Antisemitism, Genocide Justification and Holocaust denial are each illegal in some jurisdictions. But not in America. Should they be. To understand why that is let’s look at what those words mean.

Antisemitism, Genocide Justification and Holocaust denial are each illegal in some jurisdictions. But not in America. Should they be. To understand why that is let’s look at what those words mean.

“The biggest insult to the memory of the Holocaust is not denying it but using it as an excuse to commit genocide against the Palestinian people.” Said Norman Finkelstein. In so doing repeating that trope that the Holocaust refers to one specific incident.

Holocaust is one of those loaded words, like Genocide. Its very mention triggers a predetermined behavioral pattern. With intent. An association with events that are not specific to the etymology of the word Holocaust. A reaction that most people who hear this word will automatically assume its meaning to be.

The word Holocaust originates from Old French holocauste, via late Latin from Greek holokauston, from holos ‘whole’ + kaustos ‘burnt’ (from kaiein ‘burn’).

The word holocaust was first used in English in 1833 by journalist Leitch Ritchie to describe the wars of Louis VII of France.

The noun holocaust means: destruction or slaughter on a mass scale, especially caused by fire or nuclear war. For example, ”a nuclear holocaust”.

Curiously for Lexicographers, when you type the word Holocaust into google, or even raise it in conversation, the word appears to reference only one event. The Holocaust is “the systematic state-sponsored killing of six million Jewish men, women, and children.”

Not; The systematic state-sponsored killing of many Jewish men, women, and children. Or even the systematic state-sponsored killing of millions of Jewish men, women, and children.

Fall foul of this numerical distinction by asking how we know it was exactly six million and, in 17 jurisdictions, you may find yourself in jail.
Holocaust, the word, has been appropriated by a political ideology and designated to enforce a very specific legal function. By assigning a word that is hundreds of years old to one specific event from less than one hundred years ago; and then using that premise to enforce an exact and inflexible numerical value to this Zionized meaning of the word, the opportunity to examine how we arrive at this number of exactly six million is ended.

The political ideology behind this word appropriation has manipulated legal process to criminalize any investigation into their intention. Passing laws to make Holocaust denial and ‘any expression of genocide justification’, illegal. If Chuck Schumer gets his way in American law, then antisemitism will add a third layer of criminality to indemnify Zionist behaviors. Schumers bill will change the way we are able to comment on genocide. For Schumer, as for fellow Zionist Biden, refuting genocide is key to plausible deniability in War Crimes court.

What is the intention behind these laws that appear at odds with Freedom of speech.

Although Genocides have been perpetrated throughout our history, for the majority who learn the word genocide, genocide applies to one specific event only. The holocaust. But hold on. Which holocaust. The majority understand ‘the holocaust’ means the Genocide of the Jews by the antisemites.

Genocide and holocaust are two words that the majority of history students today learn as being one event that happened to one race of people. In the racist practice of another word that has been weaponized deceptively for the same purpose as those two. That is antisemitism.

So let’s agree the terminology behind the two laws relating to holocaust denial and ‘any expression of genocide justification’.

Antisemitism caused the holocaust which is the genocide of Jews by the antisemites. Any inquisitive counter narrative can find you in jail.

This word ‘antisemite’ is a reference to semitic people. Like Holocaust and Genocide, Semitic provenance means something very different to the context the majority understand the word to mean. That is, an antisemite is someone displaying prejudice against Jewish people.

There is a reason for this deception. This weaponizing of words to a propagandizing methodology.

The reason is Zionism. An ideology that has mastered appropriating a few chosen words for a specific political intention; then used the outcome of that indoctrinating process, loading words with a trigger narrative that assumes convenient conjecture, as fact to pass laws based on the misdirection these words enable.

What do these three words actually mean. Why did their meaning change from what the dictionary has for so long associated with these words.

Between 1941 and 1945, the Fascist Nazi leader-class convinced a dumbed down religious conservative nationalist worker class to perpetrate a genocide, a final solution in which they starved millions and killed millions in large-scale industrialised genocide.

Although many people including women and children died in this holocaust, the Zionist movement specified a precise number of Jews, six million, as the victims of a holocaust. Any efforts by historians or even the moderately curious to validate how this precise number are the exclusive beneficiaries of legislation protecting any conversation could end in a jail sentence. This limits the conversation in many ways, most significantly for those many victims of the Nazi genocide who were not Jewish. But also, for scholarly research. Why should any law exist solely for the purpose of blocking scientific forensic research into historical events.

Let’s consider both these issues in a multiple choice question context. What do the majority think and how does that differ from the facts.

1.) Who did the Nazis Genocide?
Was it A; Homosexuals, Special needs children, Communists, Gypsies, Rapists, Slavic people, Black people, Jehovahs witnesses, and Political opponents who contested the Aryan vision of a White Supremacist Master race.
or B: Six million Jews.

2.) What is the Holocaust.
Is it A; An old Greek word that described catastrophic events that included fire in which masses died.
or B: When the Nazis Genocided Six million Jews.

3.) What is an antisemite.
Is it A; someone who show prejudice against a descendent from the three tribes of Abraham, whose Semitic languages dating back to the Abrahamic period in the Middle East identifies them as semitic. Like all those original Arab tribes of Abrahamic origin.
or B: A gang of people who who attack Jews.
or C: Someone of Khazarian and East European origin, Ashkenazim, with little or no Semitic provenance, who converted to Judaism, who then attack Arab Semites of actual Semitic Provenance; while at the same time claiming their antisemitism is not antisemitism because they have the right to kill whichever Semites they choose, to defend their incontestable claims to being Semites. Although, physically the majority appear uncannily similar to Europeans, are very clearly not of Arab descent from the Abrahamic Tribal period.

The vast majority of people who understand those three words, Holocaust, Genocide and Antisemitism, answer B each time. This is because of a job well done by the Zionist influencers who cross fertilized educational opportunism with legal deviance.

Once you have popular opinion believing these powerful words victimized one specific race only, a race who happen to be the ‘chosen few’, then you can prevent any further investigation into how and why they performed this appropriation of words and concepts by passing laws.

That’s where criminalizing Holocaust Denial, Antisemitism. and Genocide Justification becomes a double edged sword. What happens when the Antisemite Genocide Justifying Holocaust denying President is not the Straight shooter you thought you voted for. What if the ironclad lifelong Zionists claiming Antisemitism are themselves now falling foul of the laws they argued so hard for. Committing Genocide, then denying it, is the very definition of Holocaust denial.

After WW2 those three words were applied relentlessly on world opinion, especially at the UN. After seeing those harrowing horrifying images of skeletal concentration camp victims, who wouldn’t feel sorry for a race so terribly persecuted by antisemitism that they were genocided in the holocaust. Six million Jews genocided in the holocaust by the antisemites.
In 1947 the extent of this weaponized sympathy was so real, the UN voted to allow the persecuted Zionist victims of the Holocaust to have the homeland they demanded. A place where they could defend against such a thing ever happening again. The State of Israel was born from that wave of global sympathy led by extraordinarily overfunded lobby groups at the UN. And despite the UK objecting vocally to a terrorist gang who they designated as terrorists, being given statehood.

The 1947 UN Partitions Plan set events in motion that created the State of Israel, yet the UN had no legal precedent with which to give away another peoples land. This extraordinary lobbying replayed those words endlessly. Antisemitism. Holocaust. Genocide, until, like a magic trick, the UN passed the motion. President Truman later noted,

“The facts were that not only were there pressure movements around the United Nations unlike anything that had been seen there before, but that the White House, too, was subjected to a constant barrage. I do not think I ever had as much pressure and propaganda aimed at the White House as I had in this instance. The persistence of a few of the extreme Zionist leaders – actuated by political motives and engaging in political threats – disturbed and annoyed me.”

Once the UN Partitions plan was granted the Zionists were up and running. With their weaponized monetized use of keywords to cover up the illegality of their actions. Illegality they protected by legislation that would provide immunity from accountability for terrorist atrocity.

As historians investigating the details of the ‘Holocaust’ would soon find out. Questioning the authenticity of the Jewish claim to being targets of Antisemitic Genocide in the Holocaust might find you in jail.

This who questioned the exact number of six million Jews being genocided in the holocaust faced lengthy jail terms. The fixed narrative of ‘Six Million Jews were Genocided in the Holocaust was written in stone. To question it could only mean you were an antisemite. And from that slippery gateway to Holocaust denial and ‘any expression of genocide justification’.

Historical Author and Conservative British whack job David Irving, and others, tested the law. Using scientific calculation some speculated by calculating the amount of floor space in the ovens. The maximum number of people per oven. The minimum amount of time it would take to clear out one oven before refilling it with other victims of genocide. They then crunched the numbers to arrive at a maximum number that might realistically have been killed in these ovens in that amount of time. When this number was not the Six Million the law required it to be, the opportunity to fact check the Zionist claim was over.

Try that again and you go to Jail.

In 2005 Irving was arrested in Austria. He was charged by state prosecutors with the speech crime of “trivialising the Holocaust”. In Austria Holocaust Denial law says it is a crime if a person “denies, grossly trivializes, approves or seeks to justify the National Socialist genocide or other National Socialist crimes against humanity.”

His application for bail was denied on the grounds that he would flee or repeat the offence. Irving remained in Austrian jail awaiting trial for three months. In his 2006 trial Irving pleaded guilty to the charge of “trivialising, grossly playing down and denying the Holocaust” In essence his offense was saying “The figure of six million killed Jews is just a symbolic number”.

At the end of the one-day hearing, Irving was sentenced to three years’ imprisonment in accordance with the Austrian Federal Law on the prohibition of National Socialist activities (officially “Prohibition Statute”) for having denied the existence of gas chambers in Nazi concentration camps in several lectures held in Austria in 1989.

Irving said “there were no gas chambers at Auschwitz” and “it makes no sense to transport people from Amsterdam, Vienna and Brussels 500 kilometres to Auschwitz simply to liquidate them when it can be more easily done 8 km from the city where they live”.
Irving sat motionless as the Judge asked if he had understood the three year sentence, to which Irving replied “I’m not sure I do”. Eventually, on Appeal, Irving’s sentence was cut by two thirds and he was released for time served.

Opponents of Irving’s imprisonment argue that free speech should be applied to everyone regardless of their viewpoints and that it is a slippery slope to imprison someone due to the lack of factual accuracy or unpopularity of their opinions.

The important question is not whether Irving is a typical British Conservative whack job presenting opinions as facts, or whether he offends people with what he says, but why anyone, anywhere should be imprisoned for expressing dissenting views or saying offensive things.

Today, you may be imprisoned or fined for dissenting from the accepted Holocaust history in the following countries: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Israel, Lithuania, New Zealand, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Switzerland. But not the USA. This is because lawyers in the US would have a field day if leaders could be prosecuted for ‘any expression of genocide justification’ or Holocaust denial.

And when the ‘antisemitism charge’ Zionists have depended on to warrant their right to defense discovered that the Palestinians were the Semites, not entitled to their right of defense, while the Ashkenazim are not really Semites at all. Leaders have repeatedly used Antisemitism to justify Americas ironclad support for genocide and holocaust by American bomb. That then places the interpretation of what is a Semite to the fore.

Many countries also have broader laws that criminalize genocide denial as a whole, including that of the Holocaust. Those countries that have banned Holocaust denial, including Austria, France, Germany, Hungary, Occupied Palestine, Poland, Romania, Russia and Ukraine, have also banned Nazi symbols. But not the US. You can wave your Swastika free from any fear of arrest in the USA. Often these Swastikas appear on the other side of a Trump flag. Is a Trump flag paired with a Swastika a Nazi symbol? Is Trumps ideology consistent with Nazism? It’s a good thing he is President able to ensure no laws banning Nazi symbols, aiding genocide or holocaust denial come into effect.

Should ‘any expression of genocide justification’ also a be a criminal offense in the USA?

This question occupied many hours at the Nuremberg trials. The American lawyers realized what would happen if this law was passed in which nations could be charge with genocide as opposed to individuals. The outcome at Nuremberg, the Nuremberg Protocol that governs international Criminal law, very sensible excluded the National liability, preferring instead to target individuals from the leader class for trial and sentencing as War Criminals.

Legislation against Holocaust denial and genocide Justification has been proposed in many countries that do not have it in place, including the United States and the United Kingdom. However, the proposal and implementation of these laws has been criticized and met with vigorous opposition, including from a variety of civil/human rights activists, who contend that the outlawing of these acts would violate people’s established rights for freedom of speech.

Clearly for the United States and the UK, to make ‘any expression of genocide justification’ a criminal offense would criminalize the entire Government overnight as surely as Holocaust Denial becoming illegal would.

Organizations representing the groups that were victimized during the Holocaust have generally been split in their opinions about anti-Nazi legislation, including that which deals with the legality of Holocaust denial.
The reason the US does not follow other Zionist countries in making ‘any expression of genocide justification’ a criminal offense is quite clear. The Multiple choice explanation is black and white.

1.) Is the US sending more explosives to drop on a civilian population than every previous war combined. In total tonnage. Amounts totaling Hundreds of Billion in state of the art tools for genocide. (Yes or No.)

2.) Is the starvation of the incarcerated populations in Palestine, a number near six million, paired with the carpet bombing of the displaced starving refugees Genocide. (Yes or No.)

3.) Does the US Leader Class, the Harris Trump Two Parties That are One who contested the election, intend standing ironclad behind the ongoing commitment to commit Genocide. (Yes or No.)

4.) Did 99% of American Voters vote for the two Parties whose intention is clearly defined by their commitment to Stand By Their Right to Genocide. (Yes or No.)|

If the answer to these four choices is Yes, then it is just as well that the US do not have laws making ‘Holocaust denial’ and ‘any expression of genocide justification’ illegal.

99% of American Voters voted for a leader class who are 99% committed to genocide justification by 100% commitment to Holocaust Denial.

Biden absolutely refutes that the US is doing anything illegal. Trump on the other hand doesn’t know what refute means. Or the etymology of Holocaust, Genocide and Antisemitism. But he knows the art of the Nazi deal and he knows exactly what his base like most.

That’s why 99% of Holocaust denying Americans voted for genocide. Biden was right. It’s not illegal in the U.S.

View with Captions on YouTUBE

My Retail Bookstore is here Andrew Brel Books (Amazon, Audible and Apple Books.)

I am not paid to write. My Paypal Patron support is here