A World View - with an affirmative NOW to LIFE
Years ago, when I began my Wanderjahre and journeyed around the world before settling down to start a family and leave my genetic information behind, I realized that it is futile to take on the physical world head-on, so to speak. I realized that travelling would broaden my mind and help me to develop my inner self - without needing to fall into that infantile mode of thought where a scapegoat is needed to develop and to explain my worldview, my ever-developing Weltanschauung.
What gave me an advantage in this somewhat painful endeavour was the fact that I grew up in the country on a farm, and when I began my university studies, I initially felt disadvantaged because I did not have a grounding in the writings of Karl Marx. My mind was a tabula rasa - a clean slate, except for the impressions that I had gained in living with nature on a farm, and with the human example set for me by my parents.
Early in his life my brother had challenged nature by learning to fly small planes - thereby developing an exhilarating experience that required no alcohol and was then even better than sex, though ultimately love balanced the equation for both of us.
I consoled myself in listening to Ludwig van Beethoven's Ninth Symphony and became attached to Friedrich von Schiller's Ode to Joy wherein particularly the words: "...he who can call one soul his own" - became the romantic sound bite that has stayed with me for a life-time.
Then I, too, felt the urge to take to the skies and experience freedom in the fullest sense of the word ... and joined my brother, and I learned to fly in Oceania, Europe and Africa. The combination of studying/teaching/flying was one that opened my eyes to the many cultural adventures I would experience from then on.
The big lesson that my flying instructors and colleagues - in New Zealand, Germany and Rhodesia/Zimbabwe - taught me was never to rely on prayers when in difficulties in the skies. I recall returning from my first solo flight - I was late beating a local storm cloud that had decided to block my path. What to do? No time to do anything because suddenly I was within a fog and I didn't know whether I was flying horizontally, vertically or upside down. I then still could not read the instruments - a fatal error.
Luckily I saw the road beneath me and put the plane's nose down and dived - aiming to see as much road as possible at the same time avoiding the cars travelling on the road. This gave me the balance needed to keep the plane straight and level. As I burst through the cloud before me I saw the runway. I landed perfectly. Later my instructor said that he expected as much. No one knew what I had gone through in my mind - the anxieties, the fear of crashing. Only experienced pilots to whom I later related this story know how lucky I was in landing safely.
Another time, on my first cross-country flight, I almost ended my flying experience in disaster because I adhered to the LAW, literally. We were advised to land at our designated two airstrips - this is what they were, grass strips - within the given instructions. So, if an airstrip was marked 700 metres, then that is where you positioned the plane for take-off. I landed at this particular airfield and positioned myself for take-off at the designated point. But I worried for a moment because at the end of the airstrip I saw a row of pine trees that I would have to climb over, and I noticed that the airstrip had an additional 300 metres 'unofficial' space marked out. I could easily have positioned the plane to a full 1000 metres take-off.
What to do! Take things literally and stick to the law, or take things figuratively, and become flexible and assess the situation independently? Follow instructions and stick to the 700 metre length, or think independently and realize that any extra length would secure a safe take-off?
I was inexperienced and heard my instructor's voice to stick to the law because that would cover me in possible litigation after an accident - and so I positioned the plane at 700 metres, revved up, started to taxi along the runway, gaining speed, and by 65 knots realized that I was going too slowly for a take-off that would lift me above the approaching row of pine trees.
What to do? For a moment I was reflexing - thinking I was in a car and I turned the joy-stick - the equivalent of the car's steering wheel - to the left, then quickly realized that I needed to use the peddles to turn the plane's nose-wheel to the left and abort the take-off.
While this was going through my mind, I realized that I was travelling too fast to abort the take-off - and so with full throttle I continued heading straight for the pine trees - figuratively shitting myself - realizing that this was the end for me. And worse of all, I had a little while before just crashed my brand new 450 SEL at 240km/h. This was incompetence writ large - the shame of it all, a car then, now a plane! I didn't even think about losing my life.
However, I did not give up - the looming row of pine trees was almost upon me and I pulled the stick towards me, and the plane lifted off the ground. But my speed was too slow and the stalling buzzer came on - what to do? Push the stick away from me, put the nose down and gather speed because if you do not have enough speed, then the plane just drops out of the sky and you belly-land the plane - often a fatal experience.
So, nose up - stalling sound - nose down - pine trees coming closer - nose up - stalling sound - nose down - almost collect the trees - nose up - over the trees - nose down as far as possible and skim along the ground in the hope of gathering speed.
But, before me on the other side of the pine trees there was a farmer on a tractor ploughing the field. If I continued my straight flight I would hit him with the plane. What to do? Veer to the right and avoid him but possibly hit the ground with the right wing-tip. And so I veered to the right after kangaroo-hopping over the pine trees and skimmed across the field at about six inches and gathered speed - then triumphantly aimed for the sky - and I was free - and loving every moment of floating, soaring, welcoming for that moment the joys of space, infinity - freedom.
A couple of months later the instructor took off in the same Cessna 150 with a new female student. This time the underpowered plane didn’t clear the fence at the end of the runway and flipped on its backside – luckily not hurting pilot and co-pilot. Most of us students knew that the instructor’s insistence to learn with underpowered planes would hone our skills because it is much easier to learn to fly in a plane with a high-powered engine.
This moment of clearing the tree-tops had nothing to do with luck because it confronted me with my own limitations. I could have developed a simplistic scapegoat world view and blamed the instructor for insisting I do my cross-country in an underpowered plane. But that’s too cheap for me and so this episode has in all my future endeavours kept me humble and made me realize that our brain needs to function within a legal framework - in my case the Categorical Imperative - but not only and there is MORE. It is this MORE factor that, for example, a number of individuals I have met since 1994 so clearly reveal in their endeavours. There are, among others, two that come to mind - Horst Mahler and Peter Wakefield Sault who address in their enterprise this MORE matter. Other individuals are still fixated on the Categorical Imperative or its equivalent - the concept God when they address the MORE issue, for example claiming the RULE OF LAW is supreme.
For those who cannot believe in any form of transcendence can, however, follow the opening of the mind as the MORE reaches out for more, as it embraces the pulsations of the universe - that is what freedom is all about.
Another defining incident in my life was when a school staff, which pretended to play the democratic game, voted me out of the meeting while the principle continued to defame me. While I was present I could refute the absurdities the mentally challenged man raised in public. The elimination mechanism, easily acquired by minds that rely on character assassination, is a transparent one: You begin to make a statement with some truth-content, then you elaborate on a particular incident by exaggerating things, then you distort and twist the matter so that the individual is made to be irresponsible. Finally, you leave the ground of factuality and begin to abstract the situation adding to it outright lies. The listeners are usually enraptured by the beginning because the scapegoating process is also a power game and the listeners are glad it’s not they who are at the receiving end – and remain silent.
Only one person protested at the injustice of the whole situation of voting me out of the staff meeting. That particular person had a sound moral and intellectual value system, and he could not just swan along and follow the principal’s devious plan. Of course, I did leave the staff meeting because had I not, then the principal would have ordered me out. Later he accused me of not following orders - I think it was seven times within a space of five minutes. I found it rather funny when the principal and his henchman followed me while I was on yard duty. He was firing instructions at me, and I reminded him that I could only comply after I had completed yard duty. Later these orders featured large in his case against me. Interestingly, he never once mentioned the numerous occasions when visitors came to the school and would come straight to me, and even when the principal was standing next to me, they would address me: "Are you the principal?" I then had to point to the person next to me, a scruffy and somewhat hirsute jester.
After almost four years my dismissal case arrived at court, and even then the bureaucracy supported the principal with outright lies – under oath. I had four consecutive attorneys fighting this case – all of them dropped off, one by one, because I was hitting the educational establishment brick wall. The last one dropped off six weeks before the court case stating that I had received Natural Justice. It was sworn that I had been given the opportunity to respond to the 11 allegations made against me. I objected that this was a lie, but to no avail because my attorney didn’t want to run a case that he would lose. Then I recalled that I had secretly taped the formal hearing in the Director-General’s office – and it was this recording that animated another attorney to run my case – and my dismissal was declared illegal and of no effect. I had won the case – a significant victory because the bureaucracy had up to then been eliminating teachers that didn’t tow the ideological party line using such corrupt mechanism. The sad part of all this was that the education bureaucracy and the teachers’ union worked together to eliminate those teachers who refused to lower their standards and who refused to offer students ‘value-free’ education!
[When the US and its coalition of the willing began its push against Iraq, I could see the obvious patters of character assassination developing. No matter what the Iraqis did, it wasn't enough for the USA. The Iraqi defence was released with passages blackened out - national security was used as an excuse to lie and hide the true intentions of the Anglo-American-Zionist forces pushing for a war. The 9/11 tragedy was a mere pretext for things to come - and the horrors of it all is that those in power will do anything to stay in power - and few world leaders have the courage to snap out of it.]
That our education system reached this absurd level where its leaders openly claimed to offer ‘value-free education’ is not a puzzle for me because it reflects what vice-grip the ideologues had – still have – on our young maturing minds. Ideologues fear the ideal of liberating the mind from ignorance, of the mind developing its full critical potential. The dumbing down process is still in full swing – an ideal and fertile ground for sowing absurd and fabricated HOLOCAUST stories.
Among other things, an obsessive envy and vicious hatred for things German drives this mindset. It claims that Germans may have been culturally highly developed, but they did commit the HOLOCAUST. Such a mindset then, of course, claims it is still too hurtful for the victims of the HOLOCAUST that Germans respond and look into the allegations made against them by those who push the HOLOCAUST stories into the world. The hurt feeling excuse for refusing to have an open debate on any of the many allegations made by HOLOCAUST believers against Germans is, of course, a cop-out by those who are either ignorant of the facts or are outright liars!
Anyone who can see how this dialectic process works realizes, of course, that it is switching-off the critical faculties of an individual’s mind –exactly what Horst Mahler, Ernst Zündel, Germar Rudolf, Siegfried Verbeke, Günter Kögel, Arthur Butz, Robert Faurisson, and many others, oppose. Why do they oppose it? They despise any form of enslavement of the mind to a set of lies, that defames a whole nation, the Germans – and now the world. It is mental rape – and that is not good for the mind yearning for FREEDOM.
Those who believe in the HOLOCAUST are representing the ANTITHESIS to this FREEDOM and are therefore life-denying individuals who will never know what MORE and what FREEDOM is all about. They callously imprison those who refuse to believe in the HOLOCAUST, and they break all the legal traditions that have been developed over the centuries. They deceive, fabricate, lie, and steal that which is not their own. They take away our FREEDOM - if we let them get away with it - we would be mad if we did!
One against all – the Dr Hamer case
While we are focusing on legal persecution, let us remember Dr Ryke Geerd Hamer, who in 1981 discovered the German New Medicine - www.germannewmedicine.ca/ .
Any Revisionist who is currently in prison will appear to have been on a picnic and treated with kid-gloves if compared with what Dr Hamer has had to suffer and endure.
Dr Hamer challenges the traditional school medicine, which he claims is a Jewish conspiracy against the non-Jewish world. He sees this especially in the fight against cancer that he says is driven by hatred against anything non-Jewish. The effect is that millions of non-Jews are killed through conventional cancer treatment – radical surgery and especially chemotherapy.
Hamer has formulated the iron-clad rules that cause cancer and how the body’s own immune system cures it. If his methodology is adopted, then the current multi-billion world-wide cancer industry would become irrelevant. And so the usual campaign is waged against Dr Hamer that brings in professional medical groups, the judiciary, politicians and anyone with an ax to grind. Anyone who hates slavery of any kind is a threat to such organisations.
As a free thinkers whose love for truth, whose love for family and community rises above material consideration, Dr Hamer cannot be silenced. But he can and has been persecuted. The method used is well known to Revisionists: spread alarm through society about anything to do with cancer - fabricate and instill fear throughout the medical world. Recently in Australia this was effectively done when a media personality had breast cancer – business was booming.
Dr Hamer claims it is Freemasonry, especially the B’nai B’rith Lodge – in Italy the P-2 Lodge – that controls this world-wide operation. He convincingly documents his claims in his book Einer gegen alle – Die Ernkenntnisunterdrückung der Neuen Medizin - One against all – The Knowledge suppression of New Medicine. 2005: email@example.com; www.neuemedicin.com
It is now common knowledge that Jews have networked well through this lodge system where non-Jews have become the willing helpers to establish King Solomon’s Temple in Jerusalem.
What is worse for Dr Hamer to entertain is how non-Jews unconditionally obey the Jews who are in leading positions in academia, the judiciary, in political parties, and the media so that life-saving knowledge is suppressed.
He notes that the Jews failed to install a Jew as the discoverer of the New Medicine, which he calls German New Medicine, so as to differentiate his discoveries from the numerous others that lay claim to the name ‘New’. It is not having a Jew in the leading position that motivates them to move against Dr Hamer. Recently some of his principles and the discovered laws have been found to be used in Israel but then without acknowledgement to Dr Hamer’s pioneering discoveries.
Dr Hamer is currently in a French prison on trumped-up charges, but he could be released if only he were to re-cant, and if he subjected himself to a psychiatric investigation. He refuses to re-cant and so will have to serve the full three years of a sentence that relied on fabricated evidence. The German judiciary, as Revisionists know quite well, contains so many corrupt individuals that anything can be achieved, anything that will suppress Truth and Justice.
All this is interesting to the world’s REVISIONISTS.
In his book Dr Hamer documents his claims in detail, and we are fortunate that he completed it before he was extradited from Spain to France. It all began when his son, Dirk, was shot and killed by the crown Prince of Italy. Some friends of Dr Hamer suggested that he should have accepted the two million dollars offered to him as a form of settlement by the Italian royal household in French exile.
Dr Hamer then compounds his attacks on the Jews by stating that the European Royals are tainted with Jewish blood at all levels – but he sees hope in that not all are contaminated. He states that this contamination is the death sentence of the Europeans because the Jews and their hatred towards non-Jews springs from the TALMUD. In Jewish religion/mythology the coming of the Messiah will only happen with the total subjugation or killing of all things non-Jewish so that Jews rule the world.
Dr Hamer has escaped numerous assassination attempts through poisoning. He even took a photograph of one such assassin – together with his B’nai B’rith pass.
Dr Erik Venderby invited Dr Hamer to come to Denmark, there to help him with his mother who was suffering from cancer. Somehow the story fell apart because the woman passed off as his mother was his adoptive mother, and she didn’t wish to see Dr Hamer. So Dr Venderby took Dr Hamer back to the railway station where they both had a coffee. Dr Hamer noticed how Venderby poured himself a cup and almost unnoticed dropped a small tablet into his own coffee. Venderby then clumsily poured Dr Hamer a cup, spilling the coffee, apologized, then gave his cup to Hamer with the remark that he, Venderby, has as yet not drunk from it.
Venderby then drank his coffee but Hamer didn’t with the comment that it was still too hot. Venderby then excused himself and left allegedly to make a phone call. Hamer quickly rose and got himself another cup and poured some coffee into that cup. When Venderby returned Hamer just emptied his cup. For a while they continued to talk and Venderby mentioned to Hamer that he belonged to a Jewish lodge. Hamer then animated Venderby to be photographed together with Hamer’s new book and Venderby’s lodge ID. Venderby must have been certain of his job’s success because he revealed himself so openly to Hamer.
Hamer suspects what was in the tablet was a poison, most likely eserin, that within twelve hours acts on the body’s blood sugar level lasting 15 hours – fatal for anyone. Dr Hamer praises his own instinct in having saved himself from this assassin – a classic case of the NOW factor still operating to perfection – self-preservation of LIFE.
Dr Erik Venderby Lodge ID
Under the new Terrorism Law would the following letter be permitted to be published?
To: The Hon David Tonkin, MP
Premier of South Australia
357 Greenhill Rd
Toorak Garden 5065
25 February 1982
Dear Mr Premier,
On the 15th February 1982 The Advertiser printed the following notice under the Letters to the Editor:
“ The Jewish Board of Deputies will stage from April 22 to May 5 under the patronage of the SA Premier Mr Tonkin an exhibition documenting Nazi atrocities during World War II”, etc.
Mr Premier, I think that by permitting an exhibition of that kind you are not rendering your state a good service. By patronizing it, you are linking yourself to an exhibition, which will stir up antagonism and hostility in part of your community and will be damaging 6to your good name and your party.
In the USA school children of German descent were beaten up on their way to school after showing of such propaganda. Certainly you do not wish this to happen in your state.
During World War II all nations involved have suffered all kinds of atrocities including the Germans. Millions have been driven out of their homelands, beaten to death on the roads and raped and slaughtered by the invading Russians and other nationalities. Dresden burnt seven days and nights and 350 thousand women, children and defenceless refugees perished in that holocaust.
The sufferings have not ended since. They went on in the countries occupied by the Soviet Union, in Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia and Africa and are today nearly looked at as common place. But none of these nations is travelling around for years complaining and accusing in films and exhibitions and at the same time pocketing billions of compensation from a state, which is genuinely trying to make good. May I draw your attention to the fact that in 1938 the Jewish World Population consisted of 15 688 259 – World Almanac of Jewish American Committee.
In 1948 Mr Baldwin, an impartial expert in matters concerning populations stated in an article in the New York Times the Jewish World Population to be 18 700 000.
After a loss of 6 million people – as it is claimed - the Jewish people would have had to increase by 50% within 10 years to reach that figure.
As that is not possible, the number of 6 million killed seems to me grossly exaggerated.
I cannot even see what benefit our Jewish community will gain from such an exhibition.
There are over 750 000 people of German descent in this State plus other nationalities who are friendly towards the Germans. As I know them, most of them are from the silent majority but I wonder how they will vote at the next election.
H J Marcinowski
THE PROSECUTOR THE JUDGE THE ACCUSED
Today’s hearing was to commence at 10.00, by which time over a hundred supporters had gathered in the lobby of the building. There were quite a few new faces amongst the visitors, and again there were visitors from abroad. There were very few journalists indeed, and only a couple of cameras. The security regulations were far stricter today; neither cameras nor bags were allowed, which is not too unusual, but in addition, plastic bottles were not permitted either. Furthermore, there were at least twice as many police officials in the courtroom than last week.
The pubic was admitted into the courtroom at 10.40. The room was absolutely packed and twenty-odd people were unable to get seats and had to wait outside. Ernst Zündel entered the room at 10.50, shortly before the judges and jurors, and was greeted with a warm applause.
The judge, having entered, started by warning the public that moaning and applause would not be tolerated and that he had given the police the order to keep an eye on the public and remove any disturbers from the courtroom as well as taking down their names.
Next, Dr. Meinerzhagen dismissed Ernst Zündel’s petition that the judge is biased as unfounded. He stated that there are no reasons for the accused to have doubts in the judge. Following on from here, the judge corroborated his dismissal of Sylvia Stolz as mandatory lawyer (i.e. counsel of the defence appointed by the court), and repeated the reasons he had given the previous week, as well as saying that Miss Stolz is too close to the accused. Meinerzhagen stated that he had so decided not due to any emotional impulse, but on an objective, factual basis. He again argued that Miss Stolz is not suited because she cannot guarantee an orderly procedure, and that this would lead to conflicts between the accused and the defence.
The judge continued by giving an official statement that Jürgen Rieger and Dr. Herbert Schaller would also not be accepted as counsel of the defence appointed by the court. Dr. Meinerzhagen stated that his reasons for so doing are appropriate and expedient, and that this is necessary in order to avoid a delay of the proceedings.
In his next move, the judge rejected Miss Stolz’ petition to exclude the public from the hearings. He said that the public can only be excluded from the trial, if it represents a threat, and that this is not the case. On the contrary, it is the defence which represents a threat to the trial because its intention is to incite the People. Furthermore, it is to be expected that the defence would file inciting petitions and motions to hear evidence if the public were excluded.
Dr Meinerzhagen followed this move by deciding to suspend the proceedings. He gave the following reasons: A new mandatory lawyer is to be appointed by the court. In light of the sheer mass of files, he would need time to become acquainted with the material. The trial is thus to be suspended until the new lawyer has had the opportunity to prepare himself for the trial. Zündel is to be kept in gaol; this is just, when bearing in mind the seriousness of his offence. The suspension of the hearings, Meinerzhagen continued, is the fault of the defence.
At this point Jürgen Rieger stated that since the judge had not informed the defence of his intention to suspend the proceedings – something the judge is obliged to do, the defence had not been given the opportunity to make a statement on this decision. Later on the judge stated that he had indeed informed the defence of this intention – a blatant lie.
The judge then said that Zündel may name a mandatory lawyer. He pointed out how important it is that the lawyer of his choice has his trust. At 11.20 the hearing was interrupted for five minutes in order to allow Ernst Zündel to make a decision. When the proceeding continued five minutes later, Zündel stated that he would appoint Dr. Schaller as his mandatory lawyer, and that Schaller is in best health. Dr. Schaller immediately said that he is prepared to take on this role. Ulrich Meinerzhagen stated that the panel needs time to decide on this point, and that the panel also needs to hear the comment of the public prosecutor. Rieger simply asked: “Why can’t we do this now?” The judge then asked for the public prosecutor’s opinion, and Großmann, the public prosecutor, said that he does not believe that Dr. Schaller is suited for this task. Jürgen Rieger then asked why the court could not come to a decision today, and stated that the court cannot suspend the proceedings ad infinitum since Zündel is in jail, and that this is not in the interest of the accused. Meinerzhagen had, after all, unctuously stated that the proceeding ought to be swift.
Here followed a verbal battle between the judge and the defence, which went something like this:
Meinerzhagen: “We will not decide on this issue today.”
Stolz: “I wish to make a statement concerning my dismissal as mandatory lawyer.”
Meinerzhagen: “That’s out of the question!”
Stolz: “You cannot do that, this is out of order!”
Meinerzhagen: “The trial is adjourned.”
Stolz: “I have not had the opportunity to make my statement!”
Meinerzhagen: “I don’t care!!! The proceedings are stayed!”
It was now 11.40, and upon the final words of the judge, the public vociferously voiced their disapproval and anger, shouting things like “this is a carnival!”, “scandal!”, “you just want to be off to celebrate your birthday!”, etc.The court is thus continuing along the path it has set itself. The trial will most likely be resumed February/March 2006.
After the hearing, Ernst Zündel’s supporters and lawyers met for a discussion, during which Jürgen Rieger gave some interesting background information concerning the trial. It seems that the judge will attempt to persecute the defence when they start defending Zündel. In order to prevent the trial from falling through due to all lawyers having been thrown out (which would cast a negative light on Meinerzhagen), the judge wishes to have a court appointed defence lawyer who will follow his whims. He can then press charges against the defence team for voicing forbidden thoughts in public, have them expelled from the case and will then be able to quickly end the proceedings by sentencing Zündel, his personally appointed defence lawyer meekly playing along in this charade. According to generally valid norms, the judge would of course have to appoint Dr Schaller as mandatory defence lawyer, since Herbert Schaller is neither close to Horst Mahler (Sylvia Stolz) nor has he got a criminal record (Jürgen Rieger). Not to appoint Dr Schaller due to his age is unheard of and no reason at all – in particular since Dr Schaller (84) is fit as a fiddle.
Jürgen Rieger also related to us that the judge has limited Ernst Zündel’s mail. Zündel is allowed only two letters per day and these only when they are not longer than five pages. The letters he receives are picked randomly out of a box. Printed matters are forbidden. Since Zündel has many printed texts relating to his defence in Canada, printed texts are sent to Herr Rieger to evaluate who has to return the texts within three days. (To show the ridiculousness of the situation, Rieger received a book of pictures about Tyrol, which the publishers had sent Zündel as a gift.) The judge is thus refusing Zündel to view the files which his Canadian lawyers are sending him. Also, before the trial started the judge said that Zündel would be sentenced to more than four years gaol.
Whilst the trial and ensuing meeting was taking place, Germar Rudolf was flown into Germany where, upon arrival at Frankfurt Airport he was arrested and taken to the prison in Stuttgart. Also, the Flemish Revisionist Siegfried Verbeke has recently been arrested in Amsterdam and is to be extradited to Germany. The enemy must think that he has secured a brilliant victory by making Germany the focal point of his Holocaust show trails. Hubris, however, leads to nemesis and the sudden influx of show trials, where prominent people are being jailed for their thoughts, will lead to the enemy’s downfall and the liberation of not only the German People but of all European Peoples from foreign rule, a rule based solely on the Rule of the Lie.
Germar telephoned me three times on Sunday Nov. 13, 2005.
He telephoned me in the morning to tell me that three people whom he would like to call have their phones blocked in relation to his calls. ... Germar wanted me to phone those three people to ask them to get their phones unblocked. He called me in the late afternoon to tell me that the German media are saying that he will arrive on Tuesday, so he assumed he will be deported on Monday.
The media are also saying that the prosecution will press for a 5 year sentence, followed by a 20 year prohibition on leaving Germany. He asked that on Monday I call his wife to learn whether or not he has been deported and then send out a report to his many friends around the world. His parting message is that we must uphold and advance his legacy of scholarly research, exposition, and publication.
Germar called me Sunday evening, around 8:45 PM, to ask me to telephone his wife, whose phone had become blocked. The telephones in the jail were about to be turned off, and he did not know whether he would be able to speak to her Monday morning. I should tell her he loves her, very much, and will miss her and the baby.
I communicated that message to her immediately.
I was quite in the dark throughout Monday but, since I received no phone calls from him, I assumed the worst. His wife seemed too distracted to give me information, and I did not know of his deportation until the e-mails of Tuesday afternoon came in - A.R. Butz.
Germar Rudolf's home
On 15 November 2005 Germar Rudolf arrived from Chicago at Frankfurt Airport. After a brief interlude he was transferred to Stammheim Prison, Stuttgart.
Shame on the US authorities for bending to Jewish pressure both in the US and in Germany.
Germar Rudolf’s imprisonment elicited the obligatory congratulations from Israel. The ‘Holocaust’ believers fear Germar Rudolf’s ground-breaking work that exposes ‘Holocaust’ lies. As a German he demands the right to explore the allegations levelled against Germans – that during World War II they systematically exterminated European Jewry in homicidal gas chambers. Rudolf’s scientific training enables him to expose this as a gigantic lie, as professors Robert Faurisson, Art Butz, et al, confirm. The fact that individuals who refuse to believe in the ‘Holocaust’ are legally persecuted speaks for itself. It rings hollow if the ‘Holocaust’ is placed off-limits to scientific enquiry and investigation on account of such activity generating hurt feelings in those who label themselves ‘Holocaust’ survivors.
The Germans are doubly hurt – firstly by the allegation made against them, then secondly because they are not allowed to defend themselves against such an allegation. Why noy? Because they lost the war and because most Germans have been re-educated to the point where their German identity has disintegrated. This has not as yet happened to Germar Rudolf.
Rudolf’s, Zündel’s and Verbeke’s imprisonment is indicative of the powerful Jewish lobby’s world-wide connections. As we saw with Dr Hamer, this network includes millions of willing – often innocent and ignorant – helpers that come from the non-Jewish world in the form of Freemasonry. It makes sense that National Socialism banned Freemasonry – it is a Jewish-inspired movement, which aims to re-establish King Solomon’s Temple in Jerusalem – and for that ethnic cleansing of Palestine is a pre-requisite. That the world watches and says nothing about this indicates how the subtle process of ‘dumbing – down’ through world media and financial control has achieved a state where the UN will now celebrate ‘Holocaust’ Remembrance Day – the new world religion.
Germar Rudolf's new address:
Asperger Str. 60,
Mr Michael Santomauro has bought Germar Rudolf’s US publishing business. Contact him at: RePorterNoteBook@aol.com
After a half a dozen calls through the court systems in Vienna one arrives to the office of Judge Dr. Peter Seda. He is the Judge who is willing to take the responsibility for locking up the best living historian on planet earth today.
The calls are routed around and placed on hold time and time again in a manner that indicated a desperate try for the tracing of the source. In my case the calls are looped again and again * they seem to have difficulties tracing a call originating from an IBM laptop, sitting behind a few layers of firewalls.
Finally one arrives to the secretary and it all seems so easy: "If you wish to visit Mr. Irving please come to our office between 9:00 and 12:00AM in the morning on Monday or Wednesday. We will give you a visitor's permit and you can talk to Mr. Irving."
I arrive at 11 Landesgericht Strasse close to the center of Vienna from another country, after many hours of traveling. The building is one of those century old huge structures with three feet thick walls, reflecting on the past glorious days of the country when it was Austrians who set their laws, foreign policies and even controlled their own monetary system.
At the entry the metal detector is busy, they take my camera, my metallic ballpoint pen and anything else that can kill, maim or terrorize the deputies who are running around with their side arms.
A friendly woman takes me to the half mile long hallway on the second floor, toward room #2080, at the end. As we are walking toward the room she points out Judge Dr. Seda. He is rather short, dark eyes, with some sort of slight physical disability that shows in his walking, the type who realized at an early age that the ultimate security is in the power of a government position. Judge Seda is a veteran champion for the cause of the Austrian Jews. He is on record for tracking internet thought criminals for at least ten years for "anti-Semitic expressions", "denial of the Holocaust" and "spreading revisionist literature". He is also a choice of the establishment for politically sensitive cases: He handled the Austrian investigation into the poisoning of Victor Yuschenko, then a candidate in the elections of The Ukraine, who was poisoned and was treated in Vienna. (2004)
The woman who is leading me realizes that she made a mistake, apologizes and leaves. Judge Dr. Seda tells me to walk to his office and wait there. The secretary is around thirty, long blond hair, blue eyes, with a little extra weight that is normal in her profession. Her face is actually pleasant and I can easily track the ways of her mind as she takes me through a routine that she must have played many times before. As she fills out the half a page sized paper she asks questions: My relation if any to Mr.
Irving. How long did I know him? What year was he born? How did I learn about his arrest? Is there a big publicity about the arrest in other countries? Am I also a writer?
When I ask about the type of charges filed against Mr. Irving, I'm told: "That is not public information." And so is the bail information.
When Judge Seda arrives in the room he signs the paper, they send me to room #1011 for the paper to be stamped on the first floor. Another half mile in the long hallways, a rather useless exercise since the woman in the room does not ask any questions, simply stamps the paper.
The jail is in the very same building complex. The visiting area is on the ground level. (In Europe they do not count the "first floor" as such, they count it as "ground level" and they number the floors above that.)
The officer behind the window explains it to me that Mr. Irving can have only one thirty minute visit per week and he already had one on Monday.
"Can I call Mr. Irving?"
"Can Mr. Irving call me?"
"Can I leave some books for Mr. Irving?"
"No, he does not have a permit from the judge."
"But yes, I can come again next Monday morning and try to be the first*"
"But then Mr. Irving will not be able to see his own family members if they show up*"
I think every one of the players in this tragic-comedy believes that he is normal. They play their parts in this totally insane drama with the true believe that everything is A1, Ok around them but one can actually sense the suffering on the over-controlled faces. These people need help and it will be our job to provide this help for them one day. They need to be freed from the forces of evil that are literally and visibly all around them.
24 Nov 2005
Irving acknowledges gas chambers
A lawyer for British historian David Irving said on the eve of a court hearing that Irving admitted past statements could be interpreted as denying the existence of Nazi gas chambers - but now acknowledges they existed.
Prosecutors charged Irving earlier this week under an Austrian law that makes denying the Holocaust a crime.
The charges stem from two speeches Irving delivered in Austria in 1989 in which he allegedly denied the existence of gas chambers. If convicted, he faces up to 10 years in prison. Irving has changed his views on gas chambers in recent years, his attorney, Elmar Kresbach said.
"He changed some of the views he is so famous for," Kresbach said.
Kresbach said he will argue at a custody hearing that Irving should be released on bail. It was unclear when the trial will begin.
© Press Association Ltd 2005.
http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=2298302005 Last updated: 24-Nov-05 22:25
Irving has changed his views: lawyer
November 26, 2005
The British historian David Irving's past statements could be interpreted as denying there were Nazi gas chambers - but he now acknowledges they existed, his lawyer has said on the eve of a court hearing in Austria.
Prosecutors this week charged Irving under an Austrian law that makes denying the Holocaust a crime. The charges stem from two speeches Irving delivered in Austria in 1989 in which he allegedly denied the existence of gas chambers.
If convicted, he faces up to 10 years in prison. Irving's arrest - in a country still coming to grips with its Nazi-ruled past - won praise worldwide.
But on Thursday Irving's lawyer, Elmar Kresbach, said the historian has told him he now acknowledges that Nazi gas chambers existed. "He changed some of the views he is so famous for," Mr Kresbach said.
"He told me: 'Look, there was a certain period when I drew conclusions from individual sources which are maybe provocative or could be misinterpreted or could be even wrong'."
He said additional research Irving carried out after Soviet archives were opened to scholars persuaded him that his former beliefs were "not really worthwhile to hold up," Mr Kresbach said.
Irving is "correcting himself", Mr Kresbach said, and the historian now "sees himself as somebody who can influence marginal groups who have difficulty believing in the Third Reich".
Austrian law does not allow Irving to be interviewed while in custody. The 67-year-old has the right to appeal against the charges but probably will not, Mr Kresbach said.
"There are transcripts from the speeches. We don't have to deny that he said that."
Instead, Mr Kresbach said he would focus on showing how Irving's views had changed and argue at a custody hearing that Irving should be released on bail.A trial date has not been announced. In Austria, suspected violations of the law that bans attempts to publicly diminish, deny or justify the Holocaust are heard by an eight-person layman jury and three judges.
This week, Lord Greville Janner of Britain-based Holocaust Educational Trust praised the Austrians "for doing what our law should but does not permit".
"I hope this will lead to a successful prosecution," he had said.
The martyrdom of David Irving-Crikey 21/11/05. Charles Richardson writes:
Last week, in the course of an otherwise execrable polemic against critics of the government's proposed new sedition laws, Piers Akerman made a valid point. When the free speech of Christian extremists was threatened by Victoria's Racial and Religious Tolerance Act, he said, "None of those now protesting the updating of the sedition laws raised their voices."
It's true that many defenders of free speech are too selective. So let's pause to note another case where a worthy principle is embodied in an unworthy representative: Holocaust-denier David Irving, currently imprisoned in Austria on a charge of, well, denying the Holocaust.
Irving is a fraud who deserves little sympathy. But free speech must not be confined to causes we agree with; the unpopular and the odious have their rights as well. To use laws and prison sentences against them is both wrong and counter-productive: martyrdom just gives Irving and his like further publicity, and gives credibility to his claim that his opponents have something to hide.
Even the best of principles can yield in extreme cases, and in the immediate aftermath of World War II it made some sense for Germany and Austria to enact laws criminalising pro-Nazi opinion. But that is 60 years ago; Irving and his fellow apologists for genocide now pose no threat to anybody. False ideas should be fought not with repression, but with better ideas.
ABC Radio National Breakfast with Fran Kelly, ABC - David Irving Arrest
6:45am - Monday 21 November 2005
As Germany celebrates the 60th anniversary of the Nuremburg trials, the revisionist British historian David Irving is languishing in an Austrian cell.
Acting on a 1989 warrant, police arrested the right-wing historian as he was on his way to address a students' club in Vienna last week. He could face up to 20 years jail if the country's justice department decides to press charges against him.
Deborah Lipstadt is the director of the Institute for Jewish Studies at Emory University. She was sued five years ago by David Irving for describing him as a 'Holocaust denier' in her book Denying the Holocaust: The Growing Assault on Truth and Memory. She joined us this morning from California.
When at any one time out of, say, 300 emails there are just 50 that are worth reading and the rest contain virus attachments, then I know someone is feeling the Revisionist heat – enough to force someone into becoming an anonymous saboteur, a cyber terrorist. This situation has prevailed during the past two months.
Now that the judge in the Zündel Mannheim case has resorted to non-judicial means in attempting to clinch a conviction Revisionists can breathe easy as they watch the matter develop openly into a witch trial.
Likewise with Germar Rudolf’s Stammheim imprisonment. In sentencing Rudolf -ex parte - the Stuttgart court cited his "incitement of the people in conjunction with denigration of the memory of the dead, libel and incitement to racial hatred", something that is an absolute nonsense, a cop-out by those who wish to continue to oppress Germans with the ‘Holocaust’ lies, without Germans permitted to defend themselves – a sick situation that is simply explained by “The Germans lost the war!” And the obedient Germans who sell their soul, who do the bidding of the ‘Holocaust’ lobby, have the temporal power to sentence Rudolf to years in prison.
What is Rudolf’s crime? What is any REVISIONIST’s crime? As a German Rudolf did the normal thing and challenged the ‘Holocaust’ allegations that have been made against the Germans. Rudolf’s academic and humane expertise is significant – something those who believe and uphold the ‘Holocaust’ lies can never match because they are power-drunk to the point where they would kill, like the degenerate, debased and superstitious Herodes who had forsaken reason and understanding for lust. Wagner teaches us that power and love are directly proportional – and I have met enough ‘HOLOCAUST’ believers who fail miserably on the LOVE scale. The ‘Scheusal’ Simon Wiesenthal is a prime example of total corruption, as Oscar Wild taught us in The Picture of Dorian Gray where our evil doings ultimately are reflected in our face; Wiesenthal’s side-kick, Dr Zuroff, so a correspondent from Israel advises me, is also in a bind as far as personal relationships is concerned. Public and private profile, after all, is also directly proportionate. Who does not know the gentle, lovable public figure who is a wife-basher at home!
Europe Seen Cracking Down on Holocaust Revisionists
By MARC PERELMAN
November 25, 2005 http://www.forward.com/articles/6933
In a flurry of activity on both sides of the Atlantic, several so-called revisionists have been arrested on Holocaust denial charges in recent weeks.
Three revisionists — Germar Rudolf, Ernst Zundel and Siegfried Verbeke — have been extradited to Germany. But the most visible case involves far-right British historian David Irving, who was arrested November 11 in Vienna, Austria, on 16-year-old charges that he publicly denied aspects of the Holocaust — a crime in Austria. Jewish communal leaders, including Shimon Samuels, international relations director of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, praised the moves. Samuels said that they were part of an overall trend in Europe toward greater attempts to atone for the Holocaust.
"There is a drive toward transparency that is very healthy in Europe," he said. "Unlike in America, there is not much difference in Europe between hate speech and hate crime. And there seems to be a new willingness to use those laws when it comes to Holocaust denial."
Holocaust revisionists, meanwhile, were slamming the crackdown efforts, saying they were part of a Jewish conspiracy to prevent open debate.
"As the new owner of Germar Rudolf's publishing company, I wish to express my outrage that the Holocaust, unlike any other historical event, is not subject to critical revisionist investigation," said Michael Santomauro, who runs a Web site dedicated to Holocaust denial and to attacks against Jewish communal leaders and organizations. "Furthermore I deplore the fact that many so-called democratic states have laws that criminalize public doubting of the Holocaust. It is my position that the veracity of Holocaust assertions should be determined in the marketplace of scholarly discourse and not in our legislature's bodies and courthouses."
The charges against Irving, filed by Austrian prosecutors, were based on two 1989 speeches in which he denied the existence of the gas chambers. If convicted, Irving could face up to 20 years in prison.
Irving is the author of nearly 30 books. One of them, "Hitler's War," challenges the fact that 6 million Jews were murdered in the Holocaust. He once famously insisted that Adolf Hitler knew nothing about the systematic slaughter of the Jews, and he has been quoted as saying there is "not one shred of evidence" that the Nazis carried out their "final solution" on such a scale.
In 2000, Irving lost a libel case he brought against historian Deborah E. Lipstadt for calling him a Holocaust denier. The British court ruled that Irving was antisemitic and racist and that he misrepresented historical information.
In addition to Irving's arrest, Rudolph, 41, was sent from Chicago this month to his native Germany, where he was wanted on a 1995 conviction of inciting racial hatred for disputing the deaths of thousands of Jews held captive at a concentration camp. Rudolph was sentenced to 14 months in prison for publishing a report disputing the deaths of thousands of Jews in the gas chambers at Auschwitz, according to a statement by the Department of Homeland Security. Rudolph, a former chemist, claimed in his report that since he had failed to find traces of Zyklon B on the bricks of gas chambers, mass gassings of Jews could not have occurred at Auschwitz.
After his conviction, he fled Germany and lived in Spain, Great Britain, Mexico and the United States, according to the DHS press release. He was arrested in Chicago October 19 after a background check by immigration officials, and deported November 14 to Germany.
Earlier this year, Canada deported Ernst Zundel, 66, to Germany, where a state court is hearing charges of incitement, libel and disparaging the dead. He faces a maximum sentence of five years in jail if convicted. Also, in October a Dutch court agreed to extradite Siegfried Verbeke — a co-founder of the Belgian extreme-right Vlaams Blok party, now called Vlaams Belang — to Germany, where he faces charges of racism and xenophobia and publicly doubting the Holocaust. He is looking at 14 months in prison.
Verbeke was convicted on charges of Holocaust denial and racism in Belgium in 2003 and sentenced to a one-year jail term. However, Belgian authorities refused to extradite him to Germany. After his arrest in Amsterdam this past August, he faced similar charges in the Netherlands for having questioned the veracity of Anne Frank's diary. But the proceedings were suspended and Verbeke was sent to Germany in early October.
Virtually unreported by the mainstream media and given little prominence even by those outlets that have reported it – probably so as not to alert too many – recent weeks have seen a major clampdown across the planet. On both sides of the Atlantic historians, researchers and investigators have been arrested, detained and deported to Germany to face charges of “Holocaust Denial”.
Among their number is German born Ernst Zundel, who immigrated to Canada in 1958 to work as a graphic artist. In the 1980's, he published a book called "Did Six Million Really Die?" and thereafter continued publishing and questioning conventional notions surrounding holocaust.
In 1985, he was charged with “publishing false news" and a series of trials followed between 1985 and 1988. In his defence he brought in gas chamber experts, other historians and cross-examined a number of Holocaust survivors, who reportedly fell apart under questioning.
In 2003 he was arrested for an alleged immigration violation while visiting the United States. Thereafter he was deported back to Canada, where he was held in solitary confinement in a maximum-security jail for nearly 2 years before being deported back to Germany.
Upon arrival in Mannheim, Germany, the 65-year-old Zundel was charged with “Holocaust Denial”, an offence that carries a penalty of up to 5 years in jail.
Likewise Germar Rudolph was also recently deported back to Germany to face similar charges. A German-trained chemist, Rudolf re-examined Auschwitz and Birkenau in 1989 for traces of Zyklon B, the gas the Nazis are supposed to have used to gas millions. As a scientist, he found the "gassing" claims to be scientifically untenable and therefore, in the eyes of German law, was judged to be “denying the Holocaust”.
He was sentenced in Germany to 14 months in jail but fled to the US before he served time. However he was arrested on November 18, 2005 in Chicago, and extradited back to Germany.
Similarly, British historian David Irving was arrested on November 14, 2005, while visiting Vienna at the invitation of students from the city’s university. He was to have spoken of Adolph Eichmann’s offer to Jewish leaders in Budapest in 1944, to release Hungarian Jews in exchange for cash or trucks.
However, before he could address students he was arrested on charges brought against him nearly sixteen years ago, of publicly denying aspects of the Holocaust.
According to an Austrian state prosecutor, if convicted he could face up 20 years in jail.
Not only have America and Canada been deporting individuals to Germany to face the “Holocaust Denial” charge, the Netherlands has too.
A Belgian national, Siegfried Verbeke was charged with denying the holocaust in August this year, after he questioned the Anne Frank story. Two months later on October 6th, the Netherlands agreed to extradite him to Germany, where he faces 14 months in prison.
So why the sudden clampdown on Revisionists and why now?
It’s been suggested that the Internet has panicked the Zionists, who to a large extent owe their power and influence to the Holocaust. After all, Israel was founded on its memory and if it’s proven to be a lie, or at least a gross exaggeration, the power the Zionists hold over ordinary Jews could be undermined. For the very notion of the Holocaust has been used not only to extract financial redress from other nations but also to keep ordinary Jews compliant.
In effect, it’s become like a grotesque doll wielded by witch doctors, used to keep individuals from asking too many questions, from thinking for themselves and stepping out of line.
Formally the likes of Ernst Zundel might have been written off as cranks or extremists but Internet changes that. It allows isolated individuals to question, often quite convincingly, the official line touted by the establishment and the mainstream media.
Moreover, the Internet illustrates that the accused are not “Holocaust Deniers” – in the sense that they deny the Holocaust ever took place – or “right wing extremists” intent on resurrecting the Third Reich. That’s what the mainstream media would us believe but almost without exception, the accused admit that the Nazis were guilty of gross human rights abuses. What’s at issue here are the numbers of dead, how they died and whether there was any clear plan of genocide at all.
In effect these men were engaged in historical inquiry, trying to establish the truth and broadcasting their findings, and that cannot be allowed in the New World Order.
Without even questioning what happened during the Holocaust, we should be asking ourselves: if it’s necessary to exact such draconian measures against those who ask questions, what exactly is being protected here? Are historical truth and the memory of dead holocaust victims being defended? Or is it one of the foundations of the New World Order, modern Zionist power?
Finally, a 1948 Red Cross report details nearly a quarter of a million Jews died in Nazi concentration camps but found no evidence of Genocide. This is in distinct contrast to the figure touted nowadays by the mainstream media and portrayed by Hollywood. At the time the Red Cross was a neutral body with no political axe to grind, so why the difference? And we need to ask ourselves, not only why there is such a difference in the numbers but also why those who ask such questions are being silenced?
Like they say: “he who controls the past, controls the present…” and our perception of past events shapes the way we look at the world around us now. The Zionists understand this and know that the idea of the “Holocaust” is crucial to their power. Which is why such harsh measures are being exacted against those who ask too many questions.
THE son of the violinist and humanist Yehudi Menuhin has been ousted as head of the German branch of his father’s foundation because of his extreme right-wing views.
Gerard Menuhin, 57, caused uproar by suggesting that Germany was being blackmailed by an international Jewish conspiracy preying on the country’s war guilt. He was forced to resign as chairman of the Yehudi Menuhin Foundation (YMF) in Germany, which was established to encourage the musical talent of young immigrants.
“It was a logical and comprehensible decision in this re-educated land,” Mr Menuhin, an Old Etonion who lives in Switzerland and Britain, said. “But I’m not going to change my opinions because of it.”
Mr Menuhin is one of two sons of the violinist with his second wife, the British dancer Diana Rosamond Gould, and he has taken over a number of family responsibilities. Apart from his chairmanship of the YMF in Dusseldorf, he sits on the board of the Menuhin Festival in Gstaad.
Until now his political views have barely registered with the outside world even though he has a regular column in the Munich-based ultra-nationalist National Zeitung. One of his more vitriolic columns condemned Jewish “souvenir hunters” who gather evidence in Germany to help them to lodge financial claims for wartime persecution.
“Apart from a few curious comments about America, we weren’t really aware of his politics,” Winfried Kneip, YMF’s chief executive, said.
Mr Menuhin outed himself as a clear sympathiser with the neo-Nazi cause in two published interviews this month. In Deutsche Stimme, voice of the National Party of Germany, he used classical anti-Semitic language while still staying within the boundaries of German law.
“An international lobby of influential people and organisations is trying to keep the Germans under pressure,” he said. “Some nations — mainly America, but other Europeans, too — are profiting from an obedient Germany.”
It was unfair, he said, that Germany should continue to be punished for its Nazi past. “The main tool of this endless blackmail was supplied by the Germans themselves, although the tainted period of 12 years really was only 12 years in over 2,000 years of immaculate development.”
The Menuhin family is descended from Russian Jews, and Baron Menuhin of Stoke d’Abernon, who became a life peer in 1993, was regarded as a great humanist who worked to bring communities together. Hence the shock that his son should let himself be fêted by German parties that stir up sentiment against foreigners and often glorify the Nazis.
In an interview with the National Zeitung, organ of the German Peoples’ Union, Mr Menuhin called on Germans to stop paying taxes and thus protest at the outflow of German funds to the European Union.
“People cannot be eternally exploited in this way,” he said, “as long as there is a budget deficit, no German public money should flow abroad.”
Mr Menuhin, who describes himself as a film producer and writer, is something of a maverick within the family. “He was the least musically gifted,” a family friend said, “and he suffered from that emotionally.”
There has, in fact, been a history of family sympathy for German nationalists. Mr Menuhin’s grandfather, Moshe, was a determined anti-Zionist and expounded his views in the National Zeitung; he was arts editor from 1968 to 1970 although he was aware of its extreme German nationalism. He left the job only because the paper was not anti-Zionist enough.
Lord Menuhin earned applause from German Nationalists when he played with the conductor Wilhelm Furtwängler, who had been a Nazi supporter. But Lord Menuhin’s point was to demonstrate that music can heal wounds. German nationalists, however, regarded the gesture as being something more, a sign of understanding for those who believed in national socialism.
That, and the dedication of some concerts to the plight of German refugees from the East, gave the Menuhin family some standing among German rightwingers. Although Lord Menuhin had humanitarian motives, Gerard appears to have interpreted his father’s gestures as a family blessing for his nationalist opinions.
The Yehudi Menuhin Foundation in Germany was set up by the violinist shortly before his death in Berlin in 1999. Its brief is “to use art to teach peaceful coexistence to children in social crisis areas with high immigrant populations”.
HOW DISCORD WAS SOWN
On a Jewish conspiracy:
“An international lobby of influential people and organisations is trying to keep the Germans under pressure . . .”
“Some nations — mainly America, but Europeans too — are profiting from an obedient Germany . . . Those claiming to speak in the name of (Holocaust) victims have better networks than those representing other groups of survivors. Just think of the survivors of murdered Cambodians, American Indians or the Armenians. I am not the only Jew who thinks in this way . . .”
On the need for a greater role for the far Right:
“The radical parties have to speak a clear language, offer alternatives, especially now that the parties of the centre are virtually indistinguishable and lack courage or solutions . . .”
On the EU:
“The European Union has swollen to gigantic proportions — a monster that is swallowing vast sums, most of which are paid for by Germany”
“What demon is annoying you and leading you to slander?
So a book displeases you; who is forcing you to read it?"
Israel Shamir’s Parisian publisher condemned to pay F23,500 and given a three-month suspended prison sentence.
It was an absolutely staggering piece of news that came down on the wires of the Agence France-Presse at 5.34pm on the 2nd of November. We reproduce it below as is.
On Wednesday, the court in Nanterre condemned the manager of the publishing house Al Qalam to a suspended sentence of three months in prison and to a fine of F10,000 for having published Israel Shamir’s anti-Semitic work, Lâ’autre visage dâ’IsraÃ«l (The Other Face of Israel); furthermore, the sale of the book has been prohibited.
The court found Abdelila Cherifi Alaoui, the manager of the publishing house, Al Qalam, guilty of “incitement to discrimination, exhortation to hatred and violence” towards the membership of a religion.
In addition to the suspended three-month prison sentence and the fine of F10,000, Al Qalam will also have to pay F12,000 in damages and F1,500 in court expenses on behalf of the plaintiff, the International League Against Racism and Anti-Semitism (LICRA). Lastly, the publisher has 30 days to withdraw the book from all bookshops, under a F100 penalty for every copy remaining on the shelves at the end of that period.
The court justified its judgement by the fact that “the expression ‘juifs’(Jews) is always used in the plural” in the book, and they are portrayed as “dominating of world”, within an overall framework of a “third world war” currently being waged, according to the author. As well, the court finds that “the author reveals himself to be a rather old-fashioned anti-Semite, particularly where he quotes from The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.”
First published in 1905 in Russia, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, a book announcing how the Jews intended to satisfy their hatred, destroy Christian civilisation and seize world power, went round the world, selling millions of copies.
Recognised as an obvious forgery since 1921 (it had been conjured up by the Tsar’s secret service, who was opposed to any liberalisation of his rule of Russia and thus attempted to use it as proof of an alleged Zionist plot against him); it continues, however, to be widely used and presented as authentic by those wishing to justify their anti-Semitic claims. The Nazis, in particular, claimed that it was authentic. In The Other Face of Israel, Israel Shamir says on page 282: “the Protocols ought to be regarded as a political lampoon”.
Editorials note from Quibla: This is an extremely worrisome sentence. It goes against judicial precedent with regards to criticism of religions, whatever they are. It is enough to read Shamir’s book to realise that the charges of ‘anti-Semitism’ are clearly unfounded. In the Elders of Zion and the Masters of Discourse, in 2002, Shamir tries to analyse why, one century after their first publication, the Protocols of the Elders of Zion continue to have such a success throughout the world. He concludes that it is because the Zionists behave from day to day as if they were applying the programme of domination described in this book. The publisher has been the victim of this iniquitous condemnation and will appeal. This matter is far from at an end.
DAVID Hicks is a misfit in Guantanamo Bay — a "Southern redneck" who loves talking about fishing and hunting and isn't even a practising Muslim, according to a former fellow detainee.
Moazzam Begg, a British former Guantanamo prisoner who was released in January, told The Age the 30-year-old Australian was isolated in the prison because he was so unlike other inmates.
Mr Begg said Hicks was entertaining himself by writing a novel about fishing.
"He is somebody who enjoys … I don't know, rodeos and skinning kangaroos. He likes to smoke — that sort of thing," said Mr Begg, who faced no charges when he was returned to Britain and now lives in Birmingham.
"He probably has more in common with the Southern rednecks of South Alabama than he has with any of the detainees in Guantanamo.
"He doesn't speak Arabic. I don't think he is a devout Muslim; in fact, he doesn't practise Islam at all as far as I know. I certainly never saw him practise Islam."
Mr Begg said that in Guantanamo, Hicks was known as "the token white man".
"They need to have him there, even though he technically didn't do anything. He's just an adventurer, basically."
Mr Begg, 37, slipped unannounced into the public gallery on Wednesday at the British High Court as it heard Hicks' case for British citizenship. Hicks' application to be recognised as a British citizen has been rejected by the Blair Government, but his legal team hopes the High Court will accept their argument that the Government decision is without legal foundation.
Mr Begg later agreed to speak to The Age about his former fel- low detainee, who occupied a nearby cell for the last month of Mr Begg's three years at Guantanamo Bay.
He said Hicks had never expressed much optimism about the military commission process under which he will be tried, but had placed much faith in the possibility of a political resolution.
"I think his biggest blows were the release of the last British (detainees) and especially of Mamdouh Habib," Mr Begg said.
Mr Begg and Hicks apparently spent time teasing each other about their respective accents. "He has a pretty good sense of humour," Mr Begg said. "We used to discuss his bad Australian English versus real English, on which I claimed to have the monopoly.
"One of the things he's doing in there is learning how to write — I mean, write books — and he's trying to write some sort of novel, an Australian fishing novel, which is completely in tune because that's Hicks; that's right up his alley."
Mr Begg also corroborated reports that Hicks had complained of sexual abuse at the hands of his captors. "Yeah, he told me at the beginning that he was subjected to sexual abuse — that they had violated some of his private parts and offered him prostitutes," he said.
Hicks' lawyers yesterday completed their argument before the High Court and now face a short wait for a ruling from Mr Justice Collins.
Mr Begg said he believed the British Government should accept Hicks' claim for citizenship. He himself has dual citizenship of Britain and Pakistan. He was seized by the CIA in Islamabad in January 2002. He was accused of being a personal aide to Osama bin Laden, but denies it.
Supplement to Newsletter No 269
7 December 2005
There is desperation in the air as the Holocaust believers are clutching at blunt instruments to silence their critics. They have no more arguments against the Revisionists – as if they ever had!
2005 saw matters coming to a head, especially within the weeks of October-November when Germar Rudolf was extradited from the US to Germany and Ernst Zündel’s ‘third’ Holocaust trial began at Mannheim on 8 November 2005. The eerie seven day silence between David Irving’s arrest on 11 November and it breaking news on 17 December leads me to believe that perhaps it was not planned to arrest Irving near Graz, Austria, where he apparently was picked up by a routine road control. Speculations ran wild as some typically attributed baser motives to Irving – that he wanted to be in on the action that was playing out in a Mannheim court. We shall have to hear David Irving on that point when he is able once again to freely communicate.
As we once again wish to update our Newsletter mailing list, please fill in the details below and return as soon as possible. If you are able financially to assist in any way, then please as per usual to our mailing address:
Dr Fredrick Töben,
PO Box 3300
Direct electronic transfers can be made out to the business arm of Adelaide Institute:
National Australia Bank,
King William Street,
Acc No.: 560251 510 832 5513
For those who are as yet not reading the material we have on our Internet website, the following clarifies matters as to what our policy will be once Australia’s Terrorism legislation is enacted to hunt down Australia’s own dissident thinkers.
Once again, thank you for being there – and for making it possible for us to enter our 13th year of challenging those who wish to tell us what we are permitted to think and to say! While Australia still calls itself a democracy, we shall with pleasure fearlessly oblige and heroically challenge those individuals who wish to intimidate us, those who wish us to fear the Jews, those who want to switch off our brains. We shall not bend to any kind of pressure! A dissenting brain is an active brain – an active brain indicates there is someone at home in the mind – and that is what life is all about, among other things, of course! If we let ourselves be intimidated into silence, then we must hang our head in shame. So, don’t put up your hands – hands down and head up high!
Merry Christmas and a Happy New 2006.
To: Adelaide Institute, PO Box 3300, Adelaide-Norwood 5067, Australia.
Yes, please keep me on your newsletter list. I enclose ……….. as a donation to the cause.
8. Herrn Wolfgang Fröhlich - Wien, Austria.
9. Mr David Irving, Wien, Austria.
Top | Home
©-free 2005 Adelaide Institute