Kenn's Laws | | REAL Black History | History & Archaeology | History of Racial Violence

Why I am not a Holocaust denier | Kenn Sings | Why Racism is Wrong | Why White Supremacy is Wrong | Why Antisemitism Is Wrong

MUST READ ► My Horrific Experience With A Psychopath

☝️ They're taking America back(ward)!!

Support my hard work via Patreon ►

November 3, 2018

Luggage: Evidence of the Jewish Holocaust -- I am not a Jewish Holocaust denier. 

However, I am 100 percent convinced that 6-million Jews were not killed by Hitler's government. The reason? Large round numbers — such as 6,000,000 — are nearly always imprecise estimates and, consequently, nearly always wrong. 

The number may have been more. It may have been less. That begs the question: How many Jews were killed in the Jewish holocaust? What is the exact number? Where is the documentation to support the actual number? 

Asking these questions does not constitute denial. 

More questions arise.

Question one: If we do not have documentation to support a reasonably correct estimate, why do we insist on propagating, perpetuating, and believing the six-million estimate as if it were an established fact? Obviously, it is not an established fact.

This, I believe, is what psychologist-researcher Robert Jay Lifton refers to as "sacred science." We accept certain beliefs as scared and refuse to question them as if they were settled science.

Believing the earth is round or flat has no bearing on its roundness or flatness. It is what it is regardless of what we believe. Or, simply stated, "Is is."

Believing Hitler's National Socialists were innocent or guilty has no bearing on their innocence or guilt. They were what they were regardless of what we believe. Or, simply stated, "Was was." 

One is not innocent until proven guilty. One is presumed innocent until proven guilty. I'm not denying evidence. I'm demanding evidence.

I want to see substantiated facts, not popularly believed notions. Even then I demand to review the whole truth, not selected tidbits intended to skew my perception. 

I demand apologists for any belief to apply the scientific method. That is defined as "a method of procedure ... consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses."

An old photograph of a pile of children's shoes is not evidence that the children who wore those shoes were euthanized and incinerated. Rather, it proves one possesses what appears to be an old photograph of children's shoes; nothing more. 
Note the inmates at this "Jewish internment camp" are Japanese.
Without the whole truth our minds can be manipulated
to accept a false reality. This is acutally a Japanese internment
camp in the United States. Without the whole picture in view
we often come to errant conclusions. Some people intentionally
crop the story of history to create a false conclusion. It's a
process I call, "Lying by omission."

I once posted on the Internet a WWII-era photograph of luggage belonging to those interred in camps. Viewers supposed the luggage belonged to Jews incarcerated somewhere in Hitler's Third Reich. In reality the luggage belonged to Japanese incarcerated in an American internment camp.

Question two: Why do they refer to reasonable skepticism as 'Holocaust denial'? 

The psychological trick is to bully us into accepting dogma that is critical to the generally accepted story. 

Cults use this approach. If you question the cult's story you are ostracized and stigmatized as a heretic, apostate, infidel, or some other pejorative label. Religious groups have historically used physical abuse as a method to impose their dogma on others. Think of the atrocities committed by protestants and Catholics during the Reformation era. Think of the atrocities committed at Jonestown, Guyana. 

When physical abuse is not available to corral our minds into the prevailing zeitgeist, we are subjected to social ostracizing. This is called 'shunning' and it is achieved by labeling others as 'racists,' 'holocaust deniers,' 'homophobes', 'xenophobes,' etc. We go to extremes to avoid such labels. Ironically, we even deny reality to avoid the label 'holocaust denier.' 

These hateful, abusive terms are analogous to the yellow Star of David that Jews were forced to wear in Hitler's Germany. These hate terms are not literal labels. They are psychological labels. They are very effective.  

Some cults and movements have terms for social rejection. Militant homosexual extremists call it 'jamming' rather than 'shunning.' Scientologists refer to shunned individuals as 'Suppressive Persons.' Jehovah's Witnesesses use the term 'disfellowshipping.' Rather than suffer the emotional abuse attached to shunning, shunned cultists often acquiesce and rejoin the herd. They have been effectively corralled.
The far left applies their array of hate labels with specific goals in mind. 

• 'Homophobe' prods us towards accepting the left's dogma regarding homosexuality. 

'Racist' is a Star-of-David label that prods us away from race realism. 

'Xenophobe' prods us away from rational immigration policies and towards an open-border mindset. 

'Islamophobe' creates a mindset that denies the harsh reality that over 34,000 Islamic terrorist attacks have been committed since 9-11 2001. (Unlike the 6,000,000 estimate, the 34,000 large round number is supported with documented news accounts.)

'Neo-Confederate' is a psychological cattle prod that nudges us away from real history and away from embracing Southern heritage.

• 'Holocaust denier' is akin to an off switch attached to one's brain. The mere thought of questioning convention is met with the psychological abuse inherent to the holocaust-denier label. Those who pursue accurate history are jammed and damned as heretics, apostates, and suppressive persons. Consequently, our brains shut down and we refuse to even contemplate the number could be errant.

As fascists of the past demonized those unjustly labeled with the Star of David, today's fascists demonize those unjustly labeled with 'holocaust denier.' 

The effect is far reaching. 

Joan is a politician who had dinner with Bob who was interviewed by Kenn who is a reputed 'Holocaust denier.' Even though Kenn is not a Jewish Holocaust denier, Joan and Bob are tainted with the stigma of holocaust denial. The above is true. The names were changed. 

I do not deny the Jewish holocaust. I question all history with an objective skepticism. The Jewish holocaust is not exempt from honest inquiry.  

I am not a denier. I am an inquirer. I don't want to believe what is believed to be true. I want to know what is known to be true. 

I have a term for those who label me a 'holocaust denier.' That term is 'liar.'

Owner: Columbus Marketing Group, Inc. Permission is granted to use original material in this article providing (1) the byline is included in an obvious manner crediting as the author, (2) a link to this page is included and (3) no changes are made either by deletion, addition or annotation. Original compositions at are sometimes seeded with decoy data, such as hidden acronyms, to detect unauthorized use and plagiarism.


  1. I realize that you must keep a very low public profile for very obvious reasons. But I want to reach you to respond to this article, privately, if you like. I'm reachable at the email.