Cambridge’s Black Time-Travelling Professor And His Many Superhuman Feats

 

[Backed into a corner, Jason was faced with only one final option: it was time to go nuclear; it was time for him to scream the word ‘racism’ as loudly as he could and then wait for the cavalry. This is exactly what he did, and he got exactly the result he had hoped for, as more than 12,000 people – including Green Party leader Zack Polanski, at least five Labour MPs and a gaggle of Cambridge academics all signed a petition set up by the Good Law Project supporting him. ]

This is the story of how Britain’s elite universities abandoned rigorous academic vetting and swallowed wild, superhuman claims as facts – all in the name of diversity.

Running a single marathon is a great achievement. Running 30 marathons is a spectacular feat. Running 30 marathons in 35 days is something only a world-class athlete could achieve. But running 30 marathons in 35 days, and running the final nine of those marathons with a broken leg – that’s an impossible feat that would require superhuman powers. But that is exactly what Jason Arday has claimed to achieve. But that’s not all, Jason Arday’s incredible feats aren’t just limited to running nearly 240 miles on a fractured leg without medical intervention, he also claimed to have run 600 miles in six days on a treadmill (without any evidence), played both football and snooker at a professional level (a boast that was apparently taken out of context), raised over £5.5 million for charity (but can’t name a single donor), managed to go 15 years with a barely a wink of sleep, and even appeared on the famous television documentary series Seven Up! – which originally premiered a whole 21 years before he was even born. This is the story of Cambridge University’s youngest-ever black professor, who was appointed as Professor of the Sociology of Education in 2023.

Jason Arday was born in 1985 on a council estate in Clapham, South London, to Ghanaian parents – a humble beginning for a man who would go on to achieve so much. But Jason would not only achieve great feats, but he would do so against all the odds, overcoming what some may have called ‘impossible barriers’ during his meteoric rise to greatness. At just three years of age, Jason was diagnosed with global developmental delay and autism spectrum disorder, leading medical experts and therapists to predict that he would require assisted living for the rest of his life. But this wasn’t the end of young Jason’s struggles – he was completely non-verbal throughout his early childhood and communicated entirely using sign language and as a result he didn’t learn to speak until he was 11 years-old. He credited his mother for helping him break through his silence by using music, rhythm, and song lyrics to connect him to language – the power of love and song set him on the road to such success. However, due to his late language and speech development, he did not learn to read or write until he was 18 years-old. Allegedly.

And the word ‘allegedly’ should precede many of Jason’s achievements and boastful tales. It is a well-known medical and biological fact that learning to speak a language fluently after the age of 11 – if a person has been completely non-verbal since birth – is incredibly difficult due to a biological phenomenon known as the critical period hypothesis. Whilst it is not always absolutely impossible, it is one of the steepest challenges in cognitive science. This is because children’s brains form billions of neural connections specifically designed to map sounds to meaning, however, around the point when a child passes through puberty (roughly at the age of 11 to 13), the brain undergoes what is known as “synaptic pruning”. Neural connections that were not used – such as the neural pathways for processing and producing spoken speech – are cleared away or repurposed. Once this pruning happens, the brain loses the elasticity required to naturally absorb language structure.

But it’s not all just about neural pathways, when someone speaks, their brain must also simultaneously coordinate the lungs, vocal cords, tongue, teeth, and lips. This motor mapping is trained continuously through babbling and talking during infancy and childhood. A person who has been non-verbal for 11 years has not built these specific motor pathways, making the physical act of clear speech production highly uncoordinated and laborious. But miraculously, Jason beat all the odds, and at the last possible moment he learnt to speak. But the miracles just kept on coming and Jason managed to attend local schools in South London and eventually left secondary education with two GCSEs – one in Physical Education and one in Textiles. But despite the mountainous struggles that would have beaten most men, Jason was determined to go further still – and eventually, not even the boundaries of time itself would hold him back.


You can buy Jonathan Bowden’s Reactionary Modernism here.

Determined to pursue sports and teaching, Jason then went to a local college to study for a BTEC diploma, which allowed him to bridge the gap into higher education. This was another major milestone for the young achiever – and this herculean feat was made even greater as Jason claimed that due to his late language development, he did not learn to read or write until he was 18 years-old. Some may scoff at Jason’s two GCSEs and BTEC diploma, but to have achieved these grades whilst not even being able to read and write proved that he was nothing short of a child prodigy. Jason then went on into higher education, and graduated from St Mary’s University in Twickenham in 2008 with a BA in Education Studies and Physical Education before serving as the university’s Student Union Athletics President for a year immediately following his graduation. For many, this would be the end of a long and arduous academic road, but to Jason, it was just the beginning.

Jason then went on to earn an MA in Education and Pedagogy from St Mary’s and later completed a PGCE at the Institute of Education to become a qualified school PE teacher. At this point, after achieving so much, and overcoming so many almost insurmountable hurdles, he could have entered a well-paid role in teaching. But Jason was still hungry for more, leading to his transitioning into the subject of Sociology of Education and going on to earn a Master of Education (MEd) followed by a PhD in Education from Liverpool John Moores University in 2015. This would have been incredible enough, but due to Jason’s humble background, he had no financial backing, and whilst passing through educational institutions at breakneck speed he was forced to work part-time retail shifts to fund his higher education tuition. Not only did Jason beat all the odds as a late starter, but he was both an academic genius and a hard worker.

But looking at Jason’s impressive academic résumé, it appears that mathematical qualifications are sadly absent, and that may be why things just don’t seem to add up. We are meant to believe that a boy who was completely non-verbal due to autism and global developmental delay until age 11 and who was unable to read or write until 18, then went on to earn a PhD by the age of 29. This means that in just 11 years Jason managed to learn basic literacy and catch up on all those years of missed schooling, complete an undergraduate degree (which typically takes 3 years), complete two separate Master’s degrees (typically taking 1-2 years each), complete a PGCE teacher training qualification (taking 1 year) and then write a 100,000-word PhD dissertation (taking typically 3-4 years). In just over a decade, Jason had not only learnt to read and write, but condensed 12 years of higher education into a near record-breaking period of time that would prove his hyper-accelerated cognitive processing abilities were second to none. And he did it all whilst working multiple jobs and without sleeping.

Jason’s story was remarkable – some may even go as far as to state that it was unbelievable – but it wouldn’t be long before educational institutions up and down the country would begin falling over themselves to offer him prestigious well-paid positions. Once he had completed his PhD, Jason secured his first major permanent academic post at the University of Roehampton, entering the institution directly as a Senior Lecturer in Physical Education, and it must be noted, this rapid entry without years of junior postdoctoral research was highly unusual, but surely by this point, extraordinary achievements were nothing more than everyday occurrences for Jason. Jason then went on to join Durham University’s Department of Sociology before being rapidly promoted into an executive role. Within just a year, Durham University had promoted Jason to Associate Professor. Alongside this, he was named the Deputy Executive Dean for People and Culture within the Faculty of Social Sciences and Health. Interestingly, and rather tellingly, this executive role placed him in charge of institutional diversity and inclusion initiatives.

But the meteoric rise of the non-verbal black youth from inner city London wasn’t over yet. In 2021 Jason stepped into a new role at the University of Glasgow, joining their School of Education to take the position of Chair in the subject of Sociology of Education – another milestone had been achieved, as he was now a full professor. And at the tender age of 35, this appointment officially made him one of the youngest full professors in the whole of the United Kingdom. It was at this point Jason’s numerous lofty achievements and incredible superhuman feats caught the attention of officials at Cambridge University – one of the most prestigious and influential institutions of higher education in human history had now noticed him and they wanted him on their team. And in March 2023, at just 37 years-old, Jason was appointed to the prestigious Professorial Chair of Sociology of Education at Cambridge’s Faculty of Education and was then concurrently elected as a Fellow of Jesus College. This appointment broke the record for the youngest Black professor in the university’s history. Jason was now at the very pinnacle of academic excellence; his fairytale story was now complete.

This is the point where the tale should come to an end, where things should be wrapped up nicely with a big red bow and where Jason receives the applause and recognition he deserves. And that would be how the story ends, if any of his achievements could actually be verified. But at this juncture some uncharitable folk might claim that Jason was just making it all up, and that the only reason anyone believed him is because lecturers and those with institutional power wanted to promote him in order to prove a very specific and racially charged point. It has been noted that people working within modern higher education, and specifically in institutions like Cambridge, Durham, and Glasgow are highly motivated to promote ‘diverse’ talent, especially if that ‘talent’ has a powerful, motivational and inspirational narrative attached. Jason was everything that liberal multiculturalists could have dreamed of, so much so, that university officials all over the UK were so eager to celebrate the story of a non-verbal black man that had beaten all the odds, that they skipped any of the standard, rigorous vetting of his academic work that one might usually expect.

That is exactly how Jason ended up in his position at Cambridge, not so much because of Jason’s myriad of self-professed achievements, but because the institution never checked any of his claims. And this isn’t mere conjecture: the University of Cambridge has now admitted that officials did not conduct an independent textual analysis when hiring Professor Jason Arday in 2023, instead, their vetting process relied heavily on ‘institutional trust’ and ‘reputation’ rather than any raw forensic auditing. In short, because Jason had already been vetted, hired, and promoted to senior positions by three other highly respected institutions (Roehampton, Durham, and Glasgow), Cambridge’s hiring panel assumed his foundational work was immaculate. Instead, Cambridge University’s appointment panel was deeply captivated by Jason’s unique, highly inspirational backstory and the focus of the hiring process was centred on his vision for the sociology department and his high-profile advocacy work surrounding diversity and inclusion, rather than a line-by-line verification of his past work. After all, who needs to know if a candidate can actually do the job they are being hired for when they fit the diversity profile so perfectly?


You can order Jonathan Bowden’s The Cultured Thug here.

But unfortunately for Jason and his eager backers – Cambridge University, a number of other respected academic institutions and several publishers – this isn’t where the story ends, and Jason doesn’t get to leave the stage to rapturous applause. Earlier this year, allegations would emerge that suggested that Jason’s unbelievable backstory and his near impossible achievements weren’t quite as real as some claimed. An analysis of Jason’s 2015 PhD thesis, which was awarded by Liverpool John Moores University, revealed something truly shocking: the document contained 188 sentences that were identical or nearly identical to a thesis written by a student at Brunel University in 2009. But these issues weren’t just limited to Jason’s PhD, textual overlaps were then identified in several of Jason’s subsequent journal articles, leading to two separate journals issuing formal correction notes. In some papers, Jason allegedly recycled borrowed text and framed the lines as “direct quotes” from research subjects he claimed to have interviewed himself. Worse still, The Times later uncovered severe flaws in his references, including data discrepancies and the complete omission of a research participant who Jason previously claimed had taken their own life.

This would have been enough to sink any other high-profile academic. However, Jason’s run of incredible feats and unbelievable luck only continued. Cambridge University were so enamoured with Jason that when this new information came to light and accusations of plagiarism emerged, the university’s immediate institutional response was not to question Jason, but instead to defend him. Senior figures from Cambridge University completely dismissed the allegations, framing any criticism of their all-star black professor as a “vile campaign of bullying” directed at a vulnerable, dyslexic and autistic scholar. But as more and more allegations surfaced, Cambridge University officials changed their tactics, and attempted to distance themselves and the institution from the core issue by stating that investigating a PhD thesis is strictly the legal responsibility of the institution that awarded it – they were passing the responsibility back to Liverpool John Moores University.

And the response of those who should have checked his work in the first place was just as telling. Colleagues and peer-reviewers admitted to being hesitant to question Jason’s data or writing style out of fear of looking like they were attacking a vulnerable, autistic scholar – in short, no one wanted to question the black academic prodigy, they just wanted to put him on a pedestal to prove a point. But now, and rather ironically, all eyes were on Jason Arday – but not quite in the way that he wanted, as people were now increasingly focusing on the details of his work rather than his tall tales. As a result, independent researchers began feeding Jason’s published work into advanced anti-plagiarism software and the truth was plain for all to see. Several major academic publishers were forced to confront the reality that their peer-review processes had overlooked glaring and obvious anomalies. But the embarrassment wasn’t yet over, as Jason had published several highly regarded books with a company called Routledge, a leader in academic publishing. When complaints were first made regarding text-recycling and uncredited overlap in these texts, Routledge initially stood by their man. However, as the sheer volume of identical sentences became public, the publisher was humiliatingly forced to initiate a series of formal internal reviews.

Everything was coming crashing down – and there was only one thing Jason could do. And if you thought that would be to admit to his alleged wrong doings, apologise and walk things back, you would be entirely incorrect. It was in fact time to double down, and invent another story to make everyone feel sorry for him in the hope that the whole incident would just go away and people would stop talking about his alleged plagiarism. And this is where Jason would reveal a final, previously hidden chapter to his remarkable story, it was time for him to tell the world that he had of course been the victim of racism. When Jason had first joined Cambridge University as a professor, he had been the victim of a hate campaign and all this talk of plagiarism and falsified superhuman feats of endurance risked stirring up another maelstrom of bigotry. But it wasn’t enough to claim that he had merely been the victim of hate, Jason had to go further: claiming that a severed pig’s head had been sent to him as part of a sudden escalation of abuse and threats that were specifically aimed at him due to his high-profile appointment as the university’s youngest black professor.

This incredible claim would surely silence all of his critics, as once the police reports and photos of this obscene crime were made public, no one would dare to question the black genius and his remarkable stories. There was only one small problem: Jason did not report the delivery of the pig’s head to the police when it allegedly took place. He claimed that he intercepted a large cardboard box at his parents’ house in South London, on opening the box, he discovered the pig’s head and did what anyone else would do – threw it straight into a wheelie bin and waited several months before calling the police. Well, at least he reported it to the police in the end, so a crime number would back up his harrowing tale. What’s more, Jason was so sure of his interaction with the police, that he went on to claim to reporters that when the police finally investigated the hateful act, they managed to trace the animal back to a local butcher who sold a “whole hog” on the morning that the severed head was delivered to his parents’ house.

However, unfortunately for Jason, the Metropolitan Police keep records of crimes that are reported, and they revealed that after an extensive search, there was no evidence whatsoever of any such report or subsequent investigation. This surely must have been the result of institutional racism within the Met Police and officers must have destroyed all evidence of the report. But at least Jason could still rely on the butcher to confirm the details of this gruesome hate crime. Yet in a final bizarre twist, reporters from The Guardian (who were no doubt driven by a desperate attempt to prove Jason’s story to be true) visited the specific South London butcher that Jason himself had named as the providers of the hog. However, the staff at the shop stated that no police officers had ever come in to question them about a pig’s head, dryly noting, “That’s the kind of thing we’d remember.” Indeed, who could forget such a thing?

One would expect that opening a large parcel only to discover a severed pig’s head nestled within would be rather unforgettable – but in the case of Jason, this may have been just another one of many rather extraordinary occurrences. But as we live in a technological wonderland where everyone has a telephone in their back pocket featuring a high-resolution camera, this kind of extraordinary occurrence would surely result in a photograph being taken. However strangely, Jason did not even take a single picture of the offending item before hurling it into a wheelie bin and according to the police – never even reporting the incident. Strange behaviour for a man of such incredible academic stature, after all, a man who had mastered time travel could surely operate a simple device like a smartphone. It seems that just as with Jason’s academic work, accurate citations were sadly lacking. But the embarrassment was not over yet, as Jason’s friends and colleagues at Cambridge, who were interviewed by the press, all claim he never even mentioned the incident to them. It’s almost as if it never even happened.

Backed into a corner, Jason was faced with only one final option: it was time to go nuclear; it was time for him to scream the word ‘racism’ as loudly as he could and then wait for the cavalry. This is exactly what he did, and he got exactly the result he had hoped for, as more than 12,000 people – including Green Party leader Zack Polanski, at least five Labour MPs and a gaggle of Cambridge academics all signed a petition set up by the Good Law Project supporting him. What’s more, fellow black academics were up in arms about his treatment, with Kehinde Andrews, professor of Black Studies at Birmingham City University, bellowing profusely that Jason was a good boy and he didn’t do anything wrong. In fact, according to Kehinde, poor Jason was merely the victim of a “smear campaign” that was “as predictable as it is baseless”. But it wasn’t just black academics who were angered, white professors also fell over themselves to come to Jason’s defence, with Alan Lester, a University of Sussex Geography professor who specialises in colonialism, calling the entire saga a “non-story”. But the best was yet to come.

Jewish cognitive neuroscientist, Fellow of Trinity College and director of Cambridge University’s Autism Research Centre – Sir Simon Baron-Cohen – raised important concerns about the impact that the media coverage was having on Jason and his mental health. As Jason had been through so much, and achieved so many great feats, Simon Baron-Cohen wanted everyone to just shut up and stop talking about the issue, stating: “We should of course always investigate plagiarism to protect academic standards; however, I cannot stand by and watch when an autistic man is on the ground and the kicking continues. This is relentless bullying of a vulnerable autistic man and raises safe-guarding issues. It’s time to stop.” According to Baron-Cohen, this wasn’t about truth, academic integrity or standards in higher education, this was now a ‘safeguarding issue’ and what’s more, it was ‘bullying’.

If Jason Arday had been white, it would have undoubtedly been the case that he would have either resigned, or been forced out of his lucrative position. However, at the time of writing, Cambridge University’s leadership is actively shielding him from any scrutiny, citing a prior institutional clearance. An academic misconduct panel at Liverpool John Moores University – which awarded Jason his PhD – reviewed the 188 copied sentences in March 2026 and cleared him of intentional misconduct, ruling the overlaps were an “honest and reasonable error” caused by a depleted student supervision team. They too wanted the world to know: Jason was indeed a good boy who didn’t do anything wrong and that the copied sentences weren’t his fault. Cambridge have now officially declared Jason the victim of a “vile campaign to undermine his credibility” driven by right-wing media outlets and their Faculty of Education is actively providing him with safety infrastructure, including panic alarms and specialist staff to security-screen his mail – who are no doubt on high-alert for severed animal heads. What’s more, despite everything that has happened, the commercial book publishers he has deals with have also confirmed they are still proceeding with his upcoming titles as planned.

But even now, with all these facts, assertions and allegations out in the wild, the public isn’t left with many answers – only more questions. Was Jason Arday really non-verbal until 11 years of age? Did he miraculously learn to speak at the very last minute with the help of music? Could he really not read and write until the age of 18? If he could not read and write until 18, how on earth did he get two GCSEs and a BTEC diploma? Some of what we have been told is undoubtedly true – he did indeed go to several major universities – but that raises even more questions. How could anyone even apply to a university if they were still learning to read and write? And why would a university accept a student who couldn’t read or write properly? And if he did learn to read and write at the age of 18, how did he compress such a large amount of learning into a single year of work? So many questions, and these questions are all about events and achievements that allegedly took place before Jason even got to university and before he allegedly began copying the work of others.

But then there are a string of pressing questions about his time in higher education. Why didn’t those checking his work go over it properly? How did Jason manage to get his work through the peer review process, and who were the peers who reviewed it? What work did he present when attending interviews for lucrative and prestigious positions, and how do institutions decide whether a candidate is suitable for the role? There are people out there who can answer these questions, but they never will. In fact, the only way any of this could be verified is if we had a time machine, and there’s only one person in this whole sorry tale who claims to have broken the laws of physics and travelled back through time – and conveniently, that is of course Jason. Which all leads to only one conclusion: a young black man who was woefully underqualified ended up being ushered through educational institutions and was given a pass at every level in order to unfairly elevate him in a blatant attempt to prove a political point. Jason Arday is the ultimate token black academic, and universities built him up because of that.

And that’s really the point; this isn’t just a story about a silly man with a big mouth and an overactive imagination. This story is really about the fact that one particular silly man with a big mouth and an overactive imagination ended up as a Cambridge University Professor with a number of academic book deals. And the reason he ended up in that position is simple: it wasn’t because of his incredible achievements; it was because of his ethnic background and the sob story he sold to a panel who were no doubt overwhelmingly made up of white liberals. One of the supposed strengths of the academic system is that it is meant to have rigorous checks in place to ensure those who are underqualified do not get into positions of power or authority, and these checks and balances are not only there to ensure fairness and to guarantee that only the best of the best take the top positions in leading universities, but also to ensure that at the heart of academia is a system of structured meritocracy. This meritocracy is not only to ensure the cream rises to the top, but to create a constant upward cycle that leads to ever-increasing standards and that academic boundaries are constantly tested and pushed. But this all goes out the window if a candidate is from an ethnic minority background.

The fact that Jason Arday rose to such a position is a damning indictment of the current state of academic institutions in Britain. But this story also illustrates another important issue – this wasn’t a one-off failing involving a single university and a small number of officials, but a national systemic failing involving dozens of people at multiple top-tier universities and publishing houses. It is clear, these institutions have given up on the ideals of meritocracy and excellence, and have instead elevated diversity, equity and inclusion as the most important virtues in modern education. This is not only unfair to better and more qualified candidates who have genuinely worked harder and deserve the job in question, but it also inevitably leads to a decline in the overall quality of an institution. But the damage done is not just limited to the institution in question, but is part of a wider process of societal and civilisational decline. What’s more, it is a sign that elite institutions are no longer dominated by scholars who strive for knowledge and truth, but instead are controlled by those who have an almost religious belief in multiculturalism and diversity.


You can buy Jonathan Bowden’s Extremists: Studies in Metapolitics here.

This religious belief is so great, that when a man like Jason Arday walks into an institution he isn’t just seen as a poster boy, but almost as a form of messiah who can do no wrong and should face no criticism. As such, those who are so eager to place him on a pedestal will not even question the incredible feats he boasts of – no matter how outlandish they are. Instead, officials within elite institutions will parrot the wild boasts of men like Jason Arday, happily spreading the word of the great miracles performed by their latest diversity hire. Officials at Cambridge University seem so in love with the idea of Jason that they appear to be one step away from claiming that after he ran his 35 marathons (9 of which were achieved on a broken leg) he then proceeded to walk on water and feed the entire university with one mackerel and a single loaf of sugar bread. Such is the unquestioning and almost religious belief in Jason Arday, that even now, the university stands by him and he will remain as one of the best paid and most highly revered published academics in Britain.

To Britain’s elite educational institutions, Jason Arday’s improbable tales of being non-verbal at 11, running marathons on a broken leg and appearing on a television show that premiered 21 years before he was born weren’t red flags – they were integral reasons as to why they embraced him and put him on a pedestal. And that leads to one final point that must be made clear – an uncomfortable issue that many won’t wish to accept. The case of Jason Arday is absolute proof that the ‘woke’ agenda and shibboleths of ‘diversity, equity and inclusion’ are certainly not a thing of the past – in fact they are very much alive and well. The idea spread by some within the media and in online circles that ‘common sense’ has returned and ‘woke’ politics was just a brief period of social madness is nothing more than a lie that is eagerly accepted and parroted by those who wish to believe they are winning. The notion that woke politics is a ‘thing of the past’ is as realistic as the story of a man running nine marathons on a broken leg – and anyone that chooses to believe either of those assertions is sadly only fooling themselves.

Mark Collett
https://markacollett.substack.com/

Mark Collett & Germar Rudolf – Holocaust Summit 2026

[In this livestream video Mark Collett, leader of the pro-White British nationalist movement, Patriotic Alternative, talks with “Holocaust” revisionist Germar Rudolf. Items discussed include:

Promotion of a virtual “Holocaust Summit” that Rudolf is organising.

Rudolf directs viewers to his website and to holocaustsummit.com for event details and contact information.

Recent work: Multilingual rollout of Rudolf’s “Holocaust Encyclopedia” (English 2023; Spanish and French released; Arabic in progress), noting heavy editing and verification post AI machine translation.

On restrictive laws abroad, Rudolf states he won’t comply with what he considers unjust speech laws: “I don’t give a rat’s arse about any dictatorship passing laws prescribing the writing of history.”

He says distribution uses diffuse international channels and has not yet encountered seizures.

Outlines the history of “Holocaust scepticism” from Arthur Butz’s 1976 book, the IHR conferences (late 1970s–1990s), and their decline after internal conflicts.

Rudolf’s biography: Attended early-2000s conferences; arrested/deported in 2005; served 44 months in Germany; later returned to the US after legal challenges.

Family concerns kept him low-profile for years; post-divorce and with older children, he agreed to spearhead a virtual event.

COVID-era normalisation of online conferences reduced costs / risks and made the Summit feasible.

He argues recent Gaza events have opened minds to re-examining historical narratives, claiming the Holocaust is invoked to justify policy and censor debate.

He registered holocaustsummit.com and launched “Holocaust Academy” to teach what he calls “sound” Holocaust historiography.

Mission framing: Oppose what he calls the weaponisation of history for war and censorship; “We are going to be independent… fearless… and not constrained by politically correct taboos.”

Date: Jan 27 (International Holocaust Remembrance Day). He says the Red Army “conquered” Auschwitz in 1945—“the Red Army never liberated anyone.”

Format: Livestream beginning 9:00 am. ET (2:00 pm UK), recorded for replay; viewers can watch live or later.

Platform: FTGmedia.com (to avoid de-platforming); Summit links will be kept current on holocaustsummit.com.

Structure: 45-minute talks; 15-minute Q&A; chat requires a platform account; Q&A uses small paid Superchats; recordings to be posted on Rumble, BitChute and Odysee.

Anticipated pushback: Cites pressure from anti-racism, anti-anti-semitism groups; worries about DDoS / backbone interference; contingency planning ongoing.

Opening talk (Rudolf):

“80 Years of Holocaust Skepticism”—history of the movement, key claims, and resources; an on-ramp for newcomers.

Speaker: James Mawdsley (UK Catholic priest, film-maker) on Treblinka; Rudolf served as a historical advisor on Mawdsley’s documentaries.

Speaker: Peter Rushton (UK) on British intelligence and Himmler; “The Dog That Didn’t Bark” theme about wartime assessments.

Lunch break: Premiere of a new CODOH-related documentary (~35 minutes); break also helps absorb schedule overruns.

Personal testimonies panel: Brother Nathanael Kapner (online activist), Leo Walls (US bookstore owner), Georges-Marc Theil (France) on entry into scepticism and consequences (ostracism / prosecution).

Speaker: Vincent Reynouard (France), with decades of activism and multiple current cases, on “misuse of the law” to suppress dissent.

Speakers: Heinz Bartesch and attorney Andrew Allen on US OSI “Nazi-hunting” cases; allege legal overreach and evidence abuses in immigration prosecutions.

Speaker: Prof. David Skrbina on early wartime/postwar mainstream voices who expressed scepticism.

Closing paper: Carlo Mattogno (Italy) on the state of research, presented by Rudolf; Rudolf adds “where we go from here,” future research gaps, and generational handoff.

Legal caution for EU presenters: Some will stick to personal experiences to avoid violations; audience asked not to corner them with risky questions.

Attendance: A few hundred email sign-ups so far; hopes for several thousand live viewers and many more on replay.

Sponsors/hosts: Holocaust Academy and CODOH highlighted; FTG Media donating platform access; many contributors working unpaid.

Donations: Sponsorship tiers available via the Holocaust Academy shop; live Q&A questions are donation-based.

Replay/Archive: All talks to be archived on holocaustsummit.com and mirrored to alternative video platforms.

Merchandise: Summit mugs and T-shirts available via Armreg.co.uk (publisher’s merch page).

UK legal context: Watching is legal; case law allows debate if not disparaging; both host and Rudolf stress a civil, scholarly tone to avoid issues.

On humour and speech: Rudolf warns that in some countries jokes can be criminalised—“When jokes become punishable by law, you stop laughing”—and both urge avoiding “edgy” jokes or disparagement; Mark closes by praising Rudolf, plugging future shows, and urging lawful, respectful engagement.

– KATANA]

Mark Collett: Hello everybody, and welcome to tonight’s special stream. We are live tonight on Odysee, Rumble, DLive and Entropy. Please do share the links because we’ve got a very special guest here tonight that I’ll be introducing shortly. It is of course, Germar Rudolf. And before we do that, I’m going to give you a couple of updates.

Now, as I said, this is a very important stream. It’s because we’re introducing a special event that Germar Rudolf is hosting called, The Holocaust Summit. And this event is something that hopefully will be very big. And this is basically a bit of an advert for the event, a bit of a discussion about how it came about, but also a discussion about who’s trying to stop it!

So we’re going to go through all those things and many more tonight and at the end you’ll have a chance to ask questions.

Now, if you support my work, if you like what I do, please share the stream.

But also if you support my work and like what I do, you can give a donation, you can donate through Rumble, you can donate through Entropy. Anything donated throughout the show will be read out live on the show and any questions will be put directly to Germar Rudolf.

So if you ask me a question or pay for a question via a Superchat, I will read it out after the initial presentation and we will answer your questions. All donations are gratefully received. And as I always say, if everyone gave a small amount, $3, $5, $10, that would make a great, great difference. Some of my streams in the past few months have been seen by upwards of 75,000 people. Imagine if everyone had just given $3, what we would be able to do with that money would be almost limitless at that point. But everyone would barely notice that money leaving their account because it’s probably the price of an energy drink, probably less than a coffee house coffee, certainly less than the price of a McDonald’s double cheeseburger these days.

So if you can afford something, please do consider donating. You can also donate by crypto-currency. All the crypto links, as always, are in the description below and you can email me at mark@thefallofwesternman.com. And many of you will be saying:

“Well, how can I get in touch with Germar?”

And this is obviously all about Germar. You can get in touch with Germar via the Show Notes. The Show Notes have the link to his website about this very event. So you can find him there. You can also find him on Telegram.

So thank you so much to anyone who does donate in advance. And please do consider supporting Germar’s event, because that’s what this is all about.

Now, obviously, Germar is the special guest here tonight, and I did a special show with him a while back. It was an excellent show, and his ability to present his evidence and to tell his story is almost unrivalled! I couldn’t believe it! I asked one question and Germar sort of spoke very eloquently for about 58 minutes, at which point we went to Questions and Answers. It was sort of the least work I had to do ever in a show! I didn’t need to interrupt. I didn’t need to ask him any additional questions. He just has this skill of being able to tell his story in a timely way and weave it all together almost perfectly in the allotted space that we had on the show. And after doing that show with him, I was sort of really happy with the way it turned out. I was really happy with the reception, Germar got from my audience, and I really did want to have him back on.

So when he contacted me and told me he was doing this conference, this Summit, I was very happy to promote it. And I asked him:

“So, hey, sort of, what can I do to help you?”

He said:

“Well I could always come on the show.”

So I thought:

“Well, what better way to push this event than invite him back on and spend sort of 45 minutes to an hour talking to him about this event and also just having a general catch up.”

Because the last show, as I said, it was so good and everyone appreciated it so much. I did want to get him back on eventually anyway, so this is a perfect time.

Germar, you have been a very busy man since we last spoke. How have you been? And what sort of led up to you wanting to do this event? Because you have an excellent website, you have a number of really good books, you’ve been busy with other content creators. I know that you went on Unity News Network and you’ve had sort of a little flurry of appearances, but if you want to get people up to date with what you’ve been up to and when, what sort of inspired you to decide to put on this conference, please tell us all about it.

Germar Rudolf: Yeah, well, thank you.

First of all, thank you for having me on the show again. A short remark. If people want to get in touch with me personally, learn more about me, how they can support me if they are so inclined, the easy way is just go to my personal website, which is Germarrudolf.com. So you see my name there on the screen. Just put this together without a blank and a dot com at the end, and you’re on my personal website and you can browse it there.

Now, as to what I’ve been up to over the past year, the main work that I’ve been focusing on was getting the Holocaust Encyclopedia, the English edition of which had appeared in late 2023, out in several other languages. The Spanish and French are out. The Spanish came out in I think it was maybe of last year. And the French we got out, I think it was in November. So we are up now to four languages. English, German, which was done by a different company. It was not in my ballpark. But the French and the Spanish edition, and that’s a lot of work. I mean, writing an encyclopedia is one thing, then AI helps you translate. But at the end you have to walk through it. My Spanish and French is good enough. I could do most of the proofing and editing myself. And then came the big one that we’re preparing right now! It’s an Arabic edition.

So that’s like proofing a pot full of spaghetti, because that’s how that language looks like to me. [chuckling] No clue about it! But I have professionals working on it.

And so this is making good progress and hopefully within a few months that will hit the mark and we’ll see how that’s going to be received. What kind of ripples that we’ll have, if any. So that’s on that side.

Now coming to the actual event for which we have come together today. Holocaust sceptics have been organising conferences since the late 1970s. And the early, …

Mark Collett: Okay, I just ask a quick question before you go into this?

You mentioned that the books are available in French and Spanish, but aren’t the Holocaust sort of revisionism laws or laws and against revisionist literature in France?

Germar Rudolf: So what?

Mark Collett: I was just asking about sort of the legality of the sales. Really, I was just, … What you might have to overcome in that case.

Germar Rudolf: Yes, if I have the intention to abide by unjust and illegitimate laws that violate United Nations Charter of Human Rights, I wouldn’t have gotten into the topic to begin with. So I don’t give a rat’s arse about any dictatorship passing laws, prescribing the writing of history at government gunpoints. This is something that doesn’t go down well with me.

Now, when it comes to printing and publishing the book, that’s an international network and I’m not going to expose here or reveal here what kind of logistics we use. But it basically gets lost in the massive mail stream that goes into and out of every country every day. So we haven’t had any interference, be it getting literature, English literature, or French, also to Canada, to France, to, … You name the countries. If we had them by the bag or by the truck load going into the country that would be selectively subject to border controls, that would be a problem.

But it’s just going individual for every customer into the mail stream. And this just gets lost in the shuffle. So we haven’t encountered any problems yet. So knocking on wood. Fingers crossed. I hope I’m not going to jinx it now.

Mark Collett: Yeah, I was just interested about the logistics of these things because there are draconian laws and I think what you’re doing is obviously very brave. And that answer of you’re not going to allow unjust laws to stop you. I think you’re a very courageous man. So sorry for the interjection. Please, please continue.

Germar Rudolf: That’s quite all right. So back in 1976, the first really scholarly book of Holocaust scepticism was published. That was Arthur Butz’s hoax of the 20th century. The first edition of which actually was published by Historical Review Press, kind of a small outlet that was established on occasion of that book appearing down in Brighton by Tony Hancock in the UK, even though the author, of course, is in the United States. That was the launching pad of people getting interested into Holocaust scepticism seriously, but also realizing that this is a serious School of thought that has to be reckoned with. And it led to the formation of the Institute for Historical Review in California. And they did have first conference was in 78 or 79 [1979], I can’t remember, I think it was in 79.*

[* See: The World’s First Anti-Holocaust Convention-Instauration Dec, 1979

https://katana17.com/2016/09/27/the-worlds-first-anti-holocaust-convention-instauration-dec-1979/.

[In this article, written for the Dec. 1979 edition of the revisionist journal,  Instauration, an interesting account is given of the first ever, “Anti-Holocaust” convention,  with speakers including:  Robert Faurisson from France; John Bennett from Australia; Udo Walendy from Germany; Louis FitzGibbon from Britain; Arthur Butz and James Martin from the US. This was held in Los Angeles and organised by the Institute for Historical Review  —  KATANA.]

And they had had subsequently, over the next two decades, conferences almost on a yearly basis, with a few exceptions. And unfortunately they had some internal strife in the mid-1990s, a kind of a schism there that led to internal fighting, unfortunately. That’s something that occurs on occasion. And that led to the whole School of thought and the Institute losing steam. And eventually those conferences petered out in the early 2000s.

And there hasn’t been any for the better part of 20 years now. And now I myself participated, since the first conference I attended was in 2000, I think so participated in the last few that happened, until I got arrested and deported back in 2005 and had a hiatus of six years in Germany, well, 44 months of them, full board at government expense. And after I came back to the United States a little bit shell shocked, got my feet wet slowly and eventually got back into the race.

But my family situation, I was married to a US citizen and we had a baby. And of course I was deported right out of this family. And she had to raise her daughter the first six years almost by herself. And so she was more traumatized by that event of government persecution. It was eventually decided that they deported me in violation of US law, and I had to litigate but eventually succeeded and came back. And now here I am in the United States, relatively safe from European style thought crime prosecution.

But my wife wasn’t happy in me continuing this kind of work, fearing that it would have another negative impact down the road for the family, not just for me. So we had an agreement that I could continue my work privately but keep my head down and limit or try to not even at all have any public exposure. That also means I couldn’t do any conferences. I was approached during those years starting 2014, 15, something, that a conference should be held again and I would have been the person to go to with my connections, with my involvement in the various organisations and with my track record of productivity. But I waved it off. I couldn’t have pulled it off logistically back then.

A physical conference requires a lot of work of getting the venue, organising food and accommodation for all the people that want to attend and of course for the presenters themselves. And the costs, the overhead costs could be daunting! And it’s not clear that at the end you actually walk away with profit more likely not. Most of all because you always have to have a “Plan B”. The traditional enemies of free speech and freedom of assembly in the past have always tried to shut down events like that. And they most certainly continue doing this to this day. Not just when it comes to Holocaust scepticism, but anything that is considered Right-wing, whatever that be. Even though Holocaust scepticism is neither Right nor Left. It’s about accuracy in history. But it is something that finds interest in the Right-wing spectrum of the political spectrum more prominently than in Left-wing circles or libertarian for that matter.

Be that as it may, you have to have a Plan B, a second venue, in case the first bails out under pressure of the usual suspects, you have to quickly be able to switch over. So you always have to pay kind of for both. And if your contracts are not written right, you start paying through the nose. With all these challenges, I said I can’t do it, apart from the agreement I had with my wife.

Now Covid hit. With all the negative things there is one upside to Covid and that is that in the meantime everyone is used to and technically capable of attending virtual conferences.

So the kind of discussion we have now with a lot of people watching, we can have 10 people discussing something and 10 million people watching. It has become so common due to Covid that this is something that can now be pulled off. The platforms are there are plenty of them and the overhead costs are reduced. People have the software, have the gadgets to participate, to watch it. And they used to it. Particularly the new generation is very comfortable that kind of technology.

So last summer a friend and supporter of mine, actually a pair of sisters, approached me and said we need to do something with Gaza brewing there’s an opportunity opening with people opening their mind that who see that the Zionists and the jewish Israelis to a large degree, not all of them, are pushing and committing genocide. The United Nations Commission has officially recognised Israel is committing a genocide in Gaza with the justification that they have to pre-emptively wipe out the Gazans in order to prevent them from committing another holocaust against the jews.

So the Holocaust is used as a political weapon to commit mass atrocities, to commit a genocide. That has made people realise that the agendas and the historical narrative pushed by Zionists and it’s not just jewish Zionists, I always say there are more Christian Zionists in the world than they are jewish Zionists, is recognised by people as being illegitimate, as being driven by a Holocaust narrative that is misused for these ends. And they see how the narrative about what happened on October 7th back in when was that? 2023, right? So long ago already, wasn’t quite accurate what Zionist sources told about it either. So there is the distortion and misuse of history for political purposes.

And then people are willing with their open mind:

“Wait, what’s going on here?”

To look back in history and see other cases and then to look at the big elephant in the room when it comes to historical narratives. And that’s the Holocaust used by pressure groups, not just jewish, not just Zionist ones, to push their agendas.

With that said, I couldn’t really bail out anymore. Unfortunately I had gone through a divorce in the meantime. And so my agreement with my ex-wife was no excuse anymore, that had evaporated. So with my family situation, most of my children are now grown up and they’re out of the home. There’s only one left who needs a little bit more of tender loving care still.

So that argument is gone. The logistical nightmare of doing physical conferences doesn’t exist when you do a virtual one. And I had agreed:

“Okay, let’s do it!”

The sisters actually suggested a name, Holocaust Summit.

So I went online and looked whether the domain name is still there was. HolocaustSummit.com was available. I instantly reserved it and we started contacting people who would be willing to present it. Now the website is up. If we can share that screen with the audience. I’d like to go through a number of things we’ve put up there.

So as I mentioned, anyone can go there. Holocaust Summit.com, and it is organised and sponsored by a number of organisations. I’ve actually created a Holocaust Academy roughly a year ago, which I plan on and in the process of developing as a platform to teach sound Holocaust historiography to whoever wants to listen to give an accurate and holistic picture of the evidentiary situation when it comes to this event.

One of the first things that we’re now doing as the academy, major things we have already given private lessons, but the website itself is currently under development. So having a curriculum of a college style is somewhat daunting. But I’m working together with a retired Professor of humanities to get this going. And sometime later this year we will have that flying. But it will come now into the open as the organisation that will officially host the Holocaust Summit. So we are going to be independent, we’re going to be fearless, because unfortunately in this area you have to be! And we are not going to be censored if we can help it. And we’re not going to be constrained by politically correct taboos of thinking and asking questions and looking for answers.

So we’ll be tackling the most harmful ideology, undermining peace, truth and freedom world-wide. Because the Holocaust is used to trigger wars and genocides. That is used to enact censorship laws that suppress the search, the sharing of truth, and thus is used as a starting point for government to increase censorship measures. It’s easy to get a quote, unquote, “anti-Holocaust denial” law through Parliament.

And once the first fortress of freedom has fallen, then censorship like a cancer grows. And we see that in every country in the UK. You know it for yourself, what’s going on in your country. It used to be a stronghold of freedom of speech until they passed the new., … What was in 2002, I think the Public Communications Act. And now it’s completely escalating with the constraints they put on it.

So we need to be aware that the Holocaust is at the centre of the orthodox Holocaust narrative and its abuse, its misuse for political purposes, is at the centre of the problem of deteriorating freedom world-wide, or at least in the Western hemisphere.

Now we have picked the 27th of January, which, what is today, the 20th? I’m getting flustered here. Third. It’s already the 23rd, so it’s just in four days and next Tuesday should be. We picked that day for a reason. 27th of January 1945 was the day when the Red Army conquered the Auschwitz camp. And I choose that word wisely because the Red Army never “liberated” anyone. So they conquered the camp. And in 2005, if I’m not mistaken, the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution declaring that particular day 27 January, International Holocaust Remembrance Day.

So the iconic camp of Auschwitz, which is the most known alleged crime scene of what is labelled the Holocaust, Auschwitz is also the reason why we have this day as the international day of commemorating this event. And we want to use that too. Commemorating the truth and the lies, the exaggerations and distortions and the victims of this Holocaust narrative. The Gazans are the most recent, most extreme victims of this narrative. But we will have people present their experience of persecution and prosecution. Victims, martyrs, dissidents thrown into prison or having their livelihood destroyed.

So there’s a lot to commemorate and remember for us as well, and we will do that as well.

So the event itself will start 9:00 AM Eastern US time, which if I’m not mistaken is 2 clock in the afternoon for the UK and 3 PM for the rest of the most of the, …

Mark Collett: I think 7 PM in the UK. 2 PM Eastern is 7 PM in the UK.

Germar Rudolf: Yeah, but we started 9 AM so it should be 2 PM

Mark Collett: Oh, okay. Sorry.

Germar Rudolf: Yeah. We actually may start the stream a little earlier to test things and make things sure that things are running smoothly and make few accommodations and have a few organisational remarks before actually the day picks up with the presentations that we have.

Now if you click on the second link there, that CCR list and timeline of presenters that gets everyone down to the actual table where we have the presenters.

So this is our day. How we plan on having it unfold. We have the day started out with a contribution that I’m giving. Originally we had hoped actually for Nicholas Kollerstrom to take that spot. He initially had submitted a paper but then he had to retract it because it came under pressure, has been under pressure for a long time. So he wanted to talk about the English eclipse of communications.

But anyway, it’s not going to happen. There’s already one casualty of censorship and suppression, which is mounting and increasing in the UK. So I’ve taken that spot. And I take the opportunity because that event, short side note here, that event of course is streamed live. We will have the links on that website where people can reach it. Actually at the top there is already one and we’ll keep that updated.

But it’s a Tuesday. Not everyone will be able to sit and watch an event like this all day, on a normal workday. We will of course record it will be posted and people will be able to watch it whenever they please. And we will have it not only on our holocaustsummit.com website, but the company that actually hosts it, as at least the plan, is FTG media.com, and they are an independent platform.

So when it comes to them, we will not be de-platformed because it’s owned actually by one of the board members of one of our main sponsors, which is the Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust. And he’s on the board there and he has suggested we use that platform so that we can’t be de-platformed.

I will be talking about 80 years of Holocaust scepticism, whence we came and where we are. So I give a historical overview since we assume that a lot of people over time, as years go by and these contributions will be accessible, a lot of people will not know much about our School of thought, its history and its views, that an introduction is due. We haven’t had anything like this happen in 20 years.

So there’s an entire generation that has grown up which needs to be or should be given an introduction of what we are handling and what we’re dealing with here. So I will be talking about the main events and the main achievements of Holocaust scepticism over the past, well, since the end of the war, basically 1946 or 47 when it kind of started. And in the second half I will give a quick rundown giving the most striking, the most convincing arguments why everyone should be sceptical about the mainstream Holocaust narrative, and give resources in that context where people can learn more.

So with that, the event kicks off. Every contribution, full contribution will have 45 minutes. I hope everyone stays in that slot, but you know how it goes. There will be a time overrun, possibly. Followed by 15 minutes of question answers. There will be a chat feature, FTG media.com like any other, like Rumble, like YouTube has a chat feature. In order to chat you have to have registered with the platform that doesn’t cost anything. You just submit your email address and get a free account and then you can chat. Now for the question and answer series session at the end, the last quarter hour, people are requested to make a donation in order to submit a question like the Superchat and various other platforms. And in order to do that you have to have a wallet with FTG media and the wallet is just automatically set up. When you get an account, you just have to fill it with some funds, whatever resources you take it from, plastic money or crypto or whatever.

So that is the plan. My contribution is followed by a compatriot of yours, James Mosley, who is a Catholic priest from the UK. He has done a number of documentaries on the Holocaust over the past several years. Really good documentaries. And when he was working on his first one, he approached me and asked me a number of questions. So I became his historical advisor, if you wish. Each time he was working on one, he submitted what he was doing and I would make suggestion how to improve it.

And he will be presenting what he found about the evidentiary situation in one particular camp that he had investigated and done a documentary on. And that’s Treblinka. Now if you click on James Mawdsley’s name up there in the list that actually will get you to, for every one of the presenters will get you to where there’s a short bio, you can see a portrait and a summary of the presentation. If you scroll a little up or down, you can go back to the list, back to the timetable.

So this is James Mawdsley. We have actually grouped the European presenters first. UK comes first. James Mawdsley. Next one is Peter Rushton, also from the UK and he will be talking about also history between dogma and taboo. He talks about the British intelligence communications and interaction with the German intelligence toward the end of the war. Looking for evidence that the Brits were really thinking that the German intelligence community, which was under the rule of Heinrich Himmler, the supposed main architect of the Holocaust, that the British were actually acting and communicating as if they believed that Himmler was really murdering or had already murdered at that point of time six million jews is a very interesting contribution. I’m looking forward to myself that the title of it, the Dog that Didn’t Bark is already an indication of which direction that will go.

We’re having a lunch break after that. It is scheduled to be 2 hours long now I expect some time overruns and maybe stretching into the hour between 12 and 1. But we will have enough time during that break and I have yet to announce it because we just finished up preparing for this. The lunch break will have will see the premiering of a new documentary we have just finished. And this is about an appearance of representatives of the Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust in the public arena. And we had a little bit of an impact there and we want to share that with the community. That’s I think a 35 minutes so it will fit in there either way.

So in the afternoon the first session is actually shared by three individuals who will be talking about their personal experience getting into Holocaust scepticism, how that happened and then also to what degree they were exposed to persecution, prosecution, ostracism and that kind of stuff. Nathaniel Kapner has been a very active person on social media, on YouTube, and now on other alternative platforms going after self-chosen people and their capers and also critiquing the misuse of history for political purposes.

Leo Walls is a bookstore owner in the US who tells his story of how that went when he started offering books that most don’t like.

And Georges-Marc Theil is actually a French fellow who has had decades of experiences of exposure to persecution in France.

Which leads us then to the next contribution that’s a bigger one. Seasoned revisionist Vincent Reynouard from France has under his belt now already 30 years of activism and I would say historical scepticism in general on the World War II issue, not just the Holocaust. And he has been the main focus as of last two, three years of the French judiciary to lock him away for good. He currently has to deal with seven court cases at once. He will be speaking during his presentation primarily about his experience of the abuse, … No. Not the abuse, the misuse of the law and the judiciary to suppress dissidents, peaceful dissidents on historical issues.

And after that we go into abuse of power and politics based on history. Heinz Bartesch and Andrew Allen will report about their experience with the Office of Special Investigations, that’s the jewish branch of the FBI that was focusing on what they call informally, “Nazi Hunting”. Hunting down immigrants who had some association during the war with what the Axis powers were doing and the OSI was trying to deprive them of their immigration status or even citizenship and deport them to Europe to have them put on show trials there. The biggest case known is probably the case of Ivan Demjanjuk, John Demjanjuk from the 1980s. Bartesch and Allen will actually discuss a different case, that concerns Heinz Bartesch’s father, late father, who the OSI wanted to deport. And they got a bloody nose because they didn’t reckon with the stiff resistance and skilled defense that Andrew Allen, a lawyer from the San Francisco Bay area, was putting up. They were presenting some insight into how the FBI’s branch, back in the days, it has been disbanded by now, was violating the law, breaking the law left and right and forging evidence and so forth in order to frame immigrants, just to have a heyday for themselves or to push Holocaust propaganda.

After that we have retired Professor Dr. David Scrbina, who used to lecture in the humanities and philosophy at Michigan State University, if I’m not mistaken. He will be talking about early mainstream voices of Holocaust scepticism already during the war and right not too long after the war, which shows that back in the days, even mainstream people were sceptical about the narrative being pushed at war’s end.

And we wrap up the day making full circle what I started beginning the day, showing where we came from and where we are. Carlo Mattogno, probably the most prolific revisionist scholar and writer that we have, but in my opinion, also the most knowledgeable Holocaust scholar on the planet! The mainstream included! He is. He can’t speak English or understand it well, and he is currently in a besieged situation in Italy where they passed a law in 2016, threatening anyone voicing their dissent on the Holocaust narrative with up to six years in prison. Now they haven’t done anything against him, even though he kept publishing books by the truckload. I think he’s by now more than 50 books published on that topic. But he does that in a very scholarly manner and in a very low profile. So in Italy there are a few, 10 people and maybe buy the books, but they’re kind of shelf warmers. And he wants to keep it that way. He doesn’t want to gain a larger profile. He wants to do his work underneath the radar of public attention in Italy. And therefore he has submitted his paper to me to present it. And I have increased it by my own take of: Where Do We Go from Here? One part of it is what are the White spots on the map of Holocaust historiography, which still need to be investigated, explored. But also what else needs to be done to hand the relay staff over to the next generation. And there are some quite promising prospects when it comes to new people coming on board with new ideas, with the help of new technologies, bringing it to a new level and a different level. So trying to imitate or copy what Carlo Mattogno has done with his massive work is not what’s going to happen. The direction I think will go somewhere completely different. And I will be talking about that and hopefully this is going to happen. And with this I hope we will be closing the day.

Now, there’s always a possibility that things don’t run as smoothly as they are listed here. Just today we got information that a powerful group, international group, in the business of suppressing a free speech and freedom of assembly. They call themselves “Opponents Against Racism and Anti-semitism”. But basically what that means is they want to stifle anyone who has an opinion that certain ethnic and religious groups with power and influence, don’t want to hear!

So they are working in the background. We know of that and we hopefully will be able to prepare for there’s no way of telling from DDoS attacks to trying to get to the backbone provider and what have you. Anything is possible these days to just. And if it takes to turn off the power plant so you don’t have electricity, [chuckling] but that’s what it takes, that’s what they’ll do! So we expect something. They have noticed with the kind of exposure that our Summit has already received beforehand that we are there, what we’re doing and that we are reaching out and having a ripple effect and they don’t like it!

Now the kind of presentation that I’m giving here right now, I’ve done a number of them. If you scroll up on the screen here slowly, you can actually see listed on the right-hand side a number of presentations linked to of other platforms where I have given an introduction to this event. So if anyone is interested in listening to those, you just click on the image and go to the respective platform which is usually Rumble or Bitchute where this is posted. And because of this, I think, and you helping out now too, this event hopefully is going to be a success. It promises to be a success for us, and it threatens to become one for those who don’t want our voices to be heard.

So there is going to be in the background the usual electronic warfare from the traditional enemies of free speech, to be expected, and we will see how that goes.

This is by and large my narrative now we are here right on the screen where the organisation of that event is shown. We actually, when we submitted to people who were potentially able to give presentations, the invitation to do so, we said we basically accept papers on three main topics.

The first is Holocaust in History, Taboo Between Dogma and Descent. It just talks about new historical findings and insights and interpretations on the event itself. The next one is Holocaust and Politics History as a Weapon. And I mentioned we have one contribution in this regard which will discuss the weaponisation of immigration law against immigrants in order to get propaganda campaigns out of it. And the last one is Holocaust and Human Rights History as a Muzzle, Holocaust Used to Push Censorship. And we have a number of presenters as mentioned who will discuss their very private experience of censorship.

So it should all be civilised and decent and for no one to get overly excited about in either direction. But of course certain groups get extremely excited if they fear that voices be heard that can disrupt their main source of power and influence.

And there’s a lot at stake for them and they will go to extremes if need be to shut us down. We’ll see who at the end will have the upper hand.

Mark Collett: So are you expecting the usual sort of suspects to try and put a stop to this? Have you had anybody threaten your platform or have you had any threats in the run up to this or any attempts to stop this already?

Germar Rudolf: Yes, yes! We just today we got information that as I mentioned, you can have your own platform which is a computer program, but it has to run at the end of the day. It has to run on a server and has to have the connection to the backbone with the Internet cables with enough bandwidth. And usually you have some company providing services from the telecommunications company that hooks you up to what we call today the Internet, the physical Internet, to companies who do server co-location or dedicated server renting. And along that line I’m not quite sure what it was and I wouldn’t necessarily want to reveal it either. We already had approaches from certain quarters of pressure groups to shut down any link in that chain that would get our voice from where we sit to the Internet to the world. So that’s going on in the background and we have to see how that goes. Nothing has been shut down yet, but they’re trying.

Mark Collett: And when you kick this off, what sort of attendance are you expecting?

Germar Rudolf: Well, the Holocaust Summit website itself, HolocaustSummit.com if you go to the top, you actually see a link there where people can jump to the sign up form and just submit their email address so that they can stay informed if there are any sudden changes in the timeline in whatever is going to happen. Because we never know. If we go by that the last time I checked and that’s a week ago, that’s not quite accurate. We had submitted 300 emails through that. But I would expect these are only the hardcore ones who are willing to share their email. And the other, there’s not really a need if you just keep to the website. Go to the website and look up what the link is to the actual event and we will have it posted on other websites as well. You don’t have to identify yourself. So I would assume that the vast majority will not identify themselves even with an anonymous email.

So we need to see how it goes. I don’t know. Sign up has really accelerated with my frequent experience appearances on shows like yours over the past two weeks. And I would assume by now we have probably harvested several hundred more. But there’s no way of telling, as I mentioned, how many people who, how many of those who will attend will actually have submitted their email address. I would assume it’s a minority.

So hopefully we are going to have several thousand which will most certainly exceed, far exceed the range we could have had in the past with physical conferences, which were limited to a few hundred.

And of course then we have it not just streamed, but we have it posted. So on the usual platforms that will reach many, many more thousands, ten thousands in days, weeks, a month and years to come.

Mark Collett: And bearing in mind you said you are going to be doing donations and questions and answers on the day, sort of how do you expect or is there a way that people can sort of sponsor you in advance?

So obviously these events, they take a lot of time and effort to put together. I know it’s not a physical event and I know you’re not paying people to be there, but sort of, is there a way that people can actually sponsor the event and make donations in advance to help you guys with your infrastructure and to make sure the event goes smoothly?

Germar Rudolf: Absolutely! The HolocaustSummit.com website itself, if you were to go there and you go to the very end of the very bottom of the page, it shows the logos of the two companies who are the main sponsors and have officially declared themselves to be sponsors. You know, most actually want to stay anonymous. But there’s also a link that simply says, “Become an AMREC Holocaust Summit sponsor today”, which gets you to the shop of our Holocaust Academy where you can buy sponsorship packages and that actually has several tiers of whatever you want to invest in it. This would be the way to go. So holocaustsummit.com at the very bottom of the page, that’s where you could chip in to cover any costs. Most of us are actually working for free right now and there’s no payment. And FTG Media.com is a sponsor itself and their way of sponsoring is by giving us access to the platform free of charge. We don’t know what happens if, excuse my French, shit hit the fan with all kinds of attempts to shut us down and then we have to come to some more expensive ad hoc solutions to circumvent these things. There’s no way of telling right now!

Mark Collett: And one final question. So with it being on a Tuesday, it’s going to be difficult for some people to attend. Obviously it looks like it’s going to be a fascinating day and your lineup is an extremely strong lineup. And it’s rare to have a conference that is that well packed with guests, to start at 9 AM and go all the way through to 6 PM. It’s a big event. So where will this be posted for Replay? Is this going to be up on Odysee? What sort of places will it be available on replay?

And as a final sort of additional question, usually with conferences there are some kind of sort of, I don’t know, maybe a brochure, or some kind of physical keepsakes available. Is there any merchandise that people can purchase as well to support the event? So sort of two questions. There will there be sort of a full re-upload of everything? And is the like to commemorate this, any kind of physical merchandise that supporters could also purchase?

Germar Rudolf: Yeah. So to the first question, once the event is over, it’s getting archived on our own website. HolocaustSummit.com will be moved to a folder 2026, and we will have there with posters and a short description, all the contributions listed. You click on it and you will probably have several options. They will be on Rumble and Bitshute and Odysee, and you can pick which platform you want to watch it on. We are probably not going to strain our own server because those platforms are good enough.

So this will all be available and the link to that archive will then be of course on the front page, on the home page, prominently displayed. When it comes to merchandise, we just started developing that and if I am not mistaken, … Let me have a quick look where we are with this.

The only company right now that actually has a merch contract is Armreg and we are developing, … Now if you were to go to armreg.co.uk as you know, the publishing branch of what we are doing is actually located in the UK. It is located in London. So if you go to armreg.co.uk and share that with the audience or do you want me to share it? Which way is faster?

Mark Collett: I’m just doing that myself now.

Germar Rudolf: So Armreg.co.uk.

Mark Collett: Just bringing that up. There’ll be two seconds. Just give me a couple of seconds just to get that set up. There we go.

Germar Rudolf: Okay, now at the top menu you see merch as the third entry. Yeah, click on that’s for merchandise and once that has loaded.

Mark Collett: Oh, it has loaded. Sorry, it’s just now I have to share that window as well. Well, just give me a second because it’s a pop out window. So two seconds. It’s weird how that works. Give me a second. Share screen. That’s the one.

Germar Rudolf: Yeah, that’s the one, yeah.

So if you scroll down a little, we have our various merchandise there’s one for Armreg itself and general stuff and there you see some merchandise. We have a mug and a Tshirt right now that has the announcement of that particular event.

Mark Collett: Wonderful.

Germar Rudolf: So that’s how to go about it.

Now I have still to put that link more prominently on the Holocaust Summit website so people can get there directly. That’s  a good point for you to make that and I will make that happen once we’re off here, and I will add that to the site so people can get to the merchandise easily.

Mark Collett: Well, thank you so much! We do have some Superchats so I’m just going to bring them up two seconds. We actually have a couple that hung over from the other night, so I’ll deal with them quickly. Covenant Soldier gave $10. Thank you so much! And said:

“Love the show with Rob Rondo. Hail the active clubs.”

Thank you so much! Flying Dutchman gave $50.

Thank you very much. And said:

“Catching up. Happy New Year!

Well, thank you my friend. I’ve actually sent you a message today so you can pick that up on Telegram. Thank you very much. Nationless Nationalist gave $3. Thank you so much! And said:

“Hope and encouragement to those suffering in silence.”

Well, thank you so much! Some Guy 14 gave $10, thank you so much! Said:

“Qu huge respect to Mr. Rudolf.”

Thank you so much! And Aunt Sally gave $5 and said:

“Mark, how likely am I to get my door kicked in for watching this conference?”

In the UK you see, one thing I’ll say is like in the UK, if I’m correct, And I’m just getting this sort of as correct as I can. In the UK it isn’t illegal to actually deny the Holocaust or to engage in revisionism, as far as I know.

However, if you were to do so in a way that was seen as insulting or demeaning to people, it would be. So if you were making jokes or if you were saying things which were couched in the way that was meant to be insulting, that may be illegal.

However, if you were doing sort of academic work such as what you do, that would be seen in a different light.

So I think in the UK this would be legal, but it would be very hard for anyone to get into trouble for simply watching this at home. Would you agree with that?

Germar Rudolf: Absolutely! We have, with all the censorship laws we have not a single case where a country has stooped down to the point where they persecute people for just attending, listening and consuming. Even the countries with the harshest policies when it comes to this. That’s Austria and Germany. You can, for instance, you can buy Holocaust sceptical literature that is not illegal if you buy only one copy for your own use. If the government happens to intercept it, they can still destroy it, but they can’t prosecute you for it. The same with attending a conference like this. It is not an offence in any country of the Western world. And when it comes to the UK, case law says you can contest the mainstream Holocaust narrative until you’re blue in the face. What you cannot do is in that context, disparage victims, survivors, martyrs, whatever. So in any way talking ironically, sarcastically, humourously, or in any way that is considered offending toward the survivors, the victims and so forth.

Now the company, as I just mentioned, Armreg.co.uk that has published and republished all this material and before that we were actually in the UK since 1996. I was personally, I lived in the UK until 1999. And I started the whole operation there. And it was called Castle Hill Publishers has gone belly up in late 2023, and then we switched over to Amreg. So just a reorganisation basically. Almost at all times been in the UK except for a stretch of one and a half, two years, and we have never been harassed by anyone. So keeping it scholarly, keeping it matter of factly and civilised, as you should, any discourse anyhow, keeps you safe in the UK for now.

Anyone attending, when you are in the chat and you make comments in there that can be considered disparaging to jews in general or survivors or descendants and victims of the National Socialist persecution of the jews. And you do that with an account that for some reason, because you set it up that way, allows the authorities to identify you, which would probably not be smart.

If you want to go on FTG media or somewhere else, use an ID that doesn’t allow anyone to identify you. And if an email is required, if you want safety, use a burner email or someone, some email that is not officially traceable to you directly.

However, if you abstain from making those kind of comments, which I advise under any circumstances, because nasty language doesn’t reflect good on the community and I’m no fan of it. So if you abstain from these kind of comments, you should be good under any circumstances on any place on this planet.

It’s different for our presenters. Some of them come from Europe and as I’ve mentioned, when we’re talking about those coming from France, they’re talking about their persecution. They’re not going to make statements on history themselves because we don’t want to get them in trouble. And if we have the question and answer session, I would like the audience also to abstain from questions that corners those French individuals and putting them on the spot, because they need to fly home and don’t want to be arrested. Not fly home, [chuckling] because they are at home! They don’t want to get arrested the next morning or whenever.

Mark Collett: Yeah, and I want to echo that. I mean, look, I believe it’s very important to talk about the kind of things that we’re talking about tonight. I think it’s important that we discuss things like this.

But I also think it’s very important to ensure that we do so in a productive and polite manner. Talking about this kind of stuff in a way that is disparaging or rude or ridiculous, it not only opens you up for arrest, which is a ridiculous position to put yourself in, but it also demeans the seriousness of the topic and it takes what we do out of an academic light.

Now, I’m not a revisionist. I talk about revisionism. I have revisionist guests on, but I’m generally speaking somebody who talks about demography and jewish or Zionist power and the way that jewish power affects the Western world. They’re the topics that I mainly specialise in. I do speak to revisionists. I’m interested in it. But obviously, if you are going to get involved in this, my suggestion is that you deal with it in an academic way for your own safety.

And also so the topic is held in the high regard that it deserves to be held in. If you’re there sort of cracking jokes and sharing memes and trying to be as edgy as possible, kind of undermines what people like Germar are doing. And there’s an awful lot of revisionists who have suffered greatly at the hands of the authorities over the years. And you don’t want to demean their suffering and their sacrifices.

We’ve got a five dollar Superchat from Mr. Smalls 14, who, regardless of what I just said, said:

“Germar, is it true you tried to sell soap in Sacramento with Pastor Eli?”

That’s obviously one of those jokes. You don’t have to answer that if you don’t wish. No.

Germar Rudolf: Yeah. The UK’s attitude towards Germany is that Germans have no humour. And you need to understand that the chicken has come to roost. The UK, as a winner of the Second World War, has pushed Germany in a situation where Germans can go to prison for jokes. The shortest German joke, do you know what that is?

Mark Collett: No, I don’t.

Germar Rudolf: The German word for joke is “witz”. Okay. The shortest German joke is “Ausch-witz”.

Mark Collett: [uncertain laughter from Mark]

Germar Rudolf: That gets you in prison in Germany.

Mark Collett: Indeed, indeed.

Germar Rudolf: So Germans don’t have humour because they have to watch their back. And they had to watch their backs for centuries. The Nazis didn’t invent book burning and the current government didn’t invent censorship laws. Germany has been under the stranglehold in the medievals of the Holy Inquisition, the worst of all European countries. So it has been bred into the German and out of the Germans to make certain jokes. Jokes live from the tension of putting things together that are not quite acceptable, talking seriously about them. So you package them.  And that is exactly the attempt that this fellow has been doing, pushing the envelope into the not quite acceptable. But making this joke.

And that has become a crime in Germany and in borderline areas, has always been. And now in the UK, people are getting in trouble for showing sarcasm, irony and so forth in that context. If and when jokes become punishable by law, you stop laughing! And I take that opportunity to make that clear. These kind of jokes. Make them when you’re sitting in the bar, but don’t make them publicly.

Mark Collett: Yeah, I want to sort of echo this is a serious point. So I actually believe that when it comes to comedy, when it comes to humour, when it comes to making a joke, really nothing should be off limits.

And once you start making certain things off limits, it’s very easy to make anything and everything off limits. So then you get sort of the Edinburgh Fringe voting the joke of the year as “Why did the chicken cross the road?” Because no one’s allowed to actually joke about anything else.

And I think it was Jimmy Carr who made the remark, a famous British comedian, who made the remark that:

“He’s probably already made the joke that will get him one day cancelled and ruin his career.”

And that’s how it is, because we constantly see the mainstream media, liberals, sort of fans of censorship, spending hours, if not days, if not in some cases weeks, trawling through people’s back catalogue of streams, tweets, Facebook posts, searching for something that they can find offensive in order to cancel someone, or worse still, get them arrested. And I find this very interesting because I’ve wrestled with this myself. People might say:

“Well, look, Mark, I came to your shows and I’ve now watched 200 hours of them and I found these three things offensive.”

And my question would be, if you came to the shows of Britain’s leading ethno-nationalists, and you were looking to find something offensive, is that really my fault? You know, I’m not out there saying it in the street. I’m not shouting it through a megaphone into people’s faces. I’m hosting a show. People come to the show, they know what they’re gonna get when they come to the show. This isn’t something that’s being broadcast to every car and home and workplace in the UK. You come here and you seek this out, knowing that you’re going to get a discussion about things relating to our cause.

And I think the people going out of their way to dig things up on people and to, it’s like Germar’s conference. If you were to go there and to record everything that was said and watch it in detail, taking notes, looking to find something offensive, that kind of defeats the object of watching the conference in the first place or attending the conference in the first place, because you’re not going there in good faith and then finding it offensive by accident. You’re going there on purpose to look for a reason to be offended so that you can then report it.

And this is one of the widespread problems in the West that people, the people who claim they don’t want to be offended will go out of their way and go to great lengths in order to be offended, or so they can claim that they were offended in order to report people to the authorities, which is just essentially a charter for censorship, allowing this to happen. But I do always ask people to be respectful, to exercise caution, not to use racial stuff.

As I said to all my guests, you know, please abide by sensible rules so that we are always the polite academic group that talk about things in a sensible manner.

And one thing that impresses me with Germar both times I’ve had him on is the way he can speak so fluently and in such a way that I think it would be impossible for anyone to find him offensive unless they were going out of their way to do. Optics prime gave $5. Thank you so much! And said:

“This man is a national treasure. Thank you for your work, good sir.”

Well, thank you for that Superchat. Lars Aerback with AE, gave $15.

Thank you so much! He said:

“A positive story from Denmark today. Our Supreme Court acquitted a man for hosting a site with racist jokes. Old fashioned holocaust jokes amongst them. The case has been through all three courts and has been going for over six years. This is a win for freedom of speech!”

Well, that is certainly good news from Denmark, and I hope to see more.

Germar Rudolf: Denmark? Regarding Denmark?

Mark Collett: Yeah.

Germar Rudolf: Oh that’s good! Yeah. Denmark has been a stronghold in all those years. Some German holocaust sceptics and historical sceptics actually fled to Denmark and found refuge there over the past four, five, six decades.

Mark Collett: And I’d like to say as well, big thank you to Malibu and Coke for gifting 10 subs to the channel.

And as I always say, those who accepted the gifted subs. It would mean a great deal to me if you kept them up. You know, $5 a month means very little to most people, but if I had four or five hundred people every month subbing my channel, it would take a lot of weight off my mind at the beginning of every month.

And that’s the end of the Superchat so I’m going to bring the stream to a close now. You’ve been a wonderful guest as ever! The advert for the conference has been excellent and again you’ve done most of the heavy lifting tonight and most of the speaking, but is there anything you’d like to say as a final thought before we wrap things up?

Germar Rudolf: Not much more than holocaustsummit.com! So the ultimate link will be streaming and that can change any minute depending on what happens, will be posted there there. If you submit your email, you’ll get it also in an email. And I hope we all see you there! And we are going to build a new community that gets stronger by the day!

Mark Collett: Well, thank you so much!

I’d like to thank Germar for being here. He’s a courageous guy. He’s a very good speaker. We have interviewed him in full before. If you want to watch that interview, it is in my previous videos. Go and watch it. It’s well worth watching. It’s a two hour special, that one where we talk about Germar’s personal journey, what he’s been through, the incredible repression he’s faced and his incredible journey in his life. Please do that and also support his event, support his work. He’s a really nice guy. It was really kind of him to come on here tonight and he’s been, as always, the perfect guest.

I’d like to remind you all that I will be back on Sunday with the ladies from Return to the Land. That’s three housewives, mothers and home-schoolers from Return to the Land talking about women in nationalism and their roles as mothers and homemakers and educators. So that’ll be an interesting stream. Please join me then 7 PM UK time on Sunday for that. Until then, if you’re out doing activism at the weekend, please be safe, stay within the law and know your rights. And until Sunday, have a great evening, have a great weekend and I’ll see you all again soon.

Thank you to Germar, thank you to everyone who donated so generously. And as always, thank you to this wonderful community for supporting us, for supporting these shows and for supporting the good work of my guests. Thank you everyone. I love you all. Have a great weekend. Good night.

https://katana17.com/2026/01/25/mark-collett-germar-rudolf-holocaust-summit-2026-jan-23-2026-transcript/