20. Juli-Prozess gegen Honsik
Gerd Honsik’s July 20 Trial


Honsik vor dem Ketzer-Tribunal
Honsik Again Before the Inquisition Tribunal


Written By the Editors of The National Journal
http://globalfire.tv/nj/10de/verfolgungen/Honsik_20Juli_Prozess.htm
Translated from the German by J M Damon

20 July 2010 was the date of another trial for Gerd Honsik, from which nothing good could be expected.
We remember his scandalous show trial in 2009, whose beginning was scheduled on 20 April.
< http://globalfire.tv/nj/09de/verfolgungen/honsik1.htm>
That legal sham ended with an additional five years imprisonment for the patriotic poet and author. [His patriotic ballads are posted at http://www.gerd-honsik.net/]
What message is the Israeli Cultural Community of Austria sending us with this date of 20 July? [The date of the attempted assassination of Hitler]
By choosing this historic date for the beginning of Honsik’s latest show trial, Ariel Muzikant apparently wants to emphasize his triumph over the scientists and human rights activists who dare oppose the lies of the Zionist Lobby.

Once again the indictment contrasts strikingly with the norms of justice that would prevail in a nation of laws.
The flimsy pretext for Honsik’s latest “3g Trial” is two of Honsik’s books: WIEZENTHAL, SCHELM UND SCHEUSAL (Wiesenthal Fiend and Felon) and RASSISMUS LEGAL? DER JUDEN DRITTES REICH (Is Racism Legal? The Jewish Third Reich.)
“3g Trials” are those staged under Section 3g of the Austrian VERBOTSGESETZ (Prohibition Act) of 1947, which severely represses WIEDERBETÄTIGUNG IM NATIONALSOZIALISTISCHEN SINNE  (Revitalization of National Socialist sentiment.)
[“Fiend and Felon” is posted at http://radioislam.org/historia/honsik/honsik.htm]

The book on Wiesenthal, based on official sources, irrefutably documents his lies and crimes.
In a constitutional nation of laws the book would not be indictable, since it is based on official sources; and the same is true of “Is Racism Legal?”
Because of the unassailable documentation of both books, the Establishment chose an indictment based on the “Magic Paragraph” 3g of VERBOTSGESETZ (Prohibition Act) of 1947 as dictated by the victorious enemies of Austria and Germany.
A “3g Indictment” deprives indicted persons of the right to defend themselves with evidentiary motions, which is clearly a violation of all international norms of human rights.

Even worse, every attempt at defense in “3g Trials” results in an additional conviction, the same as in the Federal Republic of Germany with “Paragraph 130" Indictments.
In Austria, convictions under Section 3g provide for imprisonment of up to 20 years – harsher than for murder!
Consider that this draconian punishment is imposed purely for expressions of opinion and reference to undisputed historical facts.

The long and the short of the matter is: when the facts about Jewish crimes and swindles are made public, the truth is punished with life imprisonment and the defendant is prosecuted without the right to prove his or her innocence by means of a defense based on forensic and documentary evidence.
In the opinion of international observers of political trials, this Austrian and German exercise in tyranny surpasses even the notorious Stalinist show trials: “Such provisions would require a declaration of war by the United Nations...
I have never seen such debasement of justice” said an observer from Norway.

When we consider that both books were already included in the indictment in Honsik’s preceding trial (April 2009), it quite takes our breath away.
In 2009, Judge Andreas Böhm knew that it would overtax the jurists to put Honsik behind bars for more than five years, since he was not convicted of any substantive crime.
Böhm assumed that what little residual conscience and professionalism remained in his jurists would rebel against a punishment of seven to ten years and work against a conviction.
For this reason he instructed District Attorney Stefan Apostol to withhold the incriminating books from the indictment and save them for a subsequent trial with additional sentence:
“In the opinion of the Prosecution, the incriminated works SCHELM UND SCHEUSAL (“Fiend and Felon”) and DER JUDEN DRITTES REICH (Third Reich of the Jews) clearly fulfill the elements of a crime as set forth in Section 3g of the Prohibition Act.
They were included in the indictment during the previous trial but were deleted at that time in order to avoid delaying the proceedings.” (DIEPRESSE.AT, 9 JULY 2010)

It worked perfectly for Judge Böhm's inquisitorial Court.
The jurists imposed “only” a five-year prison sentence on Honsik, who was innocent of any crime.
This was after he had already served 18 months for his best-known book FREISPRUCH FÜR HITLER (Absolution for Hitler.)
With this, Apostol’s intention to obtain a stiffer overall verdict on the same charge through a new trial is clearly exposed.
In the July 20 trial the books were indicted separately and with new jurists, in order to get extra imprisonment.

We observed an unexpected event in this July 20 trial, however.
Since he had nothing more to lose, Honsik launched a frontal attack on the inquisitorial Court.
At the beginning of proceedings Honsik remarked:
“It is not I who is the great liar, the modern Münchhausen.
It is Simon Wiesenthal.
Every knowledgeable person knows that there was not a single homicidal gas chamber on German or Austrian soil...
The 65-year-old lie about homicidal gas chambers in Mauthausen and Dachau has come to an end, while you are pleased to suppress evidence of six million murdered Germans and depict me as the great liar.”  

The “Holocaust” liar-baron Wiesenthal had the bestially murdered commandant of Mauthausen Camp, Franz Ziereis, hanged naked on the fence and smeared with slogans.
In his book KZ MAUTHAUSEN (Linz, 1946), Wiesenthal claims that, as he lay dying, the martyred commandant confessed to him that four million people had been gassed at Mauthausen:
 “In my estimation, as I have inspected the files in the cellar, approximately four million persons were gassed (in Hartheim / Mauthausen) with carbon monoxide during a year and a half, including the feeble-minded.”

We note in passing that the American “liberators” shot the unarmed Ziereis three times in the abdomen and allowed him to die very slowly and in great agony.
They denied his pleas for a coup de grace, even giving him infusions of his own blood in order to prolong his agony.
Only after he had “confessed” that “four million had been gassed” at Mauthausen would they allow him to die.
Afterwards his naked body was hung on the camp fence, smeared with slogans and left to decompose, which Simon Wiesenthal proudly related for the rest of his days.

On 4 February 2006 the ÖSTERREICHISCHE NACHRICHTEN reported on page 3: “By the end of April 1945, more than four thousand persons had been murdered in Mauthausen.”
It is important to note the significance of the use of the word “murdered” rather than “gassed.”
It is clear that our “Holocaust – Münchhausen” blithely added 3,996,000 victims to Ziereis’ total, and he obviously ignored the alleged mention of carbon monoxide as well.
The fairy tale about “Jew Soap” is another Wiesenthal invention.
[The “Soap Lie” was actually resurrected anti German propaganda of the First World War except that in the earlier version, the Germans tossed Belgian babies into boiling soap vats.]
All of these absurd propaganda lies are still touted as official truth in Austria, where depraved inquisitors with close ties to the Israeli Cultural Community, such as Stefan Apostol, prosecute scientists, writers and researchers such as Gerd Honsik as major criminals.

Honsik chose an inappropriate comparison when he compared his persecution with that of Nelson Mandela: “Like Nelson Mandela, I was persecuted for 25 years” he told the Court.
Mandela was, after all, a murderer and saboteur, and not unjustly persecuted like Honsik.
On 20 April 1964 Mandela stated before the South African Court that he and fellow conspirators were striving to overthrow the government of South Africa through sabotage and violence, including numerous murders.
As Mandela stated from the defendant’s dock, nonviolent resistance would have resulted in capitulation of the African National Congress.
In contrast to Mandela, Honsik is a man of the Word rather than violence.

As for Honsik's views on the alleged gas chambers, official sources long ago admitted that there were no homicidal gas chambers at Dachau or Mauthausen.
Thus, Honsik’s explanations were not new to the Court.
Such prosecutions despite official admissions would be highly significant in other countries, but not in Austria where the “Freest Conditions in All History” prevail.
Here, Allied propaganda lies about mass gassings are still accepted as official truth.
At the conclusion of Honsik's trial a year ago, he was sentenced to five years for publicly exposing and denouncing these official lies.

As expected,  the mendacious Austrian media all published articles entitled “Honsik Denies Existence of Gas Chambers in Court.”
Honsik of course was not “denying the existence” of all “Gas Chambers,” he was specifically pointing out the official lies about “Gas Chambers” at Dachau and Mauthausen.
It was long ago officially confirmed that no such facilities existed: “In response to your inquiry, we wish to inform you that (homicidal) gassings did not take place at Dachau Concentration Camp.”
[STADT DACHAU, AZ: 4.2/Ra/Sa, 14.11.1988]

Honsik made a tactical decision to follow the line of former SPIEGEL Editor Fritjof Meyer and concede “Gas Chambers” in “two farmhouses” at the Birkenau compound in Auschwitz.
There is no physical evidence that such farmhouses-cum-gas chambers ever existed, as was established in the early 1990s in an expert report prepared by the German air survey company HANSA-Luftbild.
And yet, because of judicial insisence on the “Farmhouse Gas Chamber” nonsense,  Judge Andreas Böhm and District Attorney Stefan Apostol assumed that Honsik had committed the major felony of “Denying Gas Chambers!”
In obedience to their masters, the journalists who serve the interests of the Zionist lobby then hurled another hate-filled tirade against the patriotic poet.

The simple truth is that there were no “gas chambers” at Dachau and Mauthausen.
Therefore Honsik cannot possibly “deny” such fabrications -
merely dispute them!
[Tr. Note: the German verb LEUGNEN (derived from LÜGEN, “to lie”) has a slightly different meaning from English “to deny or dispute.”
LEUGNEN implies denying something that is known to be true.]

In spite of scientifically proven factual truth and empirical evidence, school classes are still funneled through the complex of lies at Dachau and Mauthausen and children made to believe, through ambiguous explanations, that inmates were “gassed” there.
Quite recently the government even began forcing Muslim schoolchildren to undergo this mendacious brainwashing, which traumatizes and poison their souls.

Unfortunately we do not know exactly what Honsik said in the courtroom, since the Lobby-controlled media cannot be trusted.
All the Establishment newspapers quoted Honsic as saying “I deny the openly committed atrocities that were not hidden by the State (Third Reich).”
["ICH LEUGNE DIE IN DER ÖFFENTLICHKEIT VERÜBTEN VERBRECHEN, DIE DURCH DEN STAAT (DAS DRITTE REICH) NICHT GEDECKT WAREN."]

This is obviously another fabrication and makes no sense whatsoever, since Honsik would never have used the word LEUGNEn.
LEUGNEN is derived from the verb LÜGEN, which means “to lie.”
Honsik is intelligent, knowledgeable and articulate.
He would have said “ICH WIDERLEGE” rather than “ICH LEUGNE.”
[It is extremely unlikely that he would not have used the phrases “openly committed atrocities” or “hidden by the State.”]
Once again the Lobby media are deliberately misrepresenting what Gerd Honsik says.

The judge was obviously unable to intimidate this defendant.
Judge Böhm was extremely agitated and warned Honsik time and again: “You are walking on thin ice.
However, Honsik ignored the warnings and continued his attacks against Simon Wiesenthal.” (Online newspaper ÖSTERREICH  <oe24.at, 20. 07. 2010>)

The fact that the increasingly nervous judge hindered both Honsik’s attorneys from carrying out their mandate to defend their client gives a good indication of how “democratic” Austrian courtroom procedure is.
The judge attempted to outsmart Dr. Schaller and trick him into an answer that would reflect the scientific findings on the alleged “Gas Chambers”:
“The Defense Attorney always avoided giving an answer to the judge’s repeated question whether he, Dr. Schaller, was himself asserting that there were no gas chambers at Mauthausen and Dachau.” (oe24.at, 20.07.2010)

This gives a good example of the sense of justice of our “Holo-System.”
It is obvious that the Defense must be able to believe irrefutable facts and the findings of free scientific research.
It is equally obvious that he must also be allowed to express his convictions before the Court, just as his client experiences them.
If Dr. Schaller had responded with scientifically proven facts, he would have been arrested in the courtroom.
Even in view of these conditions, these shameless henchmen blather on about “democracy” and a “nation of laws.”

Honsik was able to strike a few blows against the System from which it will not easily recover.
He presented 65 evidentiary motions, all official state documents, that contradict the official lies about “gas chambers” at Mauthausen and Dachau.
In addition, his evidentiary motions include passages from Wiesenthal’s books and other writings that he had used in his book on Wiesenthal as supporting evidence for his revelations.
Furthermore, since Honsik “accepted” the so-called “Farmhouse Gas Chambers” of Birkenau, he cannot be charged with additional charges of “Denial” under Paragraph 3g.

If the propaganda lies about Mauthausen and Dachau “Gas Chambers” collapse due to Honsik’s evidentiary motions, the 5-year sentence from his 2009 trial will have to be vacated.
This is because the sentence was imposed specifically on account of his historically correct, politically incorrect statements concerning the bogus “Gas Chambers.”
If the sentence were vacated, it would deal a fatal blow to official “Holocaust” lies.
And if one wall of “Holocaust” lies collapses, the remaining walls of the entire temple of lies must inevitably collapse as well.

 It is very surprising that Judge Böhm did not summarily dismiss Honsik’s 65 evidentiary motions, as he did in April 2009.
Instead, he adjourned trial proceedings until 9 September, specifically on account of these motions.
Of course, Böhm can still reject all of Honsik’s evidentiary motions.
But how long will the government’s “wall of lies” still be able to stand, since the museum administrations of both Mauthausen and Dachau unequivocally support Honsik’s contentions?
It cannot stand much longer.
Let us hope that these official lies, which are a threat to all mankind, are breathing their last.

****************

The translator is a Germanophilic Germanist who makes noteworthy German articles accessible to those who do not read German.

Here's freedom to him who would speak,
Here's freedom to him who would write;
For there's none ever feared that the truth should be heard,
Save him whom the truth would indict!
ROBERT BURNS (1759–96)

 

 

 

©-free 2010 Adelaide Institute