ZGram - 6/3/2004 - "Holocaust 101 - Part I"
zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org
zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org
Wed Jun 2 06:57:50 EDT 2004
Zgram - Where Truth is Destiny: Now more than ever!
June 3, 2004
Good Morning from the Zundelsite:
Once again, I am forced to resort to recycling some oldies but
goodies due to time constraints. If you are a seasoned Revisionist
aficionado, take a break for about a week from my Zgrams. I will
resume regular Zgrams, including the Prisoner of Conscience Letters,
about June 9th.
[START]
"Holocaust 101"
This document below was prepared and posted on the Zundelsite as an
"Introduction to Revisionist Thought" during the first week of
January, 1996. It was meant to be a lead-in to an Internet debate
with another website, Nizkor, a "Holocaust Promotion Lobby" website.
This debate was aborted after the Simon Wiesenthal Center was
notified of this debate and immediately went into an all-out
offensive, starting with an article in the New York Times January 10,
1996, followed by 2000 letters to Internet Service Providors and
university presidents in an attempt to prevent Revisionist material
from being published on the Web.
In response to this censorship move, "computer kids" and cyberspace
journalists worldwide took up the "sheltering" of the Zundelsite by
creating Zundelsite Mirrors. From mid-January to mid-February, it was
high electronic drama - as at the most prestigous universities,
"Zündel-Mirrors" sprang up spontaneously. We know of Zündel-Mirrors
as far away as Australia.
The struggle for Freedom of Speech on the Net continues.
In the days to follow, I will run six somewhat condensed and modified
summaries of revisionist claims.
Ernst Zundel replies to Nizkor:
[START]
Before I get into the actual rebuttal, I would just like to call
attention to a few important points in (Nizkor's) detailed, elaborate
summary:
1. I am described by Nizkor, citing Canada's Security Intelligence
Review Committee, as a ". . . prolific publisher of hate literature."
That is not quite correct.
In Canada, the distribution of hate literature is a criminal offense,
as is bank robbery and child molestation. If you call me a bank
robber in print and I am not a bank robber, that is called libel. If
you call me a child molester and I am not a child molester, that is
called libel also.
You called me in electronic print a ". . . prolific publisher of hate
literature." You have just libeled me.
I have lived and worked in Canada for almost 40 years and have never
been convicted of having published and/or distributed hate literature
in that country. I have never even been charged with having published
and/or distributed hate literature in Canada, although in Canada
there are such things as "hate laws."
In point of fact, various judicial and police bodies, after extensive
study, have specifically cleared me of that charge. Had there been
proof, my enemies would have made sure I would have been charged and
convicted.
I have been charged with ". . . spreading false news," a frivolous
charge a malcontent, multi-millionaire Jewess brought against me. It
cost Canadians approximately $6 million . . . and all, for what? The
Supreme Court of Canada decided in the end that society may be
enriched by cultural and intellectual diversity, which does include
unpopular views on history and other matters of discomfort to certain
minorities.
I'll summarize 8 points to serve as "Holocaust" Revisionism 101.
Before I do so, I would like to state what I mean when I refer to
certain individuals and groups collectively as the "Holocaust
Promotion Lobby."
I use the phrase as a generic term to describe those people who have
a vested interest in keeping the Holocaust Myth alive and who will
act politically to make sure that this happens.
The Holocaust Promotion Lobby is a summarizing construct meant as a
shortcut to describe a subset of the human race, most but not all of
whom are Jews, with unique and identifying social and political
characteristics and dedicated to the maintenance and enhancement of a
dogma called the "Holocaust."
I use this phrase for summarizing purposes, as in "The Flower
Generation" describing a hedonistic youth culture, or "The Jet Set"
describing the rich.
I will leave it up to each individual, Gentile or Jew, to decide for
himself whether or not he belongs in that group.
What Revisionists are offering below is the state of the art on
Revisionism as of right now. The final word is not yet in; it will
come when more people in all kinds and sorts of disciplines will
kneel into the murky matter of the "Holocaust" and find out for
themselves was is and isn't true.
To capture the essence of what follows below, readers will need to
understand that, after years of insisting that ". . . the
Revisionists don't MERIT a response!" and refusing to engage in
debate, at the beginning of the year [Ingrid's comment: Remember,
this was in January of 1996!] a serious debate was actually planned -
or so, at least, we thought.
A world-wide censorship move was unleashed to stop this debate from
happening. Part of this effort by our opposition apparently caused
Nizkor to back out of the debate, insisting that they merely talked
of "linking." It is unfortunate that a debate didn't happen, but that
is now water under the bridge.
The Nizkor folks now say that they prefer to "link," so we will let
them "link." We would have liked a real debate with mutual and
respectful cooperation. However, that was not to be, but since we
promised we would answer a rebuttal, that is what we are doing now.
___
By way of introduction, Revisionism has taken hold as an intellectual
revival movement all over the world. People are beginning to ask
questions about the Holocaust. These questions are uncomfortable. No
longer can the Holocaust Promotion Lobby ignore the global interest
in the TRUE facts surrounding very murky claims pertaining to the
"Holocaust" by shouting "Anti-Semitism!"
In essence, Revisionism claims can be grouped into eight fairly
distinct topics. They are, as elaborated below:
1. The Revisionist claim: The Holocaust is useful postwar propaganda
that started as a systematic, insidious campaign during World War II
as one of the tactics employed by moneyed interests to rally the
troops and engage the world, specifically America, in what turned out
to be, essentially, a fratricidal war.
The principle behind this propaganda was: "Let's get an enemy to kill
an enemy."
How was this done? In old-fashioned, time-tested ways.
Sophisticated war-time propaganda about an enemy's alleged
"atrocities" is nothing new. It is an effective psychological weapon,
routinely employed to keep the home-grown troops fired up so that
they believe that they are fighting for a righteous, patriotic cause.
The enemy is demonized with systematic atrocity stories. The media
repeats over and over and over again how cruel and demonic he is.
This tactic was used by the Allies - extensively. Here is one piece
of evidence:
On February 29, 1944 the British Ministry of Information sent the
following note to the higher British clergy and to the BBC:
"Sir,
"I am directed by the Ministry to send you the following circular letter:
"It is often the duty of the good citizens and of the pious
Christians to turn a blind eye on the peculiarities of those
associated with us.
"But the time comes when such peculiarities, while still denied in
public, must be taken into account when action by us is called for.
"We know the methods of rule employed by the Bolshevik dictator in
Russia itself from, for example, the writing and speeches of the
Prime Minister himself during the last twenty years. We know how the
Red Army behaved in Poland in 1920 and in Finland, Estonia, Latvia,
Galicia, and Bessarabia only recently.
"We must, therefore, take into account how the Red Army will
certainly behave when it overruns Central Europe. Unless precautions
are taken, the obviously inevitable horrors which will result will
throw an undue strain on public opinion in this country.
"We cannot reform the Bolsheviks but we can do our best to save them
- and ourselves - from the consequences of their acts. The
disclosures of the past quarter of the past quarter of a century will
render mere denials unconvincing. The only alternative to denial is
to distract public attention from the whole subject.
"Experience has shown that the best distraction is atrocity
propaganda directed against the enemy. Unfortunately the public is no
longer so susceptible as in the days of 'Corpse Factory.' the
Mutilated Belgian Babies," and the 'Crucified Canadians.'
"Your cooperation is therefore earnestly sought to distract public
attention from the doings of the Red Army by your wholehearted
support of various charges against the Germans and Japanese which
have been and will be put into circulation by the Ministry.
"Your expression of belief in such may convince others.
"I am, sir, Your obedient servant
(signed)
"H. Hewet, Assistant Secretary"
There was even a postscript, as follows:
"The Ministry can enter into no correspondence of any kind with
regard to the communication which should only be disclosed to
responsible persons. (Rozek, Edward J., Allied Wartime Diplomacy: A
Pattern in Poland, John Wiley and Sons, NY. page 209-210)"
This is quite an astounding document. This letter is ample evidence
that during World War II, the Allies used atrocity propaganda against
Hitler Germany to distract their own people from the atrocities being
committed primarily but not exclusively by the Red Army - their
"comrades"! - in the invasion of Europe as Hitler's war drew to an
end.
Note, though, that there was nothing in this letter that talked of
gassing people.
Why not? Because foolish atrocity propaganda is something else again.
The gas chamber claim was floated briefly as a propaganda test kite
but was quickly abandoned as too "unbelievable." If atrocity fiction
is found to be so gross, outlandish and implausible that thinking,
feeling people simply cannot swallow it, it is not in an army
leader's interest to peddle such a "crime."
This was the case originally with the "gas chamber" claim.
In point of fact, the British Ministry of Information at first
requested British clergy to help spread the "gas chamber" story which
was planned to be put in circulation by the Ministry. (Rozek, Edward
J., Allied Wartime Diplomacy, pp 108-110. John Wiley and Sons, New
York ) However, from the start, it was judged to be too problematic
and bizarre and, therefore, it was quickly withdrawn as a potential
strategic embarrassment.
Some of the "lesser" so-called "crimes" that people were willing to
swallow did survive and thrive for a while, both during World War I
and World War II - some of them for longer periods than others.
For example, many of the older generation, both in Europe and
America, still vividly remember the macabre World War I Allied
propaganda claims of the German ". . . cadavers-into-soap factories,"
the ". . . chopped-off hands of Belgian babies," the ". . . crucified
Canadian soldier" stories - all of which proved to be lies, and for
some of which post WWI Allied statesmen apologized to the Germans.
Some even remember the incredible, hysterical claim made by the
then-Governor of New York State, even in 1917-18, (!) that the
Germans had been ". . . exterminating millions of Jews."
Even more telling was the claim about the ". . . six million"!
(Glynn, Martin, The Crucifixion of the Jews Must Stop The American
Hebrew, October 31, 1920.)
So you see - the "six million" story is old. Very old.
It had been peddled before. In a recent book entitled "Keystone of
the New World Order: The Holocaust Dogma of Judaism," the author, Ben
Weintraub, makes the point that the number has, in fact, mythical
significance because it is based on cabbalistic sources. (Weintraub,
Ben, The Holocaust Dogma: Keystone of the New World Order, Cosmos
Publishers, 1994)
Unfortunately, it took a gullible, systematically miseducated
populace such as we have today, coupled with relentless brainwashing
by a corruptiblelap dog media, to peddle the lie for decades. In
World War I, there was no electronic media. After WWII, this handy
tale was dusted off and heaved once more against the German people.
The massive psychological onslaught really only started, however,
with the fictitious television series, "Holocaust," shown worldwide
to an estimated 100 million people. Next there was "Schindler's
List." There were thousands of other production not nearly as vicious
in impact, but cumulatively destructive.
Let us be very clear on one point: There would have been no
hesitation to use the story of the "gassings" even during the war -
had it been plausible. However, even during the war, the leadership
of the Allied Nations - such as Churchill and Roosevelt as well as
those of the Catholic hierarchy, including the then-Pope Pius XI -
knew from their various intelligence agencies, spies on the ground,
inmates with radio transmitters inside various camps (including
inmate soldiers, inmate priests, even those who took confessions of
local military, police and guard personnel) that no organized mass
exterminations by gassing or any other means were going on inside
these camps.
How did they know?
The Allied leaders had detailed aerial photos, none of which
corroborated the hysterical claims then made by Zionist agitators
like Rabbi Stephen Wise and others around the world. It simply wasn't
true. There were no gassings of people going on - only of lice! The
story was a cheese with many, many holes. And it was judged as
problematic.
As a consequence, the Allied leadership specifically removed any
reference to "gas chambers" in their wartime atrocity propaganda,
even in their diplomatic dispatches, because there was no proof.
(Allied Diplomacy in Wartime, Samisdat Resource Book, pp 108-110)
In August of 1943, the Allies decided officially not to make this
specific allegation of "gas chambers" against the Nazis in a
published declaration on the grounds of "insufficient evidence to
justify the statement regarding execution in gas chambers." ( Foreign
Relations of the United States Diplomatic Papers, 1943. Samisdat
Resource Book)
The Allies and the Pope thus did not need to deny what did not take
place - except in the feverish brains of the Zionists who were
jockeying through unique "victimhood" for the creation of the State
of Israel and postwar political advantage (including massive
reparations payments from Germany) which needed the accusation of
genocide against the Jews.
And, as we will explain in more detail, the trials at Nuremberg were
based on those accusations. The Zionists needed a conviction, in
order to leverage the guilt money out of a craven government created
by the Allies.
[END]
More information about the Zgrams
mailing list