Wednesday, August 22, 2007
Holocaust Or Holohoax? New Nazi Records Delivered To Shoah Museums In Washington And Jerusalem May Break The Tie
The keepers of a Nazi archive have delivered copies of Gestapo papers and concentration camp records to museums in Washington and Jerusalem, providing Holocaust survivors a paper trail of their own persecution. Full story published in the Washington Post. A story was also published in the Deseret Morning News on August 22nd, but it provides no Utah perspective on this issue.
The director of the International Tracing Service, which has served as the custodian of these records maintained in Germany for over 50 years, has released these files to the custody of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington and the Yad Vashem Martyrs and Heroes Remembrance Authority in Jerusalem. The records are organized on six computer hard drives bearing electronic images of 20 million pages. However, the hard drives merely contain the first installment of digital copies; the final documents will not be copied and delivered until early 2009.
However, due to the variety and sheer volume of the records received, it will be months before the archive can be used to search family histories. First, it will take days merely to transfer the data to museum computers. Then it will have to be further decoded, classified, and indexed. Complicating this task is the fact that most of the documents in the archive are written by hand, sometimes in old German script. They also contain variations in the spelling of names, many of which are recorded phonetically. That makes it impossible, for now, to convert large numbers of files to a digitally searchable form.
To expedite the latter task, an index of about 17.5 million names on file with ITS, which appears to be the key to finding documents, will arrive this year. The index has been scanned from about 50 million cards in varying formats, organizational systems and even scripts.
Nevertheless, even after it finally opens to the public, navigating the vast files for specific names will be nearly impossible without a trained guide. One tool the museum is preparing is a search engine it plans to make accessible soon on the Internet. It will allow people to search through a separate, limited index of the archive and get a sense of what kind of documents exist. That index describes sections of the documents, where they came from and where they are stored. It could provide clues about whether the information users are seeking might be there.
However, there is yet another complication. Even though the museums' researchers can begin working with the material immediately, the public must wait for legal formalities to conclude, which could take several more months. Unlocking the archive required 11 countries to amend their international treaty. While the United States, Israel, Britain, Netherlands, Belgium, Poland, Luxembourg and Germany have already taken this step, France, Italy and Greece have yet to complete the process.
The Associated Press has been given repeated access to the archive in Bad Arolsen in recent months. Random searches through its files revealed a wealth of mundane yet telling detail on life and death in the camps.
Analysis: The transfer and ultimate release of this information to the public could go a long way towards resolving the vitriolic debate between Holocaust Defenders and a growing segment of Holocaust Revisionists. However, having this material examined and analyzed only by Holocaust Museum operatives concerns me. Would they be intellectually honest enough to accept and put forth any records which are favorable towards the Revisionist cause? Perhaps they should invite a leading Revisionist such as Norman Finkelstein to participate in the process primarily as a confidence-building measure to assure the integrity of the process.
Holocaust Defenders faithfully regurgitate the standard Holocaust theology that the German concentration camps were little more than extermination camps operated with robotic efficiency. They not only insist that EXACTLY 6 million Jews died in these camps, but that any deviation from this theology, no matter how slight, constitutes heresy. Some more extreme Holocaust Defenders, such as the Anti-Defamation League, have enthusiastically hailed the incarceration of leading German intellectuals like Ernst Zuendel and Germar Rudolf merely for publicly disputing official Holocaust theology.
Holocaust Revisionists in general do NOT deny that Jews were the main group targeted by the National Socialist regime, and also do NOT deny that many suffered and that some were wrongly put to death. However, Revisionists dispute the demographics, the methodology, and, above all, the singularity attached to this tragedy. Revisionists are frequently defamed and smeared as "Holocaust Deniers", and are subject to incarceration in several European countries under such charges as "spreading false news", "defaming the memory of the dead", etc. Truth is generally considered to be no defense. Even the occasional intellectually-honest Jew who disputes Holocaust theology can be victimized; recently, Professor Norman Finkelstein, himself the son of two Holocaust survivors, was denied tenure at DePaul University because he exposed the political weaponization and commodification of the Holocaust in his book entitled "The Holocaust Industry".
But it's generally the concept of "singularity" that is most objectionable. Top Jews present the Holocaust as a unique form of genocide, far beyond any other genocide against other people, despite the fact that the 75-year Bolshevik Holocaust cost as many as 66 million lives, and the ongoing 40-year American Holocaust against the unborn may have cost 40 million lives. By pronouncing the Jewish Holocaust as "unique", top Jews imply that Jewish suffering is somehow worse than other peoples' suffering, which in turn implies that Jewish life is somehow inherently more valuable than other human life. And this is nothing more than Jewish supremacism in its most virulent form.
One of the leading experts on Jewish supremacism is none other than former Louisiana State Representative Dr. David Duke. Having long since outgrown his youthful association with the Ku Klux Klan, Dr. Duke has emerged as an elder statesman and somewhat of a goodwill ambassador for the pro-white movement in the United States. On December 13th, 2006, Dr. Duke squared off against CNN reporter Wolf Blitzer in a memorable interview in which he debunked many false notions about himself, white nationalism, and Holocaust Revisionism. Approximately four minutes into the interview, when Blitzer asked him "Do you hate Jews?", Dr. Duke clearly responds "No, I don't". See the interview for yourself:
Dr. Duke has authored two books, "My Awakening" (free audio version HERE) and "Jewish Supremacism".
And even Utah has experienced a brush with Jewish supremacism. When Jewish activists found out that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was performing vicarious temple baptisms for dead Jewish Holocaust victims, they went ballistic. In 1995, the LDS Church reached an agreement with the World Gathering of Jewish Holocaust Survivors to discontinue performing vicarious baptisms on behalf of dead Holocaust victims.
However, that was not enough for Jewish supremacists. They subsequently demanded that the LDS Church take the additional step of identifying those already baptized, removing their names, and invalidating their baptisms. Of course, LDS officials immediately demurred, claiming they didn't have the time to go to this trouble. However, this only goes to show that Organized Jewry will always up the ante whenever you make a single concession to them.
Latter-day Saint doctrine holds that everyone must be baptized in order to progress towards eternal exaltation. That means that those who never had the opportunity to be baptized while on earth must be offered the opportunity in the spirit world. However, physical baptism cannot be performed in a spirit environment; it must be performed in a mortal environment. So the LDS Church instituted the practice of vicarious baptism for the dead, performed inside their temples. Once performed, the designated beneficiary in the spirit world can either accept it, and progress, or reject it, and remain static.
Baptism for the dead is not part of Judaism. So if Jews don't believe it has any efficacy or force, why are they complaining about it? Obviously they're afraid of it; their hatred for Jesus Christ is so intense that they cannot abide the remotest possibility that any Jew would ever put himself under the blood of Christ. Viewed through the LDS context, Jews apparently would cut off their noses to spite their faces by using political pressure against the LDS Church to deny their kin an essential step towards eternal exaltation. And we call Muslims fanatics?