extermination of European Jewry.

The 1998 Leuchter Report detailed the use of Zyklon B as a fumigant to delouse things rather than as an agent of death. This was confirmed in the 1993 Rudolf Report, and in the same year David Irving produced a powerful motivational video on the occasion of having been banned from entering Australia on account of his ‘bad character’. Therein he predicted that he would single-handedly ‘sink the Auschwitz’ within five years. As well, one of the upholders of the Holocaust narrative, sharp-witted and dynamic US academic Professor Alan Dershowitz, warned his Holocaust believers’ constituents to back off from taking Revisionists to court because the 1988 Zündel Toronto trial had illustrated that any survivor or Holocaust expert placed in a witness box would have their evidence discredited.

This was the reason why during the 2000 Irving-Lipstadt trial Professor Deborah Lipstadt did not take the stand and Irving, conducting his own case, could not force her to do so.

The issue had not been whether gassings occurred at Auschwitz, though this was canvassed by Irving, but whether Irving was a ‘racist’, Holocaust denier’, ‘anti-Semite’, et al., and of course these labels aptly fitted him, something Irving was at great pains to prove otherwise. Therefore, the material facts that make up the Holocaust-Shoah narrative, which was the bulk of Irving’s evidence before the court, was irrelevant for the judge hearing the case. But, of course, it was not irrelevant for the world media that went into a frenzied overdrive to use the derogatory labels to deflect from what Irving hoped to achieve – show the world that the pillars on which the Holocaust rested were built on sand. When Irving was arrested on 11 November 2005 in Austria, he recanted his views and stated via his lawyer that there had been limited gassings at Auschwitz. It was not enough for the judges and they imposed a three-year prison term, which ended 13 months later on 20 December 2006 when Austria decided to release him because Irving had publicly stated he now believed in the Holocaust-Shoah and in limited gassings.

Dershowitz’s strategy had proven successful. From now on the Holocaust narrative would not have its pillars on which it rested – 6 million Jews murdered, systematic extermination process, homicidal gas chambers – tested in any court of law.

Instead, the process of defaming anyone who refused to believe in these three pillars would open a new chapter in the fight to retain and further consolidate the Holocaust-Shoah as a dogma, as a religion. The hunt for the big Revisionists was finally on.

On 5 February 2003, when US secretary Colin Powell appeared before the UN to prove that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction – WMD – Ernst Zündel was arrested at his home in Tennessee, imprisoned and held for a while in a US prison, then extradited to Canada where he spent two years before being transported to Germany. In February this year he was sentenced to five years prison, the maximum under the notorious Section 130 of the German criminal code where any doubting of the Holocaust-Shoah is forbidden. The German judge, Dr Meinerzhagen refused to discount the two years Ernst spent in the Canadian prison, and so effectively sentencing Ernst to seven years for what? – Ernst refuses to believe in the Holocaust-Shoah narrative. That the Security Certificate used to deport Zündel from Canada to Germany was declared illegal by Canada’s highest court did not influence Meinerzhagen. After all, Ernst Zündel had not shown remorse for what he had done – in fact, in his closing statement to the court, Ernst had actually aggravated his situation by making the court an offer: If evidence of the gassing was ever provided to him, then he, Ernst, would apologize to Jews and to the world. Within the current absurd German legal system such a comment could well be regarded as exacerbating the situation for Ernst who can now be labeled to be an Überzeugungstäter – a criminal who is convinced of his beliefs-holds a strong conviction. For such prisoners there is no remission of sentence because they are deemed to be incorrigible, beyond redemption, and no amount of counseling would sway them away from their belief that the various narratives that make up the Holocaust-Shoah story are unsubstantiated.

Likewise, with Germar Rudolf who was also illegally ripped from his family by US officials and extradited to Germany in November 2005. Interestingly, Germar Rudolf’s work output has been phenomenal as an author and publisher using the Internet to maximum effect – and yet he received only a 30 months prison sentence. Germar did not give a closing address to the court and this can well be interpreted as not exacerbating the situation. In any case, any closing remarks would have been a repeat of what he had stated in his written submission to court.

That this historical event known as the Holocaust-Shoah has not been thoroughly studied is the message the Iranian President, Dr Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, sent around the world when his government sponsored the 11-12 December 2006 Holocaust conference in Teheran. That World Jewry does not speak with one voice was another message that flowed from the conference. The Torah True Jews oppose the Zionist occupation of Palestine, and they also refuse to receive any Holocaust-Shoah reparations from Germany and anyone else.


Joel Stuart Hayward: Holocaust Revisionism in New Zealand: The ‘Thinking-man’s Anti-Semitism?’

Without Prejudice, No 4 December 1991, pp.38-49


Joel S A Hayward is a tutor and post-graduate history student at the University of Canterbury in Christchurch, New Zealand, and is currently working on a thesis entitled ‘The Worldwide Growth and Impact of Holocaust Revisionism’. In 1989, Hayward formed a national society – which he headed until his workload forced him to step down in July 1991 – called Opposition to Anti-Semitism, Inc., which has been effective in educating Jewish New Zealanders about local forms and manifestations of anti-Semitism. He has also had numerous articles published in New Zealand newspapers and periodicals.


‘Holocaust revisionism’ is the term given to the crusade to deny the Nazi genocide of approximately six million Jews during the Second World War.

Since its inception in 1978, the Institute for Historical Review (IHR) has spearheaded, under a guise of objective scholarship, the movement to refute the authenticity of the Holocaust and to distribute pseudo-scholarly material which claims that the Holocaust is merely a monstrous fabrication.

From 1981 onwards, the IHR’s annual International Revisionist Conference has been the platform for such scholars to present lectures denying the veracity of the Holocaust. The IHR makes cassettes of these lectures, and selected papers are published in the IHR’s quarterly journal, The Journal of Historical Review. This type of Holocaust revisionist material – the ‘thinking man’s anti-Semitism’ – is disseminated worldwide.

‘Revisionism’ – as distinct from ‘Holocaust revisionism’ – is not new, however. After the Bolshevik Revolution, the term was used by Marxist scholars to designate various types of deviation from established viewpoints. Following the First World War, Dr Harry Elmer Barnes and numerous other historians, both in the victor nations and the defeated, ‘revised’ the official history of the victors with research which permanently weakened the hypothesis of sole German responsibility for the outbreak of war in 1914. Whilst the term ‘revisionism’ came to designate historical findings on World War I which were partly or totally contrary to the ‘commonly accepted view’, ‘revisionism’ now defines all historical findings, on any historical period, contrary to the Establishment version.[1]

Second World War revisionism has, since the mid-1970s. become very popular. Books are being written, and sold in their millions, which occasionally paint Churchill, Roosevelt, Stalin and Truman as malevolent tyrants, whilst the Nazi regime and its leaders are partly rehabilitated, painted in colours less harsh. Despite this, one must not make the mistake of labeling these historians as ‘Nazis’ or ‘Fascists’. The vast majority are objective, well-respected scholars – including Pulitzer Prize winners[2] - whose views on the outbreak, course and conclusion of the war are completely dependent on the evidence provided by original records and documents from the war period, often hidden away in archives that governments and established powers had kept sealed up until recently.

Holocaust revisionism, however, is something quite different from this genuine desire for historical truth, the difference being the motive. The motive behind the denial of the Holocaust is the desire to rehabilitate fully the Third Reich and also to attack and discredit the Jewish people by ‘proving’ that the Holocaust is merely a well-executed Jewish lie, that it did not happen nor could have happened. It is the manifestation in New Zealand of this Holocaust revisionism, as distinct from revisionism in general, which is the subject of this discourse.

It would be natural to assume that neo-fascists in New Zealand would find Holocaust revisionism a very acceptable form of anti-Semitism, yet at the grass-roots level neo-fascists tend to enjoy believing in the Holocaust, the humiliation and murder of millions of their racial enemies.

On the night of November 14/15, 1981, the Webb Street Synagogue and Jewish Community Centre (Wellington) were desecrated with dozens of Nazi signs and slogans in what is probably still New Zealand’s worst case of anti-Semitic vandalism. The slogans and signs – almost identical to those painted during a torrent of anti-Semitic incidents in 1979[3] - clearly indicate that the offenders believed in the reality of the Nazi genocide; written across the Centre’s walls were the words ‘BELSON [sic.] WAS A GAS’, and the name of the Auschwitz doctor responsible for deciding who was to be gassed, Joseph Mengele, appeared alongside numerous swastikas and ‘SS’ signs.[4]

Perhaps the most interesting slogan was a German phrase ‘Tod dem Juden’ (Death to the Jews) – a Nazi rallying cry of the 1930s – which indicates that the offenders, unless German speakers, had copied this phrase from literature dealing with the Holocaust and Third Reich period. In fact, the copying of Nazi slogans in German has long been a common feature of anti-Semitic vandalism in New Zealand, the first example probably being the painting of the words – with incorrect grammar – ‘Juden Schwein aus gehen’ (Jewish Swine, Get Out) during a period of anti-Semitic activity in Christchurch in 1960.[5]

Judging by the very nature of anti-Semitic vandalism, and the copious number of spelling errors contained inn the slogans painted, it would not be unreasonable to conclude that the culprits are poorly educated. However, the frequent use of German phrases , and names and places unique to the Holocaust and, of course, the shocking way they are intended to mortify Jews, indicates that these people accept the truth of the Holocaust and delight in reminding Jews of the horror of that period. Clearly the anti-Semites involved in this type of vandalism are not ‘Holocaust revisionists’.

Whilst the majority of those who adhere, or claim to adhere to Nazi doctrines are young, usually identify themselves as ‘White Power’, ‘Skins’, or ‘Skinheads’, their ideology comes from traditional 1930s National Socialism. Their knowledge of that period, however, tends to be limited, and scholarly arguments such as Holocaust revisionism have no appeal to them.

Nevertheless, there are neo-fascists in New Zealand whose commitments to nazi ideals is anything but superficial. Durward Colin King-Ansell formed the National Socialist Party of New Zealand in 1969, the party adhering to ‘true’ Nazi ideology. King-Ansell himself had been sentenced in 1967 to 18 months’ imprisonment for throwing a brick through an Auckland synagogue window and lighting a fire on its steps. In 1977 King-Ansell was convicted, under Section 25 of the Race Relations Act 1971, of publishing a pamphlet likely ‘to incite hostility or ill-will’ towards the Jewish people. The conviction was upheld on appeal, although a $400 fine was substituted for the original sentence of three months’ imprisonment. Interestingly, a book[6] written about the 1977 case has recently been ‘exported’ to the United States, where it is being sold as a ‘new release’ by the Sons of Liberty, the publishing and distribution arm of James K Warner’s anti-Judaic and anti-Zionist New Christian Crusade Church. Since 1990 they have also sold Eric D Butler’s infamous book, Censored History [see below].[7]

King-Ansell’s organizational ability enabled him to establish a small but active party which maintained a high public profile throughout the 1970s and gained the support of several ‘Bootboy’ and ‘Skinhead’ groups well into the 1980s. Having read widely on the Nazi era, and being in direct contact with American and Australian Nazi groups, King-Ansell was one of the first New Zealanders to come into contact with, and then proclaim, Holocaust revisionist theories.

In 1971 he traveled to Australia, where he became active in the affairs of the National Socialist Party of Australia (NSPA) and formed friendships with such leading Australian Nazis as Alan Parziani, Ken Gibbett and Edward Cawthron, who was the editor of the Australian National Socialist Journal and author of the booklet entitled The Big Lie. Cawthron’s The Big Lie was the first mass distribution Holocaust revisionist booklet published in Australia. It opened with these words: ‘Wherever you see or hear a Jew teaching, do not think otherwise than that you are hearing a poisonous basilisk who with his face poisons and kills people… be on your guard against them![8] Despite this nonsense, Cawthron himself has had an outstanding academic career, gaining a B Sc with first-class honours at the University of Adelaide in 1963 and being awarded a PhD in 1970. Holocaust revisionism is certainly the pièce de résistance of educated anti-Semites.

Cawthron and his lengthy revisionist booklet, which follows the arguments of Paul Rassinier, [9] must have had a large influence on King-Ansell; after his return to New Zealand in 1972, articles on “The Holocaust Swindle’ and ‘The Myth of the Six Million’ began to appear in The Observer, the journal of King-Ansell’s National Socialists. Believing that ‘the talk of the extermination camps is nonsense’,[10] King-Ansell has endorsed the Holocaust revisionist perspective for almost two decades now.

King-Ansell has certainly influenced the opinions, regarding the Holocaust, of many of the neo-fascists in direct contact with him and his literature, yet it should be noted that the vast majority of those in New Zealand who identify themselves as Nazi in their ideology – including ‘White Power’, ‘Skinheads’, and ‘Bootboys’ – have never had contact with King-Ansell’s National Socialists and, therefore, have not been influenced by the Holocaust revisionist theories he extols. Also, King-Ansell’s influence outside the small National Socialist movement is non-existent. His openly racist views, his adoration of Adolf Hitler and his passion for wearing Nazi uniforms reined any chance he had of seducing members of the public-at-large to the Holocaust revisionist perspective.

The New Zealand National Front (NZNF) was ‘officially’ formed in 1977, with the directors being careful to avoid comparison with the fascism of the 1930s or groups like King-Ansell’s National Socialists, desiring instead to draw comparisons with the contemporary British National Front. However, the NZNF retained an emphasis on ‘racial purity’ which included traditional anti-Semitic arguments. Members of the NZNF were also able, in the late 1970s, to attain and distribute large numbers of Holocaust denial pamphlets and books, such as Richard Harwood’s (a pseudonym for Richard Veral of the British National Front[11]) crude work, Did Six Million Really Die? (now re-titled Six Million Lost and Found), a book also being distributed by a Christchurch group, Viking Youth, which formed in 1979.

In June 1977, David Crawford, Chairman of the NZNF, wrote a detailed and lengthy letter in the University of Canterbury’s student newspaper, CANTA (No 11), in which he explained the key points of the Holocaust revisionist arguments. Part of his letter reads: ‘There is NO EVIDENCE in existence, even in the memories of Hitler’s secretaries, which shows any [Nazi] intent to exterminate Jews. This may come as a shock to some of your liberal readers, but nevertheless it is a fact’.

Crawford’s letter was written in defence of a full-page Holocaust-denying article, written by a Mr Stephen Ladanyi, which had appeared in CANTA three weeks earlier (No.8). Ladanyi asserted that his revisionist article was merely ‘presenting here a summary of the main evidence against the myth as prepared by the other side’. Ladanyi’s choice of the word ‘myth’ to describe the Holocaust does much to dispel the notion that his article was written as an objective historical analysis, as he claimed it was.

In March 1981, those activists who had formed the nucleus of the NZNF, feeling that the group had served its purpose, formed a new organization, New Force, which changed its name in 1983 to the Nationalist Workers’ Party (it had no connection to the Australian group of the same name). Despite a major purge of ‘extreme-right elements’[12] to gain a degree of respectability, New Force/Nationalist Workers’ Party maintained its links with its British counterparts, and continued to disseminate Holocaust revisionist material

There were numerous other small neo-fascist groups in the 1970s and 1980s, especially in Christchurch where a number of these groups believed in the veracity of the Nazi genocide – for them the Holocaust was a time of near success for Hitler’s policy of racial hygiene; something to be proud of – the majority of ‘organised’ neo-fascists in New Zealand have had at least a basic ‘education’ in Holocaust revisionist theories.

This conclusion is supported by statements made to the present writer (10/1/910 by Mr Ernest Thornton, Secretary of Conservative Front (NZ), a neo-fascist organization based – and still operating – in Christchurch, which has ideological links with the re-formed National Front in Britain. In Thornton’s view, ‘virtually all the hard-line right-wing groups promote revisionism. It is generally accepted as part and parcel of right-wing political ideology’.

In the August 1989 issue of Frontline, the Conservative Front’s monthly magazine, appeared a review of Professor Robert Faurisson’s Holocaust revisionist booklet, Were Six Million Jews Exterminated? The laudatory review was written by Kerry Bolton, a member of the Front and editor of The Realist. Bolton had previously been a member of the National Socialist Party, had been North island Director of the NFNZ, and had been involved with the foundation of the New Force.

It is difficult to determine how large the Conservative Front’s membership is, or to what extent it disseminates Holocaust revisionist literature. Thornton told the present writer (10/1/91) that he ‘passed on revisionist material to individual members…some hostile to the idea that six million Jews were killed by Hitler’s government, but some not so’. Another of Thornton’s statement is more enlightening: ‘I emphasize most firmly that it is not our intention to stir up anti-Jewish feeling, although I would say that most of our members harbour such feelings, to a greater or lesser extent.’

Neo-fascists are not, however, the only ones to propagate Holocaust revisionism in New Zealand, and in actual fact their influence in this area has been vastly outweighed by such institutions as Western Destiny Publications and the New Zealand League of Rights, who have managed to ‘peddle their wares’ to a much larger percentage of New Zealanders than the neo-fascists could.

Western Destiny Publications began in 1965 and was primarily a mail order service providing various right-wing groups with books which supported their views. In 1980 the bookshop moved from Hamilton to Christchurch, where it began to provide material for members of such groups as Tax Reform Integrity Movement (TRIM) and Zenith Applied Philosophy (ZAP). Functioning as a prominent retail shop in the heart of Christchurch, the shop attracted customers from neo-fascist groups, right-wing groups, members of the public-at-large and oddly, conservative Protestant evangelical groups.

Among the large selection of books sold by Western Destiny Publication were several Holocaust revisionist works, most notably The Hoax of the Twentieth Century by Dr Arthur Butz. This weighty tome has become the ‘Bible’ of Holocaust revisionism, and is praised by the IHR as being ‘a thoroughly academic compendium of primary research that refutes all major orthodox assertions regarding the Holocaust’.[13] The bookshop also sold traditional anti-Semitic works, such as Henry Ford’s The International Jew and the nefarious The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion.

In 1985, complaints about specific books being sold by Western Destiny Bookshop were received by the Race Relations Office (RRO), which was already seeking to have the same books, The Hoax of the Twentieth Century and The International Jew, banned from sale in an Auckland bookshop owned by the New Zealand League of Rights, after the New Zealand Jewish Council lodged a complaint.

The RRO requested that the bookshop remove the books from sale, something the League’s shop refused to do. An article in the New Zealand Herald (19/4/85) states that the League of Rights believed the issue was one of ‘freedom of expression’ and that it would fight the moves by the RRO to take it and the books to the Equal Opportunities Tribunal.

It would appear, however, that Western Destiny Publications was more responsive, as the books were fairly[14] promptly taken down from display.  By February 1986 their retail shop in Christchurch had ceased operating. [15]

Interestingly, the matter received a good deal of media coverage. For example, Professor P R Hart of the University of Waikato, and expert on the Third Reich, spoke out against the banning of Holocaust revisionist material, despite saying that ‘these books are not to be believed’ and they contain ‘ nonsense’. To Hart, the issue was one of freedom of thought; be believed the books should still be sold ‘in the interests of intellectual freedom’ but ‘obviously’ they should not be sold to minors.[16]

In any event, after discussion with Jewish community leaders and after reflecting on various similar cases overseas, the proceedings commissioner resolved not to refer the issue to the Equal Opportunities Tribunal.[17]

The New Zealand League of Rights has certainly not limited its operations to running the above-mentioned retail outlet.[18] Eric D Butler, the League’s Australia-based founder, tours New Zealand regularly (his last tour was in August-September, 1990), conducting public meetings throughout the country. The League publishes several newsletters, including On Target, which comes out fortnightly, and The New Times, which is published monthly. The League also operates an extensive cassette tape service, Conservative Tapes, which lists 132 titles in its 1990 catalogue, and a book service, Conservative Books, which lists over 350 titles in its 1990 catalogue.

It is not within the scope of this paper to detail the history and activities of the New Zealand League of Rights, which was established in 1971. The subject at hand is the dissemination of Holocaust revisionist material, therefore only those activities of the League – anti-Semitic or otherwise –  which are related to the subject matter will be discussed in this study.

The League of Rights distributes more Holocaust revisionist material – through its bookshops, book-stands at public meetings, and mail-rder book and tape catalogues – than any other organization in New Zealand. In fact, the League of Rights has probably distributed more Holocaust revisionist literature than the combined total of that disseminated by the above-mentioned groups. The League certainly does not have the same odious public image that neo-fascists have, and it has been quite successful in attracting support form people who would not consider themselves anti-Semitic in any way.

Eric Butler himself denies the Holocaust in its presently-recognised historical terms. In his iniquitous book, Censored History,[19] published in the late 1970s, Butler devotes an entire chapter to ‘The Myth of the Six Million’. Claiming that ‘the propaganda built around the story of the six million is mind-numbing’ (p37), Butler attempts to prove that the Holocaust never happened, that it is merely a Jewish lie designed to gain political and financial support for the Jewish people and the State of Israel.

In 1979 Butler published another book, Releasing Reality, Social Credit and the Kingdom of God.[20] In this anti-Semitic work, a summary of the ideology of C H Douglas, Butler asserts that there is a Jewish ‘conspiracy’ to destroy the fabric of non-Jewish society, and that Socialism and Communism are political systems devised by Jews for that purpose. Butler notes that ‘the rank and file of Jews are regarded by their leaders [“the conspirators’] as the expendable raw material of their power plan’ (p53). Amongst this nonsense, Butler slips in plenty of Holocaust revisionism. The Holocaust, writes Butler, is just one of the tools use dby the Jews to gain the support they need to carry out their devious plan for world domination. For example: ‘In spite of the fact that since the publication of Dr A R Butz’s scholarly and meticulously-documented work, The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, there is no longer any doubt that the story of the gassing of six million Jews by the Germans is a carefully fostered myth by Zionist propagandists and their dupes, the myth is used constantly in an attempt to stifle rational discussion of the “Jewish Question”’ (p52).

Butler has provided the ideological direction of the New Zealand League of Rights for almost to decades. In 1980 David Thompson, National Director, echoed Butler’s views during his own explanation of the League’s distribution of Holocaust revisionist literature: ‘We rate Harwood’s book on the Six Million as interesting, but recommend Dr Butz’s work, The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, as the most valuable yet produced. The subject of the Six Million is not merely an academic one, it relates to the question of international power politics and the role of propaganda’.[21]

In the 1970s and early 1980s, the New Zealand League of Rights offered for sale only three or four different Holocaust revisionist books. However, this small number of titles offered is not indicative of the League’s level of endorsement of the Holocaust revisionist perspective. By the late 1970s, Holocaust revisionism was very much a part of the League’s ideology. The small number of revisionist titles offered directly corresponds to the small number of Holocaust revisionist books published in English. There were numerous other tiles available to the League –  such as Professor Rassinier’s Le Mensonge d’Ulysse (in French) or Dr Wilhelm Sglich’s Der Auschwitz Mythos (in German) – but very few of these had been translated into English.

With the establishment of the Institute for Historical Review in 1978, many of these foreign language works were translated into English for the first time. There were also new Holocaust denial books being written by IHR members.

By 1985 the New Zealand League of Rights had caught up with these developments and had begin to advertise for sale such titles as Rassinier’s Debunking the Genocide Myth and Ditlieb Felderer’s Anne Frank’s Diary – a Hoax, a book which ‘proves’, according to the League’s book catalogue of that year, that the heroic story of Anne Frank is nothing more than a ‘propaganda fable’. Other Holocaust revisionist titles included in the 1985 catalogue were Dr A J App’s The Six Million Swindle; Walter Sanning’s The Dissolution of Eastern European Jewry; Richard Harwood’s Nuremberg and Other War Crimes Trials and Six Million Lost and Found; and, of course, Dr Butz’s The Hoax of the Twentieth Century.

Despite this rapid growth in the number of Holocaust revisionist books being offered for sale by the League in 1985, there was only one Holocaust denial audio-tape available: A Christian Perspective of the Six Million Hoax, by Jeremy Lee, Assistant National Director of the Australian League of Rights. Lee’s insidious audio-cassette, recorded before an Australian audience in 1983, presents his own historical andn theological reasons as to why the Jews are an anti-Christ people and how they have, for 2,000 years, tried to dominate Christian society. In doing so, lee explains, in considerable depth, that the Jews use the ‘myth’ of the Holocaust to manipulate the powers of the world into supporting and financing Israel.

The 1987 book catalogue of the New Zealand League of Rights shows that several revisionist books on the Second World War have been added, most notably Antony C Sutton’s Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler and British historian David Irving’s The War Path. Whilst these books present a perspective on the war that would be unpalatable to most Jews, they are not anti-Semitic and do not deny the veracity of the Holocaust in its presently-recognised historical terms.[22]

The 1987 catalogue also shows the addition of two books which are clearly Holocaust revisionist: Rassinier’s The Real Eichman Trial, and Colin Vary’s The Victims, a book which attempts to prove that the numerous photographs of Jewish corpses piled up at the death-camps have been ‘doctored’ for propaganda purposes.

The New Zealand League of Rights has been quick to seize upon any international news that could be useful to ‘prove’ to its members that the Holocaust is mythical. For example, in the 13 June, 1988 issue of On Target there appeared an editorial on the Israeli trial of John Demjanjuk, found guilty in April 1988 of war crimes and crimes against the Jewish people and humanity. The editorial calls the trial ‘an obscene travesty’ and asserts that ‘as the great “Holocaust” propaganda myth shows signs of wear and tear under scrutiny of revisionist historians, there was evidently a need to try to refurbish it with a massively publicized show trial’.

In 1988 Mr Ernst Zündel, a German-born Canadian, was ont rial in Toronto for ‘spreading false information’ by publishing a Canadian edition of Did Six Million Really Die? Which claims, amongst other things, that no Jews were ever gassed during the Second World War. Zündel had previously beent ried on the same charge in 1985 and was sentenced to 15 months’ imprisonment. However, in January 1987 the Ontario Court of Appeal overturned the judgment and ordered a re-trial, which began on 18 January 1988.

Fred A Leuchter, a self-styled specialist engineer and consultant in the united States for the design and construction of execution gas chambers, was asked by the defence to travel to Poland to discover if the rooms at Auschwitz could ever have been used to gas people, as claimed. His written statement to the Court, on his return, sets out the methodology and findings of the first forensic examination of the actual Polish sites where the gassings are stated to have happened. Leuchter’s ‘verdict’, after examining the sites and analyzing samples taken from the floors and walls for their cyanide content, is that the ‘chambers’ in Auschwitz could not have been used, then or now, as execution gas chambers. *

* Leuchter’s credentials as an engineer have been challenged by legal authorities in the United States, with the judge in the Zündel case ruling conclusively that he had neither the formal training nor the practical experience to conduct the kind of ‘scientific study’ which he purports to have made of the gas chambers at the Nazi death camps (see Arthur Goodman, ‘Leuchter:Exposed and Discredited by the Court’, in Shelly Shapiro (ed.) Truth Prevails–Demolishing Holocaust Denial: the End of ‘The Leuchter Report’, New York, 1990, p 79. Moreover, his ‘report’ – which the judge refused to accept as evidence in the Zündel trial (loc.cit.) – has been totally discredited by the author of an exhaustive study of the gas chambers at Auschwitz, Jean-Claude Pressac: ‘Based on false knowledge, inducing fake reasoning and leading to false interpretations, The Leuchter Report is inadmissible because it was produced in illegal conditions; because it overlooks the most basic historical data; because it is scuttled by gross errors of calculation; and because it is suspect of falsification. The Leuchter Report lands in the cesspool of pretentious human folly’. (Jean-Claude Pressac, ‘The Deficiencies and Inconsistencies of The Leuchter Report’, in Shelly Shyapiro (ed.) op. cit. p55) – [Ed. Without Prejudice]

British historian David Irving was also present at the Zündel trial of 1988, giving ‘expert evidence’ on the Third Reich. Upon reading The Leuchter Report, as Leuchter’s findings came to be called, Irving said on 22 April 1988 that the report was a ‘shattering’ document which would become essential reading for any future historian writing on the Second World War.[23]

For the New Zealand League of Rights this was the ultimate opportunity to ‘prove’ that the Holocaust never happened: firstly, an objective engineering scientist, who personally examined the ‘gas chambers’, concludes that no Jews could possibly have been gassed in them and, secondly, a best-selling historian agrees with him.

In the 30 October 1989 issue of On Target there was a large sales advertisement for The Leuchter Report and an editorial praising David Irving for finally denying that the Holocaust happened: ‘Irrespective of what may be said about British historian David Irving, it is obvious that he is a man of great intellectual integrity. At a press conference held in London on June 23rd, Mr Irving announced how he ad come to reject the story of the mass gassing of Jews at Auschwitz, Poland…’.

The editors of On Target have repeatedly praised Irving for his new Holocaust revisionist beliefs, but it is The Leuchter Report itself which has won the most acclaim. According to the League of Rights, as a result of Leuchter’s report ‘it is now only a matter of time before the Holocaust Myth is consigned to the dustbin of history’.[24]

Ernst Zündel has become quite a celebrity amongst Holocaust revisionists and the extreme right. In the years since he was first put on trial in 1985, there have been numerous books published about him and his fight for ‘freedom of speech’. In reality, however, these books are not about freedom or individual rights. They are simply intended to get unsuspecting people – concerned about personal liberties – exposed to Holocaust revisionism. The issue of whether Zündel should or should not have published Holocaust denial material is clearly secondary ton the central theme of these books, which is that the Holocaust never occurred, that it is just a ‘Zionist lie’.

According to one such book, The Great Holocaust Trial by Michael A Hoffman: ‘The “Holocaust” isn the closest thing to a state religion that the West has seen since medieval times. The majority of people are almost hopelessly brainwashed, frightened to death of the “poor, persecuted and powerless Zionists” and simply incapable of going against the massive power of the State, the Press and the Jewish lobby’.[25]

The New Zealand League of Rights sells the above title, plus two other Holocaust revisionist ‘courtcase’ titles: The Zündel Trial and Free Speech by Doug Christie, and Thought Crimes: The Keegstra Case by Doug Collins (James Keegstra, another Canadian, was convicted in 1985 on similar charges to Zündel, although his trial attracted far less publicity than Zündel’s). The League promotes these books as if they are only about civil liberties, and thus it would be possible for a person ton purchase these books thinking they are about cases dealing with violation of human rights. In this way the League is able to get those people reading Holocaust revisionism who would ordinarily avoid anything that looked anti-Semitic.

The 1990 tape catalogue of the New Zealand League of Rights shows the recent acquisition of numerous audio-cassettes of recent speeches at IHR conventions by leading Holocaust revisionists. The most dangerous of these cassettes is clearly Were Six Million Gassed? By Fred Leuchter. Leuchter’s presentation of his ‘scientific’ evidence is quite disarming; it does not seem anti-Semitic, and to someone with no scientific background it would appear very objective, lucid and logical. It could easily sway people who lack this background into believing that no gassings ever occurred and, therefore, that there was no Holocaust.

This is the principal dilemma arising from the dissemination of recent Holocaust revisionist material, which is not overtly anti-Jewish. People could read these books or listen to these tapes, not knowing that they are in fact very anti-Semitic, and believe them. It is then only a small step, from believing that the Holocaust never occurred to hating the ‘liars’ who say it did: the Jews.


At present, only a few New Zealanders would be aware that there is a campaign in New Zealand to deny the veracity of the Holocaust. Essentially, this is because no-one has taken the distribution of the Holocaust revisionist material to court in an attempt to have the distribution stopped. This type of trial has, without exception, created very negative feelings towards Jews in those countries where this legal action has occurred.[26] These legal battles have also given the revisionists a great deal of free publicity. In light of this, and of the fact that there is a free-speech issue involved, it is this author’s opinion that the suppression of Holocaust revisionist literature should not be attempted.

Instead, the Jewish community in New Zealand should try to keep the Holocaust in the collective memory of other New Zealanders. Sensitive presentations on the Holocaust could be arranged, for both Jews and non-Jews; survivors could testify to their experiences; facts could and should be presented.

Thus, in conclusion, it has been shown that Holocaust revisionism is considered by most scholars to be the form of anti-Semitism which least resembles anti-Semitism: under a guise of objective scholarship, Holocaust revisionists forcefully attack Jews, whilst not using any of the traditional anti-Semitic texts, methods or slander.

Holocaust revisionism has been a small but integral part of extreme-right ideology in new Zealand for almost 20 years. In the 1970s and early 1980s, Holocaust revisionism was promoted principally by neo-fascists. It is evident, nonetheless, that many neo-fascists are not attracted to such ‘scholarly’ arguments and prefer to believe in the Holocaust, whilst others, who lack ‘connections’ to organized neo-fascist groups, have had little or no exposure to holocaust revisionist literature.

The influence of neo-fascist Holocaust revisionism on new Zealand society has been extremely negligible. However, other institutions, such as Western Destiny Publications and the New Zealand League of Rights, have been more successful in their efforts to circulate Holocaust revisionist material. The League of Rights – clearly the largest distributor of this material in New Zealand – has, through deceptive advertising and the contrived defence of ‘free speech’, been able to get this literature into the hands of people who would otherwise avoid anything overtly anti-Semitic.

[1] There are even Jewish Israeli ‘revisionists’, such as Benny Morris who has recently published his controversial research into the establishment of modern Israel (cf. Jerusalem Post, International Edition, week ending 15/12/90.

[2] For example, best-selling military historian, John Toland, winner of the Pulitzer Prize and an author of international repute with such works as The Rising Sun, The Last 100 Days and But Not in Shame, has been an important contributor to modern historical revisionism.

[3] The Evening Post, 18/11/81.

[4] The Press, 16/11/81.

[5] Ibid., 15/1/60.

[6] C Borg, Who Are The Jews?, Bullsbrook, Western Australia, Veritas Publishing Co., 1984.

[7] Sons of Liberty Books, Audio-Tapes, Video-Tapes. Metairie, Sons of Liberty, 1990.

[8] Quoted in D Harcourt, Everyone Wants to be Führer: National Socialism in Australia and New Zealand, Melbourne, Angus and Robertson, 1972, pp143-144.

[9] Rassinier was a French socialist who was himself interned at Buchenwald for the duration of World War II. After his release, Rassinier published four books in French which alleged that there was no Nazi genocide. He is considered by the extreme right to be the ‘father’ of Holocaust revisionism.

[10] 8O’Clock, 15/1/72.

[11] Verall is the only ‘major’ Holocaust revisionist writing under a pseudonym or claiming false academic qualifications from recognized academic institutions.

[12] New Zealand Herald, 20/6/83.

[13] IHR Catalogue of Books, Periodicals, Audiotapes and Videotapes, 1990.

[14] The Press, 27/6/85.

[15] The Press, 24/2/86.

[16] The Press, 27/6/85.

[17] The Press, 24/2/86.

[18] The League’s Auckland bookshop has recently moved from its central location in Queen Street to an inconspicuous building in an Auckland suburb. The League is trying to adopt a more ‘low-key’ image, according to the New Zealand National Director (letter to the present writer, 17/1/91).

[19] E D Butler, Censored History, Melbourne, A League of Rights publication, n.d.

[20] E D Butler, Releasing Reality, Social Credit and the Kingdom of God, Melbourne, heritage Publications, 1979.

[21] Listener, 19/4/80.

[22] Despite the assertion of several ‘experts’ on the Extreme Right, David Irving was not a Holocaust revisionist prior to April 1988. Even in Hitler’s War, New York, Viking, 1977, his most controversial work, Irving clearly acknowledged that the Holocaust took place as stated, but claimed that Hitler probably had no knowledge of it. This may be called distortion, but is not denial.

[23] The Leuchter Report: End of A Myth, Toronto, Samisdat Publishers, 1988, p2.

[24] On Target, 11/12/90.

[25] M A Hoffman, The Great Holocaust Trial, Torrance, Institute for Historical Review, 1985, p61.

[26] For example, during the Zündel trial of 1985 there were numerous violent confrontations between Jews and ‘the supporters of free speech’ (cf The Globe and Mail, 7/1/85). The publicity surrounding the trial also sparked off a flood of anti-Semitic letters written to the editors of Candian newspapers. A fine study of the social effect of such court trials is Hate on Trial: The Zündel Affair, the Media, Public Opinion in Canada, by Gabriel Weimann and Conrad Winn, Oakville, Ontario, Mosaic Press, c.1986.


Final 2007 message from Fredrick Töben: During my 7-months imprisonment at Mannheim Prison I received a lot of mail from all over the world. 

One particular item I found rather intriguing because it equated me with Adolf Hitler and the National Socialists, something that did not surprise me. What did, however, shock me somewhat was the equating my stance with that of Hitler’s final stance: suicide. Whoever sent me the item below also included in a small paper-made pocket stuck on the back of the sheet a razorblade. The text on this item speaks for itself! ‘Capitulation?  Never!’ 

Needles say I also received death threats, one correspondent sent me a plastic navy seal knife with the message that when I get out my life would be worthless. 

Soon after you receive these final 2007 newsletter the outcome of my Adelaide Court case should also be known – stay tuned, and have a happy and safe New Year.  


Top | Home

©-free 2007 Adelaide Institute