Exactly who is it that is in ‘Denial’?

February 16, 2017  /  Gilad Atzmon

A somewhat biased film review

By Gilad Atzmon

In her book Denying the Holocaust (1993), Deborah Lipstadt confessed that it was David Irving’s considerable reputation as an historian that made him “one of the most dangerous spokespersons for Holocaust denial.” “Familiar with historical evidence,” she wrote, “he bends it until it conforms with his ideological leanings and political agenda.” Irving responded by claiming that Lipstadt’s words were libellous and filed a legal case against her and her publisher Penguin Books.

Was Irving brave or naïve in putting the Holocaust on trial? Probably both. Back in 1996, was Irving a hero or just grossly miscalculating in believing he stood a chance in taking on the Holocaust, still the most popular Jewish religion? Again, probably both.

The other day, I watched Mick Jackson’s ‘Denial’. The film tells the story of Irving’s 2000 defeat in court – a disaster he voluntarily brought upon himself and indeed, Irving has clearly made some mistakes in his life. Yet, in 2017 it is impossible to deny that, back in 2000, Irving was well ahead of most of us.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYcx43AmAyY

Watching the film in the aftermath of Brexit, the Trump victory and the surge of Right Wing consciousness in the West in general, it is clear that Irving, undoubtedly one of the greatest living biographer of Hitler, understood human nature better than the British judge, Lipstadt’s legal team, the BBC and probably the rest of us altogether.

Back in 2000, the Holocaust narrative was as solid as a rock. The Jews were perceived as the ultimate victims and their plight at the time of World War II was unquestionable.  No one dared ask how is it is possible that, three years after the liberation of Auschwitz, the newly-born Jewish state ethnically cleansed Palestine of its indigenous population? At the time of the trial, no one dared ask why is the Jewish past just a chain of holocausts – that is, no one except David Irving (and a few others).

At the time of the trial, I read an interview with David Irving that opened my eyes to the idea that history is a revisionist adventure, an attempt to narrate the past as we move along. I realised then that the past is subject to changes. It morphs along with humanity.

In that interview, Irving was quoted as‘ blaming the victims.’

“If I were a Jew,” he said, “I would ask myself why it always happens to us?”

At the time, I was a still Jew but I took up Irving’s challenge. I looked in the mirror and didn’t like what I saw so I decided to leave the tribe and I stopped being a Jew.

But Irving is no longer a lone voice. Two weeks ago, on Holocaust Memorial Day, it was actually the American president himself who managed to universalize the Holocaust by omitting to mention the Jews or their shoah. As we Westerns obliterate country after country with our immoral interventionism, the Holocaust is no longer a Jews-only domain and all the time more and more people grasp that it is actually Israel and its affiliated Jewish lobbies that are pushing us into more and more unnecessary global conflicts.

‘Denial’ was made to sustain a ‘progressive’ vision of the past. In this progressive but misguided universe, people ‘move forward’ but their past remains fixed, often sacred and always untouched. Nationalists, on the other hand, often see the past as a dynamic, vibrant reality. For them, nostalgia, is the way forward.

But some Jews are tormented by this nostalgia. They want their own past to be compartmentalized and sealed, otherwise, they are fearful that some people may decide to examine Jewish history in the light of Israeli crimes.

In the film, Irving is an old style British gent who sticks to his guns and refuses to change his narrative just to fit in with any notions of correctness. Irving states what he believes in and stands firmly behind it.

For Irving, one of the most damaging pieces of evidenced presented to the court was a little ditty he wrote to his daughter when she was just a few months old, and conceived by the court as the ultimate in crude misanthropy.

 

“I am a Baby Aryan,

Not Jewish or Sectarian.

I have no plans to marry-an

Ape or Rastafarian.”

 

On the day of the verdict, Irving visited the BBC Newsnight studio to be grilled by Jeremy Paxman who read the little ditty to Irving.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Anx4ZRgpQbY&t=23m7s

“What’s racist about that?” Irving wondered. “You are not being serious,” was Paxman’s  reply. Paxman, one of Britain’s best TV journalists, was, like the rest of us, trained to react to soundbites. “Aryan is a racial categorisation” he insisted.

Back in 2000, Paxman probably failed to see that,

if Jews are entitled to identify politically as a race, as a biology or as set of cultural symptoms then Whites, Muslims and everyone else must surely be entitled to do the same.

Back in 2000, Irving understood this potential Identitarian shift. Sixteen years later, Donald Trump and Nigel Farage translated this Identitarian shift into a victory. The Clintons, the Soros’ and the Deborah Lipstadts of this world are still struggling to make sense of it.

‘Denial’, is actually a film about righteousness, exceptionalism and victimhood.  It is about the condition of being consumed by self-love, that blind belief that justice is always on your side, that you are the eternal victim and the other, namely the ‘Goy’ is always the murderous aggressor.

But this type of ‘denial’ can be dealt with easily and here is just one example: The Jewish press in Britain  complains constantly that antisemitism is soaring. The more funds the British government dedicates to fighting antisemitsm, the more antisemitic incidents are recorded. I guess the time is ripe for Jews to listen to David Irving and ask themselves why?

If Jews want anti-Semitism to come to an end once and for all, all they need do is to self-reflect. However, my personal experience suggests that once you do that, you may stop being a Jew.

Note: It is worth mentioning that, since the 2000 trial, Irving is on record on numerous occasions as revising his views on the Holocaust and on the destruction of European Jews. Certainly, as he moves along, David Irving at least is able to revise the past.

 

Donald Trump vs. Jackie Walker

January 30, 2017  /  Gilad Atzmon

The Guardian reports today that the White House has defended its omission of Jews and antisemitism from a statement remembering the Holocaust by saying that Donald Trump’s administration “took into account all of those who suffered”.

In practice the conservative ‘reactionary’ president has succeeded where ultra progressive Jackie Walker failed.  Walker was suspended from the Labour party a few months ago for pointing out that the Holocaust Memorial Day was not wide-ranging enough to include other genocides.

On International Holocaust Remembrance Day last Friday, the White House ‘failed’ to mention Jews, Judaism or antisemitism. The presidential statement, instead, universally referred to the suffering of all innocent people, a fact that upset many American Jewish leaders such as Jonathan Greenblatt,  the head of the Anti-Defamation League and Steven Goldstein, the executive director of the Anne Frank Centre.  Both Goldstein and Greenblatt believe that the Holocaust is a jews-only territory and the holocaust memorial must promote the primacy of Jewish suffering. 

But for the rest of humanity, it seems, it has become clear that the Jewish State is at the root of a regional disaster. The rest of humanity is also becoming aware that it is the Jewish lobby and Zio-cons that are pushing for more and more global conflicts whether it is a war against Libya, Syria, Iran or Iraq. Those who follow my writings are aware of Israeli writer Sever Plocker, who admitted a few years ago on the Zionist outlet Ynet that “We (the Jews) mustn’t forget that some of greatest murderers of modern times were Jewish.”  Plocker basically accepted that the Holodomor, the systematic starvation of Ukrainian peasants, was largely perpetrated  by a bunch of Jewish bolsheviks who were “Stalin’s willing executioners” (as Jewish historian Yuri Slezkine refers to them in his monumental The Jewish Century)

Jackie Walker was obviously spot on suggesting that the holocaust memorial day must address other people’s suffering. Walker is a Black woman, she would probably have liked to see the Holocaust memorial day commemorating the crimes of slavery.

Bizarrely enough, despite progressive Jackie Walker telling the truth,  she was expelled by her ‘progressive’ party yet it was the ‘reactionary’ Donald Trump who succeeded in making this day universal. This anomaly demands our attention, because it is far from being a coincidence. In the world in which we live, it is often the so-called ‘reactionaries’ who lead the push for universal thinking, while those who claim to be ‘progressives’ often subscribe to tribalism and the primacy of one people’s suffering.

Donald Trump’s Holocaust message ignores JEWS

Posted on

Bibi_Hitler[1]Jonathan Greenblatt, the top gun at Israel lobby ADL, slammed US president Donald Trump over not acknowledging the six million Jews who died in his first Holocaust Memorial Daymessage on Friday.

“@WhiteHouse statement on #HolocaustMemorialDay, misses that it was six million Jews who perished, not just ‘innocent people,’”Greenblatt tweeted. “Puzzling and troubling @WhiteHouse #HolocaustMemorialDay stmt has no mention of Jews. GOP and Dem. presidents have done so in the past.”

I wonder, if Greenblatt would condemn Benjamin Netanyahu or members of Likud party over holding a retreat for party activists in Eilat that began on the memorial day.

If Menachem Begin was alive, he would never have allowed this to happen.  It undermined the work Israel had done to get the nations of the world to acknowledge the murder of six million Jews,” Yair Lapid, opposition leader said on Saturday.

Donald Trump’s official statement said: “It is with a heavy heart and somber mind that we remember and honor the victims, survivors, heroes of the Holocaust. It is impossible to fully fathom the depravity and horror inflicted on innocent people by Nazi terror. Yet, we know that in the darkest hours of humanity, light shines the brightest. As we remember those who died, we are deeply grateful to those who risked their lives to save the innocent.”

Last year, Justin Trudeau, as prime minister of Canada insulted the Holocaust Industry the same way.

On this day, we pay tribute to the memory of the millions of victims murdered during the Holocaust. We honour those who survived atrocities at the hands of the Nazi regime, and welcome their courageous stories of hope and perseverance. The Holocaust is a stark reminder of the dangers and risks of allowing hate, prejudice, and discrimination to spread unchallenged. It also reminds us that silence must never be an option when humanity is threatened. As we pause to educate ourselves and our families on the bitter lessons of the Holocaust, we also strengthen our resolve to work with domestic and international partners to continue defending human rights and condemning intolerance,” Justin Trudeau said.

Last year, the Organized Jewry condemned fellow Jew, former secretary of state, John Kerry, for belittling the Jews by saying: “On this day, we pause to reflect on the irredeemable loss of six million Jews and countless Poles, Roma, LGBT people, J Witnesses, and persons with disabilities brutally murdered by the Nazis because of who they were or what religion they practiced.”

Last year, British Labour party leader with Jewish family roots, Jackie Walker, pulled the rug under Israel Lobby feet by saying: “In terms of Holocaust Day, wouldn’t it be wonderful if Holocaust Day was open to all people who experienced Holocaust?,”

It’s customary for all Western leaders to commemorate the HMD event by reminding the White Christian folks how much their ancestors hated the Jews.

GERMANY – Jews Furious At German Politician’s Call To End Nazi Guilt

The Ugly Truth

holocaust

Berlin (AFP) – A leading member of German right-wing populist party AfD sparked an outcry Wednesday by criticising the Holocaust memorial in Berlin and calling for the country to stop atoning for its Nazi past.

Bjoern Hoecke’s comments also exposed a damaging split in the anti-immigration party, just months before Germany heads to the polls.

“Up to now, our state of mind is still one of a totally defeated people… We Germans, our people, are the only people in the world who have planted a monument of shame in the heart of the capital,” Hoecke told party faithful including youth members, according to a video of the speech circulated online.

“We need nothing less than a 180-degree shift in the politics of remembrance,” he said in the remarks on Tuesday to chants of “Germany, Germany”.

Instead of introducing younger generations to home-grown “internationally-acclaimed philosophers, musicians and ingenious inventors… German history has been made lousy and ridiculous,” he complained, winning a standing ovation from the crowd.

“There is no moral responsibility to make yourself disappear,” said Hoecke, who was a high school sports and history teacher, adding that Germany should instead “build up a positive relationship with our history”.

The comments were met with an instant uproar, with Social Democrat vice chief Ralf Stegner accusing Hoecke of making a “hate incitement speech” — which is illegal in Germany — that called for history to be rewritten.

Chairwoman of the Greens party Simone Peter said the comments were “unspeakable” and demanded an apology from the AfD to Jews.

Germany’s Central Council of Jews also lashed out, accusing the politician of trampling on six million Jewish Holocaust victims murdered by the Nazis.

“The AfD has shown its real face with these anti-Semitic and extremely hostile words,” said the council’s chairman Josef Schuster, adding that he “never thought that 70 years after the Holocaust, a politician in Germany could say such things”.

Council of Europe chief Thorbjorn Jagland also weighed in, saying that “calling our remembrance culture into question is outrageous and dangerous”.

– ‘A burden’ –

The case also exposed a rift within the party.

AfD co-leader Frauke Petry told Young Freedom weekly that the episode showed that “Hoecke has become a burden on the party with his go-it-alone attitude and constant sniping”.

But deputy chief Alexander Gauland defended the politician, telling national news agency DPA that Hoecke had “in no manner criticised the remembrance of the Holocaust”.

In a post on Facebook on Wednesday, Hoecke also insisted that he had been misinterpreted and that he “described the Holocaust… as a shame for our people”.

The AfD had started out as an anti-euro party, but has since morphed into an anti-immigration outfit railing against Chancellor Angela Merkel’s liberal refugee policy that brought some 890,000 refugees to Germany in 2015 alone.

The party, which disputes the place of Islam in Germany, is polling nationwide at around 12 to 15 percent ahead of general elections.

Hoecke, who is a regional deputy in the eastern state of Thuringia, is viewed as one of the most right-leaning leaders of the populist party.

In December 2015, he sparked outrage when he said that the “reproductive behaviour of Africans” could be a threat for Germany.

Most recently, he was greeted by students chanting “Nazis out” as he tried to make a speech at a university in the eastern city of Magdeburg, and had to leave the hall under police escort. 

zundel-off-your-knees-germany

SOURCE

‘6 Million Jews’–The History of a Number

A Curious Fixation on the number ‘6 million’

As we see in the video above, “six million Jews” suffered death and a host of other misfortunes…in Russia in 1915; “the entire world” in 1918; in Ukraine and Poland in 1919; in eastern Europe–also in 1919; “eastern Europe and Palestine” in 1920; central and eastern Europe, also in 1920; the Soviet Union in 1921;  southeastern Europe in 1931; and in central Europe in 1938. Oh yes, and we also have a newspaper mentioning “the European holocaust” in 1936–before the outbreak of World War II.

Hot Off The Press – Britain Pulled the Strings Behind Anti Settlement Resolution

December 27, 2016  /  Gilad Atzmon

By Gilad Atzmon

Ten days ago, pretty much out of the blue, British PM Theresa May announced that she decided to accept the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism and to integrate it into British law. Jews in Britain and all over the world were over the moon.  Tonight we learn that May’s declaration was a preemptive move. It was Britain rather than the USA that had been pulling the strings behind the anti Israel Security Council resolution.

Haaretz reports tonight  that it was actually the Brits that “encouraged New Zealand to continue pushing for a vote even without Egyptian support.” Israeli diplomats say that from information that reached the Foreign Ministry in Jerusalem, British legal figures and diplomats had been working directly with the Palestinians on the wording of the resolution even before it was distributed by Egypt the first time on Wednesday evening.

The suspicion in Jerusalem is that the British had been working during all those days for the Americans to make sure the “resolution was to U.S. President Barack Obama’s liking, but without the need to intervene directly in formulating it.”

“We know how to read Security Council resolutions,” a senior Israeli diplomat said in the most non-diplomatic manner. “This is not a text that was formulated by the Palestinians or Egypt, but by a Western power.”

Western diplomats have confirmed to Haaretz that there is“no proof that it was the U.S. administration that was behind the whole move.”

Zionists all over the world praised Theresa May in the passing week for adopting the IHRA definition of antisemitism. The notoriously imbecilic Zionist Manfred Gerstenfeld wrote in the Jerusalem Post  “in the definition text it says that it is antisemitic to apply double standards by requiring of Israel a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.” The truth of the matter is that Theresa May has managed to single out the Jewish state and its criminality.  Gerstenfeld thought PM May was about to shatter the BDS once and for all. The fact is that the recent security council resolution has achieved far more than the BDS ever dreamed of.

I guess the Jewish Lobby here may gather it by now—their only potential ally within British politics is Jeremy Corbyn and what ever is left of the Labour party.

 

P.S my son this evening: “She already stole Corbyn’s left-wing rhetoric, can’t she let him keep the anti-Israeli mantle at least?”

The Wandering Jew

September 22, 2016  /  Gilad Atzmon

the wandering jew.jpg

By Gilad Atzmon

This time back to Germany.  Reuters reported yesterday that

“…for London rabbi Julia Neuberger, Britain’s vote to leave the European Union has had a very personal impact: she has decided to seek German citizenship, laying to rest her family’s painful legacy of the Nazi era.”

It seems that

“…a significant number of Jewish Britons whose dismay over Brexit has led them to invoke a German law allowing people stripped of German citizenship by the Nazis between 1933 and 1945, and their descendants, to have it restored.”

But here’s the good news. Rabbi Neuberger feels she finally has made her peace with Germany. If only we had known that all it takes for a Jew to forgive Germany and to put the Holocaust behind is a bit of British patriotism well, we could have saved ourselves a lot of time and energy.  And by the way, if the Jews are now returning to Germany, maybe we Brits can reclaim their Imperial War Museum, now reduced to a permanent holocaust shrine.

But why does the Rabbi and other Jews want to be Germans again? The answer lies in the ‘Wandering’. Jews just love to travel and, as Rabbi Neuberger said:

“German passport holds the promise of a future with full access to the EU and its practical benefits such as freedom to travel” and she went on to say “We can then live and work anywhere in a bloc that has 27 other nations – rights that Britons may no longer enjoy after Brexit is enacted.”

Astonishingly enough, the Rabbi is a member of the House of Lords. Now, I could be wrong but is her behaviour here the kind of patriotism one would expect from a British Lord?  Rabbi Neuberger offers an explanation. Deep inside, she is admits to be German: “there is some German in me after all and it goes very deep,” she said.

Reuters suggests that 

“It is a remarkable twist of history that Jews who lost family members in the Holocaust are now using such old documents to obtain modern Germany’s maroon-colored passports.”

No, it’s not remarkable at all. Berlin has been attracting Israelis for at least a decade.

Julia Neuberger with her grandmother's J-stamped passport (Photo: Reuters)

Julia Neuberger with her grandmother’s J-stamped passport (Photo: Reuters)

Apparently the Rabbi is not going to flee immediately. “Like other British Jews seeking German citizenship, Neuberger intends to stay in Britain.”  I suppose this is because there is just too much for the Rabbi to lose.  Rabbi Neuberger’s family has reached prominence in Britain’s public life – “her husband is a leading academic and her brothers-in-law include the president of the supreme court.”

And the Rabbi is not alone. Michael Newman, chief executive of the Association of Jewish Refugees told Reuters

“We all don’t know what the future will hold and want to make sure that we, but also mainly our children, continue to have access to Europe.”

So, is it not the case that here Newman expresses the true meaning of Jewish Pre-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). The Jews are always ready and waiting for the next Shoah and the take-home message is clear: rootedness and dwelling are probably not characteristics associated with Jewish culture and identity. Wandering is and remains a prime Jewish trait.

%d bloggers like this: