Discussion among three Danish Jews after it became known that the Danish author Erik Haaest (pronounce 'host') had been awarded a 100,000 kr. [USD 18,357 - Euro 13,440 - £ 9,075] government grant for writing a book about Danish nazi collaborators in which still living HIPO members (HIPO = HilfsPolizei [German] = Danish police corps that assisted the German occupiers) are giving their side of the story.

The decission to give the grant to Erik Haaest was suggested and endorsed by the journalist Claes Kastholm, who by the way was praised by me earlier this year for having been on of the only msn voices in Denmark who spoke out against the introduction of the recently proposed German / Jewish holocaust denial paragraphs, that have since come into effect in a number of European countries, while Denmark supposedly has rejected this totalitarian attempt to restrict free speech.

Claes Kastholm Hansen even managed to cast a little doubt on the obligatory agreed on 'deplorable professional qualities' of the British historian David Irving at the same occasion, by remarking that Irving's work had been praised by many, before his Judaic opponents managed to smear his reputation.

Klik for Dansk version

Claes Kastholm Hansen

Claes Kastholm Hansen has come under attack and was subject to defamatory statements by enemies of free speech after his endorsement of the grant to Erik Haaest reached the front pages, and has since shown remorse by announcing that he was not aware of Mr. Haaest's revisionist views.

Three Danish Jews discuss the Eric Haaest case, and the limits of freedom of speech.

Left to right: Jacques Blum, Adam Holm and Bent Blüdnikow	Erik Haaest contact

A short introduction to these characters

Adam Holm

Adam Holm - Deadline TV Host, Jewish left wing defender of the multicultural society, professional support for the infamous fundamentalist Muslim Communist candidate (!) Asmaa Abdol Hamid who was given her own TV show by the multicultural propaganda station Danmarks Radio. Coming from the leftwing multicultural propaganda paper Politiken (founded by the father of Danish Cutural Radicalism, Jewish Brandes) he took over this central position in most watched political debate program after Martin Krasnik (also Jewish). The chief editor of the Deadline program since times immemorial is a former chairman of the Danish Zionist Leaque; Arne Notkin.

Slowly Holm seems to be changing his position by criticizing Communism recently, and who knows, in a few years he may have become another neoconservative, just like a long line former pro multicult left wing Jews in France, Holland and other European countries who turned neocon when the effects of mass immigration began to be felt by the Jewish community.

All of Denmark's radio and not in the least the (daily) Deadline program are accused by neoconservatives and Zionists of being extremely biased against the US and Israel. In face of the overwhelming amounts of material surfacing lately that is exposing the Zionist / US policies, I would say the alleged anti US / Israel bias of this Danish Public Service TV station is nothing more than damage control.

The multicultural and holocaust propaganda of the infamous TV station is still undiluted though, and night after night one dramatized 'holocaust history' and anti German hate propaganda fills the screen alternating with highly positive programs about other (muslim) cultures.

Jacques Blum

Jacques Blum sociologist former chairman of the Danish Jews (Mosaisk Trossamfund), formerly employed by a Danish 'Center for Holocaust Studies', now editor of the Jewish 'cultural' Magazine Goldberg. Has written a long list of books about 'the holocaust'.

Together with his wife Eva Bøggild he wrote the book 'By way of Lies' (Loegnens Veje) about 'revisionist lies' or 'holocaust denial' as he prefers to call it..

He is one of the guys regularly blowing the 'anti-Semitism is on the rise trumpet'.

Blum called several who don't deserve that people 'revisionists', amongst others the historian (and fervent Israel supporter) Bent Jensen. The reason seemed to be that Jensen in one of his books had written the word 'holocaust' without the capital 'H'.

Bent Jensen replied to the name calling by saying that the title of Blum's book 'By way of Lies' was 'extremely well chosen'.

Blum also complained to the editor of the newspaper Jyllands Posten, when the paper published an interview with Danish revisionist Christian Lindtner.

The photo of Christian Lindtner accompanying the article supposedly made him look too sympathetic (!) for the taste of the ethnocentric eternally persecuted holocaust victim Jacques Blum, and the article didn't contain enough 'educational material' warning against the evil Dr. Lindtner and the evil Nazi revisionists. Mel Gibson's Passion of the Christ was also strongly anti-Semitic according to Blum a few years ago..

Blum has also for a very long time been a supporter of the 'multicultural society' (in Denmark, not in Israel of course), but I suppose he has now become a doubter after Jews in Denmark are increasingly confronted with muslim hate and threats.

Well, I think most people will get the picture.

In a radio interview Blum exposed his fantastic lack of knowledge about several aspects of history and revisionist statements, and came up with hilarious theories made up on the spot, in order to counter questions and arguments from Dr. Christian Lindtner.

While Blum in the debate below 'dedicates himself to free speech' and does not want to follow the German example of forbidding opinions and persecuting 'holocaust deniers', it seems also quite clear that he is not being entirely honest about this...

But in Denmark it is currently not politically correct to say openly that you want to restrict free speech, not even for Jews, a tendency that has become stronger since the so called muhammed cartoon crises reminded us of the crucial importance of that basic freedom..

Bent Blüdnikow

Bent Blüdnikow, journalist, historian.

Bush and Israel suporter, Jewish neoconservative currently writing for the newspaper Berlingske Tidende.

While Blum is a plain idiot with virtually no no verbal or argumentative skils, common sense or logic, and who usually solely relies on appealing to emotions and who very often harms his own case when speaking in public, Blüdnikow is quite a different type, and apart from probably [hopefully] sharing the common logic about freedom of speech with the rest of us, he is also intelligent enough to understand that all this all to openly 'Jews against free speech' oppression is handing out exactly that ammunition to revisionists, anti-Zionists and simple free speech supporters for which even the Jews have not yet have developed an effective shield.

Transcript and English translation of the program:

Adam Holm:

Is it okay that the Arts Council gives 100.000 kr. grant to a writer who calls Anne Frank's diary lies and swindle, and who openly questions the existence of gas chambers in Auschwitz?

We will discuss that in a moment.

[Balder: Notice the word 'openly', already implying that there must be something socially unacceptable about questioning aspects of history]

Introductory
images

Train whistle sounds, pictures of concentration camps and dead bodies of supposedly gassed Nazi victims fly by, so we all can come into the right mood..

The picture (right) was used to introduce the subject of the discussion, writer Erik Haaest [pronounce 'Host'] who was called a 'holocaust sceptic' in the program, although something quite different was implied by the horror graphics that were displayed, with his picture as an overlay.

Clearly we should not hear about such a dangerous person without creating an image of an evil personality.

Female voice:

There were no gas chambers in Hitler's concentration camps, and Anne Frank's diary is lies and swindle, that is what holocaust skeptic Erik Haaest has said about WWII, and twice the writer and journalist has received 100.000 kr. from the Arts Council for his work documenting the so called other side of  the history of the German occupation.

And that is terribly wrong, it sounds from an article in the Danish newspaper Information. The authors of the article wonder amongst other things about the fact that the rest of Europe speaks of outlawing holocaust denial (it's so decided) while Denmark awards it with government funds.

And the criticism has also resonated internationally. The last few days several international newspapers have spoken of the grant to the Danish holocaust skeptic, and the Jewish human rights organization the Simon Wiesenthal Center demanded in a letter to the Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen that the grant be pulled back immediately.

The debate begins

Adam Holm:

Allright, welcome to you two, look over here now please, - Bent Blüdnikow historian and journalist with Berlingske Tidende, and Jacques Blum cultural sociologist and editor of the Jewish cultural magazine Goldberg.

Let me begin with asking you both what you think about the Wiesenthal Center urging to pull back the grant given to Erik Haaest?

I think it is pure nonsense, there has to be an arm lenght principle here, there should be no interference, not even from the side of the Simon Wiesenthal Center.

The board [of the Arts Council] is allowed to give the money it wants to those historians or writers they deem fit.

Well, I look at it an other way, but of course they should not interfere...,

But eh, when they interfere, when they come with statements, then it is very much to point out that abroad people are actually offended about it and cannot understand that Denmark has not outlawed holocaust denial; that it is not a criminal offense...

[Despite his mumblings about 'not wishing for anti revisionst laws', his voice is clearly filled with regret! Comment Balder]

Contrary to in Germany for example..

In Germany, Austria and so on.. And that there eh..

For example it is completely incomprehensible many places abroad that Denmark funds a Nazi radio station, and then on top of that it is Denmark that does it, and people.., eh they have a hard time understanding that.

Bent Blüdnikow:

It is possible that it is hard to understand in foreign countries, but freedom of speech here [in Denmark] is sacred, and if people want to deny the holocaust, you and I and Adam, can find that terrible., but they should be allowed to, and then the debate afterwards will have to prove they are not right, the holocaust deniers.

To go in the same direction as Germany and a number of other countries, and restrict freedom of speech, and like making it illegal to hold convictions, is a very very dangerous path to take.

And where is the limit, who is to decide where to draw the line, if next time there is somebody who claims that the communists Mao and Stalin have never exterminated anybody? We would think it would be terrible if they were punished for that.

We cannot limit freedom of speech..

Jacques Blum:

  Efff.. I agree it should not be made illegal; of course we shouldn't do that.. [!!!]

But if we now go to the actual case, we are talking about eh, and I think this is often misunderstood, people who deny these things Haaest denies, have not done their homework...

It is simply technically wrong...

Adam Holm:

There I had to ask you, because some years ago you wrote a book together with your wife Eva Boeggild about history denial; holocaust revisionism...

So let me hear both of you, [Blum and Blüdnikov] you both know very much about this question, do you see Erik Haaest as a holocaust revisionist?

Is it here we shall find him, Erik Haaest as a holocaust revisionist, is it there we shall find him?

Jacques Blum:

 Eh..., it is something of the sort... eh if he does it in order to provoke or why he does it I will abstain from searching motives, you know but eh..

Just recently, that is just a few days ago he said about Anne Frank for example,... he has also been quoted for it, that this is a case which has been thoroughly researched.

And what I think we should remember is that the Arts Council has divided things up, in this way that a substantial part of the Arts Council's means go to general literature, and that it is professional, it is professional, they are professional historians, they are professionals.

<-- The Anne Frank Diary has been researched quite a bit indeed.

It is an established fact [Corroborated in a US court of law] that a professional New York ghost writer by the name of Meyer Levin has been paid by Otto Frank, Anne Franks father for work on the diary. Also the BKA (Bundes Kriminal Amt) a high German police authority, has established that parts of the diary were written with a ballpoint pen (those pens were not available while Anne was alive).

There are also a great number of different versions of the book. Which one is the 'real story' ?

Many different commentators from several different countries have independently from each other noticed incompatible styles of writing in the diary. There is a lot of doubt about the handwriting itself too.

So the words 'lies and swindle' in this context have nothing to do with 'holocaust denial'.

Apart from that, Anne Frank's diary, even if we coose to forget the obvious forgeries, manipulations and lies surrounding the book by the rather questionable character Otto Frank, proves nothing about the so called holocaust, other than that, if we choose to believe Anne's story, rich Jews, even when in hiding, were eating a lot better in occupied Holland than the rest of the population...

Since Anne's diary was written in Amsterdam, at least at that time she didn't know one bit more about what was going on elsewhere in occupied Europe than anybody else residing in Holland.

Rejecting Anne Frank's diary as a true story written by a 16 year old girl can in no way be synonymous with 'holocaust denial'.

Anne died of typhus in the hospital of Bergen Belsen towards the end of the war, while her father Otto Frank survived, and made millions by publishing the diary. Otto Frank's firm did good business with the Germans during the whole war, and he was actually charged with collaboration with the ennemy by the Dutch authorities after the war.

But the story of Anne Frank's life itself leaves a big question mark at the theory of the supposedly exterminist Nazi policies in Auschwitz. Why would the Germans have kept such a young girl who was infected with a contagious disease, and unable to work, alive in a hospital, in stead of sending her straight to the alleged gas chambers?

Ok, but let us return to that, because I just have to.. but is he a revisionist?

No matter what opinions he has, we should not get in there and get interfere whether the Arts Council has given him money or not, that is up to the Arts Council, I think it was frivolous to give him money because he is a bad historian, that's shown by his previous books, but not, I mean but not because of political views, 'cause if we were to accuse...

You don't think that a man who spreads doubt about The Holocaust, and says; well there were no gas chambers in Auschwitz, and who calls the eh as it is, thoroughly researched diary about Anne Frank for lies and swindle and so on..

Has he deserved government money?

Yes but if we had to use 'deserve criteria', there would be lots of people who would not be able to get funding...

The university is filled with people, who have supported both Mao and Lenin, and who thought what happened in Lenin's time was wonderful, will they also have disqualified themselves from receiving funding for all future?

Jacques Blum: 

Ahm Bent you know.. I don't think it is a question of convictions here.

Ehm if it was an eh, have to think, what if there was an astronomer who said my position is that the earth is flat? Then you would probably say that ahr.. Something or another is wrong...

We are actually in a field where we can prove a number of things, historically and by other means..., then it becomes a little akward to say just he [is awarded a grant], and we also heard from the newspaper [Information] that 75% have been rejected, then it must be terribly bad with these 75%, if the remaining 25% is to go to   [...blah, blah, unintelligible....]

He should not have been awarded the 100.000 kr. in the first place, is that what you are saying?

I say he is a bad historian you know, and for me holocaust denial is bad professionalism...

I don't put those moral... eh for my sake they are allowed to say that the world is flat eh uh, whatever, you know...

Bent Blüdnikow:

Well historical research is full of bad professionalism, and there are wrong assumptions, wrong assessments in many books.

We have just had a debate about a historian by the name of Christian Hvidt, who has been a reviewer of professional literature at Berlingske [the same center right newspaper Blüdnikow works for] for many years, who has published a book about the history of Europe in which he paints a very positive portrait of Lenin.

Lenin who was involved in massive repression, who decreed that woman and children should be shot, who deported whole ethnical groups. Has Christian Hvidt now disqualified himself because he has gotten the Lenin history wrong? Of course he hasn't, he may very well be considered the next time he applies for money..

But when we talk.. yes ok come in..

Erik Jensen - Marxist

The article that started the commotion was written by to left wing personalies. One of them is the left wing extremist Erik Jensen from the ultra Marxist Organization DEMOS, closely connected to the communist underground 'intelligence service' network REDOX. Erik Jensen also has a bunch of good friends who are organized under several cover names, but who belong to the international redfascist network AFA.

At demonstrations he is often seen talking to prominent communist strormtroopers, and it is alleged that he is playing a direct part as a strategist also during 'live action'.

Exactly how Erik Jensen manages to balance his views on Stalin, Lenin, Hitler and Mao, and his support for the very oppression of free speech and defamatory policies exercised by the most influential organizations of the Zionist / Jewish entity that manage to oppress Erik's Palestinian friends partly by exaggerating the dimensions of the so called holocaust, is a big question.

But also AFA groups in other countries such as Canada have been proven to be cooperating with Zionist organizations.

It seems that the left wing Communist revolutionaries are exactly as corrupt as their neoconservative Capitalist counterparts. Do they need money from Jewish circles that bad, or are their other reasons, like getting their own anti Israel alibi in order, by 'proving they are not anti-Semites', and striking a blow to their Nationalist ennemies at the same time?

The other author of the article is Poul Smidt a journalist who has a degree in law. Information July 18 2007: Holocaust-benægter fik kunststøtte

Yes but this is a little bit different isn't it?

When you are part of a committee, you ask the following questions;

1. The project, is it interesting? 2. the method; is it durable. 3. how serious is the researcher..

If it is so, that it has been proven repeatedly that it is substandard, and that has nothing to do with convictions, but is just simply wrong..

Then I think it starts to become a little fishy, when there are so few resources that he [Erik Haaest] should be among the 25% that have received money..

The 75%, the majority, must be complete retards..

Yes yes, there I have to go and ask you Bent Blüdnikow, what it is that today we can almost say that Erik Haaest can get money today...

He himself told the newspaper Information, that ran this story first with a feature article, and later with a number of follow up articles, that it would have been unthinkable in the seventies and eighties for him to get state funding, since he was persona non grata, and didn't belong to the politically correct establishment. Now he receives 100.000 kr..

Bent Blüdnikow:

The following happened in the historical research that we have begun to focus on Nazi's, Danish collaborators and a long range of books by Peter Oevig Knudsen and by somebody by the name of Henrik Lundtofte that have focused on the losers, the henchmen so to speak, eh and ask what kind of people they were, and therefore it is also relevant that Erik Haaest, who has connections in those circles apparently comes in.

His books are in my opinion not very good, but his books are not an expression of holocaust revisionism; that is something he has said in the media.

Adam Holm:

But we have to hold on to how it is possible that he gets this money at this time because that is part of the on going debate, ehm cultural historian and debater Morten Thing has been quoted in 'Information' for saying, that they eh, I have to find the quote, here it is, quote:

"I am actually astounded deeply that they support a man who hasn't shown as much as a grain of literary quality, it almost only  makes sense if there have been some trade offs between the members of the Arts Council, it smells of political momentum" end quote.

In other words, it is politically opportune at this moment...

Not at all, well I don't think we should see conspiracies, since there is a tendency at this point of time to focus at Danish Nazi's, Danish collaborators, they [the Arts Council] have found that perhaps he could contribute with something; he has not expressed holocaust revisionism in his books, that is something he has said in the media, and hence I don't find it strange that they have awarded him the grant. I think he is a bad choice, because he is a bad historian..

Jacques Blum, what is it that caused that Erik Haaest can get the money, can get this scholarship, can get peace to work, when that was not possible for him 20 years ago?

Oh it's so hard with all this searching for motives; well I don't belief in any conspiracy theory either.. ah eh..

No but that there are favorable political winds

Jacques Blum: 

Not for holocaust denial, certainly not.

Well what I think happened is that he has sent in an application, we have not seen the application, but we get a small hint as to what it is about.

He has sent an application in which it says that he has some contacts, as you mentioned before, that others don't have, and that it could be interesting to get this man to interview these people, and it is very relevant to say: Well, there are not that many who enjoy such fine company, ironically speaking, so let him have some money..

That which I am irritated about is that it is an approval of professionalism to get this money you know, Eva and I have received such money and we have been proud of that, I think that has become a little less valuable now, because there hasn't been a good assessment of it.

Last remark

I think it is crucial to hold on to the principles here, we should not mix subsidies with politics, in that case we should deny Morten Thing and a lot of other old left wing radicals forever.

We end in a slide which ends with a berufsverbot situation.

End Transcript

Online Video:

DR Deadline 21 juli 2007:

DR - Debat med Jacques Blum og Bent Blüdnikow om legatet til Erik Haaest

Max Planck Institute Chemist doing two years of prison in Germany for doing forensic research on the walls of the alleged gaschambers in Auschwitz and getting politically incorrect results....

Germar Rudolf - Lectures on the holocaust | German version

Illegally expelled from the US for an allegedly missing an immigration appointment, imprisoned in Canada under the now declared unconstitutional 9/11 panic anti-terrorist laws. Jewish organizations pulled many strings in all of these cases where unusual decisions and practices were a shocking testimony of their uncanny influence on judicial proceedings.

Ernst Zündel was the only person who was ever jailed and evicted under the Canadian'anti-terrorist laws', right into the hands of the new German totalitarians, and convicted to five years in prison after a mockery of a trial in which lawyers were prosecuted for defending their client.

This horrible abuse of justice was kept away from the general public by the (Jewish controlled?) media, who rather focus on abuse of power in Zionist weary Russia, and opponents of American / Israeli hegemony in the Mideast lik Syria, Libya and Iran, than in the German Bundesrepublik, Austra, Switzerland France and other European countries. Even Christian priests are being jailed under the German / Jewish laws that do not allow criticism of the Jewish version of WWII. More about Zündel in Danish

After being abducted from Germany and Canada where he was kept in solitary confinement for two years before he was expelled to Germany under now abolished 'antiterrorist laws' 67 years old pensioner Ernst Zündel with no criminal record is now serving a five year sentence in Manheim Prison in Germany for doubting the Jewish version of history..

In Germany a specially created concept called 'Offenkundigkeit' is used to shut up defendants and their lawyers. For all practical purposes it means that if something is considered 'public knowledge' or 'commonly known' it is not allowed to question its validity. It is a concept which is totally unique for Germany, but the concept might be practiced under another name some in some islamic states, North Korea, China etc.