link
On one of my blog post’s comment sections, a mini-debate ensued about the good ole’ Mufti’s meeting with Hitler, in which I pointed out to a link, involving Zionists with The third Reich, written by the Institute for Historical Review. It was later pointed out to me that the Institute for Historical Review is headed by someone who’s written for neo-Nazi publications. I’ve made the correction on the comment section, but I was definitely dissatisfied with the simplistic shelving of a source- even if I’m disgusted by its motives- as I felt there was academic merit to it. The world is far from black and white, and just as the Zionist Benny Morris’ work is regarded in academic discussion of Palestinian history, so can the writings of the Institute for Historical Review teach us about Zionist history. The rule of thumb would be, in these cases, to tread carefully and consider only the facts and not the conclusions.
The Undeniable Facts
The first question on my mind, when I was sent this list of links about Institute for Historical Review and its head, Mark Weber, was “how the hell could I miss that?!”:
- PublicEye (search: institute for historical review)
- PublicEye (Encountering Holocaust Denial)
- Southern Poverty Law Center (40 to watch)
- Forward: The Jewish Daily (Revisionist: It’s Time To Quit Shoah Fight) (Note on this site: it seems to have zionist tendencies, so I take it with a grain of salt)
The answer to this is twofold: On the emotional side, I’ve been lied to all my life, about “my” roots, “my” history and “my” heritage. So in my search for the truth, I’m a big believer in revisionism, pluralism of sources and so on (more on this later on). On the scholarly side, I looked into the sources of the article and it actually is irrefutable.
In order to set things straight, I give you a more Kosher link. True Tora – Jews Against Zionism make the exact same claim; Zionist leaders have, in fact, cavorted with the Third Reich. One look at the bibliography and you are baffled to discover that True Tora cavorts with Mark Weber and The Journal for Historical Review. Nothing is simple and it will take a much more serious scholar than myself, to determine the accurateness of the eery evidence, which The Journal for Historical Review puts forth. I’ve Googled the almost identical bibliography of these two articles and have come to a conclusion that one fact is undeniable: Zionist leaders had contacts with Nazi leaders. Period.
Holocaust Denial Revisionism
Unfortunately, now that I’ve linked Zionism with Nazism and accepted the words of apparent Neo Nazis, I’m open to one of the most common Zionist attacks: “Holocaust denier”. The following addresses that. (Though I’m sure it won’t really change the Zionist mind about me- this post didn’t have to be written, in order for me to earn this title.)
My experience with entries in Wikipedia, regarding anything that has to do with Israel, Palestine and Judaism, has left me skeptic. The gist of my skepticism lies in the fact that the Hebrew entries are completely bias, in favor of the Zionist narrative, and differ from the English entries (rather than translate them), which are also bias, but more moderately so. (Checking out the “discussion” tab, is the most you can do at this point, to spot the discrepancies.)
In my research for this post, I typed “holocaust revisionism” into the Wikipedia search box. “Holocaust revisionism” doesn’t exist- I was automatically redirected to “Holocaust denial” (a sub-directory of “Antisemitism”). This extraordinarily long article is bias at its core, stressing:
“Holocaust deniers do not accept the term “denial” as an appropriate description of their point of view, and use the term Holocaust revisionism instead. Scholars use the term “denial” to differentiate Holocaust deniers from historical revisionists, who use established historical methodologies.”
Personally, I see nothing wrong with looking into the facts of the (Eastern European) Holocaust, as I see nothing wrong with looking into the facts of the Palestinian, Armenian, Rwandan, or any other holocaust that may tragically come about. But it seems that I’m not in the majority, again:
“Holocaust denial is explicitly or implicitly illegal in 13 countries: Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Israel, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Poland, 0.Portugal, Romania, and Switzerland.”
I am hyper-aware of the dangers of denials of genocide, how it promotes further genocide and so on. If it isn’t clear yet: I DO NOT DENY THE EASTERN EUROPEAN HOLOCAUST AND DO NOT DEFEND THOSE THAT DO. I do, however, have a huge problem with state issued thought control. As the premise of this Wikipedia entry is that revisionism of the history of the Eastern European Holocaust is in fact holocaust denial, it seems that any freedom of thought into this issue is illegal, in the aforementioned states. (I’m already a huge criminal, but you can add this to my rap sheet…)
On the Eastern European Holocaust and the Palestinian Nakba
Quite frankly, I wouldn’t be so doubtful of “my” history, had it (and I) not been so cynically used, in the first place. (Norman Finkelstein is just one historian to write about my (and other Israelis’ and Jews around the world’s) predicament.) Had Zionists not made this cynical connection, the Eastern European holocaust would have had absolutely nothing to do with the Palestinian Nakba. In fact, the Nakba wouldn’t have occurred at all. As evidence, I urge you to open any random Zionist book about Zionism. What you’ll find is that the majority of the book is preoccupied with anti-Semitism rather than the core ideas of Zionism. More than anything, for me, these statements divert my attention from the task at hand- human rights. On the other hand; History must be explored, because we’ve repeated enough mistakes already.
No comments:
Post a Comment