Saturday Afternoon: Interview with Bradley Smith, Founder of CODOH

katana

July 21, 2013 at 7:44 am

Thanks Carolyn and Bradley for that interview. Some points:

1. Fascinating account of Bradley’s ‘Road to Damascus’ like conversion when he realizes that at 49 years old, after just perusing Arthur Butz’s book in a downtown LA library on New Years Eve, 1979, that he knew two things; he would deal with the ‘taboo’ of the ‘holocaust’, and that any possible career as a literary writer was now finished because of this decision to focus on the ‘taboo’.

2. Bradley’s framing of the ‘holocaust problem’ as a free speech issue and why should it be a taboo topic beyond questioning is a good tactic of widening the debate from a technical, factual issue to one of our basic rights to question things. The ‘holocaust has been declared ‘religious dogma’ that can only be questioned under pain of punishment via job loss, imprisonment, physical assault and death threats (David Cole). As Bradley says, the ‘taboo’ nature of the ‘holocaust’ can be recognized by anyone. Even believers in the ‘holocaust’ can take offense at this crazy taboo.

3. Bradley says that although he is known as a ‘holocaust denier’ he doesn’t like the term because of its imprecision and its ‘news-speak’ nature. I like his practical reasoning here. If your audience understands what the term ‘holocaust denier’ is defined as, then it may be appropriate, but otherwise it confuses the issue with mixed audiences.

4. On whether CODOH has been a success or not, Bradley modestly says that it has been a failure given that despite its growth and the growth of Revisionist movement in general the ‘holocaust’ industry has grown even more. I’d say this is like a very successful rat catching organization saying they have failed because there are more vermin around than ever. All this means is that the rat catchers need to redouble their efforts and be grateful for keeping the expansion of rats down.

5. Carolyn then throws out the novel view point that perhaps Revisionism has itself fueled the very ‘holocaust industry’ it fights against. I think that this is very true! But all because the liars need to react tenfold to try to crush the questions from the revisionists! If there were no revisionists then there would be no need for the boot on our throats, but also, there would be no truth either.

6. Much more …

code law

July 21, 2013 at 5:02 pm

Karski. Very interesting, I remember being impressed by his performance in Lanzmann´s epic shoah. Of course he didn´t mention the stupid story of people murdered by “flesh-destroying quicklime” in this “documentation”.

Weichseler

July 22, 2013 at 1:52 am

Katana’s point 5 is absolutely true. Prior to Butz’s book and the appearance of the initial IHR revisionist publications, the Holocaust propaganda was no where near the smothering proportions it has assumed ever since. The Holocaust revisionists inadvertently triggered the Jewish onslaught, which shows their fear of the truth, and their power to intimidate.

katana

July 22, 2013 at 10:07 am

Cont’d

6. Bradley sums up what the jews have constructed, that is, if you question the ‘holocaust’ you are ‘attacking jews’ which by definition means you are an anti-semite. The official definition of the ‘holocaust’ consists of what I would call the Holohoax Trinity:

1). The Germans had a plan to exterminate the jews.
2). They used gas chambers as the main method.
3). They killed 5 million and up (but ideally 6 million, if you don’t mind).

7. A major bone of contention was introduced when Bradley said that the whole holocaust narrative was introduced not by jews but by Gentiles since we controlled the Nuremberg trials, although jews were very influential.

I have to say that this raised my eyebrows! Hasn’t Bradley got the memo that the whole war was a jewish war and that they controlled the allies and that nearly all the staff at the trials were jews? Hmmm…

Bradley then goes on to say that Dresden, Hamburg, Hiroshima, etc., were decisions made by Gentiles, not jews.

Hmm, … hasn’t Bradley heard of Gentiles fronting for jews behind the curtain? Hard to prove, but that’s the general idea.

Bradley goes on to say that the problem is not the jews, it is us. He says that at all the universities there’s not one academic who is willing to stand up and say that no jews were gassed. Well, he’s 99% correct, since a handful like Butz has (and made a huge difference).

A lively discussion develops with each in their own corner on the persistent question of who is to blame for our predicament. Are jews to blame because they are aggressors out to destroy us or are we to blame because we don’t (yet) fight back against the jews, as Bradley says?

I’d say Bradley is correct in the sense that Whites go along with the jew agenda because it’s comfortable to do so (for some).

But, Carolyn is also correct in her resistance to that idea in that the vast majority of Whites don’t even understand what they are up against. They are clueless (compliments of jew media brainwashing) that they are in a war.

8. Continuing with the issue of responsibility, Bradley say that academics choose not to speak out about the ‘holocaust’ because of ‘reasons of money and career’… ‘We choose not to stand with the truth.’ … ‘It’s money and career.’ .. ‘We, (in the academic world) are so interested in our money and careers that we will follow the bidding of jewish interests. And we blame that on jews.’ … ‘I find that morally repugnant. … That we are willing to go against the truth and protect jews.’

I’d say that the vast majority of academic Whites are totally clueless about the jewish agenda. That is why they submit to the holocaust lies, because that is what surrounds them and us day and night throughout everyones lives. It’s not because they have consciously sold out to the jews knowing the full story. Only traitors would do that.

9. Bradley then talks about how Whites were running the world in the 19th century and ‘not very nicely’. Carolyn objects to this, but the conversation then goes on to Jan Kaski.

OK, some concluding remarks. Bradley is a ‘living treasure’ for the immense amount of work he’s done on the holocaust from a revisionist point of view. So I salute him for that. Thank you Bradley Smith!

I feel that his focus on the need to blame ourselves for our subjugation by jews is a good good end strategy. Here are some stages:

1) Discovering the very existence of jewish control and their agenda to destroy us. Waking up, in other words, to the enemy.
2) Blaming the jews for all our problems.
3) Realizing that blaming the jews in itself will not cure us of these problems.
4) Taking ‘responsibility’ for our ‘jewish infection’ and therefore starting the ‘cure’.

It’s tough medicine that we need to swallow in order to move on through the stages of realizing that we have been infected with the deadly jew virus, to curing ourselves of it and eventually our societies of it.

Our White societies are being destroyed methodically by a methodical entity, that can be labelled as ‘jews’. They have been, and are, systematically taking our societies apart decade over decade by corrupting every value that has held us together. The Holohoax is their major weapon as it underpins the psychological warfare against us.

As Bradley has said, academics need to to stop being traitors, whether unwittingly or not. Academics need to come together and show that they are not cowards and reveal to the world the lies of the holocaust. The floodgates will be opened by the brave few among them.

An international coalition of scholars for ‘Holocaust Truth’ will eventually destroy the foundations of those out to destroy us.

Franklin Ryckaert

July 22, 2013 at 1:31 pm

I think this whole battle between revisionism and Holocaustianity is essentially a battle between the Internet and the MSM. The Internet is growing daily and cannot be controlled by the Jews, while the MSM are losing credibility, many are even going bankrupt. This battle will never be won in the MSM, the universities or politics (where the Jews rule supreme), but that doesn’t matter anymore. What we are seeing is the growth of an alternative society with its own sources of information. When that society has reached critical mass it will be able to topple the PTB and their Official Lies. The process is unstoppable.

code law

July 22, 2013 at 1:41 pm

A lively discussion develops with each in their own corner on the persistent question of who is to blame for our predicament. Are jews to blame because they are aggressors out to destroy us or are we to blame because we don’t (yet) fight back against the jews, as Bradley says? —>When conclusion would be blaming ourself, then it doesn´t make sense to deal with that issue any further! Furtheron I don´t see any necessity for academic degrees or scolarship, there is little complexity. Imagine carolyn would have got eight or ten brothers / sisters and the attention which is put on Mr Wiesel now would be applied to eight or ten of his comrades ( Vrba, Wetzler, Karski, Gerstein, K.Morgen, Reitlinger, Y Bauer, Amery, Glazar, G Bach + some recent fellows ). At the end of the day, there is little more than 10 people with decisive influence and indirectly the publications are very often reactions on various claims, even when names are never mentioned explicitly