The twentieth century could be marked as the holocaust century; it was a time like no other for it’s scale of mass-murders and genocides. The holocausts of the twentieth century — each of them — should be studied, revised with an eye toward historic accuracy; and those revisions should be described in publications as often as opportunity permits. The more people know about the genesis — the driving forces behind these atrocities, the better they will be able to recognize the behaviors and events that lead to such holocausts.
 |
| Yagoda |
Of course, the leader of the Soviet Union at that time was Stalin. When a person reads anything about the Ukrainian holocaust, his name is usually the only one you will see connected to that crime; and the genocide is generally minimized, or made to look like something that it wasn’t. But just as Hitler couldn’t have carried out the Nazi holocaust alone, Stalin didn’t carry out the Ukrainian holocaust by himself. Hitler had Heinrich Himmler, Joseph Goebbels, Rudolf Hess and Hermann Goring, while Stalin had Lazar Moiseyevich Kaganovich, Vyacheslav Mikhailovich Skryabin (Molotov) and Enokh Gershevich Ieguda (Genrikh Grigoryevich Yagoda), to name just a few. While it’s quite common to point-out the German ethnicity of Hitler’s helpers, it is also quite common (and expected) for members of the Jewish community — or any non-Jewish writer of that history — to attempt to hide the Jewish ethnicity of Stalin’s comrades in mass-genocide.
There are many good reasons why the Ukrainian genocide needs further study, and recognition world-wide. At this point in time, many Jews and Gentiles alike believe that the word holocaust is a Jewish trademark; a word that belongs to the Holocaust Industry and Jewish shoah merchants; to use and profit from as they see fit. The misuse and promotion of the Nazi holocaust narrative has stripped all the victims of that crime of their sacred place in history, and turned them into a commodity, to be traded-on for large sums of money, political arm-twisting, and as fuel for culturally destructive victim-mythology. If the same amount of energy were given to learning about the Ukrainian holocaust, the Nazi holocaust might then be put into proper perspective and context. Nazi victims might no longer be used as leverage for profit, victim-mythology, and the theft of Palestinian lands. If the world knew that Jews were big players in the Bolshevik mass-murders that claimed upwards of 60 million people, Jews would ultimately benefit by being forced to face-up to the fallacy that they are superior. Jews willingly participated in the same kind of crimes as Nazis, and there can be no claim to superiority when such truths undoubtedly exist.
All of the worlds greatest historians have been revisionists, constantly looking back at primary sources in an effort to bring clarity and truth to history. The two historic events that face an uphill battle in that regard, are the Ukrainian and the Nazi holocausts. The only obstacle to bringing truth and clarity to those events by means of continued historic inquiry and revision, is Jewish tribal chauvinism. All other events in history are welcome and respected subjects for historical revision. The truth of those holocausts, when compared and put into context, threaten many Jews in their belief that they are the worlds singular victims; superior in their morality and intellect, and chosen by the God they have invented. Telling the whole truth about the holocausts of the first half of the twentieth century could work to deflate the Jewish ethos of superiority, and force them to face the fact that they are human, just like the rest of us.
Unfortunately, many Jews fight and dread the equalization that would occur if they were forced to face these simple truths. Many choose to expend enormous amounts of energy attempting to stigmatize revisionists as misfits. They curse them with words like anti-Semite, neo-Nazi and racist, in an effort to paint them as perverted social deviants. But how can a person who seeks truth and clarity in history possibly be considered a deviant? How is it possible to stigmatize a person for simply wanting to reach a truthful understanding of historic events? It isn’t, of course. The only thing revisionists are deviating from is Jewish demands to control historic narrative, for their own benefit. It’s about control: It has nothing to do with respecting historic truth. If it did, Jews would welcome revisionism with open arms. Calling a person an anti-Semite for seeking the truth is the true social perversion. It’s the true deviation from decency, and it should be stigmatized for the dishonest act that it represents.
Of course, the people who might benefit the most from the truth of twentieth century holocausts are the Palestinians. They are presently suffering a slow motion genocide by a group of people who’s ancestors willingly participated in the Ukrainian holocaust, and the rest of the Bolshevik mass-murders. But the Palestinians can’t hold-out as long as the Ukrainians could. If Jews would only face up to the facts surrounding their participation in the murder of 60 million people in Soviet Russia, then they might — if only out of shame — stop repeating genocides, and the Palestinian people might not perish for good. Holocausts need to be looked at honestly. The participants need to be named, and the profiteers need to be exposed, and that includes the ongoing Palestinian holocaust. Historic revisionism is a gift to mankind, as it continues to clarify the mistakes we have made through time. We cannot learn from these terrible events if they are guarded by clownish anti-Semitic thought police, and turned into orthodox Jewish religious dogma. Or as in the case of the Ukrainian holocaust, simply white-washed out of existence to hide the criminal complicity of communist Jews.
River to Sea
Uprooted Palestinian 
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!
0 comments:
Post a Comment