Friday, December 22, 2006
The timing of the release of David Irving from an Austrian prison where he was being held for denying that the Nazis exterminated Jews and others during WWII is timed to the just concluded conference in Iran about the accuracy of the Holocaust version of history in the mainstream West.
The challenge for the would-be real Christian is to sort out the truth from the obfuscation. Get the half of the half-truths on both sides that is true and put that together and discard the half of the half-truths on both sides that is false.
In a dig at Mel Gibson, the news reports state that David Irving backs the drunken admission of Mel Gibson that he believes that Jews were behind every recent war. Well, the fact is that that is true; however, non-Jews were also. It has never required a Jew for nations to go to war. Nations have warred without Jewish instigation. It just so happens that Jews have risen in the mundane ranks in many countries in the world.
The Jews look upon such statements though as suggesting that certain Jewish entities are particularly evil in that they are of the spiritual and genetic line, (both required) libel for the murder of Jesus, which is true. Well, the fact is also that those particular Jews have no monopoly on such liability or such spirit.
Any time anyone falls into selfishness, he or she heads down the path of scapegoating others rather than down the right path of the spirit of universal repentance, atonement, and forgiveness.
Jesus was scapegoated by the high priests and the dark side of the Sanhedrin with the aid of the Roman Empire, but that didn't spare them in the end. It also points to that same spirit running through the other nations of humanity.
Now, freedom to sin is slavery to evil. Nevertheless, coercion is also evil. Today, England and the US and other states are headed further down the road of saying that nothing but the official history will be allowed. Anything not the official history is to be viewed as inciting bad feelings in the ones holding to that official history. This means that questioning that official version will not be allowed. Therefore, taken to its logical conclusion, if George W. Bush came along in the future of this official world, he could imprison anyone who said he lied to get the US into Iraq.
Who controls the official version? Those with the most money and power to control it, of course. It has ever been so. Today, they just aren't hiding it or apologetic about it. It's blatant.
Labour peer Lord Foulkes, a member of the Policy Council of Labour Friends of Israel, said the police should keep a close watch on Mr Irving's comments to see whether they breached anti-racism laws.
He said: "Mr Irving should be aware that since he was last in the United Kingdom, the laws have been strengthened to deal with people who hold racist views and who stir up antagonism on the basis of either race or religion. That is why the authorities, particularly the police, need to keep a very close and careful watch on him."
Well, it cuts both ways. Is it not racist to cover up unrepented racism? What of those who believe that the false-Zionists are racist towards the Palestinian Arabs? Isn't suppressing their views then a form of racism, aiding and abetting the false-Zionists in their "transfers" of the Palestinians out of Palestinian homes? Yes. Can it then be claimed racist to point to the racism of the false-Zionists who do not comprise the whole of the descendants of Jacob? It can be claimed, but it's a false charge.
In addition, what about the treatment of Blacks after Hurricane Katrina? Who can doubt that White racism is at the bottom of it? What about the treatment of the Blacks in Nigeria by the oil industry? Isn't that racism?
Look, Debora Lipstadt, who prevailed in a libel suit brought against her by David Irving has the right idea.
"I am not happy when censorship wins, and I don't believe in winning battles via censorship... The way of fighting Holocaust deniers is with history and with truth."
...the issue [Irving's imprisonment by Austria] also raised a debate on what grounds freedom of speech could be denied in democratic countries.
The ACLU has the right idea too that freedom of speech means freedom to say the wrong things on all sides. The difference real Christians have with the ACLU is that the ACLU favors using the coercive force of the majority to protect the erring speech and the ACLU doesn't say to people that they ought not to be saying what they are saying.
We say that each person must control himself or herself freely through knowledge, of and love of, truth. This is the real civil libertarian position. Anything else is offense and of the devil.
In truth, Irving has said, "I am not a Holocaust denier. Nobody in their right mind can deny that the Nazis killed millions of Jews." We agree. He also has said that there is no evidence Hitler knew about the Holocaust. Well, is there evidence that he knew? Well, it depends upon for what level evidence one is holding out.
Certainly he hated the Jews and would gladly have seen them all gone from existence on this plane.
He was certainly there when the final-solution type coded talk took place (plausible deniability since they all knew by then that Germany had lost the war?).
Irving has also said that fewer Jews died at Auschwitz than is commonly believed, and that the "real killing centres" were elsewhere.
We haven't seen his so-called evidence for these positions, because we were never interested in the lines he was pursuing.
He's entitled to be either right or wrong about it in as much as no one else is right to force his silence. Convince him he's wrong. Make your case to the people, openly, honestly, and directly. Let everyone be able to do that. There is censorship now by the mainstream media about the impeachable offenses of Bush/Cheney, et al.
This European law against questioning anything about the official line of the Holocaust is fascistic in its own right.
Self-censorship from conscience is the only correctly applied censorship.
Let people self-sensor without human coercion. Let their hearts guide them. Let their consciences guide them. If they reject the truth, don't take God's law into your own hands. Vengeance is not yours. If we all adhere to these things, God will set everything right.