Thoughts on Youtube’s banning of Anthony Lawson’s latest video, based on a vague complaint from an apparently nonexistent person.
April 1st, 2011
Today is as good a day as any to admit it: I am a holocaust denier.
I deny that the US military’s slaughter of two million Muslims as revenge for 9/11, funded by my family’s and friends’ and neighbors’ tax dollars, constitutes a holocaust.
I deny that the Zionist genocide of Palestine constitutes a holocaust.
I deny that the European settlers’ genocide of tens of millions of Native Americans, perpetrated by some of my own ancestors, constitutes a holocaust.
I deny that the mass murder of tens of millions of Africans in the New World slave trade, perpetrated by some of my own ancestors, constitutes a holocaust.
I deny that the firebombings of German cities including Dresden, and the nuclear bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, constitute holocausts.
And I deny that the German murders of Gypsies, Slavs, handicapped people, communists, Jews, and others during World War II constitutes a holocaust.
The root meaning of the word holocaust is “a religious sacrifice consumed by fire.” There is nothing religious about the mass murders listed above, or the dozens of other similar episodes. God doesn’t want us to mass-murder our fellow human beings.
I deny that these and other stupid, evil mass murders have any religious significance whatsoever. I deny that histories of these mass murders are sacred in any way. I deny that any of these episodes of mass murder or genocide somehow justify other episodes of mass murder or genocide. I deny that the people who question historical details of any of these stories are heretics. I deny that they should be silenced or jailed.
I guess that makes me a holocaust denier. So go ahead: Burn me at the stake.
In the minds of witch-burners, there is something sacred about burning people at the stake. Especially people like me.
What can you say about people like that? “Say to the unbelievers: I do not worship what you worship, and you do not worship what I worship. I do not worship what you worship. And you do not worship what I worship. To you your religion, and to me my religion.” (Qur’an 109).
13 Thoughts to “I Am a Holocaust Denier”
When it becomes clear that Lipstadt has nothing clever to say about the subject (or maybe any subject) she pulls the rabbit out of her hat, or should we say, she pulls Ahmadinejad out of her wig. “During the past five years we have heard a stream of Holocaust denial, overt anti-Semitism, and threats against Israel emanate from the mouth of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad… Ahmadinejad’s Holocaust denial is linked directly to his animus toward Israel.”
And this is where Jewish past, present and future are wrapped together into a collective meaning that appears totally impervious to reason, ethics or humanity. It is obviously clear that those who oppose Israeli barbarism may, at a certain stage, look at the Zionist’s raison d'être, namely the holocaust. It is obviously natural for those who detest Israeli lies to scrutinise every Israeli or Jewish narrative – And the question is, what is so wrong with doing so? Why are Jews, or at least some Jews, horrified by the idea that others might be suspicious of aspects of their historical narratives? Why is it so difficult for Lipstadt to accept that Ahmadinejad opposes Israel, and also, questions aspects of the Jewish past?
-Gilad Atzmon: Taking Deborah Lipstadt Apart http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/gilad-atzmon-taking-deborah-lipstadt-apart.html#entry10995362
How can you deny something that did not happen?
Kudos! Another well-crafted declaration and I agree with you!
Shari (Los Angeles)
Rather childish blog post.
Childlike in simplicity, perhaps. But what's childish about deconstructing the irrational and indefensible beliefs of the human sacrifice cults?
You may care to investigate the suppressed facts of the so-called "Russian" revolution of 1917 and the following decades, when the Bolsheviks murdered tens of millions of Christian Russians and Ukrainians.
You can then deny that holocaust too, and just like all the others (with the exception of the alleged 1945 one) you won't get 5 to 12 years in a neoBolshevik European Gulag for opinion crime.
Research which group fomented the slaughter of Christian Russia, planned it, financed it, directed it, and then gave it a name designed to hide their culpability for it.
Hint: It wasn't a Christian coup; it was a …… coup.
"The Holocaust" was a religious sacrifice alright. The Zionists sacrificed their own for 'the greater good.' The Nazis were Zionists, and the inner sanctum of the Zionist Cabal secretly revere Der Fuhrer as the father of modern Israel. He was Jewish, after all. And quite possibly a bastard Rothschild. And was well funded by the Zionist machinations of Wall Street. What more is there to know.
Great post here Dr. Barrett, I'm glad to see you address this issue. The Holocaust, as we know it, is a big time fraud. WWII was an ugly, brutal war, instigated by Zionist Jews (just like WWI) largely.
Dr. Barrett, I've you've never read this, please do so:
ProfJoe223 is just trying to keep his job, covering up one of the greatest lies of all time, so we can easily dismiss HIS childish attempt at discrediting your well reasoned, thoughtful and, yes, simple, post here.
Keep up the good work my friend! Love listening to your radio podcasts!
Interesting piece here:
Please note that my post recontextualizes the notion of "holocaust" but does not cast doubt on any specific versions of any historical events.
I do think it's weird that "holocaust supporters" – people who say "Well, in the long run it's a good thing that the Europeans took over North America" or "it's a good thing that the European Zionists took over Palestine" – get off easier in the media than so-called "holocaust deniers," meaning people who cast doubt on historical details.
The US is pretty much a nation of "holocaust supporters."
great one !
Well Said Kevin!!! You Rock Dude!
Kevin, you seem to be turning it up a notch of late. I've just loved your recent guests and see you are still on the offensive without being offensive. Of course, why should we bother to be inoffensive since the opposition is anything but?