March 2009 No 436
Horst Mahler’s Evidentiary Motion I
In My Show Trial for Insult and Incitement of the Masses
Before Landshut District Court: Case No. 2 Ds 2 Js 36110/07
Translated from the German by J M Damon – 2 February 2009
I submit herewith a copy of the news magazine Der Spiegel, No. 4, dated 19 January 2009, in conjunction with the following evidentiary motions:
1. That the report contained on pages 32 and 33, “A Problem for the Pope” be read into the documentary evidence; and
2. That Bishop Williamson of the Fraternitas Sacerdotalis Sancti Pii X – Pious Brotherhood – be called as witness.
His official address can be obtained from the Conference of German Bishops.
The evidence will show that the news magazine Der Spiegel reported that the witness stated in a televised interview that he does not believe six million Jews were gassed in homicidal gas chambers during World War II, and further that no such homicidal gas chambers ever existed.
The evidence will also show that the witness supports the Revisionist opinion that between two hundred thousand and three hundred thousand Jews perished in National Socialist concentration camps, but none in homicidal gas chambers.
The witness will confirm that he made these statements and that he arrived at his conclusions after long and careful consideration of revisionist historical works, in particular Germar Rudolf’s Lectures on the Holocaust and Fred Leuchters expert reports.
The witness will also confirm that his statements and conclusions are not just his private opinion.
He made the statements in a diplomatic context, namely the effort to canonize Pope Pious XII, which the Pious Brethren support.
Canonization requires that Pope Pious XII be cleared of false accusations associated with atrocity propaganda of World War II.
This Allied propaganda alleges that the Germans murdered millions of Jews in homicidal gas chambers and rendered their corpses into soap, leather, etc.
The opponents of canonization claim that this propaganda is true and that Pope Pious XII was aware of the alleged atrocities but kept quiet about them.
My Reason for Submitting This Motion
The facts provided by the witness will put an end to attempts by the “Holocaust” Inquisition to depict opponents of the “Holocaust” thesis as a “small circle of political extremists acting out of ignorance, incorrigibility or spite to deny that millions of Jews were murdered in concentration camps under the National Socialist government during World War II.”
I submit this motion in conformity with the Alsberg/Nüse/Meyer handbook Der Beweisantrag im Strafprozeß – The Evidentiary Motion in the Criminal Trial, 5th Edition, Munich, 1983.
Landshut, 22 January 2009
Evidentiary Motion II
In My Show Trial for Insult and “Incitement of the Masses” Before Landshut District Court
Case No. 2 Ds 2 Js 36110/07
I submit herewith a computerized version of the book by Hans Meiser, Das Tribunal – Der größte Justizskandal der Weltgeschichte – The Tribunal - Greatest Judicial Scandal In World History, Grabert Verlag, Tübingen 2005, ISBN 3-87847-218-8); and I hereby move:
1. That the Court take cognizance of the contents of this book through Selbstleseverfahren - in which members of the Court read the evidence individually.
2. That an expert witness for contemporary history be called.
The taking of evidence for Motion 1 will create the basis for convincing the Court that this book presents factual historical information regarding the background and development of the socalled International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg.
To guide and assist the Court, the expert witness will testify that the facts presented in the book correspond to the contemporary state of research and knowledge in this field and should therefore be included in the court’s deliberations, in accordance with authentic contemporary historiography.
Reason for Submission
The unproven allegations of the International Military Tribunal serve in public consciousness as the principal foundation of the assumed “Manifest Obviousness” of “Holocaust.”
The author of the book, Hans Meiser, demonstrates that the socalled International Military Triubunal was not conducted by a lawful and authentic Court in pursuit of truth and justice.
Instead, it was a propagandistic production staged by the victors of World War II that was designed to cover the hangings of leaders of the German Reich.
Landshut, 22 January 2009
Evidentiary Motion III
In My Show Trial for Insult and Incitement of the Masses Before Landshut District Court
Case No. 2 Ds 2 Js 36110/07
Motion to Create An Adequate Capacity for Perception and Understanding
In order to fulfill our responsibility to enlighten and educate the public according to Section 244 Paragraph 2 of the Penal Code, I hereby submit 6 copies each of two of my lectures on DVDs, namely:
a. the lecture “World Resurrection” and
b. the lecture “On the Heels of the Satanic Lie..”
I further move that the media be made aware of Section 249 Paragraph 2 of the Penal Code. [This section concerns robbery]
My Reason for Submitting This Motion
The determination of truth, which is the true goal and purpose of this trial, assumes an adequate capacity to perceive and understand the issues that have occasioned it.
Since the breakthrough investigations by the German philosopher Emmanuel Kant, mankind has known that intellectual perception is possible only through a priori processes, that is, processes that are determined by our cumulative experience.
This knowledge or realization explains that perception and understanding of the world and major events are possible only through interactions of conceptual complexes that have been commonly known as ’Weltanschauung’ – world view since Kant’s day.
Every court trial proceeds from the Weltanschauung that prevails in the collective consciousness.
However, the charges against me concern actions that arise from a deviating or dissenting Weltanschauung.
They significantly contradict and conflict with conventional and prevailing Weltanschauungen that, as unreflecting habits of thought, alienate the Court’s conceptions of truth and justice from my own.
Any judgment of a dissident Weltanschauung that is oriented toward truth and justice assumes knowledge and familiarity with the premises of the dissident world view, since the determination of motive is a central task of criminal justice.
In those cases having to do with acts whose motivations are rooted in a Weltanschauung that deviates from the conventional, it is necessary to examine the specific characteristics of the defense arguments in order to build the bridge of comprehension that is required to make possible an understanding of the opposing viewpoints.
The dissident must bear the burden of accomodation and communication whereas the Court, in view of Article 103 Paragraph 1 of Basic Law, is obligated to demonstrate unhampered willingness to take the dissident opinions into consideration.
The videos of my lectures that are included in my evidentiary motion provide concise and easily understood insight into the essentials of my world view.
The central focus of the video “Weltauferstehung” – World Awakening is the contemporary event known as “global financial crisis” that has intruded into universal consciousness.
In the present crisis, the central significance of the collapse of the “Holocaust” complex appears in a new form, a form that is in the truest sense of the word “lifesaving” for world revival and economic recovery.
The role of Jewish financiers in this crisis is entirely clear and free of any kind of moral judgment, as a function and expression of systemic compulsions.
In this video, I clearly indicate the path to reconciliation, demonstrating that in the final phase of liberal capitalism there is a compulsion to deceive that is a function of its instinct for self-preservation.
If this liberalist economic instinct for self-preservation is not overcome through the abolition of interest slavery – National Socialism, mankind will be hurled into a catastrophe such as it has never seen.
Bernd Striegel’s book Über das Geld – Gechichte und Zukunft des Wirtschaftens – About Money – the History and Future of Economic Life, published by Verlag Ulmer Manuskripte 2004, makes clear, within the framework of Hegelian thought, that the present crisis is in fact a crisis of confidence in money.
The liberalist bank-dominated monetary system has again destroyed money as such and thereby destroyed Jewish power as well.
The place of Jewish money-power must inevitably be taken by the new Order of Money that has been developed by National Socialism under the banner of the abolition of interest slavery. – It is not as though the present crisis were entirely new.
It is in many respects similar to the crisis that existed 85 years ago, which was described in the book Kampf gegen die Hochfinance – The Struggle Against Globalism, published by Reichstag Member Gottfried Feder in 1933.
It is extremely important to take this lecture into consideration, since it can be accurately comprehended even within the conventional and unreflecting way of thinking.
For a deeper understanding of these issues, while providing an introduction into the religious and philosophical significance of the present global crisis, I am appending my discussion of Bernd Striegel’s book to this evidentiary motion.
The lecture “On the Heels of the Satanic Lie” provides religious and philosophical insight into contemporary events.
In the Hegelian manner it presents world history as the progression of God through the world to Himself and presents the struggle of the two opposing principles, the Jewish and German national spirits, as well as their ultimate reconciliation.
I depict the revolt against “Holocaust” tyranny as the struggle for survival of the German nation, and I present this survival struggle in its various aspects.
Our national struggle for survival has occasioned the present trial, which arose from an invitation to debate that Michel Friedman sent to me followed by his legal complaint.
Landshut, 22 Januar 2009.
From: Horst Mahler - firstname.lastname@example.org
Sent: Saturday, 7 February 2009 11:07 AM
Subject: [Voelkische Reichsbewegung] SYLVIA STOLZ - BGH Urteil analysiert
Die Entscheidung des Bundesgerichtshofes im Falle Sylvia Stolz enthält einen Freispruch vom Vorwurf der Beihilfe zum Verstoß gegen ein Berufsverbot, die Einstellung in einem gleichgelagerten Fall und eine substantielle Korrektur bezüglich der Anzahl vermeintlich selbständiger Taten.
Eine Untersuchung der Entscheidungsgründe ergibt rein rechnerisch eine Reduzierung der verhängten Freiheitsstrafe von 42 auf 23 Monate. Darauf ist die erlittene Untersuchungshaft von 13 Monaten anzurechnen. Bleibt eine fiktive Reststrafe von 10 Monaten. Diese Straferwartung dürfte kaum ausreichen für die Aufrechterhaltung des mit Fluchtgefahr begründeten Haftbefehls.
Sylvias Großmutter (95 J.) liegt im Koma. Sie hat die letzte Ölung erhalten. Dieser Umstand macht die Entscheidung über die Untersuchungshaft besonders eilbedürftig. Am kommenden Montag wird Sylvias Verteidiger einen Haftentlassungsantrag stellen. Wir können hoffen, daß Sylvia im Lauf der kommenden Woche ihre Bewegungsfreiheit wieder erhält.
Der Schuldspruch des Landgerichts Mannheim vom 14. Januar 2008 lautete:
"Die Angeklagte Sylvia Stolz aus München hat sich wie folgt schuldig gemacht:
- der Volksverhetzung in 4 Fällen, davon in einem Fall tateinheitlich mit versuchter Nötigung, Beleidigung, versuchter Strafvereitelung und Verunglimpfung des Staates und seiner Symbole sowie in einem weiteren Fall tateinheitlich mit Beleidigung, versuchter Strafvereitelung und Nötigung
- der Beihilfe zum Verstoß gegen das Berufsverbot in zwei Fällen,
- der Beleidigung,
- der Nötigung in Tateinheit mit versuchter Strafvereitelung.
Sie wird deshalb zu der Gesamtfreiheitsstrafe von 3 Jahren und 6 Monaten verurteilt."
Der BGH hat den Schuldspruch dahingehend geändert, daß Sylvia Stolz der Volksverhetzung in zwei Fällen, der Beleidigung sowie der versuchten Strafvereitelung in Tateinheit mit Volksverhetzung in zwei Fällen, Nötigung, Verunglimpfung des Staates und seiner Symbole und Beleidigung in zwei Fällen schuldig ist.
Das Urteil des Landgerichts Mannheim ist bezüglich des nicht durch Freispruch bzw. Einstellung erledigten Teils unter Aufrechterhaltung der tatsächlichen Feststellungen im gesamten Strafausspruch aufgehoben worden, "um dem neuen Tatrichter die Gelegenheit zu geben, über die Strafzumessung insgesamt neu und damit einheitlich zu entscheiden."
Da das Landgericht die Vielzahl der vermeintlich selbständigen Taten strafschärfend berücksichtigt hatte und diese Vielfachheit teilweise entfällt, ist mit einer reduzierten Gesamtstrafe unter 23 Monaten zu rechnen.
Ein Albtraum: Steffen Mack zum Prozess gegen die rechtsradikale Anwältin Sylvia Stolz
Mannheimer Morgen 10. Februar 2009
Jetzt geht der Albtraum wieder los. Das Mannheimer Landgericht muss sich erneut mit Sylvia Stolz herumplagen. Jener Anwältin, die erst das Verfahren gegen Holocaust-Leugner Ernst Zündel, dann das gegen sie selbst sabotierte, auf unerträgliche Weise menschenverachtende, die Naziverbrechen völlig verharmlosende Hetze verbreitete. Der "Heil Hitler"-Ruf, mit dem sie ihr Urteil quittierte, sollte allen Prozessbeteiligten in gruseliger Erinnerung sein.
Leider hat der Bundesgerichtshof nun Stolz von einigen eher marginalen Tatvorwürfen freigesprochen. Sie kann nun auf eine etwas mildere Strafe als die verhängten dreieinhalb Jahre hoffen. Ums Gefängnis dürfte sie aber nicht herumkommen. Dabei wäre sie in einer Nervenheilanstalt vielleicht besser aufgehoben.
Dies zeigt erneut, dass die Justiz sich in der Auseinandersetzung mit braunen Wirrköpfen oft selbst keinen Gefallen tut. Aber weder darf das dreiste Agieren der Sylvia Stolz straflos bleiben, noch kann man sie ihres Anspruchs auf ein rechtsstaatliches Verfahren berauben. Wenn die Gerichte - wie jetzt der BGH - so oder so kein Auge zudrücken, ist das schon richtig. Aber im Ergebnis äußerst bedauerlich.
Steffen Mack und Kommentar ueber Sylvia Stolz Prozess
Der Mack hat eine macke - er ist derjenige, der eine Nervenanstalt benoetigt.
Bitte, warum die grosse Angst sich mit den Tatsachen die Stolz erwaehnt auseinanderzusetzen?
Wissen Sie dass Deutschland noch keinen Friedensvertrag hat?
Wissen Sie dass die Holocaust-Shoah Sache eine Verknechtung des deutschen Volkes ist?
Es ist nie bewiesen worden, dass 6 million Juden getoetet wurden; es existiert kein staatlicher Befehl zur Ausrottung Europaeischer Juden; keine Gaskammern wurden jemals verwendet als Toetungsstaette. Zeige mir eine Gaskammer wo Menschen vergast wurden? Bis Heute ist es nicht geschehen.
Seien Sie mutig und weisen Sie diese Sachen zurueck ohne Beweis. Es ist eine Beleidigung Deutsche damit beschuldigen ohne Beweise und sofort ins Gefaengnis zu bringen, was ja Richter Meinerzhagen machte mit Sylvia Stolz und Ernst Zundel.
An die Redaktion: Sie muessen Angst haben meine Worte zu drucken weil Sie dann eine Straftat begehen - in Deutschland wird das Denken kriminalisiert weil es keine Gedankenfreiheit gibt – Gruende, die diese juristische Ungerechtigkeit aufrechthalten sind Infantil und zeigen moralischer und intellektueller Bankrott.
Dr Fredrick Töben
From the recent archives
Arrest of Dr. Frederick Töben in London
- Fax to the City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court - From: Kirche zum Mitreden, 13.10.2008
A few days ago, Australian revisionist Dr. Gerald Frederick Toben (Dr. Friedrich Töben) has been arrested by police after flying into Heathrow Airport in London. The Met Police's extradition unit detained Dr. Töben under a German-issued EU warrant. This is how the warrant describes the conduct alleged against Dr Töben: "From 2000 up to this day, worldwide internet publications of anti-Semitic and/or revisionist nature. Deliberately contrary to the historical truth, the said publications deny, approve or play down above all the mass murder of the Jews planned and implemented by the National-Socialist rulers. The offender is committing the acts in Australia, Germany and in other countries." Now the City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court has to decide whether Dr. Töben will be extradited or not. The next hearing in this trial will take place on October 17. Therefore, the following fax was sent today – Oct. 13th, 2008:
City of Westminster Magistrates' Court, Court 2660
70 Horseferry Road, London, England – SW1P 2AX
DX 120551 Victoria 6; Fax: 0 - 044 - 20 7805 1193
Arrest of Dr. Fredrick Töben
Dr. Töben must be released unconditionally and allowed to leave Europe immediately. He may not be extradited to Germany. The claims of the German public prosecutor that Dr. Töben can be charged for "instigation to race hatred, insult and reviling the memory of the dead" are deliberately contrary to the historical truth.
Truth is: It is not defined what opinion exactly you must confess concerning the persecution of Jews during WW2. According to the principle of "nulla poena sine lege" (no penalty without a law), which belongs to the human rights and is even an explicit part of the German law, this lack of definition already makes it at least next to impossible to sentence anybody as a "holocaust denier". Canadian lawyer Barbara Kulaszka published a very short and well-known survey about this issue in her essay "What is holocaust denial".
You could argue that only opinions which are obviously false are punished, therefore here are two examples of German justice:
1: You can punish anybody who utters that the "gas chamber" in Auschwitz is not original, because British Historian David Irving was fined 30.000 DM for saying this. So, there you have a clear teaching (i.e. that the gas chamber is original) that you have to confess. However, even Dr. Franciszek Piper, senior curator and director of archives of the Auschwitz State Museum, admitted on camera that the alleged 'homicidal gas chamber' shown off to hundreds of thousands of tourists every year at the Auschwitz main camp is not original. Irving was never refunded, though.
2: You can punish anybody who claims that there were no gassings in Dachau, because German Electrician Martin Fiedler was sentenced to seven months in prison for "denying" the "homicidal gas chambers" in Dachau. However, today even all official holocaust teachers admit that there weren't any gassings in Dachau. And beware: Time in jail cannot be "refunded" in any way.
So, undeniably, German courts committed grave crimes against innocents, only to defend some lies concerning the "holocaust". Therefore, even if you would agree to punish people for their opinions about WW2, you still know that there have been innocent victims of these "holocaust trials".
Please also consider that lots of "holocaust survivors" have been made out to be liars, e.g. recently Misha Defonseca, and that some exposed lies are still told and believed today, e.g. the "original gas chamber" in Auschwitz or the "Jewish soap". A careful revision of the holocaust stories is undeniably very important.
You could argue that Dr. Töben could defend himself in Germany. While it is indeed a human right to defend yourself, you are not granted that right in Germany. If you do defend yourself, you only get punished more severely, see the fate of German Revisionist Germar Rudolf. And while lawyers are obliged to defend their clients, they themselves are punished for doing so, see the fate of German lawyer Sylvia Stolz.
The whole holocaust problem aside, the situation of justice in Germany is generally catastrophic. Describing what millions of German people today have to suffer because of perversion of the course of justice would be a monumental task; here it should suffice that even the European Court of Human Rights definitely admitted that Germany is not a state under the rule of law (EGMR 75529/01 Sürmeli / Germany).
To sum it up: You know that these "legal actions" against Dr. Töben are not legal in any way. Obviously it is by no means possible to help Germany in celebrating another "holocaust trial". Free Töben!
Father Rolf Hermann Lingen, Roman-Catholic priest
For more information about the author, see "Extinction of the Church in Germany":
THE WORLD STREET JOURNAL - WORLD
Wednesday, January 28, 2009 As of 2:29 PM EST
URL SOURCE: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123317069332125243.html
Putin Speaks at Davos
The following text is a transcript of Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin's speech at the opening ceremony of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.
Good afternoon, colleagues, ladies and gentlemen,
I would like to thank the forum's organisers for this opportunity to share my thoughts on global economic developments and to share our plans and proposals.
The world is now facing the first truly global economic crisis, which is continuing to develop at an unprecedented pace.
The current situation is often compared to the Great Depression of the late 1920s and the early 1930s. True, there are some similarities. However, there are also some basic differences. The crisis has affected everyone at this time of globalisation. Regardless of their political or economic system, all nations have found themselves in the same boat.
There is a certain concept, called the perfect storm, which denotes a situation when Nature's forces converge in one point of the ocean and increase their destructive potential many times over. It appears that the present-day crisis resembles such a perfect storm. Responsible and knowledgeable people must prepare for it. Nevertheless, it always flares up unexpectedly.
The current situation is no exception either. Although the crisis was simply hanging in the air, the majority strove to get their share of the pie, be it one dollar or a billion, and did not want to notice the rising wave. In the last few months, virtually every speech on this subject started with criticism of the United States. But I will do nothing of the kind.
I just want to remind you that, just a year ago, American delegates speaking from this rostrum emphasised the US economy's fundamental stability and its cloudless prospects. Today, investment banks, the pride of Wall Street, have virtually ceased to exist. In just 12 months, they have posted losses exceeding the profits they made in the last 25 years. This example alone reflects the real situation better than any criticism.
The time for enlightenment has come. We must calmly, and without gloating, assess the root causes of this situation and try to peek into the future. In our opinion, the crisis was brought about by a combination of several factors. The existing financial system has failed. Substandard regulation has contributed to the crisis, failing to duly heed tremendous risks.
Add to this colossal disproportions that have accumulated over the last few years. This primarily concerns disproportions between the scale of financial operations and the fundamental value of assets, as well as those between the increased burden on international loans and the sources of their collateral.
The entire economic growth system, where one regional centre prints money without respite and consumes material wealth, while another regional centre manufactures inexpensive goods and saves money printed by other governments, has suffered a major setback.
I would like to add that this system has left entire regions, including Europe, on the outskirts of global economic processes and has prevented them from adopting key economic and financial decisions.
Moreover, generated prosperity was distributed extremely unevenly among various population strata. This applies to differences between social strata in certain countries, including highly developed ones. And it equally applies to gaps between countries and regions.
A considerable share of the world's population still cannot afford comfortable housing, education and quality health care. Even a global recovery posted in the last few years has failed to radically change this situation.
And, finally, this crisis was brought about by excessive expectations. Corporate appetites with regard to constantly growing demand swelled unjustifiably. The race between stock market indices and capitalisation began to overshadow rising labour productivity and real-life corporate effectiveness.
Unfortunately, excessive expectations were not only typical of the business community. They set the pace for rapidly growing personal consumption standards, primarily in the industrial world. We must openly admit that such growth was not backed by a real potential. This amounted to unearned wealth, a loan that will have to be repaid by future generations.
This pyramid of expectations would have collapsed sooner or later. In fact, this is happening right before our eyes.
* * *
Esteemed colleagues, one is sorely tempted to make simple and popular decisions in times of crisis. However, we could face far greater complications if we merely treat the symptoms of the disease.
Naturally, all national governments and business leaders must take resolute actions. Nevertheless, it is important to avoid making decisions, even in such force majeure circumstances, that we will regret in the future. This is why I would first like to mention specific measures which should be avoided and which will not be implemented by Russia.
We must not revert to isolationism and unrestrained economic egotism. The leaders of the world's largest economies agreed during the November 2008 G20 summit not to create barriers hindering global trade and capital flows. Russia shares these principles.
Although additional protectionism will prove inevitable during the crisis, all of us must display a sense of proportion. Excessive intervention in economic activity and blind faith in the state's omnipotence is another possible mistake.
True, the state's increased role in times of crisis is a natural reaction to market setbacks. Instead of streamlining market mechanisms, some are tempted to expand state economic intervention to the greatest possible extent. The concentration of surplus assets in the hands of the state is a negative aspect of anti-crisis measures in virtually every nation.
In the 20th century, the Soviet Union made the state's role absolute. In the long run, this made the Soviet economy totally uncompetitive. This lesson cost us dearly. I am sure nobody wants to see it repeated.
Nor should we turn a blind eye to the fact that the spirit of free enterprise, including the principle of personal responsibility of businesspeople, investors and shareholders for their decisions, is being eroded in the last few months. There is no reason to believe that we can achieve better results by shifting responsibility onto the state.
And one more point: anti-crisis measures should not escalate into financial populism and a refusal to implement responsible macroeconomic policies. The unjustified swelling of the budgetary deficit and the accumulation of public debts are just as destructive as adventurous stock-jobbing.
* * *
Ladies and gentlemen, unfortunately, we have so far failed to comprehend the true scale of the ongoing crisis. But one thing is obvious: the extent of the recession and its scale will largely depend on specific high-precision measures, due to be charted by governments and business communities and on our coordinated and professional efforts.
In our opinion, we must first atone for the past and open our cards, so to speak. This means we must assess the real situation and write off all hopeless debts and "bad" assets. True, this will be an extremely painful and unpleasant process. Far from everyone can accept such measures, fearing for their capitalisation, bonuses or reputation. However, we would "conserve" and prolong the crisis, unless we clean up our balance sheets. I believe financial authorities must work out the required mechanism for writing off debts that corresponds to today's needs.
Second. Apart from cleaning up our balance sheets, it is high time we got rid of virtual money, exaggerated reports and dubious ratings. We must not harbour any illusions while assessing the state of the global economy and the real corporate standing, even if such assessments are made by major auditors and analysts.
In effect, our proposal implies that the audit, accounting and ratings system reform must be based on a reversion to the fundamental asset value concept. In other words, assessments of each individual business must be based on its ability to generate added value, rather than on subjective concepts. In our opinion, the economy of the future must become an economy of real values. How to achieve this is not so clear-cut. Let us think about it together.
Third. Excessive dependence on a single reserve currency is dangerous for the global economy. Consequently, it would be sensible to encourage the objective process of creating several strong reserve currencies in the future. It is high time we launched a detailed discussion of methods to facilitate a smooth and irreversible switchover to the new model.
Fourth. Most nations convert their international reserves into foreign currencies and must therefore be convinced that they are reliable. Those issuing reserve and accounting currencies are objectively interested in their use by other states. This highlights mutual interests and interdependence.
Consequently, it is important that reserve currency issuers must implement more open monetary policies. Moreover, these nations must pledge to abide by internationally recognised rules of macroeconomic and financial discipline. In our opinion, this demand is not excessive.
At the same time, the global financial system is not the only element in need of reforms. We are facing a much broader range of problems. This means that a system based on cooperation between several major centres must replace the obsolete unipolar world concept.
We must strengthen the system of global regulators based on international law and a system of multilateral agreements in order to prevent chaos and unpredictability in such a multipolar world. Consequently, it is very important that we reassess the role of leading international organisations and institutions.
I am convinced that we can build a more equitable and efficient global economic system. But it is impossible to create a detailed plan at this event today.
It is clear, however, that every nation must have guaranteed access to vital resources, new technology and development sources. What we need is guarantees that could minimise risks of recurring crises. Naturally, we must continue to discuss all these issues, including at the G20 meeting in London, which will take place in April.
* * *
Our decisions should match the present-day situation and heed the requirements of a new post-crisis world.
The global economy could face trite energy-resource shortages and the threat of thwarted future growth while overcoming the crisis.
Three years ago, at a summit of the Group of Eight, we raised the issue of global energy security. We called for the shared responsibility of suppliers, consumers and transit countries. I think it is time to launch truly effective mechanisms ensuring such responsibility.
The only way to ensure truly global energy security is to form interdependence, including a swap of assets, without any discrimination or dual standards. It is such interdependence that generates real mutual responsibility.
Unfortunately, the existing Energy Charter has failed to become a working instrument able to regulate emerging problems. I propose we start laying down a new international legal framework for energy security. Implementation of our initiative could play a political role comparable to the treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community. That is to say, consumers and producers would finally be bound into a real single energy partnership based on clear-cut legal foundations.
Every one of us realises that sharp and unpredictable fluctuations of energy prices are a colossal destabilising factor in the global economy. Today's landslide fall of prices will lead to a growth in the consumption of resources.
On the one hand, investments in energy saving and alternative sources of energy will be curtailed. On the other, less money will be invested in oil production, which will result in its inevitable downturn. Which, in the final analysis, will escalate into another fit of uncontrolled price growth and a new crisis.
It is necessary to return to a balanced price based on an equilibrium between supply and demand, to strip pricing of a speculative element generated by many derivative financial instruments.
To guarantee the transit of energy resources remains a challenge. There are two ways of tackling it, and both must be used.
The first is to go over to generally recognised market principles of fixing tariffs on transit services. They can be recorded in international legal documents.
The second is to develop and diversify the routes of energy transportation. We have been working long and hard along these lines.
In the past few years alone, we have implemented such projects as the Yamal-Europe and Blue Stream gas pipelines. Experience has proved their urgency and relevance. I am convinced that such projects as South Stream and North Stream are equally needed for Europe's energy security. Their total estimated capacity is something like 85 billion cubic meters of gas a year.
Gazprom, together with its partners – Shell, Mitsui and Mitsubishi – will soon launch capacities for liquefying and transporting natural gas produced in the Sakhalin area. And that is also Russia's contribution to global energy security.
We are developing the infrastructure of our oil pipelines. The first section of the Baltic Pipeline System (BPS) has already been completed. BPS-1 supplies up to 75 million tonnes of oil a year. It does this direct to consumers – via our ports on the Baltic Sea. Transit risks are completely eliminated in this way. Work is currently under way to design and build BPS-2 (its throughput capacity is 50 million tonnes of oil a year.
We intend to build transport infrastructure in all directions. The first stage of the pipeline system Eastern Siberia – Pacific Ocean is in the final stage. Its terminal point will be a new oil port in Kozmina Bay and an oil refinery in the Vladivostok area. In the future a gas pipeline will be laid parallel to the oil pipeline, towards the Pacific and China.
* * *
Addressing you here today, I cannot but mention the effects of the global crisis on the Russian economy. We have also been seriously affected.
However, unlike many other countries, we have accumulated large reserves. They expand our possibilities for confidently passing through the period of global instability. The crisis has made the problems we had more evident. They concern the excessive emphasis on raw materials in exports and the economy in general and a weak financial market. The need to develop a number of fundamental market institutions, above all of a competitive environment, has become more acute.
We were aware of these problems and sought to address them gradually. The crisis is only making us move more actively towards the declared priorities, without changing the strategy itself, which is to effect a qualitative renewal of Russia in the next 10 to 12 years.
Our anti-crisis policy is aimed at supporting domestic demand, providing social guarantees for the population, and creating new jobs. Like many countries, we have reduced production taxes, leaving money in the economy. We have optimised state spending.
But, I repeat, along with measures of prompt response, we are also working to create a platform for post-crisis development.
We are convinced that those who will create attractive conditions for global investment already now and will be able to preserve and strengthen sources of strategically meaningful resources will become leaders of the restoration of the global economy.
This is why among our priorities we have the creation of a favourable business environment and development of competition; the establishment of a stable loan system resting on sufficient internal resources; and implementation of transport and other infrastructure projects.
Russia is already one of the major exporters of a number of food commodities. And our contribution to ensuring global food security will only increase.
We are also going to actively develop the innovation sectors of the economy. Above all, those in which Russia has a competitive edge – space, nuclear energy, aviation. In these areas, we are already actively establishing cooperative ties with other countries. A promising area for joint efforts could be the sphere of energy saving. We see higher energy efficiency as one of the key factors for energy security and future development.
We will continue reforms in our energy industry. Adoption of a new system of internal pricing based on economically justified tariffs. This is important, including for encouraging energy saving. We will continue our policy of openness to foreign investments.
I believe that the 21st century economy is an economy of people not of factories. The intellectual factor has become increasingly important in the economy. That is why we are planning to focus on providing additional opportunities for people to realise their potential.
We are already a highly educated nation. But we need for Russian citizens to obtain the highest quality and most up-to-date education, and such professional skills that will be widely in demand in today's world. Therefore, we will be pro-active in promoting educational programmes in leading specialities.
We will expand student exchange programmes, arrange training for our students at the leading foreign colleges and universities and with the most advanced companies. We will also create such conditions that the best researchers and professors – regardless of their citizenship – will want to come and work in Russia.
History has given Russia a unique chance. Events urgently require that we reorganise our economy and update our social sphere. We do not intend to pass up this chance. Our country must emerge from the crisis renewed, stronger and more competitive.
* * *
Separately, I would like to comment on problems that go beyond the purely economic agenda, but nevertheless are very topical in present-day conditions. Unfortunately, we are increasingly hearing the argument that the build-up of military spending could solve today's social and economic problems. The logic is simple enough. Additional military allocations create new jobs.
At a glance, this sounds like a good way of fighting the crisis and unemployment. This policy might even be quite effective in the short term. But in the longer run, militarisation won't solve the problem but will rather quell it temporarily. What it will do is squeeze huge financial and other resources from the economy instead of finding better and wiser uses for them.
My conviction is that reasonable restraint in military spending, especially coupled with efforts to enhance global stability and security, will certainly bring significant economic dividends. I hope that this viewpoint will eventually dominate globally. On our part, we are geared to intensive work on discussing further disarmament. I would like to draw your attention to the fact that the economic crisis could aggravate the current negative trends in global politics.
The world has lately come to face an unheard-of surge of violence and other aggressive actions, such as Georgia's adventurous sortie in the Caucasus, recent terrorist attacks in India, and escalation of violence in Gaza Strip. Although not apparently linked directly, these developments still have common features.
First of all, I am referring to the existing international organisations' inability to provide any constructive solutions to regional conflicts, or any effective proposals for interethnic and interstate settlement. Multilateral political mechanisms have proved as ineffective as global financial and economic regulators.
Frankly speaking, we all know that provoking military and political instability, regional and other conflicts is a helpful means of distracting the public from growing social and economic problems. Such attempts cannot be ruled out, unfortunately. To prevent this scenario, we need to improve the system of international relations, making it more effective, safe and stable.
There are a lot of important issues on the global agenda in which most countries have shared interests. These include anti-crisis policies, joint efforts to reform international financial institutions, to improve regulatory mechanisms, ensure energy security and mitigate the global food crisis, which is an extremely pressing issue today.
Russia is willing to contribute to dealing with international priority issues. We expect all our partners in Europe, Asia and America, including the new US administration, to show interest in further constructive cooperation in dealing with all these issues and more. We wish the new team success.
Ladies and gentlemen, the international community is facing a host of extremely complicated problems, which might seem overpowering at times. But, a journey of thousand miles begins with a single step, as the proverb goes. We must seek foothold relying on the moral values that have ensured the progress of our civilisation. Integrity and hard work, responsibility and self-confidence will eventually lead us to success.
We should not despair. This crisis can and must be fought, also by pooling our intellectual, moral and material resources. This kind of consolidation of effort is impossible without mutual trust, not only between business operators, but primarily between nations.
Therefore, finding this mutual trust is a key goal we should concentrate on now. Trust and solidarity are key to overcoming the current problems and avoiding more shocks, to reaching prosperity and welfare in this new century.
Copyright 2008 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. Distribution and use of this material are governed by our Subscriber Agreement and by copyright law. For non-personal use or to order multiple copies, please contact Dow Jones Reprints at 1-800-843-0008.
Flight captain Hannah Reitsch
From: Corrections to History of our Time – The Great Wendig, Volume 2, page 326.
Grabert Verlag, D-72066 Tübingen, PO Box 1629, Germany
An especially impressive example of the devious methods of interrogation on part of the US- military toward high profile German prisoners was the treatment of the exceptional flight pioneer Hanna Reitsch. Like many others, this exemplary woman had to endure the worst humiliation and great hardship.
A biography of Hanna Reitsch, born on the 29. March 1912 in Hirschberg/ Silesia, cannot be told in just a few pages. But in the manifold parts of her life three directions stand out: Her love for her family, her homeland and flying. She became famous for her flying, she is even included in encyclopaedia entries.
Hanna Reitsch learned to fly in her local Glider flying school at Graunau in Lower Silesia. Apart from her studies at Medical School, she has always been – according to her own words – a „birdman“, when she visited, among others, South America, Finland and Libya and gained further record breaking awards. „Every trial flight served the life of others and enhanced Germany's reputation“, she said. Small wonder that she also became a pilot for motorised aeroplanes and in 1937 she was the first woman to be awarded the distinction of „Flight Captain“.
During the war she increasingly made testflights, especially with the rocket aoeroplanes „Me 163B“ and in Peenemünde with the manned „V1-rocket“. But she was also serving at the Eastern Front and in April 1945 she flew Fieldmarshall Ritter von Griem with her „Fieseler Fi 156 Stork“ to a meeting with Hitler in the beleaguered City of Berlin. She was the only woman to receive the EK 1 (Iron Cross 1), as well as the Military Flyers Award in Gold with Diamonds.
At the day of the surrender she, as well as other soldiers, was taken in American captivity and had to live through emotionally and physically most difficult times. The following chapter gives an insight of the American methods of interrogation, as suffered on part of Hanna Reitsch through the US-Captain Cohn:
„I said clearly that I had nothing to disclose and there was nothing with which to implicate my country and its government, he should not set his hopes too high. I saw that in his fury the blood shot to his head and I had the feeling to be sitting opposite the most unpleasant person I had ever met. My words and my facial expression must have revealed the limitless contempt I held for him. ... Now he got excited and said to me agitatedly and loudly not to be so stupid, so short-sighted and foolish, as to reject the chance he offered simply for the reason of a false loyalty complex. He would not hear another word from me, but rather said with cutting severity: „I warn you not to commit this stupidity. Think of the rest of your life!“
Hanna Reitsch would not be otherwise persuaded ‚to change her mind’ with chocolates, nor was she willing to take the ‚presents’ of the occupation officers, such as: Shoes, stockings, perfume, powder, lipsticks etc. She also declined to have her hair coiffured by a hairdresser, seeing clearly it was all part of the plot.
Inevitably poorly groomed, „with woolen socks, unmended shoes, stringy straight hair“ and after an outburst of fury on part of Captain Cohn, Flight Captain Reitsch meets the press: „Behind a lectern stood Captain Cohn and asked me in English to step up. I was completely calm and looked nonchalant out of the window, while he repeated the flatteries regarding myself, in front of the others, which I well knew from the day before. Then he requested of me to frankly answer the questions, which would be asked of me. First question: 'how I would judge the criminal Hitler'. My answer: 'If you are addressing our Head of State as a criminal, I am surprised that your Heads of State have made contracts with him and have sat with him. Perhaps you should ask them this question....“
Second question: If I had not perhaps acted against my conscience in the service for Hitler, that is,
had I been forced? My answer: 'No, absolutely out of my own free will. And apart from that, I have fought for my country as devotedly as you have for yours. If I were placed before the same decision again, I would once more act as I have done and as it is regarded as honourable in every country of
the world'. Third question: 'What do say to the crimes, which Adolf Hitler had committed?' Answer: 'I know of an incredibly tragic war, which cost many lives on every side. Who and what caused this war, I am not able to determine as yet. In regards to crimes, one hears more about those committed by other countries, rather then those committed by one's own country. I have come to know much about the crimes of other countries. About the crimes of my own country I only have heard since my imprisonment from our enemies.' It had become noticeably quiet in the room, apart from some clearing of throats.
Captain Cohn, who had grown very nervous, declared a break, in which I was quickly led outside. In front of the door, where two guards took charge of me, he told me with eyes full of hatred: 'You will regret this for the rest of your life'. It was altogether like a nightmare.“
From the life of this outstanding woman, who even after her time as POW broke many records and received awards, are many more things to tell. She flew in many parts of the world and was received and honoured by many personalities of highest rank, such as President Kennedy, Wernher von Braun and NATO-General Steinhoff. After an unusually rich, but also hard life Flight Captain Hanna Reitsch died on 24. August 1979 in Hamburg. Her personality is and remains a role model.
Next to Hanna Reitsch and Elly Beinhorn, another woman flyer deserves to be named, Frau Melitta Countess Schenk von Stauffenberg, née Schiller, was 1937 the second woman in Germany to be awarded the title of Flight Captain. She flew mostly the dive bomber Ju87 (Stuka) and the Ju 88 at the Aeronautics Test Station Rechlin and at the technical Academy of the Luftwaffe in Berlin-Gatow, with 2500 Sturz-flights to her credit and was only surpassed by Hans-Ulrich Rudel. In 1943 she was the fourth woman to receive the EK II (Iron Cross II).
She had a Master’s Degree (Diplom-Engineer), still handed in a dissertation during the war, developed flight gun sight, and was shot down on 8. April 1945 by a US-hunter and died, after surviving the crash only a few hours, of heavy injuries.
Hanna Reitsch wrote:
Fliegen mein Leben. Erinnerungen, – Flying is my life. Memories. Herbig, München 1951, 89 Tsd. 1986; Heyne-Pocket Book Nr 5839; Ullstein-Book Nr. 34537.
Das Unzerstörbare in meinem Leben, The indestructable part of my life, Herbig, München 1979, 1984; Heyne-Pocket Book Nr. 5628.
Höhen und Tiefen, Heights and Depths, Herbig, München 1978.
Ich flog in Afrika für Nkrumahs Ghana, I flew for Nkrumah's Ghana, Herbig, München 1979.
Hanna Reitsch, des Ikarus deutsche Schwester – Hanna Reitsch, the German sister of Ikarus, Documentation by Robert H. Dreichsel, in Deutsche Dokumente, 1/1980.
Gerhard Bracke Melitta Gräfin Stauffenberg. Das Leben einer Testpilotin, Melitta Countess Stauffenberg. The life of a woman Test Pilot. Langen-Müller, München 1990; Obituary by publisher Gert Sudholt, in Deutsche Annalen 1980, Druffel, Leoni 1980, S. 256 ff.
Randulf Johan Hansen. http://www.thenewsturmer.com/
From: Lifeforce: email@example.com
Airbus Ditching in the Hudson Date:Thu, 5 Feb 2009 08:
Just got this interesting info from a friend who flies a corporate jet for a major corporation. Very interesting.
And a good reason to buy American. "If it ain't a Boeing I ain't a going."
The press is having a field day turning "Sully" Sullenberger into a Lindbergh-like hero. I attended his welcoming home reception in Danville, CA last weekend... me and the estimated 3000 other attendees. All credit is given to him and his crew, but they will be the first to tell you, "they just did their jobs." They did them well, but when your job entails holding the lives of hundreds of people in your hands every time you fly, then doing your job well is the minimum acceptable standard.
I don't, and I doubt if more than just a handful of other pilots, begrudge Sully his day in the sun. What I am concerned about is how the real cause of this accident is being glossed over and, on the part of Airbus Industries, actually lied about. There are stories circulating now about how the flight computers helped "save" the aircraft by insuring the ditching was done properly. The stories themselves are absolute nonsense and the contention that the flight computers ensured the proper attitude was maintained for ditching is pure fabrication.
So what's wrong with Airbus wanting to steal a little glory for their computerized drones? There is a good chance it was the computers that put the aircraft into the water!
I readily admit I heartily dislike Airbus because of their design philosophy, I will never set foot in an A-380 (the superjumbo) as I consider it a really bad accident looking for a place to happen. I am not much happier with the rest of them but especially the A-320 which has killed several folks, while the engineers try to perfect software that can replace a human brain that has a talent for flying... something that I, rather naturally, don't believe possible.
It is well known that I love Boeings. I love to fly them. Beyond the sheer joy of just flying the Boeing, I also believe in their design philosophy that the last word has to be with the pilot, not the machine. No pilot, no matter how hard he tries, can turn an A-320 upside down. It just won't do it. Airbus believes it has designed a computer that is smarter than a pilot (the evidence of dead bodies scattered around Mulhouse, France to the contrary) and gives the last word to the computer. If a pilot moves the controls so as to turn the airplane upside down, the computer will refuse.
I can turn the B777 upside down. Once I get it upside down, if I let go of the controls, it will turn itself right-side up (smart airplane). I don't believe I will ever be in a situation where I will need to turn the airplane upside down, but I feel good knowing I have the control to do it. That's why I'm not really kidding when I say: "if it ain't a Boeing; I ain't going".
What follows is an e-mail from a retired US Air Pilot who has flown the Airbus A320 just like the one that ended up in the Hudson. It was written in response to a friend asking him if he knew the pilot who did the ditching. It is most illuminating and worth the read...
I don't know him. I've seen him in the crew room and around the system but never met him. He was former PSA and I was former Piedmont and we never had the occasion to fly together.
The dumb shit press just won't leave this alone. Most airliner ditchings aren't very successful since they take place on the open ocean with wind, rough seas, swells and rescue boats are hours or days away. This one happened in fresh smooth water, landing with the current and the rescue boats were there picking people up while they were still climbing out of the airplane. It also happened on a cold winter day when all the pleasure boats were parked. Had this happened in July it would be pretty hard not to whack a couple of little boats. Sully did a nice job but so would 95% of the other pilots in the industry. You would have done a nice job.
Don't be surprised if the Airbus fly by wire computers didn't put a perfectly good airplane in the water. In an older generation airplane like the 727 or 737-300/400, the throttles are hooked to the fuel controllers on the engine by a steel throttle cable just like a TBM or a Comanche. On the Airbus nothing in the cockpit is real. Everything is electronic. The throttles, rudder and brake pedals and the side stick are hooked to rheostats who talk to a computer who talks to a electric hydraulic servo valve which in turn hopefully moves something.
In a older generation airplane when you hit birds the engines keep screaming or they blow up but they don't both roll back to idle simultaneously like happened to Flt. 1549. All it would take is for bird guts to plug a pressure sensor or knock the pitot probe off or plug it and the computers would roll the engines back to idle thinking they were over boosting because the computers were getting bad data. The Airbus is a real pile of shit. I don't like riding on them. Google the Airbus A320 Crash at the Paris Airshow in 1998. Watch the video of an airbus A320 crash into a forest because the computers wouldn't allow a power increase following a low pass. The computers wouldn't allow a power increase because they determined that the airspeed was too low for the increase requested so the computers didn't give them any. Pushing the throttles forward in a Airbus does nothing more than request a power increase from the computer. If the computer doesn't like all the airplane and engine parameters you don't get a power increase. Airbus blamed the dead crew since they couldn't defend themselves. A Boeing would still be flying.
An Australian gets arrested in Britain because Jews in Germany have a problem about what he said. World-wide Zionofascism has been implemented.
From Canada to Europe, questioning the Jew’s sympathy project the Holohoax can get you arrested, fired, and imprisoned. As per the Zionist concept of freedom of speech and debate, the truth is not allowed as a defense.
Australian Holohoax-exposer arrested at Heathrow Acting on German arrest warrant, British police take Gerald Toben into custody on charges of publishing anti-Semitic material, perpetrating Holocaust denial, Ynet, 10.01.08, Israel News
British police arrested Gerald Fredrick Toben on Wednesday on charges of Holocaust denial. The 64-year-old Australian citizen was taken into custody upon arrival at Heathrow Airport on charges of publishing and distributing anti-Semitic material and Holocaust denial and revisionism.
An EU warrant for Toben’s arrest was issued by Germany authorities. He has served time in a German prison after being convicted on inciting racism.
“From 2002 to this day the worldwide, internet publication of an anti-Semitic and, or, revisionist nature
deliberately contrary to historical truth the said publications deny, approve or play down above all the mass murder of the Jews, planned and implemented, by the national socialist rulers,” reads the warrant.
In 2006 Toben traveled to Tehran to take part in the ‘International Conference to Review the Global Vision of the Holocaust.’ Toben told an Iranian audience that evidence of gas chambers are “the products of a feverish pathological mind filled with pure hatred, mostly directed against Germans and anything German.” He maintained that those who believe in the gas chambers display “an appalling state of ignorance of natural and chemical processes”.
Ernst Zündel and his 2003 Ordeal and ongoing
Vor sechs Jahren, auf den Tag genau, am 5. Februar 2003, entführte die Polizei von Tennesse Ernst Zündel aus seinem Heim vor den Augen seiner Frau Ingrid, die ihn seitdem nicht mehr gesehen hat. (Ingrid kann sich nicht nach Deutschland begeben, weil gegen sie ein internationaler Haftbefehl erlassen wurde). Der Vorwand der Entführung war folgender: er habe im Mai 2001 einen Anhörungstermin mißachtet, der seinen Statut als Einwanderer betraf. Jedoch hatte er niemals dazu eine Einladung erhalten. In Wahrheit war Ernst Zündel ein viel zu aktiver Revisionist geworden und es war besser, man würde seinem Schaffen ein Ende bereiten.
Fünfzehn Tage später, am 19. Februar 2003, schickten ihn die Behörden der Vereinigten Staaten zurück nach Kanada, das Land, in dem er die meiste Zeit seines Lebens gelebt hatte, bevor er Ingrid heiratete. Ohne strafrechtliche Begründung warfen ihn die Kanadier auch ihrerseits ins Gefängnis und er lebte zwei Jahre lang in Zuständen, die „würdig eines Abu Ghraib“ waren (er hatte z.B. keinen Anspruch auf Besuch). In dieser Zeit konnten die kanadischen Behörden einen Scheinprozeß auf die Beine stellen, um angeblich nachzuweisen, daß Ernst Zündel eine Gefahr für ihr Land darstellte. Es war der 24. Februar 2005, an dem der Richter Blais folgenden Beschluß verfaßte: „Die Aktivitäten von Ernst Zündel sind nicht nur eine Gefahr für die nationale Sicherheit Kanadas, sondern sie stellen auch eine Gefahr für die internationale Gemeinschaft der Staaten dar.“ Fünf Tage später, am Dienstag, den 1. März 2005, wurde Ernst Zündel an die deutschen Justizbehörden übergeben, die seine Auslieferung beantragt hatten. Nach einem widerwärtigen Prozeß in Mannheim wurde er zu fünf Jahren Haft verurteilt. Da er von keiner Hafterleichterung profitiert (er hat ja weder gestohlen noch jemanden vergewaltigt oder getötet), wird er nicht vor dem 1. März 2010 aus der Haft entlassen werden.
Nutzen wir diese Nachricht um an einen schönen Sieg unseres Gefangenen zu erinnern, der das wahrlich verdient: Im August 1989, nach seinem großen Prozeß des Vorjahres, veröffentlichte Zündel einen „offenen Brief an Gorbatschow“ und startete weltweit eine große Kampagne bei seinen Lesern, sie mögen Gorbatschow, dem Papst und den Behörden in Auschwitz einen Brief schreiben, es solle die Inschrift von 4 Millionen von Toten des Konzentrationslagers Auschwitz gestrichen werden, eine Zahl, die in 19 Sprachen auf dem Denkmal in Auschwitz eingetragen war. (Einige Jahre später würde diese Inschrift durch die neue Zahl von 1,5 Millionen ersetzt, die genauso falsch ist.)
5. Februar 2009
per Bocage, Frankreich
Il y a 6 ans, jour pour jour, le 5 février 2003, la police du Tennessee enlevait à son domicile Ernst Zündel, sous les yeux de sa femme américaine, Ingrid, qu'il n'a plus revue depuis ce jour...(*) Le prétexte de l'enlèvement était le suivant: il aurait manqué, en mai 2001, de se présenter à une audience concernant son statut d'immigré. Or il n'avait jamais reçu une telle convocation!
En réalité, Ernst Zündel était un révisionniste beaucoup trop actif et il fallait mettre un terme à ses activités.
Quinze jours plus tard, le 19 février 2003, les Etats-Unis le renvoyaient aux autorités du Canada, pays où il avait vécu la plus grande partie de sa vie avant d'épouser Ingrid. Sans motif pénal, les Canadiens le jetèrent à leur tour en prison où il vécut pendant deux ans dans des conditions "dignes d'Abu Ghraib" (ne bénéficiant d'aucun droit de visite...), le temps pour les autorités de ce pays d'organiser un simulacre de procès pour tenter de prouver que Ernst Zündel constituait un danger pour leur pays. C'est le 24 février 2005 qu'un juge Blais rendait un arrêt où il prononçait:
"Les activités de M. Zündel ne sont pas seulement une menace pour la sécurité nationale du Canada mais elles sont aussi une menace pour la communauté internationale des nations."
Cinq jours plus tard, le mardi 1er mars 2005, Ernst Zündel était livré à la justice allemande qui avait demandé son extradition: à l'issue d'un procès ignoble tenu à Mannheim, il était condamné à cinq ans de prison. Comme il ne bénéficie d'aucune remise de peine (puisqu'il n'a ni volé, ni violé, ni tué), il ne sortira que le 1er mars 2010.
Profitons de ce message pour rappeler une belle victoire remportée par notre prisonnier, qui le mérite bien:
En août 1989, à la suite de son grand procès de 1988, Zündel publiait une "Lettre ouverte à Gorbatchev" et lançait auprès de ses correspondants dans le monde entier une grande campagne leur demandant d'écrire à Gorbatchev, au Pape et aux autorités d'Auschwitz pour que soit effacé le chiffre de 4 millions de morts du camp d'Auschwitz, chiffre inscrit en 19 langues sur le monument d'Auschwitz-Birkenau: le 3 avril 1990, ce chiffre était effacé des
19 plaques! (Il sera remplacé, plusieurs années plus tard, par celui de 1,5 million, tout aussi faux.)
(*) Ingrid ne peut pas se rendre en Allemagne puisqu'elle fait l'objet d'un mandat d'arrêt international.
Top | Home
©-free 2009 Adelaide Institute