Reign of Terror and the Holocaust Racket
by Alan Stang
March 5, 2009
You probably have long since figured that sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof, but something immensely evil is snaking through the world that I have yet to say anything about. What inspires me to do so now is a statement Richard Prasquier recently made. Prasquier is a cardiologist and is president of the Representative Council of French Jewry (CRIF). Prasquier says, “Today we strongly reaffirmed that the denial of the Shoah is not an opinion, but a crime.”
“Shoah” is the Hebrew word for Holocaust. The occasion for Prasquier’s reaffirmation was a meeting of world Jewish leaders with Vatican officials about Catholic Bishop Richard Williamson, who stands accused of “anti-Semitism.” Williamson says there were no gas chambers in the Nazi concentration camps and that no more than 300,000 Jews perished in them, not the official figure of six million.
This appears to mean that the only way to head off the possibility of such a meeting at which you will be denounced is not just to affirm the Holocaust but also to affirm the official figure. Experts tell us there are two or three versions of “Holocaust denial.” A few “deniers” say there never was any such thing as the Holocaust. Others say some Jews did die, not victims of a plan, but of typhus or another disease.
A third kind of “denier” says yes, there was a Holocaust, but it killed nowhere near as many Jews as six million. And every one of these versions of “Holocaust denial” generates considerable Jewish heat. Why? We don’t need to spend much time on the first version. It has few advocates. Yes, they walk among us, but in view of the Everest of evidence of the horror – all the arms with numbers on them – one would have to be either an imbecile or a Nazi psychotic to maintain it.
These are the people who claim Jews run the world and cause whatever goes wrong; and that every traitor from Clinton to the Bushes to Mr. Big Ears are Jews. I do not believe these people are threats. Their affliction is only mildly contagious, but in my experience it is usually incurable. Instead of opposing the conspiracy for world government, they construct genealogies, because you never know who could be kosher.
Now what about the people who dispute the number of Jews killed? In our system of jurisprudence, they can send you to an American gas chamber for killing one – one – one human being. If you kill a pregnant woman, they can gas you for killing two. So, when I compare killing 300,000 people to killing six million people, I see no moral difference. I see statistics. Statistics are important, yes, because we always need to know what happened. But the guilt is the same. The satanic monsters who killed 300,000 are not less guilty.
But the Jewish heat I mentioned has provoked considerable rancor. After more than half a century of harangues, many people don’t know that most victims by far of the concentration camps and the war were not Jews. Many were Catholics. Others were nationals of the invaded countries. Our Communist media typically have foisted a fatally skewed impression upon us.
Indeed, the endless spate of books and movies and magazine articles and conferences and exhibits and et cetera have the calculated effect of always keeping the Holocaust before us, as if the defeat of Hitler’s Germany did not end it; or as if it could erupt again at any moment if we relax. The reason is obvious. What Dr. Norman Finkelstein, whose parents are Holocaust survivors, calls the “Holocaust Racket” is immensely lucrative, like the race racket. Its beneficiaries will not voluntarily give it up.
But, again, what inspires these remarks is Prasquier’s assertion that Holocaust denial is “not an opinion, but a crime.” Take some time to mull on this. It is truly breathtaking. According to Prasquier, if you refuse to toe the mandatory statistical line – if you endorse a different view of a now historical event that happened some sixty five years ago – you are a criminal and you should be locked up.
Where are all those disciples of Voltaire, who disagree with what you say, but will fight to the death for your right to say it? I am not aware that they have whispered a complaint. And what does it say about the credibility of your argument if you must throw people into prison to maintain it?
I do not exaggerate. Around the world, “Holocaust deniers” have been thrown into prison for years. The latest is Horst Mahler, who recently was sentenced to six years in prison in Germany for “volksverhetzung” (racial incitement). He says the Holocaust is “the biggest lie in world history.” He says every German must “deal a deathblow to the Holocaust religion as martyrs for the truth.”
The report I am reading from Munich says Mahler has been convicted of other “thought crimes.” Another case still pending would increase his sentence to twelve years, perhaps a life sentence because he is now seventy three. He stands accused of repeated dissemination of his views on the Internet – that’s right, “repeated” (more than once) – as well as distribution of a revisionist videotape and a CD and book (N.B., a book) by Germar Rudolf, now serving time himself for “Holocaust denial” in a German prison.
Indeed, Horst is even more kerfuffled than you think. In the 1970s, he was a founder of the Red Army Faction, aka the Baader-Meinhof gang, an extremely violent Communist terror gang tied to Palestinian revolutionaries and East Germany’s secret police, the Stasi. Horst’s gang perpetrated kidnappings and murders, killed thirty four people and injured hundreds. Maybe that was why he served ten years in the can.
Here in passing you see again the natural affinity between Communism and Nazism. Of course, it was der Führer himself who said that National Socialism (Nazism) was basically Marxist. So Mahler is not just another Dummkopf. He’s a lifelong Schweinerei, nutty enough to be baked into a strudel. But that is not the evil I speak of. By now, Horst is too decrepit, too big a joke to be dangerous.
The evil is the official German policy of throwing people into jail for public disagreement with official Holocaust doctrine. Remember, we are not talking about men who participated in the Holocaust. Even the craziest Holocaust racketeer does not accuse them of that. Horst, for instance, was nine when World War II ended. We are talking about men who are merely talking about it, who, as we say here in the States, are “politically incorrect.” By now you have long since seen where I am going.
It gets worse. Germany goes into court anywhere in the world and seeks extradition of anyone who says publicly that fewer than six million Jews were “finally solved,” or that gas chambers and crematoria were not the primary means of “solving” them. Ernst Zundel lived in Canada for forty years without a criminal blemish. He is a graphic artist whose work has appeared on the cover of Canada’s national magazine, Maclean’s. Then he lived a couple of years in Tennessee.
But Zundel also is crossways on the Holocaust. U.S. immigration officials in Washington, who couldn’t find an illegal alien if he hit them with a taco, arrested him on orders of der Fourth Reich and deported him back to Canada, where he spent a couple of years in solitary as a “threat to national security.” The Canadians sent him back to der Fourth Reich where he now sits in jail. The lawyer who defended him there in the show trial was sentenced to more than three years in jail for doing so.
Another is a world-class historian who went abroad to make a speech on the subject, was arrested and spent a couple of years in jail. I shall not name him. He does have exquisite taste in women, but I have a personal animus for him because at a book show in Chicago he made a pass at the Love Priestess, who had made the mistake of going to his booth a few feet away to tell him we have a mutual friend.
Dr. Frederick Toben is an Australian historian. Last October, en route to Dubai, he was arrested at Heathrow in London on application of der Fourth Reich, which demanded that he be deported to Germany for der usual show trial and prison. Toben has questioned the six-million figure and the methods of the Holocaust.
I hate to give the English credit for anything – they have always been our main enemy – but the devil is due here. The English courts rejected der Fourth Reich’s extradition petition and refused to send Toben to Germany. But he is still a hunted man. Mannheim prosecutor Andreas Grossman says, “England will not extradite him, but we will continue to attempt to have him arrested in other countries.”
So in der Third Reich there was book burning and arbitrary arrest, and in der Fourth Reich there is book burning and arbitrary arrest. Is that an example of plus ça change, etc., or of déjà vu? I see no problem if the Holocaust racketeers and deniers keep each other busy and knock each other out. But I am a literary man from my toenails to the tips of the hair I have left. My hackles automatically rise (what are hackles, anyway?) when I hear that someone is burning books.
Again I ask: Is there not something suspiciously wrong with your argument when you must throw someone into prison – however daft he is – to maintain it? The scariest thing about this issue is that once the principles have been installed the totalitarians can use them against everyone. They usually begin the process by attacking the unpopular.
Few people are as unpopular as a nutter who says there never was a Holocaust. But when it is illegal for Frederick Toben or Ernst Zundel or Horst Mahler to say something unpopular, it is also illegal for you to say something else unpopular. Presumably that is what the Holocaust Racketeers want because that is the natural consequence of their fanatic madness.
Remember, the report from Munich says Horst Mahler has been convicted of “thought crimes.” When I hear that phrase – “thought crimes” – I can feel the hair I have left standing up. What about you? If Horst’s thoughts are illegal, could your thoughts be illegal? Achtung! You are leaving der Western Sector!
Finally, if you have read this far, this piece is about free speech; it is not about the Holocaust. If you want to communicate with me about free speech, please do so. If you are either a Holocaust racketeer or denier, please do not waste my precious time with the usual frenetic contentions about whether anyone was killed and, if so, how many. I am not a statistician and have more important things to do.