Source: The Adelaide Institute

ST. MARTIN’S PRESS CAPITULATES TO JEWISH
PRESSURE GROUPS

The editor of St. Martin’s Press, Mr Thomas L Dunne, announced on 22 March that he would resist the pressure not to publish Irving’s latest book Goebbels.

David Irving responded to this good news by stating on 26 March: “Having a still unpublished book shredded by anonymous (U.S) reviewers is like being mugged by masked men. In Britain sales are sky high so far, and over a hundred newspapers have asked for review copies.”

Then on 3 April, Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and Editorial Director of St. Martin’s Press, Mr Thomas J McCormack wrote in a covering note to a lengthy press statement:

“This cover memo is meant to convey on one page the essential message of the attached release: St. Martin’s made a mistake, and there is no worse way to compound a mistake than by not admitting it, and not correcting it if you can. We are today announcing the cancellation of our planned publication of David Irving’s book. The book has not been printed, and will not be published by St. Martin’s.

I want to emphasize in this cover that we are not cancelling under coercion – publishers can often be their best in resisting pressure – nor was was our decision prompted by mere embarrassment. We are cancelling because we think many of the arguments put to us as objections to publication are valid and convincing and because of discoveries we made on our own as we investigated the matter more deeply.

Do we wish we knew back then what we know now? Yes, we do. But we know these things now and we must face up to the judgment that we made a wrong decision six months ago and we must reverse it.”

Except for three interesting paragraphs, McCormack’s Press Statement is too long to reproduce here.

“…The final decision about whether or not to go forward with “Goebbels” fell on my desk. Among many other things I did, I at last sat down to examine the page proof myself. I despised it intensely. There are several reasons for this, but one was sufficient for me: The subtext of “Goebbels” was in my judgement this: The Jews brought it on themselves. My feeling was that this is at base an effective anti-Semitic book, an insidious piece of Goebbels-like propaganda that we should have nothing to do with……”

“Last night we held an open forum on this book at St. Martin’s. Something close to a hundred employees appeared to voice their opinion. Some of them argued in favor of publishing and their arguments were neither insensitive nor unreasonable. But they weren’t persuasive either. The immense majority conveyed fervently that they hoped that I would not go forward….”

“I am informing David Irving today of our decision: We will not publish his book. I should say that Tom Dunne agrees with this decision. The Military Book Club also joins St. Martin’s: They are cancelling the book as an offering to their members.”

Our Comment: This is a classic case of how discussions of contentious historical events are censored. Irving’s options are clear. Either he finds another publisher who has the courage to defy a minority pressure group’s financial clout used to intimidate those who lack moral courage, or he places the book on Internet where he will escape the censors’ clutches.

It is an insult to our intelligence that someone pulls out the “hate-monger”,”anti-Semitic”, “Racist”, or “neo-Nazi” cards because they do not like to hear another person’s point-of-view.

Anyone who wishes to understand what happened during World War II, especially what happened to European Jewry, must not shy away from asking important questions. For example, what role did the Ha’avara Agreement between the Nazis and the Zionists play in setting up the state of Israel? It may be painful for some to realize that there was Nazi-Zionist-Jewish collaboration, but a study of this is essential if we wish to understand what is happening today in the Middle East. Brain-dead academics and morally bankrupt individuals attempt to stifle debate on such topics. Why?