Form 20
                                                                                                                         Order 14, Rule 2



NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY                                                               No. NSD327 of 2001






On 13 August 2007 I, Fredrick Töben, of  Wattle Park, in the State of South Australia, say on oath:

1. I make reference to my Affidavits of 17 January, 5 March, 9 August and together with the contents of this Affidavit aim to augment the material facts of this matter before this court.

2. The pattern of legal persecution of Revisionists is a global phenomenon that is applied by a number of European countries, but is most ferociously exercised by the German judiciary, especially by the Mannheim public prosecutor.

3. The hallmark of the mindset that participates in such legal process is the notable total absence of basic legal principles such as we still enjoy within our Common Law – the presumption of innocence and the absolute privilege attached to anything offered as evidence in court. Any Revisionist before a court in Germany cannot mount a defence because by offering a defence the accused exacerbates his situation. For example:

3.1 A defence counsel who offers the court physical proof of the impossibility of, for example, the existence of homicidal gas chambers will himself face a charge of contempt of court. Professor Robert Faurisson challenges anyone to offer him proof of the existence of the homicidal gas chamber, for example, at Auschwitz, by either showing it to him or drawing it for him. In France, as in Germany such a challenge in court would be considered to be a breach of the law and quite irrelevant in any legal proceedings. Since the 2006-07 Ernst Zündel trial at Mannheim a judge is not required to rely on any evidence at all when convicting Revisionists.

3.2 A defence counsel, who points out that the six million Jewish deaths figure has religious significance, is a physical impossibility and exists without having been proven, will himself be charged under the notorious Section 130 that prevents anyone from attempting to find the physical truth of the matter.

3.3 Until the 1985 and 1988 Zündel Toronto, Canada, Holocaust trial, noted >Holocaust< historian, Raul Hilberg – who recently died – had to admit that the allegation of the systematic extermination of European Jewry was not a proven matter as Hilberg had claimed in his book: The Destruction of European Jewry. Hence, what had been claimed until then by all historians – there were two written Hitler orders that started the program of systematic extermination of European Jewry – had to be revised, thanks to Ernst Zündel setting the record straight, something historians failed to do. Historian Hilberg revised his view of events without that written Hitler order by claiming that the German bureaucracy >>knew what to do< and was kick-started by a >wink and a nudge< - an outright absurd claim. This example can be multiplied where Revisionists have shown that the official version of this historical event called the >Holocaust< is continuously being correct through Revisionists research.

4. Since 1988 the >Holocaust< laws have been designed in such a way that actual proof of historical events is not necessary anymore when prosecuting Revisionists. The Australian legal system has as yet not fully embraced the European mindset that drives legal >Holocaust< persecution. This matter before the Federal Court is designed to stifle open debate about the >Holocaust<, especially the questioning of the pillars on which it rests, as illustrated in 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3. It now suffices that someone, the Applicant in this matter, has a hurt feeling while reading the material on the website. One would have thought that the easiest thing to do would be to stop reading so-called offensive material, and the intellectually dishonest claim that Revisionist work on the >Holocaust< can be likened to pornography, merely hides the political agenda that lies behind the activities of >Holocaust< believers.

5. The contempt of court charge before this court is a proxy exercise designed to criminalize anyone who refuses to believe in the >Holocaust<.

6. German judges talk about >criminal energy< if an accused persists in refusing to believe in the >Holocaust< and attempts to prove how rational his written material about the >Holocaust< is, and how absurd is the rationale of those who believe in the >Holocaust<. Annexed hereto and marked “1” is a copy of Adelaide Institute Newsletter No. 352 wherein this legal mindset is exposed as belonging more to the witch-trial mentality than to a judiciary that is mindful of respecting and protecting basic human rights.

7. The Germar Rudolf case is instructive here because if the Applicant, Mr Jeremy Jones, has his way, then this kind of summary justice is what he seeks to establish in Australia. Mr Rudolf presented his case in a scholarly way, but for the judge this merely proves how >incorrigible< Rudolf is in refusing to believe in the >Holocaust<. Never is there a moment where the judge weighs up any new evidence surrounding the pillars of the argument that make up the >Holocaust< story. One needs also bear in mind that an accused – sneeringly labelled a denier – cannot prove that the >Holocaust< did not happen. It is up to those who claim the >Holocaust< is an historical physical fact to prove their claims, something that contrary to what >Holocaust< propaganda teaches, has not been done in open court. The judiciary that refuses to entertain any questioning of the >Holocaust< claims >judicial notice< of the event, thereby making it unnecessary for a judge even to consider new evidence.

8. It is in the public’s interest – of national and international interest – that a review of the >Holocaust< is done in a so-called western democratic countries such as Germany. As Ernst Zündel reminded the Mannheim court at the end of his trial in March 2007, he is quite prepared to apologize to anyone if his account of the >Holocaust< is wrong. The matter must be investigated because the event is distorting world historical knowledge and world politics. This was evident when in December 2006 Iran hosted a conference that aimed merely to REVIEW the period of history called the >Holocaust<, and leaders from so-called western democracies roared against the Iranian President holding such a conference. I refer to Newsletter No 351. It is not a matter of >denying< the Holocaust but rather of acknowledging the fact that >>The Holocaust has no reality in Space and Time, only in Memory<<.

9. On 12 August 2007 ABC Radio National, Australia’s public broadcaster, featured in its Correspondents Report, the discovery of a World War One mass grave in France:

Mass Australian WWI grave found in northern France, Sunday, 12 August 2007

ELIZABETH JACKSON: An expert panel in Canberra was recently given a report into the discovery of a mass grave containing the bodies of 160 Australian soldiers killed in World War I.
The Battle of Fromelles in July 1916 in northern France was one of the bloodiest battles of the Great War.
In a day of fierce fighting, over 5,500 Australians were killed - they were wounded or taken prisoner.
Now archaeologists at the University of Glasgow have found several mass graves containing the remains of 399 Commonwealth soldiers, including 160 from the Australian 5th Division. Dr Tony Pollard headed up the team that made the discovery, and he's been speaking to our reporter in London, Stephanie Kennedy.

TONY POLLARD: We used a background of quite in-depth historical research, which included a quite substantial archive of allied wartime aerial photographs taken between 1916, just days after the Battle of Fromelles, going right the way up to 1918, and these show the eight pits that the Germans were ordered to dig by their commanders, the C, to actually accommodate the bodies from the Battle of Fromelles, both British and Australian.
There's no trace of them obviously in the field today. There are one or two slight depressions, so what we wanted to do was to use everything we had in our power to survey the ground without actually digging trenches and with the possibility of disturbing the bodies.
So we did topographic survey, we measured the lumps and bumps, we did ground-penetrating radar, we did resistivity survey, which allows us, using a variety of techniques, to measure anomalies under the ground, and we did a metal detector survey [emphasis added by FT]. And all of those techniques, when measured together, have given us quite a valuable insight into this area of ground and the deposits within it.

STEPHANIE KENNEDY: So how confident are you that the bodies of 399 soldiers are actually there?

TONY POLLARD: Um, everything we've done thus far, including both the historical research and the archaeological fieldwork, suggests that these grave pits weren't disturbed.
We found artefacts which certainly proved without much doubt that the bodies were buried there by the Germans, at least as far as the Australians are concerned. There's really nothing there to suggest, that's leaping out at us, to say that the bodies were exhumed after the war and reburied elsewhere.
Obviously we will need to now … if the project was to be taken forward, the next stage would be some sort of evaluation where holes would be dug to establish the presence or absence of bodies without doubt. But the evidence at the moment certainly points to the bodies still being there.

STEPHANIE KENNEDY: What's the likelihood that these bodies can be actually identified?

TONY POLLARD: Theoretically it's possible. We are looking at wet soils in the clay. There may be soft tissue preservation, so we may be able to do DNA analysis, but again it's going to be highly problematic. There may, in some cases, be artefacts that may assist identification. But as far as we're aware, most of this sort of identification material was taken off the bodies by the Germans and sent back via the Red Cross.
So it would be problematic, it would certainly be something that we would have to consider as a potential aspect of any exhumation project.

STEPHANIE KENNEDY: Is it feasible to remove the remains, and how big a job would that be?

TONY POLLARD: It is feasible. It's certainly a type of job that has been done before, I suppose most recently in war zones like Kosovo and places like that in the Balkans, where war crimes work were being undertaken by archaeologists and anthropologists. It would be a major task. You would be talking about a project of several months' duration, with …
Certainly if the decision was taken at the highest level to exhume the bodies, you would be looking at an international team, so it would involve the British, it would involve the Australians, and importantly, let's not forget, the French. This is, after all, their territory.

There has been a suggestion that the site itself be turned into a military cemetery, so what you would be looking at there is the men essentially exhumed what attempts there could be made to identify the bodies, which is going to be very problematic, and then turning that ground into a formal cemetery and reburying them with the required and proper pomp and circumstance about it. And I think it's very important that these men are memorialised.

STEPHANIE KENNEDY: How significant is the find of this site, and has a mass grave like this been discovered before?

TONY POLLARD: It's really quite a unique site as far as the Western Front and the First World War goes. The largest unmarked mass grave to have been excavated prior to this contained 20 soldiers, 20 British soldiers, near Arras, from the Battle of Arras in 1917. And if you considered it within the grave pits here, we've got around 400 men, it's obviously quite a large number. It's quite unique, actually, given its size and the fact that there is no known marker for the site. These men have literally been lost to history.

ELIZABETH JACKSON: Stephanie Kennedy with Dr Tony Pollard from the University of Glasgow.

9.1 Surely such excavations can officially be carried out at Auschwitz, Treblinka, and any of the other many concentration camps that are alleged to have been genocide sites where European Jewry was allegedly exterminated. Such investigations would clarify Revisionists’ research that >Holocaust< believers’ claims are untrue, if not outright fraudulent. For example, the 1999 pioneering work of Revisionist Richard Krege at Treblinka needs to be done officially without fear of persecution.

10. The >Holocaust< is not the only topic of concern, and a far more important subject matter that is just coming into focus and prominence is the expected global >economic meltdown<, something that makes a comparison with pre-World War Two conditions relevant. This in turn brings into focus, again, the National Socialist phenomenon as embodied in the populist hate-object Adolf Hitler that >Holocaust< believers fervently propagate. Annexed hereto and marked “2” is a copy of Adelaide Institute Newsletter No. 353.

11. However, Revisionist persecution remains our prime thrust because it is so obviously unjust. This is clearly illustrated by the use of the shut-up words to stifle open debate about the >Holocaust<: hater, Holocaust denier, antisemite, racist, neo-Nazi, xenophobe, and now a link is being made to the next word used to terminate public debate – terrorist. The German judiciary at Mannheim and Karlsruhe has refined the legal persecution process to the point where it clearly resembles that process which operated when there was a general uncritical belief in >witches<, just as there is now a general uncritical belief in the >Holocaust<. The following is a plea for support of the World’s most productive Revisionist, Germar Rudolf:

>>10 August 2007
Dear Friends of Freedom,

Germar Rudolf, who is incarcerated at Mannheim Prison in violation of all the principles on which Western democracy is supposedly founded, recently wrote a description of the myriad harassments to which he is now exposed in the “BRDDR.” Officially he is being protected against >gefährdeter Resozialisierung – threats to his resocialization<.

Specifically this means that he must be protected from exposure to visits and telephone conversations and his letters are intercepted, in addition to other harassments.

Germar’s written account of his outrageous show trial and verdict has been confiscated as well. He writes that during a so-called Vollzugskonferenz - prison conference for dangerous criminals, he informed the assorted >psychologists< and >sociologists<, who lack professional training and titles, that they are the criminals, not he.

He informed them that he is a victim of official tyranny, and it is their duty as government officials and law abiding citizens to support the struggle for his exoneration and freedom. The result was that on 25 July 2007 he was placed under a general telephone and visitation ban, on account of >Uneinsichtigkeit – uninformed, imprudent, lack of understanding, unreasonable, unintelligent, unwise<.

In view of the increased harshness of his incarceration, it is necessary that we exhibit and increase solidarity in our support for him. At the least, we should send him small pleasures such as books and CDs. To this end I am renewing my call for Solidarity Action “Music in the Prison Cell.” This year, the procedure for procuring and mailing CDs will be different from last year. Whoever would like to take part in this Solidarity Action should contact me at kontakt@peter-org for further information. More than anything else, Germar needs postage stamps in the amounts of .55, .70 and 1.70 Euros.
Here again is his present address:

Herrn Germar Rudolf
Herzogenriedstraße 111
D - 68169 Mannheim

12. I reiterate that as an Australian of German origin I cherish my German heritage. Unfortunately my quality of life is diminished by the Applicant’s incessant racist hate speech that is the >Holocaust<. Whenever I publicly cherish German cultural achievements and traditions, there is always someone who pulls out the >Holocaust< card and uses that to diminish my quality of life by diminishing my appreciation of my German heritage.

This is exacerbated by the Applicant bringing this matter into court and attempting legally to silence me. By this act the Applicant also thereby implies that my father belonged to a criminal military organization that, as far as I am concerned, he honourably served during World War Two.

Whenever Mr Jeremy Jones talks about the >Holocaust<, by implication he states that my father was a mass murderer and that I am a son of a mass murderer. It is this subjective matter, among other things, that through my research I attempt to give objective content, and hence universality.

If the Applicant is successful in securing my conviction - Contempt of Court - , then he is free to engage in a further act of racist hatred against me, against Australians of German origin, against Germans generally.



Sworn by Deponent
at Adelaide
on the 13th day of August 2007



Filed by Dr F Töben

Tel: 08 83310808

Mob: 0417088217


Top | Home

©-free 2007 Adelaide Institute