By Michael Hoffman.

Though it could have been from an assassin’s bullet or a terrorist’s bomb so virulent and persistent were the threats against him, Catholic attorney Douglas “Doug” Christie, Canada’s premier defender of the damned, the marginalized and the downtrodden, has died at the age of 66 from cancer, which he had been battling for approximately two years. He worked virtually up to the time of his death. He is survived by his magnificent wife, Keltie, who shared in his battle for freedom, and two lovely children who are pursuing law and engineering careers, respectively.

Christie stood up for mostly indigent Canadian “thought criminals” who were victims of censorship and prosecution directed by a government-backed, misnamed “Human Rights” cabal which seeks to protect Judaism, Zionism and Holocaustianity from the same kind of scrutiny and skepticism which every other religion and ideology faces in the marketplace of ideas.

(Read more…)

 By Nigel Jackson.

The Australian Press Council has declined to accept for processing a complaint against the Melbourne newspaper The Age which I laid before it on 2 October 2012. As the reasons given by the Council for so acting appear to me to be logically invalid and not in accord with its own principles, I believe that the situation should be presented for consideration to the general public, especially since very important ethical issues are involved. During 2012 the Finkelstein Report, chartered by the federal government, called into question the effectiveness of the Council and recommended that it be replaced with a government-regulated body. This generated enormous public interest and discussion. Thus a context exists in which the Council’s practice should be most closely studied.

(Read more…)

By Richard A. Widmann:

By the mid-1990s the term “Holocaust denier” had become part of the popular consciousness and vocabulary.  Likely catapulted into media newspeak by Deborah Lipstadt’s publication of Denying the Holocaust in 1993, the new term supplanted the earlier term “Holocaust revisionist.”

While certainly the phrase of choice for those who oppose the activities of that band of scholars and independent investigators who doubt the traditional view, revisionists (my preferred label) have hotly debated which label to associate themselves with.  While several revisionists have argued strongly against the term “Holocaust denier” others have embraced it and named their Websites and at times even their on-line aliases with the term.

(Read more…)

By Richard Widmann:

The team here at Inconvenient History has just learned that our Print on Demand publisher Lulu.com will no longer print or distribute our Annual editions.  The “Questionable Content Team” at Lulu has informed us that our content and in fact all revisionist writing is “illegal and anti-constitutional” in France and Germany — two of their markets.

(Read more…)