I have received many letters in reply to yesterday's verdict - with one exception, all saying more or less as simply summarized by one of our cyber activists:
"Denial of a real fact has no effect on the fact itself. Denial of a false proposition is a step towards truth. Hurt feelings are no excuse for censorship."
But here is one essay that has, as yet another cyber fighter puts it, ". . . both meat and sizzle." Sit back and savor it - this is Revisionist gourmet:
*** The Dogma of the 20th Century ***
It seems to me that a conclusion can be drawn from the Irving vs Lipstadt verdict: bowing to the abstract "Holocaust" vacuum as a necessary pro-forma ceremonial before any criticism of its tenets doesn't pay.
Either one ignores the cliché altogether and therefore neither confirms nor denies one's position as a "H denier" on the grounds that there is nothing sufficiently explicit in the concept to be affirmed or denied (this was more or less Irving's *implicit* position but not sufficiently repeated during the trial or outside of it, since he was trying to fight the "dogma denier" murderous label) or one simply assumes the position of "denier" in the sense that the "Holocaust" is a set of sufficiently falsifiable propositions. It doesn't pay to walk the middle "definitions" ground and this is the part that constitutes little surprise to me.
Nevertheless I must say I expected a partial vindication of Irving's position since clear instances of libel existed. I was impressed by his courtroom performance and his mastery of the subjects under examination. I was therefore dumbfounded to see the truly amazing extent to which one side doesn't even need to speak any more to have practically everybody -- judges, politicians, historians, media opinion-makers -- intellectually capitulating and crawling on all fours before the Dogma of the 20th Century and its blindingly mediocre and ignorant proponents.
Something is terribly wrong here and this is much more worrying than any overblown estimates of Jewish power in contemporary non-Jewish societies, for the symptom is not the disease. What we have is not "Jewish power", but the power of stupidity, ignorance and the good life over integrity and the desire to know more and in better ways. Jews in general -- and I don't mean the Jewish professional charlatans that know very well what they are doing to their own people for the sake of a few more shekels in their purses -- are as much the victims as anybody else.
In any case, you'll notice that we are back to scholastic discussions of the religious type and this is not by accident. The "Holocaust" debate nowadays is the equivalent of proclaiming oneself an agnostic on the grounds that the concept of "God" like the concept of "Dwjwlrkjf" is not sufficiently clear to be discussed in an exclusively logical way; or claiming one is an atheist on the grounds, say, that a gaseous mammal is not conceivable as an igneous talking vegetable in the world of our experience, where things like virgin human births and beanstalks that reach the sky and gas chambers with roof-holes that simultaneously exist and don't exist, are factually *false* (an everyday irreligious concept that means the opposite of *true*).
It's already a fully fledged new religion, no more, no less. And although it benefits the group that actively -- but not solely -- contributed the most to it, its perverse appeal extends to many outside the Jewish fold, just like early Christianity progressively outreached the circle of its original Jewish inventors and reached the heart of so many unfortunate slaves and haters of free philosophical inquiry. Let's face it: good Christians still love to crawl at someone's feet and good Christians deserve what they get at the hands of good Jews. It's their way to happiness. It's not fair to make the Jews guilty of *this* particular crime. They are quite right when they claim the "Holocaust" is now part of the human heritage and not an exclusively Jewish hoax for power and money.
By all means fight the "Holocaust" religion and its followers of every nominal creed and nationality, including Jewish sham-foundations still drilling the ridiculous mountain of golden teeth, British judges that put their unashamed faith in judicial circuses such as Nuremberg or Frankfurt, German and French halfwit imbeciles empowered as lawmakers, Polish popes trembling on their feet, American preachers and show-bizz politicians, Muslim "realists" even if they are Palestinians doing their best to call your attention to their unhappy lot, and all who proclaim the "Holocaust" dogma from their many different pulpits in any way you think worthwhile. A plague on all of them.
But don't fight the "Holocaust" as if it was something else. It's an ecumenical phenomenon, and no longer the vanguard of any particular highway-robber gang with a single-minded purpose. Irving's expression "the traditional enemies of freedom" may be a good counter-propaganda formula to the "Holocaust" amoeba-like monster we are forbidden to pin down. And, unlike their Big H weapon, it's not unfair, it's not addressed to individual innocent people, it doesn't need the ritual sacrifice of inarticulate old men and it's unmistakable in context. We know what we are talking about. At least I do.
*Mankind* -- not Jewry -- is "the traditional enemy of freedom". Freedom is a lonely divinity and individual eccentrics are its only friends. As long as you understand this, as I hope Irving will in spite of all, not everything will be lost. And, of course, the historical psycho-drama can be an amusing spectacle in spite of its many tragedies, great and small.
I'm very sorry for Irving. I appreciate his courage and aplomb and his brave stand in the face of adversity and truly scandalous conspiratorial persecution. I hope he will find ways out of his continued predicament as well as the health, the financial help and the mental strength to continue the good fight. And I hope his small daughter will live happy in a happier world. We need more people like him, but we also need more Rassiniers and Faurissons above all else. Also more Zundels: politics is an entirely secondary matter in the present context; we are talking about *religion*, not politics. And politics is child's play compared to empowered religion. If you have what they call a Nazi party in your neighbourhood, vote Nazi. I'm sorry, I won't because I never vote; but if you feel like winning the accolades of your local masters for doing your "civic duties", vote in a way that will show those despicable characters that run our societies exactly what you think of *them*.
You can fight the Nazis later on if the need arises. Most probably it won't, because the Nazi menace in our present context is nothing more than a ridiculous bogeyman to condition our mind. That's why we still get -- after more than half a century! -- one daily "Hate Hitler" hour on every channel, with the same old images of a silly man making wildly accelerated soundless gestures and they still don't manage to reduce the movie speed to the normal rate. Alas, the emerging risk of an anti-semitic backlash to an endless stream of abuse and exploitation from the Jewish sham-organisations dedicated to the conditioning of the imbeciles and the suppression of free-thought and free-inquiry is a real risk.
If you have any remaining doubts, please read the British libel legislation -- regardless of whether you agree with it or not -- then the complete transcripts of Irving vs Lipstadt, and then draw your own conclusions after reading the verdict. My advice to you is not to judge lightly or cowardly, even in the face of the scurrilous, revolting, indecent behaviour and total impunity of untouchable entities with names like the Board of Jewish Deputies of the British Parliament. They were not on trial, of course, nor could they ever be, for we don't live in free societies.
But do avoid anti-semitism and let the superstitious bastards on all quadrants silently deface their own graves and spit on their own dead through their own actions. That should be punishment enough.
Spit on the murderous "Holocaust" lie instead. Spit on the dark "Holocaust" because that's where true evil -- an heritage for all mankind -- will take sanctuary for a long time to come.
But not for ever, rest assured.
(ASMarques)
=====
Thought for the Day:
"(Judge) Gray starts out saying he is no historian and unfit to make judgements about facts of history, and that history should be left to he historians. Then Gray in completely contradictory manner determines that Irving has consistantly and deliberately twisted and distorted history. Gray's ruling on this matter should be overturned because Gray starts out by disqualifying himself to make such a ruling."
(Letter to the Zundelsite)