Understanding the real significance TODAY of the Nazi holocaust


DISCLOSURE: VT condemns the horrific tragedy committed by the NAZI Party against Jewish Citizens of Europe during Word War II known as the "Holocaust". VT condemns all racism, bigotry, hate speech, and violence. However, we are an open source uncensored journal and support the right of independent writers and commentors to express their voices; even if those voices are not mainstream as long as they do NOT openly call for violence. Please report any violations of comment policy to us immediately. Strong reader discretion is advised.

“Studio Prop” Auschwitz Smokestack (not connected to any “facility,” built in 1947 by the Soviets

Understanding the real significance TODAY of the Nazi holocaust


By Alan Hart


I am writing this piece fully aware that it will result in me being reviled and condemned by some who read my articles on web sites other than my own (www.alanhart.net) and are fixated with Nazi holocaust denial and/or what is called “holocaust revisionism”, which is usually something less than complete denial.

Incidentally, I never use the term The Holocaust (neither a capital T for the definitive article nor a capital H for the noun) in any reference I make to the fate of Jews in Nazi Germany and Nazi occupied Europe. Why not? The holocaust experience – being the victims of genocide – is not a uniquely Jewish experience as Zionism wants and needs the world to believe, and as the capital letters (used by the mainstream media to avoid offending Zionism) imply it to be. Since the obscenity of the Nazi holocaust there have been more than 70 other genocides and there were more than a few before it – the elimination of most of the native Indians of America, for example.

Those who deny and/or revise the Nazi holocaust offer three main assertions in support of their case.

The first is that the Nazis had no official policy or intention of exterminating Jews.

In my understanding of real history there is what could be called a starter grain of truth in that assertion but only to this extent. Killing Jews in large numbers was not on the Nazi agenda when Hitler came to power in 1933. As has been well documented by others, there was on some levels co-operation between the Nazis and Zionism to empty Germany of its Jews and get them into Palestine. Killing Jews in large numbers only became behind-closed-doors Nazi policy after the 1939 British White Paper effectively repudiated the Balfour Declaration of 1917 and reversed British policy for Palestine.

(The detailed and documented background to what I am attempting to summarize here is contained in Britain Admits, Too Late, “We were Wrong”, Chapter 8 of Volume One of my book Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews, which is sub-titled The False Messiah).

Six weeks before the White Paper was published on 17 May 1939, a committee whose members included the Lord Chancellor, Vincent Caldecot, reported that

His Majesty’s Government were not free to dispose of Palestine without regard for the wishes and interests of the inhabitants of Palestine (the majority of whom were Arabs).

The White Paper set out its stall by pointing to the ambiguity in the Balfour Declaration of the expression “a national home for the Jewish people” and “the resulting uncertainty as to the objective of (Britain’s) policy.” The indicator that there was to be no more ambiguity and uncertainty was this most explicit statement:

His Majesty’s Government therefore now declare unequivocally that it is not part of their policy that Palestine should become a Jewish state.

Britain’s newly defined policy objective was an independent Palestinian state within 10 years, and to prevent it becoming a Jewish state, Jewish immigration was to be limited to 10,000 a year for five years, after which no more Jews would be allowed to enter Palestine without the consent of the Arabs (consent which everybody knew would not be given).

Zionists declared the White Paper to be a betrayal of Britain’s promise to them. And that in the proverbial nutshell was why Zionism in some of its in-Palestine manifestations turned to terrorism – initially to break Britain’s will to stay and implement the White Paper policy.

Britain’s new Palestine policy, in particular the limits on Jewish immigration which were enforced, was a problem for the Nazis, too. If they couldn’t make use of Zionism as an agency to assist with the removal of Jews to Palestine, what to do? The answer was, “Kill them.”

There is a great deal of documented and irrefutable evidence of what Nazi leaders said behind closed doors and wrote in their diaries on the matter of exterminating the Jews.

One of the responsibilities of Heinrich Himmler, the commander of the SS, was setting up and controlling the Nazi concentration camps. To a secret meeting of top SS officials on 4 October 1943, he said: “I also want to refer here very frankly to a very difficult matter. We can now very openly talk about this among ourselves, and yet we will never discuss this publicly.” What was the “very difficult matter”? In Himmler’s own words to his audience, “the extermination of the Jewish people.”

When Germany’s defeat was imminent and Nazi leaders feared they would be captured and brought to trial, Himmler instructed his camp commandants to destroy records, crematoria, and all other signs of mass extermination.

The Nazi leader who most frequently and explicitly committed his thoughts about exterminating the Jews to paper was Joseph Goebbels, Hitler’s Minister of Propaganda. Here, for example, are just a few of his diary entries:

5 February 1942: The Jewish question is again giving us a headache; this time, however, not because we have gone too far, but because we are not going far enough.

14 February 1942: The Jews have deserved the catastrophe that has now overtaken them. Their destruction will go hand in hand with the destruction of our enemies. We must hasten this process with cold ruthlessness.

18 February 1942: …We must show them no mercy and no indulgence. This riffraff must be eliminated and destroyed.

6 March 1942:the greater the number of Jews liquidated, the more consolidated will the situation in Europe be after this war.

20 March 1942: …the Fuehrer is as uncompromising as ever. The Jews must be got out of Europe, if necessary by applying most brutal methods.

27 March 1942: The procedure is a pretty barbaric one and not to be described here more definitely. Not much will remain of the Jews. On the whole it can be said that about 60 per cent of them will have to be liquidated whereas only about 40 per cent can be used for forced labour,

29 April 1942: Short shrift is made of the Jews in all eastern occupied areas. Tens of thousands of them are liquidated

14 December 1942: Jewry must pay for its crime just as our Fuehrer prophesied in his speech in the Reichstag; namely, by the wiping out of the Jewish race in Europe and possibly in the entire world.

9 March 1943 … (Hitler) approved of my measures and specifically ordered me to make Berlin entirely free of Jews.

13 May 1943: There is therefore no other recourse left for modern nations except to exterminate the Jew….

The second main assertion of those who deny and/or revise the holocaust is that the Nazis did not use gas chambers to mass murder Jews.

I wonder how many of those who believe this and display in comments on web sites their loathing and even hatred of all Jews everywhere have ever met and talked with Jewish survivors of the Nazi holocaust. I have and I’ll quote just one of them, my anti-Zionist friend Dr. Hajo Meyer who survived Auschwitz.

He told me, and I believed him without reservation, that some of his Jewish “comrades” in Auschwitz were assigned the task of removing the corpses from the gas chambers and transferring them to incinerators for burning. He added that the smoke and fumes from the chimneys of the incinerators could be seen and smelled all over the camp.

The third main assertion of holocaust revisionists is that the figure of six million Jewish deaths is a gross exaggeration and that the real number was very significantly lower. That might be the case but even if it was, my response is still – so what! For the sake of discussion, let’s assume that only one million Jews were exterminated, would that be a rational reason to deny that there was a holocaust? Of course not!

As I note in Holocaust – Jewish Death, Zionist Life, Chapter 9 of Volume 1 of my book, holocaust denial (and most aspects of holocaust revisionism) is something I cannot get my Gentile mind around. It strikes me as evil on a par with the commissioning of the slaughter and the slaughtering itself.

The paragraph immediately above is my message to holocaust deniers and revisionists but transmitting it is not the main purpose of this article. It is to draw attention to the real significance today of the Nazi holocaust.

Its initial significance can be summarized as follows. Without the holocaust there almost certainly would be no Israel because prior to the unleashing of Nazi ant-Semitism there simply was not enough Jewish support for Zionism’s colonial enterprise.

The real significance of the Nazi holocaust today is in its use by Zionism and all supporters of Israel right or wrong as a card to blackmail non-Jewish North Americans and Europeans into refraining from criticising Israel or, to be more precise, staying silent when its leaders demonstrate their absolute contempt for international law and resort to state terrorism.

In a recent editorial even the New York Times expressed a measure of despair at the consequences of Zionism’s ability to shut down honest discussion and debate. It said:

“One dispiriting lesson from Chuck Hagel’s nomination for defense secretary is the extent to which the political space for discussing Israel forthrightly is shrinking. Republicans focused on Israel more than anything during his confirmation hearing, but they weren’t seeking to understand his views. All they cared about was bullying him into a rigid position on Israel policy. Enforcing that kind of orthodoxy is not in either America’s or Israel’s interest.

“The sad truth is that there is more honest discussion about American-Israeli policy in Israel than in this country. Too often in the United States, supporting Israel has come to mean meeting narrow ideological litmus tests.  J Street, a liberal pro-Israel group that was formed as a counterpoint to conservative groups like the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (the Zionist lobby’s command and control centre), has argued for vibrant debate and said ‘criticism of Israeli policy does not threaten the health of the state of Israel.’”

Criticism of Israeli policy, the editorial concluded, “is essential.”

Question: What must happen if there is ever to be enough political space in America for informed and honest debate which includes criticism and condemnation of the policies and actions of Israel’s leaders?

In my view what is most needed is a president with the courage to say something very like the following to the Jews, not only his fellow Americans who are Jewish but the Jews of the world. “The persecution you suffered on and off down the centuries and which climaxed with the obscenity of the Nazi holocaust IS NOT A JUSTIFICATION FOR ZIONSIM’S PERSCUTION OF THE PALESTINIANS IN THE NAME OF YOU ALL.”

If I was drafting a presidential speech which contained those words or something very like them, I would add this. “It is time for all of us to say that we reject Zionism’s implicit assertion that the Nazi holocaust justified its ethnic cleansing of Palestine and still justifies its oppression of the occupied Palestinians, and that we are no longer going to be blackmailed into silence by Zionism’s use and abuse of the holocaust.”


I am fascinated by the fact that some of those who display their loathing and hatred of Jews while denying the Nazi holocaust in the comment spaces of web sites, the VT site in particular, seem to be speaking from the same script. That makes me entertain the thought that the script they are working from was provided by Zionism, and that they are, in reality, Zionist assets. That’s by no means impossible because, as I have previously noted, Zionism needs anti-Semitism. The more anti-Semitism there is slurping around web sites, the less likely it is that Zionism will be called and held to account for its crimes. It would not surprise me if that is Zionism’s calculation.


We See The World From All Sides and Want YOU To Be Fully Informed
In fact, intentional disinformation is a disgraceful scourge in media today. So to assuage any possible errant incorrect information posted herein, we strongly encourage you to seek corroboration from other non-VT sources before forming an educated opinion.

About VT - Policies & Disclosures - Comment Policy
Due to the nature of uncensored content posted by VT's fully independent international writers, VT cannot guarantee absolute validity. All content is owned by the author exclusively. Expressed opinions are NOT necessarily the views of VT, other authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners, or technicians. Some content may be satirical in nature. All images are the full responsibility of the article author and NOT VT.
Previous articleTyson Foods Receives an A for New Corporate Responsibility Report
Next articleBritamgate: Staging False Flag Attacks in Syria
Alan Hart is a former ITN and BBC Panorama foreign correspondent who has covered wars and conflicts wherever they were taking place in the world and specialized in the Middle East. His Latest book Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews, Vol. 1: The False Messiah, is a three-volume epic in its American edition. He blogs on AlanHart.com.