I sincerely hope that the recent appeal by Vincent Reynouard with, at his side, Marie Bruchet, will be heard by all our friends.
At the strictly scientific and historical level revisionism has won the match but, on the other hand, at the educational, propaganda and media level we are more and more besieged. To the general public we increasingly risk appearing as losers. The flood of falsely scientific publications by our opponents swells relentlessly; now more than ever it must be stemmed with responses of real scientific and technical character. In France the Florent Brayards, Edouard Hussons, Patrick Desbois and partners come out with stacks of the most hefty, hollow and dishonest books. They need to be answered. We would be fooling ourselves if we thought it would do to keep quiet in the face of them, or refer people to revisionist studies published in the past.
At a trial five years ago barrister Charrière-Bournazel, then head of the Paris bar association and representing the “anti-racist” organisation LICRA against me, had the court itself remark his surprise at my “energy”. “Where does he get all that energy?”, he cried, adding, with the delicacy for which he is known: “The biological solution doesn’t seem to be in view!”.
Today the biological solution has come closer. My lifestyle – like, for that matter, Vincent Reynouard’s and that of other revisionists – is, so to speak,… overwork.
At 83 such a lifestyle becomes deadly. In the face of this fatal outlook I used to console myself, until just lately, in thinking that the job would be carried on in France by Vincent Reynouard, assisted by a vigorous young woman (as I was able to see at the recent conference in Tehran where, knowing her subject thoroughly, she was not intimidated in the least by the opposing side). But now I learn the dismal news: Vincent and Marie might be forced to jump the revisionist galley!
There can be no question of it. Vincent Reynouard is exceptionally gifted for scientific research and, above all, he has no equal in the skill of explaining things. He owes this rare talent to his qualities of the heart: he knows how to listen, to put himself in the position of others and, with forbearance, to bring those unable or unwilling to understand back onto the path of comprehension and intelligence. His dedication to the revisionist cause is total and he has already paid dearly for his heroism.
It would be absurd and disgraceful if, having a man of this calibre in our ranks, we let go of him just when the desperate offensive of an opponent at bay threatened to swamp us.
There is of course more than one dwelling in the revisionist house and I know that, in his turn, a man of singular energy is about to enter fully upon the scene to come to our aid, but I shall say what I think: “Vincent Reynouard is irreplaceable”. You were probably already aware, but it seemed to me, at this defining moment for the future of revisionism, that I ought to remind you, even if with “the remnants of a dwindling voice and an ardour that is fading”.
I beseech you: give him your help, unstintingly. Do so for him, for me, for the noble cause of historical revisionism. Thank you.
March 31, 2012