Ironic Translation: “Work Makes You Free”
Are there any Holocaust deniers left in the world?
I had one of those days yesterday: I read chapter five of “The Truth Behind the Bible Code” entitled ‘The Black Fire of Holocaust’; and last night I watched the final episode of the Netflix series “Five Came Back” which contained George Stevens’ disturbing Dachau images from the liberation of Europe from Nazi control at the end of World War II.
When two (or more) bits of information coincide on the same day, that synchronicity is my inner guide’s way of saying, “Pay attention, here.”
Weissmandl and Ultra
All the effort that goes into breaking a code is lost the moment the enemy realizes that it has been broken. (Hence the shattering security implications of the quantum cryptographic keys mentioned above.) Cracking a really difficult cipher is therefore only half the job; the other half is keeping the fact hidden. Unfortunately, one of the fastest and easiest ways to let the cat out of the bag is to give evidence of knowing something that can only be known by reading the cipher. One of the most dreaded decisions facing any military strategist is whether to refrain from acting upon a discovery — and so perhaps allowing a terrible price to be paid by others — for fear that action would result in a far higher price later.
At one time one of Turing‘s Enigma decryptions had been too directly acted upon, and as with the Americans’ near disaster with the Japanese code previously, it almost reversed the course of the British victory at sea. By playing off German ignorance of the decryption, the Allies fooled many (but even so not all) of the Nazi high command into believing that a feint on D-Day was the actual invasion. Success depended almost wholly on the Allies knowing what the Germans knew (and thought); and upon the Germans knowing neither what the Allies knew nor that the Allies knew. By the time Berlin figured out what was going on, it was too late. (Rommel, sensitized to the extraordinary value of decryption, had long before figured it out — but Hitler would not listen to him.)
As Rabbi Weissmandl sat in the bunker, immersing himself in the ancient codes discovered by the kabbalists, he agonized over the Allies’ failure to respond to his pleas to save his people from destruction. Why did they not bomb the rail lines to Auschwitz? It wasn’t that they disbelieved his smuggled information: He had letters acknowledging it. In the years after the war, the Allies repeatedly claimed that it was simply because such bombings would have done no good in the larger scheme of things. The Germans would just rebuild immediately.
But Weissmandl knew that most of the Nazi high officials were keenly aware of the price they would pay were the world to become aware of their secret crimes. If the lines to Auschwitz — of no military significance — had been bombed, the message to Berlin would have been unequivocal: We know, and you shall pay. The deportations and exterminations would have ceased immediately. And Weissmandl knew the Allies knew this, too. So why did they not act?
Only in 1996 was it finally revealed that even before Rabbi Weissmandl forwarded his smuggled map of Auschwitz, British and American intelligence already knew about the Holocaust — in excruciating, bureaucratic detail — from the Ultra Project, Enigma transmissions intercepted and decoded by the Allies in London. The British Americans knew about it in June 1941, seven months before implementation of the “Final Solution” would begin; six months before the attack on Pearl Harbor, the foreknowledge of which the Americans did not believe. A calculation had been made, and agreed to by Churchill himself, long a friend of the Jews: Saving the Jews was not worth revealing to the Nazis the fact that their vaunted war-code had been penetrated. The Allies feared that the Nazis would conclude that the cracking of Enigma was the only way their dire secret could have been exposed. It would have been inconceivable to them that the deed had been done by a pathetic Slovenian rabbi.
But what seemed, and perhaps was, a heartless failure of the Allies to respond to the plight of his beloved Jewish people left Weissmandl himself a broken man. If it was true, as he believed and lived by, that “to save a single life is to save the world,” what could be said about a calculation that deliberately paid out one or two million of them? That the calculation itself was carefully kept from public knowledge until November 1996, and then forced into the open, not volunteered, suggests an answer.
The “hinge of fate” that won the war also closed the circle: The Jewish kabbalists had given the world cryptology and all its fruits; to keep secret the acquisition, Auschwitz would be allowed to operate until the very end. What would Weissmandl have thought had he lived to learn that there would subsequently arise a powerful movement that denies the Holocaust altogether; that points to the Allies’ failure to act on what they were told as prima facie evidence that the Holocaust never happened, indeed that claims the Holocaust was invented by one man: Rabbi Michael Ber Weisshandl? The Holocaust denial movement, or anything that could even vaguely be thought of as evidence for its claims, would never have had the opportunity to arise were it not for Allies’ decision to keep secret for more than fifty years its own extensive knowledge of it.
The ancient underground stream had come full circle; the primordial serpent had bitten its own tail: What more fitting image could their be than the bite of a serpent for such a cruel intersection of time and eternity as Rabbi Weissmandl had had to live through? Could the antivenin for the toxin of ultimate meaninglessness be extracted from the bite itself?
The basis of the word annihilation is from the Latin word “nihil”, meaning ‘nothing’.
Why would one race decide to annihilate another race as the ‘Final Solution of the Jewish Question’? What was the ‘Jewish Question’ anyway? What to do with them?
In the end, the ‘solution’ turned out to be the creation of the State of Israel to allow the resettlement of what was left of Europe’s Jewish population in their own homeland.
But now the Israelis are doing the same to the Palestinian people within their own borders, basically ‘an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.’ Has nothing been learned?
It’s not as if Canada or the United States are free from such thinking. The First Nations people are treated badly on a daily basis in Canada, and being Black (or brown or yellow) in the States can bring a daily fear of reprisal, sometimes leading to death.
It seems that the five skin colours that separate us from each other need to become invisible. We are one another, we are humanity.
Now the United States has a Presidential election looming where the colour lines are showing up in political rhetoric. Kamala Harris has been selected by Joe Biden as his running mate. The Black Lives Matter banner has been hoisted by one of the two white guys running for President. The other one is panicking, even though his whole political career has been focused on White Privilege. The lines are now clearer then ever.
The ‘race war’ that has been fought ever since Lincoln emancipated the slaves is now about to blow up in the battle for the hearts and minds of Americans of all colours.
Will the new ‘civil (and sometimes not-so-civil) war’ tear the United States apart?
The spiritual war of ‘good vs. evil’ has been painted with only two colours: black and white. But nothing is ever really just black and white. The shades of grey that exist between these two spiritual realities are where we all live on this earth, in this time.
If we cannot find our common ground and learn to support each other, we may just bring an end to this “grand experiment”. Is that what we really want?
And then there’s this: