How can that NOT be a Hate Crime?
Jewish Witnesses for Peace and Friends staged a protest at the Holocaust Memorial Center on their commemoration of “Yom HaShoah Holocaust Day of Remembrance”, Sunday April 27th.
The reason for this protest was to challenge the power these museums have for manipulating peoples’ emotions to ensure that criticism of Israel relegates those who do to hateful status. We purchased six new signs for this event with the following slogans:
Free Ernst Zundel
Support Historical Revisionism
Museum or Manipulation?
Tell us the Truth
End the Palestinian holocaust
Support Open Debate (CODOH)
Eight members of JWPF stood outside this museum in protest, while three members and supporters went inside for a glimpse of what was going on. Some of the protesters felt a tad uncomfortable holding the new signs, and chose to display some of our regular, anti-Israel signs. The only altercation occurred when two very large men in a pickup got out of their truck and physically intimidated Laila, a small protester. Ironically, the sign Laila was holding did not challenge the Jewish Holocaust narrative at all; it read “Israel: No Right to Exist.”
Fortunately, we had contacted the Farmington Hills Police Department prior to our showing up, and when an officer spotted this large man moving towards Laila, he drove across Orchard Lake Road with lights flashing and siren whooping. He addressed the two men, one of whom said “I’m Jewish. How can that sign not be a hate crime?” See photo below. The officer gave a textbook performance on how to deescalate a tense situation, assuring the irritated man that if he wanted to hold a sign in support of Israel, the FHPD was there to protect his rights as well.
On the way to the protest, some JWPF members read Dan McGowan’s 2009 Op-ed titled “What Does Holocaust Denial Really Mean” (reprinted after signature) in which he states one of the reasons there exist 44 Jewish Holocaust museums in the United States:
“… the Holocaust itself has been used as the sword and shield in the quest to build a Jewish state between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River, where even today over half the population is not Jewish”
So in the opinion of this writer and many members of JWPF, we feel that Jewish Holocaust museums are fair game for venues of protest. JWPF has been challenging Jewish Power since 2003, and our protest Sunday was consistent with this goal. By imprisoning non-violent people – like Ernst Zundel and Germar Rudolf – for their historical research, Jewish intellectuals expose themselves as wanting more to silence their critics rather than defeat them in open debate. What are they afraid of?
There was no Vigil Report for 04-12-14 and 04-19-14
April 12: seven vigilers
April 19: seven vigilers
April 26: ten vigilers
Exercising Free Speech Rights for ten years
Jewish Witnesses for Peace and Friends
What Does Holocaust Denial Really Mean?
by Daniel McGowan / February 17th, 2009
In April 2007 the European Union agreed to set jail sentences up to three years for those who deny or trivialize the Holocaust.1 More recently, in response to the remarks of Bishop Richard Williamson, the Pope has proclaimed that Holocaust denial is “intolerable and altogether unacceptable.”
But what does Holocaust denial really mean? Begin with the word Holocaust. The Holocaust2 (spelled with a capital H) refers to the killing of six million Jews by the Nazis during World War II. It is supposed to be the German’s “Final Solution” to the Jewish problem. Much of the systematic extermination was to have taken place in concentration camps by shooting, gassing, and burning alive innocent Jewish victims of the Third Reich.
People like Germar Rudolf, Ernst Zundel, and Bishop Williamson who do not believe this account and who dare to say so in public are reviled as bigots, anti-Semites, racists, and worse. Their alternate historical scenarios are not termed simply revisionist, but are demeaned as Holocaust denial. Rudolf and Zundel were shipped to Germany where they were tried, convicted, and sentenced to three and five years, respectively. Williamson may not be far behind.
Politicians deride Holocaust revisionist papers and conferences as “beyond the pale of international discourse and acceptable behavior.”3 Non-Zionist Jews who participate in such revisionism, like Rabbi Dovid Weiss of the Neturei Karta, are denounced as “self-haters” and are shunned and spat upon. Even Professor Norman Finkelstein, whose parents were both Holocaust survivors and who wrote the book, The Holocaust Industry, has been branded a Holocaust denier.
But putting aside the virile hate directed against those who question the veracity of the typical Holocaust narrative, what is it that these people believe and say at the risk of imprisonment and bodily harm? For most Holocaust revisionists or deniers if you prefer, their arguments boil down to three simple contentions:
1. Hitler’s “Final Solution” was intended to be ethnic cleansing, not extermination.
2. There were no homicidal gas chambers used by the Third Reich.
3. There were fewer than 6 million Jews killed of the 55 million who died in WWII.
Are these revisionist contentions so odious as to cause those who believe them to be reviled, beaten, and imprisoned? More importantly, is it possible that revisionist contentions are true, or even partially true, and that they are despised because they contradict the story of the Holocaust, a story which has been elevated to the level of a religion in hundreds of films, memorials, museums, and docu-dramas?
Is it sacrilegious to ask, “If Hitler was intent on extermination, how did Elie Wiesel, his father, and two of his sisters survive the worst period of incarceration at Auschwitz?” Wiesel claims that people were thrown alive into burning pits, yet even the Israeli-trained guides at Auschwitz refute this claim.
Is it really “beyond international discourse” to question the efficacy and the forensic evidence of homicidal gas chambers? If other myths, like making soap from human fat, have been dismissed as Allied war propaganda, why is it “unacceptable behavior” to ask if the gas chamber at Dachau was not reconstructed by the Americans because no other homicidal gas chamber could be found and used as evidence at the Nuremburg trials?
For more than fifty years Jewish scholars have spent hundreds of millions of dollars to document each Jewish victim of the Nazi Holocaust. The Nazis were German, obsessed with paperwork and recordkeeping. Yet only 3 million names have been collected and many of them died of natural causes. So why is it heresy to doubt that fewer than 6 million Jews were murdered in the Second World War?
“Holocaust Denial” might be no more eccentric or no more criminal than claiming the earth is flat, except that the Holocaust itself has been used as the sword and shield in the quest to build a Jewish state between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River, where even today over half the population is not Jewish.
The Holocaust narrative allows Yad Vashem, the finest Holocaust museum in the world, to repeat the mantra of “Never Forget” while it sits on Arab lands stolen from Ein Karem and overlooking the unmarked graves of Palestinians massacred by Jewish terrorists at Deir Yassin. It allows Elie Wiesel to boast of having worked for these same terrorists (as a journalist, not a fighter) while refusing to acknowledge, let alone apologize for, the war crimes his employer committed. It makes Jews the ultimate victim no matter how they dispossess or dehumanize or ethnically cleanse indigenous Palestinian people.
The Holocaust story eliminates any comparison of Ketziot or Gaza to the concentration camps they indeed are. It memorializes the resistance of Jews in the ghettos of Europe while steadfastly denying any comparison with the resistance of Palestinians in Hebron and throughout the West Bank. It allows claims that this year’s Hanukah Massacre in Gaza, with a kill ratio of 100 to one, was a “proportionate response” to Palestinian resistance to unending occupation.
The Holocaust is used to silence critics of Israel in what the Jewish scholar, Marc Ellis, has called the ecumenical deal: you Christians look the other way while we bludgeon the Palestinians and build our Jewish state and we won’t remind you that Hitler was a good Catholic, a confirmed “soldier of Christ,” long before he was a bad Nazi.
The Holocaust narrative of systematic, industrialized extermination was an important neo-conservative tool to drive the United States into Iraq. The same neo-con ideologues, like Norman Podoretz, routinely compare Ahmadinejad to Hitler and Nazism with Islamofascism with the intent of driving us into Iran. The title of the recent Israeli conference at Yad Vashem made this crystal clear: “Holocaust Denial: Paving the Way to Genocide.”
“Remember the Holocaust” will be the battle cry of the next great clash of good (Judeo/Christian values) and evil (radical Islamic aggression) and those who question it must be demonized if not burned at the stake.
1. Associated Press, “EU approves criminal measures against Holocaust denial,” Haaretz, 19 April 2007. [↩]
2. Holocaust. Dictionary.com. The American Heritage® New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy, Third Edition. Houghton Mifflin Company, 2005. [↩]
3. Statements of Senator Hillary Clinton. [↩]
Daniel McGowan is a Professor Emeritus at Hobart and William Smith Colleges. Because of admonishment by the administration, it is hereby stated that the above remarks are solely those of the author. Hobart and William Smith Colleges neither condone nor condemn these opinions. Furthermore, the author has been instructed to use his personal email address of firstname.lastname@example.org and not his college email at email@example.com for those wishing to contact him with comments or criticisms. Read other articles by Daniel.
This article was posted on Tuesday, February 17th, 2009 at 9:00am and is filed under Freedom of Speech, History, Propaganda.