Thirteen Reasons Why I Am a Holocaust Revisionist

Is any part of the 20th century historical record accurate?

by Mary W. Maxwell

Many people want to have a second look, a critical look, at the 7-decade old narrative of the Nazi killing of Jews en masse.

Here are thirteen reasons why I want to have a critical look.

  1. In my high school in 1964, we were taught the “fact” that the cause of World War I was the 1914 assassination, in Sarajevo, of Austria’s archduke Francis Ferdinand. (Remember that one?)
  2. In Hobart in 1996, a young left-hand shooter was easily convicted of having killed many people at Port Arthur by shooting them very accurately with his right hand (Martin Bryant).
  3. In Germany, the female lawyer for revisionist Ernst Zundel was imprisoned for trying to defend him against the charge of “Holocaust denial” (Sylvia Stolz—she was physically carried out of the courtroom by guards in 2006).
  4. During World War II, before a cure for typhus was found, there were epidemics of typhus. The pesticide Zyklon B was widely in use to kill the [lice] that were carrying typhus.
  5. In the 1990s, the museum at the Auschwitz concentration camp in Poland officially lowered its claim of the number of persons who died there, from 4 million to 1.5 million.
  6. The United States, during Lyndon Johnson’s presidency, denied that the crew of the US ship Liberty had been deliberately killed by Israelis.
  7. A man spent 3 months in prison in Australia, in 2009, for continuing to post anti-Semitic material on his Adelaide Institute website after a court told him to remove it (Fredrick Toben [but he didn’t consider what he continued to post was anti-Semitic]).
  8. Philip Roth’s 2004 novel The Plot against America shows how the people of the US could wrongly start to persecute Jews for anything, based on a rumor.
  9. Professional, paid witnesses at the 1945-1949 Nuremberg trials were relied upon for data about the Holocaust.
  10. A French [academic] was convicted, by a court in France, for his speech at the 2006 Teheran International Conference on the Holocaust (Robert Faurrison). The conference had invited persons with any point of view to state their case.
  11. In numerous publications of the 1920s and 1930s it was claimed that 6 million Jews were killed in the first World War.
  12. In Boston, the FBI created a hilarious case against a young lad for doing the bombing of the 2013 Marathon (Jahar Tsarnaev).
  13. An elderly lady in Germany has to fight for the right to talk about the loss of huge numbers of Christian people from her city of Breslau in the 1940s (Ursula Haverbeck).

Where I Came into This Subject Matter

  1. Fools’ Paradise

As you can see from #1, 2, and 12, I am inclined to historical revisionism of any kind, given that we now know how easy it is for a whole nation to be fooled.

Millions of Australians in 1996, including myself, accepted unquestioningly that Martin Bryant was the Port Arthur massacre gunman.  Earlier, the whole world had accepted that Lee Harvey Oswald (who once defected to Russia – “a hot clue!”) was the assassin of JFK.

And regarding the “Archduke Ferdinand” bit in our textbooks, the basic truth wasn’t revealed until 2014, in a book by Gerry Docherty and Jim Macgregor entitled Hidden History. That is, it took a full century for people to learn the simple facts about the origin of World War I. (Namely, a coterie of Brits arranged the war.)

  1. Evidentiary Matters

As you can see from #4, 5, 9, and 11, there are also many tidbits of research showing that the standard depiction of the Holocaust has real problems.

Many years ago I came across the figure “6 million Jewish deaths” in a book published around 1928. It gave me pause, but as there was no public discussion going on, and I didn’t know what to make of it, I filed it away as just a curiosity.

For strict methodologists, let me acknowledge that even a large number of documents stating incorrectly that 6 million Jews died in WWI do not PROVE that at a later date 6 million “didn’t die.”

Likewise, the use of Zyklon B as an ordinary pesticide does not of itself tell us that such a chemical is never used as a murder weapon. All possibilities should be given an airing.

  1. Whatever Happened to Free Speech?

Still, when citizens and scholars yak about those evidentiary matters and land in jail for so doing, you have to wonder how much of a suppression apparatus is out there.

I feel moved by the persons in #3, 7, 10, and 13 — perhaps especially by the French guy, Faurrison, since he does not even have the impetus of feeling wronged as a Kraut, he being a Frog.

(Note: “political correctness” disgusts me intellectually.)

— Mary W Maxwell has a PhD in Politics. She is addicted to research. Email mary at