Holocaust History Denial: A Clear and Present Danger by Kevin Barrett

May 1, 2013 by 1 Comment

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/04/22/holocaust-history-denial-a-clear-and-present-danger/

Screen Shot 2013-05-01 at 12.03.52 PM

Screen Shot 2013-05-01 at 12.03.36 PM Screen Shot 2013-05-01 at 12.03.20 PM
Monday, April 22nd, 2013
Holocaust History Denial: A Clear and Present Danger

by Kevin Barrett

I used to believe in “the Holocaust.”

Not as a religion – I’ve never been to any of the museum-temples or made a pilgrimage to Auschwitz or pored over the sacred texts. And I never was stupid or crazy enough to accept the Holocaust as a valid excuse for the Zionist theft of Palestine.  (If the Holocaust had anything to do with Israel, then Israel would have been established in Germany – not Palestine.)

In short, I believed in “the Holocaust” as history, because I assumed that 99% of Western academic historians can’t be wrong.

I assumed that about six million Jews were exterminated by the Nazis in concentration camps, mostly in gas chambers, as part of a pre-planned effort to exterminate the Jews of Europe. As far as I knew, all of the reputable historians believed this. The handful of dissenters, I assumed, were cranks of one sort or another. And though I had met many Muslim academic colleagues who were Holocaust skeptics, I thought they were probably biased due to their anti-Zionism.

Then in 2006, out of the blue, for no apparent reason, I was attacked on Wikipedia as a “holocaust denier.” In fact, I was a well-known skeptic about 9/11 – not the Holocaust. I knew next to nothing about the controversies surrounding the alleged gas chambers. Wikipedia claimed I was a supporter of David Irving, Mark Green, and Ernst Zundel. In fact, I had never heard of Green, and barely even knew the names of Irving and Zundel.  (I had spent most of the 1990s reading every French literary classic for my French Literature MA, then learning Arabic and studying Islam and Morocco for my Ph.D. while supporting my wife and two small children, so I wasn’t really paying attention to Holocaust-controversy news.)

I tried to correct the erroneous information – which came from some crank’s personal website, and had never been checked, much less corroborated – along with the dozens of other derogatory factual errors, on my Wikipedia page. The corrections would always be removed, and the lies, reinstated, by the next day. Sometimes it happened in a matter of hours.

This was enough to make me slightly paranoid.

But as the hippies used to say, just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they aren’t out to get you.

Somebody was trying to frame me as a “Holocaust denier” – presumably to damage my credibility on 9/11. Why would they do that?

By 2010 or so, I finally got around to reading a few books about the Holocaust controversies. The first book I read was Denying History by Michael Shermer and Alex Grobman. It had been recommended as the best introduction to why the Holocaust deniers are wrong.

Denying History blew my mind – but not in the way its authors presumably intended. It consists mostly of weak ad-hominem attacks against “Holocaust deniers.” Its arguments about the actual issues – the questions of pre-planned total extermination, cyanide gas chambers, and six million Jewish victims (or was that six million total victims?) – were not nearly as strong as I had expected. In fact, they were surprisingly flimsy.

Shermer and Grobman admit that the keepers of the Auschwitz memorial suddenly decided, one day in 1989, to reduce the number of victims of that notorious camp from 4 million to “about one and one half million.” That is a lot of victims to vanish so suddenly.

Shermer and Grobman claim that the suddenly-missing 2 1/2 million Auschwitz victims somehow magically re-appeared on the Eastern Front, where they turned out to have been shot down by German firing squads. This maneuver preserves the seemingly magical “six million” figure. But it raises some obvious questions about the reliability of the death counts. First, isn’t the mathematics of “subtract-two-and-one-half-million here, add two-and-one-half-million there” just a bit too convenient?  Second, what about the forensic evidence? How can the remains of 2 1/2 million human cadavers have suddenly moved from Auschwitz to the Eastern Front? And third – if the orthodox Holocaust historians were that wrong about Auschwitz prior to 1989, what else might they be wrong about?

Shermer and Grobman downplay the issue of forensic evidence – because, it seems, there really isn’t a whole lot. Millions of people seem to have vanished without a trace. Instead, orthodox Holocaust historians rely on eyewitness accounts, not forensics, to establish the existence of mass-execution cyanide gas chambers and six million dead bodies. They say the bodies and skeletons were almost completely burned, so little or nothing remained. No point in looking for millions of bodies, you won’t find nearly enough.

On that point, the skeptics and the orthodox historians agree.

Denying History raised questions in my mind about the truth of what I had previously believed. It also, paradoxically, evoked my sympathy for the people the authors wanted me to despise. Just about all of them seemed like reasonably nice people. David Irving, Shermer and Grobman admitted, was a highly-qualified and accomplished historian who had suffered greatly, and even been imprisoned, for his sincerely-held scholarly opinions. David Cole, a young Jewish man led to “Holocaust denial” by his penchant for truth, had won a debate against the pro-Orthodoxy forces, including Shermer himself, on the Phil Donahue Show. The only way the forces of orthodoxy could win their debate with David Cole, it turned out, was by issuing death threats to terrify him into recanting.

Shermer and Grobham made me like David Cole, feel sorry for him, and despise the JDL terrorists who threatened to kill him if he didn’t pretend to agree with them.

Since Shermer and Grobman were such poor defenders of orthodoxy, I turned to Deborah Lipstadt, who had won a libel suit filed against her by David Irving. I assumed that anyone who could beat Irving in a history debate must have a rock-solid command of the facts. Her book Denying the Holocaust, I assumed, would put the deniers’ arguments to rest.

As I turned the pages of Denying the Holocaust, my astonishment gradually turned to fury. The book has nothing to do with history. It is one long hysterical polemic in favor of the author’s utterly unexamined a priori belief system. Lipstadt’s book consists of 100% emotion, zero percent rational-empirical argument about historical fact. It is basically an endless chain of mindless ad-hominem insults against the “holocaust deniers.”

If this was the best the defenders of Holocaust orthodoxy could do, maybe they didn’t have quite the airtight argument that I had assumed.

At this point, my faith in Holocaust orthodoxy was somewhat shaken.

Then one of my 9/11-skeptic acquaintances told me I should read Debating the Holocaust: A New Look at Both Sides by Thomas Dalton. I did – and found it was far better than the books by Shermer/Grobman and Lipstadt. Of course, it wasn’t really as neutral as the title sounded. Dalton obviously believed the holocaust skeptics had a better case than the keepers of orthodoxy. But at least he did try to elucidate the historical arguments, point by point. Though he did not convince me that the Holocaust skeptics were right, he successfully argued that the Holocaust controversy was a legitimate topic of historical debate.

I invited Dalton to join me on the radio to debate two defenders of orthodoxy, Roberto Muehlenkamp and Andrew Mathis, on my radio show. (Read about the show here, and listen at http://www.americanfreedomradio.com/archive/Truth-Jihad-32k-042410.mp3 ).

Then I met Nick Kollerstrom, author of the best book on 7/7, Terror on the Tube. Dr. Kollerstrom, a Ph.D. History of Science chemistry specialist, was expelled from his teaching post at University College of London simply for publishing a scholarly article evaluating the chemical evidence for the existence of homicidal gas chambers during World War II. Those who expelled him threw in gratuitous insults, but refused to make any effort to dispute the facts as laid out in the offending article.

I got to know Nick, rambled all over London with him, and found I liked him and respected his intellect. His views were legitimate scholarly interpretations, not bigotry.

These experiences have led me to conclude that the problem isn’t Holocaust denial – it’s Holocaust history denial (HHD). People like Deborah Lipstadt, and the other keepers of Holocaust orthodoxy, irrationally deny that the Holocaust is history, and therefore open to free and fearless rational-empirical debate. For them, the Holocaust is emotion-saturated sacred myth, not history.

Western culture – not just a few keepers of orthodoxy – is suffering from HHD. Everywhere you go, it is denied that the Holocaust is just one unfortunate historical episode among others, and that the data can be interpreted and reinterpreted in a wide variety of ways. The sacred shibboleths – six million dead, cyanide gas chambers, and a pre-planned total extermination – are the new holy trinity. Anybody who doubts them isn’t just another revisionist historian, but a heretic.

And the heretics are sent to prison, or have their careers destroyed, simply for writing or speaking about their interpretations of historical data.

Nick Kollerstrom tells me that many thousands of people have been prosecuted, in Germany alone, under the “political correctness” laws. How can anyone possibly be a historian in a society that imprisons people for expressing their interpretations of history?

Holocaust history denial is a clear and present danger. The Western tradition of freedom of inquiry is under threat. Ever since Socrates founded philosophy, acerbic skepticism about “public myths” has been central to Western thought. Today, it can get you thrown in prison or ejected from your job.

It’s time to meet the threat of Holocaust history denial head-on. Let’s re-historicize the Holocaust, and put an end to the Holocaust Religion!

I propose that America’s top fraud investigators should be immediately assigned to the Holocaust survivors’ fraud beat. The recent discover of $42 million in phony “survivor” claims is undoubtedly only the tip of the iceberg; billions more are there for the taking. The money recovered from the “no business like Shoah business” shysters should be applied to the endowment of Holocaust Revisionism chairs in a dozen or so of our leading universities. There, the world’s top Holocaust revisionists should be turned loose to develop their very best historical arguments. A lively scholarly historical debate between the revisionists and the defenders of orthodoxy would ensue.

Who would win the debate? I have no idea. Maybe, with the debate reinvigorated, the orthodox camp would find the motivation to go out and look for the long-lost forensic evidence, including the ruins of actual mass-human-extermination gas chambers and the remains of millions of victims’ bodies. Or maybe the revisionists, given a modicum of legitimacy and funding, would definitively prove their case.

Either way, history – and the Western tradition of freedom of inquiry – would be the real winners.
—

Filed Under: Auschwitz, Bishop Richard Williamson, David Cole, David Irving, Deborah Lipstadt, Editor's Zone, Ernst Zundel, Holocaust denial, Jewish Defense League (JDL), Kevin Barrett, Mark Green, Nick Kollerstrom, Thomas Dalton

What was Hitler’s unforgivable sin? by J. B. Campbell

May 25, 2011 by

What was Hitler’s unforgivable sin?

by J. B. Campbell

hitler&supporters

Hitler resisted Judaism. When you’re a little kid in school or at the movies, resisting Judaism can be made to seem a very wicked thing. As an adult, you can be made to think that to resist Judaism is the very worst, the most dangerous thing. When you see what has happened to people who have resisted Judaism, well – you certainly don’t want that to happen to you.

Adolf Hitler was, is and will always be the most dangerous character in history due to his resistance against Judaism, combined with his eloquence in explaining why Judaism must be resisted. Some of us Jew-fighters have a personal motto, delenda est judaica, or Judaism must be destroyed. Or, Defense Against Jewish Aggression. When we have studied the history of whatever period you care to name, or just looked at the news, true humans react with the natural urge to remove this cancer from society. The most astonishing example of the Jewish mentality was last year’s murderous assault against the humanitarians attempting to bring food, medicine and building materials to the people of Gaza. Jewish ways are repellant to the human mind and are not examined overmuch for that reason.

Judaism can be simply described as very bad behavior.

Hitler never attempted to destroy Judaism but rather to isolate it and perhaps remove its adherents from Europe. This followed attempts to train Jews to be productive human beings in places such as Dachau and Theresienstadt. As Evelyn Kaye writes in The Hole in the Sheet, orthodox Jews do not work. They are allergic to work, preferring instead to occupy themselves by reading the Talmud and arguing endlessly with other Jews about what they read. So this is a big problem with Jews, their refusal to work and produce something that is not based on ripping off and confounding their victims.

[Read more...]

Filed Under: 'state' of Israel, Adolf Hitler, Alternative Media, Communism, David Cole, Editor's Zone, Ernst Zundel, Federal Reserve System, Henry Ford, Hjalmar Schacht, International Banking Syndicate, Jewish Holocaust Industry, Judaism, Morgenthau Plan, National Socialism, Political Zionism, Secrets of the Federal Reserve/Eustace Mullins, The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, Vidkun Quisling

Here It Comes by S. H. Pearson

January 24, 2011 by

SHOCKWAVELOGO

http://shpearson.wordpress.com/2011/01/22/here-it-comes/

Here It Comes

By S.H. Pearson

The time has come to write a little about myself.

I graduated from the University of Miami in December 2008.  It was an exacting curriculum that tested my mental disciplines.  This phrase from a UM campus tee-shirt says it best, “All it takes — is all you got.”

During the literature side of my coursework, I studied under some of the world’s finest professors.  Literature scholars who enriched my mind with the classics and the greats.  Their class room was a delight of learning.  Every minute golden.  Their exams opened a vein of lyrical catharsis.  I bled ink to the last second.

Then there were exams in the sciences, maths, sociology and “political science” written by sadists.  Their agenda was a clear one.   See which students could weather it.

Hiding among these great professors like copperheads were outrages against the Western Canon beyond my wildest nightmares.  Abominations against culture, literary art and all decency.  They shook the foundation of scholarship and sullied the study of literature with filth and perversion.  Their classes were a disgusting quagmire of smears against the Catholic Church, the Bard’s finest and a descent into back-alley smut.  The language that came from their mouths was nothing short of street corner sleaze.  Somebody had to approve these jokers.  Somebody had to hire them.  But who?  It became my mission to find out.

There was one literature professor who had us fill out index cards at the beginning of a semester  with personal information.  He wanted to know what city we were born in for some reason.   As he began lectures, he would walk down the aisle by my desk, staring at me, lecturing Nazi atrocities.  I questioned in my mind as he beat the dead horse of Nazi Germany, why a literature professor was off on a tangent that had nothing to do with our reading assignment.  I felt that he was lecturing “history” to me personally because of his physical proximity and eye contact.  But also perhaps because of my birth city.  Who hired these jokers?  It was a literature class.  Not a history class.

Then there was the journalism side of the house.  Here I knew I had struck the mother lode.  The finest, the sharpest, the grandest.  They were the best.  Boy did they teach me how to write the news.  And how to investigate the facts of a story.  Check every fact three times come hell or high water.   I don’t care if your mother says it’s true — go behind her back and check it anyway.  Dig down to the bare metal.  Check public records.  Get it right.  “A journalist is in the business of truth-telling.”  Those were my marching orders.  And they sent me all over the city researching public records, investigating an assigned target.  I came up with the goods, fleshed out the narrative and learned how it worked.  They taught me hard.  They taught me good.

Along this grueling steep, I felt a pelting of slings and arrows.   My efforts were downgraded one to two letter grades from several Jewish professors.  Jewish students heckled my math questions, went for my throat in critiques and did other mean-spirited things to me that I found — unfounded.  The only thing I could come up with was that I was not a Jew.

Five minutes before the professor arrived, a Jewish student in one of my journalism classes cussed me out.  He belittled me harshly in front of the class with great arrogance and charisma — for being ignorant of a recent Jewish holiday.  He was full of hatred and venom.  I was shocked by his demeanor.  Nothing I said could have earned his response.  He was the student sitting next to me.  Having missed the previous class, I was only asking him for lecture notes.  What I did not know was that he had also been absent due to a Jewish holiday.  This lack of knowledge earned me his Vesuvius.

The next day many of the Jewish students were wearing golden Star of David pendants outside their tee-shirts, exhibiting solidarity.  The following day I wore a large golden Cross.  If there is one Man whom I am not ashamed of,  it is Jesus Christ.  I was christened in His name shortly after birth and baptized 18 years later just to make double sure.  I am a Christian soul and don’t care who knows it.

Later I learned that everyone in the class with the exception of one black student and one Hispanic student was Jewish.  I was the only non-Jewish white person in the class.  As the semester progressed I  noticed how the non-Jewish professor tread lightly around her Jewish students.  She seemed cowed by them.  As if they had the power to make or break her career.  This got my attention.

Upon reporting to the professor my experience with the disrespectful Jewish student and his vulgar outburst, she said that she would speak to him about it.  I confronted her after graduation to learn that she never did.  She seemed intimidated by her Jewish students.

Until that day I was gullible, trusting and clueless as most non-Jewish Americans about the Jewish worldview and undercurrent.  I had no negative vibes toward Jewish people nor toward things Jewish.  But after getting cussed out in class by a cocky punk who was younger than my own son would be, I knew that I wasn’t seeing the whole iceberg.

My academic life went down-hill from there.   I was threatened with expulsion by the campus disciplinary lawyer.  He interrogated me in a room at the end of a long hallway and tried to trick confessions out of me for things I did not do.  He was a master of sophistry.  But I was a fan of Socrates.  So he failed.  And I graduated.

I felt that I was persecuted on campus for not being a Jew, but particularly for being a Christian.  The campus chaplain was an aficionado of the weekly dining menu.  When I wrote him about the anti-Christian climate on campus, he had no comment.  I realized then how effete our church had become.  Sort of like the Queen of England.  Aye Lady, where is thy scepter?

As I wagged my books through tropical steam, the question occurred to me, “Why did Hitler want the Jews out of Germany?”  Nobody ever told me the why of it.  All we got in history books was the standard “because he was a madman and a hater.”  It occurred to me I had not read a single word of what Adolf had to say about it.  I knew that I needed to stock up on light bulbs.  Because I had some reading to do.

This observation sparked a new awareness.  I began asking questions about what Jewish’ness was and what it meant in society.  I embarked on extracurricular study.  As I devoured books, I was shocked to learn things that have been completely suppressed during my life time.  And shocked to learn that what was in these books had been removed from the halls of academe.   Juxtaposed against  the venom spat upon me by this Jewish student, I experienced an epiphany.  Zionism is a scourge on all that is right and good.  And lies at the heart of all that is wrong with the world.

Looking at writing the news in a burgeoning new wave of media, just months away, I thought about what I had just learned.  There was no way in hell I was going to work for the mainstream media.  Nor sell my soul to the father of lies.

Zionism read to me like a hornets nest of venom, hatred, racism and sinister intent.   Their media assassinates the characters of good people.  And jeers at virtue.  They calumniate, besmirch and lampoon Christendom, the Holy Roman Catholic Church and the Mosque of its spiritual counterpart.  I want no part of their kind of writing.

The books I read that spanned centuries seemed as though they were written by one hand.  The crowning Voice of which are the words of Jesus Christ.  He was direct about it.  And left nothing to wonder.  The many books and articles I read were also in lock-step with the Holy Qur’an.  I was onto something.

The truth.

So it was no surprise that after publishing my first articles in a newspaper known for its acerbic criticism of Israel and brass tacks reporting, that I would draw fire from Zionist Jews.  And earn a place on the shit list of my Zionist-dominated university.  I fully expected persecution, lampoonery and the usual line-up of their hate squad.  Death threats and harassment were not unexpected and I sure got them.  Since September 2009 I have had three people crash their cars into me.  A few others charged out of side-roads at me, but missed.  One of the crashers seemed under the influence but the cops protected her from scrutiny.  She said that she worked for CNN.   Surely it was all a coincidence.  The trash man forgets to pick up our trash quite often.  That sort of thing.  I now understand what Jesus meant when He said, “Take up your cross and follow me.”

During my time with Jewish students, I saw some who were truth-seekers like David Cole and Baruch Spinoza.  They stood out among their fellows like Shakespeare’s “snowy dove trooping with crows.”  So stark and pure were they.  Dancing in their eyes was the light of truth.  An eager incandescence.   They were ever washed along by their Hillel classmates.  Ever pressured and counseled not to consort with Gentiles.  Some wore a crestfallen, brow-beaten expression.  Those poor kids.  Purists and scholars were they.  Bless their hearts.  May they break free from the grip of Zionist pathogen before they meet their Maker.

Those who dare break away from their raven flock and seek the face of truth — I am for them.

__________

Filed Under: Baruch Spinoza, Christianity, David Cole, Editor's Zone, Gentiles, Germany, Jesus Christ, Jewish Media Monopoly, Jews, Political Zionism