ZGram - 10/10/2002 - "Defending the Indefensible"

[irimland@zundelsite.org]

ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny

October 10, 2002

Good Morning from the Zundelsite:

I guess that wonders never cease!

Now if only this "Jewish Scholar" could give himself a push and take 
World War II revisionism all the way, demolishing the Holohoax, that 
might turn out to be a very sunny day!  Subtract the so-called 
"Holocaust" out of the article below - and what do you have?  A 
concession that far more cruelties accumulated on the slate of our 
enemies than could ever be laid at Germany's feet!

[START]

Defending The Indefensible -
A Jewish Scholar Defends Hitler
 From YesConcepts
yesconcepts@mweb.co.za
10-9-2

George Steiner, Cambridge professor of English and comparative 
literature, author of numerous scholarly books such as Tolstoy or 
Dostoyevsky, Language and Silence etc, set out his sobering views in 
a novel called The Portage to San Cristobal of A.H. (1981). Strangely 
enough - Dr Steiner is a Jew - he uses his imagination to 
hypothetically 'give Hitler the chance to defend himself before a 
Jewish court', 'to defend the indefensible'.

How on earth can a Cambridge professor, a Jew, in effect defend A.H., 
claimed by Jews to be the 'greatest embodiment of evil in human 
history'? What can be his argument? In summary (Steiner pp 120-126):
 
Point One: 'The Nazi race doctrines were but a "parody" of the Jewish 
doctrine of "a chosen people, chosen by God for his own, the only 
race on earth chosen, exalted, made singular among mankind.. to set a 
race apart, to hold before it a promised land".'

Point Two: 'The Jew's addiction to [his version of] the ideal.. "It 
is no accident that Marx and his minions were Jews, that the 
congregations of Bolshevism - Trotsky, Rosa Luxemberg, Kamenev, the 
whole fanatic, murderous pack - were of Israel..'

[Chaim Bermant in his book The Jews devotes a chapter to this aspect 
of Communism that is hardly generally known. The author, himself 
Jewish, writes with a certain authority and familiarity concerning 
his subject and can hardly be accused of the charge of 
'anti-Semitism' which is usually leveled at anyone who offers any 
criticism, no matter how justified, of Jews.  "No people is so averse 
to change yet none in recent times has dissipated more of its energy 
on revolution.. Although Jews formed less than five percent of 
Russia's population, they formed more than fifty percent of its 
revolutionaries..
 
"It must be added that most of the leading revolutionaries who 
convulsed Europe in the final decades of the last century and the 
first decades of this one, stemmed from prosperous Jewish families.. 
They were perhaps typified by the father of revolution, Karl Marx.. 
Thus when, after the chaos of World War I, revolutions broke out all 
over Europe, Jews were everywhere at the helm; Trotsky, Sverdlov, 
Kamenev and Zinoviev in Russia, Bela Kun in Hungary, Kurt Eisner in 
Bavaria, and, most improbable of all, Rosa Luxemburg in Berlin.
 
"To many outside observers, the Russian revolution looked like a 
Jewish conspiracy, especially when it was followed by Jewish-led 
revolutionary outbreaks in much of central Europe. The leadership of 
the Bolshevik Party had a preponderance of Jews and included Litvinov 
(real name Wallach), Liadov (Mandelshtam), Shklovsky, Saltz, Gusev 
(Drabkin), Zemliachka (Salkind), Helena Rozmirovich, Serafima Gopner, 
Yaroslavsky (Gubelman), Yaklovlev (Epstein), Riaznov (Goldendach), 
Uritsky and Larin. Of the seven members of the Politburo, the inner 
cabinet of the country, four, Trotsky (Bronstein), Zinoviev 
(Radomsky), Kamenev (Rosenfeld) and Sverdlov, were Jews."]
 
Point Three: "You have exaggerated. Grossly. Hysterically. What were 
Rotterdam or Coventry compared to Dresden and Hiroshima? Did I invent 
the camps? Ask the Boers.. To whom did you hand over millions, tens 
of millions of men and women from Prague to the Baltic? What did 
[Solzhenitsyn] say? That Stalin had slaughtered thirty million. I was 
a man of a murderous time, but a small man compared to him. That he 
perfected genocide [of the kulaks] when I was still a nameless 
scribbler in Munich. My boys used their fists and their whips. I 
won't deny it. The times stank of hunger and blood. But when a man 
spat out the truth they would stop their fun. Stalin's torturers 
worked for the pleasure of the thing. To make men befoul themselves, 
to obtain confessions that are lies, insanities, obscene jokes. The 
truth only made them more bestial. It is not I who assert these 
things: it is your own Jewish survivors, your historians, the sage of 
the Gulag. Who, then was the great destroyer, whose blood-lust the 
more implacable? Stalin's or mine? Our terrors were a village 
carnival compared to his. Our camps covered absurd acres; he had 
strung wire and death-pits around a continent. Yet Stalin died in 
bed, and yet you hunt me down like a rabid dog.."

Point Four: 'Zionism was shaped in the image of German nationalism..

"The Holocaust gave you the courage of injustice, to drive the Arab 
out of his home, out of his field, because he was without resource, 
because he was in your way, knowing that those you had driven out 
were rotting in refugee camps, not ten miles away, buried alive in 
despair and lunatic dreams of vengeance.. You used the Holocaust to 
create Israel.. Should you not honour me who have made your long, 
vacuous dream of Zion a reality?".'

Why is anti-Palestinianism, unquestionably a form of anti-Semitism, 
not 'politically incorrect'? As various commentators have been 
pointing out for more than half a century, the Palestinians have been 
made to pay for the Holocaust over this extended period, and are 
still doing so.
 
Is this fair or just? Is it logical or even reasonable? Is it moral? 
Does it matter? Does world peace matter? Does anything matter?

[END]