David Cole Youtube videos of July and August 2020 and responses

[Lamprecht]

"The lack of evidence of transported Jews in the East is certainly a weakness in the history of Aktion Reinhard."

This argument is slowly but steadily losing its ground. Several people were transited through the Reinhard camps.

https://inconvenienthistory.com/12/2/7311

And then, if they weren't transisted, why can't we find the remains of the jews in the locations, where they were supposedly cremated and burried? Well, because they weren't cremated and burried, where the believers say. That really settles this.

Yes, Jews were transited from multiple AR camps:

Jews Transited through "pure extermination camps" Belzec, Sobibor and Treblinka
viewtopic.php?t=13330

I wonder, why he doesn't mention the "Höfle-Telegram"? For the time being it is considered to be the best documentary evidence for the extermination of Jews in the Reinhard camps.

Oh well, I'll tell you why:

1. The document does not mention any extermination.
2. The Hoefle-telegram lists Majdanek among the Reinhard camps and he cannot square that with the pure extermination camp hypothesis. David Cole doesn't believe that Majdanek was an extermination camp. Majdanek has been officially deleted from the list of extermination camps.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H%C3%B6fle_Telegram

I think that puts David Cole between a Rock and a hard stone. If he believes that Majdanek was not an extermination camp, then the Reinhard camps were not extermination camps. If he believes that the "Aktion Reinhard" was a policy of extermination, then Majdanek was part of this extermination policy.

Other documents on the AR camps don't mention anything of the sort either. See part of my reply to another thread:

Re: Hoefle telegram / Korherr report / news articles
viewtopic.php?p=97380#p97380

17 March 1942 Fritz Reuter memo on his conversation with Höfle
viewtopic.php?t=12417#p92065
Reuter explains that Jews sent unfit for work would be expelled from Poland via Belzec to the east, "cross the border and never return." Is that supposed to mean killed? Hoefle was Globocnik's deputy. Both Hoefle and Globkcnick "committed suicide" before being put on trial: Very convenient.

13 August 1942 Karl Wolff memo to Albert Ganzenmüller
viewtopic.php?t=10360
In response to "The Ganzenmuller Letter" regarding deporting Jews to Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka – Wolff stated that he was very glad to hear about their plan "to accelerate this population transfer" - a transfer into mass graves that cannot be shown to exist anywhere close to the quantities alleged? Mass graves don't have legs and can't travel.

The "Operation Reinhadt Secrecy Oath"
viewtopic.php?t=12924
The document says no photographing or talking about the camp is to be allowed for AR staff. Perhaps this explains the "lack of evidence" for resettlement. Regardless, it explains that the purpose of these camps was an "evacuation of Jews" policy. Some dishonest people try to use this as evidence of an extermination camp, but it is in no way incompatible with the transit camp thesis. It's just more "code word" conspiracy theorist tinfoil-hat nonsense.

5 July 1943 Himmler order "transit camp Sobibor is to be converted into a concentration camp"
viewtopic.php?t=4973 and https://codoh.com/library/document/lies ... obibor/en/
"The transit camp Sobibór is to be converted into a concentration camp. In the concentration camp a plant for the repair of captured munitions is to be established."

5 January 1944 Globocnik Report to Himmler (4024-PS) on Operation Reinhardt
viewtopic.php?t=12359
The document above explains quite clearly that AR was an operation to round up Jews, confiscate their wealth, and then deport them away to the newly occupied Eastern territories.

[Sannhet]

I posted a simple question below his video. The question was immediately deleted. David fears debate.

The Youtube-comments are split on the latest Cole video but the top-voted comments all look like this:

Andew Tarj***i
2 days ago

Those whom you refer to as deniers were primarily interested in the absence of physical evidence upon which the credibility of the eyewitness depended.

In that respect, the burden of proof is on you and not the "three stoogies". Also, physical evidence is primary evidence, all else, including that which you have presented here is supplementary. Therefore, if the physical evidence fails, so too does the supplementary. If you disagree, I would be fascinated to "learn" why.

PowerTuber 3.0
1 day ago

Looks like it [David Cole's new book] won't be a revisionist book but a milder form of the current H lies.

blake121666
1 day ago

There is no clear connection between any usage of the word Todesfällen in the Korherr Report and the inferred (from that report) 2.4 million Jews. Reasses your bogus argument about that. You are misleadingly giving the impression that Korherr clearly refers to 2.4 million Todesfällen Jews. That is inference upon inference - not clear statements.

And this comment is especially good:

What do you think 20 year old David cole would say to 50 year old David cole if they were able to talk to each other would you have believed your older self?

[PeddlePowered]

I know exactly what he means. He means to obscure and obstruct.

David Cole may want to be seen as a holocaust affirmer to get his co-religionists off his back.

Or he may be helping us to undermine Jewish power by questioning the magical six million. The holocaust is a pillar of Jewish power. For ordinary folk to see this magical six million questioned breaks a spell which the Jews have put people under. If that was a lie, they wonder, what else could be a lie? Suddenly the Jewish narratives can be questioned.

[PrudentRegret]

I know exactly what he means. He means to obscure and obstruct.

David Cole may want to be seen as a holocaust affirmer to get his co-religionists off his back.

Or he may be helping us to undermine Jewish power by questioning the magical six million. The holocaust is a pillar of Jewish power. For ordinary folk to see this magical six million questioned breaks a spell which the Jews have put people under. If that was a lie, they wonder, what else could be a lie? Suddenly the Jewish narratives can be questioned.

That's a funny thought. If somebody who doesn't believe that Auschwitz had gas chambers can ever be rehabilitated as a "non-Denier" then that might really indicate the Auschwitz legend is being abandoned.

David Cole being accepted as a "former denier" would move the Overton Window of the Holocaust narrative in the revisionist's favor, for sure.

[EtienneSC]

David Cole's latest instalment:

You can miss the first 15 minutes or so. His advice is to read Reitlinger's The Final Solution. He relies on the Korherr Report and says that the Jewish community should take a more open attitude the revisionism (25.00). He states that Himmler's Posen speech is not as precise as his Sondhoven (?) speeches (37.00) - these latter speeches count in favour of his view of AR, but against the fate of the Hungarian Jews..

[stinky]

David Cole may want to be seen as a holocaust affirmer to get his co-religionists off his back.

Nope. He could have kept his mouth shut after 're-canting' to Rubin & the JDL.
He repudiated his revisionism.

Or he may be helping us to undermine Jewish power by questioning the magical six million.

Yes, but only to appear plausible to revisionists as opposition.
David Cole IS controlled opposition.

[legis548]

[Sannhet]

I wonder what it means that David Cole keeps doing (anti?-)Holocaust Revisionism videos (that is to say, incorporates a lot about Holocaust Revisionism in his weekly "watch David Cole talk about whatever for 60-90 minutes" videos). I guess he sees a market demand.

I wonder if he (ever) reads CODOH Forum?

[legis548]

[Sannhet]

.
"I'm a Mossad agent!"
-- David Cole

This must refer to to:

Fred Leuchter says he believes David Cole was sent to infiltrate Revisionism in the 1990s
(CODOH Forum thread, July 29, 2020)
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=13400

[Archie]

Watching Cole at this point is like watching a past-his-prime rock star who had a couple of hits in the early 90s but you go to his show and he only plays "the new stuff" that isn't any good.

Come on, David. We want to hear "46 Questions."

[Sannhet]

Some highlights from David Cole's August 17 video, first ten minutes:
.

At the start of the video, Cole praises Mark Weber (That's Mark “Holocaust Revisionism is Irrelevant to the IHR" Weber) and Tom Marcellus (formerly an IHR director).

He then makes fun of Bradley Smith seemingly attempting some kind of crude impression of Smith [3:50]. Cole says Smith was "not bright," but that "in the early days, he was good-hearted."

David Cole then claims he himself is the one who made Holocaust Revisionism "legitimate," along with help from Mark Weber, David Irving, and a small handful of unnamed others [4:20]:

We were doing some very good work in moving Revisionism out of what it had been in the 1970s through the '80s and making it a much more legitimate field that people could respect.

To that, I say this:

He then goes on to Zundel [5:05], whose name he mispronounces but whom he treats more gently than he did Smith. Cole stresses repeatedly that Zundel was "not a historian" but that he was good for raising awareness and money for research. He sums up his view of Zundel (as kind a of a big goy dummy?) thusly:

Zundel...never had an original idea or thought about the Holocaust, but so what, he served his purpose.

Then Cole turns to the hard-core Deniers, the people who were "just trying to deny everything about the Holocaust." At the mention of this group, the hard-core Deniers, Cole makes a bug-eyed expression [5:38]. Here it is:

On these hardcore, extremist Ultra Deniers, he names: Robert Faurisson and Carlo Mattogno and Jurgen Graf, as well as Carlos Porter. Then he names Fred Leuchter, whom Cole says he is to come back to later for special attack (the video appears to be a response to Fred Leuchter saying he now believes David Cole may have been "Mossad"). At the pronunciation of Leuchter's name [6:00], Cole's eyes again bug-out.

Cole then claims that during his era or activity in Revisionism, "we had been doing too well" [6:20]. The media, he says, wanted Revisionists to show up at TV studios doing Hitler salutes, which he demonstrates:

Cole then claims [7:05 to 7:55] that it was three things combined that led him to abandon public Holocaust Revisionism ca. 1997:

1. The media appearances dried up because they were "doing too well;"
2. The Jewish Defense League threats worried him (he names Irv Rubin and the "constant harassment" and death threats);
3. He wanted to get married.

Cole then says [7:55], talking about the period after 1998:

So -- I vanish. And, pretty much, level-headed Revisionism vanishes, too.

He then qualifies that it wasn't solely because he left that Revisionism declined.

[Sannhet]

Has David Cole joined CODOH Forum?

The newest member:

Agente da Mossad

memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=4710

Maybe not:

Occupation: NEET
Location: Brazil
Joined:Wed Aug 19, 2020

[stinky]

Hey Sannhet, your review of Cole's latest video chronicle almost exactly up to the point when I stopped watching - for the reasons you specifically quoted.
I couldn't stomach his self congratulatory, self-interested narrative, lies, distortions, the promotion of his boyfriend Mark Weber, and the disrespectful & dismissive manner in which he speaks of recently deceased, courageous, honorable men like Zundel & Smith.
Cole's recent activity on YouTube is largely about promoting the new version of his book.
He couldn't lie straight in bed

[Sannhet]

Cole's recent activity on YouTube is largely about promoting the new version of his book.

That's for sure, and he often says as much himself.

I couldn't stomach his self congratulatory, self-interested narrative, lies, distortions, the promotion of his boyfriend Mark Weber, and the disrespectful & dismissive manner in which he speaks of recently deceased, courageous, honorable men like Zundel & Smith.

One person he is careful to avoid criticizing later in the video is Germar Rudolf, who does fit into his category of hardliner wacko Ultra Deniers. Here is a transcription of the part where he talks about Rudof:

[22:05]

[DAVID COLE monologuing to video camera, occasionally gesticulating:] Leuchter is a minor figure. But more importantly [...] he was fairly quickly surpassed by Germar Rudolf. Germar Rudolf is an actual chemist. And he was working at the Max Planck Institute. I believe, at the time, he was a doctoral student.

Germar Rudolf is a brilliant man. The fact that I don't agree with him about his conclusions about the Holocaust doesn't mean that I don't think he's brilliant. I can disagree with people and still respect them as an intellect. My definition of whether you're smart or dumb is not whether you agree with me or not.

So Rudolf came in, and he could do the real wall tests. He didn't go in there like f****g Hulk Hogan, smashing walls!

At this point [23:00], Cole begins wildly gesticulating in some kind of metaphorical impression of Fred Leuchter, comparing him to "Hulk Hogan" (I believe he means The Hulk, the comic character, not the former pro wrestler Hulk Hogan):

DAVID COLE: Rudolf went in there, like a scientist, and he did much better tests. It got to the point nobody would invoke the Leuchter Report anymore. Nobody would. I'm talking on our side. By '94, nobody would talk about it because we had Germar Rudolf doing much better work. Because, again, Rudolf is a bright man, a very bright man, and capable.

Even when Mark Weber and I did the Montel Williams Show, and that was '92, Rudolf wasn't even on the scene yet. We still didn't invoke the Leuchter Report, because we didn't have any faith in it, and we didn't have any faith in the man, Fred Leuchter.

So by '94, Leuchter's out of the picture. The best way I can demonstrate that is that Leuchter and I both spoke at the 1992 IHR Revisionist Conference. By the '94 Revisionist Conference, Leuchter wasn't even invited! He wasn't even there.

Here's a photo of all of the speakers from the 1994 IHR Revisionist Conference. Hey, who's that good-looking young buck, right in front and center, where he should be, right where he deserves to be, front and center -- and look at the crank in those pants would you look at that, that is impressive people always say, "Dave, how come you always get the good looking girls?" Well the answer is right there.

[24:25]

DAVID COLE: But [Leuchter] unlike Bradley Smith and Faurrisson and and all the others, he hasn't died. [24:45]

What to make of Cole's non-criticism, and even guarded praise, of Germar Rudolf?

Notice he only praises Rudolf insofar as the praise can be immediately used as a bludgeon to bash Leuchter. Cole riffs for minute after minute on the Holocaust Lobby line that Leuchter was some kind of clueless amateur. The praise for Rudolf appears to be nothing but an indirect way of bashing Leuchter, whose criticism of Cole (as an infiltrator) appears to have really gotten to Cole.

_______________

On Cole's "Who's that good-looking young buck right in front and center, where he should be!" -- See this recent post which made that same observation and analyzes that photo's significance in light of the "infiltrator" allegation (either the softer form of the allegation, that Cole was a personal infiltrator/opportunist, or the harder form of the allegation, that he was 'sent' by some well-funded group):

(from the "Fred Leuchter says he believes David Cole was sent to infiltrate Revisionism in the 1990s thread)
viewtopic.php?p=97666#p97666

Here is another little bit of David Cole history:

That's a photograph of speakers at the 12th Institute for Historical Review (IHR) Conference, Sept. 3 to 5 (Saturday to Monday; US Labor Day weekend), 1994. Notice something about this picture: David Cole positioned himself at the exact center. There are six men to his right and six to his left.

The way pictures like this work, as we all know from experience, is that seldom are people assigned to specific places to stand. The way it works is someone says, "Hey, everybody, stand over there; let's get a picture! Picture! Yes. Hey you, enough snacks, it's picture time. Thanks. Yes, over there," and so forth. An organic process occurs. The only rule that the taller stand to the rear. David Cole appears to be the shortest in stature of the thirteen (he describes himself as 5'6" [167.5cm], "on a good day, including shoes") and maybe that's why he ended up positioned at the center, behind the tallest man, Greg Raven. Alternatively, or additionally, we might assume that Cole's winding up at the exact center at the opportune time is symbolic of his perceived/desired role in Revisionism by Sept. 1994.

(Among groups of men of the West assembled for some solemn purpose like an academic conference, politely declining the very center spot is standard practice -- unless the actual host -- until someone was forced to stand there. Certainly the youngest man in a group, among men many of whom had been known to each other professionally for years, would decline the center spot.)