We Are Living in a ‘Post-Truth’ Era


By Richard Edmondson

Recently Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov made an interesting comment. He described the time we are living in as a “post-truth” era. It’s a very apt, on-target description.

Lavrov made the comment at the Munich Security Conference, held February 17-19 in Munich, Germany. In his remarks at the gathering he spoke of the need for nations to seek harmony by advancing justice and also by practicing “modesty,” as he termed it. It’s hard to find fault with such a proposal.

“If everyone adopts that approach,” said Lavrov, “we could overcome the period of post-truth fast and resist information wars imposed on the international community.”

“Information wars” in a “post-truth” era–this of course is what we are experiencing now.

Lavrov also said that the expansion of NATO “has led to an unprecedented level of tension over the last 30 years in Europe,” and yet Russia now nonetheless seeks a relationship with the US based upon “pragmatism, mutual respect, and an understanding of special responsibility for global stability.”

Compare Lavrov’s remarks to those of Vice President Mike Pence, who represented America at the conference. Pence alluded to President Trump’s desire for better relations with Russia, but at the same time he also adopted a belligerent tone, calling for Russia to be held “accountable” for events in Ukraine.

“In regard to Ukraine we must hold Russia accountable and demand that they honor the Minsk agreements, beginning by deescalating the violence in eastern Ukraine,” Pence said.

He also spoke of “Russia’s efforts to redraw international borders by force,” an apparent reference to the alleged “forced annexation” of Crimea. Despite claims perpetually made by the media in this post-truth era, Crimea was not annexed by force. A referendum was held there on March 16, 2014 in which more than 96 percent of the people voted to join Russia. The referendum took place after the US had sponsored a coup in Kiev, overthrowing the legitimate, democratically-elected government.

One wonders: does Pence believe the US should be held “accountable” for organizing the coup which triggered the Ukrainian conflict in the first place? Apparently he does not.

Another US speaker at the conference in Munich was Sen. John McCain, who discussed what he views as the indispensable role that America and the rest of the West have played in advancing “truth,” and in advancing the current global order as well as the “prosperity” that the West now supposedly enjoys.

“We must take our own side in this fight,” said McCain. “We must be vigilant. We must persevere. And through it all, we must never, never cease to believe in the moral superiority of our own values—that we stand for truth against falsehood, freedom against tyranny, right against injustice, hope against despair.”

McCain made no mention of America’s shameful support for terrorists in Syria, and it defies logic of course to describe the US, whose mainstream media are widely recognized as the number one purveyors of fake news, as standing “for truth against falsehood” in today’s world.

The Arizona senator also described the West as having ushered in an “unprecedented period of security and prosperity that we have enjoyed for the past seven decades”–and of course for the wealthiest one percent, we are, no doubt about it, in an “unprecedented” period of prosperity. But the unemployment rolls and the numbers of homeless people on the streets of America would suggest that the “prosperity” has not been enjoyed by all. McCain may not be “certified,” as such, but he does appear to be a fully-fledged lunatic.

The unprecedented period of security and prosperity that we have enjoyed for the past seven decades did not happen by accident. It happened not only because of the appeal of our values, but because we backed them with our power and persevered in their defense. Our predecessors did not believe in the end of history—or that it bends, inevitably, toward justice. That is up to us. That requires our persistent, painstaking effort. And that is why we come to Munich, year after year after year.

McCain objectified his laudatory comments in terms of “the West,” for of course he was speaking at a conference held in the EU. But in his use of the words “we” and “us,” what he really meant was America. America is the “indispensable” and “exceptional” nation–this is the ideology relentlessly, one might even say fanatically, adhered to by US leaders and the mainstream media.

So it seems that while we get truth out of a Russian official like Lavrov, we get delusions, reverie, fantasy, and outright lies from our own leaders. Americans, I would say for the most part, are good, decent people. How did we end up in this fix?

Perhaps worth recalling are the words of Jesus: “The last will be first, and the first will be last.” If that principle applies to nations as well as to individuals, then the implications for America are not good.

By the way, those words–about the last becoming first and the first becoming last–appear in one form or another in Matthew 19:30 and again in 20:16, as well as in Mark 10:31 and Luke 13:30. Additionally, in Luke 9:48 we have Jesus telling his disciples that, “the one who is least among all of you is the one who is the greatest,” this after overhearing them arguing about which one was to become the “greatest.”

And let us not forget also the episode related in the Gospel of John of Jesus washing his disciple’s feet. What we can conclude, then, is that the practicing of humility was a central tenet of Jesus’ teachings. Perhaps little wonder that Jesus was not terribly popular with his fellow Jews. Jewish “exceptionalism” (or more specifically “chosenness”) was, and still is, a central component of Judaic belief.

And yes, what we have in America are leaders who, rather than practice humility, spout boastful words like McCain’s. Thus it should come as no surprise we now find ourselves in a “post-truth” era. After all, boasting and lying are two human traits which go very much hand in hand.

I often wonder when, if ever, we will have a leader who will make Americans proud to be Americans again. Sadly it has been a very long time since we had one.

نصرالله يقطع طريق الحرب الأميركية على إيران

نصرالله يقطع طريق الحرب الأميركية على إيران

روزانا رمّال

بعد دخول حزب الله الأزمة السورية من بابها العريض والمشاركة الميدانية القتالية فيها وتحقيقه مكاسب أمنية جديّة، وبعد دخول إيران الحرب بثقل عسكري واستخباري ولوجستي جنباً الى جنب مع الجيش السوري، لم يعد ممكناً فصل خطاب امين عام حزب الله السيد حسن نصرالله عن مركزية حضوره في هذا الحلف الذي أعلن منذ اقتسام ملف قتال «الإرهاب» في ما بينه بكل الاراضي السورية ان الخطر القومي وتهديد الأمن الحيوي للمحور هو «واحد».

المقاربة الإيرانية والسورية إضافة لحزب الله في مسألة مواجهة الانتكاسات أو تقاسم الأرباح في المنطقة أصبحا وجهة متكاملة ومؤسسة لهيكل المقاومة التي يعتبرها الحلف ضرورة في ديمومة رسالته وحضوره، ففي وقت تتمسك إيران بشعار الراعي للمقاومة والمستضعفين وكل أحرار العالم أمام الطغيان المتجسّد بمنظارها أميركياً و«إسرائيلياً»، باتت مسألة الدعم المباشر مترجمة واقعاً بحضور القوى القادرة على تبيان جدوى الحلف ومغزاه.

تقود إيران في اليمن حرباً غير مباشرة مع السعودية ومن ورائها «إسرائيل»، وقد أكد امين عام حزب الله السيد حسن نصرالله بذكرى مهرجان القادة الشهداء بأنها حرب «إسرائيلية». ضمن هذا المنطلق، يُشرّع حزب الله مسألة دعمه القتال في اليمن وهو ليس قتالاً ضد مجموعات إرهابية مثل داعش أو النصرة ولا يشبه على الإطلاق مسألة قرب الحدود مع لبنان على غرار مدينة القصير السورية وضرورة استباق الحرب قبل أن تصل لبنان، بل إنها ترجمة لواجب ودور تفرضه «إسرائيل» أينما وجِدت أو وجدت خيوط مشاريعها فتخلق «المشروعية».

هذا الحديث يؤكد ان حزب الله لا ينتظر إذناً ولا تمنعه «حدود» عن المشاركة في القتال داخل فلسطين المحتلة على غرار مشاركته في الحرب السورية بثقل، وفي الحرب العراقية واليمنية على شكل خبراء ومتدرّبين، كما أكد نائب الامين العام لحزب الله الشيخ نعيم قاسم لـ«البناء» في وقت سابق.

الأكيد أن حزب الله لن يتأخّر لحظة في المشاركة في أي دور قتالي داخل فلسطين المحتلة، وأنه كان ممكناً أن يتقدم المشهد لو كانت الأمور أسهل ومفتوحة لوجستياً، ولو كان هذا الأمر حاجة لا يستطيع الفلسطينيون تحقيقها. وهنا باب آخر يستدعي استذكار دعم إيران وحزب الله للحركات المقاومة على اختلافها داخل الأراضي المحتلة وخارجها.

«التدخل» «واجب»، حيث أمكن، بالنسبة لحزب الله الذي يشكل عصب هذا المحور، لكن الأهم قدرته على أداء أدوار استثنائية تحت عنوان صفته كحركة مقاومة لا تفتحها أو تشرّعها الصفة الرسمية للدول. لهذا السبب هو يشارك في حروب في اليمن والعراق وسورية من دون أن يشكل هذا توريطاً مباشراً للبنان أو حتى لتلك الحكومات أو الجهات التي شرعت مشاركته كـ»خيار خاص».

يرفع حزب الله مسألة قتال «إسرائيل» أينما وجدت عكس ما يُشاع أو يُطلب منه حصر المهمة في الأراضي اللبنانية، وهو أمر منافٍ للواجب والمقدّسات العقائدية ولروحية الصراع مع «إسرائيل» بالنسبة له.

خطاب نصرالله في ذكرى قادة حزب الله الشهداء جاء فيه ما يقلق «إسرائيل» لدرجة «مهولة» بالشقّ المتعلق في دعوته أو نصيحته للحكومة «الإسرائيلية» بأنه لا يجب عليها فقط إخلاء خزان الأمونيا في حيفا، بل عليها تفكيك مفاعل ديمونا النووي، والسلاح النووي «الإسرائيلي» الذي يشكّل تهديداً لكل المنطقة فيتحوّل عبر معادلة حزب الله هذه تهديداً لـ«إسرائيل» وشدّد عليها بأن المقاومة تفي بما تَعِد.

لكن هذا التهديد ليس تهديداً محصوراً بحسابات الحزب مع «إسرائيل» محلياً ولم يعد يتوقف عند كلمة خارجة عن منظومة أو محور بأكمله. فكلمة نصرالله التي تأتي بمقدمة هذا المحور في حربه مع «إسرائيل» وتوحيد جبهات القتال لكل المحور منذ الحرب السورية في المنطقة كلها هي إشارة شديدة الوضوح الى استحالة اعتبار مسألة الحرب الأميركية على إيران وما تطلقه الإدارة الأميركية من تصعيد كلامي «فُهم» على أنه نيات لحرب على طهران أمراً ممكناً أو بالاستطاعة فصله عن حيثية المحور ونظرته لمسألة الحروب الأميركية «الإسرائيلية». بالتالي حيث تكون «إسرائيل» سيكون هناك حزب الله أو مَن يستدعيه ضمن «الحلف». وهو الأمر نفسه الذي تعتمده واشنطن أو تل أبيب وحلفاؤهما في أي حرب على إيران بما يعنيه استخدام قواعد أميركية في الخليج لضرب إيران أو في تركيا. وهذا كله يبيح استخدام الحلفاء القدرات العسكرية الموحّدة كافة في حروبهم وهو ما تشرّعه العلوم العسكرية والسياسية ضمن ماهية الأحلاف وأدوارها تاريخياً.

وبعد رفع مرتبة تهديد حزب الله لمصاف الدرجة الأولى وفق التقارير الأمنية «الإسرائيلية»، وهو ما أعلنه نصرالله ليليه إيران ثم المقاومة الفلسطينية، فإن تحليل كلمة نصرالله في أجهزة الاستخبارات الأميركية و«الإسرائيلية» معاً سيأخذ بعين الاعتبار تعقيداً دقيقاً، وهو ما أخذه نصرالله على عاتقه بإعلانه استعداده لسحق قدرات «إسرائيل» النووية وغيرها بالكامل. وهو الأمر الذي «تخطّى» عملياً إشكالية ملف إيران «النووي» الذي أصبح يشكّل في هذه الحالة تلويحاً كلامياً وإعلامياً. فلم يصدر أي تهديد عن إيران باستخدام سلاح نووي ضد «إسرائيل» مثل ما ألمح أمين عام حزب الله وتناوله الخطر النووي على «إسرائيل» بشكل معاكس من جهة لبنان.

نصرالله يقطع الطريق على حرب أميركية «إسرائيلية» على إيران ويُبعد توقيت الحرب «الإسرائيلية» عن لبنان.

(Visited 1٬246 times, 109 visits today)
Related Videos

Related Articles

‘Open Bethlehem’–Podcast Discussion on Palestinian Film

Recently the good folks at We Hold These Truths uploaded a podcast featuring a discussion on the film, “Open Bethlehem.” That’s the trailer of the film you see above. The description of the podcast is below:

Victories for the struggle for peace and justice for Palestinians come slowly, but are coming more frequently. We discuss the inspiring documentary Open, Bethlehem by Palestinian filmmaker, Leila Sansour. and her Bethlehem passport project designed to put wings to her film. We also talk about a recent, major victory in Boulder, Colorado where a resolution to make the Palestinian city of Nablus a sister city to Boulder was passed by the city council over strong opposition from vocal, local Zionists.

You can go here to access the full podcast. And you can also go here to visit the “Open Bethlehem” website and here to apply for your own Bethlehem passport. Should you be issued a passport, you will automatically become eligible to become an official ambassador of the holy city where Jesus was born. Here is a picture of former President Jimmy Carter being issued his own passport:

 photo jcbethpssport_zps0wx4ipjw.jpg

The passport reads as follows:

“In that the bearer of this passport is a citizen of Bethlehem; that they recognize this ancient city provides a light to the world, and to all people who uphold the values of a just and open society; that they will remain a true friend to Bethlehem through its imprisonment, and that they will strive to keep the ideals of Bethlehem alive as long as the wall stands; we ask you to respect the bearer of the passport and to let them pass freely.”

Indian-Jewish ‘Lost Tribe’ Members to Settle in Occupied Palestine

 photo losttribe_zpsqxmkevkp.jpg

[ Ed. note -We now have a new group of “Jewish settlers” coming to lay claim to Palestinian land–only in this case they are coming all the way from India. I received the link to the following article by email sent from a friend of mine who comments as follows:

“Been to Nazareth…and Nazarene Illit is a duplicate suburb that bisects the Palestinian community of Nazareth…a beautiful small hilly small city w/lovely Palestinian churches and mosques in the older part but the govt will use these newly “chosen” to upset the ongoing struggles. The Naz.Illit is strictly jewish SETTLER….pushing them into a traditional Christian city of Nazareth….having already installed a BAPTIST EVANGELICAL COLLEGE from central Texas to play divide and conquer there with young people. A total absolute mess. Chaos reigns. Wish you could see the postcard beauty of Nazareth from every angle as it used to be….with a gigantic church at the very top of the mountain there….huge tourist draw… with the influx of these 3000 Beni Menashe Indians followed by another 7000 waiting to travel there thus 10,000 new immigrants influx should drive all sorts of wedges between many different groups….an incidious plan crafted to cause the most chaos possible no doubt.”

The new arrivals will be settled in the town of Nazareth Illit, also called Upper Nazareth, whose former mayor, Shimon Gapso, once issued a ban on Christmas trees. This putative “lost tribe” of Jews, who are being transplanted from northern India, is referred to as the Bnei Menashe. Wikipedia is not the best source of information on Middle East issues, but here is what they say about them:

The Bnei Menashe are made up of Mizo, Kuki and Chin peoples, who all speak Tibeto-Burman languages, and whose ancestors migrated into northeast India from Burma mostly in the 17th and 18th centuries…Prior to conversion in the 19th century to Christianity by Welsh Baptist missionaries, the Chin, Kuki, and Mizo peoples were animists; among their practices were ritual headhunting.[5] Since the late 20th century, some of these peoples have begun following Messianic Judaism. The Bnei Menashe are a small group who started studying and practicing Judaism since the 1970s in a desire to return to what they believe is the religion of their ancestors. The total population of Manipur and Mizoram is more than 3.7 million.

The Bnei Menashe number below 9,000; several hundred have emigrated to Israel. In 2003–2004 DNA testing showed that several hundred men of this group had no evidence of Middle Eastern ancestry.

Sounds very much like another case of those who “claim to be Jews, but are not.” Meanwhile, Palestinians who have been exiled from their homeland still are denied the right of return. The author of the JTA article below, however, seems to think that’s fine and dandy.


By Josefin Dolsten

(JTA) — One hundred and two members of the Jewish community in India, who trace their heritage to one of Israel’s lost tribes, are moving to Israel this week.

The immigrants, who hail from the northeastern Indian state of Mizoram — home to the second largest concentration of the country’s Bnei Menashe community, as they are called — will arrive in Israel on Tuesday and Thursday. The move is being facilitated by Shavei Israel, a nonprofit that seeks to connect “lost” and “hidden” Jews to the Jewish state.

The group plans to live in the city of Nazareth Illit, where other members of their community have already settled. Some 3,000 Bnei Menashe have immigrated to Israel in recent years, with another 7,000 remaining in India.

Their move represents the first time in three years that members of the Bnei Menashe community from Mizoram have moved to Israel, according to a statement by Shavei Israel.

“After 27 centuries of exile, this lost tribe of Israel is truly coming home,” said Shavei Israel founder Michael Freund. “But we will not rest until all the remaining Bnei Menashe still in India are able to make aliyah as well.”

Freund, a conservative writer and former aide to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, said his organization was hoping to bring more than 700 Jews from India to Israel this year.

In December, as they have in years past, thousands of members of the Bnei Menashe community gathered to celebrate Hanukkah in the town of Churachandpur, in the northeastern state of Manipur.

New Military Alliance to Be Formed in Middle East

New Military Alliance to Be Formed in Middle East

PETER KORZUN | 17.02.2017 | WORLD

New Military Alliance to Be Formed in Middle East

Combining available information to get the whole picture, one can see the situation in the Middle East changing drastically, especially as the US strategy is reviewed and new alliances are formed.

The Trump administration is in talks with Middle East allies about forming a military alliance that would share intelligence with Israel to help counter Iran, according to several Middle Eastern officials.

The planned coalition would include countries such as Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait and Bahrain. Egypt and Jordan have longstanding peace treaties with Israel. For the Arab countries involved, the alliance would have a NATO-style mutual-defense component under which an attack on one member would be treated as an attack on all, though details are still being worked out. The US and Israel will cooperate without full-fledged membership. According to the Wall Street Journal, «one Arab diplomat suggested that the notion that the Trump administration might designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist group was being floated as an incentive for Egypt to join the alliance».

US President Donald Trump has assured visiting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that Tehran would never be able to build a nuclear weapon.

«The security challenges faced by Israel are enormous, including the threat of Iran’s nuclear ambitions, which I’ve talked a lot about. One of the worst deals I’ve ever seen is the Iran deal», Trump told reporters at a joint news conference with Netanyahu at the White House. Reading the statement between the lines, it becomes evident that the US is ready to go much further than warnings and sanctions to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear capability.

Russian Izvestia daily reported the US plans to substantially increase its military presence in Iraq. The newspaper cited its own sources in the U.S. Republican Party. The plans include a few thousand troops to arrive in Iraq in the coming months. The reinforcement will continue the policy of the Obama administration, which was gradually expanding the military presence in that country.

It was reported on February 16 that the Pentagon was developing proposals for sending an unspecified number of American military personnel into Syria, conventional ground forces which would augment the 500 combat advisers already there coordinating efforts to destroy the Islamic State (IS).

Military Times reports that multiple US Army sources indicated that about two thousand soldiers with the 82nd Airborne Division’s 2nd Brigade Combat Team may soon bolster other Army elements already in the region. Currently, about 1,800 paratroopers from the 2nd BCT are in Iraq participating in the US military’s train-and-advise mission. The 82ndAirborne Division is based at Fort Bragg in North Carolina. Citing an unidentified U.S. defense official, CNN indicated additional deployments could happen within weeks. Today, there are about 5,000 US troops deployed to Iraq and another 500 in Syria.

The White House indicated in January that it could task the military with establishing «safe zones» on Syrian soil. A large number of troops would be needed to defend havens, pitting them against pro-government forces as well as rival rebel groups. Without approval by UN Security Council, few nations will contribute leaving the US alone to shoulder the main burden. Hundreds of aircraft will have to be deployed to carry out the mission.

Deploying substantial forces in the Middle East risks putting the US on a slippery slope to further involvement in the war. Safe zones should not become no-fly zones to impede the operations of Russian and Syrian air forces. If the US decides to continue with the idea, it should it become an issue on the agenda for talks with Russia before any practical steps are taken to implement it.

It’s not Arab states only. Army Gen. John Nicholson, the top US commander in Afghanistan, told lawmakers on February 9 that thousands more American or NATO troops are needed to break the «stalemate» between Afghan forces and the Taliban insurgent group while the IS also remains active in the nation. The general did not specify how many additional troops were needed, but did not rule out the potential for up to 30,000.

The strategy, which relied on special forces teams and intensive operations conducted by drones, may become a thing of the past, with the U.S. returning to large-scale presence.

The terrorist activities of the IS go beyond the scope of a regional problem. There are a few options here for cooperation of the military agencies and special services of Russia and the US ranging from intelligence exchange on IS to exercising influence on the countries affected by the war with the terrorist threat.

Whatever are the plans of Trump’s administration aimed at changing the Middle East strategy, the US cannot go it alone there. It needs allies, partners, and friendly pertinent actors to coordinate activities with. This shows how important it is to speed up bilateral and multilateral discussions.

It all goes to show that Russia and the US should speed up launching regular contacts to exchange opinions on the situation in the Middle East. On February 16, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Joseph Dunford met face to face with their Russian counterparts Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Chief of General Staff General Valeriy Gerasimov in Bonn and Baku respectively. Hopefully, the first contacts will spur the process and the parties will be engaged in dialogue concerning major security issues. The volatile situation in the Middle East should be addressed without delay as part of preparations for a possible summit in Slovenia.

Russia and the US: A Major Question Goes Unanswered

A rather fascinating interview with Stephen Cohen, professor emeritus of Russian studies at Princeton University–fascinating, perhaps, as much for what is said as what is left unspoken.

In Cohen’s view there is a major danger now of war breaking out between the US and Russia, and as he puts it, we presently are in “the single most dangerous moment in American-Russian relations.” I certainly would not take issue with that, nor would a good many others.

Three other important points he makes which I also would not take issue with are:

  • Russia has been deliberately portrayed (falsely) as “the number one existential threat” to America
  • There are different groups and factions within the CIA and other intelligence agencies that are at war with each other
  • It has been more important for the “forces in Washington to be rid of Assad” than to fight terrorists in Syria

The question he leaves unanswered,and which Abby Martin fails  even to ask, is what is the motive of these “forces in Washington” that are trying to provoke a war with Russia? More specifically, why are certain factions within the intelligence community at war with each other, what is the motive there, and is it possible some of these warring factions have loyalties to a country other than America? If so, which one? What exactly is the force that is driving this inflammatory outpouring of hostility toward Russia?

Cohen’s answer may well have been, “I don’t know,” but it would have been nice if Martin had at least asked.


Another question that arises is where do Trump’s own loyalties lie? He does seem to be running a lot of interference for Israel as the video here makes clear. People will certainly recall that during the campaign, Trump talked about “Muslims” who were seen celebrating the 9/11 attack on the World Trade Center.

The reality of course is that those seen celebrating–and who in fact were arrested on the day of 9/11–were  Israelis. Trump may well be sincere about wanting to “make America great again,” and if so what we have seen from him could be nothing more than genuine naivete on the subject of Israel, and most particularly on the subject of Israel and 9/11. A lot of people have been, and still are, willing to give him the benefit of the doubt on that. Of course the other possibility is too bleak to think about.


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.


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.


“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.


%d bloggers like this: