Saturday, March 27, 2010
“The gas isn’t working like before!” The Israeli Gilad Atzmon makes increasingly revisionist remarks
De plus en plus d’eau dans le gaz ! L’Israélien Gilad Atzmon tient des propos de plus en plus révisionnistes
Né en 1963 en Israël, Gilad Atzmon réside à Londres. Le 13 mars 2010, il a développé des considérations de nature révisionniste que je reproduis ci-dessous sans que ceux-ci aient besoin du moindre éclaircissement ou du moindre commentaire ; je reproduirai simplement en gras les parties qui me semblent les plus intéressantes (http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/after-all-i-am-a-proper-zionist-jew-by-gilad-atzmon.html).
« When I was young and naïve I regarded history as a serious academic matter. As I understood it, history had something to do with truth seeking, documents, chronology and facts. I was convinced that history aimed to convey a sensible account of the past based on methodical research. I also believed that it was premised on the assumption that understanding the past may throw some light over our present and even help us to shape a prospect of a better future. I grew up in the Jewish state and it took me quite a while to understand that the Jewish historical narrative is very different. In the Jewish intellectual ghetto, one decides what the future ought to be, then one constructs “a past” accordingly. Interestingly enough, this exact method is also prevalent amongst Marxists. They shape the past so it fits nicely into their vision of the future. As the old Russian joke says, “when the facts do not conform with the Marxist ideology, the Communist social scientists amend the facts (rather than revise the theory)”.
When I was young, I didn’t think that history was a matter of political decisions or agreements between a rabid Zionist lobby and its favorite holocaust survivor. I regarded historians as scholars who engaged in adequate research following some strict procedures. When I was young I even considered becoming an historian.
When I was young and naive I was also somehow convinced that what they told us about our “collective” Jewish past really happened. I believed it all, the Kingdom of David, Massada, and then the Holocaust: the soap, the lampshade*, the death march, the six million.
As it happened, it took me many years to understand that the Holocaust, the core belief of the contemporary Jewish faith, was not at all an historical narrative for historical narratives do not need the protection of the law and politicians. It took me years to grasp that my great-grandmother wasn’t made into a “soap” or a “lampshade”*. She probably perished out of exhaustion, typhus or maybe even by mass shooting. This was indeed bad and tragic enough, however not that different from the fate of many millions of Ukrainians who learned what communism meant for real. “Some of the worst mass murderers in history were Jews” writes Zionist Sever Plocker on the Israeli Ynet disclosing the Holodomor and Jewish involvement in this colossal crime, probably the greatest crime of the 20th century. The fate of my great-grandmother was not any different from hundreds of thousands of German civilians who died in an orchestrated indiscriminate bombing, because they were Germans. Similarly, people in Hiroshima died just because they were Japanese. 1 million Vietnamese died just because they were Vietnamese and 1.3 million Iraqis died because they were Iraqis. In short the tragic circumstances of my great grandmother wasn’t that special after all.
It doesn’t make sense.
It took me years to accept that the Holocaust narrative, in its current form, doesn’t make any historical sense. Here is just one little anecdote to elaborate on:
If, for instance, the Nazis wanted the Jews out of their Reich (Judenrein - free of Jews), or even dead, as the Zionist narrative insists, how come they marched hundreds of thousands of them back into the Reich at the end of the war? I have been concerned with this simple question for more than a while. I eventually launched into an historical research of the topic and happened to learn from Israeli holocaust historian professor Israel Gutman that Jewish prisoners actually joined the march voluntarily. Here is a testimony taken from Gutman’s book:
“One of my friends and relatives in the camp came to me on the night of the evacuation and offered a common hiding place somewhere on the way from the camp to the factory. …The intention was to leave the camp with one of the convoys and to escape near the gate, using the darkness we thought to go a little far from the camp. The temptation was very strong. And yet, after I considered it all I then decided to join (the march) with all the other inmates and to share their fate” (Israel Gutman [editor], People and Ashes: Book Auschwitz - Birkenau, Merhavia 1957).
I am left puzzled here, if the Nazis ran a death factory in Auschwitz-Birkenau, why would the Jewish prisoners join them at the end of the war? Why didn’t the Jews wait for their Red liberators?
I think that 65 years after the liberation of Auschwitz, we must be entitled to start to ask the necessary questions. We should ask for some conclusive historical evidence and arguments rather than follow a religious narrative that is sustained by political pressure and laws. We should strip the holocaust of its Judeo-centric exceptional status and treat it as an historical chapter that belongs to a certain time and place.
65 years after the liberation of Auschwitz we should reclaim our history and ask why? Why were the Jews hated? Why did European people stand up against their next door neighbours? Why are the Jews hated in the Middle East, surely they had a chance to open a new page in their troubled history? If they genuinely planned to do so, as the early Zionists claimed, why did they fail? Why did America tighten its immigration laws amid the growing danger to European Jews? We should also ask for what purpose do the holocaust denial laws serve? What is the holocaust religion there to conceal? As long as we fail to ask questions, we will be subjected to Zionists and their Neocons agents’ plots. We will continue killing in the name of Jewish suffering. We will maintain our complicity in Western imperialist crimes against humanity.
As devastating as it may be, at a certain moment in time, a horrible chapter was given an exceptionally meta-historical status. Its “factuality” was sealed by draconian laws and its reasoning was secured by social and political settings. The Holocaust became the new Western religion. Unfortunately, it is the most sinister religion known to man. It is a license to kill, to flatten, no [sic, pour to] nuke, to wipe, to rape, to loot and to ethnically cleanse. It made vengeance and revenge into a Western value. However, far more concerning is the fact that it robs humanity of its heritage, it is there to stop us from looking into our past with dignity. Holocaust religion robs humanity of its humanism. For the sake of peace and future generations, the holocaust must be stripped of its exceptional status immediately. It must be subjected to thorough historical scrutiny. Truth and truth seeking is an elementary human experience. It must prevail. » (http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/truth-history-and-integrity-by-gilad-atzmon.html)
Enfin, le 25 mars 2010, son site a contenu la déclaration suivante :
« AIPAC leaders are clearly repeating the grave mistakes of their forebearers [sic, pour forbears] : the American Jewish Congress. They do not learn from their history, for there is not a single Jewish history text to learn from. Instead of a history text, Jews have the Holocaust, an event that matured into a religion. – The holocaust religion is obviously Judeo-centric to the bone. It defines the Jewish Raison d’être. For the Jews it signifies a total fatigue of the Diaspora, it regards the Goy as a potential “irrational” murderer. The new Jewish religion preaches revenge. It even establishes a new Jewish God. Instead of old Yehova, the new Jewish God is “the Jew” himself: the brave and witty being, the one who survived the ultimate and most sinister genocide, the one who came out of the ashes and stepped forward into a new beginning. – To a certain extent the Holocaust religion signals the Jewish departure from monotheism, for every Jew is a potential little God or Goddess. Gilad Shalit is the God “innocence”, Abe Foxman is the God anti Semitism, Maddof [sic, pour Madoff] is the God of swindling, Greenspan is the God of “good economy”, Lord Goldsmith is the God of the “green light”, Lord Levy is the God of fundraising, Wolfowitz is the God of new American expansionism and AIPAC is the American Olympus where American elected human beings come to ask for mercy and forgiveness for being Goyim and for daring to occasionally tell the truth about Israel. – The holocaust religion is the conclusive stage in the Jewish dialectic; it is the end of Jewish history for it is the deepest and most sincere form of “self love”. Rather than inventing an abstract God who prefers the Jews to be the chosen people, in the holocaust religion the Jews cut out the divine middle substance. The Jew just chooses oneself [sic, pour himself]. This is why Jewish identity politics transcends itself beyond the notion of history. God is the master of ceremony. And the new Jewish God cannot be subject to humanly contingent occurrences. The new Jewish God, i.e. “the Jew”, just re-writes fables that serve the tribe at any given time. This may explain why the Holocaust religion is protected by laws, while every other historical chapter and narrative is debated openly by historians, intellectuals and ordinary people. – As one may guess, with such a self-centered intensive world-view, not much room is left for humanity, grace or universalism. It is far from being clear whether Jews can collectively recover from their new religion. However, it is crucial that every humanist stands up against the holocaust religion that can only spread misery, death and carnage. »
(NB : Sur G. Atzmon et Günter Deckert en 2005 et 2006 on consultera en allemand http://karl-heinz-heubaum.homepage.t-online.de/31wh-aus.htm).
27 mars 2010
Monday, August 11, 2003
Lettre à "Science et Vie"
à Monsieur le Directeur responsable de Science et Vie
1, Rue du Colonel Pierre-Avia
75503 PARIS CEDEX 15
Monsieur,
Dans votre livraison de ce mois, vous reproduisez une photographie dont la légende porte : « Une chambre à gaz d’un camp nazi (ici, Majdanek, en Pologne )». Vous donnez à entendre qu’il s’agit d’une chambre à gaz d’exécution puisque votre photographie a pour but d’illustrer le propos de Madame Françoise Héritier, professeur au collège de France, qui, à votre question sur ce que peut être son image de la violence, répond : « Une chambre à gaz d’un camp nazi ».
En réalité, la pièce que vous montrez est une chambre à gaz de désinfection qui, à Majdanek, fait partie de l’ensemble « Bad und Desinfektion ». Même les tenants de la thèse exterminationniste ont fini par en convenir. Voyez, par exemple, l’ouvrage de Jean-Claude Pressac publié en 1989, à New York, par la Beate Klarsfeld Foundation sous le titre d’Auschwitz : Technique and Operation of the Gas Chambers. A la page 557 de cet ouvrage, la photographie 30 montre que le bleu de Prusse a même traversé le mur de briques. J.-C. Pressac écrit en toutes lettres qu’il s’agit de « l’une des chambres à gaz de désinfestation, prise pour une chambre à gaz homicide ». Il précise, comme l’avaient fait avant lui les révisionnistes, que les traces de bleu de Prusse sont la marque d’un usage prolongé de l’acide cyanhydrique ou acide bleu, agent d’épouillage connu sous le nom de la marque de fabrique « Zyklon B » (en usage depuis 1922 et encore aujourd’hui, quoique sous une autre dénomination). A Auschwitz aussi les chambres à gaz de désinfection portent ces traces, y compris à l’extérieur des murs de briques tandis que les chambres à gaz réputées d’exécution ou ce qui en reste ne portent aucune marque bleue, ce qui ne manque pas d’embarrasser les tenants de la thèse exterminationniste. Ces derniers, y compris dans les cas de Simone Veil, de Raul Hilberg, de Jan Van Pelt, préfèrent nous dire que Hitler (tel Satan ? ou tel Saddam Hussein ?) a fait disparaître toutes les traces de son crime.
S&V s’honorerait de procéder à une rectification dans sa prochaine livraison.
Les prétendues « chambres à gaz » d’exécution et les prétendus « camions à gaz » d’exécution d’Adolf Hitler n’ont pas plus existé que les « armes de destruction massive » de Saddam Hussein. Il s’agit du même mensonge. Les menteurs de l’entourage de Roosevelt (Morgenthau Jr et le War Refugee Board de 1944-1945) et les menteurs de l’entourage de Bush Jr (Wolfowitz et l’Office of Special Plans de 2002-2003) sont identiques. A une réserve près : ces armes d’Adolf Hitler sont tout simplement inconcevables pour des raisons physiques et chimiques que les révisionnistes ont largement développées tandis que les armes de destruction massive attribuées à Saddam Hussein sont, elles, tellement concevables qu’elles existent à profusion chez ses accusateurs.
Veuillez recevoir, je vous prie, mes salutations.
Robert FAURISSON
Monday, June 23, 2003
Arrestation à Vienne de l’ingénieur chimiste W. Fröhlich
Samedi 21 juin, Wolfgang Fröhlich, ingénieur chimiste (Diplom.Ing.), âgé de 51 ans, a été arrêté à Vienne et emprisonné. Son procès pourrait durer soit deux jours comme le souhaite le ministère public, soit deux ou trois semaines comme l’espère son avocat, Herbert Schaller.
Pendant sept ans, W. Fröhlich avait envoyé à des juristes, des membres du parlement, des personnalités politiques et des journalistes des milliers d’exemplaires de ses écrits dans lesquels il affirmait que les prétendues chambres à gaz nazies sont, pour reprendre son propre mot, un mensonge. Fait surprenant, il ne fut pas poursuivi en justice. Par la suite, lorsqu’il se décida en 2001 à rendre public un dossier de 368 pages sur Le Mensonge des chambres à gaz, les autorités décidèrent son arrestation, mais il disparut et la police ne mit apparemment aucun zèle à le trouver.
Son arrestation, le 21 juin, est probalement à mettre en rapport avec une déclaration faite à Vienne, l’avant-veille, par Rudolf Giuliani. Le 19 juin, en effet, l’ancien maire de New York, prenant la parole en qualité de représentant des Etats-Unis, avait déclaré devant les participants d’une conférence de deux journées sur l’antisémitisme, conférence tenue à Vienne par l’Organisation pour la sécurité et la coopération en Europe (OSCE), qu’il fallait mettre un terme au révisionnisme. Dans un article publié la veille par le New York Times et intitulé « Comment l’Europe peut mettre un terme à la haine », il disait à propos des représentants des Etats européens : « Il est vital qu’ils assurent à leurs citoyens une franche compréhension de l’Holocauste, parce que les points de vue révisionnistes nous font courir le risque que se reproduise un génocide à base raciale ». Quant au président Bush lui-même, il avait, le 16 et le 17 juin, attaqué « l’histoire révisionniste » (« a lot of revisionist history now going on ») et « les historiens révisionnistes », coupables à ses yeux d’avoir exprimé des doutes sur la version officielle de la guerre des Etats-Unis contre l’Irak.
En un certain sens, Ernst Zündel et Wolfgang Fröhlich sont peut-être bien les premières victimes révisionnistes de Bush et de Giuliani.
En janvier 1944, le président Roosevelt, manipulé par Henry Morgenthau Jr, son secrétaire d’Etat au trésor, avait créé le Conseil des réfugiés de guerre (War Refugee Board ou WRB), qui allait fabriquer un rapport, devenu depuis tristement fameux, sur : « Les camps d’extermination allemands—Auschwitz et Birkenau ». En septembre 2001, le président Bush, manipulé par Paul Wolfowitz, créait le Bureau des plans spéciaux (Office of Special Plans ou OSP), qui allait fabriquer de fallacieux rapports sur les armes de destruction massives de l’Irak (Weapons of Mass Destruction ou WMD). Ce bureau est dirigé par Abram Shulsky. Au sein dudit bureau les quatre responsables en charge des rapports sur ces armes de destruction massive se désignent eux-mêmes sous le nom de « la cabale » ! Seymour Hersh, journaliste américain de renom, en a fait la révélation dans un long article du New Yorker daté du 12 mai et, en France, Jacques Isnard l’a rapporté dans Le Monde du 7 juin, en page 7.
Pareils mensonges. Pareils menteurs. Pareils bénéficiaires. Pareilles victimes.
Il semble donc qu’on ait besoin d’un pareil travail révisionniste.
Aux dernières nouvelles, deux auteurs du nom de Rampton et de Stauber publieraient, le mois prochain, un ouvrage intitulé : Weapons of Mass Deception. The Uses of Propaganda in Bush’s War in Iraq (Armes de tromperie massive. Les emplois de la propagande dans la guerre de Bush en Irak).
NB : Le 17 juin, Le Monde a publié en première page un article ironiquement intitulé : « Saddam était méchant, donc il avait des armes prohibées ». Le lendemain, j’ai envoyé au journal, pour publication, une lettre dont le contenu se limitait à une phrase : « Hitler était méchant, donc il avait des chambres à gaz et des camions à gaz ». Ma courte lettre n’a pas été publiée.
Le 16 avril 2004, en page 31, Le Monde a publié un long article intitulé : « Hans Blix, l’homme qui voulait des preuves. » Je viens de suggérer au journal de publier un article qui serait intitulé : « Robert Faurisson, l’homme qui voulait des preuves. »
Engineer Fröhlich arrested in Vienna
On Saturday, June 21, chemical engineer (Dipl. Ing.) Wolfgang Fröhlich, 51, was arrested in Vienna, Austria, and taken to prison. His trial could last two days, as the public prosecutor wishes, or as long as two or three weeks, as his attorney, Dr. Herbert Schaller, hopes.
For seven years, Fröhlich had sent to jurists, members of parliament, politicians and journalists, thousands of copies of his writings, in which he says that the alleged wartime Nazi extermination gas chambers are, as he put it, a lie. Remarkably, he suffered no real legal consequences. Then, following the publication in 2001 of his 368-page file, Die Gaskammer Lüge (The Gas Chamber Lie), the authorities decided to arrest him. But he went into hiding, and the police apparently made no serious effort to find him.
Fröhlich’s arrest on June 21 may, perhaps, be connected with a statement in Vienna two days earlier by Rudolph Giuliani. On June 19 the former mayor of New York, speaking as a US government representative, told participants at a two-day Conference on Anti-Semitism, held in Vienna by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), that Revisionism should be stopped. In an article published a day earlier in The New York Times, “How Europe Can Stop the Hate”, he said, referring to officials of the European states: “Making sure their citizens have an honest understanding of the Holocaust is vital, as revisionist viewpoints put us at risk of a repetition of race-based genocide.” On June 16 and 17, President George W. Bush criticized “a lot of revisionist history now going on” and “revisionist historians” for expressing doubts about the official version of the US war against Iraq.
In a way, Ernst Zündel and Wolfgang Fröhlich may be the first revisionist victims of Bush and Giuliani.
In January 1944, President Franklin D. Roosevelt, manipulated by Henry Morgenthau, Jr., his Treasury Secretary, created the War Refugee Board (WRB), which fabricated its infamous report on the “German extermination camps—Auschwitz and Birkenau.” In September 2001, President George W. Bush, manipulated by Paul Wolfowitz, his Deputy Defense Secretary, created the Office of Special Plans (OSP), which fabricated untrue reports about Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD). The OSP is headed by Abram Shulsky. The OSP individuals who are responsible for the WMD reports call themselves “the Cabal” (from “cabala”). (This has been acknowledged by Seymour M. Hersh in The New Yorker, May 12, 2003, and by Jacques Isnard in Le Monde, June 7, 2003, p. 7.)
Similar lies. Similar liars. Similar beneficiaries. Similar victims.
Therefore, it seems, a similar Revisionism is needed.
Note: On June 17, the French daily Le Monde published an ironic front-page article entitled (in French): “Saddam was evil, therefore he had prohibited weapons.” To Le Monde I sent a one-sentence letter, meant for publication: “Hitler was evil, therefore he had gas chambers and gas vans.” My brief letter was not published.
On April 16, 2004, Le Monde published, on page 31, a long article entitled (in French): "Hans Blix, the man who wanted proofs”. To Le Monde I sent a one-sentence letter, meant for publication: “Why not an article about Robert Faurisson, the man who wanted proofs?” I suppose my brief letter will not be published.
June 23, 2003