Archive/File: people/p/prideaux.gary/zundelsite-analysis-methodology.07
Last-Modified: 1997/10/16

Tab 18. Zundelsite - Power Letter - July 1996 - Part B

     "Remember Jewish Professor W.D. Rubenstein of
     Australia who wrote in Sept 1979, "If the Holocaust can
     be shown to be a 'Zionist myth', the strongest of all
     weapons in Israel's propaganda armory collapses. "
     Knock that shield away, and they will have no choice
     but to defend themselves on their own merits. Without
     the self-bestowed "victim " status and without their
     copyright on pain and suffering, they will be revealed
     to be a rather paranoid, shrill, whining group of
     shysters, common racketeers, distorters of history,
     falsifiers of documents who created a gangster enclave
     in the Middle East called Israel to which thieves,
     crooks, swindlers, real estate and stock market frauds
     and Mafia king pins like Meyer Lansky, Flatto Sharon
     and thousands of other can retire to a safe haven. From
     there they can send forth their hit men and
     assassination squads, riding in bombers or on the banks
     of tanks, terrorizing their neighbors or even
     individuals in far off lands, sometimes even
     governments or heads of state."

     "Until now, the ''Holocaust " story and their
     stranglehold on the media in many parts of the world
     have made them immune, so far, from exposure - but now
     their defenses are crumbling, for every day brings to
     light more misdeeds, more con games, more insider
     trading, more lies and more cheating - and more and
     more crimes against the Germans, the Palestinians, the
     Lebanese, the Iraqis and the hapless Russians during
     their Bolshevik reign of terror and destruction there."
     
     The day of global reckoning is dawning. The Jewish
     Century is drawing to a close. The Age of Truth is
     waiting to be ushered in, and we will be its ushers."

Analysis

In the first paragraph, the writer focuses on the Jewishness
of Professor Rubenstein, and quotes from him (without
citation of source):

     "If the Holocaust can be shown to be a 'Zionist myth',
     the strongest of all weapons in Israel's propaganda
     armory collapses."

However, the reader is provided no context in terms of which
to assess the thrust of this statement. In particular, there
are (at least) two possible and conflicting interpretations:

                                                   [Page 23]

1. Professor Rubenstein's context is one in which he is
`defending' the truth of the Holocaust and pointing out that
the deniers of the Holocaust are attempting to represent the
Holocaust as a Jewish myth.

2. Professor Rubenstein's context is one in which he is
`attacking' the truth of the Holocaust and urging it to be
seen as a product of Jewish propaganda.

The writer invites the second interpretation, since the
second sentence follows with approval upon the first,
suggesting that the Holocaust Zionist myth is a shield
protecting Jews The writer has moved quickly and fluidly
from `Zionists' to the class of all Jews.

In the second and third sentences, the pronoun `they' has no
overt antecedent. The reader is thus forced to construct an
antecedent, a referent such that the use of the pronoun can
make sense. Following upon Sperber and Wilson's `relevance'
principle, the reader constructs such an antecedent which
will be congruent with the context. In this instance, the
naturally invited referent is `the Jews.' That is, it cannot
be `the French' or `dogs,' etc., because these nouns are
simply not relevant to the context. Once the reader
constructs the antecedent as `the Jews,' this entity serves
via `topic continuity' (i.e., there is no other competing
referent), to be the subject of the predication of the
sentence. In this case, all Jews (Jews as an identifiable
class) are attributed with a series of negative
characteristics (shysters, gangsters. racketeers, distorters
of history, falsifiers, etc. ) By invoking the names of two
`Mafia king pins,' namely `Meyer Lansky' and `Flatto
Sharon,' the writer quickly moves to extend the group of
such criminals to `thousands of others,' with absolutely no
evidence cited for such a number. in the same paragraph,
`they' (the Jews) are asserted to have created a corrupt
state (`Israel') which conceals evil activities and which
has adopted a state policy of providing safe haven to
criminals.

Thus, in this paragraph, although Jews are never overtly
mentioned, they are nevertheless invoked via `relevance' as
the referential antecedent of the pronoun `they,' after
which they, (the Jews) are assigned negative and
inflammatory attributes and characteristics.

The same strategy is employed in the second paragraph, where
`they' is again introduced. Again here, the natural referent
is the Jews, sustained via topic continuity from the first
paragraph. In `their Bolshevik reign of terror,' `their'
refers to Jews and implies that the Jews as an identifiable
group are gangsters and Zionists and that this group is co-
referential with the Bolsheviks. Thus, here again the Jews
are singled out negatively as criminals.

The third paragraph constitutes a covert threat against the
Jews. In it, the writer contrasts the  `Jewish Century' with
the `Age of Truth.' The contrast itself constitutes a
rhetorical device which pits the two terms against one
another along some particular dimension. In this instance,
the relevant dimension is that of `truth,' a term overtly
used. Thus, the contrast implies that the opposite of truth
resides in the contrasted term, the Jewish Century.
Specifically, the contrast implies that the Jewish Century,
presumably the present twentieth century, is one dominated
by lies. The `we' in this paragraph also needs an
interpretation: who is/are the referents? The `relevance'
principle invites the interpretation that the `we' refers to
those who oppose the Jewish position, and threaten to lead
in its destruction. When `we' is read with its inclusive
sense, the

                                                   [Page 24]

reader is allowed to be a member of the writer's group. This
paragraph is an implicit threat of violence.

In summary. the passage singles out Jews and assigns them
negative attributes. It accuses Jews of criminal actions. It
treats all Jews as a single group and threatens them with
violence.

Home ·  Site Map ·  What's New? ·  Search Nizkor