A personal note from Fredrick Töben
Two things seem to have occupied my mind in May more than any other matters: firstly, my approaching September 2007 court appearance that may result in my spending time on a longer RELAX within a controlled environment, and directly flowing from that my second concern, to put my house in order for such an eventuality.
During my 21 May Federal Court appearance before Justice Moore it was suggested that incarceration may result from a decision made at the conclusion of the case. I am thus ensuring that things will continue at Adelaide Institute, just as matters continued when I spent most of 1999 on a lengthy RELAX in Mannheim, Germany.
What astounded me at the third directions hearing on 21 May was that His Honour stated he does have the power to assist me in obtaining legal representation. Order 80 enables him to do just that if someone is financially embarrassed. I am now wondering why Justice Branson did not make use of that Order when I asked her to assist me in finding legal representation. Instead, Justice Branson sneered at me, suggesting that on account of my tertiary qualifications I ought to go to the Law Library and read up Practice by consulting a book – she named the authors of the book, I forget the first name she mentioned but the second name was >Branson<.
Later my floundering in the court was labeled as proof of my not being serious about mounting a defence, when in fact I knew very well that it was futile to do just that on my own. David Irving’s libel action proved that so conclusively. No-one could surpass Irving on matters of FACT but he was lost when it came to the decisive matters of LAW!
In my case it was likewise with my appearance before Commissioner McEvoy and the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission where the commissioner decimated my extensive witness list. The evidence of most Revisionists I called upon was considered to be >irrelevant< because it came from Revisionists. Documentation, such as the Hayward thesis, the Rudolf Report and Arthur Butz’s The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, was also >irrelevant< as evidence and merely proved that I was not doing serious research, i.e. that the subject of the >Holocaust-Shoah< was not up for debate, as Professor Deborah Lipstadt had stated on ABC-TV Lateline in 1994. Michael Shermer, et al, supported such view in smearing Revisionists by calling them unreasonable and unbalanced, etc.
Of course, the December 2006 International Holocaust Conference in Teheran, Iran, wiped away such superficial one-sided judgments by opening the topic to global scrutiny. The genie is now out of the bottle and even the significant 2006-7 court cases in Germany involving Germar Rudolf and Ernst Zündel, could not put it back again. And that in itself is, if one thinks in terms if win-lose, a massive victory for Revisionism. No doubt, as Professor Faurisson reminds us, for the individual Revisionist times will continue to be difficult.
After all, we are slowly dismantling a multi-billion dollar industry – and this will cause hurt to those who have lives off the >Holocaust-Shoah< industry, in particular the people living in Israel. I can even empathize with those who believed in the >Holocaust-Shoah< and went to realize their dream. But then we must remember that this dream was being realized at the expense of the Palestinian people, that Israel was built up to what it is today at the expense of a virtual genocide of the Palestinian people. There are still over 4 million Palestinian refugees, dispossessed of their homes and lands, waiting to go home to Palestine. Of course, this is nothing new for Germans who towards the end of World War Two were dispossessed of their lands, for example in Prussia where they had lived for over 700 years.
I would like to thank those individuals who have sent in much-needed financial support and each of you has received from me personally a written acknowledgment of your generosity. By the end of June I shall know if my barrister is able to progress with the matter. If he cannot do it, then I shall have to go back to court and request Justice Moore make use of Rule 80 and find a court-appointed barrister.
Further, I also traveled about and thanked supporters personally for their support, almost as if I was leaving the scene, but as I stated to Justice Moore, I am preparing myself for all eventualities. It is unwise to just coast along and then be struck down with surprise when the marching orders are given for going on that RELAX behind bars. I consider myself lucky that I do have until September to put my affairs in order. Just like in 1999 I hope that things will continue as usual without me. This has always been one of my aims in life – never to make myself indispensable in anything I do. That does not mean there is no deep commitment in whatever I do, far from it, and I don’t think I have to justify this matter because deeds speak louder than words – most of the time, anyway!
The month of May still brought with it plenty of media coverage of current issues, and always there is the ever-present >Holocaust-Shoah< that can be brought into any storyline. Gestapo and SS featured in current political squabbles, and the latest trend is wildly to speculate about >Nazis< perhaps having designed and planned something that didn’t happen, but could have happened, if things had gone differently. And so the >guilty parties< need to be found even if they have nothing to reveal to interrogators. For example, the story of Colonia Dignidad, the Post-WWII German settlement about 500 km south of Santiago, featured on SBS TV. It was a French television production that tried to emphasize how the settlement was begun by child molesters and Nazis. What was not mentioned was that twice the Simon Wiesenthal Centre visited the settlement and found no >Nazis< there. Then the Chilean police also combed through the land for mass graves that would have offered proof of General Pinochet’s >death squads< operating out of this settlement. Also what was not mentioned was the fact that during the Pinochet era a Chilean revolutionary tried to seek refuge at Colonia Dignidad, but was refused on account of the settlement trying to stay out of politics. This particular person is now in government and is set on destroying the German settlement. Ironically, the German government is happy to assist in any way because the individuals that make up the German government love to help those who persecute Germans and anything German.
So, the sickness that has befallen Germans – as Dr Tomislav Sunic so well expresses in his book: Homo Americanus – from the re-education program emanating from the Frankfurter Schule has been highly successful with the immediate post-World-War-Two generation and, perhaps, slightly less with the second generation. Fortunately, the third generation of Germans are resisting instinctively this Jewish mind-set and those Christian Zionists who support it. The German character is emerging again and cutting loose from those mental chains and breaking out of the conceptual prison that Germans were too weak to resist immediately after the war. It is thus pleasing to see how third generation Germans are slowly shaking off this madness called >Holocaust-Shoah<. Of course the gruesome impulses that constructed it, as David Brockschmidt points out in his article, are based on the horror stories found in the writings of the Babylonian Talmud and the Old and New Testament.
The world is still waiting for the Anglo-American-Zionist forces to find a pretext for the planned invasion of Iran. Should it be a similar one to that staged in March 2003 on Iraq, then it will be a catastrophe for them because the Iranians have a few million youngsters who are prepared to martyr themselves for their country. I think a full military invasion of Iran would not last any distance at all. That is how healthy and strong nationalism is in the Islamic Republic of Iran! A conventional nuclear weapons’ attack is not feasible because the whole region, including racist, Zionist Israel will also be destroyed. Hence, the only option is some limited attack on some strategic sites, and perhaps this is what the US fleet has in mind as it builds up in the Gulf. But that would be a problem as well because Iran has hundreds of little boats that could sabotage those huge floating elephants quite easily. So, what’s the final option? Send in the US dollars by the container load and cling to the disaffected and official opposition, such as the former President, Rafsanjani, whom Dr Mahmoud Ahmadinejad beat to the presidency. The president has just on three years left to get his program solidified, something the US and its allies – all-lies – are trying to sabotage in any way possible. Some rumours abound that the current president will not see the year out but I hope and pray that he will see out his elected term.
And now a few pictures
- me saying thank you to supporters – you know who you are!
Mr John Bird, Cooktown, reflects on many things while camping out – his sister is the legendary Nancy Bird-Walton, Australia’s most famous pioneer aviatrx.
Dapper dictator: Adolf Hitler flanked by his SS guards, enters a concert in the Bavarian town of Bayreuth in July 1939 Picture: Charles Turner
London: Photographs of Adolf Hitler taken by a British spy just before the outbreak of World War II have been made public for the first time.
The pictures show the Nazi leader arriving at a concert dressed in tails, receiving flowers from two girls at a music festival and getting out of a black convertible.
Charles Turner, a composer recruited as a spy, told his children that he took the photos at the Wagner Festival in Bayreuth, Germany, in 1939, after using the love of music he shared with Hitler to gain access to the dictator’s inner circle, his son David Turner said.
>>My father was invited to join Hitler’s entourage for the day, Wednesday, July 26. He was given carte blanche permission to photograph the Führer,<< Mr Turner said.
>>He regarded these photos as an extraordinary souvenier of a remarkable and fortuitous event. They are very, very important to me and my family and for all this period of time I have regarded the possession of these photos as an intimate family matter.<<
The composer was one of the last Englishmen to speak to the dictator before Nazi forces invaded Poland on September 1, 1939, his son said. Charles Turner had attended the festival annually since 1934 and was recruited as a spy four years later when war seemed imminent. He had been invited to meet Hitler by a member of the local chamber of commerce, his son said. Historians say the images bear a striking resemblance to official portraits of Hitler published in magazines at the time.
>>When I was looked at them I thought these were cast-off photographs by one of his official photographers,<< said Michael Burleigh, and expert on the Third Reich.
One image capturs a common Hitler motif: the dictator accepting a bouquet of flowers from two blonde girls. In another, dressed in white tie and tails, a stern-looking Hitler strides in front of his aides.
In others, surrounded by uniformed bodyguards, Hitler wears a fedora and a baggy double-breasted beige raincoat.
Victory for Holocaust Denier
Friday, May 18, 2007
The following was posted by a Margaret Soltan who intersperses a media report about Professor Faurisson with her personal comments […], and she invited responses. My posted comment was the fifth one – but it lasted on her website for only about five minutes, then was pulled. It is obvious why.
'An Italian university closed one of its campuses for the day Friday to prevent a planned lecture by a retired French professor who denies gas chambers were used in Nazi concentration camps. [And in so doing has given him mucho publicity in the International Herald Tribune and elsewhere. It has also robbed all of its students of a full day of study.]
Robert Faurisson, who has been convicted five times in France for denying crimes against humanity, is expected to speak at a local hotel instead. [If he'd spoken at the university a few fools would've attended; or students and others would have showed up to protest. Both outcomes would have been fine. Both would have avoided international publicity for Faurisson's cause and the denial of class time to the university's students.]
The University of Teramo cited security fears in announcing the closure of its law, political sciences and communications departments. "(There is) a climate of tension which could put in danger the safety of the students," the university said in a statement. [UD very much doubts anything other than perhaps a protest would have happened.]
The Nazi-hunting Simon Wiesenthal Center had urged the university to cancel the event.
"To welcome Faurisson [a protest would have made clear that he was not welcomed] is an embarrassment to Italian academia, offends the families of Italian martyrs who fell in fighting the scourge of fascism ... and encourages a perverse propaganda to incite a new generation to anti-Semitism and racist doctrine," the center said in a statement. [This language -- incitement, scourge -- lends Monsieur Retired Crank a wholly undeserved significance.]
Faurisson has caused outrage in France, arguing for a decade against claims that Nazi Germany systematically destroyed the Jews. He maintains that no gas chambers were used in Nazi concentration camps during World War II.' [So let him maintain that. Don't get all skeered and make a Thing out of him.]
1. Chris | 05.18.07 - 1:49 pm |
Au contraire: by allowing this event to happen, the university ran the risk to be associated with the content of his talk, or at least to acknowledge that Holocaust denial would be somehow acceptable in a public forum such as the university in question. Please bear in mind that while Europeans should not measure American situations by a European yardstick, likewise Americans should not measure a European situation with an American yardstick. In Europe, there is a different tradition regarding freedom of speech, some topics are generally agreed by society to be out of the question.
2. ud | 05.18.07 - 2:09 pm |
I'm well aware, Chris, that they shouldn't judge us by their standards, and we shouldn't judge them by ours. And I know that Europe has excellent reasons for being much more skittish about these particular matters than America.
But I hope you can see the absurdity of outcomes like these - closing a university - and the way they should prompt Europeans to begin thinking differently about free speech.
3. Chris | 05.18.07 - 2:52 pm |
Well definitely they should have just cancelled the event instead of closing down the campus. But you know, even in America, Holocaust denial is not considered sufferable. Even though it is not illegal, like in many European countries (and I am surprised that Italy is not amongst them), I could not well imagine a renowned American university giving the floor to a Holocaust denier.
4. David foster | Homepage | 05.18.07 - 3:15 pm |
Very bad judgment by the professor who invited him--the argument about "free debate and different interpretations of historical events" in this context makes about as much sense as a physics professor sponsoring a debate about whether gravity causes attraction or repulsion between objects.
Once the invitation had been issued, a good response by the university would have been to sponsor a counter-lecture by reputable historians focusing on serious historical documentation.
And Chris, when you say "In Europe, there is a different tradition regarding freedom of speech, some topics are generally agreed by society to be out of the question" it sounds as if you're asserting that anything that is somebody's social tradition must be respected. Surely you wouldn't apply this to (for example) the old Russian and East European tradition of pogroms or the old American southern tradition of racial segregation.
Indeed, perhaps the existence of traditions mitigating against free speech in some countries had something to do with enabling the political climate that led to the Holocaust.
1. This closing a university is a massive sign of how morally and intellectually bankrupt are those who believe in the Holocaust-Shoah and who fear objective scrutiny of their belief, which they are passing off as an historical fact.
2. The Holocaust-Shoah has no reality in space and time, only in memory.
3. Future generations will be astounded by the gullibility of those who hunt down the courageous individuals that refuse to believe in the Holocaust-Shoah story.
4. It is as if the Holocaust-Shoah is some kind of new religion. How else can it be explained that blasphemy laws are specifically designed to give legal protection to the Holocaust-Shoah narrative.
5. Thanks to the courageous Iranian President Dr Mahmoud Ahmadinejad - who did not bend to Jewish pressure and cancel the December 2006 Teheran Holocaust Conference - that the topic is now up for debate.
6. Perhaps we should be reminded that those who are dismantling the Holocaust-Shoah are actually hurting millions of individuals who live off that Holocaust-Shoah industry.
7. Then also it must be remembered that a dismantling of the Holocaust-Shoah industry will liberate specifically Germans who have been defamed for over 60 years for a crime they did not commit.
- the comment lasted for just a few minutes before it was pulled
Jerusalem - An Israeli court on Monday convicted former nuclear technician Mordechai Vanunu, who in 2004 completed a prison term for spilling military secrets, of violating the terns of his release by speaking to foreign media.
The verdict could mean fresh jail time for Vanunu and hurt his fight to leave Israel in the face of a travel ban that the government, citing security concerns, has renewed annually.
Vanunu was sentenced to 18 years behind bars in 1986 after giving an unauthorised interview to a British newspaper about his work at Israel's Dimona reactor. The disclosures all but blew away the secrecy around an assumed Israeli atomic arsenal.
Since his release Vanunu has campaigned for the Jewish state to be disarmed while denying Israeli officials' charges that he has more secrets that he could divulge if allowed to emigrate.
"All that I want is to be free, to leave the country," Vanunu, 52, told reporters at Jerusalem Magistrate's Court.
The court found him guilty of giving a slew of interviews to international media outlets over the past three years, defying a government order on him to limit contacts with foreigners.
A sentencing hearing was set for May 18. Justice Ministry sources said prosecutors could seek to jail Vanunu anew. Vanunu's lawyer said his client would likely appeal the ruling.
"We should be clear here that Vanunu was convicted for the very act of speaking to non-Israelis, rather than the content of those conversations," attorney Michel Sfard said. "We do not consider this appropriate for a democracy in the 21st century."
Sfard said he had been told by Israel's Interior Ministry that the travel ban on Vanunu had been extended by another year, to April 2008, when it will again come up for review.
"I plan to meet with the interior minister on this issue, which we hope will be reconsidered," Sfard said.
Israel neither confirms nor denies having the Middle East's only atomic weapons under a policy of "strategic ambiguity". The monopoly has long aggrieved Arabs and Iran, which is now developing its own nuclear programme - for energy, it says.
Vanunu was convicted on Monday of telling US, British, Australian and French media that Israel assembled hydrogen and neutron bombs at the Dimona reactor and was annually producing 40 kilos (88 lb) of plutonium, enough to make 10 atom bombs. Those statements appeared to be a retread of Vanunu's 1986 interview with Britain's Sunday Times, for which he was jailed as a traitor.
Vanunu, a Jewish convert to Christianity, argues that by refusing international inspections Israel inflames regional tensions and risk a "second Holocaust". He has also said that the Jewish state has no right to exist. - Reuters
Published on the Web by IOL on 2007-04-30 09:59:23
© Independent Online 2005. All rights reserved. IOL publishes this article in good faith but is not liable for any loss or damage caused by reliance on the information it contains.
The very idea of denying the Holocaust is so ludicrous that any attempt at writing a serious play on the subject would seem futile. Yet Peter Sagal’s “Denial,” at the Metropolitan Playhouse, is an engrossing legal drama that examines the moral and ethical dilemmas inherent in the First Amendment. Bernard Cooper is a mild-mannered engineering professor who has written a book and published a newsletter saying that the Holocaust was a fiction perpetrated by Henry Morgenthau Jr. and other Jews to malign der Führer and draw international sympathy.
A sort of milquetoast neo-Nazi himself, Cooper is a cult hero to skinheads whose idea of fun is to beat up Jews. When the F.B.I. raids his house, seizes his mailing lists and charges him with inciting violence, Cooper appeals to the American Civil Liberties Union, which in turn sends him to Abigail Gersten.
Gersten, a Jewish lawyer whose belief in the First Amendment overcomes her personal revulsion for Cooper, takes the case. “A witch hunt is a witch hunt, even if he happens to be a witch,” she reasons. The prosecutor is a zealous young Jew fresh out of law school who wears a skullcap and tries to shame Gersten into refusing to represent Cooper.
At the heart of the conflict is the question of how much sufferance a free society should give its crackpots to maintain its liberties. And at what point does the threat of violence to citizens validate curtailing an individual’s rights?
Mr. Sagal uses this platform to examine the issue of Holocaust denial. In fairness, he lets Cooper present his argument and even introduces a plot twist that exposes a false account of a death at Auschwitz that had appeared in a book by a famous survivor of the camp. Cooper posits that one lie makes the whole account of Holocaust horrors suspect.
For the most part, Mr. Sagal avoids sermonizing, although a final scene tacked on as a sort of redemptive coda for Gersten is ill advised. He also employs some dubious legal practices to bring the Holocaust denier and survivor face to face in the lawyer’s office.
But the characters are well drawn, the arguments balanced, and the central issues couldn’t be more timely.
Under Alex Roe’s smooth direction, the six actors give able performances. As Gersten, Suzanne Toren is thoroughly convincing as a woman struggling to reconcile conflicting beliefs. As Cooper, H. Clark Kee is chillingly calculating. And John Tobias delivers an excellent turn at the end as Nathan, the Auschwitz victim who actually survived.
“Denial” continues through May 13 at the Metropolitan Playhouse, 220 East Fourth Street, East Village; (212) 995-5302.
Source: Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company
Letter in Response:
The Holocaust Denied, and the Denier Defended – Dr Fredrick Töben, Australia, 5/2/2007 18:42
The reviewer has a problem by implying that anyone who refuses to believe in the Holocaust myth is somewhat deranged.
However in the penultimate sentence of his review he states what it is all about:
>>As Gersten, Suzanne Toren is thoroughly convincing as a woman struggling to reconcile conflicting beliefs<<
Revisionists have always insisted that the claims made by Holocaust believers cannot be confirmed through physical/scientific research, that the Holocaust is in fact one big lie, or with Professor Arthur Butz, it is the hoax of the 20th century. In other words, the Holocaust has no reality in space and time, only in memory, and that memory is perfect.
Fredrick Töben email@example.com
An HIV-positive man convicted for having unprotected sex with three women has lost an appeal, after a South Australian judge rejected defence claims the virus does not exist.
Andre Chad Parenzee, 36, was convicted on three counts of endangering life last January after one of the women, a mother of two, became infected with HIV.
Defence lawyers launched an appeal calling two Perth medical researchers – Eleni Papadopulos-Eleopulos and Dr Valendar Turner – who testified in the South Australian Court of Appeal that the virus did not exist and could not be sexually transmitted.
The two AIDS-dissidents are members of the Perth Group, founded by Ms Papadopulos-Eleopulos, that believes HIV is not the cause of AIDS.
Justice John Sulan today dismissed the witnesses' testimony, saying the pair lacked credibility and were advocates for a cause rather than independent experts. He said the evidence that HIV existed was compelling and he rejected the application for a re-trial. "I am satisfied that no jury would conclude that there is any doubt that the virus HIV exists," he said in his judgment. "I consider no jury would be left in any doubt that HIV is the cause of AIDS or that it is sexually transmissible."
Justice Sulan said Ms Papadopoulos-Eleopulos, a physicist who works at the Royal Perth Hospital, relied upon opinions of others, which she often took out of context and misinterpreted. He said claims that HIV testing methods were flawed were unfounded and the virus had been thoroughly studied by international experts.
Parenzee's application for leave to appeal his conviction was the first time that the existence of HIV/AIDS had been tested in an Australian court.
The hearing spanned more than a year with controversy lining much of the witness testimony.
Under earlier cross-examination, Ms Papadopulos-Eleopulos was asked by the prosecution if she would have unprotected vaginal sex with a HIV-positive man. "Any time," she replied. In other testimony, Ms Papadopulos-Eleopulos declared that Africa did not have an AIDS epidemic because HIV did not exist and efforts to curb the spread of the virus were merely political stunts.
To counter the claims, the prosecution called eight HIV experts including AIDS research pioneer Professor Robert Gallo. Prof Gallo, who was one of the scientists who discovered AIDS in the early 1980s and linked HIV as the cause of the disease, testified via video-link from his home in Bethesda, Massachusetts.
He told the court the Perth Group members was misguided, inappropriate and delusional.
Parenzee was remanded in custody to be sentenced at a later date.
All our Jewish friends tell us Judeo-Christianity is the Judeasising of Christianity, Judaism for non-Jews and a word construct created by the Christian clergy who don’t want to be Christian anymore. This is the betrayal of the Christian Messiah, Jesus Christ.
I recall my 1967 discussion with historical scholar, Moise Teitelboim, from the Jerusalem Jewish quarter Mea Sharim. He was a follower of the Rebbe Menachim Mendel Schneerson, the leader of the lubavitscher movement. It links up with a relative of my wife, Kolja Seebergs, the first secretary of the Latvian Embassy, Warsaw, Poland, at the beginning of World War Two, who issued transit visas for Schneerson and his group to leave Warsaw via Germany to Sweden, and from there to New York where he died a few years ago. The Australian connection with this group is embodied in the Rabbis Gutnick.
The German transit visas were issued to the Schneerson group by specific orders of Adolf Hitler, as required by the US Ambassador saying: >>Let my people go<<. Schneerson and his group were accompanied on the trip from Warsaw to Berlin and on to Stockholm by the Jewish German Colonel, Bloch, serving in the Wehrmacht, like the other 150,000 Jews serving in the Reich’s defence force, in scientific research and civilian administrations.
Here is my recollection of what transpired between Teitelboim and myself:
Teitelboim: >>Because if we Jews would be Judeo-Christians, seeing in Christianity the fulfillment of Judaism, we would not be Jews anymore. If we Jews would like the Christians so much, we would not have forced Pontius Pilate to crucify your Messiah. No, we Jews are quite the opposite to you Christians. We don’t love our enemies, we kill them. For us it’s always an eye-for- an-eye, a tooth-for-a-tooth, until there are no more eyes and teeth left. That’s why a lot of our Rabbis, like Baruch Goldstein, for example, are one-eyed if it comes to Gentiles, especially Christians and Muslims. But never mind, the one-eyed are always king of the blind. We will defend our rights >to run the show< to the last Christian, the last Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, and so on, until the whole world becomes Jewish.<<
Brockschmidt: >>Moise, we know you are the Chosen People, but is that what your God chose you for? If this is the case, then being chosen is not a privilege but a curse.<<
Teitelboim: >>That is exactly right, my friend, and I would like to go a big step further – from the dance around the golden calf at the foot of Mount Sinai to Adolf Hitler.<<
Brockschmidt: >>What do you mean by that?<<
Teitelboim: >>I mean that Hitler was sent by God to punish us because we have, and still do, break and violate our own religious laws.
I was lost for words. Teitelboim became angry and continued:
>>What do you Christians and/or Judeo-Christians want? You want to be goodies, goodies with everyone? Even with the ones who hate you? Why aren’t you happy with who you are and what you’ve got? After all, your Messiah could do all these miracles, make dead men walking, he himself walked on water in the winter, of course, when the Lake Tiberias was frozen. He made blind men see again. When he comes back to you for the second time to punish you for trying to copy us, trying to become usurers and speculators like us, we would like to rent him out from you for a while to make our blind men and women see the light again. He owes us, because originally he was one of our boys, anyway. But two thousand years ago he jumped ship and started his own hallelujah business. Quite successfully, actually. You are approximately one billion today and we are fewer than 15 million.
I know he was the seducer and destroyer of Israel as our Holy Book the Babylonian Talmud said, but somehow I like this fellow, not because of all his miracles but because he turned water into wine. I can see here a terrific business opportunity. Just imagine, my friend, Jesus and Teitelboim, Ltd, we would become the biggest wine producers and merchants in the world. I know, I know, this is not the reason for his second coming, but business is business, he will understand. Now you Judeo-Christians we will beat you at your own game. Victory has many fathers and defeat is not an option. Do you understand now what I am saying? Don’t try to kiss our feet continuously, stand up, show flag, be counted, and fight for your own religion. Neither your or our lord is with the half-hearted.<<
In order to clarify and confirm what Moise Teitelboim told me here, I would like to introduce some quotations from the Babylonian Talmud, the English Soncino edition of 1935 and published in London.
The Talmud is also known as The Tradition of the Elders.
>>Jesus is in hell, boiling in hot semen and Christians are in hell boiling in hot excrement<< Gittin, 57a.
>>Jesus committed bestiality with his ass.<< Sanhedrin, 105a.
>>Jesus burned by pouring hot lead down his throat.<< Sanhedrin, 52a.
>>Jesus’ resurrection cursed.<< Sanhedrin, 106a.
>>The best among the Gentiles deserves to be killed.<< Rabbi Simon ben Johai, in: Abhodah Zarah, 26b, and in Zohar, 1.25a.
>>A non Jew who studies the Torah and/or Talmud deserves death. For Moses commanded us a law for an inheritance, it is our inheritance, not theirs.<< Sanhedrin,59a.
>>Happy is he whose children are males and woe to him whose children are females.<< Sanhedrin, 100b.
We could carry on with hundreds of such quotes, some of them are unfit to print and raise the question if these prophets and rabbis, who made these statements, were of sound mind.
Last but not least, here is the Jewish version of the Kama Sutra:
>>The Rabbis taught: On coming from a privy (toilet), a man should not have sexual intercourse till he has waited long enough to walk half a mile because the demon of the privy is with him for that time. If he does, his children will be epileptic. The Rabbi taught: If a man has sexual intercourse standing, he will be liable to convulsions if sitting to spasms, if she is above and he below, he will be subject to diarrhea.<< Gittin, 70a.
Let me point out what Judeo-Christianity really means to Jews:
>>The great ideal of Judaism that the whole world shall be imbued with Jewish teachings, and that in a universal brotherhood of nations, a greater Judaism in fact – all the separate racists and religions shall disappear.<<
The Jewish World, February 9, 1883.
>>The Jew is not satisfied with a de-Christianising, he Judasizes, he destroys Catholic or Protestant faith, he provokes indifference but he imposes his idea of the world, of morals, and of life upon those whose faith he ruins, he works at his age-old task, the annihilation of the religion of Christ.<<
Bernard Lazare, L’Antisemitisme, p 350.
>>I’m devoting my lecture in this seminar to a discussion of the possibility that we are now entering the Jewish century, a time when the spirit of the community, the non-ideological blend of the emotional and rational and the resistance to categories and form will emerge through the forces of anti-nationalism to provide us with a new kind of society. I call this process the Judaisation of Christianity because Christianity will be the vehicle through which this society will become Jewish.<<
Rabbi Martin Siegel, New York Magazine, January 18, 1972, p32
>>We are living in a highly organized state of socialism. The state is all, the individual is of importance only as he contributes to the welfare of the state. His property is only his as the state does not need it. He must hold his life and his possessions at the call of the state.<<
Bernard M Baruch, The Knickerbocker Press, Albany, New York, August 8, 1918.
>>I believe that the active Jews of today have a tendency to think that the Christians have organized and set up and run the world of injustice, unfairness, cruelty, and misery. I’m not taking any part of this, but I have heard it expressed, and I believe they feel it that way. Jews have lived for the past 2000 years and developed in a Christian world. They are part of that Christian world, even when they suffer from it or be in opposition with it, and they cannot dissociate themselves from this Christian world and for what it has done. And I think that the Jews are bumptious enough to think that perhaps some form of Jewish solution to the problems of the world could be found, which would be better, which would be an improvement. It is up to them to find a Jewish answer to the problems of the world, the problems of today.<<
Baron Guy de Rothschild, NBC-TV The Remnant, August 18, 1974.
>>The Jews might have had Uganda, Madagascar, and other places for the establishment of a Jewish fatherland, but they wanted absolutely nothing except Palestine: not because the Dead Sea water by evaporation can produce 5 trillion dollars of metalloids and powdered metals, not because the sub-soil of Palestine contains twenty times more petroleum than all the combined reserves of the two Americas, but Palestine is at the cross-roads of Europe, Asia and Africa, because Palestine constitutes the veritable center of world political power, the strategic center for world control.<<
Nahum Goldman, President World Jewish Congress, in: The Jewish Paradox.
>>Our fathers reached the frontiers, which were recognized in the Palestine partition plan. Our generation reached the frontiers of 1949. Now the Six Day War generation has managed to reach Suez, Jordan and the Golan Heights. This is not the end. After the present cease-fire lines there will be new ones. They will extend beyond the Jordan, perhaps to Lebanon, and perhaps to central Syria as well.<<
General Moshe Dayan, 1967.
>>I know I don’t have to say this, but in bringing everybody under the Zionist banner we never forget that our goals are the safety and security of the state of Israel foremost. Our goal will be realized in Yiddishkeit, in a Jewish life being lived every place in the world and our goals will have to be realized, not merely by what we impel others to do. And here in this country it means frequently working through the umbrella of the president’s conference (of Jewish organizations) or it might be working in unison with other groups that feel as we do. But that, too, is part of what we think Zionism means and what our challenge is.<<
Rabbi Israel Miller, The American Jewish Examiner, March 5, 1970, p14.
>>The world Zionist movement is big business. In the first two decades after Israel’s precarious birth in 1948 it channeled an estimated four billion dollars in donations into the country. Following the 1967 Arab-Israeli war, the Zionist raised another $730 million in just two years. This year, 1970, the movement is seeking 500 million dollars. Gottlieb Hammar, chief Zionist money raiser, said: >When the blood flows, the money flows<.<<
Lawrence Mosher, National Observer, May 18, 1970.
>>The modern socialist movement is in great part the work of the Jews, who impress on it the mark of their brains, it was they who took a prepondering part in the directing of the first socialist republic … the present world socialism forms the first step of the accomplishment of Mosaism, the start of the realization of the future state of the world announced by our prophets. It is not til, there shall be a League of Nations, it is not till its allied armies shall be employed in an effective manner for the protection of the feeble that we can hope that the Jews will be able to develop, without impediment in Palestine, their national state, and equally it is only a League of Nations penetrated with a socialist spirit that will render possible for us the enjoyment of our international necessities, as well as our national ones.<<
Dr Alfred Nossig, Integrales Judentum. Vienna, Berlin, New York, 1922.
Let’s now consider hate in religion.
Whenever historians and/or religious leaders talk about the three major religions who have their origin in the Middle East – Judaism, Christianity, Islam – they talk at the same time about Judeo-Christian history and culture, but they do not mention Islam.
This always puzzles me because the three big monotheistic religions have the same founding fathers:
Moshe – Moses – Mussah;
Avreham – Abraham – Ibrahim;
Add to that Jesus (pbuh), the Christian-God-Prophet and Mohammed (pbuh) as the prophet and founder of Islam, the foundation of these three religions are complete.
The hate in these religions not only against other religions like Hinduism, Buddhism, Shintoism, or any other non Middle Eastern religion. What I mean is the hate from within, the hate nurtured by the children of Abraham against each other. They talk about pax -peace, shalom-peace, salam-peace to one other, but at the same time they have for centuries killed one another in the most brutal and vicious ways – and it is still on-going.
What has gone wrong here? They worship the same God the Jews call Elohim, the Christians Yehova, and the Muslims Allah.
In order to find answers to this pressing problem we have to read their Holy Books.
Let’s start with the oldest Middle Eastern monotheistic religion, Judaism. The main works are Torah comprising the five books of Moses, the Babylonian Talmud, the Kabbalah, the Zohar, and other Jewish mystic teachings.
The anti-Gentile hate in Torah and Talmud alone, not only directed against Christians and Muslims but Gentiles in general, makes you wonder if the prophets and rabbis, who preached and wrote this religious hate had any love left for those who did not share their belief system.
The Christians have a trump card here, which is the teachings of Jesus, especially the teachings on the mount. Nevertheless there are parts in the Christian Bible, in the New Testament, which are quite nasty towards the Jews, defaming their tribal God, Elohim, as the father of lies from the beginning of time, and telling the world that the Jewish religious ruling class led by their head priest, Caiaphs, are all the children of the Devil.
Judas, until a few years ago, was the bad fellow because he betrayed his master, Jesus, to the Romans. Caiaphs and his lot paid him 30 shekls for his betrayal and forced Pontias Pilat to crucify Jesus. Caiaphs said:
>>It is better one man dies than the whole nation will suffer.<<
I think this is hypocritical and nonsense because the only ones that would suffer and lose power would be the scribes and the Jewish ruling class. The majority of ordinary Jews were sympathetic to Jesus’ teachings.
As the story goes, Judas hanged himself. But now the story is changing since the discovery of the Gospel of Judah. Here Jesus said to Judah: >>You are my favourite disciple, you will have your righteous place in heaven, but the world will hate and despise you.<<
So Judas turns from the bad fellow into the good fellow because he helped Jesus to fulfill his mission on earth, which was to die for mankind’s sins so we could live.
This is pure religious revisionism, which makes you think, was Jesus one of us – a Revisionist?
So, let’s round off our religious historical excursion with Islam, the youngest in this Middle Eastern religious trilogy. The Holy Book of Islam is the Koran and its supplements the Haddids, and other Islamic religious writings.
In Islam we have to differentiate between the Mecca and the Medina versions of the Koran. The former is the earlier version of the teachings of the Prophet Mohammad, and the Medina version contains the later teachings.
The Koran makes it clear that Jews and Christians are people of the Book and as such must be respected. For Muslims Jesus was a prophet of God not son of God. His mother, Mary-Miriam, and his father, Joseph-Yussif, are mentioned in the Koran. But at the end of the Prophet’s life, who died in Medina and is buried there, Mohammed said: >>Kill the Infidel<<, the non-believers in Islam. Some of his last sayings before he died were: >>Jews and Christians are like dogs and swine and must all be killed. Here we see the circle of hate closing – from the Talmudic anti-Gentile hate >>The best of the Christians should be killed<< to the Christians calling the Jewish scribes and Pharisees >>Children of the Devil<< to the Muslim invocation >>Jews and Christians are like dogs and swine, they must all be killed<<.
>>Pax – Shalom – Salam<<? Not much love lost here in this Holy Family. For the sake of peace and real brotherhood of man I suggest that Islamic Christian and Jewish Scholars detox their Holy Books so humanity can live in peace and harmony together. If religion is still needed by some, then I suggest you look at Buddhism because that religion does not contain the word >HATE<.
Fredrick Töben comments: The phenomenon of >anti-Semitism< therefore cannot be understood because it relies on conceptual fraud.
Further, if Talmud thought structures are not taken into consideration any discussion about it remains deceptive discourse. In this way the myth of perpetual victimhood remains with those Jews who wish to lay the blame for >antisemitism< at the feet of those who consider it their civic duty to express disgust at certain forms of behaviour that are aired in the world media. Anyone who seeks to cleanse >antisemitism< from the world must begin by focusing on and eliminating the hatred contained in Talmud against the non-Jewish world.
If this is not done, then the hunt for >antisemites< is just another persecution of those who refuse to bend to Jewish power.
Top | Home
©-free 2007 Adelaide Institute