AUSTRALIANS AT WAR

AUSTRALIANS AT WAR
THE NEW AMERICAN CENTURY is a compelling factual history of neoconservatism and its influence on US Foreign Policy in the Middle East during the first decade of the twenty-first century. Click on image above for details.

Wednesday, November 01, 2006

A RESPONSE TO A RIGHT-WING PRO-ISRAELI ZIONIST WHO USES THE ‘HOLOCAUST’ AS A PROPAGANDA TOOL TO DEFEND RIGHT-WING ZIONISM.

I reproduce below a post I sent to a predominately right-wing Australian website. I do so in the hope that it attracts more readers here than it does there.
The post was in response to a post written by Mike Lyvers, an extreme right-wing pro-Israeli Zionist, that, in part, read: “…[Roslyn] Ross [a Webdiary commentator in Australia] has questioned the Holocaust, denied that Jews were its primary victims, and made other blatantly anti-Semitic, neo-Nazi style assertions about Jews that had little or nothing to do with Israel.”


I wrote in response:

“Lyvers, I’ve read Roslyn Ross’s posts and I don’t recall seeing anything that she wrote that came anywhere near anti-Semitism or Holocaust denial.

You assert that she ‘denies’ that Jews were the Holocaust’s primary victims. First, if the ‘Holocaust’ is taken to mean the destruction and extermination of all peoples that were an enemy of Nazism, then she is correct. Few people realise what Hitler and the Nazis had in store for the ‘Slavic’ races had he prevailed in his war against Eastern Europe and Russia. The destruction of the Jewish peoples of Europe was merely a part of Hitler’s overall plan and would have paled compared with the slaughter planned in Eastern Europe and Russia.

Secondly, the word ‘Holocaust’ is one that has all but been usurped by right-wing Zionists to symbolize the horrors that were committed on Jews by the Nazis whereas in reality the Jews were not the Nazis only victims; many, many others died alongside Jews in camps that were designed for exterminating all sorts of peoples besides Jews.

You’ll find if you re-read Ross’s posts carefully that there is no anti-Semitism and there is no Holocaust denial. There is only the realignment of historical perspective that more accurately reflects the objective reality of events that over the years have been distorted by the subjective nature of historic sentimentality – a sentimentality that has been abused ever since by certain Zionist elements who now use the ‘Holocaust’ as a propaganda tool to defend against anti right-wing Zionism.”

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

"...if the ‘Holocaust’ is taken to mean the destruction and extermination of all peoples that were an enemy of Nazism..."

The problem with this is that nobody who uses the word 'Holocaust' means this. Changing the meaning of the word to fit the argument you prefer is dishonest.

Can you point to some reputable sources that would support your definition of 'Holocaust'?

Damian Lataan said...

The use of the word 'Holocaust' here is contextual; not definitive. Furthermore, the context it was being used in during the course of debate was not of my choosing or making and, therefore, hardly dishonest as far as my use of it is concerned. The dishonesty is in the way the word has been usurped by right-wing Zionists in order to push a line of propaganda.

xiando said...

".. problem with this is that nobody who uses the word 'Holocaust' means this. Changing the meaning of the word to fit the argument you prefer is dishonest."? Holocaust is just another word for mass-murder on a large scale, like Israel's continious murder of the people in Palestine. WW2's holoca$h event is just a holocaust, a one over-rated which pales in comparison to other holocausts who took place in the 20th century.

It is also interesting to note that nobody seems to remember the first Holoca$h, during WWI, and it's even more interesting to note that 6 million jews supposedly died in that holocaust. Why isn't this known today? People didn't buy it, maby they were better educated back then or something. So now the media wants us to forget about that holoca$h..