Footer Pages

Iran’s Secret Weapon, by Dr Robert Faurisson

A slightly edited version of this article, with pictures, captions and additional commenary by Lasha Darkmoon

It is a far deadlier weapon than any weapon Israel has in its armory — and it is capable of destroying Israel. What weapon? To find out, read on.

“If everyone who claims to be a Holocaust survivor actually is one, who did Hitler kill?” — Norman Finkelstein’s mother, quoted in Norman Finkelstein’s The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering. 

The energy crisis is causing worry. However, Iran, which possesses huge reserves of oil and gas, wishes to exploit them better, with our help, and sell us the products, a procedure that would lead to a marked softening of worldwide petrol, diesel, fuel oil and gas prices. A good many nations have an eye on this great potential wealth and would be apt to respond favorably to Tehran’s business proposals. But the United States has decreed the boycott of Iran and, up to now, the world’s policeman has generally been obeyed.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad can make all the proposals he likes: he still finds himself considered a criminal. His request for a collaboration that would let him fully re-equip the country’s drilling, production and processing operations is refused. He goes so far as to suggest that countries using the single European currency pay in euros and no longer in dollars, but to no avail. People turn their back to him. Some threaten him. Even the Pope refuses to receive him.

In many countries, President Ahmadinejad’s embassies and diplomatic staff are deprived of contact with the local authorities and foreign delegations; they have ended up with pariah status.

One may well ask oneself where such radical behavior towards the Iranians ever originated and why the international community acts so obviously against its own economic interests.

Three grounds are usually brought up to explain this policy of boycott and open hostility toward Iran:

1) The Iranian president is perhaps trying to arm his country with nuclear weapons.

2) It seems he wants to exterminate the Jews in Israel.

3) He holds the extermination of the European Jews during the Second World War to be a myth.

The first two grounds do not make much sense; only the third is serious and, for that reason, instructive.

In reply to the first ground, it’s fitting to observe that if Ahmadinejad’s accusers possessed the slightest evidence that Iran was trying to acquire nuclear weapons, such evidence would long since have been brandished before the world; however, up to now, they have supplied no real evidence.

In any case, if Iran had a nuclear bomb at her disposal, she could not launch it towards a geographic zone populated by as many Palestinians as Jews, since her bomb would kill or maim both populations without distinction.

The second bone of contention against Iran — that it seeks the extermination of the Jews in Israel — is without foundation. It rests on the absurd manipulation of a text. Ahmadinejad has had, and continues to have ascribed to him, an incendiary statement according to which the Jewish State is to be “wiped off the map”, words taken to mean the extermination of the Jews in Israel.

Actually, Ahadminejad had merely repeated (in 2005) Ayatollah Khomeini’s 1979 declaration that “the regime occupying Jerusalem” would one day “vanish from the page of time”. This was the repetition of someone else’s prediction, not a threat.

Ahmadinejad took care to spell out his phrase by specifying that, if all the inhabitants of the land of Palestine – Moslems, Jews and Christians – had the right one day to vote freely and opt for a regime of their choice, the Zionist regime would disappear from Palestine just as, for example, the Communist regime disappeared from Russia. The Western media, as a whole, have reported neither the exact wording nor the explanation.

PRESIDENT AHMADINEJAD’S EXACT WORDS: “Imam ghoft een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad.” —The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time“.

A literal word-for-word translation of the Farsi: Imam (Khomeini) ghoft (said) een (this) rezhim-e (regime) ishghalgar-e (occupying) qods (Jerusalem)  bayad (must) az safheh-ye ruzgar (from page of time) mahv shavad (vanish from).

Note that the word MAP (nagsheh in Farsi) occurs nowhere in Ahmadinejad’s speech; nor do the words ISRAEL or WIPE OUT. The English translation “I want to wipe Israel off the map” is therefore much more than a mischievous mistranslation. It is a complete fabrication. [LD]

The third ground is the true one: if the Iranian president causes so much fear, it’s owing to his revisionism. He has wielded the sole weapon that can deeply worry the Jewish State and its ally, the United States.

He possesses what I’ve called the poor man’s atomic bomb. In the findings of historical revisionism, he effectively holds a “weapon of mass destruction” that would kill no one but could neutralize Israel’s number one political weapon: the Great Lie of the alleged Nazi gas chambers and the alleged genocide of Europe’s Jews.

Raised in the religion of “the Holocaust”, the peoples of North America and Europe generally believe in this Great Lie and see Ahmadinejad as a heretic. Thus they dare not defend any policy of rapprochement with Iran, or call for a lifting of the boycott, although therein lies the only chance of seeing their energy costs decrease. Doubtless some of these peoples’ leaders desire an understanding with Iran, but they back away at the prospect of being criticized as accomplices of the new Satan, of the “denier”, the “negationist” who “kills the Jews once again by denying their death”.

The news of the international “Holocaust” conference in Tehran (December 11th—12th 2006) rang out like a warning shot. By no means reserved to revisionists, that conference was open to all. Confrontation of opposing views was allowed, and it took place. The rout of the anti-revisionists was dramatic. And President Ahmadinejad, already fully apprised of revisionist argumentation, was thus able to restate that “the Holocaust” was a myth.

Bush, Blair, Chirac, who know nothing of revisionism, responded by making a terrible fuss. As for the Israelis, they are aware of the Jewish authors’ utter inability to answer revisionist arguments on the scientific level; they now uphold their Great Lie only with Elie Wiesel-style fake testimony or cinematic guff in the manner of Claude Lanzmann, when they don’t resort to novels, drama or even sham museum exhibitions like those at Yad Vashem in Jerusalem or the Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington.


— Elie Wiesel, the world’s most famous Holocaust survivor and — some would claim — the world’s most widely acclaimed liar. “In Buchenwald they sent 10,000 persons to their deaths each day,” he lied. “I was always in the last hundred near the gate. They stopped. Why?”

Concerning Babi Yar, a place in Ukraine where the Germans executed Soviet citizens, Wiesel wrote of Jews being killed: “For month after month, the ground never stopped trembling; from time to time, geysers of blood spurted from it.” (Reporting another witness to this miraculous event).

In 2007, Wiesel stated that President Ahmadinejad of Iran had openly admitted he wanted to nuke Israel into oblivion. “When he says he wants nuclear weapons to destroy the state of Israel, I must believe him,” Wiesel said.

The late Christopher Hitchens had no time for Wiesel and was not impressed by his Nobel Peace prize or his 76 honorary doctorates. “Is there a more contemptible poseur and windbag than Elie Wiesel?” he asked rhetorically. (The Nation, February 11, 2001).

Holocaust revisionismi.e., any doubts about the official version of the Holocaust as laid down by the Zionists and their camp followers — is illegal in many parts of the world. Questioning the magic six million figure is now a “thought crime” which can get you sent to prison for several years in the following 17 countries: Austria, Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Hungary, Israel, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, and Switzerland.

Here are two photos of the author of this article, Dr Robert Faurisson, after he was savagely beaten up by three Jewish fanatics for daring to question the sacred tenets of the Holocaust: namely, that 6 million Jews were killed in gas chambers on the orders of Hitler. To this day, not a single gas chamber has actually been seen by anyone. [LD]

The Zionists and their friends are getting more and more alarmed at the diffusion of revisionism over the Internet. They make many attempts, cynical or veiled, to strengthen Internet censorship but, up to today at any rate, they have not yet achieved their aims. Throughout the Western world repression of revisionism is worsening, but it’s all a waste of effort so far. The holocaustic propaganda and Shoah Business grow ever more deafening, but henceforth they tend to annoy or tire people.

The Zionists have therefore seized the occasion to draw up a bill in the Knesset that would let the State of Israel demand that any revisionist, wherever in the world he might be, be delivered to its own courts!

When there’s no proof to show, the cudgel is used.

Herman Rosenblatt and his wife Roma, smirking contentedly after having conned the world into accepting their fake Holocaust memoir Angel at the Fence. TV celeb Oprah Winfrey was taken in by their touching concentration camp romance and gushed breathlessly, “This is the single greatest love story we’ve ever told on the air!” Asked why he had lied, Mr Rosenblatt explained, “I wanted to bring happiness to people.” Despite the book being a proven fake, a $25 million blockbuster movie is now being made by Jewish producer Harris Salomon.

Rosenblatt’s fake memoir is one in a long series of Holocaust hoaxes, some of them even more flamboyantly absurd. e.g., the case of Misha the Wolf Girl who was raised by wolves and fed on raw meat like a wolf cub — a story that netted her over $20 million and was also made into a movie. Nor are matters made any better when we learn that Holocaust scams are frequent, with thousands of fraudulent claims being  made every year by bogus “survivors”, costing Germany and other countries tens of millions of dollars. In one case alone, Germany was cheated out of $42 million. All this blatant dishonesty by unscrupulous Jews only brings the Holocaust into disrepute and gives ammunition to the Holocaust deniers.

This, then, is the “secret weapon” against Israel that Iran wields so effectively — a weapon far deadlier than all of Israel’s 200-300 nuclear warheads: Holocaust truth. If the truth about the Holocaust should ever turn out to be what historical revisionists and millions of other increasingly skeptical people think it is — a spectacular hoax to prop up Zionism and give the Jewish state a semblance of legitimacy — Israel’s days are numbered.

It is for this reason that Israel is perhaps so desperate to destroy Iran: to silence it before the truth gets out.  (LD)

10 Responses to Iran’s Secret Weapon, by Dr Robert Faurisson

  1. David Holden October 22, 2012 at 7:57 pm #


    ahmedinejad speaks his mind, and his mind is not isolated from his human heart. unthinkable in a statesman of the west. the latter are without exception shop-windows dummies, with a bit of software and primitive servo-mechanisms controlling their mouths.

    aside from the holohoax reason you mention. Hell-On-Earth hates ahmedinejad because

    (1) he shows them up to be the puppets they are

    (ii) he knows the truth about 911 and has the evidence to prove it.

    he is playing with them until he hears the hammering of gallows being erected everywhere

  2. Ariadna Theokopoulos October 22, 2012 at 9:44 pm #

    The Holocaust™ and 9/11 are definitely the two most dangerous topics for the ZPC, hence the forces deployed in all venues, in various versions, to stifle any discussion on them.

  3. Ariadna Theokopoulos October 22, 2012 at 9:46 pm #

    Did I say “The Spanish Inquisition?” (cf. Monty Python)
    Having said “9/11” I have inadvertently invoked jay.
    I better suit up in my Box Cutter Boys Conspiracy-proof cape, just in case.

    • David Holden October 23, 2012 at 8:31 am #

      i can hear him, wondering whether to take your bait and if so how or whether on this occasion to preserve gravitas by maintaining a dignified silence.

  4. pgg804 October 23, 2012 at 4:42 am #

    Also worth mentioning. David Irving wrote what he considers his greatest book, “Hitler’s War” in 1977. Until that year Irving was widely acclaimed as one of the most important historians in the world. He was sought after for interviews and leading newspapers and magazines in Germany, England and other countries reported on the importance of his new books and paid him to write articles for them. If there was a Nobel Prize for historians, he would have received one.

    In “Hitler’s War” Irving does not hold back from reporting on the violence and injustices of the National Socialists. But he found no evidence of a conceived plan to murder all the Jews of Europe and therefore did not write a chapter on the holocaust. His editor (who Irving was on good terms with) told Irving this would destroy the value of the book and perhaps damage his career and told him to “invent evidence”, but Irving refused to do this. Since then David Irving has been savagely attacked in the media, jailed and banned from entering Australia, Canada, South Africa and other countries. If he enters Germany or Austria he risks being arrested.

    One of David Irving’s major points is that if there was a conceived plan to murder all the Jews of Europe, there must be a written document with Hitler’s signature on it ordering this. Any army would require this, but particularly one as disciplined as the German military. There is no document ordering the murder of all Europe’s Jews and definitely nothing with Hitler’s signature on it. Irving even writes that Hitler protected Jews such as when he was outraged by Kristallnacht and ordered it be stopped; Irving says Goebbels was responsible. There were atrocities committed against Jews and Irving discusses them, but no state policy to kill all the Jews.

    David Irving has offered a cash reward to anyone who can find such an order by Hitler, but it has never been found.

    • Jonathon Blakeley October 23, 2012 at 7:30 am #

      thanks for an interesting comment pgg8804

    • David Holden October 23, 2012 at 8:41 am #

      Irving has been a much maligned man, but his loudest critics, as with Gilad Atzmon’s Wandering Who, are unlikely to have read his work.

      the search for truth may land you in prison or penury, but it nourishes the soul.

      for the stubbornly blind, mouthing lies and platitudes may gain them a country house and a professorial chair, but the discerning eye will see them gradually transformed into animated cadavers.

  5. Ariadna Theokopoulos October 24, 2012 at 1:30 am #

    “Asked why he had lied, Mr Rosenblatt explained, “I wanted to bring happiness to people.”


  6. pgg804 October 24, 2012 at 2:35 am #

    Paul Eisen posted an interesting article on the scientist and holocaust revisionist Germar Rudolf.

  7. pgg804 October 25, 2012 at 1:38 am #

    I’m posting part of historian David Irving’s diary below because I think it is relevant to any individual or organization (such as Deliberation) that holds (or allows) opinions contrary to the existing narrative in the west regarding WW II, Israel/Palestine and all other related discussions. I think after reading it you might agree that without the internet, Deliberation would probably have never gotten off the ground as a publication.

    Irving is currently touring the USA and posted his recent diary entries today. It contains an interesting letter from a high school history teacher.

    From David Irving’s diary:

    October 15, 2012

    A veteran History Teacher at a Massachusetts High School has written me:

    I have been a WW2 buff since I was in elementary school, and a keen researcher of the who’s what’s where’s and why’s of Germany’s expansion and ultimate destruction. Fast forwarding to this era, our school teaches a Holocaust class. I mentioned David Irving to the teacher, and he responded with a measure of disdain and hint of vitriol that caught me off guard. Shortly after, I purchased the three book compilation, Hitlers War, read it quickly, and reported to the history teacher that it was very erudite and relied heavily on primary sources–many unpublished to date. I was dismissed with a hand wave.

    Now…it is ten years later, and I have just finished my second read of the same text. I am quite perplexed at the brickbats, literally and figuratively, that have been tossed your way.

    The intervening ten years have expanded my research, and I have some ideas as to why there has been such a negative reaction to this work. (the single sentence dedicated to the liberation of Auschwitz has to be the big one…) But the vividness of the writing, the humanization of the subject are quite gripping. And therein lies the likely problem. A tale that tells more than a modicum of truth bucking the wave of global demonization and semi slanderous versions of what history is….would be considered dangerous by those who value an opinion over truth.

    11:22 p.m I send the above letter to Jessica: “I thought you’d be proud to read this kind of letter, which I now often get. Just in case you wonder…”

    I reply to him with a broad hint: “May I say what would most please me: if you or some other teachers would say, “Mr Irving, would you like to come one day or evening to talk to my history classes? After all you personally knew Hitler’s private staff and interviewed them at length.” I would come like a shot. I shall probably be in New England this spring. At present only one university, in Denver, dares invite me to come and talk to their classes, twice a year, which I am happy to do without fee.”

    October 17, 2012

    Hello Mr. Irving-

    I have broached the subject at school today, and received quite polarized responses. The second in command of the history department is quite open minded and intrigued, and compared the pervasive brick batting of your work with the widespread violence in response to the YouTube video of Mohammed across the Muslim world . . . I.e. no one has seen it but are very upset. I thought this to be quite apropos.

    I feel that a visit would be overwhelming for our small performing arts charter school, but . . . I am still going to broach it with the department chair, an admitted non fan of your work, although I have come very close to getting him to admit that he has read none of your works.

    A quick perusal of the Wikipedia page devoted to you is somewhat ingenuous, and sometimes borders on calumny. The portion devoted to ‘Holocaust denial’ is definitely the portion that will blind many to the research that you have done, and the primary sources you have at your disposal. Be that as it may, this is part of the legacy that taints many before they have even turned a single page.

    For many, the primary source education on the 1933-1945 period rely on few sources. Albert Speer and William Shirer (an insider and a journalist) and Trevor-Roper and Joachim Fest. I again have to say that there are so many tidbits you have unearthed that bring a richness to the tale, which again probably rubs many the wrong way-those who only wish to see a condemnation of evil, not a studied objective view that leaves the reader the right to decide what actually was happening. And that is the job of a good historian.