[This is the last known video interview of Bradley Smith, an indefatigable proponent of free speech and a supporter and promoter of revisionists, in particular those that have concluded that the so-called “Holocaust” is in actual fact, the “Hoax of the Twentieth Century“.
Bradley sadly passed away at the age of 86, on February 18, 2016 — KATANA]
Click on the above link, or copy the link into your browser to view the video.
Jim Rizoli for the League of Extraordinary Revisionists interviews Bradley Smith — his 5th in the series.
TRANSCRIPT — WITH IMAGES
TRANSCRIPT — TEXT ONLY
Jim: Hi everyone! Jim Rizoli here with Bradley Smith.
And we’re going to be talking to you today. He is one of The League of Extraordinary Revisionists that we have picked out to interview and we have only a few of them. So far, Bradley will be the fifth to be interviewed. And we have a few more we would like to talk to, but we’re very glad we have Bradley with us today.
You live where, Bradley, exactly?
Bradley: I live in Baja, Mexico.
Jim: OK, so you live in Baja, Mexico.
Bradley: Baja Norte.
Jim: Well that’s good. [laughing] We live in Massachusetts so, we are a little far away from you.
Bradley: I’ve never been there.
Jim: Oh, well, you should be glad!
But anyway, we’re very happy that we can interview you because I’ve been familiar with your writings for many years. What I really appreciated about you and your coming into the revisionist movement is you’re like me. I don’t write books. I read a lot. And I talk a lot. But you probably write a lot more than me. I do more talking than writing. So I depend on people like you to inform me of what’s going on, to see how it works.
Bradley: I depend on people like Faurisson.
Jim: Well, that’s what I’m saying. They have written everything about this. OK ,so I don’t have to write anymore. What else can you write. You know, we can just get the message out. I look at like yourself and myself as messengers. We’re the messengers.
Bradley: I agree.
Jim: So we’re good on that.
So Bradley, why don’t you tell us a little bit about your background first of all, your claim to fame, I suppose. But give the audience a little about your background, what you’ve done in your life and from where you come to where you are now.
Bradley: Well, listen. That’s a long story. Your assistant sent me a series of questions and she told me for the background, tell us a little bit about yourself, your family history and your education.
My Family History: I’m from a working class family in South Central Los Angeles, in the thirty’s, where they used to do the riots. When I hear all this talk about poverty now, … It never occurred to me a day when I was a child. The issue of poverty was never there. And we lived in a converted goat shed. The goat shed had been remade. This was in a lot, a regular lot behind a house in South Central. They had a goat shed. Well, they got tired of the goat, so they rebuilt the goat shed to be the kitchen and they added two rooms to the goat shed and a toilet. That’s where I spent my early years.
My character must have been initiated there! [laughing] I slept on the sofa until I was 11 years-old, and then we moved. My father was a boiler maker. My mother was a housewife. I had twin brothers when I was 5 years old, they were born. I still remember the day after, I remember them coming out of the hospital into the parking lot and my mother and father each had a baby. I didn’t understand that, because I didn’t understand that my mother had been pregnant. I had not understood that. As a matter of fact, I didn’t know what “pregnant” was!
So anyway, they managed to get the whooping cough and die a year later.
I remember my mother crying and so forth, but we didn’t go on about it for years.
Oh, by the way, they were both lapsed Catholics. The family was largely Irish and there was some German back somewhere, on my father’s side.
By the way, they grew up in the coal mines of Johnstown, Pennsylvania in the 1890s. My father went to work when he was 10 years-old, in the coal mines. That’s considered a crime against humanity nowadays. But in those days, it wasn’t. This stuff all seems normal to me.
My education: I have to say that I am a graduate of John C. Fremont High School in South Central Los Angeles. And then, it more or less went to the dogs! I didn’t want to go to school when I turned 18. When I turned 17, I graduated. I wanted to go into Marines, but my mommy wouldn’t sign for me. So when I was 18, I joined the Army.
And when I got out in early 1952, I thought to study creative writing at Los Angeles City College. I went to a few classes at night, but one night I showed up and I had to sneeze and I opened my jacket, to take out a handkerchief I had in there, and there was a gasp in the room. It was a classroom. There were probably 20 people there. There was a gasp there, because I had a 38-caliber revolver in a shoulder holster.
Jim: Wow! Oh my goodness!
Bradley: In the meantime, I had become a deputy sheriff. You know I was like one of the youngest guys on the force in Los Angeles. When they interviewed me to be a deputy sheriff, they said what’s the job that you would least like to have. I said, I don’t want to work in a county jail. I want to be in a car. I want to be out on a road. I want to get the bad guys.
So of course, they assigned me to the county jail! And after eight months, I quit.
And I decided to continue my education in Mexico City, on the G.I. Bill. And so I went down there to Mexico City, to Mexico City College, an American institution in 1955.
But one day, my friend Mike and I, we used to go to the bullfights on Sunday to pass the time, drink beer. One Sunday afternoon, I saw a bullfight that was really remarkable, by a guy named Ramirez. This was a guy who was kind of kooky and was doing very erratically with the bulls. He was working very erratically, and he ended up getting a very bad reputation.
This afternoon, in order to clear up his reputation, he went into the fight, went into the corrida. He was going to kill all 6 bulls himself! Well, this was going to be a disaster, but I wanted to see it. So we were there and five of his animals, if I remember this right, or the first four of his animals, they had to drag out, live. He couldn’t kill them.
And then the last Faina occurred and it was the most wonderful thing I had ever seen in my life! It was really remarkable. And I remember you’re not supposed to take booze into the stadium, but I always took a bottle of wine in under my jacket. And I’m not a demonstrative guy, but when Ramirez finished this Faina and killed his animal in a perfect show, how a toreador should do it, it was so exciting, it was so beautiful, that I jumped up in the air with all of the Mexicans and started yelling, “Yeah!”.
When I did that, that bottle of wine fell out of the bottom of my jacket and bounced down the concrete steps of the bull ring in Mexico City that has room for 50,000 people, and I was toward the top and it bounced all the way … I’m waiting for it to break. It didn’t break. It went all the way down to the fence, to the coral that goes around the bull ring!
Anyway, I was so struck by that Faina, that I quit school. I quit Mexico City College to study bullfighting.
And so once again, my attempt at educating myself came to naught. Except, I had a pretty good education about the bulls and I worked in that for two years until I drank some dirty water and got hepatitis. Then the rest of my education, I think that was it. That’s my formal education.
Jim: The big question is, what made you want to get into the Holocaust issue? I mean, there had to be something that really got you going in the beginning?
Bradley: Well yeah. Usually I explain it as it was just bad luck!
But I was into the libertarian movement, in Hollywood, in the 70s. And, I, one night in September, October 1979, I went to a Libertarian presidential nomination convention in the hotel in downtown Los Angeles, a major hotel.
And I’m up there. It was on the balcony. And I go up to the balcony and there’s lots of people milling around there and they’re my kind of people. There was this one guy, who comes up to me and he has some leaflets in his hands. And he begins talking about how the gas chamber stories are not true! And how the Holocaust story is a scam! I couldn’t believe I was hearing it, because I was a true believer! I believed everything I’d ever heard about the Holocaust story since the 40s. I mean there was no question in my mind that it happened more or less the way everybody said it happened. I was a true believer! I was a true believer.
Jim: You don’t remember who he was, do you?
Bradley: I didn’t know who he was. I have since learned, and I can’t believe it because I remember another face entirely, but I have since learned that two people were there that night, two revisionists: David McCalden. It was not him, and John Bennett from Australia.
Later I got to know John Bennett. And it turns out that he’s not the face that I remembered, but apparently it was John Bennett, the Australian libertarian and revisionist. And anyway he’s telling me that the Holocaust story is a fraud and I’m right in the middle of all my people there.
I couldn’t believe I was hearing this, but the man was respectful, and he seemed to be very well informed, in some way. And my hands literally began to sweat. Because I’m aware that all of the people who are there have been proselytized by him before I got there and now they’re all watching me, to see what I’m going to do.
What am I going to do? Well I take the leaflet from him and there was a trash can near a pillar, a few feet from us and I started in that direction. And I looked down and it was titled, “The Problem of the Gas Chambers” by Robert Faurisson. Who was a guy I’d never heard of.
I’m walking to the trash bin and I was going to dump this thing and dump it in a way that everybody could see that I was dumping it, so that I wouldn’t be associated with this guy.
Because I didn’t want to be associated with him. And as I got to the trash can, I saw that it’s an article that’s been translated from Le Monde. It was published in Le Monde. And I don’t know who Faurisson was, but I knew that Le Monde is one of the primary daily newspapers in the world. I actually knew that. And at the last minute it was when I made my most serious error! At the very last instant, I doubled that thing up and put it in my back pocket.
And when I got home that night, I read it. I lived in one room in Hollywood then by myself. 
The prose was so simple, and the ideas were so simple, and there was a logic attached to it, that I thought:
“There’s something to this. I don’t know what it is! But there’s something to this!“
And I put it on the table and I began thinking about it and thinking about it. But I refused, I refused to take it anywhere else.
Then one night after Christmas, that same year, I had a dream, which I have been circulating lately. That night, I was staying in my mother’s apartment, sleeping on the living room floor. It was just a three-bedroom apartment in a canyon in Hollywood, in a very narrow lot and it was a wooden framed house, two stories with a peek roof. Made about 1805, a traditional house. So anyway, I was sleeping on the floor in her front room and I had a dream. And the dream was that I had been gassed in Auschwitz!
Jim: [laughing] I read about your dream!
Bradley: And you’re laughing!? [said jokingly] No fun being gassed at Auschwitz! So anyway, I saw myself there.
Two things happened — I’m there. The gassing has already taken place. And I’m not hurt and I’m not suffering. I’m just sitting there amidst this big pile of filthy shit-covered bloody corpses!
Everything is in kind of a green pallor, a faded green tone, an ugly tone. And then as I’m sitting there and I remember then part of the dream that two big windows open in the back of the chamber, and I saw all these faces of the Sonderkommando up there. And they were all in the dream. They tended to be eastern European Jews, in the sense because I had been associating with Jews for years, for decades and they tend to be smaller and a little bit stockier, but smaller. They looked Jewish.
But anyway, I’m looking at these guys. I had been living with them and among them for 20 to 30 years. These were the guys who were going to come in and ram their fingers into the innards of their little girls and their wives and mothers, to take out the gold and the diamonds and all this stuff.
And I’m sitting there looking at it and I say:
“You know what, they wouldn’t do it. They would never do that. One of them might or two, once or twice. But they’re not going to spend months or years treating people that way. I know these guys. They’d never do it.”
And that was more or less it for the dream.
And then, instead of dodging the issue, it may have been the next day that I went to downtown Los Angeles to the main library and I asked for Dr Arthur Butz’s, book, “HOAX OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURY”.
I remember the librarian looking at me kind of funny. She was a middle-aged lady and she knew that I wasn’t supposed to be asking for that book. And because I didn’t find it on the shelves, or in a catalog. And it turns out they had a copy, but they had it in the back room. So she was good enough to go get it. And I read three or four chapters of Butz’s, “HOAX”. And all of a sudden, you know what, I knew! I put it down and began walking in circles around the library. I mean the head was just flashing!
I knew that when I walked out that night — it was New Year’s Eve 1979. I walked out that night and I knew from that moment on, my life was going to take a dramatic change with how I was using it. I wasn’t really using it, I was wasting it. The thing is, that’s what happened. Faurisson, the dream, Butz and I was finally able to say, well you know what, I’m on their side. The thing is I knew from the beginning I wasn’t going to do any scholarly work. I’m not engineered that way. That’s a phrase that David Irving uses for people like me, they’re not engineered right. And I knew that I was going to do what you talked about, that I was going to get the scholarship of others out to the public.
Jim: Now let me ask you this. What was the first thing that YOU did on your own, representing them? In other words, what was the first thing you threw out there to the people to say, “Well, here are my thoughts on it” with this information? Do you remember? Was there something you wrote in a magazine somewhere?
Bradley: I think what I did is that, one, I told the story briefly that I just told you. And I founded a tabloid newspaper, which I don’t remember the name of. And it had one issue, no more. And I probably printed 500 copies, a 12-page tabloid. I actually have one of them around here somewhere, I’ve forgotten about it.
And what I did is I took it to a few bookstores into some news racks. And I distributed it hoping that I would sell one here and there. I offered subscriptions on the back page. I got one subscription. It was interesting in that the guy who subscribed was a guy from a Scientology organization in Santa Monica. Not the main one. His name was Tom Marcellus. By the time I had made contact with him, he had found a job with the Institute [of Historical Review].
David McCalden and Willis Carto founded the Institute. Marcellus had gotten a job there. He had gotten an editorial job or something there and he had subscribed to my paper because it had to do with revisionism. And I remember that he told me he went in and he put this in front of David McCalden. McCalden sat there and he didn’t move. He read the entire 12 tabloid pages before he looked up.
But anyhow Marcellus got in touch with me and invited me down and I had lunch with Marcellus and McCalden. They were in Newport Beach, I think. We had we had a lunch out there. I met both of these guys. That was the beginning.
Jim: So you don’t remember what you wrote about, what the revisionist article was about? Was it just about the Holocaust in general? I’d love to see that.
Bradley: I don’t remember. It was 30 years ago.
Jim: So you were in close association with McCalden and Willis?
Bradley: Not with Willis so much. He was always around, but he didn’t spend a lot of time with me. We only sat down 2 or 3 times in those years.
Jim: So they basically got the publication going themselves, the IHR stuff.
Bradley: McCalden was responsible for publishing the first edition of, “The Journal of Historical Review“.
Jim: You know, I don’t know much about him. I’m glad I’m talking to you about that, because I only saw him in the older videos that he did. And I guess he died young or something, huh?
Bradley: Yeah, he did. McCalden died of AIDS. There was never a lot of discussion about it. But the thing is, is that after he quit, or was separated from the Institute, he had no way to make a living. And so I remember one day I see he was driving a bus for the Los Angeles Airport, taking passengers here and there. But later he got a job as a bouncer at a Persian nightclub in West Los Angeles — doorman/bouncer. And the thing is, it was a place known for being full of loose ladies. I mean that was the purpose of the thing. He was rather a womanizer. I just imagine. that he became intimate with the wrong Persian.
Jim: You think he got AIDS because of that, you think?
Bradley: One, I don’t know and two, that’s my best guess.
Jim: I’ve heard rumors, some saying that he was gay.
Bradley: I would be surprised if that would be so.
Jim: But now knowing what you just said, see that now connects it a little better for me because that makes sense.
Bradley: Not only that, but he had a very attractive wife, besides being a womanizer. He had a very good looking wife. And she was not just someone. She was of Puerto Rican descent and she was a professional psychologist. So she had a real job. And they had a daughter. She also died of AIDS, of course, but he died first.
Jim: He was young.
Bradley: So I remember, I have an anecdote. You want another anecdote?
After McCalden died, he had his little house. He lived in very modest quarters. It was full of books. And hundreds and hundreds of important books. He had a library and his wife didn’t want them. Because that wasn’t her thing. She wasn’t into it at all. So they were giving the books away. And I didn’t want any more books myself because I didn’t want to have to read anything. But I dropped by the house one day to see how it was going. And I was there for a few minutes. And Viviana, her name, she came out of the back bedroom and she was walking very slowly and uncertainly. And I remember, I noted this in my last newsletter, I think. I then did one of the stupidest things, stupidity that I have never got over. She came out and I said:
“Viviana, you look good!”
She looked at me for a moment and then she turned around unsteadily and walked back into her bedroom and closed the door. I never saw her again. She knew she didn’t look good and that I was doing the wrong thing by saying it — something that I’ll never be able to get straight about.
Jim: So, you didn’t get the books?
Bradley: No, I didn’t take any of the books.
Jim: Who got his books?
Bradley: I don’t remember who was there. I think David Cole got some of them. And he may have been there that day, but I don’t remember. I don’t remember any of the other guys who were there. Again, that was in the 80s.
Jim: That’s an interesting story. I’m glad you cleared that up for me, because I really like what he had to say.
Bradley: He was really something. He was very good. He was already a radical, when he was in England. He was against fox hunting. So he used to get some guys together to go out into the forest. He let the fox go by. When the horsemen came, they’d jump out and yell at the horsemen, hopefully seeing the guys fall to the ground. He was always a radical.
Jim: He was a good contributor to the issue. Well let me ask you this now. When did you decide to do the college thing?
Bradley: You know what. I don’t know how I decided to do that. What I did first, I was in New York in July, 1984. I had a manuscript of my first book, Confessions of a Holocaust Revisionist and I was going to take it back to the Institute. They were going to publish it.
By the way, I think the first story in my tabloid that I made was the first story in the book. It was how I got the Faurisson, article from Le Monde. I was in the airport in Newark waiting for a flight to Los Angeles. I bought a copy of The New York Times and in The New York Times, I found on the inside — they had little notes, late-breaking news notes — and one of them was that a book distributor in Southern California, called the Institute for Historical Review had been burned to the ground. My publisher!
And by the way, this was on the 4th of July. And so I’m sitting there, I find that my publisher, my first publisher has just been burned to the ground! That can be seen as irony, right? Especially the date, July 4, 1984 — Mr. Orwell.
The jerks who did the burning were probably not thinking of Orwell. They were thinking of 1984, July 4th. They had overlooked the fact that it was Orwell.
So I went out and I volunteered. Willis was there and Marcellus and two or three other guys. And I volunteered to do a newsletter for the Institute that would be directed toward journalists only, pointing out the falsehoods and unproven accusations and nonsense that American journalists were distributing about the Holocaust story. And so Willis said OK. He had a big mailing list and he gave me a mailing list of 4,000 people and so, remember that we decided to call the newsletter, “Prima Fascia“.* Which was a name given to me by another guy. I remember the guy, I forget his name, but it was suggested by him. And I had never heard the term before but he explained what that meant.
[* Prima facie (\PRY-muh-FAY-shee; -shuh\) is a Latin expression meaning “at first sight,” used in common law jurisdictions to denote evidence that is sufficient, if not rebutted, to prove a particular proposition or fact. In most legal proceedings, one of the parties has the burden of production, which requires that party to present prima facie evidence of all facts essential to its case.]
So I went with the Prima Fascia. And we did three or four issues of Prima Fascia but it was directed at journalists nationwide. It went out in print, in an envelope. I think it was probably eight pages. It was easy to get material for the newsletter, because the Holocaust now was all over everything. Before the 1960s, it was not really around. In the 60s, it went like that.
After doing this four times and getting a modest response from journalists who didn’t want to commit themselves to anything, either negative or positive, Mr Carto decided it wasn’t for him.
And so, well, I didn’t know what to do then so then I thought, well, it occurred to me talk shows were very big then on radio. Radio talk shows were very big — mainline talk. It’s gotten big again but it’s more on cable. Then it was audio. It was radio. Once again, I went to the Institute, to Willis Carto and Tom Marcellus and pitched them the idea of me getting radio interviews. To talk about the Holocaust, how the journalists were treating it, or not treating it and free press issues.
So once again they went along with it. And this turned out to be a very successful operation. I literally did hundreds of radio interviews and some TV interviews over the next 8 years, maybe.
Jim: I saw a video of you, was it the Phil Donahue [Show] where you were with David Cole?
Bradley: Yeah, that was Donahue.
Jim: So it was Donahue. I remember watching that one. You know what was funny about that? That was the woman who said, (she was talking about the crematory or the gas chambers — she got them confused, I think). She said:
“If you knew what I knew …” (Because she claimed to be so close to the crematoria), “… you wouldn’t eat chicken today because of the smell of the burning flesh.”
She equated it to eating chicken and I’m saying to myself:
“Lady, you probably were next to the kitchen. You weren’t next to the crematoria!”
Bradley: [both laughing] I didn’t think of that! I should have said that. I did a radio interview in Riverton. I don’t remember where it was and he was a young man, and a lady called in. And she said:
“One of the things that I hated about the Nazis most (she was a Jewish lady in Germany) is that they mated gorillas with Jewish women.“
“Did you say mate gorillas with Jewish ladies.”
And she said:
I told the kid [the radio host], I said:
“Listen, get her off of here!”
They threw me off the program for insulting one of their customers.
Jim: Well that story, at the time you were on TV, I mean you have to laugh. The things that they were saying were just so ridiculous and you’re sitting there trying to just say to them:
“What’s going on here?”
Bradley: Imagine that the Nazis were mating Jewish ladies with gorillas!
Jim: Of course, you’ve got to say something like that.
Bradley: I wonder how successful they were! [laughing] Ah, that’s a bad joke. I apologize for that joke. So the lawyers don’t get on you.
Jim: [laughing] I’m not worried about lawyers.
Bradley, getting back to the campus project, because that’s really of interest to me now. Because you started going to the schools. Did you actually go to any of the colleges to do this or what?
Bradley: I gave talks at very few colleges in the 90s, a very few. And I remember one day. I do not know. There was no signal event that caused me to say:
“Ah, I’m going to start submitting full-page advertisements to campus newspapers urging free speech, urging a free press on the Holocaust.”
I don’t remember when I started that, but I do remember one time walking. University of Southern California, U.S.C., is not too far from where I grew up; it’s about three miles literally down the street, down Figaro Ave to 62nd Street. U.S.C. is on 35th or 40th and I grew up on 62nd. And I remembered, that I was going to give a talk that day and it was kind of interesting in that as I walk onto the campus, the campus is largely vacant. I don’t know why that would be; there were very few students.
And I remember walking by myself through these great building that are 2 and 3 stories tall, brick buildings built 75 years earlier. And the huge weight of the university campus — I’m just a little figure walking through this thing and I walk up to a place where I’m going to give the talk. So I remember that, how insignificant I was physically, compared to the physical qualities of the university itself. I mean I was so insignificant.
And when I got there, there was a little subgroup of people there and the police were there. And they said who are you and I told them:
“So far, there have been 14 death threats against you. We have police here and we’re going to change the room in which you’re going to speak.”
I said, “OK.” So I had heard that before. When I was down there, one of my supporters who had heard from me through the Institute or something, introduced himself, and it turned out he was a Los Angeles policeman in civilian clothes. He wasn’t on duty. He had come to take care of me if anything had happen.
And it turns out something was happening. And so 2 or 3 things that were interesting here were that when they got up, when they took me up to the new room where I was going to speak, they had it all set up and the kids were sitting down and so forth. They had my table set against the windows that looked out over the street and into the building on the other side of the street. And so they had set me up to speak, to stand up in front of those windows with my back to the windows, to speak to the children.
I told the police:
“Listen, if you think that someone around here wants to shoot me, why are you setting me up with my back to the windows?“
He got it. He didn’t get it before then. And then it turns out that my friend came up to me, the policeman in civilian clothes. He called me outside actually, because they wouldn’t let him in the room, and it turns out that one of the cops had frisked him and they found out that he had had a shoulder holster.
“Well, this happens, you know.”
The thing was, that he was ashamed of himself that he had allowed a lowly, PD officer — I think he was a detective — he had allowed a lowly PD officer shake him down at the door well, and he left. I asked him to stay around and he said:
“I can’t stay.“
And he left and I never saw him again, never heard from him again. He had been shamed out of duty.
But anyway the talk went OK. I don’t remember what I talked about, the usual stuff.
Jim: How many people were there?
Bradley: Oh, I’d say, it was a small room, I’d say 30-35 people.
Jim: But they didn’t try to stop you?
Bradley: No, they found me a different room. Yeah I just had to advise on where to set me up. [laughing]
You know what, I do not remember, except that there was a couple in Chicago, I don’t think I should mention their name now. The husband turned out to be very helpful to me and he turned out to be a very good editor, an “idea man“.
He set it up so that my first full-page advertisement, but I don’t remember why. I don’t remember how it occurred to me to do this. But I was tired of doing radio. I just didn’t want to do it anymore.
And I was doing a newsletter, but a newsletter is supposed to have news in it, so I decided that it might be good if we made some news. So I used an article that had been drafted by Mark Weber, who was at the Institute then. Mark Weber and I started on a letterhead, Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust [CODOH]. But after he drafted the first article, the letterhead article, he got a job at IHR. He went into another direction. But that article is still around in various forms. I edited it, I rewrote it and my Chicago man helped me to rewrite it.
We published it at Northwestern University, which is in Chicago. We published it in The Daily Northwestern, a full-page ad.
Well this is not the title of it; I have the title all over the place, but I don’t remember it, but it was called something like:
“Let’s have an open debate on the Holocaust story, in the interest of a free press.”
That was the whole thing. So, they published it.
Now this is one of the things that I find very interesting is that at the beginning, I could publish, and by the way, one of the professors wrote an article that absolutely condemned me and didn’t refer to one point in the article.
You know what, it’s been 25 years now, I can’t really talk about it that much.
I published the same ad at Harvard, University of Boston and in a dozen of the major universities around the land and it was an open call for open debate on the Holocaust story, given in a very logical way all the reasons or why.
But these are a few quotations that were taken from the National and Academic Press supporting the publication of our ad. Here’s the title of the ad:
“The Holocaust Controversy: The Case for Open Debate.”
* This article is still around. Robert Peck, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) said:
“The principle of freedom of speech has been not to restrict expression on the basis of content. Newspapers refusing ads because they don’t like the idea Smith is expressing are turning their back on first amendment principles.” This is from the ACLU.
* And then from the president of the American Historical Association. This, by the way is in 1991. These are all in 1991 and 1992:
“Some of us feel that a professional association ought not to get into the business of certifying what is and is not history.”
That’s Leuchtenberg, President of the American Historical Association.
* An editorial in The New York Times. January 1992:
“Denying the Holocaust may be unjust. When there is freedom of expression, even the ugliest ideas enrich democracy.”
* The Washington Post, an editorial in 1991:
“Students should be encouraged to investigate the holocaust story the same way they are encouraged to investigate every other historical event.”
University of Michigan. The editor of The Michigan Daily:
“The most important question is whether the Holocaust ad should have been printed. I believe strongly more than ever that it should have been. Using free speech, after all, is more important than simply cherishing it.”
* The Washington Times, Alan Dershowitz:
“Some college newspapers ran the ad, as I would have done myself.” 1992.
Alan Dershowitz is the same guy who when I went to University of Texas for a meeting with the editorial staff, there was a quote on the front paper:
“Bradley Smith is a known anti-Semite and anti-black racist, who should never appear in any newspapers!”
He didn’t know then that I was married to a Mexican. They used to use the word “racist” all the time. And then this is from a philosophy professor at Northern Illinois University:
“I suggest we practice what is being preached at us and commit ourselves to tolerating the expression of opinions we strongly disagree with.”
* Here is the final one at Duke University, Professor Peter Fish:
“Can it be argued the radical views on the existence of the Holocaust as a historical event are unfit to print in the sense that publication constitutes obscenity, defamation of individuals or solicitation of criminal actions? If so, then there undoubtedly exist a variety of radical views should never grace the pages of The Chronicle. Erstwhile campus censors should seize the present opportunity to step forward, enumerate their agenda of specific subjects deemed unfit to print.”
When I started this whole thing with the Holocaust controversy, the Case for Open Debate, those are the reactions that I was getting before the Jewish Anti-Defamation League and the Hillel Jewish organization for students on campus got into the act.
And they wrote a 9,000-word essay, which was published as a book, dedicated to keeping Smith out of the campus press! The thing is that they may be bullies in the classic sense, but they’re not dumb. The guys who are associated with the ADL and Hillel are smart guys and smart students. But the thing is that they are true believers. And if you’re a true believer, you stand up for what you believe in. And they believe in almost anything that a Jewish survivor says about a German during WWII. That’s the long and the short of it.
That began the slow, unwinding of my campus campaign. It cost almost $1,600 to publish a full-page ad, back then in the campus newspaper. So I started publishing half-page ads and then quarter-page ads and finally, I noticed that the major papers were not accepting my ads anymore, and I began publishing 1/8-page ads. I was publishing a lot of them, but I had had such success. I had had so many significant academics and journalists support the publication of this material when I started it, before they heard from the ADL. Before from Hillel.
Jim: So basically, the Jews really spoiled the whole show here. They just came in just hoodwinked in, just brought it all down, kind of.
Bradley: I’m going to have to say that you’re making it too easy. The Jews are responsible for what Jews do. But the overwhelming number of administrators, professors and students on the American campus, the overwhelming percentage, are not Jews; they’re us! They’re us!
It’s OK to call Jews for what they are guilty of. But listen, how is it that the great, vast majority of those administrating, serving, teaching and studying at the American universities are Gentiles, who are not Jews, go along with this. The problem is it is not them!
Jim: Here’s the question Bradley to you. What can we do to get this going again, because this is what I want to get into? I want to be able to represent the movement, getting into these places. Because I live in Massachusetts. There are more colleges here than anywhere in the world. And that’s what I would love to do.
Bradley: Which one of them is free to publish revisionist work?
Jim: I don’t know. I haven’t really looked into any of this yet.
Bradley: Well listen, you should. For instance, one of the things to do and that’s one of the things I would do. I have some health issues, you know, and I can’t really do as much as I used to. Germar Rudolf has developed the CODOH bookshop in an extraordinary way. One of the first things to do if you want to work in Massachusetts is maybe he has already suggested this, is to find out which libraries in three Massachusetts universities, which of the libraries stock books by revisionists? You find out and the thing is that I looked into this with Jeff Rucker once. The thing is, that they have the books but they are not out on the shelves. They are in back rooms. One of the things that I might do, for instance, I can’t go to Massachusetts. I may become part of something back there. I only stay up 3-4 hours at a time and I have to lie down. But one of the things I can do is working with the titles of the books that we can demonstrate that are actually on the shelves in, say, 3 university libraries.
Jim: I have practically all the books on the Holocaust.
Bradley: I heard that somewhere.
Jim: I got the whole thing. I’m only missing a couple, but I’ll be getting those. I have 32 volumes. I’m reading all these books now.
Bradley: Well, you’re a young man!
Jim: I’m 63 years old! I mean give me a break! [said jokingly]
Bradley: I was still working when I had 63 years. [laughing]
Jim: I know. I’m willing to go confront these people and talk to these people, have some discussion with them. I have the information and I have been studying long enough to be able to hold my own against them. So I have no problem with them, if I could do it. That’s my goal, that’s my game plan. That’s my goal. That’s why interviewing you and all the other, the high-profile revisionists was my first step. My next step now is getting this out to the public more. Getting them more involved with it as best I can. So, we’ll see what happens.
Bradley: By the way, I might be able to help you. My right-hand man, my SKYPE genius, who got this thing set up. It only took him about a week or so. (He’s sitting right here). We have a new way to get press lists from these universities, which could be very helpful, in which I could participate in something like that, but from a distance. I can’t go back there.
Jim: Like I said, I’m here.
Bradley: Yeah, you’re there.
Jim: I’m here and I’m willing to take some time to do it. If we can work that out. Now, you did mention about Germar. I notice he’s doing a lot with your site now, right?
Bradley: I want to tell you what I’m wrestling with because people who watch this, would like to know. I have cancer of the blood, lymphoma, blood cancer. It’s been 7 years now.
People ask my advice about getting blood cancer. Well, my advice is don’t get it. Then there is a lot of other little stuff. I did chemo [chemotherapy] four times. I have done radiation. I am now dealing with congestive heart failure. This limits my traveling. So we are not going to go on about it.
This is an interesting story. As my ads in the campus newspapers got smaller and smaller, I got less interested in doing them. I wanted to do something other. And I decided it was time to write a book. Well the fact is I’ve always been working on a book.
Behind the scenes, I’m always doing this and doing that, Jim. I had one primary supporter, who was paying for these ads, the primary guy. Everybody who contributes helps me. But one day I talked to him, I said listen, you know I am really tired of this. I think we’re not getting in any of the major newspapers any more and I think I want to just stop it. And I’m going to do a book, and then I’m going to work on promoting the book. He said;
He was an Oregon man, who by the way, got in touch with me. He had been putting revisionist pamphlets under the windshield wipers of the cars parked in one of his child’s schools outside of Portland. Then he heard of me. Then this is an interesting point. He said, how many ads did you run this last season? I said 73. He said 73? That was a lot. We were in 73 student newspapers, oftentimes one-column inches, two-column inches.
Jim: What did you say in the ad though that went into the paper?
Bradley: One of the things I would say is:
“Read the evidence, judge it, think for yourself, CODOH.com.”
Jim: So that was it, take them to your website.
Bradley: Here is where the weakness comes in. I did publish my book, 1992, 1993, “BREAK HIS BONES”. I remember Richard Widman, [of] Inconvenient History [inconvenienthistory.com], told me that if I were going to use that title, that it would be, “BREAK MY BONES”. That seems a little indulgent. He was absolutely right. I put ads in the Harvard Crimson, picture of the cover of the book, University of Texas in Dallas and University of California at Berkeley.
It appeared one time that same week in each paper. The next week, it was cut out from each paper. I could not advertise the book. The whole thing had changed. This was in the early 90s. This was like 15 years ago. The whole thing had changed.
I’d like to tell you the name of that book that the ADL published. It was published by Hillel and ADL and the title of the book is called, “FIGHTING HOLOCAUST DENIAL IN CAMPUS NEWSPAPER ADVERTISEMENTS, A MANUAL FOR ACTION.”
Jim: It’s on the ADL site actually, a PDF, you can download it.
Bradley: This is the last edition, “FIGHTING HOLOCAUST DENIAL IN CAMPUS NEWSPAPER ADVERTISEMENTS, A MANUAL FOR ACTION.”
That’s me. No one else did it. In the intro to the book, they actually mentioned me. They actually said the reason they were writing this was because of Bradley Smith. So, this was a very successful production for them. They have annual budgets of millions of dollars and so it was very difficult for a lone guy (I’m not alone — I couldn’t do anything if people didn’t help me). My budget is nothing like their budget.
Jim: I can see looking at the introduction of it now, it mentions you right at the beginning of it. It says there:
“Holocaust denial is most often encountered in the form of advertisements, submitted to student newspapers by Bradley Smith and his Committee for Open Debate On the Holocaust (CODOH). The ads are an affront to truth and an insult to the memory of those who had been murdered by the Nazis.”
Can you imagine saying that. I mean, an insult to those who were murdered! !
Bradley: That’s the game I’m in. My mistake was that I took it that I could not advertise the book and I never did anything. I had done nothing to sell concessions of Holocaust revisionism and now I did nothing to sell “BREAK HIS BONES”. It was late last year that I published “THE PERSONAL HISTORY OF MORAL DECAY”. I have tried to sell that, but unsuccessfully and so when people ask me how I look about myself, I reply that I’m an unsuccessful literary writer. That’s my contribution.
Jim: If you want to write about the Holocaust, yeah, that’s going to be the case for anybody. You’re not going to make any money on any books about the Holocaust.
Bradley: Well, but the thing is “THE PERSONAL HISTORY OF MORAL DECAY” has hardly anything about the Holocaust.
Jim: But, yeah, it’s about morals and people don’t talk about morals today. Everybody is immoral. What do they care?
Bradley: But they talk about moral decay. That’s me. I’m a prime example of moral decay. That’s the meaning of the title. I’m still interested in trying to peddle this book.
Jim: Do you have the book there? You might as well get some advertising out of this. Bradley Smith: “A PERSONAL HISTORY OF MORAL DECAY”.
Bradley: By the way, Chip Smith, remember the night I was at the libertarian conference and I was given Faurisson’s essay from Le Monde. (It was the Faurisson, the dream and then Butz.) I walked out of the library and this is what I wrote in the notes at that time. Chip Smith, my publisher at Nine Banded Books. He put this couple sentences on the cover of the book:
“While I have not spoken the words, I do not know precisely know what the words are, I understand that a resolution is formed inside me that will change my life from this moment on.”
That’s what I wrote after when I left the library that night. That was what was in my mind. From that moment on, it changed everything.
Jim: The same thing happened with me. When I got into the Holocaust topic in my town. (I produce cable shows. — well I used to.) When I got onto the Holocaust topic, that was it. They just came after me like gangbusters and I’m banned now. I can’t put anything on TV myself. They banned me from producing cable shows anymore in my town. And I cannot for anything politically in my town. I couldn’t get elected dog catcher. I mean, what they do to you, they just destroy you.
Bradley: Well, it is a taboo. A taboo is very powerful and they work — the ADL and Hillel — the ADL in public and the Hillel on campus. They work to maintain the taboo. They are taboo fixated and the thing is that it’s a technique that truly does work because when you challenge a taboo, the entire community is against you and every witch doctor knows that. In the most primitive society, every powerful figure in a primitive society knows that he’s there, that he’s going to use taboo to maintain his position. In the New Guinea jungles, it’s all the same as to be on the Harvard campus.
Jim: We’re going to work on that. I’ve been to Harvard, going to do other things there, video wise, etc. I’d like to really get this topic in there. Thirty percent of the teachers there are Jews. So it’s not too bad. Seventy percent aren’t, but the other 70%, like you say, they’re all accountable to the Jews anyway.
Bradley: No they aren’t. They’re accountable to themselves. This is really important that we don’t blame this as if it’s the Jews alone. It’s US.
Jim: They aren’t taking the high moral road.
Bradley: Well, it’s not THEY. We as a people are not taking the higher moral road.
Jim: But we are they. The teachers are “we”. So I mean it’s it’s tough.
Bradley: But it is WE. If you’re going to talk about “the Jews”, you have to talk about us.
Jim: Well it’s not a good thing.
Bradley: You know something? It’s very rare for any one around the edges of revisionism to ever blame us. We always blame Jews. The thing is, so Jews are responsible for what Jews do, I agree. But then we say the Jews are responsible for what we do. And you know what. We have to stop saying that. Because we’re responsible for what we do.
Jim: You’re right, Bradley. It’s absolutely true. It is just we can’t get enough of those, the “we” on our side. They just don’t want to see it.
Bradley: Well that’s a failure of us. That’s our failure.
Jim: Well, we will see what we can do. We’re going to work on this.
Bradley: We’re going to have to work on the subjective life of the Gentile population.
Jim: The Gentiles are going to have to see what’s going on at some point in time because it’s all going to come crashing down.
Bradley: They know what’s going on. They know that if they speak out on this subject, that they’re going to lose their jobs.
Jim: There you go. That’s the point.
Bradley: They know what’s going on. And the thing is that usually the administrators are not Jews. Every once in a while I say, referring back to the dream, being gassed in Auschwitz, that I didn’t feel like I could go with that because I didn’t want to say that I had come to doubt the greatest story of the twentieth century in a dream. How does that work? I had a dream that changed my life. Where’s Ms. King?
Jim: She’s in the other room.
Bradley: Is she taking care of you?
Jim: Yeah, she’s my administrator. She is working with me to get all this done. She accomplishes a lot. She’s a good woman. She makes all my arrangements. She’s been a very big help to me.
If you have anything else you want to conclude with, or anything else? Well, you should be happy to know that there are many of us who respect you and honor you. We’ve learned a lot from you and if it wasn’t for you and the other revisionists, I wouldn’t be here today. So I’m very happy about that.
Bradley: My SKYPE genius here is telling me I should have mentioned “A Light on Campus”. That’s an icon on my site. I’m supposed to do a little publicity here.
Jim: I’m putting your site up. “alightoncampus.com”. I’m looking at your website now. You have some great links there. It’s probably one of the best ones out there, if you ask me. CODOH.com and CODOHfounder.com.
Bradley: Go to codohfounder.com. There will be a link to A Light on Campus. By the way, A Light on Campus might well be where we would focus on the Massachusetts universities.
Jim: Well, like I said, I’m willing to go out on the road and do this. No problem at all. I offer to debate anybody in my town or anybody about the topic on my TV program, and of course, nobody ever got back to me. They did get back to me, they kicked me off. That’s how they got back to me.
Bradley: As long as you see the joke in that. This [website] is one we may be able to tie in with what you’re thinking of doing. I’m not saying that that would be the site, but whatever you set up, we could link into it and help you.
Jim: There’s your dream, “The Night I Was Gassed in Auschwitz”. If you have anything else that you want to conclude with or anything else you plan on doing in the future, let us know.
Bradley: Nothing specific. This is my right hand man, who lives down near Guadalajara. I don’t think there is anything new here. We could get into a lot more substantial stuff. But the thing is essentially, I’m doing what you said you’re doing. I did some intellectual work at the beginning because it was so interesting to try and figure out why Eli Wiesel, for instance, would repeat the stories and Babi Yar with the Jews underground and being massacred.
They’d all get together and they’d kind of form a union down there, so that they could spurt geysers of blood. And, so I’m looking into stuff like that. The Sonderkommando, and they just have a new movie, “Son of Saul” about a Sonderkommando. This is a guy who chooses to help murder Jews to save his own life. He’s the hero of the movie. The thing is, the Sonderkommandos had a choice to behave with honor or to murder their own children and to live another week. And they chose to murder their children, wives, family.
Jim: Of course, they’re looking at it from the view of being a gas chamber, which we know wasn’t there.
Bradley: Yes, but this is their story.
Jim: I know, that’s what I’m saying.
Bradley: They’re responsible for this story. And not only that but Steven Spielberg has hundreds of interviews with people who tell stories like this. A Sonderkommando was committed to save his own life to search through the vaginas of their wives and children, look for gold, to put their hands into the asses of the dead to find stuff. They volunteered to do this. Now one of the guys who is featured on Steven Spielberg, helped build doors for gas chambers.
Jim: That’s his claim to fame.
Bradley: That’s what he said. These guys were real jerks. The Jews who create and distribute this stuff — it’s indefensible what they do. But all of us who accept it and buy it, it’s indefensible what we do.
Jim: You know what kills me about this movie? Look when they’re releasing it — Christmas. Christmastime. Can you imagine. Isn’t that a Merry Christmas! They’re just shoving it up our ass figuratively. A stupid movie to make us feel sorry for them.
Bradley: Apparently it’s well acted.
Jim: I won’t pay to go see it. But I’ll wait until it comes on Netflix. But I don’t even like watching these movies. I never watch them because they are so bad.
Bradley: I don’t watch them any more.
Jim: They’re so bad. It’s hard to watch these movies. I just read all the revisionist books and anything that deals with revisionism. I don’t even waste my time. Time is valuable. I’m not going to waste it on their garbage. Their garbage is just garbage. I don’t deal with this.
Bradley: We chatted right along, right?
Jim: We did going good and you’re coming along. It gives people a good idea about you and what you have had to deal with. I just think that again the next step for us, anyway what I’m going to try to do is I’m going to try to take what you’ve done and the other revisionists have done — let’s move it up a notch and see what we can do with it. We’re going to try.
Bradley: Well you’re in a good place to try it. That’s sort of the intellectual center of the campus in America.
Jim: Well, Bradley, I want to thank you for this interview. You did really good. You brought us some really good stuff and I think a lot of people are going to enjoy it too. I want to thank you again and I will catch you next time around. You take care.
I felt stunned, as if Buck Rogers had somehow come down from the 21st century and zapped me with a beam from his ray gun. I had heard about people like the little man who was confronting me, who deny that the Holocaust happened, but I had never actually seen one.
He was a small, thin, middle-aged man with a white pointy beard, clear blue eyes and a ruddy complexion.
The picture of health. He talked fast (though in a well-mannered, articulate way) as if he were afraid he would lose me.
In the first instant I didn’t truly grasp what he was saying; then I understood that he was telling me that there had been no Nazi gas chambers — none – that the stories I had heard all my life about the gas chambers were meant to gain sympathy for Jews at the expense of Germans. I felt my heart change its beat and pick up speed.
I felt sweat appear on the palms of my hands.
The first thing I wanted to do was to get away. We were on the mezzanine of the Bonaventure Hotel in downtown Los Angeles; there were a lot of people standing around and I supposed that he had proselytized the others before I had arrived. The others then had already heard what I was hearing now, and in my imagination each of them had one eye on me, waiting to see what my first move would be, waiting to judge me.
I felt ashamed listening to the man talk about Jews. I felt ashamed holding the photocopied articles in my hand. I could not have repeated anything he had said after his first few words; my brain had closed itself down in self-defense and yet: I was aware that he sounded knowledgeable and sincere.
I felt trapped between his sincerity and my shame. I wanted to get away from him, to hand back his flyers and turn away so that those who were watching would see that I rejected out of hand everything he was saying. At the same time, because of his honest and open manner, I didn’t want to cause him embarrassment by publicly rejecting him. I had never looked into the history of the Holocaust, had never examined any of the primary documents used to support the literature, so in my ignorance I felt I had no right, really, to believe or disbelieve any statement about it whatever. I didn’t feel I had the right to embarrass another man simply because he doubted what I believed. If sincerity isn’t to be taken seriously in human relationship, what is?
In the end the little man with the white devil’s beard and the very blue eyes made my decision for me when he turned to a new arrival and began his spiel all over again from the beginning.
Feeling defiled somehow by the flyers in my hand, I walked toward a large trash can. Even at that moment I knew that the problem wasn’t so much that I was holding the flyers as that I was being observed by others to be holding them. I had accepted the flyers innocently in deference to another’s sincerity. The shame I felt, the defilement, did not come from inside me but from the others, from what I understood to be the standards of my peers.
As I approached the trash can I glanced down at the lead article in one flyer. It was titled, “The Problem of the Gas Chambers, or The Rumor of Auschwitz.”
What Rumor?, I thought. What problem? There wasn’t anything that rang a bell for me. The author of the article was a certain Professor Robert Faurisson. I’d never heard of him. Then I noticed that the article had originally been published in Le Monde, the Paris daily. It was confusing. I had no idea at all what the problem of the gas chambers might be, or what the rumor of Auschwitz referred to. It sounded crazy. And I’d never heard of Faurisson. But I did know about Le Monde. My understanding was that Le Monde was one of a handful of world-class newspapers.
What, then, was Le Monde doing publishing an article critical of the Holocaust, or the gas chambers, or whatever? A moment before I had intended to drop the flyers into the trash on principle. In my circle you did not read material that might make Jews feel uncomfortable. It was a principle. It was necessary in my circle to maintain principles about some few things. Not many, but some. At the last moment I folded the flyers and put them in my back pocket. All that day I went about my business, the flyers folded up secretly in my pocket.
That night, alone in my room, like a thief, I took them out and read them, all the while conscious of the fearfulness in my behavior, the lack of self-respect. I was aware that I was reading something that everyone I knew, and all the people I liked best, would think bigoted and dirty, and that I was doing it at a time and in a place where they could not find me out. I had spent years learning to accept the weaknesses in my character, and to stand aside from them, yet there I was, 49 years old, hiding in my room with a newspaper article, fearful and ashamed.
HOW CAN I EXPLAIN what happened to me in my apartment that night? I read a newspaper article written by a professor I had never heard of which had been translated from French by who knows who, given to me on a hotel mezzanine by a stranger who was probably a crank, maintaining a thesis that was outrageous and dangerous because – of what? I didn’t know, but a sense of tension and danger enveloped the thing. I sensed immediately into the reading that if I didn’t reject everything Faurisson was saying that I would be in danger of suffering great losses, though that night I would not have been able to identify what they would be.
Why was I willing to read the Faurisson piece with an open mind? I’ll never know, but the source of its original publication was given, along with the date, so the accuracy of the translation could be checked.
Key statements in the text were referenced; anyone willing to spend an hour or so in a good library could discover for himself if Faurisson was being honest in those instances. I was impressed by the simplicity of his claims and the objectivity of his tone, treating as he did a matter of tremendous significance from such a radical perspective.
Another probably reason was ignorance. Until that time I had not read a history of the Holocaust and hadn’t paid much attention to the stories of Holocaust “survivors.” I don’t know why. There were no heroes in the Holocaust stories I had heard – maybe that was it. Masses of sheep-like people being herded to the slaughter. Helplessness, passivity, pathos, no heroes to create tragedy from catastrophe. Maybe that was it. Ignorance then, a disinterest in suffering unredeemed by heroic action and finally, I suppose, a kind of primary boredom with a wretched story told and retold far too often.
That being so, how is it that I was so stunned at reading Faurisson’s thesis about the poison gas chamber stories? If the stories had not interested me in the first place, why should I have been affected by the discovery that they might not be true? Wouldn’t my fundamental lack of interest in the Holocaust forfeit my right—to a certain extent—to be shocked by the possibility that Faurisson had his finger on something?
But the real surprise might have been my discovery that despite my ignorance and the boredom I professed about the Holocaust, I had believed everything I had ever heard about it. Not the shadow of a doubt had ever crossed my mind. I had believed all the eyewitness testimony related by Holocaust survivors. I had believed what I understood to be the thesis in all the books written by Holocaust historians. Maybe that is why something broke in me that night. Maybe I had believed too rigidly for too long. There was nothing in me that could give a little. No room to bend. Intellectually, psychologically, something had to break. I think it was belief itself that finally cracked that night. My mind welcomed it— but in my heart I felt the awful anxiety that only great insecurity can create.
Click to download a PDF of this post (Text Only) (x.x MB):