Institute for Historical Review

Institute for Historical Review

IHR Update Newsletter

MAY 1992 NUMBER 87


Stockholm Media in Tumult for Weeks

Unprecedented Coverage of Revisionism in Scandinavia

Professor Robert Faurisson -- Europe's leading Holocaust Revisionist historian -- touched off an unprecedented storm of media coverage and a violent protest demonstration during a recent visit to Sweden that captured worldwide attention.

Even before his arrival, Swedish newspapers and officials had been in turmoil for weeks in anticipation of the visit. In parliament and in the press, the question was debated: Should Faurisson be permitted to enter the country?

When he arrived at Stockholm's Arlanda airport on March 17, Faurisson was greeted by a small group of sympathetic supporters, a much larger mob of hostile protesters, and a large crowd of journalists. (This was reportedly the largest group of journalists ever to turn out for a foreign visitor at the airport. Dagens Nyheter, Sweden's most influential daily paper, confirmed that the media presence there had been "enormous.")

Faurisson had come at the invitation of Ahmed Rami, a courageous Moroccan-born activist who runs "Radio Islam," a small, staunchly anti-Zionist radio station based in Stockholm.

Before permitting him to enter the country, officials questioned the meticulous French scholar and historian whose books, lectures and scholarly articles debunk the widely-accepted Holocaust extermination story. When asked "Why are you coming to Sweden?," Faurisson replied "To visit Ahmed Rami and to meet with the Swedish media which is slandering me." In response to the question "Have you ever been in jail for what you have written?," he drolly answered "Unfortunately, not yet."

As Faurisson and Rami drove away from the airport in Rami's car, evading the mob of hostile protesters, television journalists followed and insisted on holding a news conference. This was accordingly improvised in the cafeteria of a television station.

Faurisson told the journalists, almost all of whom were very hostile and seemed to regard him as a kind of "Nazi prophet," that the incessantly repeated "six million is a symbolic figure." He also dramatically issued a challenge in the form of a three-page prepared written statement:

"My Challenge to the Swedish Media: Show me or draw me a Nazi gas chamber."

In it he stressed that none of the rooms or buildings where it has been alleged that people were killed with poison gas could possibly have functioned as a homicidal gas chamber. For incontrovertible physical and technical reasons, the claims in each case are simply absurd. (For many years now, Faurisson has insisted that the gas chamber question is the crucial core of the entire Holocaust issue.)

In the morning a group of about 200 demonstrators, most of them Jews, gathered outside the parliament building to protest against the French visitor.

That evening, a group of about 30 demonstrators -- some of them armed with clubs, knives and tear gas -- attacked Faurisson, Rami and two young supporters as they tried to enter a building where they were to address a meeting.

Policemen who were present refused to intervene to protect the Revisionists from the hostile and Jewish-led crowd, which totalled about 200 altogether. The police said that they were not there "to protect Faurisson."

At one point, Faurisson stood his ground with fists raised to protect himself against the mob. He had no time even to take off his glasses. A video segment showing him defending himself like this, and then quickly escaping from the crowd, was shown on millions of television sets around the world, including the CNN network and many local American stations.

A young Revisionist who was carrying Faurisson's papers was severely beaten up, and Rami was tear-gassed. In this case as well, Swedish police did not intervene to protect the victims. Although Faurisson was thus forced to cancel his scheduled lecture, he and Rami were able to evade the mob and get away.

Ahmed Rami is a former Moroccan army officer and the author of several books. In 1972 he took part in an unsuccessful attempt by military officers to overthrow the regime of Morocco's dictatorial king, Hassan II. With a death sentence hanging over him, Rami has been living as a political exile in Sweden for twenty years. Not long ago, a Stockholm court found him guilty of making statements that showed a "lack of respect" for the Jewish people, for which he was sentenced to six months imprisonment (three of which he served).

For two nights during his Swedish visit, Faurisson answered numerous call-in questions as a guest on Rami's "Radio Islam" interview broadcast. He was on the air the first night from midnight until six in the morning, and the next night from 11 p.m. until 6 a.m.

Sensational Media Coverage

Swedish media coverage of Faurisson and the Revisionist view of the Holocaust extermination story has been unprecedented, both in extent and intensity. Even weeks later, it was still talking about the headline-making visit and Holocaust Revisionism.

Scandinavia's most influential daily, the liberal Dagens Nyheter, explored the background and implications of Faurisson's Revisionist work in a series of lengthy articles that appeared both during and after his visit. Although very tendentious, these occasionally daring articles did focus some attention on suppressed and "inconvenient" chapters of twentieth century history.

Complaining that "Faurisson is more dangerous every day," Dagens Nyheter editor-in-chief Arne Ruth, also obliquely confirmed the growing acceptance in Sweden of Holocaust Revisionism. And one of the paper's most prominent journalists confirmed that Faurisson had not said anything during his two-day, 13-hour interview over "Radio Islam" that could reasonably be construed as criminal.

In a feeble and even rather embarrassing effort to respond to Faurisson's media challenge, Swedish newspapers and magazines published photographs of a door, a crematory oven and a pile of bodies. "I think they realized," he later commented, "that no photo or drawing exists of a Nazi homicidal gas chamber, and that they had deceived themselves about believing that they had ever seen pictures of such a thing."

As a result of Faurisson's news conference, his challenge, and his radio appearances, the Swedish media seemed to became somewhat less hostile and hysterical as time went by. There was some acknowledgement that the French scholar is not a Nazi after all, and agreement that the violent mob attacks against Faurisson and Rami had been disgraceful.

In general, though, Swedish media coverage was sensational, distorted, and hysterically critical of Faurisson and Revisionism. A typical newspaper headline castigated him as a "Dangerous Liar."

Swedes have been torn by the Faurisson visit, which has pitted traditional tolerance for even repugnant views against an ingrained and sometimes self-righteous Swedish intolerance of anything that smacks of "fascism."

After five Swedish politicians called for a special anti-Revisionist law that would make it a crime to question the Holocaust story, Dagens Nyheter published photos of these five individuals with the caption: "The friends of censorship."

Professor Peczenik of Sweden's Lund University declared that it is a mistake to try to prevent Faurisson from expressing his views, no matter how erroneous or objectionable they might be. It would also be a mistake, he added, to enact laws designed to prohibit Revisionism.

Jan Myrdal Controversy

Jan Myrdal, one of Sweden's most prominent writers and social critics, has come under sharp criticism for some conditionally favorable comments about Faurisson and his work.

Several years ago, Myrdal favorably compared Paul Rassinier, generally regarded as the founder of scholarly Holocaust Revisionism, to Russian writer Alexander Solzhenitsyn. Myrdal has also praised American scholar Noam Chomsky for his defense of Faurisson's right of free speech.

More recently, Myrdal has said that Faurisson's "intentions" are "honorable," and that his "methods" are "conscientious."

In a long article in Dagens Nyheter (March 30), Myrdal more or less endorsed the generally accepted view of the Holocaust extermination story. At the same time, though, he credited Faurisson (and other Revisionists) with interesting and noteworthy arguments, and criticized France's anti-Revisionist law (sometimes called the "Lex Faurissonensis"), which makes it a crime to question the "official" Nuremberg Holocaust extermination story.

In another lengthy article about Faurisson and Holocaust Revisionism (published April 21), Myrdal acknowledged that Revisionists are not crackpots.

As a result of Faurisson's courageous visit to Sweden, and the stalwart help of Rami and many others, awareness of Holocaust Revisionism in Scandinavia has reached a new and unprecedented level.

The Struggle Continues

In spite of the rigor of his Swedish visit, Europe's leading Revisionist remains undaunted in the face of new threats and challenges.

For one thing, he must still contend with costly and time-consuming court cases arising from his conviction in April 1991 for remarks made in an interview published in the French magazine Le Choc du Mois. In that case, eleven organizations brought a suit against him on the basis of a 1990 law against Revisionism.

On April 9 Faurisson was obliged to appear in court as a result of a suit brought the "International League Against Racism and Anti-Semitism" (LICRA) in the nameof a 1972 law against expressions of "racism." The next day, the 10th, he had to appear in another courtroom as a result of a suit brought by the state prosecutor for remarks made in the Le Choc du Mois interview. The results of these two cases are expected to be made known in mid-May.

Aside from the absurdity of taking expensive legal action for a few remarks made during the course of a magazine interview, this Le Choc du Mois case is particularly disgraceful because the bringing of no less than three suits for the same alleged misdeed is a violation of the universal principle that no one may be tried more than once for the same offense. As Prof. Faurisson remarked it's as if, instead of bringing charges against a bicycle thief for stealing a bicycle, one were to charge him three times: first, for stealing the bicycle's handlebars, and then for stealing the front wheel, and, finally, for stealing the back wheel.

As we go to press, Faurisson is scheduled to testify on behalf of a young Revisionist engineer, Philippe Costa, in a court case in Fontainebleau on April 30. He also plans to testify in a court case in Vienna on behalf of author and publisher Gerd Honsik, who is ably defended by the courageous attorney Herbert Schaller.

As a result of all this, Faurisson reports, he has not had even a minute of spare time during the last six months for scholarly work.

(Law suits have also recently been brought against French Revisionist publisher Pierre Guillaume and two other French Revisionists. "This is France," Faurisson ruefully comments.)

In October, he will be welcomed here in the United States when he joins Revisionists from America and other countries at the Eleventh IHR conference.


Revisionist activists Mark Weber and David Cole successfully presented the case for Holocaust Revisionism on a recent hour-long broadcast of the Montel Williams Show, a syndicated television program seen on about 70 stations around the country. (As we go to press, we are told that it will be aired on April 30. Regrettably, this is after subscribers will receive this issue of the IHR Newsletter.)

The hour-long broadcast on Holocaust Revisionism was taped before a studio audience on April 13 at the Los Angeles CBS building. The fast-paced Montel Williams Show is similar in format to the better-known "Donahue" and "Oprah" television shows.

Weber is an editor for the Institute for Historical Review, and David Cole is the youthful southern California regional director of the Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust (CODOH).

Throughout this emotion-charged and sometimes very contentious broadcast, Williams, who is Black, remained professionally skeptical and provocative, but consistently fair to each side. Matched off against Weber and Cole, the two main featured guests, were Dr. Michael Thaler, a wartime ghetto internee and director of a northern California Holocaust center, and Ernest and Anna Hollander, wartime inmates of Auschwitz and other camps.

After a highly one-sided introductory film segment that inaccurately characterized Holocaust Revisionism, Weber was the first guest to speak. He was in good form as he cogently and succinctly explained the Revisionist view of the Holocaust story.

David Cole proved to be particularly effective in making the case for Revisionism. Because of his own Jewish ancestry, he could not simply be dismissed as an "anti-Semite," and the impact of his Revisionist arguments were therefore all the more telling. Cole called into question the accuracy of the testimony of many "Holocaust survivors," and said that the Holocaust serves very many Jews as a kind of substitute religion.

Audience Response

Most of those in the studio audience seemed merely skeptical or perhaps open-minded, and about ten percent were noticeably hostile towards Revisionism. But a sizeable minority of the audience -- perhaps 20 percent -- was clearly and sometimes vocally pro-Revisionist.

Among the members of the audience who were invited to ask questions, one Black man accused Jews of reaping enormous financial profits from the Holocaust campaign, and charged that Jews owned the ships that brought slaves from Africa to the New World. Another audience member, a Jewish Holocaust survivor, stridently charged that the Ukrainians were "the worst collaborators" with the Germans during the Second World War.

Before the taping, producer Marilyn Kaskel privately said that because of her own Jewish background, she could not help feeling emotionally partisan about the topic of this broadcast. Afterwards, she expressed dissatisfaction with the way the session had turned out. Whereas Weber and Cole were clear and effective in making their points, she said, the survivors were not very articulate.

Brock's "First Amendment" Meeting

Producer Kaskel said that she had decided to put together a broadcast devoted to Holocaust Revisionism after hearing about a "First Amendment" rally in Los Angeles on February 1 that featured Revisionist speakers.

As it happened, few of the scheduled speakers were ultimately able to be present to address the rally, and an unruly mob of hate-filled protesters intimidated many would-be audience members from attending. About 50 policemen and about a hundred protesters, several of them carrying Communist banners, gathered outside of the meeting hall in south central Los Angeles.

All the same, rally organizer and Black community activist Robert Brock spoke at length about Black community consciousness, freedom of speech, and Revisionism. IHR director J. Marcellus and IHR editor Mark Weber also spoke for about 40 minutes each.

Media coverage of the February 1 meeting was invariably distorted and misleading, including news reports on all area television stations and in the Los Angeles Times. (The meeting is scheduled to be broadcast in its entirety on Los Angeles public radio station KPFK.)


Readers Urged to Support Outreach Project

A new outreach campaign has been launched that promises to further raise public awareness about Holocaust Revisionism, much as Bradley Smith's CODOH campus ad project has already done.

Smith -- who is both IHR media project director and founder of the Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust (CODOH) -- has so far submitted the new full-page advertisement to student newspapers at about a dozen colleges and universities around the country.

The new ad, headlined "Falsus in Uno, Falsus in Omnibus: The 'Human Soap' Holocaust Myth," is based in large part on an essay by IHR editor Mark Weber that first appeared in the Summer 1991 issue of the Journal of Historical Review.

Care has been taken to make sure that there is nothing in the ad text that can be cited as a pretext for rejecting it on the basis of supposed untruthfulness or bigotry.

The full-page ad has been prepared in two versions: One is designed for publication in larger "broadsheet" size newspapers, and a second version, with a slightly abridged text, is meant for publication in tabloid size newspapers.

The tabloid size version is printed in actual size on pages four and five of this issue of the Newsletter.

We encourage readers to support this new outreach campaign. For a relatively modest amount of money and effort, you can personally arrange for publication of this ad in your own local daily, weekly, community or association paper.

Interested? Let us know, and we'll arrange to send you a "camera-ready" copy of either version of the ad, which you can then take to any newspaper advertising department for processing.

With your support, this new campaign can significantly further the cause of historical truth and awareness.


In the wake of the controversy at Rice University over the CODOH free speech advertisement, IHR Media Project director Bradley Smith appeared as a guest on a broadcast that aired in February over the school radio station. Although a lengthy article about the radio talk show interview that appeared later in the Rice student newspaper was generally hostile, some grudging admiration for Smith's presentation was also expressed. (The paper had earlier declined to run Smith's CODOH ad.)

Rice University history professor Francis Loewenheim, whose commentary on Smith's appearance was aired immediately afterwards, "wasn't too happy about the interview and was expressing frustration with Smith," the student paper reported. (The Rice Thresher, Feb. 21)

At one point Loewenheim asserted that "the authenticity of the [Nuremberg trial] documents was not once challenged by any of the [German] defense lawyers. Not one of those documents has ever been challenged as a fabrication or found, in any way, tampered with." This statement is patently false, as anyone who has seriously studied the Nuremberg trial record can easily confirm.

Not only did defense attorneys protest against the prosecution use of spurious documents (such as 1721-PS), but some of the most important Nuremberg documents are now almost universally acknowledged to be fraudulent (including 386-PS, USSR-378, 1515-PS, 3870-PS, and NO-1973).

The talk show host later complained: "I didn't make Smith look like a total fool, like I wanted to." And one student listener commented: "Smith was a very dynamic orator and very well-versed who found it easy to tear apart anything [host] Monton could suggest. While I'm not sure Smith was convincing, he was good enough to cast doubts on many well accepted facts of the Holocaust."


Along with the collapse of Communism in the former Soviet Union has come a drastic reassessment of twentieth century history. Nowhere has this process been more profound than in newly free republic of Ukraine, where Soviet tyranny claimed millions of lives. One remarkable expression of the new Revisionist outlook has been the erection of monuments and plaques honoring the memory of the tens of thousands of Ukrainian volunteers who fought against Soviet Communism during the Second World War in the ranks of the Waffen SS, the German-led pan-European combat force. Such memorials have already been erected in the Ukrainian cities of Lvov, Tarnopol and Ivana Frankovska. (The Jewish Press, Brooklyn, Oct. 11, 1991.)

Meanwhile, more than 50,000 Ukrainians who were unjustly convicted of crimes under the Communist regime have been granted "rehabilitations" on the basis of the Ukrainian republic's April 1991 Amnesty Law. The Simon Wiesenthal Center, a major Holocaust lobby and pressure group, is distressed that some of these rehabilitations may have been granted to Ukrainians who were convicted of mistreating Jews during the Second World War.

A Note of Thanks

At a time when Revisionism is so much in the news, we appreciate all the more the important help of our faithful supporters here in America and around the world. We are grateful, for example, for the many newspaper and magazine clippings about Revisionism, noteworthy readers' letters, reports and commentary on the campus ad campaign, and so forth, which arrive every day here at our crowded southern California office.

Unfortunately, our over-worked staff is simply not able to individually thank each and every person for thoughtfully sending such items. While asking for your understanding, we want to once again express our appreciation in this general way for your continued support.

Director's Corner

J. Marcellus

Eleventh Conference

First of all, let me apologize for a goof in last month's column. The registration fee for the upcoming Eleventh Revisionist Conference is $325, not $250 as stated in the column. This $325 is the same amount we charged for the last (October 1990) conference, but you can save yourself $30 by remitting prior to July 31, 1992 at the earlybird rate of $295.

For two relatives -- or a couple (husband and wife, father and son, boyfriend and girlfriend, etc.) -- attending together, the registration fee is only $ 250 per person.

If you've already sent in your registration fee based on the incorrect rates in last month's newsletter, please mail us a check for the difference as soon as you can. My apologies for the inconvenience. Also, even though you may have already reserved your place at the Eleventh Conference by sending in a portion or all of your registration fee, you will still need to fill out a formal registration application and send it in. We must have an application form on file for each conference attendee. You should be receiving yours shortly.

The Eleventh IHR conference -- which will be held over Columbus Day weekend, October 10-12, 1992, in the Los Angeles area -- is shaping up very well. Attendees will meet and hear Prof. Robert Faurisson, David Irving, Willis Carto, Mark Weber, Ted O'Keefe, Bradley Smith, and yours truly. We also look forward to welcoming to the podium Dr. Arthur Butz, author of the pathbreaking Revisionist study, The Hoax of the Twentieth Century. Six other distinguished speakers, yet to be announced, will also address the three-day gathering.

Decide now to attend the Eleventh Conference, and send in your reservation application and fee. I've got a feeling this one, like the last conference, will be sold out early. As you know, we have been forced to turn down numerous applications in the past to avoid overcrowding.

Montel Williams Show

It was a rare pleasure to be present at the exciting taping session of the Montel Williams Show, April 13, which featured two of the feistiest Revisionists anywhere: our own Mark Weber and CODOH Southwestern regional director David Cole.

The fast-paced hour-long television talk show, with a format similar to "Donahue" and "Oprah," was devoted to an exhilarating and occasionally very emotional dispute about the Holocaust extermination story. Three Holocaust survivors, including two wartime internees of Auschwitz, appeared with Mark and David, but were remarkably less alert and articulate.

We've been told that this segment will be broadcast on April 30 on about 70 stations around the country. (Check your local television listing for availability and time.) Caution: There is an outside chance that because of Mark and David's stunning presentations, Montel Williams might bow to pressure from the "powers that be" and cancel the segment entirely.

Editorial Shift

Ted O'Keefe is turning over editorship of the Journal of Historical Review to Mark Weber, who had been serving as associate editor. This shift will permit Ted to devote more time to other essential work, including book editing, as well as to important new projects.

Since 1987, Ted has done an outstanding job of editing The Journal. Above all, he has brought our flagship periodical to a level of quality that has significantly increased both the effectiveness of the IHR and long-range impact of the cause of Historical Revisionism.

On the Bulletin Boards

The hottest electronic bulletin board going for Historical Revisionists right now is GEnie, a major public subscription computer bulletin board service (BBS) owned by General Electric. For several weeks now, several dedicated IHR supporters have been shaking up GEnie's public forums, posting and tenaciously defending Revisionist views on the Holocaust. It's turned into a regular free-for-all with dozens of persons on both sides of the issue joining in the intense debate. More than 500 electronic messages thrashing out the Holocaust controversy have been posted -- many of them quite thoughtful. During the debate's peak, up to a hundred were being posted per day. On my desk here is a three-inch stack of print-out copies of just some of the hundreds of messages. This stack was sent to us by an IHR supporter who has been at the forefront of this campaign. As we go to press, the debate continues to rage, and messages are still being posted at a steady clip. So far, the ADL thought police appear not to have tried to nail GEnie for keeping its public forums open to all views.

In addition, Revisionists are still active on some other BBS computer services, including USENET and Internet. A Very Well Done to all who have taken the time and trouble to conscientiously post so many Revisionist messages.

Last October, the ADL reprimanded another major BBS, Prodigy, for permitting public postings that challenge Indisputable History. Since then, Prodigy has continued to indicate "no interest in the [Holocaust] topic." We haven't heard about anyone starting Revisionist fires on Compuserve, another huge BBS.

We're in the process of preparing a special flier on how to purchase a personal computer and set it up to access electronic bulletin boards. It's for beginners who've never worked with a computer, as well as for those with a computer who want to know more about logging onto a BBS and posting public messages. Drop me a line and I'll send you the publication when it's ready.

If you're currently on any BBS, let me know which one, along with your ID number. I'll share the information with other Revisionists who log-on to the same service -- they'll receive your ID, and you'll receive theirs. Otherwise, the information you provide will be considered confidential. If nothing else, at least you'll be able to send E-mail to one another, and perhaps even conspire to finagle some honest history into the public forums for everyone to see.

Book Notes -- Books Available from the IHR

A Military History of the Western World, by J. F. C. Fuller. Magnificent three-volume overview by the eminent British military historian who, in spite of his allegedly "fascist" views, remains the acknowledged master of the field. Includes a superb Revisionist analysis of the Third Reich and the origins of the Second World War. Vol. 1: From the Earliest Times to the Battle of Lepanto (606 pp.); Vol. 2: From the Defeat of the Spanish Armada to the Battle of Waterloo (562 pp.); Vol. 3: From the American Civil War to the End of World War II (666 pp.) Softcover. $ 44.85, plus $ 2.00 for shipping. (Sold only as a set.) Stock #0980.

With Rommel in the Desert by Heinz Schmidt. Inside story of Rommel's brilliant campaigns by his aide-de-camp. Detailed, dramatic account of the Afrika Korps' epic victories and defeats. A key staff officer tells about the legendary "desert fox" both as a revered commander and as a man. Clothbound. 240 pp., photos, maps. $15.95, plus $2.00 for shipping. Stock #0169.

From Moscow to Berlin: Marshal Zhukov's Greatest Battles by Georgi K. Zhukov. The greatest Soviet commander tells how he directed the Red Army's bitter last-ditch defense of Moscow, masterminded the encirclement and defeat of the German Sixth Army at Stalingrad, smashed the last great German counteroffensive of Kursk-Orel, and led the climatic assault on Hitler's Berlin. Must reading for every student of military history. Clothbound. 304 pp., photos. $18.95, plus $2.00 for shipping. Stock #0165.

Charles A. Lindbergh Addresses the Nation. Casette tape of four outstanding radio speeches by an authentic American hero. You'll be inspired by these thoughtful calls for national strength and freedom: (1) Radio address of Oct. 13, 1939, "Neutrality and War." (2) American First rally speech in Chicago, August 4, 1940, "Our Relationship with Europe." (3) Radio address, Oct. 14, 1940. (4) America First rally in New York, May 23, 1941. / Audio casette. $9.95, plus $2.00 for shipping. Stock #A107



I first became aware of the IHR through a Jewish friend who had corresponded with your organization, and who recommended Dr. Butz's brilliant work, The Hoax of the Twentieth Century. As a result of reading his book, I am able to effectively argue the Revisionist case. Consequently, I have succeeded in converting many highly educated people to our side.

I heard Mr. Weber and Mr. O'Keefe on KFI radio one night. They were brilliant. While most of the callers offered emotional pleading, Weber and O'Keefe stayed with the facts in an unbiased fashion. I remember one woman caller who cited a monument in New York City as "proof" of the Holocaust! [A casette recording of this two-hour live radio talk show interview is available for $11.00 postpaid. Stock # A105.]

I have also been reading postings of IHR information on the Internet [computer bulletin board] system. Here as well, the opposition continues to make ludicrous arguments. Finally, I am writing a paper that will analyze and point out the numerous flaws in the "Hoaxsters" arguments.

I am not anti-Semitic. I just resent being lied to.

I want to thank the Institute for Historical Review for its fight for truth in the face of overwhelming opposition. Keep the faith. Your voice is being heard!

D. A. -- Los Angeles


Just a special word of thanks to you for your courage and love of truth in making available books with such precious and vital information. What you are doing is good and right.

J. R. -- Corcoran, Calif.


Congratulations on your management of the IHR in its successful endeavor to establish and defend the Truth. It greatly pleases me that the Institute has survived and succeeded despite the proverbial Devil and his kindred liars.

I know it's been an uphill battle for the Institute, but your phenomenal successes prove your sterling mettle. I am very proud to be a staunch supporter of such an honorable group as the Institute and its staff and advisory committee. I am herewith enclosing my $100 for continued support.

Dr. L.W. -- San Diego, Calif.