I was involved in the organisation of the 50th anniversary commemoration of the liberation of Auschwitz, while First Secretary at the British Embassy in Warsaw. The 50th did not receive anything like the media coverage given to the 70th, of which more later.
Senior British visitors to Poland invariably included a concentration camp on their itinerary, and from escorting people around I visited camps a great deal more often than I would have wished. I found the experience appalling and desolate. The first I ever saw was Majdanek and I recall that I just had to sit helpless and shivering for some time. One thing the experience left me with – including meeting survivors and both Polish and German eye-witnesses, and seeing the architects’ plans for camps – was a contempt for those who claim the whole thing did not happen, or was an accident, or was small scale.
It in no way diminishes the genocidal attack on the Jews to remember that a vast number of Poles also died in the camps, as well as gypsies, homosexuals, the disabled and disparate political prisoners. I tried sometimes to diminish the horror I felt at involvement with the camps, with attempts at humour. I was present at a meeting listing the guests of honour; the President of Lithuania was included. I whispered that he was coming to represent the camp guards. That was offensive, and I apologise. But there is a real problem that to this day Eastern Europe – including Poland itself – has not come to terms with historical truth about collaboration with anti-Jewish genocide and other attacks on minorities. I recommend this website, which tackles these issues very honestly and is well worth a lengthy browse.
It requires bigotry not to be able to understand why nationalist resistance movements against Russian occupation became allied with Germany during World War II. That would be reprehensible only in the same sense that allied collaboration with Stalin might be reprehensible, but for the added factor of enthusiastic collaboration with genocidal and master race programmes and fascist ideology. That is what makes the glorification of Eastern European nationalist figures from this period generally inappropriate.
I fear however that the real reason that the 70th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz received so much more coverage than the 50th is a media desire to reinforce the narrative of the War on Terror and Western policy in the Middle East by invoking the spectre of massive anti-Semitism. There have been isolated but deplorable, apparently anti-Semitic attacks of a small-scale terrorist nature in France and Belgium in recent years. But to conflate this into stories of a wave of popular anti-Semitism in Europe is a nonsense. Maureen Lipman’s claim that she may have to leave the UK is not just silly but disingenuous. I do not believe she feels in personal danger of attack – there is absolutely no reason why she should – she is rather making a political point.
There are two factors which could exacerbate anti-Semitism at present. One is the appalling behaviour of Israel and its indefensible action in continually seizing Palestinian land and using its military superiority to dominate and occasionally massacre Palestinians. Regrettably, there are a very small minority of people who wrongly blame Jews in general for the actions of Israel.
The second factor is of course the terrible economic hardship wrought across the whole world by irresponsible banking practices, and the fact that the bankers luxury lifestyles were maintained at the cost of everybody else. There are still a tiny minority of people stuck in the medieval mindset associating banking with the Jewish community. There is in fact a very plausible argument that if any “race” has a disproportionate influence on the development and character of international banking since the mid eighteenth century, it is the Scots! But those who see banking as a racial issue are nutters.
You could construct an argument from these factors, and you could identify that anti-Semitic people do exist. They certainly do. They dominate the very small category of people who get banned even from this free speech blog. But are their opinions intellectually respectable, promoted in the mainstream or able to be expressed openly without fear of either social or legal consequences? No, no and no. Anti-semites are fortunately a tiny and strange minority. I might add that in my numerous and frequent social contacts in the British Muslim community, I have never encountered anti-Semitism (unlike, say, Poland and Russia where I encountered casual anti-Semitism quite frequently).
The final point, is of course, the conflation of anti-zionism with anti-Semitism. That seems to me the fundamental design of the media campaign exaggerating the scale of anti-Semitism at the moment. Yes, we must always remember the terrible warnings from history and it is right to remember those who died in the concentration camps, Jewish, Polish, Romany, Gay, Communist or any other category. But we should be aware of those who wish to manipulate the powerful emotions of horror thus evoked, for present objectives of the powerful.
“So Fred’s a troll too. ”
Better than being a Holocaust denier.
Nevermind
The Numbers, the hundreds of years of Genocide, Anthropology …was it boat or walking…
Thank you for highlighting this
“I said that that is what must be asserted by those who wish to avoid the Holocaust Denier/anti-Semite label. It is the purest expression of Jewish anti-Goy racism.”
Ok, that’s one point addressed, wasn’t to hard was it. Care to try another?
@ Homeneara
I was not even born, and my parents where not political.
That’s no excuse. You bear the eternal shame and stain of anti-Semitism, because, um, well because it’s been very profitable for some Jews and the state of Israel to promote hatred against you and all others of your race, while they themselves pursue the age-old Jewish policy of genocide against those who get in their way (and here).
@ Fred the Troll
“So Fred’s a troll too. ”
Better than being a Holocaust denier.
Good one Fred. Are you paid for this kind of pathetic hassling of those who question the official line, or just a natural-born jerk?
@ CanSpaccy,
Thanks, but I did not mean that point, made later, I meant a reply to this.
“Clearly the “Liberals” (neo = not really) in power at the moment seem to be doing all they can to destroy European culture. I’m sure they’d be happy to see Greece evaporated. They been trying as hard as they can it seems. The roots of our own culture. What do we expact? Creating such a mess in so many eastern places. Austerity. etc.
“Liberal” plan, do you even know what that word means?”
That you identified none of the substance of apart from the first sentence. Maybe I made it neater for you now?
“Good one Fred. Are you paid for this kind of pathetic hassling of those who question the official line, or just a natural-born jerk?”
Fuck off and die retard.
@Je: I don’t want to sound patronising but the fact is that I’ve studied this subject over many years from many sources including Christian, anti-Christian, and Jewish, whereas you seem to have just looked something up on wikipedia- an extremely unreliable source as reagrds anything detrimental to mainstream religions. I’m well aware that the early Christians were Jews. However, Christianity soon spread far beyond its Jewish origins to such an extent that the original Jewish Christian Church (the Ebionites) were declared to be heretics by the non-Jewish hierarchy. As they were mostly in Jerusalem they mostly died in the seige of 70 CE when Jerusalem was destroyed by the Romans.
Antisemitism has a complex history and if you’re really interested in this and in the history of Jews generally I suggest you read the Yuri Slezkin book and also The Invention of Ancient Israel by Whitelam, the Invention of the Jewish People by Shlomo Sand, and The Bible Unearthed by Silberman and Finkelstein. Three of these four books are written by Jews but they all refute the Zionist version of history.
The fact that the numbers of Jews increased over the past 2000 years doesn’t mean they weren’t being persecuted. One of the highest recorded population growths in recent centuries was that of the Black Americans in the days of slavery. Systematic ill-treatment is certainly compatible with popoulation growth.
Of course antisemitism wasn’t a universal, uniform phenomenon throughout 2000 years of an entire continent’s history. It waxed and waned for all sorts of reasons- political, economic, religious, etc. However generally speaking the Jews did get it in the neck a good deal more than anybody else.
KOWN, Node (and others)
Craig’s response to those who are arguing about whether the number of European Jews slaughtered was 6, 4 or 3,5 (or whatever) millions is both accurate and gets to the heart of the matter:
“The problem with those arguing whether it was 4 or 6 million is that very often it is a code for what they really want to say.”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
My take on this, KOWN, Node (and others) would be as follows.
Whether 6, 4, 3,5 or 2,5 million Jews were slaughtered, that was 6, 4, 3,5 or 2,5 million too many.
Would you agree with that proposition?
@CM:
The problem with those arguing whether it was 4 or 6 million is that very often it is a code for what they really want to say.
Why is it there no reply to my question?
Specifically, I asked, what is it that they — the jailed, the despised and the ridiculed holocaust deniers — really want to say?
The only response has been some fairly nasty trolling.
I guess that must be because the question is unanswerable.
But if the question cannot be answered, why is it asked? The answer seems clear:
To call someone a Holocaust Denier is to label them as the holder of beliefs that are unspeakably evil, and since their views are unspeakable, no evidence can, or therefore need, be provided.
Yeah, that’s it. There’s really nothing for it but to gaol or hang every Denialist, whether their
Denialism has anything to do with the murder of Jews or not (It might be, for instance, that they are global warming deniers.).
The charge of Denialism is the ultimate Liberal-leftist weapon of mass destruction. It equates whatever you’re accused of with approval of the killing of six million of God’s chosen people.
“Of course antisemitism wasn’t a universal, uniform phenomenon throughout 2000 years of an entire continent’s history. It waxed and waned for all sorts of reasons- political, economic, religious, etc. However generally speaking the Jews did get it in the neck a good deal more than anybody else.”
I think some of the reason for that can be found in the Old Testament.
Deuteronomy 23:19 Thou shalt not lend upon interest to thy brother: interest of money, interest of victuals, interest of any thing that is lent upon interest.
Deuteronomy 23:20 Unto a foreigner thou mayest lend upon interest; but unto thy brother thou shalt not lend upon interest; that the LORD thy God may bless thee in all that thou puttest thy hand unto, in the land whither thou goest in to possess it.
“I guess that must be because the question is unanswerable”
I know the feeling. Perhaps throwing insults, if well written, is a more worthy use of time than addressing how any of what you said is Liberal.
Miss Castello
“Of which I am proud to be one of them. Try ‘looking’ at yourself, you “wretched” coward.
You don’t even have the balls to type your own name.”
_____________________
There are quite a few Castellos in the London phone directory and no doubt more in the other UK phone directories.
Would you therefore please supply your first and any middle name so that you can be properly identified.
(A question of balls…..)
@ Habby
Whether 6, 4, 3,5 or 2,5 million Jews were slaughtered, that was 6, 4, 3,5 or 2,5 million too many.
Would you agree with that proposition?
Well most decent people think that the murder of one person, Jewish or otherwise, is too many. But why must non Jews specially memorialize a murder of Jews, as opposed to, say, Palestinian children or the 50 million or so Chinese supposedly done in by Mao Tse Tung.
Habbabkuk
Whether 6, 4, 3,5 or 2,5 million Jews were slaughtered, that was 6, 4, 3,5 or 2,5 million too many.
Would you agree with that proposition?
_______
Of course. Absolutely.
Who wouldn’t?
But would you agree with this proposition:
If the original figure was 6 and the figure has been revised down by 2.5, as a free man one should be allowed to adjust the 6 million figure accordingly.
Pete – “Jews did get it in the neck a good deal more than anybody else.”
There are lots of groups who were wiped out completely in those 2000 years. Look at what happened to the Tasmanians. Or to the native Americans. With Jewish communities growing to millions in Europe, and surviving pretty unscathed throughout the middle East until the creation of Israel.
Some of those black slaves you mentioned had Jewish plantation owners.
That’s because they were accepted members of the community. Just as Jews were considered whites in South Africa. Where, incidentally the Jewish Board of Deputies took about 70 years to condemn Apartheid.
The extent of the population growth is not consistent with the endless pogroms narrative. About 40% of Ashkenazis descended from just 4 women. That’s a phenominal growth. That looks to me like 2000 years of largely tolerance and acceptance – punctuated by some periods of oppression.
It depends what you want to zoom in on. If you insist there was 2000 years of persecution you will see that. But its far removed from the whole picture. Its not even an accurate summary.
Some of the OTHERS were talking about a 100 Million Pluss Geonocide.
in The Americas
I think the definition of holocaust denier is someone who denies not the numbers but that it was a holocaust. A holocaust is a great destruction of life. So any event involving the death of millions could obviously be described as that and someone who is denying it is someone who is saying it was not a truly great destruction. In some countries (I won’t name them)there is (or has been) a holocaust denying industry – that is shocking.
CanSpeccy
“The problem with those arguing whether it was 4 or 6 million is that very often it is a code for what they really want to say.
Why is it there no reply to my question?
Specifically, I asked, what is it that they — the jailed, the despised and the ridiculed holocaust deniers — really want to say?
The only response has been some fairly nasty trolling.”
__________________
Well, Fred has provided rather good answers, actually.
I suppose you call him a troll because his answers displeased you.
Well, your comment, above, displeased me, so I’ll call you a racist cunt. And politely ask you to fuck off.
But not before myself providing you with a couple of suggestions as to what’s really at the back of their minds:
1/. If 6 millions becomes 4, why should 4 millions not become 2 millions. And 2 millions might be wrong as well, so carry on until the total is zero. All Jews are liars.
2/. So that’s why there are Jews everywhere in charge of everything!
3/. Pity the Germans didn’t kill more of them.
I am with Fred on this one.
“But why must non Jews specially ‘memorialise’ a murder of Jews, as opposed to, say, Palestinian children or the 50 million or so Chinese supposedly done in by Mao Tse Tung.”
Is someone forcing you? It was an EU issue. I don’t think people in other places mark it the same. Myself it was just another day really. So long ago now, not that I forget, but I don’t want to involve myself in what I see as an exploiting situation.
It’s very very hard to say it’s OTT, even when remembrance events like this are overblown by interest’s, and they are imo. In fact I don’t think we do mark it enough in the right way.
….Notice that, I even corrected your spelling. Feeling kind today.
I….seem to be with Habbabkuk.
It can’t be true.
The problem I see with Holocaust memorial events is that the alleged special nature of those particular crimes allows this:
World leaders who are themselves invaders, assassins, mass murderers participating at Holocaust memorial events.
Them saying “never again”. They can do that because of the claimed exceptionalism. A detachment between those events… exceptional, special etc… and the crimes of those world leaders.
That’s the problem with it. It doesn’t work. It doesn’t do what it should do.
Je
28 Jan, 2015 – 8:43 pm
Agree.
One order of magnitude lower than 5 to 6 million would be 500,000 to 600,000.
@Habby
“Well, Fred has provided rather good answers, actually.”
LOL
Fred attributed his proposed Holocaust denier belief to me. Hardly a good answer since I have said nothing whatever about the fact relating to the Holocaust (i.e., the celebrated alleged Holocaust of 6 million European Jews).
But I see Craig Murray has indicated his approval of Fred’s sly bit of trolling. And that I think pretty much characterizes this blog. It’s a place for the politically correct liberal-left view to be shoved down the reader’s throat and where any skeptics are hounded, abused and insulted by an experienced team of trolls.
Good work Habby and Fred.
I do overstretch myself. And I agreed with David Cameron on something recently. And I agreed with bloody Christopher Hitchens on the Greek Sculptures.
No good can come from it. Someone needs to take me out.
My question:
“Whether 6, 4, 3,5 or 2,5 million Jews were slaughtered, that was 6, 4, 3,5 or 2,5 million too many.
Would you agree with that proposition?”
elicited interesting answers from its addressees.
CanSpeccy started off by saying:
“Well most decent people think that the murder of one person, Jewish or otherwise, is too many.”
which is not quite an answer because, rather than answering directly (“yes” or “no”) it invites us to assume that CanSpeccy is a decent person and that he therefore would agree with the proposition. But can we assume that CanSpeccy is indeed one of those decent persons?
He then goes on, immediately, to introduce possible relativities and certain irrelevancies, no doubt as a diversion:
“But why must non Jews specially memorialize a murder of Jews, as opposed to, say, Palestinian children or the 50 million or so Chinese supposedly done in by Mao Tse Tung.”
The answer to those non-genuine questions is as follows:
a) perhaps people make a distinction between the death (regrettable, for want of a better word) of hundreds if Palestinian children in the course of military operations and the herding into gas chambers or the shooting in the back of the neck of hubdreds of thousands of Jewish children as part of non-military operations?
b) perhaps it might be for the present Chinese govt to condemn and commemorate the killing of 50 million Chinese under the Great Helmsman, just as it is for the Europeans to condemn and commemorate the killing of European (Jewish) children by Europeans?
**********************
The answer to KOWN’s question, which follows hard on the heels of his agreement with my proposition:
“But would you agree with this proposition:
If the original figure was 6 and the figure has been revised down by 2.5, as a free man one should be allowed to adjust the 6 million figure accordingly.”
is relatively simple. The figure of Jewish deaths in the Holocaust is generally accepted by most historians to be between 5,5 – 6 millions irrespective of the exact number killed at Auschwitz. I refer him to the Wikipedia article “The Jewish Holocaust”, section 4.1. Having read that he can – of he woishes – read the works of some of the historians referenced in that Wikipedia article.
Homeneara
“I….seem to be with Habbabkuk.
It can’t be true.”
_______________
And I with you (your post at 20h40).
We’re all…doomed! 🙂