Messages

What The Holocaust
Debate Is Really About
Terrell E. Arnold
3-2-9


The recent attempted defrocking of a Catholic Bishop on a charge of "Holocaust denial" brings to the fore once again the need to review the history of World War II in a properly detached fashion. A horrible truth is that more than 55 million people died in that war and the overwhelming majority of them were not Jews. That is the holocaust we must all remember. In addition to those deaths, World War II caused the virtual destruction of Western Europe, and gave newborn communism, the invention of Jewish politicians in Russia, its chance to prove it did not work. The victory went to the best and most determined killers, and various victims tell their stories in their own ways. That is a dubious privilege of all those who suffered greatly. It gave no one the right to a story that cannot be examined in the pursuit of truth and honest scholarship.

Yet, examining the official story of the Holocaust is a crime in Germany. It is not a crime in the United States as such, but one historian, Ernst Zundel, married to an American citizen, was summarily picked up in the United States, sent to Canada and imprisoned without conviction of any crime. He was then bundled up and sent to Germany, but moved covertly, not through normal legal processes of extradition.

In Germany Zundel has been tried in a German court and imprisoned, but he has not been allowed to present arguments in his own defense, and in fact his attorney has been imprisoned for attempting to enter such defenses in the court record. Zundel shares this fate with two others who have been sent to Germany from other European countries, and a move is now afoot to make Holocaust denial a crime throughout the European Community. If that is accomplished, the European Community will have prohibited any scholar to examine any part of the official Holocaust story. To do so will result in imprisonment with a trial in which the defendant can submit no evidence of the history explored and the findings made, regardless of how factually demonstrable they may be.

Much of the controversy stems from the fact that some elements of the story have simply been proven false. For example, the gruesome tale of human skin having been used to make leather was dropped after it proved impossible to provide any evidence. It is also reasonably clear that there were no gas furnaces for extermination at Auschwitz, and that part of the story has been dropped. General George S. Patton, then in charge of occupied Germany, disbelieved several aspects of the story and may have been killed because of his outspoken comments. Disturbing stories have emerged that confessions at Nuremberg were obtained by torture. The Red Cross, which had access to the camps in question, has been circumspect in its comments, but has yet to bless the official version of the Holocaust.

The numbers really need to be reexamined: The six million figure commonly used in the official story first appeared as the number of displaced Jews in 1919, before Hitler came along, and before the carnage of World War II. The plaques at Auschwitz tell an evolving story. As reported by observers, the first plaque at Auschwitz said 4 million dead. That was replaced by one that said 3 million dead. That was replaced by a plaque that said 2 million dead. The plaque now reads 1 million dead. Those changes reduce the number of victims at all reported sites to less than 3 million. Serious scholarly research obviously is needed to confirm the number, if that indeed is possible. _See Endnote_

The problem with the debate as pursued is that it does not honor the dead. Over fifty million innocent people died in this carnage. Concentration camps in Germany, Poland, the Ukraine and elsewhere do credit to neither the Hitler government in Germany nor the Stalin government in Russia, or their numerous local collaborators. US and allied carpet bombing of German cities such as Dresden deserve equal opprobrium. Millions of young men and women in uniform died or were wounded in those engagements, and many parts of the story have yet to be accurately chronicled.

The history of Jewish migration to Palestine needs to be understood to have a complete picture of what happened to Jews at the end of World War II. Many were bundled by occupying authorities into former concentration camps and other facilities, some taken by expelling German residents. Then many Jews were "offered" the take- it-or-leave-it chance to migrate to Palestine.

There is no question that, as chronicled by Jewish writers, the official Holocaust story has been used and abused by the Zionists to justify their establishment of a Jewish national home in already fully occupied Palestine. The story has been used continuously ever since World War II to justify or thwart criticism of their continuing confiscation of Palestinian lands and their systematic killing, imprisonment, harassment and confinement of the Palestinian people. Even a prominent Jewish historian, Ilan Pappe, has described this entire process as ethnic cleansing that in international law is a war crime.

It has become increasingly clear that doubts about the official Holocaust story will not go away and, in fact, are growing. The reactions are perhaps a worst case version of "Methinks thou dost protest too much," generated in part by the fact that the official version of the Holocaust is the only story in human history that cannot be examined. Very questionable "hate crime" laws are being pursued in Europe, Canada and the United States in a primary effort to quash discussion of the Holocaust and to hush criticism of Israeli behavior in Palestine.

The matter has reached a point where the truth must out to stop the destructive behavior of concealment. Key elements of the story are inescapably true. Many Jews and many more other people were picked up and confined to stifle dissent or outright rebellion against the Nazi cause. Those travesties were mirrored in Russia and neighboring states as Stalin tried to suppress resistance to the emergent system of communism. Many of the would-be victims took what they could and left, enduring unimaginable hardships that brought them to remote places such as Shanghai, and eventually to the United States.

Both history and humanity will be better served by an open, honest examination of all events of World War II and its aftermath. The lessons we should all take from that gruesome history are badly distorted by singular focus on the story of a group of people who represent only a minority of the victims. No one wants to deny the cruel realities of that experience. Yet, as aptly expressed by the late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion but no one is entitled to his own facts."

_End Note_

For solid background on the diminishing death count at Auschwitz, readers should read

"Auschwitz ­ The Final Count" by Michael Collins Piper at www.rense.com/general62/aauc.htm

Great analogy on the importance of patience, GF.

People generally do not get involved in radical politics until they have felt the sting personally, until they are made to feel so uncomfortable that they finally say, "ENOUGH!," and start looking around for others with pitchforks that they can join with. We are now fast approaching that time when folks are being made to feel very uncomfortable, their retirement accounts cut in half, their security threatened.

Example, this angry fellow:
---

WHAT IF?"
1)We let the banks that gave too many bad loans fail?
Well, the stupid motherfuckers who ran the bad banks would be fired, the customers would get their money from the FDIC and good banks that didn't make stupid loans
would be rewarded with new customers from the bad banks.

2)We let the auto manufacturers like GM and Chrysler fail?
Well, people that had even a little bit of money could get a hell of a deal on a new car sold at auction by a bank.  The laid off workers and execs would be on unemployment for 6 months, costing the taxpayer much less than they do now.
People like me, with gm bonds, would be fucked, but we should have known to get out a long time ago.  the remaining car manufacturers would hire the best gm and Chrysler empoyees and gain a bigger market share.

3)We sold the bad loans at a drasticly reduced rate?
Well china and India, etc. would sell our dollars driving down their value and making it once again cheaper to manufacture US goods in the US.  The fucking Chinese, who are too stupid to do anything but copy american Technology, would lose their plants, their money wouldn't be worth a shit, their people would starve like God intended.  The USA would soon be undisputed heavyweight champ of manufacturing again.  I would once again see the label "made in USA" if I ventured into Walmart.  Unemployment would end.

Why can't the damned government just leave things alone?

As for my GM bonds, instead of giving me 13 cents on the dollar, the likely outcome, why don't they redeem my bonds for a) common stock or preferred b) a $20,000 credit on any new GM car at any GM new car dealership.?  It's not like they are selling this stuff.  it's just sheet metal that they have to maintain. 13 cents on the dollar may just piss me off enough to hunt down Rick Wagoner ($8 Million in comp. last year) and pistol whip him until he either dies of coughs up my $20,000.
---

He ain't seen nothing yet.

["invoking The Holocaust" is "a ploy to delegitimize all criticism of Jews."]

Is it just me or do other people here generally think that any kind of diplomacy with jews is a waste of time ?

Jews are as scorpions, Quicksilver. And, unfortunately, our Race has been like stupid frogs. Remember Aesop's Fable:

The Scorpion and the Frog

  A scorpion and a frog meet on the bank of a stream and the
scorpion asks the frog to carry him across on its back. The
frog asks, "How do I know you won't sting me?" The scorpion
says, "Because if I do, I will die too."

  The frog is satisfied, and they set out, but in midstream,
the scorpion stings the frog. The frog feels the onset of
paralysis and starts to sink, knowing they both will drown,
but has just enough time to gasp "Why?"

      Replies the scorpion: "Its my nature..."

This case about Bishop Williamson is instructive of the power of religions. It's a good one for Creators to follow and learn from. Here's an excellent article by long time revisionist historian (or "forensic historian," if you prefer), Mark Weber:
---

http://www.ihr.org/williamson_march09.html

Bishop Williamson and `Holocaust Denial': Why the Uproar?

By Mark Weber

Institute for Historical Review

March 9, 2009

The furor over the "Holocaust denial" remarks of Bishop Richard Williamson is not a controversy about historical truth, the role of history in society, anti-Semitism or "hate." This affair is really about power -- about those who really wield it in our culture, as well as about how and why that power is used.

Williamson is a 68-year-old English-born traditionalist Roman Catholic who has been fiercely criticized in recent weeks for his remarks about the Holocaust. In a Swedish television interview, which has been widely viewed on the Internet and quoted widely in the media, he expressed the view that no more than 300,000 Jews died in German concentration camps during World War II, and none were killed in gas chambers.

The uproar, which has received wide media attention, began several weeks ago after Pope Benedict XVI lifted the excommunications of Williamson and three other renegade bishops as part of an effort to heal a rift with a conservative Roman Catholic group that opposes liberalizing trends within the Church.

As the controversy grew, Williamson was expelled from Argentina, where he had been living, and German authorities announced that they might bring criminal charges against him. In Germany and some other European countries it is a crime to deny, justify or play down World War II genocide of Europe's Jews. German authorities claim the right to prosecute anyone, anywhere who makes "denial" remarks that can be accessed through the Internet. After returning to his native Britain, Williamson issued an apology for the "harm and hurt" caused by his remarks, but he did not retract them.

Bishop Williamson holds unconventional views on a range of issues. He has repeatedly said that Nine-Eleven was an "inside job," and believes that the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks were organized by the US government. But no one is demanding that Williamson apologize for charging that high-level US officials carried out mass murder of their own fellow citizens. Indeed, if the US government were to insist on such an apology, it would rightly be regarded as an act of arrogant effrontery.

Whereas Williamson's non-conformist views about crimes committed seven years ago are considered strange but inconsequential, his dissident views about the treatment of Europe's Jews more than half a century ago are treated as "thought crimes." Expressions of disbelief about "The Holocaust" are swiftly and fiercely punished. Holocaust "blasphemy" is routinely treated as more offensive than verbal assaults against the well-established religious beliefs and sensibilities of many millions in Europe and around the world. In short: Jewish feelings and sensibilities are regarded as more important than those of non-Jews.

In our society, "The Holocaust" is held up as an icon of virtually religious stature. Jewish leaders, supported by many non-Jewish political figures and much of the media, insist on everyone's dogmatic affirmation of this totem -- one that is used to further Jewish-Zionist interests.

Tony Judt, a Jewish scholar who serves as director of the Remarque Institute at New York University, has written:

"The Shoah [Hebrew term for Holocaust] is frequently exploited in America and Israel to deflect and forbid any criticism of Israel. Indeed, the Holocaust of Europe's Jews is nowadays exploited thrice over: It gives American Jews in particular a unique, retrospective 'victim identity'; it allows Israel to trump any other nation's sufferings (and justify its own excesses) with the claim that the Jewish catastrophe was unique and incompa­rable; and (in contradiction to the first two) it is adduced as an all-purpose metaphor for evil -- anywhere, everywhere and always -- and taught to schoolchildren all over America and Europe without any reference to context or cause. This modern instrumentalization of the Holocaust for political advantage is ethically disreputable and politically imprudent."

Norman Finkelstein, a Jewish scholar who teaches at DePaul University in Chicago, writes in his bestselling book, The Holocaust Industry, that "invoking The Holocaust" is "a ploy to delegitimize all criticism of Jews." He adds: "By conferring total blamelessness on Jews, the Holocaust dogma immunizes Israel and American Jewry from legitimate censure... Organized American Jewry has ex­ploited the Nazi holocaust to deflect criticism of Israel's and its own morally indefensible policies."

In Israel, says Tom Segev, a prominent Israeli journalist and author, the Holocaust has become "an object of worship." Moreover, he writes, "the 'heritage of the Holocaust,' as it is taught in [Israel's] schools and fostered in national memorial ceremonies, often encourages insular chauvinism and a sense that the Nazi extermination of the Jews justifies any act that seems to contribute to Israel's security, including the oppression of the population in the territories occupied by Israel in the Six-Day War."

The Holocaust remembrance campaign reflects an arrogant view of Jews as a special and superior people. Abraham Foxman, head of the Anti-Defamation League -- one of the most influential Zionist groups — has declared:  "...The Holocaust is something different. It is a singular event. It is not simply one example of genocide but a near successful attempt on the life of God's chosen children and, thus, on God himself. It is an event that is the antithesis of Creation as recorded in the Bible; and like its direct op­posite, which is relived weekly with the Sabbath and yearly with the Torah, it must be remembered from generation to gen­eration."

The Williamson affair underscores a great social-political danger -- not the danger of dissent or of historical error, but rather of ruthlessly enforced orthodoxy. Far more harmful than Williamson's unconventional views about crimes committed, or not committed, more than 60 years ago is the well-organized global campaign, backed with the power of police and courts, that demands submission to an instrumentalized and dogmatically-presented view of one chapter of history. This campaign is an expression of a hypocritical double standard that makes a mockery of the pretentions of "democratic" states to uphold freedom of speech and expression.

A society's real hierarchy of values, and of power, is shown by what it prohibits. The Williamson affair underscores a well-entrenched Jewish-Zionist bias in the cultural life of modern Western society, and reminds us, once again, of the power behind that bias. 

Yeah the video above is sarcastic. I doubt that guy believes that god exists (and I certainly don't). It's just a funny video not supposed to even be educational.

The video you posted looks really interesting thanks for the link.

Zeitgeist the Movie is a good tool for deprogramming the more open-minded Xians. You'll find it compelling, Bro. Brent, even with its shortcomings on matters of race. The history of Xianity as a forged creed forces the Xian to confront his superstitions and his gullibility.

Xian nonsense. In order for the Jewish tribal god Yahweh to disappear, "He" would first have had to appear. 

A better recent exposure of Xianity is Zeitgeist the Movie by the Jew David Spector: https://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=RU&hl=ru&v=Mzciu8HvfwA Being a Jew, Spector didn't address the hidden Jewish hand in control of humanity through control of religion, media and banking, but the informed viewer can connect the kosher dots. It's the kind of production that will force the unthinking "believer" to start thinking.

Comedic genius George Carlin is at his best ridiculing Jew-spawned Christianity (near end of Part I). Listen to his audience howl at his exposure of belief in "God" as foolish.