33 Irving Place
New York, NY 10003
INSTITUTE FOR HISTORICAL REVIEW
P.O. Box 2739
Newport Beach, CA 92659 - USA
Tel. 949 - 631 1490
Fax: 949 - 631 0981
Web site: http://www.ihr.org
Wednesday, April 28, 2004
Dear Mr. Novog,
This letter is to respond to yours of April 21, and to follow up on our telephone conversations on Thursday, April 22, and yesterday, about the decision to pull our one-eighth page display advertisement for The Founding Myths of Modern Israel following its appearance in the May 3 issue of The Nation. It was pulled in spite of our agreement that it would run six times.
It was pulled, as you explain in your letter, because "the IHR's claim" about the Holocaust "is not based on fact," and/or because the advertisement is "patently fraudulent."
In fact, the IHR as such makes no claim about the Holocaust, other than that it should be examined with the same objectivity and freedom as any other chapter of history. The IHR strongly opposes the laws that, in some countries, make it a crime to express skepticism about the Holocaust.
While it's quite true that the IHR has published numerous books and other items that dispute the standard Holocaust story, or specific Holocaust claims, it has also, over the years, published and distributed books and articles that affirm the standard and generally accepted Holocaust story. (I'd be glad to cite examples, if you wish.)
You and I discussed the claim being made by the David Wyman Institute for Holocaust Studies that The Nation "has adopted a new policy of refusing to accept paid advertisements from Holocaust deniers." I was pleased to learn from you that the Wyman Institute claim is not accurate, and that no such policy has been adopted.
It is difficult to believe that our ad is "patently fraudulent" given that it was readily accepted for publication by you and, apparently, other members of The Nation staff.
You have told me that the sticking point here is not any claim by the IHR itself, or even the content of the book being advertised, but rather the text of the advertisement.
Accordingly, I have repeatedly asked you to explain what, precisely, is inaccurate or fraudulent about the advertisement. You've responded by telling me that you are not able to answer that question.
As I've emphasized, we are willing, even eager, to modify the advertisement text so that it can appear in The Nation in conformity with your policy. Obviously, though, we cannot do that unless we know, precisely, what your policy is.
As I've mentioned, our advertisement in The Nation is a modification of a very similar IHR ad with a nearly identical text that appeared in the Book World section of The Washington Post, Sunday, February 18, 2001. (I'm sending you a copy.)
Is the advertising policy of The Nation more restrictive than that of The Washington Post?
As I've mentioned to you and others, in the very same May 3 issue of The Nation in which our ad appears, readers can find a classified ad (on page 61) offering a "scholarly booklet" that claims to provide "incontrovertible proof" that Jesus is fictional and never existed.
Your policy of accepting "Jesus denial" advertising while rejecting "Holocaust denial" ads manifests a clear double standard that highlights the real icons and taboos in our society. This double standard also affirms the validity of what the author of The Founding Myths, and others, say about the clout and character of Jewish-Zionist power in America.
In our view, your handling of this matter is a test of The Nation's commitment to the principle of free expression and open debate.
I look forward to your response to this letter.
Institute For Historical Review