Note: Mosaic Upps only wants the truth in this matter and is not competent to be involved, apart from facilitating the discussion and informing interested persons of the issue
The case of Dr. Christian Lindtner: An Epilogue
Several people have enquired about the possible reasons of Lindtner’s about-face. Of course I cannot read another person’s mind, but in the case of Lindtner his motives seem to be pretty clear.
When I first met Dr. Christian Lindtner in November 1997, he already was a revisionist. He must still have been one nine years later, because in December 2006 he not only attended the Teheran conference, but even agreed to join a committee charged with the preparation of a second conference (which never materialized).
If the revisionist arguments are indeed worthless, and if revisionism is indeed „chutzpah“, as Lindnter now argues, why did it take him more than a decade to become aware of this fact? After all, he must have known the Goebbels diaries and the alleged Himmler speeches from the very beginning of his revisionist activities, these sources being quoted so frequently in orthodox Holocaust literature that Lindtner cannot possibly pretend to have discovered them only recently. Likewise, an ample revisionist literature has existed for decades about the alleged huge slaughter of Jews in the East. For example „Die Truppe des Weltanschauungskrieges“ by Helmut Krausnick and Hans-Heinrich Wilhelm dates from 1981, so why did Lindtner have to wait for the two Curilla books to „discover“ that the Germans had killed millions of Jews in the occupied Soviet territories? If revisionism is „chutzpah“, Dr. Christian Lindtner, who has been an active revisionist for at least nine years, must really be a blockhead!
Ideologically, Lindtner was very close to National Socialism. As I learned from Siegfried Verbeke, he repeatedly took part in events organized by an unabashed admirer of Adolf Hitler, Florence Rost van Tonningen, the widow of Dutch National Socialist leader Meinoud Rost van Tonningen. During our discussions in Copenhagen, Lindtner made some comments about the Jews which were so unflattering that I will not repeat them here.
Why this sudden about-face? The solution of the „riddle“ is obvious. In his Swedish-language book „Hemligheten om Kristus“ (Hägglund Förlag, 2002), Lindtner claims to have discovered evidence that the figure of Jesus Christ is an invention of Buddhist missionaries. He knows that the media will not even discuss a thesis presented by a „Holocaust denier“, so he desperately tries to get rid of this label and to become kosher by revoking his revisionist and pro-National Socialist views. This proves that Lindtner, while undoubtedly a very intelligent man, has a shabby character. He reminds me of British historian David Irving, who is also extremely intelligent, but totally amoral (cf. my article „David Irving and the Aktion Reinhardt Camps“1.
But probably the media will continue to ignore Lindtner. Many, if not most of his former revisionist and right-wing comrades now thoroughly despise him. While he has lost many of his old friends, the only new ones he has made are probably the clown Roberto Mühlenkamp and his cronies from the Forum „Holocaust Controversies“. After all, the fact that a former professor of Sanscrit now writes on their website would greatly enhance the prestige of these individuals, if they had any prestige at all.
8 December 2011
In order to follow the discussion, go here and take the links from there