Source:  American Chronicle

By Ian Brockwell, June 18, 2007

It is perhaps human nature for some of us to question historic events, this might simply be because it is an interesting subject to discuss, or because some of the facts do not appear to add up.

Take the JFK assassination for example, could one lone shooter really have done it? We are asked to believe the government's version of events, but they won't release records that could prove it. What do they have to hide?

Many believe the 9/11 'attack' was an inside job, and there is certainly evidence to suggest that the official explanation is questionable. But once again, information is withheld and there is surprise when people become suspicious.

Religion is also a topic that always attracts heated discussion, as people argue about their faith.

There are of course many other examples that could be presented, and whilst questioning the aforementioned subjects might upset some, the important thing is that you can! And by allowing such debates to take place, it is possible for both sides to state their case (as they would in a court of law).

Unfortunately, some feel that the 'Holocaust' is a special subject that can not be debated in any shape or form, and should be accepted without question. Surely, if people have doubts, isn't it better to discuss these openly and try to convince them with the facts, rather than gag them? If something happened in a certain way, why be afraid of doubters if the truth is on your side?

However, as many are already aware, to deny that the 'Holocaust' ever existed can result in a prison sentence, and some are sitting in prison right now for doing just that. If these same people had stated that the WTC was not destroyed by Islamic terrorists, they would be walking around free. Is this not a denial of the historical 'facts' as well, which involved the deaths of a large number of people?

In many cases it is not the 'Holocaust' that is in question, but the numbers involved. Some believe that the total of 6 million is not accurate and there appears to be some evidence to support this.

Some may argue that the numbers are not that important, and the extermination of 200,000 Jews would be just as horrific as 6 million. Whilst I agree that both would be equally terrible, is it so wrong for people to seek confirmation of this figure, in order to eliminate any doubts they may have?

We are told that by keeping the "Holocaust" memories alive we are helping to prevent a repetition of this in the future, but has it? Has mankind really behaved any better since this event? If it doesn't reduce the killing or "ethnic cleansing" we constantly hear about on the news, why do we support it so strongly, and who does it serve?

Would it not be better to target those who are really responsible for these crimes (governments, certain businessmen and dictators), rather than throw members of the public into prison, or brand them as anti-Semitic, because they dared to ask questions?

If reminders of the past do not prevent the horrors of the future, we should look for an alternative way of achieving this. Perhaps, after more than 60 years, the 'Holocaust' should be allowed to take its place in the history books, along with other such tragic events. The Russian's lost many more millions during the Second World War, but they have learnt to live with their losses and move on. Sadly, we can not turn the clock back.

This does not mean forgetting the past and pretending it never happened, but accepting that it did and that those responsible are longer around or have been brought to justice. Punishing future generations for an event they had no hand in is not the way to move forward, and will only create more hatred and new problems.

I once asked the question why a new 'Holocaust' memorial in Germany only remembered the Jews that were killed, and not the "other" 5 million who shared the same fate. The reply I was given was "They can build their own memorial if they want to". Perhaps others would have responded differently, but this person gave me the impression that the memorial was for the sole benefit of Jews and not a reminder to the rest of the world that a "Holocaust" is wrong no matter who the victims are. I was of course immediately branded an anti-Semitic for bringing up the subject, but the question remains. Are 'Holocaust' reminders designed to help protect all races and religions from such an event, or not?

Censoring people's thoughts does not make them go away, they just resurface later, much stronger and often more violently than before. Let the people have their say and try to win the battles with words, not censorship, accusations or prison sentences.

This article was written in response to a story called  "Switzerland Offered To Host Holocaust Deniers' Conference".