HOLOCAUST CULTIST DREAMS

For several days now a story has been running in the papers about the American Library Association convention being held here. The Association reports that since 1979 there has been a threefold increase in censorship efforts by "outside" groups and an atmosphere reminiscent of the 50's when librarians became targets of Red-baiters because they continued to make available literature on communism.

The ALA is grappling with such issues as ethnics and access to information: what to do, for example, with blatantly racist materials provided by special interest groups insisting on inclusion of their own propaganda rather that the exclusion of materials of those they criticize and/or disagree with.

You can see right away how the American Library Association, as progressive and mindful of First Amendment rights for all citizens as it is, is expending its energy grappling with problems it creates for itself. Why doesn't the ALA follow a policy of encouraging libraries to buy and shelve material on its merits, racist or not? That would avoid such serious problems as grappling? Why doesn't the ALA encourage the same standards, for example, it uses to encourage libraries to buy and shelve tens of thousands of "blatantly" integrationist books. In a free society, would bigotry not be legal?

Now the ALA is creating for itself still another problem with which it will soon have to begin grappling-its own participation in the censorship of books written about the Holocaust from a revisionist perspective. These books are now considered by ALA stalwarts, defenders of the First Amendment rights for some of us, though not all of us, as "blatantly" (or is it "virulently"?) anti-Semitic by definition, the suppression of which is routinely encouraged in the name of protecting the innocent and the ignorant. This is the usual trashy double standard followed by the ALA , so I suppose it's heartless to expect anything different from them.

I've become so concerned about the plight of the ALA and all the grappling it has to do just to keep its head above the water in the Great Sea of Censorship it promotes that it occurred to me to hop a bus over to Beverley Hills and have a look through the card index at the public library there to see how a rich Jewish community treats such issues as the right to read and the right of free inquiry.

There are some 105 titles indexed in the Beverley Hills Public Library relating directly to the Holocaust from the establishment, cultist perspective and none with a revisionist viewpoint. Nothing. No Butz, nothing by Faurisson, Walendy, Felderer, Rassinier, Harwood, Christopherson. Nothing. You can see the problem that the Beverley Hills Library is creating for itself. It will soon have to begin grappling with this if it wants to maintain even the semblance of a library that is not being openly run by bigots-a bigot being defined as that person who has a closed mind.

I considered checking at the reference desk to see if I hadn't overlooked the many Holocaust revisionist titles they do in fact shelve. The lady at the desk looked terribly Jewish. I hesitated and changed my mind. I have learned a few things in the last three years about initiating a conversation about the Holocaust with people who are Jewish. It wasn't easy, it took a while and several very unpleasant incidents, but I did learn.

I looked around at the people using the reading tables and browsing through the stacks. Most of them looked Jewish. I strolled around the library in an innocent manner, peering into the different faces. Nearly all looked like Jews. I thought maybe it was just a bad night.

Then I saw the reflection of my own face in a darkened windowpane. I looked like a Jew myself. A portly German-Jewish lawyer down on his luck, a man who had been moved early on by the spirit of the law, perhaps, rather than its letter, and was suffering poverty because of it. Maybe everyone in the city, maybe America , was a Jew. My ex-father-in-law always suspected I was a Jew and to amuse myself I suppose I never responded directly to his inferences about it.

More recently, early one Sunday morning, I was walking along through the thrash on Hollywood Boulevard when a middle aged woman who I could see had, at one time, been quite attractive, approached me for a handout. Usually I give something to the bums on the Boulevard. For some reason I refused her. I think it embarrasses me to give money to lady beggars. And then the lady turned on me in the empty morning street screaming: "No you wouldn't give anyone a penny would you, you goddamn Jew!" To say she set me back a bit doesn't describe very well the confusion and discomfort I felt. Maybe for the first time in my life I'd felt personally, deep inside, something of how it must feel to be a Jew and suffer hostility and hatred gratuitously because of it. Occasionally I still see the woman walking the Boulevard. She isn't a drunk or a prostitute. She's just poor and mean, and I can still see traces of the beauty that was once in her face.

It was Wednesday evening when I went to the Beverley Hills Public Library. Thursday afternoon I took the bus downtown to the Rufus B. von Kleinsmid Central Library. I thought maybe the von Kleinsmid collection on the Holocaust might be rather more complete than the Beverley Hills collection. It was: two hundred titles altogether, with one copy of the Butz book held in the reference stacks and a handful of titles by Rassinier, Faurisson and Felderer. Not much, a pitifully small display really, but something.

Friday, using a guide titled "The Los Angeles Library: Your Library," unless you're somebody like me, I began calling branch libraries to discover the results of the American Library Association's influence on the purchase of titles on the Holocaust. All 62 branches of the Los Angeles Public Library shelve books on the Holocaust from the cultist viewpoint. Two of the 62 branches shelve Butz's "Hoax" but no other revisionist title, and of those two branches one has since gone up in flames, which is probably mere coincidence. Not one of the other 60 branch libraries shelves a single title on the Holocaust that is not written from a cultist perspective.

I can't prove that there is anything to be learned from such an informal survey, but I do think it's interesting. It gives one a feel for what really is being censored at our public (read: Government) libraries. While Christian fundamentalists are concerned that their children will go to the library and get their hands on a book with dirty words in it, Holocaust Cultist fundamentalists and the ALA are afraid that grownups will read a book about the "gas chambers" that has not been approved by itself or its cultist supporters.

Still I like a good story as well as the next fellow and there's always a Holocaust "survivor" someplace willing to cook up a few for any reporter, drunk or sober, who happens to be stumbling past. Once the trusting, dog-like reporter has got his survivor tale there is always some great American newspaper willing, eager even, to publish it. It doesn't matter how old the story is, or how stupid or how craven it sounds, or that it is not documented and cannot be documented. Those are not the things that matter. What matters is that the follows very strictly the Holocaust Cultist line that indiscriminately accuses Germans of bestiality to gain sympathy for Jews.

Recently, when some ten thousand Holocaust survivors got together in Washington D.C. to commemorate their trials and tribulations at the hands of the German beasts, one of them, Mike Jacobs by name, told a tale about how when he was a lad of 16 in Ostroweic, Poland, he was forced to run up and down the stairwells of an apartment building carrying Jewish babies to the roof so German soldiers up there could throw the tots over the side and splash them on the pavement below. According to Holocaust survivor Jacobs, the German soldiers did this because they thought it amusing. They did it for "sport".

Today Holocaust survivor Mike Jacobs is a successful junk dealer in Dallas . I'll bet Mike has been dealing in junk all his life. Listen to this: "In my dreams, the SS soldiers try again and again to kill me. Take me outside, whipping and kicking me all over. They beat and torture me, but I always come out the winner and I never let them kill me."

Like so many of these Holocaust survivors who like to tell their horror stories, Mike does a lot better against the German beasts today in his dreams than he did 40 years ago in real life. In real life Mike was a little on the cooperative side. Snatching up Jewish babies (out of their mother's arms?) and running them up to the roofs of apartment buildings so German sadists could have some sport?

How many Jewish tykes did he cart up there so Germans could off-load them onto the pavement below? A dozen? Fifty? More? Didn't he get tired of it? Couldn't he see what a mess it was making down below? How does one get into relationship with a junk dealer like this Holocaust survivor Mike Jacobs who implies that it was poor form for German soldiers to throw Jewish babies off rooftops but does not drop a hint there might have been something amiss in his taking care of the hard part himself, getting the little people up there in the first place?

Doesn't Mike feel a little remorse for this? I suppose he does, perhaps not directly. In his dreams (he says): "I stand up to them (the bestial SS). I wake up in a sweat with a smile on my face. I won." But doesn't Mike dream about the babies? Does he dream only about what happened to him and nothing about what he helped the German monsters do to the Jewish babies? I know it's just me, but I think that's a little insensitive on Mike's part. I think it suggests that Holocaust survivor Mike Jacobs has yet to deal with how he lived out his life during World War II.

The reticence of Mike Jacobs, and the equally nauseating reticence of the Washington Post, about Mike's participation in mass infanticide is touching but weird. And what is it with all these Jewish stories about German baby-killers anyhow? The same bloody edition of the Washington Post has yet another story about still another sensitive Holocaust Survivor who participated in another baby-killing story about German beasts. This fellow gave his name as Adam Tems and the scene of the crime as the Lodz ghetto. There, the German beasts threw babies from the fourth floor of the hospital into a truck on the street below.

They weren't real sharpshooters however, these German creatures, not anything near what you'd expect from trained baby-killers. "Our job", Holocaust survivor Adam Tems goes on to say, "was to pick up the babies that missed the truck and throw them in."

It's certainly possible. It's a classic, Cultist example of German organization, orderliness, and monstrosity. Quickest way to get the little Jewish babies down there is, clearly, to toss them out the fourth-floor windows. More efficient than to carry them down four flights of stairs. And more monstrous. All that was needed was a few cooperative Jewish potential survivors down below to take care of the missed shots and maybe clean up the mess.

Leo Clwilich was as the same get together as Tems and Jacobs. He didn't have a baby-killer story-if he had had one the Washington Post or any other mainline newspaper in America would have been more than glad to print it-but he had a torture story. Clwilich was tortured by German sadists-pay attention to this one. German beasts forced him to put his coat on backwards, put rocks in the pockets of the coat, walk three miles, then wash his face in coffee. Some of those German creatures, as psychologically primitive as they were, nevertheless had lively imaginations and, it would seem to me, a not inconsiderable sense of the comic.

But lets get serious here. Lets get back to the baby killing that Holocaust survivors, along with American journalists, are so interested. Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel, one of the Chief Survivors in the world, the man chosen to head the United States Holocaust Memorial Council in Washington D.C., is himself a personal witness to a baby killing atrocity by German beasts, as well as a circulator of other atrocities by the German beasts that he did not see with his own eyes but heard about from other Holocaust survivors. The truly dependable Washington Post, when it comes to objectively reporting monstrous acts by German beasts with never a hint of reticence, reports the story briefly:

Wiesel was 14 when he entered Auschwitz-Birkenau. It was night. The line advanced slowly toward Dr. Mengele, who moved his conductor's baton (or "horsewhip" depending on which authentic Holocaust survivor eyewitness you read.) to the right. to the left. Wiesel and his father were sent to the left. The smoke of the crematoria filled the sky. As they walked Wiesel saw a truck pull up full of babies and then saw SS men throw the screaming babies into a flaming ditch.

If I understand Elie Wiesel and The Washington Post correctly, Mr. Wiesel is saying that the German creatures through a truck load of (Jewish?) babies into a flaming ditch to be burned alive, right there in the barracks area, in front of hundreds, perhaps thousands of newly arrived Jews. Maybe these babies were those the good Adam Tems and his potential-survivor comrades had loaded up for the Germans over in the Lodz ghetto earlier in the day. Not likely though, since Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel, who witnessed this with his own eyes, told the Post that the tots were "screaming."

In any event, Elie Wiesel and his father and all those other hundreds of Jews that had arrived in the same transport, and all the Jews who had arrived earlier and were left over, all of them together apparently just stood around with their hands in their pockets and a soulful look in their eyes, observing the scene, while German beasts burned their babies alive right there in front of them. Maybe that particular evening all those Jews had rocks in their pockets and just couldn't make a move. Or maybe the German creatures had forced these hundreds of Jews to wash their faces in coffee and they were just too overcome by the horror of that experience to mouth a protest.

In Chartock and Spencer's The Holocaust Years: Society On Trial , Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel recounts as fact, though he did not see it himself, how in the forests of Galacia Jewish babies were thrown in the air so that German machine-gunners could use them for target practice. Wiesel often does this, reports some terrible act ostensibly carried out be German beasts that cannot be verified but is left there hanging in the wind, knowing that no American journalist will question the story, which at its core is an accusation of unique German monstrosity, knowing that some Holocaust cultist will use it sooner or later, not having any proof that it is true, to demean Germans as sub-human creatures, thereby creating sympathy for Jews.

It's possible of course that all these stories are true. But how am I supposed to decide if they are true or not? How do the brave reporters at The Washington Post know if the stories they write are true? Do they care? Do their editors know? Do their editors care? Does Ellie Wiesel care? Do those who promote the Holocaust Death Cult care?

Who cares?

Yesterday at sundown, walking along Highland Avenue past the Hollywood Bowl, wondering who cares about all this, wondering how deeply I really care about it, I saw lilac pools shimmering on the walk beneath the jacaranda trees. The warm evening air rustled the fallen flower petals and in that moment, my gaze suffused with their lilac light, I felt that the time would come when I probably would not care at all.

End

If you liked this story you will probably like my book
Break His Bones: The Private Life of a Holocaust Revisionist
I will send you a copy FREE (it retails for $19 + P&H)
with your subscription to my monthly hard-copy newsletter Smith's Report
Click Here to subscribe to SR and get Bones -- FREE