• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

UN Declares Ban on Revisionism[free speach]

Aug 13, 2005
Reaction score
Political Leaning
Dr Robert Faurisson
The UN Decides a Universal Ban on Revisionism

17 November 2005



On November 1st, unanimously and without a vote, the representatives of the
191 nations making up the UN adopted — or let be adopted — an Israeli-drafted
resolution proclaiming January 27th “International Day of Commemoration in
memory of the victims of the Holocaust”.

Moreover, the resolution “Rejects any denial of the Holocaust as an
historical event, either in full or part”.

Historical revisionism thus sees its existence acknowledged by the whole
world, a fact proving that it has some life in it, but, at the same time, this
decision means that the revisionists find themselves struck with the reprobation
of all the countries of the world.

As for the “State” of the Vatican, which has no seat at the UN, it had, as
early as in 1992, declared: “There is no historical revisionism that can call
into question the inhuman abyss of the Holocaust” (« Non c’è revisionismo
storico che possa rimettere in discussione l’abisso disumano dell’Olocausto ») (
L’Osservatore Romano, 7 November1992).

The history of human societies and religions is rich in
prohibitions, bannings, excommunications but, whereas, up to a recent past, the victims
could, at least in principle, hope to find a refuge outside of their land or
group of origin, here the condemnation is, for the first time ever, of
universal character. It is thus confirmed that historical revisionism is a phenomenon
of exceptional nature and also that the Jews, yet once more, have been able
to obtain exorbitant privileges.

A sleight of hand by the Jews

It was through a sleight of hand that the Israeli delegation
succeeded in getting this resolution passed. It proceeded in a manner like that of
certain associations which, in France, under cover of a campaign against
paedophilia, have obtained a law prohibiting, on the Internet, communication
relating to paedophilia and … to revisionism! To begin, they asked: “Is
paedophilia not a horror in itself?” The response was “yes”. Their second step was to
add: “Is paedophilia on the Internet not to be banned by a specific law?” The
response, there again, was “yes”. As a third step the associations concluded:
“Let’s fight, accordingly, to obtain a law against paedophilia and …
revisionism [which they called ‘negationism’]”. For his part, the President of the
General Assembly, the Swede Jan Ellasion, had the deftness on November 1st to
ask orally whether anyone was opposed to the resolution aimed at commemorating
the “Holocaust”. No hands being raised, he declared, without prior recourse
to a vote of any kind, that the resolution was thereby adopted, the text of
which contained in one of its provisions the condemnation of any form of
“Holocaust” revisionism. The draft was approved by the United States in utter
disregard of the guarantees of freedom of opinion provided by the first amendment to
its constitution. And, most remarkably, this Israeli text was accepted by the
Arabo-Moslem countries, including Iran. All those present approved, or let pass
with soft verbal restrictions, a resolution originating from the Jews that
goes so far as to condemn the right of free research on a historical subject.

The UN act assumes only a political and not a juridical character. Still,
since it provides that the Secretary General will have to report on the measures
subsequently taken within the framework of the resolution, the revisionists
will have reason to fear consequences for themselves of a judicial or
administrative nature, for instance, as regards border and airport police, authorisation
to enter and stay in certain countries or the issuing of visas. The
resolution will serve morally to justify and facilitate extradition measures taken
against revisionists.

Precedents are not lacking, what with:

1) the European arrest warrant;

2) the virtual handing over of revisionist René-Louis Berclaz by Serbia to

3) the handing over of revisionist Ernst Zündel by the United States to
Canada, then by Canada to Germany;

4) the handing over of Belgian revisionist Siegfried Verbeke by the
Netherlands to Germany;

5) the handing over of revisionist Germar Rudolf to Germany by the United

6) In Austria, on November 11, the semi-revisionist David Irving, a British
citizen, was arrested by traffic police on a motorway and is now in detention
in Vienna.

For any noted revisionist it is already risky to leave the confines of his
home country. In doing so, he exposes himself to a request for extradition made
to the country of transit by either Israel or Germany. There is at present a
bill in committee at the Knesset that will authorise Israel to demand the
handing over of any revisionist in order to bring him before a court, sitting in
Jerusalem, that will apply the 1986 Jewish antirevisionist law against him.

The Jewish State’s Offensive

A fortnight ago, Philippe Bolopion, United Nations correspondent for Le Monde
, wrote a particularly informative article on the successes achieved at the UN
by the Jewish State since June 2004 (“L’offensive de charme d’Israël à
l’ONU rencontre un certain succès”, Le Monde, 4 November 2005, p. 3).

He listed six recent accomplishments of that State:

1) in June 2004, Kofi Annan called for an acknowledgement “that the United
Nations’ record on anti-Semitism has at times fallen short of our ideals”;

2) in October of the same year, a resolution including a condemnation of
antisemitism was adopted;

3) in January 2005, a special session of the General Assembly marked the 60th
anniversary of “the liberation of the death camps”;

4) in June, an Israeli ambassador was elected vice-president of the General
Assembly — the first Israeli in fifty-three years;

5) in September, on a visit to the UN for a gathering of heads of state and
government, Ariel Sharon shook hands with Pakistani president Pervez Musharraf,
while the Israeli delegation made numerous new contacts;

6) in October, the Security Council was quick to condemn the Iranian calls,
which were nothing new, for the Jewish State to be erased from the map.

The Jewish State’s incomparable gall

These successes are all the more striking as no nation in the world has made
fun of the UN like “Israel”, a state that, however, owes its creation to …
the UN. The Jewish State, with an incomparable gall (in Jewish parlance: chutzpah
), has thrown a record number of United Nations “resolutions” straight into
the bin.

In violation of international law, this State, founded on the colossal lie of
the “Holocaust”, practises colonialism, racism, apartheid, military
occupation and torture. We may add that it possesses an arsenal of atomic weapons and
on this score has, for example, in the last few years been supplied by
Germany, free of charge, in the name of the said “Holocaust”, with three
ultra-modern submarines fitted out for nuclear armament.

The collusion between, on the one hand, the Jewish State and armed forces
and, on the other hand, the German State and armed forces has become such that
the German mail service has just released a stamp, for the most regular rate of
postage, depicting, on the left, the Israeli flag, then, on the right, the
German flag and, finally, linking the two, a strand of barbed wire, symbol of the
perpetual “Holocaust”. Germany is becoming the Jewish State’s “Guantanamo”.

On October 5, 2003, Israeli ambassador to the UN Dan Gillerman had warned the
Security Council members that the God of the Jews was “watching” them and,
on July 16 2004, annoyed at the behaviour of some Arab states, flung the remark
at his colleagues in the General Assembly that things had “reached a point
where the inmates are running the asylum”. On the other hand, on October 31 of
this year, he said that he was “moved” when presenting the “Holocaust Day”
text, his country’s first successful draft resolution ever. He declared: “I
feel moved and privileged to present this historic resolution today, as an
Israeli, a Jew, a human being and a child of a family of Holocaust victims”. That is
understandable. The next day, the “adoption” of his resolution marked the
triumph of the “Holocaust” sham. For the occasion, one may say that as far as
gall, dishonest procedure, spirit of domination and intolerance are concerned,
the Jewish State has outdone itself.

This extraordinary UN resolution also constitutes proof that
historical revisionism is a reality that can no longer be bypassed, denied or
played down. Its notoriety has become global. Still, let us take care to recognise
that the revisionist researchers who remain active are now but a handful and,
with each passing year, their future grows darker.

Professor F. Littell has said:

You can't discuss the truth of the holocaust. That is a distortion of the
concept of free speech. The United States should emulate Germany, which outlaws
such exercises.



"Deep down, I believe that a little anti-Semitism is a good thing for the
Jews - reminds us who we are." --Jay Lefkowitz (NYT Magazine. Feb.12, 1995. Page
65). Jay Lefkowitz is now Deputy Assistant to the President for Domestic


Chinese Axiom:

When things are investigated, knowledge is extended. When knowledge is
extended, the will becomes sincere. When the will is sincere, the mind is correct.
When the mind is correct, the self is cultivated.

Top Bottom