The second part of your question turns on the revisionist rejection
of the term, Holocaust Denier. The main reason
why revisionists reject that term is that it implies that the
entirety of the Jewish tragedy is being rejected.
Revisionists do not deny the camp system, the targeting of the
Jewish people, the persecution, theft, incarceration, and mass
deaths. Many revisionists accept the claim that hundreds
of thousands of Jews were shot on the Eastern Front, or elsewhere
in Occupied Russia. What revisionists actually _do_ reject is
the claim that millions of people were killed at "extermination
camps", and that these killings were a pre-planned and carefully
orchestrated conspiracy. Of course, there is a wide divergence
of opinion among revisionists concerning how much of the rest
of the story is true, depending largely on how they wish to
read the evidence. But no revisionist claims that "nothing happened."
David Irving is a classic example. He accepts most of
the Holocaust story, and even accepts the use of gas chambers.
His complaints have had to do mostly with the scale of the alleged
massacres and the quality of evidence offered for them.
Yet, for all this, this 68 year old sits in a prison cell, sentenced
for three years. No wonder he is angry at being called
a "Holocaust Denier", because the use of that abusive term,
created by Deborah Lipstadt, is precisely the means whereby
revisionists are first segregated, then demonized, and then
eliminated.
AnswerMan
Replies: