David Irving Decides Against Martyrdom

David Irving has long been the respected elder historian of the holocaust denial scene. At one point he was a fairly respected British academic, but eventually fell in with the anti-Semitic far right, and began publishing books which minimized the crimes of the Third Reich. His subtle pro-Nazism lead author Deborah Lipstadt to savagly attack his resarch in her book “Denying the Holocaust”. Irving sued Lipstadt for lible in a U.K. court and lost. In writing his dissmissal of the case, the presiding judge noted that:

"Irving has for his own ideological reasons persistently and deliberately misrepresented and manipulated historical evidence; that for the same reasons he has portrayed Hitler in an unwarrantedly favourable light, principally in relation to his attitude towards and responsibility for the treatment of the Jews; that he is an active Holocaust denier; that he is anti-Semitic and racist, and that he associates with right-wing extremists who promote neo-Nazism."

After this rather stinging rebuke, Irving busied himself with various speaking tours, mainly in the United States. Last November, he was arrested in Austria and charged with holocaust denial. Yesterday, he plead guilty and was sentenced to three years in prison. Appealing to the court for mercy, Irving stated that “I made a mistake when I said there were no gas chambers at Auschwitz”, and that he had changed his views on the holocaust in light of new documents he had uncovered. The white power people have been surprisingly sympathetic to Irving’s change of heart, correctly noting that the renunciation of his beliefs was the only way for him to avoid what, at age 67, was likely to be a de facto life sentence. I for one will be interested to see if the neo-Nazis will be willing to overlook this renunciation upon Irving’s release, and if he will try to reintegrate himself into that subculture.

Irving’s general creepiness aside, as an American I find his imprisonment for making historically controversial remarks to disturbing. It also, as some have pointed out, makes the European community’s claim that the publishing of anti-Islamic cartoons should be considered a protected expression of free speech seem rather hypocratical. How many of the papers that reprinted the cartoons will protest Irving’s unlawful imprisonment?

On a side note, many on the far right suggest that the Jews are behind the laws in Europe outlawing holocaust denial. This must be an easy connection for anti-Semites to make, but it is a false one. As William F. Buckley recently wrote, if the holocaust had occurred in Missouri, it is likely that the Constitution would have been amended to allow for similar laws here. Nazism is a touchy subject in Europe, particularly in Germany and Austria. The U.S. on the other hand has a much higher Jewish population than central Europe, yet every halfwit racist is still allowed to publicly manipulate historical events as he sees fit.

The Secret Source Of Homophobia

James Cameron

When some religious right flunky wants to provide “scientific” evidence to back up their anti-gay rhetoric, they usually cite the work of James Cameron. Cameron is a thoroughly discredited researcher whose foundation specializes in publishing bizarre and outlandish materials attacking homosexuals. Among his more interesting claims are that only 1% of the gay population of the U.S. will die of old age (How many people do you know who died of that cause? My grandpa, for instance, died of cancer.), and that lesbians are 300 times more likely to die in car accidents than are straight women (?!). The Southern Poverty Law Center has published an entertaining article on Cameron in its new Intelligence Report. It points out the obvious absurdities of Cameron’s research, and notes how many fairly respectable right wing Christians still rely on his work to buttress their arguments. Perhaps the most interesting thing in the article is its illustration of the confused sexuality one often finds among hardcore homophobes. For instance, there’s this bit from a 1999 Cameron interview:

"Marital sex tends toward the boring end. Generally, it doesn't deliver the kind of sheer sexual pleasure that homosexual sex does. If you isolate sexuality as something solely for one's own personal amusement, if all you want is the most satisfying orgasm you can get, then homosexuality seems too powerful to resist. The evidence is that men do a better job on men."

Riiiight. It turns out that Cameron was sexually assaulted by both men and women as a child. This may partially explain the arguments he put forth in his 1978 book “Sexual Gradualism”. Cameron suggests that children should be “taught” heterosexuality by being allowed to experience progressively more intense sexual exploration under the direction of their parents. Realizing that many parents would find the idea of allowing young children to explore their sexuality to be repugnant, he notes: “While no parent wants his child starting the sexual process ‘too young,’ better too young than homosexual.”

Let’s just hope James isn’t lurking around some playground right now, hoping to “educate” the youngsters.

Muslims Take Themselves Far Too Seriously

The best thing that can be said of Christianity is that it’s not as bad as Islam.

-Fred Woodward

As much as I complain about the actions of the religious right in this country, I must admit that compared to radical Muslims, Christian fundamentalist come across as rather benign. For example, the sort-lived network television program “Book of Daniel” was considered by many Christians to portray Jesus and Christianity in general in a sacreligious way. So they proceeded to call for boycotts of the show’s advertisers and started a letter writing campaign directed at NBC. After three episodes, the show was cancelled partially as the result of the boycott, and partially due to viewer disinterest. End of story.

Compare this to the sh*t fit thrown by radical Muslims all over the world as the result of a few badly drawn cartoons that mocked the prophet Mohamed. Let’s not even talk about the embassy burnings in the Middle East. Western Europe is at this point infested with these barbarians, and extremely hostile protests were held throughout the region. Just check out this sign from a protester in London:



We should all be grateful that the number of jihadists residing in the U.S. is still relatively small. I hate to come across as religiously intolerant, but well, I’m religiously intolerant. I think these protests are only the most visible symptom of a sickness that infects the entire Muslim faith. This is after all a religion founded by a man who advocated military conquest as a means to spread his teachings. In many ways, Islam is the largest and most dangerous extremist movement on Earth. This is not to say that there are not many good, law-abiding, friendly Muslims out there. But to put things in perspective, a lot of the rank-and-file members of the Nazi Party were nice people too.

For a good run down of the latest atrocities committed by Muslims worldwide, check out the Western Resistance site. This is also a good piece from the National Review on how Muslims shouldn’t be too surprised that Westerners take a rather dim view of their religion.

Are The Masses Asses?

“Think of how stupid the average person is. And then realize that half of the people are stupider than that.”

-George Carlin

Almost all political extremists possessing even the most basic grasp on reality eventually come to notice a painfully obvious truth: The majority of Americans are simply not interested in their political doctrines. The usual explanation for this apathy is that a dark cabal manipulates the media in the support of its own goals. Whether the cabal is seen as being comprised of the corporate rich, atheistic liberals, or Jews, the result is the same: The brainwashing of the masses. This mental conditioning prevents the majority from seeing the obvious “truth” of the extremist’s message. Of course, this conclusion leads to yet another question: Considering how easily the average American can be beguiled and led, what are we to make of his or her intelligence level? The conclusion seems obvious. As Paul Craig Roberts, a former Regan administration official turned leftist writes regarding polling data on the public’s view of the war on terror: “What does it say for democracy that half of the American population is unable to draw a rational conclusion from unambiguous facts?” He speaks in particular of the issue of President Bush’s warrantless wiretaps, but the statement could have come from the mouth of any fringe politico.

Interestingly, the far right is not as bothered by this realization. William Pierce, the most notable post-WWII National Socialist thinker considered white Americans to be as a whole a worthless lot, often referring to them as “lemmings”. His view is consistent with the elitist worldview of fascism. Only under the direction of a strong dictatorship could the average person function as a productive member of society. But for anti-authoritarian leftists, the idea of the average person being a dolt is a bit more disturbing, as the whole “Power to the People” chant would become a bit ridiculous. It’s a critical flaw in their thinking that the radical left has yet to come to terms with.