Shraga Elam response to
defamations
following e-mail to David Irving
Here is my mail to the
renown Shoa expert Professor
Randolph L. Braham
and his statement.
Mail to
Professor Braham:
From:
Shraga Elam
To: R._Braham
Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 4:55
PM
Dear Prof. Braham,
I want to ask you a big favor which
I hope will not cause you too much
trouble. It would help me a lot.
I need a statement, a kind of short
Gutachten from you that I can use
in a court suit.
You might know that I have been
defamed again and again because
I “dared” to write
ONCE to the Holocaust denier
David Irving. My aim was to try
to convince him to stop denying
the gassing of the Jews. I assumed
that the main reason for his denial
was because no written order by
Hitler (Führerbefehl) for
the gassing has ever been found,
and as far as I know there is no
proof that Hitler was even informed
about the gassing (see e.g. the
incident of the Korherr report that
Himmler prevented Hitler's being
informed about the industrial murder
of Jews -
http://www.ns-archiv.de/verfolgung/korherr/himmler-sipo.php
+
http://www.ns-archiv.de/verfolgung/korherr/korherr-begleitschreiben.php).
The view that extermination on an
industrial scale was impossible
without Hitler's approval is common,
albeit wrong, and has led some lunatics
to conclude
that there could not possibly have
been any systematic murdering. I
suspected that this line of reasoning
was behind Irving’s transformation
from a brilliant researcher (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9802E3D6153AF935A15755C0A96F958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=print)
into a Holocuast denier, and that
I could convince him to abandon
his hallucinatory theory if I provided
him with a plausible alternative
explanation for the lack of a “Führerbefehl.”
From my book “Hitlers Fälscher,”
you might remember that I believe
that behind the Jewish annihilation
was a satanic blackmail plan of
Himmler's. Many historians accept
that Himmler tried to topple Hitler
in 1944, and that he tried to use
Hungary's Jews as bargaining chips
to force the allies to negotiate
a “Sonderfrieden” with him. I believe
that the Europaplan from 1942 was
for real and was part of the same
scheme. Himmler would have had no
problem convincing his subordinates
that there was a “Führerbefehl.”
They would not have needed to see
it in writing. Hitler‘s position
on the Jews was well known, so it
was very possible that he ordered
their extermination. My theory
may be mistaken, but there is nothing
morally wrong with it, as I’m not
trying to whitewash Hitler. He was
a criminal whether or not he authorized
the gas chambers at Auschwitz. My
grandparents were murdered by the
Nazis before Auschwitz was founded.
On this background I wrote a short
private e-mail to Irving on 15.
April 2000. The letter was very
condensed as it was not addressed
to the broad public but to an expert
acquainted with the issues. Not
many people are aware of the fact
that Irving is considered by several
serious historians to be a brilliant
researcher; only his denial stuff
is rejected. Not many people are
aware of the New York Times article
from, June 26, 1999, Taking a
Holocaust Skeptic Seriously
By D.D. GUTTENPLAN,(http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9802E3D6153AF935A15755C0A96F958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=print)
Irving replied to me in a friendly
way, but he also published my e-mail
without my permission, and I broke
off contact with him. To be honest,
in a way I regret not trying to
continue the dialogue, but then
I got the impression that he was
crazier than I had thought and his
publishing my e-mail was very irritating.
Of course my private e-mail to him
contained many statements to upset
the uninformed. As I said, it was
not meant for the broad public.
Unhappily, since then my letter
has been held against me again and
again by people not acquainted with
the issues. Finally, I decided to
sue a well-known Jewish-German journalist,
Henryk M. Broder, who wrote a defamatory
article about me, accusing me of
being Irving's friend and
supporter.
Broder wrote:
http://web.archive.org/web/20070104221554/http://www.achgut.com/dadgdx/index.php/dadgd/article/e/
Die
Achse des Guten: Ein Freund, ein
guter Freund… Schräg, schräger,
Shraga
Shraga
Elam: Broder
obviously has a problem with English.
For example, in court he
translated “Stuff like” as „Material“
and not es Zeug, Kram or Tinnef,
which one can find even in an Internet
dictionary (http://dict.tu-chemnitz.de/dings.cgi?lang=de&service=en-de&opterrors=0&optpro=0&query=Stuff&iservice=&comment=).
The correct
translation into German is for me:
Wie schade, dass ein brillanter
Forscher wie Sie mit diesem Krempel
(Kram, Zeug - im Original “stuff“)
der sogenannten “Auschwitz-Leugnerei“
in Verbindung geraten ist. Denn
ich bin völlig mit Ihnen einverstanden,
dass Hitler nicht Teil des Auschwitz-Projekts
war.
Gemäss meiner Theorie, war dieses
[Auschwitz-Projekt] sogar Teil von
Himmlers Plan gegen Hitler, wie
es im Fall der Vernichtung der ungarischen
Juden von 1944 gut belegt ist.
Ich teile zwar generell Ihre Skepsis
gegenüber der Oral History und den
Manipulationen durch die Priester
der “Holocaust-Religion“.
Dennoch sind alle “Beweise“ gegen
die Gaskammern in Auschwitz absolut
nicht überzeugend.
Irvings Antwort:
Faszinierend.
Lassen Sie uns mehr korrespondieren,
vor allem wenn die Hitze der gegenwärtigen
Hässlichkeit vorbei [im
Original] ist. Ich verstehe, dass
Sie ein israelischer Journalist
sind? Manche meiner besten Freunde
sind…
For people like Broder, the term
“Holocaust Religion” is Neo-Nazi
code for the claim that the Judeocide
is a total invention. For people
like me, it is a term of protest
against exploiting the tragedy of
the Nazi Judeocide for political
purposes.
Broder
did not even bother to read my article
in the Berner Zeitung which was
published the same day that I sent
the letter to Irving (http://www.arendt-erhard.de/deutsch/palestina/Stimmen_Israel_juedische/shraga_elam_auschwitzleugner_attacke_unglaeubiger.htm
). I don‘t suffer from schizophrenia
and I was completely aware of my
own article as I was writing the
letter to Irving. The letter is
more politely phrased as I wanted
to win him over. The article contains
a more detailed explanation of my
position. Possibly some of the phrasing
in my letter to Irving was not well
chosen, and my English is far from
perfect. But this is no reason to
distort it totally to invent a friendship
between me and Irving and to accuse
me of Holocaust Denial.
I don’t expect you to support my
Himmler theory. I have no problem
if you reject it partially or even
totally. A recent description of
the theory can be found here:
http://www.arendt-art.de/deutsch/palestina/Stimmen_Israel_juedische/shraga_elam_ss_vernichtungsplaene_gegen_juden_palaestina.htm
.
What I ask of you, if you agree,
is a short statement that I can
tender to the court and eventually
publish on my blog, saying that
although you may not agree with
my theory, it is tenable on the
available evidence. Saying that
my position, as reflected in my
letter to Irving and in the Berner
Zeitung’s article, is not to be
equated with Holocaust Denial, would
be perfect for me.
Many thanks in advance and happy
Pessach
Shraga Elam

Shraga
Elam
My e-mail
to David Irving from 15. April 2000:
I
find it a real pity that a brilliant
researcher like yourself got mixed
up with this stuff of the so called
“Auschwitz-denial,” because I agree
with you completely that Hitler
was no part of the project Auschwitz.
According to my theory, it was even
part of a plan of Himmler against
Hitler, just as is quiet good proven
[sic] in the case of the destruction
of the Hungarian Jewry in 1944.
I share generally your scepticism
towards oral History and the manipulations
of the priests of the “Holocaust-Religion,”
still all the “proofs” against the
gas chambers in Auschwitz are not
convincing at all.
|