The Anti-Fascism Wolf in Sheep's Clothing

[zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org]

-- 



http://pcapostate.blogspot.com/2006/09/anti-fascism-wolf-in-sheeps-clothing.html

The Anti-Fascism Wolf in Sheep's Clothing

By Curt Maynard
Al-Jazeerah, September 20, 2006

I'll be darned if Sean Penn didn't say something the other night on 
CNN's Larry King Live that made a great deal of sense. As a rule Mr. 
Penn and I don't see eye to eye on many things, but I couldn't help 
but be pleasantly surprised to see Penn, the son of a Jewish father 
and Irish Catholic mother catch Larry King momentarily off guard when 
he quoted the old Kingfish Huey Long. Penn said, "Well, in 1932 Huey 
Long said something very interesting. It was, 'Fascism will come to 
America, but likely under another name, perhaps anti-fascism.'" The 
look on King's face was priceless, for a moment he was speechless, he 
finally managed a few words just before going to a commercial break, 
"We'll dwell on that for a minute," he said with a perplexed look on 
his face.

Of course King never returned to that particular comment, nope, 
something like that hits way too close to home. For the better part 
of fifty years Larry King [born Lawrence Harvey Zeiger] has done his 
absolute best to convince Americans that "anti-Fascism," is the 
personification of the greatest American ideal, that as the polar 
opposite of fascism, it must always be good, whereas fascism is 
always bad, and should forever be equated with Hitler, the Nazis and 
of course the holocaust. And in one unguarded moment, this 
half-Jewish co-ethnic of King's goes and gives the whole thing away, 
on national television, honestly noting that there isn't a dime's 
worth of difference between two types of totalitarianism, even if the 
current perpetrator may have once been its victim.

What difference does it really make if one's ideas and inherent right 
to express them are suppressed openly, as they might be under a so 
called "fascist system," or covertly, as they are in our current 
system, which likes to masquerade as a government with the greatest 
respect for its constituencies civil and constitutional rights, a 
modern democracy it likes to refer to itself as, but yet when it 
comes to expressing an idea that doesn't jibe with the status quo's 
view of things, suppression and persecution are in order. It happens 
every day in the United States, Canada and Europe, if someone takes a 
stand and the ruling elite doesn't like it, that individual will be 
made to pay a stiff price, to serve as an example to others, often 
this happens with the full support and collusion of the misinformed 
public.

In Europe they throw people in prison for questioning certain aspects 
of the holocaust - don't believe me - perhaps you should do a google 
search on Ernst Zundel, David Irving, Germar Rudolf, Siegfried 
Verbeke, Horst Mahler, Sylvia Stolz, and hundreds of others. Canada's 
approach is slightly different, but with the same results.  Instead 
of charging historical revisionists with "defaming the memory of the 
dead," as they do in Europe, they charge them criminally with a "hate 
crime," or drag them into the courts and force them to engage in 
expensive litigation to avoid a lengthy prison sentence. The alleged 
modern democratic nation of Canada held one historical nonconformist, 
Ernst Zundel, in solitary isolation, in a maximum security 
institution no less, for two years without charging him with a crime, 
just because he dared to question a few details associated with a 
relatively brief moment in time, when time itself is considered in 
its totality, the years 1939 through 1945, and what really happened 
during those years in Nazi Germany.

Any relatively intelligent and inquisitive person might wonder about 
some of these details too - for example six million Jews allegedly 
died during the holocaust. Initially, four million of these Jews were 
said to have been gassed to death at Auschwitz. For decades a plaque 
commemorating their deaths sat on the Auschwitz grounds for all to 
see. Presidents, Prime Ministers, Popes and Ambassadors paid homage 
to it, diligently pointing out during their photo-op the dangers of 
fascism. The plaque read "Four million people suffered and died here 
at the hands of the Nazi murderers." Today a different plaque 
commemorates those that died at Auschwitz, it was quietly changed in 
1990. It now reads that "about one and a half million men, women and 
children," were killed by the Nazis. I'm not a mathematician, but I 
do know there is a numerical difference of two and a half million 
between four million and one and a half million. The Zionists know it 
too, but the difference between them and Ernst Zundel is that the 
Zionists don't want you to know about the change in plaques and 
Zundel does.

It is for this reason that Zundel was illegally arrested in the 
United States under the guise of a missed immigration hearing. It is 
for this reason that Zundel, a white European Christian, without any 
history of criminal behavior, and/or terrorism was illegally 
deported, without due process, from the United States and held in a 
Canadian maximum security prison without any criminal charge as a 
"threat to Canada's National Security." Can you believe his case is 
really this petty and simple? Can you? Well it is, it's just that 
simple, Zundel questions certain aspects of a story that doesn't add 
up entirely, and for that reason and no other he now sits in a German 
prison facing five additional years.

The charge he faces in Germany, i.e. "defaming the memory of the 
dead," has a five year sentence attached to it and the so-called 
modern democratic German government doesn't intend to give him any 
credit for the three and a half years he's already spent languishing 
in prison. Talk about vicious - it's all about making an example of 
Zundel, albeit cryptically, but it still amounts to the same thing - 
an attempt to frighten any other dissidents or skeptics into silence 
- fascist principles to be sure, doled out by our so-called modern 
anti-fascist governments.

=====

In what has become the normalcy of our modern schizophrenic approach 
to democracy, we believe we can force other nations to embrace the 
"democratic process," but when they actually exercise those 
princliples and elect rulers our government doesn't like, our 
government then believes the results should be null and void - in 
other words democracy is only good if the people democratically elect 
representatives our government approves of. If that isn't a 
schizophrenic view, I don't know what is. The very same thing 
happened in Germany after the Second World War, but the American's 
found a much more willing and compliant group of people in Europe 
than they are finding in the Middle East at present.

A perfect example of this logic, or lack thereof, at work can be seen 
in a recent Reuters article by Erik Kirschbaum entitled "Far Right 
Wins Seats in German Assembly." Without so much as noting the irony 
associated with his article, Kirschbaum details the fact that the far 
right in Germany "won 7.2 percent of the vote in 
Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, a northeastern state on the Baltic Sea which 
borders Poland," in a democratic election. In the very next sentence 
Kirschbaum quotes "Dieter Graumann, vice president of the Central 
Council for Jews in Germany, who told Reuters, "The [German] 
government must look for ways to impose a ban," on the political 
party that the German people had just democratically elected.

As noted above, Kirschbaum doesn't even attempt to tone down 
Graumann's obviously undemocratic statement, he just puts it out 
there for all to see, but he does it in such a way as to hide its 
true implications, which is that democracy is great as long as you 
elect who the Zionists want you to elect. Unlike the Iraqi people and 
their democratically elected government, which apparently cannot be 
cowed, there is a distinct possibility that the German government 
will outlaw or ban its competitors - damn the voters!  They have 
attempted it before, as evidenced by Kirschbaum's article, in which 
he notes that Jewish groups intended to call upon the "federal 
government to renew its bid to ban the party after a previous attempt 
failed."

So in the name of anti-fascism, because the German far right is 
perceived to be fascist, the anti-fascists are more than willing to 
embrace fascist principles in order to deprive the German people of 
their democratic right to elect their own representatives - now if 
that isn't twisted and downright undemocratic, I don't know what is.

Wake up America, you are being deceived. Fascism HAS arrived in 
America, and the rest of the western world, and it IS parading about 
as anti-Fascism, just as Huey Long predicted seventy-four years ago.