On 3rd February 2026 a somewhat prominent jew named Rabbi Jeffrey Salkin published a piece his regular column called ‘Martini Judaism’ at ‘Religion News’ on the so-called ‘Many Forms of Holocaust Distortion’.
As is my want I thought I’d reply in kind to Salkin’s piece titled ‘The Many Forms of Holocaust Distortion and Why J. D. Vance Remarks Matter’ and show just how typically moronic jews tend to be in terms of their ‘arguments’ on this score.
Salkin begins by writing that:
‘In his statement about International Holocaust Remembrance Day last week, Vice President JD Vance omitted any mention of Jews. He said on X:
Today we remember the millions of lives lost during the Holocaust, the millions of stories of individual bravery and heroism, and one of the enduring lessons of one of the darkest chapters in human history: that while humans create beautiful things and are full of compassion, we’re also capable of unspeakable brutality. And we promise never again to go down the darkest path.
His statement is just one example of how many less-than-friendly actors have distorted the meaning of the Holocaust. Here’s my taxonomy of ways its memory has been distorted:
Holocaust minimization: “The Holocaust happened, but the Jews have exaggerated the numbers.”
Holocaust trivialization: “The Holocaust happened, and Jews have used it to play the victim card.”
Holocaust inversion: “The Holocaust happened, but the genocide [sic] in Gaza is worse.”
Holocaust universalization, part 1: “The Holocaust happened, but it was not just about the Jews.” (This is where the Vance statement falls.)
Holocaust universalization, part 2: “The Holocaust happened, but other groups have had huge losses as well.”
Holocaust denial: “The Holocaust did not happen.”
And the paradoxical: “The Holocaust did not happen, but I wish that it would happen again.”’ (1)
The first thing to note is J. D. Vance is simply… well… being your average politician and writing a failure generic blurb about some ‘sad event’ that is being commemorated on a given day (one rather doubts Vance wrote a word of it) and Salkin is basically upset because it isn’t ‘specific’ or ‘tailored’ enough to jewish ‘victims’.
The second thing to note is Salkin’s seven ‘Holocaust Distortions’, which we will go through one by one and in detail.
To wit:
A) ‘Holocaust minimization: “The Holocaust happened, but the Jews have exaggerated the numbers.”’
This is a true statement of an intellectually valid position, which is that someone believes that the ‘Holocaust’ was a real event (this is incorrect based on available primary source evidence in this writer’s opinion but anyway) but rightly notes that jews have exaggerated the numbers of jewish ‘victims’.
This later point isn’t false at all – despite Salkin implying it is – since we know that the ‘6 million’ number was conceived of in the context of a ‘Shoah’ event before the First World War – (2) the first mention I have found of it is during the Damascus Affair of 1840 – (3) and the ‘6 million’ became a symbolic/totemic figure in the context of the ‘Holocaust’ sometime in 1943-1944 long before large numbers of jews had been ‘gassed’, (4) which is one of those historical facts that jews don’t like to acknowledge for obvious reasons.
So, the first of Salkin’s ‘Holocaust Distortions’ is actually… well… not a distortion at all, but rather the inconvenient truth.
B) ‘Holocaust trivialization: “The Holocaust happened, and Jews have used it to play the victim card.”’
This again is a true statement of an intellectually valid position that is often seen on the traditional anti-Zionist political left and is again actually true with the financial and political blackmail aspects of ‘The Holocaust Industry’ being thoroughly documented by Norman Finkelstein in his famous eponymous book first published in 2000. (5)
As former Israeli Minister of Education Shulamit Aloni bluntly stated in an interview with ‘Democracy Now!’ in 2002:
‘Well, it’s a trick, we always use it. When from Europe somebody is criticizing Israel, then we bring up the Holocaust. When in this country [the US] people are criticizing Israel, then they are anti-Semitic.’ (6)
So, once again the second of Salkin’s ‘Holocaust Distortions’ is actually… well… not a ‘distortion’ at all, but rather the inconvenient truth and has openly confessed to be the case by prominent jewish figures who should… well… know.
C) ‘Holocaust inversion: “The Holocaust happened, but the genocide [sic] in Gaza is worse.”’
Now this is again a true statement of a valid position that is often seen on the traditional anti-Zionist political left just like Salkin’s second ‘Holocaust Distortion’, but this is completely mischaracterised by Salkin as this is not a statement that claims to be factual but rather is subjective opinion. If for example I claimed that the Armenian Genocide or the Holodomor ‘was the worse than the Holocaust’ (or vice versa); I could use multiple grounds for doing so such as the alleged cruelty involved, the number of estimated victims, the methods used etc. (7)
The point however is that these are inherently subjective opinion of whoever is making that argument and don’t represent an objective claim so as such as not a ‘Holocaust Distortion’ but rather a representation of what might essentially be called the victimhood Olympics.
So, again we can see that the third of Salkin’s ‘Holocaust Distortions’ is actually not even a ‘Holocaust Distortion’ but rather a subjective opinion that differs from Salkin’s own which is simply seeking to invalidate by mischaracterizing it as something it is not.
D) ‘Holocaust universalization, part 1: “The Holocaust happened, but it was not just about the Jews.” (This is where the Vance statement falls.)’
Once again this is a true statement of an intellectually valid position that is primarily seen among non-jewish populations that like to make ‘Holocaust’ style claims in relation to the Third Reich’s treatment of them with the notable groups doing so being the Romani/Gypsies, (8) the Poles and Russians (it is also not uncommon among Slavs in general), (9) Jehovah’s Witnesses and homosexuals.
The problem with Salkin’s claim that this is a ‘Holocaust Distortion’ is that if you take the arguments made at face value and on their own merit – for their evidential ‘merit’ is also very similar to the arguments made concerning the alleged jewish ‘Holocaust’ so this isn’t a way to differentiate between them – then it means that the jewish ‘Holocaust’ cannot be viewed as ‘unique’, because groups were also ‘persecuted’ due to their biological origins/race (Romani/Gypsies and Slavs in general), because of their religion and because they resisted the Third Reich (Jehovah’s Witnesses) and also because of their ‘inalienable characteristics’ (if we follow the modern assumption that you ‘can’t help being homosexual’) as well as being alleged gassed by the Germans as well (Slavs in particular are commonly claimed to actually been the first targeted for gassing other than alleged Aktion T4 program according to orthodox ‘Holocaust’ scholars no less).
Salkin’s counterargument on this is that:
‘Drilling down on the universalization/Vance version, he is still far from alone in making this type of remark. In fact, I have encountered many Jews who rush to universalize the Holocaust. It is as if our own extended family’s pain — the murder of 6 million Jews — was not bad enough for us to endure, as if we are afraid to name our own particular pain.
Some have even accused me and other Jews of playing the game of comparative victimization.
Is there any justification for the universalization of the Holocaust?
In one sense, yes. When it came to the concentration camps, Jews shared those wretched, subhuman quarters with Jehovah’s Witnesses, gay men, labor leaders, people with disabilities, political dissidents, Slavs, Poles and others.
But that limits the Holocaust only to the concentration camps. For the Jews, the horror began with the Holocaust by bullets, or mass shootings by the Einsatzgruppen. That’s because the Nazi obsession was to hunt down every Jew — man, woman and child — everywhere. Nowhere in Europe did Jews find safety simply by staying put. No other group faced that total, relentless, continent-wide pursuit. It was about destroying the entire Jewish people and the Jewish religion. How else does one account for the savage glee with which Nazis desecrated Torah scrolls and other sacred objects?’ (10)
This is a frankly moronic and historically illiterate ‘counterargument’ by Salkin since the Einsatzgruppen’s primary role was not ‘to kill jews’ – that’s just the ‘Holocaust’ industry’s rather ridiculous characterization of them meant to avoid having to explain why anti-partisan troops and local populations in Eastern Europe killed so many jews – but rather to conduct anti-partisan operations on the Eastern front. (11)
The Germans rolled into every country they occupied with Einsatzkommando/Einsatzgruppe units in various forms; for example, ‘Reserve-Polizei-Bataillon 101’ in Poland in 1939-1940, ‘Einsatzkommando GB’ that was to be headed by Franz Six if ‘Operation Sea Lion’ had been successful in 1940 and ‘Sonderkommando Tunis’ in North Africa from November 1942 to May 1943.
The point is that the focus of the Einsatzgruppen was not simply ‘jews’ even in the East and indeed the Einsatzgruppen spent a lot of time of combating local anti-German partisans such as members of the ‘Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists’ (the OUN) who had split off from the pro-German OUN leadership and were now fighting/working against the Germans as well as the Soviet Union. (12) Even when jews were targeted it was primarily because of their close local affiliation with Stalin’s communist regime and its atrocities less because they were jewish as the ‘Einsatzgruppen Reports’ themselves make perfectly clear. (13)
What Salkin is guilty of doing here – aside from engaging in insufficient research before opening his mouth – is presenting documented German policy out of context to make it seem like jews were the ‘primary victims’ when in fact they were one of many ‘victims’ who were ‘persecuted by the Third Reich’.
A good example of this lack of any kind of historical context is Salkin’s claim that:
‘No other group faced that total, relentless, continent-wide pursuit. It was about destroying the entire Jewish people and the Jewish religion. How else does one account for the savage glee with which Nazis desecrated Torah scrolls and other sacred objects?’ (14)
As this completely ignores that – for example – the Third Reich immediately (and systematically) went after homosexuals and the institutions of promoting homosexuality in Germany – headed by jews like Magnus Hirschfeld for example (again note the startling concordance between the promotion of degeneracy/internationalism/communism and jews [Hirschfeld was a close associated with the German communist party – the KPD – and was a member of the German socialist party; the SPD]) (15) – and burned ‘desecrated their gay porn stash and other sacred objects’ (like Hirschfeld’s ‘historic sex toy collection’ from his ‘Museum of Sex’) in public no less almost immediately after the beginning of the Third Reich (16) and continued to ruthlessly and systematically purge homosexuals and pro-homosexual organizations throughout its existence in Germany and all German-occupied areas in Europe. (17)
Thus we can see that Salkin’s ‘counterargument’ is simply a load of nonsense (and frankly ignorant) claims that appear to have been culled from ‘History Channel’ style documentaries on the so-called ‘Holocaust’ not a detailed understanding of who the Third Reich ‘persecuted’, why they ‘persecuted’ them and how they went about said ‘persecution’.
Thus, what Salkin is actually doing – by differentiating the jewish ‘Holocaust’ from the other so-called ‘Holocausts’ – is the ‘Holocaust Distortion’ not what he is criticising as ‘Holocaust Distortion’ which is – if you believe the traditional claims anyway – the ‘true Holocaust’ which would include multiple groups of which the jews are but one not just jews.
E) ‘Holocaust universalization, part 2: “The Holocaust happened, but other groups have had huge losses as well.”’
Now on this front I am not sure why Salkin differentiated D and E as ‘Holocaust universalization, parts 1 and 2’ because they are essentially the same point in all particulars other than part 2 specifically references scale, while part 1 does not although part 1 necessarily infers that ‘other Holocausts’ were of a similar scale and type.
To my mind they should just be one point, but presumably Salkin is trying to seem more intellectually precise than he is actually being and as I’ve commented on many times in the past. Jews are heavy on form/rhetoric but very light on substance generally speaking.
Ergo we have addressed this so-called ‘Holocaust Distortion’ in regard to point D where we have shown that this Salkin distorting history – probably through a mix of ignorance and straight up malice – to fit his overtly jewish agenda.
F) ‘Holocaust denial: “The Holocaust did not happen.”’
Now the problem is that this isn’t a ‘Holocaust Distortion’ – since the ‘Holocaust’ whatever else it may be is not ‘revealed absolute truth’ but rather a historical theory about the fate of the jews during the Second World War and nothing more – but rather a simple disagreement that there was ever a ‘Holocaust’ to begin with.
It is the historical position which has a vast amount of primary source documentation/evidence to support and as such is the position that all sane and thoughtful people should take as the evidence currently stands. (18)
Thus, in no way can ‘Holocaust Revisionism’ (or if you prefer ‘Holocaust Denial’) be ‘Holocaust Distortion’ because the ‘Holocaust’ is simply a historical theory about the fate of the jews during the Second World War not some kind of weird ‘absolute truth’ as Salkin tries to present it.
G) ‘And the paradoxical: “The Holocaust did not happen, but I wish that it would happen again.”’
This is a so-called ‘Holocaust Distortion’ that I have never seen in the wild and has been simply invented by Salkin. That said I think what Salkin is referring to is the position that you sometimes see on the anti-Semitic nationalist right, which is:
‘The Holocaust did not happen, but it should have happened/it should happen.’
This is not the ‘paradox’ that Salkin claims it is, but rather a statement of frustration with the usage of jewish ‘victimhood’ to defend the jews and/or Israel from any and all criticism and/or historical responsibility (such as their now well-documented role as ‘Stalin’s Willing Executioners’) (19) combined with a wish that it just be true so jews can just shut up about it.
Since if we put the jews in their appropriate historical context then all of a sudden ‘anti-Semitism’ suddenly stops becoming the ‘irrational fantasy’, ‘paranoid aberration’ and ‘result of jealousy’ that jews have variously claimed it to be and a rational response to jewish collective behaviour towards individuals, groups and civilizations at different times, in different places, in different cultures and with different religions.
The complaints – and charges made – against the jews however stay the same.
Funny that: isn’t it?
References
(1) https://religionnews.com/2026/02/03/the-many-forms-of-holocaust-distortion-and-why-jd-vances-remarks-matter/
(2) Cf. Don Heddesheimer, 2003, ‘The First Holocaust: Jewish Fund-Raising Campaigns with Holocaust Claims During and After World War I’, 1st Edition, Theses and Dissertations Press: Chicago
(3) On this please see my article: https://karlradl14.substack.com/p/the-origin-of-the-6-million-jews
(4) See for example; Carlo Mattogno, 2005, ‘Auschwitz: The First Gassing’, 1st Edition, Theses and Dissertations Press: Chicago, p. 84; Carlo Mattogno, 2021, ‘The Making of the Auschwitz Myth: Auschwitz in British Intercepts, Polish Underground Reports and Postwar Testimonies (1941-1947)’, 2nd Edition, Castle Hill: Uckfield, pp. 386-387
(5) Cf. Norman Finkelstein, 2000, ‘The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering’, 1st Edition, Verso: New York
(6) https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Shulamit_Aloni
(7) For an example of jews doing this relative to other genocides see the preface to Anne Applebaum, 2003, ‘Gulag: A History’, 1st Edition, Anchor: New York
(8) The similarly risible myth of the ‘Gypsy Holocaust’ has been thoroughly debunked by Carlo Mattogno in his 2014 article ‘Gypsy Holocaust?’ in ‘Inconvenient History’: https://web.archive.org/web/20230217010855/http://inconvenienthistory.com/6/1/3239
(9) These are as bad as the jewish ‘Holocaust’ claims as I have been progressively demonstrating in my series of articles addressing the primary evidence adduced for these claims. See my articles: https://karlradl14.substack.com/p/is-the-martin-bormann-the-fertility; https://karlradl14.substack.com/p/did-the-third-reich-want-to-turn; https://karlradl14.substack.com/p/is-the-erich-koch-if-i-find-a-ukrainian-54e; https://karlradl14.substack.com/p/source-texts-on-generalplan-ost-2; https://karlradl14.substack.com/p/source-texts-on-generalplan-ost-1
(10) https://religionnews.com/2026/02/03/the-many-forms-of-holocaust-distortion-and-why-jd-vances-remarks-matter/
(11) On this see Philip Blood, 2006, ‘Hitler’s Bandit Hunters: The SS and the Nazi Occupation of Europe’, 1st Edition, Potomac: Sterling and Carlo Mattogno, 2018, ‘The Einsatzgruppen in the Eastern Territories: Genesis, Missions and Actions’, 1st Edition, Castle Hill: Uckfield
(12) For example: International Military Tribunal, 1947, ‘Trial of the Major War Criminals Before the International Military Tribunal’, Vol. 39, pp. 269–270
(13) For example, Mattogno, ‘The Einsatzgruppen’, Op. Cit., pp. 178; 259
(14) https://religionnews.com/2026/02/03/the-many-forms-of-holocaust-distortion-and-why-jd-vances-remarks-matter/
(15) Ralf Dose, 2014, ‘Magnus Hirschfeld and the Origins of the Gay Liberation Movement’, 1st Edition, Monthly Review Press: New York, p. 7
(16) I have told the story of what happened and why in the following article: https://karlradl14.substack.com/p/what-books-did-the-nazis-burn
(17) Cf. Richard Plant, 1986, ‘The Pink Triangle: The Nazi War against Homosexuals’, 1st Edition, Henry Holt: New York
(18) On this please see my article: https://karlradl14.substack.com/p/a-simple-guide-to-holocaust-revisionism
(19) For example, see my articles: https://karlradl14.substack.com/p/jews-and-communism-in-poland-1918; https://karlradl14.substack.com/p/jews-and-communism-in-moldovamoldavia; https://karlradl14.substack.com/p/jews-and-communism-in-moldova-june; https://karlradl14.substack.com/p/jews-and-communism-in-lithuania-1918; https://karlradl14.substack.com/p/jews-and-communism-in-latvia-1918; https://karlradl14.substack.com/p/the-jews-behind-fidel-castro-and; https://karlradl14.substack.com/p/jewish-influence-in-the-communist; https://karlradl14.substack.com/p/jewish-communist-espionage-in-the; https://karlradl14.substack.com/p/the-jewish-role-in-the-hungarian; https://karlradl14.substack.com/p/the-jews-behind-the-bavarian-soviet; https://karlradl14.substack.com/p/the-jews-behind-the-1919-spartacist
Karl’s SubstackRead More
T1
