Inasmuch as we’re dealing here with a phenomena which allegedly occurred in the early 1940’s, how can material from 1998 or 2006 be considered “outdated”?

The assertion that materials from this time period need to be updated brings to light an interesting assumption on the part of the author: That history must continually undergo revision. And yet, regardless of which publications are being used, this is precisely the process of historical revision which the author so vehemently objects to. Why?

A little something you need to know about library policy. If it doesn’t have a call number sticker on it, it goes into the recycle bin or the trash.

They have no value, they are worth nothing, and when the books are finally shifted, the pamphlets without call numbers will be removed and destroyed.

Let me make it clear that these little magazines are notpart of the library’s collection. Some Reinhard Heydrich-wannabe neo-Nazi trailer trash just left dozens of copies of decade-old David Irving newsletters stuffed in between books across an entire section of our library.

Any comparison between this and a library having in its collection “historic documents on pre-revolutionary pro-slavery records or Japanese deniers of the Rape of Nanking” is fucking puerile.