- Rarely in our society does a historical event play such
an important role that it takes on a persona of its own, elevated beyond
the scope of intellectual questioning. However, we must never lose sight
of the role that history plays in shaping our beliefs, views and culture.
History should always be placed in its proper perspective through unbiased
- The purpose of history is not the regurgitation of dates,
facts and timelines, but is an instructor in understanding and enlightenment.
History is the revealer of human behavior, the identity shaper of nations
and a lighthouse to guide our paths towards the future.
- Mark Weber of the Institute of Historical Review stated
regarding history, "Any people that has a distorted sense of its own
history is unable to know what to do. The best guide to the future is an
understanding and a study of the past. When history is distorted, then
any kind of rational, wise policies for the future become impossible."
- With this in mind, to question the iconoclastic and preternatural
status of the Holocaust becomes mandatory given its magnified position
in American society. Its predominance has transcended the world over, indoctrinating
those in an exclusively one-sided Jewish perspective. Many are completely
unaware of the existence of other perspectives, perspectives of the historical
revisionists that shatter this social dogma.
- First, revisionists do not want to "revise"
history, but are simply advocating that we look again at historical events
in order to better understand them and apply their lessons. Specific to
the Holocaust, they do not deny the existence of concentration camps or
Jewish suffering under National Socialist Germany, but are quick to point
out that many people suffered on both sides of World War II.
- Where revisionists part company from mainstream historians
is their skepticism of Nazi industrial complexes or formal plans specifically
designed to exterminate the Jewish people.
- So, to participate in the freedom of academic inquiry,
let us look again at the Holocaust through the eyes of historical revisionists
- Imagine for a moment that you read the following account
printed in numerous Arabic newspapers and broadcast on Al-Jazeera:
- "The Americans hate the Iraqi people. George W.
Bush and his Republican Party have invaded Iraq to kill all Iraqis. Inside
Abu Grahib prison, under the direction of President Bush and his Republican
Party, the Americans are making lampshades out of Iraqi skin and soap from
the fat of dead Iraqis. Outside the prison is a large building used to
gas the Iraqi people. Millions have been gassed and cremated. There is
a device that is used to electrocute and vaporize Iraqis without a trace
- Now, I'm willing to bet that every American would, at
a minimum, read the account with a raised brow. In fact, most of us would
play it off as Arabic propaganda. Yet, why do we not question the *same*
accounts of the Holocaust?
- Certainly, propaganda existed then as it does today.
As Harry Elmer Barnes - regarded by many as the founder of historical revisionism
- truthfully noted, "The tendency of governments to lie is most pronounced
during times of war and conflict." This tendency was demonstrated
a few years ago by Colin Powell at the United Nations when holding up photographs
of buildings in Iraq that he claimed were weapons of mass-destruction factories,
but were just buildings, after all.
- Still, all of us have heard the testimonies of numerous
Jewish concentration camp survivors and their stories of alleged Nazi atrocities,
so, to eliminate redundancy, I will not quote them here. Yet the mere existence
of millions of survivors would produce a shadow of doubt - one would hope
- on the extermination theory. Unfortunately, the survivors who tell a
completely *different* story of the concentration camps are seldom heard.
They are often silenced like many historians who try to tell their stories
for them. But their testimonies do exist.
- For example, in The Toronto Star, Maria Vanherwaarden,
an inmate of Aushcwitz in 1942, reported a Gypsy woman told her they would
all be gassed in showers upon their arrival. When the train arrived, Maria
and others were ordered to take a shower. Now, convinced of the Gypsy woman's
claim, she felt the certainty of death. However, instead of gas pouring
from the showerheads, there was only water. Maria testified of her experience
in Toronto District Court in 1988, 43 years after her internment.
- (In his autobiographical work 'Night', Nobel Peace Prize
winner and former Auschwitz inmate, Elie Wiesel complained about the German
regulations of three showers a day for all workers.)
- Likewise, in the book Voices from the Holocaust, Marika
Frank - a Jewish woman - testified of her complete unawareness of the existence
of gas chambers or gassings during her internment at Auschwitz in 1944,
a time when 25,000 per day were allegedly gassed.
- A rational and reasonable person would observe that there
are witnesses for and against the extermination theory. Because of this,
both sides of the debate can't be right. Enter forensic science to clear
- In 1988, Fred Leuchter Jr., an engineer by trade and
noted capital-punishment expert - including a manufacturer of gas-chamber
hardware - was commissioned for a detailed analysis of the concentration
camps. Upon completion of his findings, he testified under oath in Toronto
- Leuchter's testimony revealed that the 32 forensic samples
taken from the concentration-camp facilities produced "no significant
cyanide gas" traces. He concluded his examination by stating, "Chemical
analysis supports the fact that these facilities were never utilized as
gas execution facilities. After a thorough examination of the alleged execution
facilities in Poland and their associated crematories, the only conclusion
that can be arrived at by a rational, responsible person is the absurdity
of the notion that any of these facilities were ever capable of, or were
utilized as, execution gas chambers."
- Likewise, Dr. William Lindsey, a chemist for DuPont,
testified in 1985 after an on-site examination of three concentration camps,
including Auschwitz, "I have come to the conclusion that no one was
willfully or purposefully killed with Zyklon B [hydrocyanic acid gas] in
this manner. I consider it absolutely impossible."
- As the decades-old debate continues, it is becoming more
apparent that the details of the Holocaust are essentially unimportant.
In fact, as was recently told to me by an expert on the subject, the importance
is its social and political influence. The Holocaust has risen to a ruling
symbol of our culture because of Jewish political power. In other words,
you can't understand one without understanding the other.
- Yet one can easily conclude that Holocaust promotion
(and more specifically, Jewish suffering) has produced a social psychosis
- a psychological phenomenon - resulting in the elevation of the Jewish
people to "special victim" status. It has created Holocaustism
- inducing individuals to subconsciously, through constant reminding of
the Holocaust and Jewish suffering, stay away from criticizing Israel or
Jewry for fear of being labeled anti-Semitic.
- This is exactly what the promotion was intended to achieve.
- Many Americans are unaware of its subconscious effects
on their own lives. This is demonstrated in a subtle exhibition of eloquence
by Bradley Smith when lecturing at college universities. First, he reads
a quote by Elie Wiesel - former Auschwitz inmate and recipient of the 1986
Nobel Peace prize - from the book Legends of our Time:
- "Every Jew, somewhere in his being, should set apart
a zone of hate - healthy, virile hate - for what the German personifies
and for what persists in the German."
- He then pauses allowing the audience to think about that
statement. Then, he changes two words to show the effects of one-sided
Jewish media perspectives and the influence it has over their hearts, minds
and souls. The result is always stunned silence.
- "Every Palestinian, somewhere in his being, should
set apart a zone of hate - healthy, virile hate - for what the Jew personifies
and for what persists in the Jew."
- Feel the difference?
- President Bush is assisting the spread of this psychosis
when he recently told the audience at the American Israel Public Affairs
Committee, "The demonization of Israel ... can be a flimsy cover for
- Dishonest statements such as this deter debate and questioning
regarding Israel or organized Jewry.
- However, it isn't just the Holocaust itself that has
given rise to psychological Holocaustism. There are other institutions,
mainly religious and political, that create a pro-Israeli or pro-Jewish
atmosphere. For instance, America's "amen corner" is fanatical
in its support of Israel and organized Jewry, often over the interests
of their own country. And politicians of both parties exalt the state of
Israel, frequently placating to Jewish interests.
- In a remarkable illustration of the effects of Jewish
power on American politicians, House Majority Leader Tom DeLay boasts of
his pro-Israeli servitude on his Web site.
- "We know our victory in the War on Terror depends
on Israel's survival ... We hear your voice cry out in the desert, and
we will never leave your side ... All free men and women must rally to
the defense of Israel."
- Even worse, in a small reminder to everyone of Jewish
power in Washington, DeLay reverently displays on his site an image of
the Israeli and American flag flying triumphantly together over the U.S.
- David Mullenax resides in Fishersville. His column, "Dave's
Diatribe - Unfair and Unbalanced," appears every Friday in The Augusta
- What do you think? Share your thoughts on this story