Jews were killed and that’s not funny

2 Responses to “Jews were killed and that’s not funny”

---

• moonkoon

  6 July 2009 at 4:19 am

  Hi, Welcome back. I like the new format.
  This is a bit long but I have read it, and if nothing else, it is mildly interesting, and the tone should not interfere too much with the reader’s state of repose. But please skip right over it if you consider the very idea of talking about the scale and methodology of the Holocaust to be a provocative and disrespectful act.

  Thanks to Max and the Southern Poverty Law Center (??, Max and the SPLC!.. really? That same blind crusader that obligingly overlooks supporters of apartheid based initiatives such as the Israeli “settler” movement, like bingo king Moscowitz? Politics makes for such strange bedfellows,) for covering yet another controversial subject. Hopefully, Youtube won’t ban this one.

  The Holocaust is sui generis in that it is the only historical event that I am aware of where criminal sanctions can be applied to those who question the “official” narrative.
  Australia has recently joined this debate stifling club so it is probably not a good idea to discuss Holocaust matters on Australian websites. The local Human Rights Commission appears to have criminalized speculation about the scale of, and methodology employed in, the tragedy.
  Hopefully, the Commission will not adopt the same proscription to the “black armband” view of local historical events should it ever be brought to its attention by way of complaint.
  .
  <i>April 17, 2009
  A FEDERAL Court judge has found revisionist historian Fredrick Toben guilty of criminal contempt of court after he continued to publish offensive material denying the Holocaust and vilifying Jews.
  Judge Bruce Lander yesterday ruled Toben, 64, had wilfully disobeyed previous court orders by keeping the material on his Adelaide Institute website, deciding the former school teacher was in contempt on 24 counts.
  Jeremy Jones, former president of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry, brought the case against Toben on the grounds he had persistently breached the Racial Discrimination Act following a 2002 court decision against him…
  …Mr Jones said: … “It’s nothing to do with free speech, it’s about respect for the law.”</i>
  http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25344976-5006787,00.html
  So I will confine my remarks to other issues.

  David Irving is an unconvincing advocate of his claims. Perhaps he saw it as an opportunity to promote his books, (which I haven’t read). He seems to be making it pretty easy for Max, giving him plenty to work with. One could be forgiven for thinking that maybe his heart wasn’t in the job, that he is following a script. It seems to be an adaption of the technique of damning with faint praise.

  Whatever, maybe I’m reading too much into all of this. After all, Irving is a “bona fide” Holocaust denier, he has “done time” for a related matter. But I can’t say I’m very impressed with some of his other historical interpretations. Irving’s view that Hitler started WW2 to impress the Austrians seems somewhat superficial.
  Anybody who doesn’t consider the disposition of Russia’s army at the time (configured to attack) as a major influence in Hitler’s deliberations about how to handle the situation doesn’t have a lot of credibility with me.

  Pre-emptive attack has been employed before, you know.

  <i>“…The English Parliament, rightly interpreting all these sinister movements in the north to be a menace, determined to strike the first blow and to invade Scotland.</i> (The next bit isn’t really relevant but it does add color and movement to the story. )<i> General Fairfax had conscientious scruples regarding this unconstitutional procedure, and declined the duty of leading the army. Cromwell, having consulted the Psalms, found the necessary authority to take command in the hope that the Lord would ‘enable this poor worm and weak servant to do His will.’ “</i>
  THE COVENANTERS -A History of the Church In Scotland from the Reformation To The Revolution. -By James K. Hewison
  http://www.archive.org/stream/covenanters02hewi/covenanters02hewi_djvu.txt

  Other contemporaneous events such as <i>”…the effects of the Zionist elements among world Jewry which had declared war on Germany by means of a boycott on all German goods. “</i>* would also need to be considered in a credible explanation about what got the disaster started.
  *The Transfer Agreement: The Untold Story of the Secret Pact between the Third Reich and Jewish Palestine. – By Edwin Black.

  Or consider Churchill’s quoted view on the role of economic power as a factor in getting the ball rolling.
  <i>(Churchill to Lord Robert Boothby…) “Germany’s unforgivable crime before the second world war,” Winston Churchill said, “was her attempt to extricate her economic power from the world’s trading system and to create her own exchange mechanism which would deny world finance its opportunity to profit.” </i>
  Quoted in the Foreword, 2nd Ed. Sydney Rogerson, Propaganda in the Next War 2001, orig. 1938

  I am more interested in the views of deniers such as ex? Bishop Williamson, he has sacrificed his job and a relatively secure future in order to voice his doubts publicly. (The video report that precipitated his decline into disgrace, was, by the way, another example of the shock jock genre that Max sometimes adopts, Borat being the most famous current exponent of the art), or the recently convicted Faurisson.

  <i>“…In 2006 Faurisson was charged and later convicted and given a three-month probationary sentence and fined F21,000 on the grounds that he denied the Holocaust in an interview given to Iranian television, under the Gayssot Act, which prohibits Holocaust denial in France.</i> (link below)

  I’m not sure if I can add Max to my list of public figures that support the Spirit of Open Enquiry. At the moment it has two names on the list, Noam Chomsky and Susan Renouf.

  Noam Chomsky expounds on the subject.
  <i>“…He was then brought to trial for “falsification of History,” and later condemned for this crime, the first time that a modern Western state openly affirmed the <b>Stalinist-Nazi doctrine that the state will determine historical truth and punish deviation from it.</b> Later he was beaten practically to death by Jewish terrorists*. As of now, the European and other intellectuals have not expressed any opposition to these scandals; rather, they have sought to disguise their profound commitment to Stalinist-Nazi doctrine by following the same models, trying to divert attention with a flood of outrageous lies. [A]s to the minor matter of my role … it has been the subject of a flood of lies and deceit…“</i>
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faurisson_affair
  Susan Renouf works tirelessly in defending other notorious deniers.

  There are many conundrums about WW2, for instance, why did the West ally itself with an atheistic communist regime and noted people killer,. J. Stalin?.
  I think we do ourselves a disservice by discouraging and persecuting those who question the conventional wisdom.

  P.S. Boothby is an interesting historical figure.
  He made frequent trips to Germany in the early 30’s, on one occasion he met Hitler, and almost  immediately blew the whistle on him, saying in 1933, <i>”…most of the things which seem to make life worth living will be swept away.”</i>
  He went on to successfully agitate (with Churchill and Amery) for a buildup of military forces.
  His fortunes waned in 1940 when he was found by a Parliamentary Select Committee to have neglected to mention his financial interest in a seized Czechoslovakian assets redistribution plan that he had been promoting.
  http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/PRboothby.htm
• dunja

  7 July 2009 at 3:25 pm

  this was really painful to watch …