Ya know, I just found out that it is actually illegal in some European countries to "deny" the Holocaust.  A person can go to jail, just for saying something like that.  How strange, since the same European countries say that they are a "democracy", and they support free expression.  I wonder if there are any other laws on the books in those DEMOCRATIC countries that will put a person in jail for denying anything else about any other people?

While I question how overwhelming evidence that the Holocaust did happen would lead a person to deny it, I do not think it is right to place them in jail.  To me, this seems like punishment of non democratic regimes, placing a person in "re education camps" until they "get the facts right".  To me, it just sounds so wrong.  I wonder how a person will change his mind in jail about this.

I really want to be nice about this question...believe me I do, and I will restrain my post here, as not to cause anger amongst those blind followers.  Of course, some of you will decide, even as I try to be overly careful in my words and phrases, that I support, and possibly agree with those who deny the Holocaust.  I assure you, as dumb as I am for writing this article, I am not dumb enough to deny the evidence.

But lets look at reality here.  The victims of the genocide were not all Jewish, and there were many more people than the estimated 6 million people killed by the Nazis.  It is believed that maybe 12 million people were treated the same, for the sole means on genocide by them.  Of course, throughout the world during World War 2, many atrocities were deliberately  carried out by the Axis, and the Allies against innocent people. (Buzz bombing of London, fire bombing of Dreasden, siege of Leningrad, the building of the Burma railroad,  atomic strike on Hiroshima...the list goes on)  Of course, you may use the justification that some of these atrocities saved many more lives, or made the conflict shorter, but it does not change the fact that it happened, on purpose, and that innocent people died because of it.  To me, to justify killing an innocent person in any form is simply choosing villain or victim based on who killed them.  I see the problem here is that we want to write history in a way that glorifies us, and ignore the things that make us human.  I see those who would make a law to prevent someone from exposing his "lack of facts" by putting him in jail is trying to suppress conversation that might expose something much more sinister, or perhaps, we simply want to ignore it.

If you really look around this world, you will find that the free expression of historical events, dealt with in honest, frank debate have seemed to heal some of the wounds of World War 2.  Most of the countries in which the atrocities happened are at peace, are thriving, and are democratic.  Most notably though, even though honest history would contradict it, most nations who opposed each other then work together now, even forming unions in monetary and foreign policy affairs.  The look out for each others best interests, understanding perhaps that they want to prevent becoming enemies again because it was so horrible.  It seems that this would be the lesson taken away from being victims of horrible acts, rather than using the atrocity for sympathy and or an excuse to do it to someone else.

Perhaps, as we march down the road of war again, we need to have a really honest, world discussion about our past mistakes...not as an excuse to visit them on others, but as a means to keep it from happening again. 

Avoid the atrocity of blissful ignorance...time to tell the WHOLE truth, time to stop hiding and ignoring it.  We are quickly running out of options here.

Asslyamu 'alaykum

Zanubiyah