ANOTHER HOLOCOST DENIER (ERIC HUNT) BITES THE DUST By Jim Rizoli & Diane King

ANOTHER HOLOCOST DENIER (Eric Hunt) BITES THE DUST

By Jim Rizoli & Diane King

FIRST EMAIL:

From: Diane King <dianekayking@hotmail.com>
Subject: ANOTHER HOLOCOST DENIER (Eric Hunt) BITES THE DUST
Date: February 15, 2017 at 10:41:59 AM PST

Jim and I have received a response from Eric Hunt about my inquiry: “Did Eric Hunt Write This” and we responded to it. (These letters are in a separate email.) Below are OUR responses to the news of Eric Hunt’s capitulation. Diane

“ERIC HUNT: For over a decade I have devoted a great deal of my life to investigating what is known as “The Holocaust.” I’ve endured 18 months imprisonment, overwhelming hardships, and live life as an outcast due to my activism as a Holocaust skeptic. All along, I claimed I was looking for the truth and out to tell the truth. I have determined I have reached “the end of the line” in the extent relevant research in the central issue of the “Holocaust denial” debate is able to go.”

JIM RIZOLI: Another HoloHoax truther bites the dust….Why are these people retreating from the revisionist camp? Are they being threatened? No matter…..I still will stick to my hardcore revisionist views until I can be proven wrong with FACTS and not just what ifs, and maybes. I notice that this article supposedly by Eric Hunt seems like it came off the skeptics site….maybe they are his new friends.

DIANE KING: I would like to thank Joe Rizoli for finding and sharing this ‘reversal’ and Germar Rudolf for confirming this unexpected issue. (My letter response to Germar Rudolf):

HISTORICAL REVISIONISM

WE ARE A FACT-BASED not a FAITH-BASED movement. Now, I’m a dyed-in-the-wool, 100%, BORN AGAIN BELIEVER – Christian. I wouldn’t say my belief system is based exclusively on faith … OR facts. I believe there are plenty of FACTS to support my faith. There are so many things we CAN’T PROVE in our ‘faith,’ but having come to understand the Lord’s character, I have no problem with my inability to prove everything about GOD.

Having said that, THAT isn’t the way it is in the revisionist world. We springboard FROM the facts and nearly EVERYTHING can be proven. So, I’m appalled at this “bailing” mindset. How can you turn your back on the facts!!!!

It’s like NO ONE has suffered but him. (Not to minimize what he’s been through). MANY soldiers of truth – Germar, Leuchter, Faurisson, Fredrick, Deckert, Fromm – a number of us in lesser AND greater degrees — have suffered too. We haven’t ‘bailed’ on the truth. But bottom line is the facts addressing the specific points concerning the claims of the holohoax are nearly indisputable. So because of this, isn’t this PC-incorrect issue worth fighting for????!!! It’s like he’s been tortured (as it seemed were David Cole and David Irving) until he RECANTED. So once he does, instead of the peace he seeks, he will continue to be hounded to keep him in line.

So what’s he going to do now? More articles denouncing what HE KNOWS is the truth??? Go on the road and try to ingratiate himself back into his tormentor’s good graces? If nothing else, what is going on with Ingrid and Ernst Zundel should prove THERE IS NOT ENOUGH GROVELING you can do – when you resist them, YOU ARE MARKED FOR LIFE.

Jim and I will be pursuing this further (stay tuned for further correspondence).

Eric Hunt’s Kapitulation

Jim and Diane’s Response to Eric Hunt

Dear Eric:

Diane and I collaborated with our response, as this was a big discussion point with us, to make sure the wording and sentiment were precise. This may be long, but we took the time to read yours. You can do us the courtesy of reading ours.

I appreciate your response but you still haven’t proven anything … you sound like you’re coming from the Skeptics (forum) crowd who continue to uphold the Holohoax theories 100?, where not only do they just emote on certain points, but they ridicule and punish counter arguments by censorship. I’m not saying that the National Socialist Germans were angels. I don’t maintain that – it was wartime – but had they wanted to exterminate ANYONE, you KNOW they’d have come up with extremely MORE EFFICIENT means than drafty/questionable facilities using a less than effective agent — Zyklon B. or whatever silly method they say. (By the way, your using the term ‘gassing’ for the means of extermination suggests you’ve bailed on scientific proof.) Have you even considered the other ridiculous methods that were said to have been used? Have you heard about these? Eric do you really believe this below? Have you even read revisionist literature?

Killing methods
Holocaust or Hoax book Jurgen Graf. 55

If we trace the evolution of the Holocaust yarn over the years since 1942, we stumble across one surprise after the other. In particular, innumerable methods of mass killing of which there is not the slightest mention in the later literature, are described in the most graphic detail, particularly:

a) Pneumatic hammers
This method is described as follows in a report of the Polish resistance movement on Auschwitz (23): “When the Kommandos went to work, they led them into the courtyard in the penal company where the executions took place by means of a ‘pneumatic hammer’. They bound the prisoners’ hands together behind their backs and brought them in, one after the other, naked, into the courtyard. They placed them in front of the barrel of an air gun, which was discharged without a sound. The hammer crushed the skull, and the compressed air destroyed the entire brain.”

b) Electric baths
As reported by the Polish resistance movement, the following method was also commonly used in Auschwitz (24): “According to the report of an SS officer, the number of victims in the electrical chambers amounted, unofficially, to 2,500 per night. The executions took place in electrical baths…”

c) Electrical assembly line killing
Another variant was described by Pravda on 2 February, five days after the liberation of Auschwitz: “They (the Germans) opened up the so-called ‘old graves’ in the eastern part of the camp, removed the bodies, and wiped out the trace of the assembly linekilling installation where hundreds of people were killed simultaneously with electrical current.”

d) Atomic bombs
At the Nuremberg Trial, US prosecutor Robert Jackson made the following accusation (25): “A village, a small village was provisionally erected, with temporary structures, and in it approximately 20,000 Jews were put. By means of this newly invented weapon of destruction, these 20,000 people were eradicated almost instantaneously, and in such a way that there was no trace left of them; the explosive used developing temperatures of from four to five hundred degrees Centigrade.”

e) Burning alive
Elie Wiesel, honored with the Nobel Peace Prize in 1986, was interned at Auschwitz from the spring of 1944 until January 1945. In his memoirs of the camp, La Nuit, published in 1958, he never mentions the gas chambers — not once, not with one single word — even though 400,000 Hungarian Jews, among others, are said to have been gassed during his period of internment. (In the German translation, which appeared under the title of Die Nacht zu begraben, Elischa, the gas chambers nevertheless make a miraculous appearance, for the simple reason that, whenever the word “crématoire” appears in the original, the translator has mistranslated it as “Gaskammer”). According to Wiesel, the Jews were exterminated in the following manner (26): “Not far from us blazed flames from a pit, gigantic flames. They were burning something. A lorry drove up to the pit and dumped its load into the pit. They were small children. Babies! Yes, I had seen it, with my own eyes…Children in the flames (is it any wonder, that sleep shuns my eyes since that time?). We went there, too. Somewhat further along, was another, bigger pit, for adults. ‘Father’, I said, ‘if that is so, I wish to wait no longer. I shall throw myself against the electrified barbed wire fence. That is better than lying around in the flames for hours’.” How little Elie survived lying around in the flames for hours, by some miracle, will be revealed below.

f) Steam chambers
In December 1945, at the Nuremberg Trial the following accusation was made regarding the mass killings at Treblinka (27): “All victims had to strip off their clothes and shoes, which were collected afterwards, whereupon all victims, women and children first, were driven into the death chambers… After being filled to capacity, the chambers were hermetically closed and steam was let in. In a few minutes all was over… From reports received may be assumed that several hundred thousands of Jews have been exterminated in Treblinka.”

g) Suffocation by pumping all the air out of the death chambers
This method was described by the Soviet-Jewish writer Vassily Grossman at Treblinka.

h) Quicklime trains
At Belzec the Jews were killed according to eyewitness Jan Karski as follows (29): “The floors of the car had been covered with a thick, white powder. It was quicklime. Quicklime is simply unslaked lime or calcium oxide that has been dehydrated. Anyone who has seen cement being mixed knows what occurs when water is poured on lime. The mixture bubbles and steams as the powder combines with the water, generating a large amount of heat. Here the lime served a double purpose in the Nazi economy of brutality. The moist flesh coming in contact with the lime is rapidly dehydrated and burned. The occupants of the cars would be literally burned to death before long, the flesh eaten from their bones. Thus, the Jews would ‘die in agony'”, fulfilling the promise Himmler had issued “in accord with the will of the Fuehrer”, in Warsaw, in 1942. Secondly, the lime would prevent decomposing bodies from spreading disease. It was efficient and inexpensive – a perfectly chosen agent for their purposes.

It took three hours to fill up the entire train by repetitions of this procedure. It was twilight when the forty six (I counted them) cars were packed. From one end to the other, the train, with its quivering cargo of flesh, seemed to throb, vibrate, rock, and jump as if bewitched. There would be a strangely uniform momentary lull and then, again, the train would begin to moan and sob, wail, and how. Inside the camp a few score dead bodies remained and a few in the final throes of death. German policemen walked around at leisure with smoking guns, pumping bullets into anything that by single motion betrayed an excess of vitality. Soon, not a single one was left alive. In the now quiet camp the only sounds were the inhuman screams that were echoes from the moving train. Then these, too, ceased. All that was now left was the stench of excrement and rotting straw and a queer, sickening, acidulous odour which, I thought, may have come from the quantities of blood that had been let, and with which the ground was stained. As I listened to the dwindling outcries from the train, I thought of the destination toward which it was speeding. My informants had minutes described the entire journey. The train would travel about eighty miles and finally come to a halt in an empty, barren field. Then nothing at all would happen. The train would stand stock-still, patiently waiting until death had penetrated into every corner of its interior. This would take from two to four days.” This Jan Karski was, by the way, appointed to chair a committee for “Scientific Research on the Holocaust” along with Elie Wiesel.

i) Chambers with submergible, electrified flooring. Stefan Szende, a Doctor of Philosophy, describes the extermination of the Jews at Belzec quite differently: “The death factory comprises an area approximately 7 km in diameter… The trains filled with Jews entered a tunnel into the underground rooms of the execution factory… The naked Jews were brought into gigantic halls. Several thousand people at one time could fit into these halls. The halls had no floor. The floor was of metal and was submergible. The floors of these halls, with their thousands of Jews, sank into a basin of water which lay beneath — but only far enough so that the people on the metal plate were not entirely under water. When all the Jews on the metal plate were in the water up to over their hips, electrical current was sent through the water. After a few moments, all the Jews, thousands at once, were dead. Then they raised the metal plate out of the water. On it lay the corpses of the murder victims. Another shock of electrical current was sent through, and the metal plate became a crematory oven, white hot, until all the bodies were burnt to ashes… Each individual train brought three to five thousand, sometimes more, Jews. There were days on which the lines to Belzec supplied twenty or more trains. Modern technology triumphed in the Nazi system. The problem of how to execute millions of people, was solved.”

j) Blood poisoning
This method, described on 7 February 1943 in the New York Times (“… gas chambers and blood poisoning stations which were erected in the rural regions…”), appears to have gone into oblivion as soon as it was invented.

k) Drowning
According to the Israeli Holocaust specialist Yehuda Bauer, the Romanians in Odessa murdered 144,000 Soviet Jews, mostly by drowning (31). The same method of extermination was testified to by the underground press agent for the Warsaw ghetto, as well as for Babi Yar (32): “Not a single Jew remains in Kiev, since the Germans have thrown the entire Jewish population of Kiev into the Dnieper.”

l) Chlorine gas, assembly-line shootings, boiling water, acids
Mass murders with chlorine gas, as well as assembly line shootings were reported for Treblinka (33). Reports of massacres with acids and boiling water round make a complete assortment of killing methods (34).

The exterminationists no longer wish to be reminded of all these stories today. At that time, however, they were considered to be “proven fact” — “proven” by the testimonies of “eyewitnesses” — just like the gas chambers, which have been placed a under legal protection order in several “free democracies”. Not to mention, that as the revisionists assert certain facts, the hoax changes to attempt to address the ‘new’ findings, not the least of which is the diesel to gas discussion (following) again, from Jurgen Graf:

Diesel or gas?

A marvelous metamorphosis is already taking place in the holocaust story. Several leading Holocaust proponents are now taking great pains to drop the Diesel claim and replace it with the view that the engines were not Diesels but conventional gasoline engines which simply burned Diesel fuel, presumably to make the engines more deadly than if they had only burned regular gasoline. This amazing transformation has appeared in a recent book in Germany entitled Nationalsozialistiche Massentötungen durch Giftgas. (fn. 34) The book was a joint project of 24 of the most eminent scholars on the subject, including such notables as Eugen Kogon, Hermann Langbein, Adalbert Rueckerl, Gideon Hausner, Germaine Tillion and Georges Wellers. The book represents the current state of the art of holocaust mythomania and has already been recommended by the World Jewish Congress in London. (fn. 35) The new, “revised” version of the holocaust says, in effect, that Gerstein and others were mistaken when they had claimed that Diesels were used to kill Jews at reblinka, Belzec and Sobibor. The claim now is that gasoline engines were used.

The clumsy juggling of evidence which characterizes this book is exemplified by the fact that although the Gerstein statement refers to Diesel engines four times, the portion of the Gerstein statement which is quoted in this supposedly definitive rebuttal of the revisionists does not mention Diesels at all, nor does it even describe the alleged killing process. (fn. 36) For a description of the killing process that Gerstein supposedly witnessed, the book gives a piece of postwar testimony by Dr. Pfannenstiel in which there is also no mention of the use of Diesels, but only of the use of Diesel fuel in the engine. How one could possibly have operated a gasoline engine with Diesel fuel is, of course, left to the imagination. The fact is that any gasoline engine simply would not operate with Diesel fuel (and vice-versa).

A fatal flaw in the new, non-Diesel, version is the retention of the recurrent claim that the corpses were “blue.” Although any possible death from Diesel exhaust would have been due to lack of oxygen, which would in turn have caused a bluish appearance of the corpse, death from gasoline engine exhaust would “only” have been due to carbon monoxide and could “only” have caused a distinctive “cherry red” or “pink” appearance. Although Pfannenstiel’s postwar testimony is generally less wild than the Gerstein statement, nonetheless he and other “eyewitnesses” also repeated the claim that the corpses were “blue.” (fn. 37)

That the Gerstein statement, although in a severely abbreviated form, is included at all in such a scholarly work, despite the problems for the “revised” version of the holocaust story which should be obvious to anyone looking at the complete text of that statement, only shows how desperate the holocaust scholars are to scrape together everything they have in support of their monstrous fantasy. They have precious little, and the Gerstein statement is still the best evidence they can present.

The new “revised” version of the holocaust story is actually more absurd than the old version. Although it might be remotely possible for an engineer to have mistaken a gasoline engine for a Diesel engine, how could anyone possibly have mistaken “red” for “blue”? Perhaps they were all color blind-we will just have to wait and see. No doubt, we will see many more attempts by desperate men to hold together a crumbling patchwork of lies.

The Diesel gas chamber claim is rubbish-apparently some of the exterminationists themselves recognize that now. However, the alternate claim that gasoline engine exhaust was used instead is rubbish also.

Holohoax museum
https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/mobile/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005220

Snippet…
Belzec, Sobibor, and Treblinka

In 1942, systematic mass killing in stationary gas chambers (with carbon monoxide gas generated by diesel engines) began at Belzec, Sobibor, and Treblinka, all in Poland. As victims were “unloaded” from cattle cars, they were told that they had to be disinfected in “showers.” The Nazi and Ukrainian guards sometimes shouted at and beat the victims, who were ordered to enter the “showers” with raised arms to allow as many people as possible to fit into the gas chambers. The tighter the gas chambers were packed, the faster the victims suffocated.

I hope all that was educational for you for future discussions.

Lets get back to the gassings.

FRED LEUCHTER: Not withstanding the evidence that Irving and Weber, have relative to “Limited Gassings”, The fact remains that Mass Gas Executions are impossible from a hardware standpoint. The evidence cited by both Weber and Irving is circumstantial. I have great respect for circumstantial evidence. It indicates an need for further investigation. This evidence will convince some and not others, and I can respect everyone’s opinion. However, the fact that is impossible from an engineering standpoint to effect Mass Executions with gas is not circumstantial. It is Scientific/Engineering Fact. This should override any doubts created in anyone’s mind about the matter. If anyone is willing to believe “Leuchter” and “Rudolf” some of the time, they should believe all the time. There is not middle ground in Science (Rudolf) and Leuchter (Engineering) …. I have left no room for doubt nor has Germar. (Fred Leuchter).

In complete agreement, the claimed mass extermination could NOT have occurred in ANY venue – because the facts for such are just not there like the solid facts of mass killings in the Reinhardt camps like Treblinka. (On this topic, Both Jim and Diane on separate occasions asked Mark Weber, “How did they do it, how were the killings done in the Reinhardt camps?” To which he responded, “I don’t know.” We learned that David Irving was asked the same thing and he answered, “I don’t know and I don’t care!”) THAT’S A PROBLEM! What kind of answer is “I don’t know?” How about “results are pending” (.LOL) Even some Jews admit there are some issues here.

“Most of the memoirs and reports of Holocaust survivors are full of preposterous verbosity, graphomanic exaggeration, dramatic effects, overestimated self-inflation, dilettante philosophizing, would-be lyricism, unchecked rumors, bias, partisan attacks…” –Samuel Gringauz, “Jewish Social Studies” (New York), January 1950, Vol. 12, p6.

Now, I’m all for open debate but honestly, the stupidity or believing things that are just totally impossible to have occurred, which you seem to now believe …. !!!! You’re a smart guy. But sadly You seem to just parrot the mainstream, PC-driven, mind-numbing, brain dead drivel who make statements without any facts to back up the claims: Saying “it” happened because (all hinging on the trumped-up question) “Where did these people go?” Really now we have to prove that to make our points valid? We don’t have to prove ANYTHING (the accuser must make his case) We just have to show that the official narrative is wrong which I think I’ve done with above comments.

What this is really about?

The Holohoax narrative is operated and controlled by a high-powered CULT, one that wants to USE the Holohoax narrative to control and suppress ALL thought and expression. THEY will decide what WE are to think and express. THEY will determine the parameters of what is acceptable to speak about – their game, their terms – typical CULT behavior and if you question ANY of their tenets, YOU will be dealt with as an apostate, as you have been, as Germar has, Leuchter, Deckart, Faurisson, Toben, Zundel have, to name a few of the many high-profile targets of this cult. And then there are also the low-profile ‘deviants’ (in their mind) like ourselves. So if you think you’re going to get on the fast track and be welcomed again by these people that hate you and what you believe, you better think again.

You think that by taking on this new PC-version of truth, you’re going to be accepted in the Holohoax community? That by ingratiating yourself to THEIR narrative (at least partially) that they will welcome you with open arms or leave you alone? Do you really honestly think that the Holohucksters are going to appreciate you in your back pedaling when you don’t subscribe 100% to THEIR version of the narrative, that you don’t believe in the Six Million!!!??? They still will look at you as a HOLOCAUST DENIER largely because you KNOW that 6 million did NOT die (even with those deaths you claim at Treblinka).

Sorry Eric – ain’t gonna happen. You’re a marked man now just like David Cole, Mark Weber and David Irving? You have joined THEIR dishonorable and even cowardly ranks? The only problem now is people are going to look at you as a sell-out – someone who couldn’t “take the heat,” who sold his soul to the PC devil, if you will. The only good news is your videos have been state of the art and MOST desired and respected and largely, THAT’s how you will be remembered. It’s easy to give in. It’s difficult to HANG TOUGH, which you have done for quite some time. Know this, though, that by caving, whatever you do from now on will be tainted and discounted. We draw the line on your work up to this date, as we have with Weber, Cole and Irving. Are you now going to recant what you have already done and call it wrong, misguided, and not in harmony with the facts?

I just think you’ve been sold a bill of goods and cannot accept the truth that the entire narrative of the Holohoax is a farse because it has cost you to maintain that stance. Why would you capitulate after so many years of ‘hanging tough’!!!! They wear you down? You waved the WHITE FLAG OF SURRENDER/CAPITULATION. You didn’t have to. You now have the option to hang tough or place yourself as a doormat where the HoloHoax Cultmasters can wipe their feet on and claim victory. Is that what you want? Because that is exactly what you will get from them.

I guess there is not much more to say to you….As a final note, and hopefully you will entertain this invitation we’d like to interview you so you can say exactly what your thoughts are so you won’t be misquoted… I’ve interviewed nearly all of the high-profile revisionists and many ‘unsung revisionist heroes’ who have consented to such an interview. We’ll give you your voice, your say and we’ll have a lively debate. Also note, I’m NOT like Ray Dawson, who would hang up on you if he doesn’t like what you say. We look forward to hearing from you about the interview.

ELISABETH CARTO: Eric H’s story can be totally disproved by Walter N. Sanning’s book “The Dissolution of Eastern European Jewry”. The breakdown of individual countries by their Jewish populations, who had a low birthrate in any case, shows that the disabled and children were absorbed into the nearby Jewish Ghettos as in Hungary. They certainly were not killed in gas chambers that did not exist. In 1990/91 Auschwitz had to remove the 6 mil figure from it’s stone monument and changed to 4 mill deaths. There was not ever any word of children being killed there. Actually, there were registered births of babies at the camp hospital. If the book is still in print, readers should buy it. Good luck, Elisabeth Carto

Keine Kapitulation (No Surrender),
(Capitulation is more than surrender, which may suggest ‘mere ceasing hostilities’. Capitulation is GOING OVER TO THEIR SIDE – a worse betrayal).

Jim Rizoli and Diane King
508-872-7292

Enough Already! HolocaustDeprogrammingCourse.com

EnjoughAlready!

HolocaustDeprogrammingCourse.com

Holocaust deprogramming course

Do you care to know about how the people you have trusted all your lives have lied to you?

If anything were to ever convince you of the terrible Jewish lies about World War II, this would be that document. You can’t possibly read this compilation of sources by hundreds of serious minded examiners and still believe the lies that mainstream accounts have forced upon you as “the truth” of World War II.

Many thanks to my friend “pdk” in France.
Please read as much as your mind can tolerate. You will never find as many courageous truth tellers represented in one place.
Best wishes,
John Kaminski

Escape From The Holocaust Lie by Arthur Topham

EscapeHoloHdr

Escape From The Holocaust Lie

By
Arthur Topham

“The first and most important value is the freedom to debate, the freedom to think, the freedom to speak and the freedom to disagree. This prosecution, has already had a very serious effect on those freedoms. If it were to result in a conviction, I suggest to you that a process of witch-hunting would begin in our society where everyone who had a grievance against anyone else would say “Uh-huh, you are false, and I’ll take you or pressure somebody else to take you to court and force you to defend yourself.”
~ Douglas Christie, Barrister & Solicitor from his Summation to the Jury
in the Ernst Zundel Trial, February 25, 1985

I chose the above quote from Douglas Christie, the greatest defender of freedom of speech Canada has ever produced. Doug, more than any other person I know (and I knew him personally for seven years right up to the time of his death in March of 2013), epitomized the spirit of Truth, intelligence of Heart, the noble Grace and indefatigable Courage and Integrity of a free man all combined with an adamantine faith in God.

DouglasHChristiecopy_zps43b1b5c0

It was due in great part to the efforts of Doug Christie during the trial of Ernst Zundel that he, like the biblical Moses of old, was able to lead the captured consciousness of Truth Seekers of the 20th Century out of their mentally-induced prisons into the fertile lands of freedom of speech and expression.

tazebook_dees-1-copy

Ernst Zundel had been charged under Section 177 of the Criminal Code for having knowingly “published false news that was likely to be injurious to the public good” when he began dispensing a small booklet titled Did Six Million Really Die? – one which he hadn’t written himself but felt expressed his views on the alleged Jewish Holocaust. It was Zundel’s trial that finally brought to a head the (then) forty years of Canadians wondering aimlessly through a cognitive “6 Million” wilderness of deception not knowing that all the while they were being psychically manipulated and conditioned to believe the greatest LIE ever told to humanity.

Awhile ago I typed out and digitally recorded on RadicalPress.com Doug Christie’s Summation to the Jury which first appeared in booklet form not too long after the trial ended and I highly recommend that anyone in the least concerned about this massive experiment in mind control read it. If nothing else it will vividly show you the brilliance and logic (and levity) of the lawyer who honestly earned his handle “The Battling Barrister”.

ZundelTrialFreeSpeechDC800 copy

Doug Christie put the issue of Ernst Zundel’s concerns before the jury in the following manner:

“The booklet Did Six Million Really Die? is more important for German people than it is maybe for others, because there is a real guilt daily inculcated against German people in the media every time they look at the war.

The German people have been portrayed for forty years in the role of the butchers of six million.”

In Christie’s Summation to the Jury at the culmination of the trial he recapped much of what was revealed to the court through weeks of mind-bending cross-examination, regarding this one fundamental LIE that has superseded all other interpretations of what took place during WW 2 in German occupied territories in Eastern Europe.

During the Zundel Trial Christie literally demolished the illusions of the “gas chambers” and the “6 Million Jews” myth that the Crown and its Expert Witness Raul Hilberg had attempted to foist upon the Jury and, by extension, the nation and the world as a whole. The final results showed that the much-touted, world renowned “holocaust expert” Raul Hilberg’s testimony (the Jews considered Hilberg to be their No. 1 man) ultimately proved to be nothing more than unsubstantiated bluff.

As Doug Christie put it in his summation:

“Who denies Dr. Hilberg the right to publish his views? Who denies that he should be free to say there was a Hitler order to exterminate Jews? Not my client; not me; nobody in society denies him that right. Who denies anyone the right to publish their views? Well, it’s the position of my client that he’s obliged to justify his publication. And I suggest he has….”

“Has Dr. Hilberg proved a single thing here to be false? No, he hasn’t. He says he had documents. He produces none. He talks about the train tickets and schedules. What train tickets and schedules? If we’re talking about a criminal case we should have evidence. There isn’t enough evidence here today to convict one person for murdering one other person. But they want you to believe that six million died, or millions died, and that this question mark is false. Where is the evidence to support one murder by one person? There is no Hitler order; there is an alleged order somewhere by somebody alleged to have heard it from somebody else. There’s no evidence.”

RaulHilbergPic

And the Beat(ing) Goes On

Now, seventy-one years later (thirty-one years after Doug’s summation) we’re still witnessing the relentless, malicious efforts of the Zionist Jews (and their sycophant zombie clones) to brow-beat, bludgeon, bedazzle and intimidate Canadians into accepting as FACT everything that the Ernst Zundel trial legally established as mere FICTION.

I am specifically referring to the current mainstream media uproar of feigned sound and fury that’s overtaken not only the local media in Jasper, Alberta The Jasper Local, and the Canadian Edmonton, Alberta media but has even extended itself to the state of Israel’s Haaretz newspaper since one of Jasper’s better known residents and peace activists, Monika Schaefer, published a short video denouncing the alleged “6 Million Jewish Holocaust”. The video in question was titled, Sorry Mom, I was wrong about the Holocaust.

MonikaSchaeferSorryMomHdr copy

No ifs ands or buts, it’s intentional mind-control on the same level as that of MKULTRA.

No ifs and or buts, it’s intentional mind-control on the same level as that of MKULTRA. Canadians, like people everywhere, have been unwittingly under the hypnotic, sorcerer’s spell of Jewish controlled “mainstream media” since the end of World War 2. They have surreptitiously endured a lifetime of brainwashing and mendaciously motivated mind control and for many today they still have little or no clue that the alleged “6 Million Jewish Holocaust” was and is the BIGGEST and most pervasive LIE ever foisted upon the world.

Of course that’s how it was intentionally designed to be when the perpetrators of this fantastic fiction first formulated, then forecast for use on such a massive scale, their serpentine “6 Million” siren song purposely meant to entrap the masses into subconsciously entering a Zionist-induced cognitive gulag or concentration camp strikingly similar to their own Talmudic Rabbi’s historically induced ghetto consciousness that forms the superstructure upon which Zionism’s atheistic ideological edifice rests.

Back in 2009 I wrote an article titled Israel’s Wall: For Palestinians or Jews? where I try to show the similitude between the wall that the Israeli government constructed on stolen Palestinian land and the mental/emotional wall that the Talmudic Rabbis built around their own tribe in order to control the minds of each successive generation of Jews and keep them trapped in the Talmudic oral “law”; an alleged law that purported made them especially chosen by God to rule over the world and because of that exclusiveness therefore separate and a step above the rest of humanity. It was a thesis first put forward by the British author and journalist Douglas Reed in his monumental classic, The Controversy of Zion.

The final point thought that needs to be restated again and again is the fact that down through history and right up until the 20th Century the most astute observers of civilized development in the West continually questioned and criticized the actions and motives of the Babylonian Talmudic tribe of Pharisees whenever they began to meddle too deeply in the affairs of other nation states but beginning with the take-over of the majority of the media in the West around the turn of the 20th century this practise began to cease and in its place there began renewed efforts on the part of the Zionist Jews to attack any and all critics of their ideology and their actions with the endless epithets of “anti-Semite” and “racist” and “Jew Hater”, an enterprise that has today reached such epidemic proportions that critics of present day Zionism lay wasting away in dungeons and website owners, university professors, researchers and writers everywhere are being accused of “hate crimes” throughout most, if not all, western nations.

Monika Schaefer’s case is the latest in that long and disgusting list of Truth Revealers who Jewish lobby organizations like B’nai Brith Canada and the new viper on the holohoax block The Centre for Israel & Jewish Affairs (CIJA) along with all their trance-induced toady followers are attempting to smear and degrade and destroy in order to keep the BIG LIE from being questioned.

CanadaBBLOBBY3 copy 5

What to do?

The longer this travesty of injustice goes on the more insanely vile and blood-thirsty the Zionists are becoming. Their desperation has grown almost exponentially over the past decade as they wend their way through the corridors of Canada’s justice system plying their rag-tag “hate crime” laws in order to safeguard the collusion they’ve made with the Devil.

No better example of just how demented it’s becoming was the latest attack upon Monika Schaefer that occurred but a day or so ago in Jasper. When Monika Schaefer moved to Jasper, Alberta busking (i.e. the playing of an instrument on the public streets) was illegal. Bearing that in mind, in communication with Monika over this matter  she told me the following:

“The irony of the fact is that it was me who brought the issue of busking to town council already a few years ago, made a presentation (at least on one occasion, and have raised it a few times since…) to support busking in town. You see, it has always been illegal to busk in Jasper. Yes, you read correctly Arthur. Anyway, so you see the irony – I have been pushing for busking for a long time. This summer is the first time it is legal. So when I went yesterday to get my busking license, my senses already went up. Dave wasn’t there, but the woman who was there (whom I have also known for decades – it’s a small town) was behaving very cagy. Then I left a phone message, text message, and email message with the person who was supposedly in charge (someone else, not even Dave). Today my gut feeling of yesterday was proven correct when I received Dave’s message.”

And here’s the rub for those who haven’t read the article. Dave’s message read: “We have considered your application for a busking permit in Jasper. In light of your recently publicly proclaimed non-inclusive beliefs we have decided to decline a permit to you at this time.”

“publicly proclaimed non-inclusive beliefs” !!!???

As one commenter on RadicalPress. com wrote in reply to the article, Surely you guys are making this up! because no one can possibly be dumb enough to actually write and publish that sentence – NOT, in Canada, no f’n way!”

Unfortunately for Canada someone in an official position with the municipal government of Jasper, Alberta DID write that sentence and sent it to Monika Schaefer.

Since my own arrest, incarceration and criminal case began back in May of 2012 after I was charged with “communicating statements” that did “willfully promote hatred against an identifiable group, people of the Jewish religion or ethnic origin, contrary to Section 319(2) of the Criminal Code” I’ve been doing my damnedest to warn Canadians of the extreme danger of these so-called “Hate Propaganda” laws that the Zionist Jew lobbyists created and are using with increasing fervour and zeal to censor any and all criticism of their deeds both here at home and abroad in the state of Israel. And of course the kicker is the fact that they used the “6 Million” holocaust lie in order to justify the inclusion of these Orwellian anti-free speech laws into Canadian jurisprudence.

Given the current Prime Minister of Canada, Justin Trudeau’s, longstanding indoctrination on the holocaust deception and his unabashed public display of obeisance to the perpetrators of this hoax there’s little chance that we will see him do what Conservative PM Stephen Harper did with the equally nefarious Sec. 13(1) legislation formerly contained in the Canadian Human Rights Act; that is, repeal the law. But that is the only and final solution to this “hate speech” madness that’s slithered like a snake from out of that den of vipers known as the Canadian “Jewish Lobby”.

RepealHateLaws-1000 copy 2

The issue must be taken from Cybespace’s Facebook and the Alternative media and transposed down onto the streets and turned into a public spectacle that the mainstream media cannot refuse to cover. Instead of focussing their attention on Gay Pride festivities it’s time that the Jewish-controlled media was forced to recognize that the fundamental rights of ALL Canadians are being jeopardized by these draconian “hate speech” laws and the only way this is going to happen is if normal, law-abiding citizens of Canada get their act together and begin to openly PROTEST this blatant act of sedition by these foreign lobbyists against Canadians’ lawful right to freedom of expression both on and off the Internet.

The time to organize this is NOW. Their game plan is so in our face obvious and the people know it. All that remains is for concerned Canadians to stand up, take to the streets and say ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!

If we want our basic freedoms we’re going to have to fight to hang on to them one way or another.

______

Petition on behalf of Arthur Topham and freedom of speech in Canada

Lasha DM Pet4AT

http://www.change.org/p/hon-suzanne-anton-attorney-general-of-bc-jag-minister-gov-bc-ca-hon-suzanne-anton-retract-your-consent-for-the-criminal-proceedings-against-mr-arthur-topham?recruiter=146329715&utm_campaign=signature_receipt&utm_medium=email&utm_source=share_petition

Open Letter: To Tim Wilson, Human Rights Commissioner, Sydney, Australia from Fredrick Toben

TobenLetter Hdr

Dear Mr Wilson,

1. The last time I saw you was at the Senate Hearings into the RDA in Melbourne where you presented your passionate plea for sexual tolerance. Now as the new Human Rights Commissioner you stated on ABC TV, Lateline, Friday, 14th of March 2014, that I am motivated by hatred because I am a Holocaust questioner, you’re labeling me a “Holocaust denier” – see below for transcript of session and clip: http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2014/s3963918.htm .

2. Please note that with my German background it is a normal reaction for me to question any accusation leveled against Germans whenever matters Holocaust arise, specifically when this horrendous unexamined accusation is made that Germans with clear intent systematically exterminated European Jews in homicidal gas chambers. See below the story: ‘The number is with me everywhere I go’. This current story is an example of another miraculous escape from the Auschwitz gas chambers, and I ask: When will the matter be tested for factual truth-content? After almost four decades Professor Robert Faurisson’s challenge still stands: ‘Show me or draw me the homicidal gas chamber – the murder weapon of Auschwitz?’  Then there are texts whose content remains unrefuted: Professor Arthur Butz’s classic, The Hoax of the 20th Century, Germar Rudolf’s The Rudolf Report, Carlo Mattogno, Thomas Kues, Jürgen Graf The “Extermination Camps” of “Aktion Reinhardt”, and many other books that in Germany, for example, are banned because they question the pillars on which the Holocaust narrative rests.

3. This act of inquiring into the factual claims, and whether they stand up to scrutiny, cannot be labelled an act of HATE, as you do. In fact, I consider the teaching of matters Holocaust as an act of expressed racial hatred against Germans. Years ago I attempted to bring an action of such nature before the Human Rights Commission but was almost laughed at by the registry staff. Kirsty Gowans at that time advised me that HREOC was a political animal.

4. Please view the following clip http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xS73ufRIoYc  wherein at the beginning a questioner states that the Holocaust narrative remains unchallenged, which cannot be questioned and is taught in schools as ‘a quasi religious dogma’, and she elicits from a Holocaust believer the astounding response at 5.05: …the West incurred a debt towards the Jews from the Holocaust and the Palestinians paid for that, and I think that one of the great discoveries of the last few years from Palestinian solidarity is the understanding that  the West also has a debt to Palestinians and we ….

5. Then, let me briefly comment on the comment made by Jeremy Jones in the ABC TV program, Lateline: >>Since that time we’ve had a series of cases and when we look at the situation before the law came in, and since, you could say that the law has acted to do exactly what Tim is saying we need, which is providing the argument against those – the people who will otherwise not listen to reason, and I don’t agree that you can automatically say that it’s self-evident that somebody like a Holocaust denier is bad. It took the court case to go through to identify what was wrong with the argument and it was because of the judgment that this was seen to be something abhorrent.<<

5.1 When in 1996 Jones started legal action against me he refused to conciliate and opted directly for a formal hearing because Section 18C had been designed specifically to stifle debates on matters Holocaust and the legal model used was that from Germany where a specific Holocaust law stifles debate because any questioning results in “defaming the memory of the dead”. In most legal jurisdictions a defamation action ends with the aggrieved person’s death. Not so with the Jews.

5.2. Mr Jones also refused to conciliate with Mrs Olga Scully and Mr Anthony Grigor-Scott, the latter was the only one who won his appeal before the Federal Court. Both Mrs Scully and I were bankrupted on account of having court costs awarded against us. Jones’ aim was to place so-called “Holocaust denial” out of the reach of open debate. Both Mrs Scully and I insisted that the commissioners and the judges help us in finding the truth of the allegations made against Germans within the officially-sanctioned Holocaust narrative. Unfortunately, both commissioners and judges refused to state to us that truth is a defence against the allegation leveled against us. And they were certainly not interested in looking into the factuality of what we were presenting. In fact, one judge during my 2009 appeal threateningly stated to my counsel: ‘You are not suggesting the Holocaust didn’t happen!’ Counsel’s response was: ‘With respect, Your Honour, that is not how I ran the case’.

5.3 Thus at no time were matters of fact canvassed in court for truth-content, but only whether Section 18C was activated by the published material in question. Of course, any material can be judged to give rise to an offence – and questioning the factuality of the Holocaust narrative is offensive to those who fear open debate about this historical incident now labelled “Holocaust”. The almost two decades-long court case in which I was locked in with Jones never once looked at any arguments and what allegedly was abhorrent about them. The last time Holocaust matters of fact were canvassed in a court of law anywhere in the world was in 1988 during the Ernst Zündel Toronto Holocaust trial. Since that time Holocaust trials focused on matters of law – and operated under a watered-down defamation legal framework where there was in effect no defence available for an accused of, for example, spreading HATE.

6. Mr Wilson,  if you really value free expression, which you state is also in your personal interest, then be wary of those who split free expression into free speech and hate speech. After all, for the latter we have defamation laws where individuals can go to court if aggrieved about what someone has said or written about them. Then we test such “absurd”, “ridiculous” and “preposterous” statements for truth content and investigate the physical facts. The implied allegation you have made against me is that my expressing my views is because I have “hate in their [my] heart”; or would it be possible for you to entertain the thought that I am just telling the truth! After all, is it not a truism, which any student has to learn, that sometimes the truth hurts?

7. As I am being blocked by personnel within the Attorney-General’s office from personally discussing this matter with Senator Brandis, with whom I briefly exchanged words about a visit to his office during the Wagner Ring Gala Dinner in November 2013 at Melbourne, I would appreciate us having a discussion on this matter and then perhaps you can ascertain whether I am motivated by hate in my heart.

Kindest regards

Fredrick Toben
toben@toben.biz
===================================

Read further to view the articles mentioned in Toben’s Open Letter
[Read more…]

Töben tells Zundel why he doubts the Holocaust: Video talk introduced by Lasha Darkmoon

http://www.darkmoon.me/2013/toben-tells-zundel-why-he-doubts-the-holocaust-video-talk-introduced-by-lasha-darkmoon/

cropped-mc

TobenHdr

Famous “Holocaust denier” Ernst Zundel is here seen interviewing his fellow revisionist Dr Fredrick Töben (left) in this 100-minute cult classic video. Zundel questions Dr Töben about his early life and the evolution of his ideas. The interview throws a fascinating light on the genesis of a “Holocaust denier” and raises the important question: how does one break free from the prevailing mass hypnosis practiced on the public through the Jew-owned mass media and finally come to realize the shocking truth—that what is now purported to be the central feature of WW2, the Holocaust, is in fact the most spectacular hoax of all time?

___________________________________

 

Before you listen to the video, I would like to set the scene and make some general observations of my own about the Holocaust in general and Dr Töben in particular.

Dr Fredrick Töben was born in northern Germany in June 1944, but emigrated to Australia when he was ten. He has lived most of his life in Australia and is an Australian citizen. Having studied at Melbourne University in Australia, he went on to attend the universities of Heidelberg and Tübingen for postgraduate studies, finally acquiring his doctorate in philosophy from Stuttgart university.

Töben specialized in the thought of German political philosopher, Karl Popper, whose doctrine of scientific falsifiability has now become a cornerstone of modern science. According to this theory, any hypothesis that is not empirically testable and “falsifiable” is not a scientifically valid hypothesis, i.e., it is mere metaphysics or “dogma”.

It seems to me that Töben, educated in the philosophy of science, decided at some point to apply the same idea of “falsifiability” to the Holocaust. He examined the historical data of World War II methodically, with the precision required of a philosopher of science, and found that the facts presented by the traditional Holocaust scholars simply did not add up. The Holocaust narrative, he concluded, amounted to no more than a religious dogma: a belief unsupported by solid evidence.

Having reached this momentous conclusion — that the traditional Holocaust narrative was essentially belief in a new religion which might be called “Holocaustianity” — Dr Töben was to bring down the wrath of the Jewish establishment on his head.

As a result of his politically incorrect views, Töben was systematically bullied, victimized and vilified as a “Holocaust denier” and anti-Semitic racist. He was to receive two prison sentences, one in Germany and one in Australia. He was also to receive crippling fines that amounted to the total confiscation of his property. All this was to demonstrate to the world what his supporters already knew: that the vindictice malice and cruelty of his persecutors knew no bounds.

Organized Jewry, having taken control of most of the Western world’s media and legislative institutes, has now succeeeded in making it a crime to question the Holocaust in 17 countries: Austria, Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Hungary, Israel, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, and Switzerland.

Dr Töben has always shown himself a plucky and highly principled opponent who has refused to buckle and bend under Jewish intimidation, refusing on several occasions to apologize for his views when an apology might well  have diminished the severity of Jewish vengeance. To stand up to the Jewish power structure has now, as noted above, become a heinous crime in seventeen countries. Indeed,  even to draw attention to this disgraceful fact, as I do now, is a crime in the Jewish lexicon. Kowtowing to Jewry is now compulsory. De Iudaiis nil nisi bonum.

Töben, like Ernst Zundel and so many other revisionist historians, considers the Holocaust to be a barefaced lie: a myth perpetuated (in his own words) by “the Holocaust racketeers, the corpse peddlers, and the Shoah Business Merchants.” He has further asserted, to the accompaniment of howls of rage from the traditional enemies of free speech,  that “the current US government is influenced by world Zionist considerations to retain the survival of the European colonial, apartheid, Zionist, racist entity of Israel.” (See here)

Dr Töben clearly entertains  no love for the state of Israel, which is in itself regarded as a shocking crime nowadays, for any negative criticism of Israel is seen as a symptom of anti-Semitism.

In 2005, in an interview with Iranian state television, Töben made the controversial comment: “Israel is founded on the Holocaust lie.”

The fact that millions of educated people all over the world happen to believe that Dr Töben  is right does not detract from the controversial nature of the above statement that Israel is founded upon the Holocaust lie. If there were a way of throwing all these millions of Holocaust skeptics into prison, the state of Israel and its zealous supporters would not hesitate to do so. Unfortunately (or fortunately) they cannot consign so many millions of people to prison. It just isn’t practical. There are not enough prison cells in the world for so many potential prisoners.

How did Dr Töben end up in a German prison? Well, that’s simple: he went to Germany. And soon after he got there, the authorities nabbed him. In April, 1999, they put him in prison, without offering him bail, and kept him there for the next seven months while awaiting trial. He was then accused in court of inciting racial hatred, insulting the memory of the dead, and public denial of the genocide of six million Jews in gas chambers.

After three days of careful consideration by Judge Klaus Kern, in which neither Töben nor his lawyer Ludwig Bock was allowed to mount a defense—for any defense against “Holocaust denial” is itself regarded as a further crime!—Töben was found guilty and sentenced to 10 months in prison.

Taking into consideration the seven months he had already served in custody, Judge Kern ruled that Töben could be released on payment of a fine of 6,000 marks ($3,500) in lieu of the three months remaining of his prison sentence. German sympathizers raised the money at once, without difficulty, and Töben was a free man within 24 hours of the verdict.

“This is a victory for free speech,” Töben commented upon his release, and went on to add defiantly: “I will not be silenced! I intend to keep on using the Internet to promote discussion on these issues. I believe in seeking the truth. Why are they so afraid in Germany of allowing open discussion about the so-called Holocaust? It can only be because they are afraid of the truth.”

Afraid of the truth! Cutting words. But if this is the only way to coerce belief in the Holocaust—to punish people in seventeen countries for daring to doubt the word of the soap-and-lampshade propagandists—there is little hope that Holocaustianity will prevail for much longer as the world’s newest religion.

Even during Töben’s trial, his lawyer Ludwig Bock had compared the prosecution of Töben and other “Holocaust deniers” to the trials of witches in the Middle Ages. The judge had just sat there, rigid and stone-faced, unable to deny what was only too apparent: that Töben was to be just another innocent victim of a Jewish witch-hunt.

”I wanted the court to go with me to Auschwitz to see the evidence,” Töben pointed out reasonably. “In any case where murder is alleged, there has to be a murder weapon. I have been to Auschwitz and I know there is no mass murder weapon there. The so-called homicidal gas chambers do not exist.”

Screen Shot 2013-09-29 at 8.40.41 AM

French Revisionist historian Robert Faurission had said pretty much the same thing.

Show me or draw me a Nazi gas chamber!” Faurisson had challenged his critics. “I’m still waiting!”

No one has been able to do so. Not a single gas chamber has ever been produced as evidence. What is more, the gullible public don’t even know this. It is universally assumed that there are dozens of gas chambers dotted all around Germany and Poland when in fact there are none.

It is sobering to reflect that British historian David Irving—who probably knows more about the Holocaust than anyone alive today—was fined 30,000 marks ($21,000) for publicly stating what is now openly and authoritatively conceded: that the extermination gas chamber shown to tourists in Auschwitz was a mock-up or “dummy”. It had never gassed a single Jew. It had been built by the Russians after the war.

Screen Shot 2013-09-29 at 8.40.59 AM

For decades, the authorities had deliberately lied to the public by pretending that this  fake gas chamber was an authentic one.

How many Holocaust hoaxes have there been? Wikipedia, which has produced countless articles on every aspect of the Holocaust, has failed as yet to produce a single article giving us a comprehensive list of Holocaust hoaxes.

Anne Frank has been written about at great length, but the fact that her famous memoir is essentially a forgery concocted by her uncle and a Hollywood scriptwriter (who was asked to write the dialogue) has not been revealed. Elie Wiesel, at every opportunity, relates his Holocaust woes to the world, but is too shy to show us his Holocaust tattoo. Geysers spouting blood. Jewish girls being adopted by kindly wolves and nursed on wolf milk. Jewish couples falling in love with each other behind barbed wire, losing each other after the war, only to meet up again decades later for a whirlwind romance and matrimonial consummation. The schmaltz is only equaled by the brazen mendacity.

How many tears have been shed over Jewish skin turned into lampshades and Jewish bones made into soap?

It is impossible to say.

***

Let me end this brief introduction by relating what happened to me a few days ago. I was sitting in my favorite sidewalk café at my corner table and writing this essay on my laptop, as is my wont, when a man I knew approached my table and sat down opposite me. “Remember the story about the Kuwaiti ambassador’s daughter?” he said.

“Only too well,” I replied dryly. “What of it?”

For those of you who are unacquainted with the story of the Kuwaiti ambassador’s daughter, let me say that this story is a typical example of mass media fabrication and black propaganda. It is the way the Jews dish up our news: sensational stories designed to deceive the public and promote profit for the few and mass misery for the rest of us. This story was the work of a public relations firm, Hill and Knowlton. The central character was the teenage daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador.

When Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait in 1991, having been first given the green light by America, the world was to be outraged by the sob story related by an unknown girl called  Nayirah—who was later on to be outed as the Kuwaiti ambassador’s daughter in disguise.  She was to testify tearfully, before the cameras, of atrocities committed by Iraqi soldiers in a Kuwaiti hospital: of scenes of horror which the wretched girl had witnessed with her own eyes.

She had seen these satanic soldiers rip babies out of incubators and toss them sadistically on the ground. I forget if she said they had trampled on the babies with their hobnailed boots, crushing their skulls to a bloody pulp on the hard stone floor. I can’t remember. I wouldn’t put it past her. After all, she had been schooled in her story by the best merchants of mendacity, the public relations firm of Hill and Knowlton, with a view to enraging the credulous masses of America—natural born saps who can always be relied upon to fall for the latest lie.

And fall for it they did. Leading to America’s subsequent intervention in Iraq in 1991 and the massacre of countless Iraqi soldiers in the cruelest circumstances: by burying them alive in huge open pits and burning them to cinders as they fled for their lives.

“Okay, so what’s your point?” I asked the young man who had interrupted me in my literary labors. “Why do you bring up the story of the Kuwaiti ambassador’s daughter?”

He threw a newspaper down on the table. “Read that,” he said. “Does it ring a bell? Doesn’t it remind you of the story of the Kuwaiti ambassador’s daughter?”

Screen Shot 2013-09-29 at 8.41.17 AM

I began to read the book review. As I read, I began to feel my blood boil. My pulse began to race and rattle and I had to pause several times in my reading, biting my lip in anger at the outrageous lies being marketed by this British tabloid rag, the Daily Mail. The book review was about the evil German women of the Third Reich, thirteen million of them apparently, all rampaging around in the “Nazi killing fields.” Written by Professor Wendy Lower, it was called Hitler’s Furies.

Let me give you an idea of this “chilling” and “sensational” new book by quoting from the review which I now have before me on my desk. I wonder what Dr Töben will make of these latest revelations of German iniquity, all of them concentrating on the female of the species, mulier Teutonica.

This is how the book review begins:

Blonde German housewife Erna Petri was returning home after a shopping trip in town when something caught her eye: six small, nearly naked boys huddled in terror by the side of the country road.

Married to a senior SS officer, the 23-year-old knew instantly who they were.

They must be the Jews she’d heard about — the ones who’d escaped from a train taking them to an extermination camp.

But she was a mother herself, with two children of her own. So she humanely took the starving, whimpering youngsters home, calmed them down and gave them food to eat.

Then she led the six of them — the youngest aged six, the oldest 12 — into the woods, lined them up on the edge of a pit and shot them methodically one by one with a pistol in the back of the neck.

This sets the tone. Cold, heartless Aryan murderesses. Every single one of them, Satan’s daughter, an emissary from hell. Let me add that the book reviewer is forced to admit in a reluctant memo, at the end of the article, that the evidence against these women was virtually non-existent.

Screen Shot 2013-09-29 at 8.41.34 AM

Apart from one woman, Erna Petri, “all the others mentioned here,” he admits candidly, “were tried and acquitted or released after questioning.”

They were tried and acquitted by the Americans, incidentally, not by the Germans. So they were actually acquitted by their own wartime enemies.

In spite of this acquittal, the Jewish (?) author of this blood-and-thunder Holocaust memoir  bizarrely suggests that the women were nevertheless guilty,  but managed to get off the hook only because they were too ashamed to admit their guilt.

“This fact has been suppressed and denied,” she sputters indignantly, “by the very women who were swept up in the regime and by those who perpetrated the violence with impunity. But genocide is also women’s business. When given the ‘opportunity’, women too will engage in it, even its bloodiest aspects.”

We’ll take your word for it, Professor.

After all, you’re a woman. And so you must know from personal experience what genocidal hellhags women can be.

***

The story of the Kuwaiti ambassador’s daughter springs to mind as one reads these sensational anecdotes, all from eyewitness accounts of dubious provenance and without a single source reference that can be accepted as reliable. Here’s another story that could have come straight from the public relations firm of Hill and Knowelton:

She [Johanna Altvater,  a 22-year-old secretary] marched into a building being used as a makeshift hospital and through the children’s ward, eyeing each bed-ridden child. Then she stopped, picked one up, took it to the balcony and threw the child to the pavement three floors below. She did the same with other children. Some died, and even those who survived were seriously injured.

Her speciality — or, as one survivor put it, her ‘nasty habit’ — was killing children. One observer noted that Altvater often lured children with sweets. When they came to her and opened their mouths, she shot them in the mouth with the small pistol that she kept at her side.

On another occasion, she beckoned a toddler over, then grabbed him tightly by the legs and slammed his head against a wall as if she were banging the dust out of a mat.

She threw the lifeless child at the feet of his father, who later testified: ‘Such sadism from a woman I have never seen. I will never forget this.’

True, it is hard to forget. It is even harder to believe. I have met German women. I have lived in Germany. German women are among the noblest I have met. Never forget that two  million of these women were raped, tortured, and put to death in the cruelest circumstances after WW2 by their Allied victors, especially by the Russians on the express orders of their bloodthirsty Bolshevik Jewish commandant Ilya Ehrenberg.

Even [German] nuns in habits were raped….182 Catholic nuns were raped by Red Army soldiers in the diocese of Kattowitz, the soldiers left behind 66 pregnant nuns. Some women lived for weeks on rooftops trying to escape the violence….

The Russians had gone as far as actually to crucify nearly all the [German] villagers whilst still alive, nailing a number of women and even babies to barn doors…. Every room contained bodies, the corpses of children and of women who had evidently suffered serial rape before their deaths….women who had been raped and mutilated one by one, each with an empty wine bottle in her vagina…. (See here)

And these German women, we are now told in this new Holocaust memoir, were no more than a bunch of sadistic serial killers. Thirteen million of them, all in the Nazi party, all goose-stepping vampire girls in jackboots wielding wicked whips like demented dominatrices!  The point being, I guess, that as German women they had it coming to them after WW2. Rape, torture and brutal murder—with their breasts hacked off and their babies ripped from their wombs—all this was no more than the horrid creatures deserved. It was retribution for being evil Nazis who had done away with six million Jews in gas chambers—in imaginary gas chambers, please note, since not a single authentic gas chamber has to date been found.

Remember the gas chamber at Auschwitz turned out to be a fake—just like the fake lampshades made of Jewish skin and the fake soap made of Jewish bones. (See here here, here, and here.)

***

The video you are about to see is cult memorabilia. The interview it features took place in 1997, ten years before Ernst Zundel’s conviction in February 2007 in a German court for “inciting hatred against an identifiable group“:  in short, for the crime of saying what millions now increasingly believe—that the Holocaust is a hoax calculated to legitimize the state of Israel and defame the German people.

The Holocaust narrative, unproven and unprovable, subjects the German people to endless obloquy and defamation. It makes extortionate demands for reparations payments, without an end in sight. It is, quite simply, legalized blackmail.

To see the video, click on

Ernst Zundel in Conversation with Dr fredrick Toben — Portrait of a Philosopher, 1997.
—-

Eighty Years of Infamy by Arthur Topham

Screen Shot 2013-05-22 at 5.31.19 PM

This dynamic volume [Germany Must Perish!] outlines a comprehensive plan for the extinction of the German nation and the total eradication from the earth, of all her people.”

“It is a definite obligation which the world owes to those who struggled and died against the German yesterday, and to those who are fighting him again today, as it is the bounden duty of the present generation to those yet unborn, to make certain that the vicious fangs of the German serpent shall never strike again. And since the venom of those fangs derives its fatal poison not from within the body, but from the war-soul of the German, nothing else would assure humanity safety and security but that that war-soul be forever expunged, and the diseased carcass which harbors it forever removed from this world. There is no longer any alternative: Germany Must Perish!”
~ Theodore N. Kaufman, Germany Must Perish!, Argyle Press, Newark, New Jersey, 1941

On Thursday, March 23rd, 1933 the newly democratically elected Chancellor of Germany Adolf Hitler and his cabinet, in a vote taken in the Kroll Opera House in Berlin by the Reichstag on proposed legislation known as the Enabling Act – the “Law for Removing the Distress of People and Reich,” were given a four year mandate to rule Germany, unrestrained by Parliament. The vote, when taken, was: 441 for and 84 against.

On Friday, March 24th, 1933 one day after this historic event, world Jewry openly declared war on Germany.

JudeaDeclaresWarGermany 700

Thus was set the stage upon which Germany and the world at large would be continually forced to bear witness to world Jewry’s endless and psychopathic vengeful obsession with their ongoing campaign of vitriolic lies, racism and HATRED toward the German people and the German nation.

2013 marks the 80th anniversary of this planned strategy of intentional conditioning of generation upon generation of western civilization’s citizens to fear, loathe and despise first and foremost the National Socialist Party of Germany (termed “NAZI” by the Jew media), its leader Adolf Hitler and then, by extrapolation, the German people as a whole.

After eight decades of defamation and endless slurring it begs the question as to why world Jewry would continue to, as the saying goes, flog a dead horse over and over and over again? To what (or whose) advantage is is to constantly harken back nearly a century in order to reinforce what is now, thanks to the tireless efforts of historical revisionists, evidently the most profoundly provocative and colossal LIE ever foisted upon the world?

A day never passes when the so-called “mainstream media (msm)” doesn’t make mention of either Adolf Hitler or the Nazi’s or the purported “Jewish Holocaust”. Relentless and hard-hearted as the tax man or the bill collector the Jew-controlled msm, like the ancient Mariner in Coleridge’s famed poem, holds the general pubic’s attention hostage with its “glittering (tv) eye” while spinning out its slanderous tales of endless misery and woe and persecution, all of which is maliciously and willfully designed to shore up a deceit that is now unravelling before the world thanks to the miracle of the Internet.

Only those born before 1933 could honestly say that they lived in a period of history when libel of Germany wasn’t an all-pervasive reality and the numbers of people living today who are of that age and still conscious of their former world are few and far between.

Those of us born after world Jewry’s 1933 declaration have all been subjected to the unceasing assault on the German nation that still persists today.

It was writers like Theodore N. Kaufmann, quoted above, who spear-headed the intentional promotion of HATRED toward Germany prior to America’s involvement in a war that Hitler and the German nation never wanted and never were guilty of causing. Kaufmann and world Jewry’s aim was to change the attitude of the American people; one that was then either neutral or pro-German rather than anti and twist the truth about Hitler and the National Socialist government and their amazing accomplishments from 1933 until 1939. And so his hate-filled screed titled German Must Perish! was promoted by the most prestigious msm publications in the USA when it appeared in 1941 prior to America’s entry into the conflict. Magazines like Time and newspapers like the New York Times and the Washington Post lauded the idea of absolutely destroying the German nation and the German race as a whole referring to the grotesquely contemptible concept as a “SENSATIONAL IDEA!”

GermanyPerishF&BCovers copy 3

Once world Jewry was successful in dragging the USA into the war via their choreographed “Pearl Harbour” maneuver all stops were pulled out and the vicious denigration of Hitler and Germany began in earnest never to abate even to this day.

Canadian children growing up during the war years were subjected to all the anti-German hatred propaganda that was carried in the media. Images of Hitler and the “Nazis” were ever-present and for all the German Canadian citizens throughout the nation the devastating effect of such vile and systematic psychic abuse worked its way into the minds and subconscious of those who, prior to world Jewry’s intensions, had been respected members of Canadian society.

HitlerSnowball 2

HitlerDartboard

When the war finally culminated in a victory for Soviet Communism, world Jewry and so-called western “democracy” in 1945 one would think that soon thereafter the hatred and vilification of the German people would have slowly wound down but that was not to be the case.

In February of 1945 the Allied powers met to sign the Protocol of the Yalta Conference.It was then that U.S. president Franklin D. Roosevelt first articulated the policy of “Unconditional Surrender”, a demand that the Axis powers yield to the Allies without concessions or negotiations. It was Douglas Reed in his 1956 book The Controversy of Zion, who stated in  Chapter 42 of his book aptly titled ‘The Talmudic Vengeance’, that it was an act of “blind vengeance” which meant that “the enemy would not be granted peace at any price whatever, and this was the absolute reversal of all “principles” previously proclaimed by the Western leaders….

“Thus at Casablanca in 1943 the decision to wreak vengeance was first taken. This was the background to the “Morgenthau Plan” of September 1944 (obviously first devised in Moscow, then drafted by Mr. Harry Dexter White for his superior, then forwarded by Mr. Morgenthau to Mr. Roosevelt, who with Mr. Churchill initialed it), the spirit of which pervaded the Yalta Conference and its Protocol. Mr. Roosevelt’s later expression of astonishment (“he had no idea how he could have initialed this”) and Mr. Churchill’s words of regret (“I had not time to examine the Morgenthau Plan in detail … I am sorry I put my initials to it”) are both voided by the fact that both then signed the Yalta document, its child and the charter of vengeance.”

Screen Shot 2013-05-22 at 2.35.32 PM

No sooner had the Yalta Protocol been signed than the propaganda machines in Canada started churning out their deceptive misinformation regarding what this Protoc0l truly meant for the German nation.

After world Jewry achieved their “unconditional surrender” of Germany (thanks to Roosevelt and Churchill), and the Bolshevik Communists were victorious in gaining full hegemony over all of eastern Europe including Poland and half of Germany then came the next phase of hate animosity toward the German people as the Jews, aided and abetted by their Marxist/Communist compatriots, began to reveal their quintessential ‘ace-up-the-sleeve’ scheme of  blaming Hitler and the National Socialists and Germany itself with having “holocausted” 6 million Jews during the three year period when anti-German collaborators had been placed in work camps throughout eastern Europe.

crucifixion-

It was an old ruse that had been attempted numerous time before throughout the early part of the 20 century but now that world Jewry was able to conspire with Stalin and their Communist counterpart and fabricate false and incriminating “evidence” of such a deed the picture changed dramatically. Using the moral abomination called the Nuremberg Trials, a pseudo-legal process not unlike that of the Canadian Human Rights Commission and its attendant Tribunal, where truth is no defence, the victors, via torture, terror and trauma, were able to force “confessions” out of former German military leaders that was then cultivated into fields of propaganda which yielded an endless supply of an adulterated diet of falsehoods for generations to come.

Nuremberg1

Reed also tells us that by 1945 world Jewry’s U.S. propaganda “hate” wing, the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai Brith was already carrying out “a high-powered educational program, geared to reach every man, woman and child” in America through the press, radio, advertising, children’s comic books and school books, lectures, films, “churches” and trade unions. This program included “219 broadcasts a day”, full-page advertisements in 397 newspapers, poster advertising in 130 cities, and “persuasions” subtly incorporated in the printed matter on blotters, matchbox covers, and envelopes. The entire national press (“1900 dailies with a 43,000,000 circulation”) and the provincial, Negro, foreign-language and labour newspapers were kept supplied with, “and used”, its material in the form of “news, background material, cartoons and comic strips”. In addition, the A.D.L. in 1945 distributed “more than 330,000 copies of important books carrying our message to libraries and other institutions”, furnished authors with “material and complete ideas”, and circulated nine million pamphlets “all tailored to fit the audiences to which they are directed”. It found “comic books” to be a particularly effective way of reaching the minds of young people, soldiers, sailors and airmen, and circulated “millions of copies” of propaganda in this form. Its organization consisted of the national headquarters, public relations committees in 150 cities, eleven regional offices, and “2,000 key men in 1,000 cities”.

Constantly beating and pushing their hate-filled anti-Semitic drums, world Jewry’s unremitting mind control operations have carried on right up to the present with book after book and magazine article after magazine article and newspaper clipping after newspaper clipping eulogizing the “6 Million” and lying through their teeth about mythical “Nazi” atrocities in Germany’s “death camps”.

Pulp fiction propaganda such as that depicted in the graphics below are typical of the Jewish publishing houses and reflect their psychotic obsession with publishing HATRED toward the German people.

Screen Shot 2013-05-22 at 3.43.23 PM

EichmannPropaganda copy

HolocautBook copy

Recently I was in a book shop perusing the shelves when I spotted the following title “Hitler’s Daughter.” I couldn’t believe my eyes. Upon looking at the book I realized that it had been published by Scholastic Books the famed publisher of children’s literature.

When the Jew say there’s “no business like Shoah [holocaust. Ed.] business,” the lesson truly sinks home when one considers the depth of depravity that they will sink to in order to brainwash future generations into believing their insane paradigm of opprobrium against the German people.

Hitler'sDaughter copy

The Final Solution

The triumph of world Jewry over the past eighty years is something to behold. Since 1933 they have worked overtime in an all out effort to flush Germany down the shit hole of history. In the process millions of otherwise sincere and honest individuals have been slowly and steadily insidiously conditioned into believing lies of such a magnitude that only now, after ten decades of deception are they finally beginning to lose their grip over the minds of the masses as the Internet and dedicated historical revisionists continue to make headway in their dismantling of the myths of the 20th century that have perpetuated a degree of HATRED never before witnessed on such a global scale.

Any such force willing and capable of deceiving the world on such a gargantuan scale is obviously not unaware of what has been taking place since the advent of the net, email and social media sites such as Facebook where these topics are slowly permeating and drawing more and more attention. The sense of desperation and panic on the part of world Jewry is palpable. If a person has been studying these events over the past quarter century or longer they can taste it in the rarefied air of cyberspace with each passing day. The pillars are beginning to shake and the deceivers are in a mode of defence that they’ve never had to contend with for a very long time. What to do? How do we stop the sheeple from becoming informed of our Great Deception and becoming aware and concerned people?

Those who have been controlling the historic dialogue since 1933 have always displayed one trait – the fervent need to CONTROL the non-Jewish gentiles (or goyim/cattle as they are wont to refer to the rest of the world’s population). Laws must be enacted to prevent the Truth from getting out and the overall population eventually realizing to what degree they have been lied to all their lives. Laws? What sort of laws could possibly prevent the people from debriefing themselves at this advanced stage of the game? Why HATE LAWS! Laws that will penalize and imprison those who are exposing our planned program of global deception. Laws that will make Truth an invalid, useless reason to speak out against the infamy. Laws that will make any factual evidence irrelevant. Laws that will make it a crime just to DENY that world Jewry’s interpretation of history might possibly be skewed and biased in favour of their own New World Order agenda for global dominance. Laws that will prevent the population from coming to the only plausible and reasonable conclusion that makes common sense, that being, the creators of the HATE LAWS are the very same folks who have been spreading universal HATRED toward the German people for the past eighty years. In other words Hate Laws for the haters and prison and fines and censorship for the Truth seekers of the world who are now on to their scam. Oi veh! what can you say?

Screen Shot 2013-05-22 at 5.22.38 PM

Well, given my own predicament and the fact that I have been under extreme attack by world Jewry myself for over six years now, I have pondered this question again and again and finally a solution that appears to be almost self-evident now that it came to my mind has arisen.

When the Jewish lobby groups here in Canada who have been instigating and pushing their “HATE LAWS” realized some years ago that sec. 13(1) of the Canadian Human Rights Act was actually a double-edged sword and some Muslim groups had the unmitigated audacity to turn these same laws upon the Jews they quickly began an all out effort to have sec. 13 of the Act removed from the statutes*. What that exercise illustrated was that any such “HATE” law, be it in the domain of the Human Rights Commissions or the Criminal Code of Canada is amenable to all Canadians, not just the Jewish lobbies. Thus the obvious answer to the goyim’s woes.

It’s time for Canadians of Germanic descent to stand up and take the bull by the horns and stop simply accepting their fate as victims of world Jewry’s program of hatred and instead become pro-active and utilize these same laws in their own defence. It’s time to stop retreating and time to go on the offensive. Time to reach out and grasp the sword of Truth, pick it up and begin to wield it, challenging the haters by applying the same hate crime laws to the actual perpetrators.

Let us fill our courtrooms around the nation with Section 319(2) “HATE CRIME” complaints against every Jewish person and Jewish media conglomerate and Jewish publishing house that has been spewing forth their vitriolic hatred against the German people for the past eighty years. Let us see how they like it when THEIR freedoms and their “rights” to defame and slander the German people are suddenly challenged from every quarter. Let us see how our federal government likes it when they have to investigate and act upon each and every legitimate grievance that the German people of Canada have to offer them in the way of injustice, prejudice and discrimination to their ethnic community. And let us see how the Jewish-controlled msm reacts to this unprecedented move by ethnic German Canadians who finally say to the government and to the world ENOUGH!

Prologue

I am certain that somewhere beyond this third rock from the Sun there must be a place of peace and truth where honesty and love prevail and children grow up free of mental conditioning so they can spend their productive adult lives doing positive and life-enhancing things that make them happy and joyful and fill their hearts with laughter. In such a place I imagine is where Adolf Hitler now resides watching over his people awaiting the day when their great sacrifices of 1939 to 1945 will eventually be vindicated and along with that vindication will come the release of the rest of the world from the restraints and the deception that have been imposed upon us all.

God be with us all.

———–

* At the moment it is sitting in the Senate awaiting final reading and approval by the Conservative government of Canada.

The Radical Press would like to pay a special thank you to Mr. Ian V. Macdonald for granting permission to use three of the Star Weekly front page illustrations from his superb book “Star Weekly at War” in this article.

StarWkly@War700

 

The Trial of Guenter Deckert by Sylvia Stolz (English translation by Christine B. Miller)

GuenterDeckerHeader copy

The Trial of Guenter Deckert

By Sylvia Stolz

Translated from the German language
by Christine Miller

“A prison sentence will not force me into believing.”
~ Guenter Deckert

“When I have doubts I demand the right to express them …They talk about tolerance, but mean the inquisition.  … The hunt to find incorrect literature pretending to fight crime. For a short time people can be intimidated by the threat of punishment, but the brain continues to reason.”

Guenter Deckert1 copy

Thus spoke Guenter Deckert in his final comment at his sentencing February, 2012 in front of the state court Mannheim. The report of his trial follows.

Since January 2, 2013 Guenter has been in prison on account of aiding and abetting so-called Holocaust denial. We accompanied him on his journey to prison and took leave of him at the Mannheim prison gate.

We expressed our thanks for his courage and his commitment to freedom, justice and truth. We will always remember that. The day will come when the Germans and other people will appreciate his zeal.

He is supposed to be released May 2013. We will be there waiting for him starting at nine o’clock.
Address: Herzogenriedstrasse 111, 68169 Mannheim. Whoever wants to be there and greet him is cordially invited.

Screen Shot 2013-04-26 at 7.18.38 PM
The Opinion Terror

By Sylvia Stolz
Screen Shot 2013-04-26 at 7.19.03 PM

A prison sentence for doubting the “Holocaust.”

No probation for expressing one’s opinion in these times of alleged “right wing terror.”

In these times of the “resurfacing” of right wing extremism which, without question, is due to the criminal deeds of the alleged “NSU”,  Holocaust denial constitutes a considerable danger for public peace.

Guenter Deckert, former high school teacher, on February 2, 2012  was sentenced by the state court of Mannheim to a prison sentence of six months without probation on account of aiding and abetting so-called Holocaust denial. As well, because of the “radical” law and in spite of high evaluations he was dismissed from his high school teaching job in November, 1988 in the State of Baden-Wuertenberg and was denied his pension.

He is charged with having cooperated in the translation into German of the book by Carlo Mattogno, Auschwitz – the First Gassings, Rumors and Reality (December, Castle Hill Publishers.)

 

Screen Shot 2013-04-26 at 7.19.27 PM

CarloM300

On July 28, 2010 Guenter Deckert had been sentenced by the lower court of Weinheim to a prison term of 4 months with probation. The charges were: promotion of incitement of the public by means of Holocaust denial and defamation of the memory of the dead. (&&130 III, IV, 189 STGB-BRD. Aktenzeichen: 2Ds 503 Js 14219/08 – AK 579/09).

The prosecutor appealed and on February 2, 2012 the sentence by the state court of Mannheim was increased to six months without probation. Guenter Deckert’s appeal was thrown out (Aktenzeichen: 12Ns 503 Js 14219/08)

Many people in the BRD (Germany), the BRO (Austria), Switzerland, France, Spain, Greece and other countries have been sentenced because they denied or doubted the Holocaust when defined as systematic genocide.  At times very high prison sentences have been handed down. For example  the sentence against lawyer Horst Mahler.
Screen Shot 2013-04-26 at 7.19.45 PM

The Holocaust is not defined

During his appeal Guenter Deckert  wanted to know the concrete facts which he, according to the accusations, deliberately ignored and the truth he contested. He received no answer.

It is especially telling that the so-called “Holocaust” is not legally defined (This is against the principal of the penal law). In the first trial no concrete facts as to the place of the crime, the methods of killing or other proofs, directly or indirectly  presented in the findings of other trials, were presented.

Concerning his denial the court pointed to &130 section 3StGB , &6 section of the international penal law which defines genocide as being when a member of an ethnic or religious group is killed with the intent to destroy or partially destroy the whole group. According to &130 section 3StGB i.V.m &6 section VStGB people can be punished who deny that under the rule of National Socialism, without knowledge or intent of the German Reichsregierung,  a Jew, by someone or another   (even by a none German), had been killed with the intent to partially destroy Jewry as an ethnic and religious group.

“Known to the court” to be challenged”

Guenter Deckert at the beginning of his appeal made the following motion:

“I move for the court to discuss point by point the principles on which the court rests its “known to the court” facts which, since the beginning of the Seventies of the Twentieth Century, generally go under the notation “Holocaust.”

The court should establish if and how far the persons who are called to judge have knowledge of these “facts” or only base their judgment on hearsay or secondary literature.”

Before coming to a decision about this motion the court should take into consideration the resolution by the petition caucus of the German Bundestag (upper house) Pet 12-4-07-45-5699 Deutscher Bundestag  12. election period – print 12/2849.

An excerpt: During a main trial the court is duty bound to discuss those facts of which the court has taken judicial notice in order to give the accused the opportunity to contest them. In addition it has to be acknowledged that “known to the court” does need to exist in perpetuity or has to remain unchanged. New information might have been gotten and new events might have happened which will bring about a different conclusion. If the accused presents such circumstances which in the past have not been mentioned or discussed the “known to the court” can be challenged and new proofs concerning these facts have to be considered. In this way the accused and his defender have the possibility to counter “it is known to the court.”

The decision concerning “it is “known to the court” & 244 lies therefore exclusively in the hands of the court in question and is subject to the principle of independence in respect to judges. It is also possible that in individual cases a different judgment may be the result.”

Judgment based on the media

Concerning “it is known to the court”  the following decisions have been made: (…)

The county court Bernau presided over by the female judge Kroh rejected the motion to discuss the principles of  “known to the court,” stating that the facts and the legal situation were the same. She simply gave judicial notice that during the National Socialist (NS) period, the genocide of the Jews in gas chambers located in the concentration camps happened.

The 3. Senate of the Bavarian state court rejected the motion concerning “the Holocaust is a  fact, known to the court” with the pronouncement that it does not have any doubts as to the reality of the Holocaust, referring to the accessible and common information in words, pictures, and sound. (decision 1/14/2011, Bay AGH II – 27/09). The motion of the defense to challenge which material the senate based its certainty of “known to the court” was denied citing material in newspapers, on TV, in reference and history books (decision 2/8/2011).

The judiciary degrades itself to a grotesque caricature if it bases its judgments on the media and TV. Judiciary contains the word justice. It does not deserve its name.

No actual facts

It is worthy of notice that the so-called Holocaust is not legally defined and facts are avoided. In & 130 StGB-BRD which is used to convict “Holocaust deniers” the so-called Holocaust is not defined. It is not even mentioned.

The sentencing of Guenter Deckert in the first instance at the local court in Weinheim contains no determination of the crime of “Holocaust denial”. In other words there is no determination of the Holocaust in regard to the place of the crime, the methods of killing, the number of the dead, the time frame, the perpetrators, the bodies, no deposition taken of the witnesses, no proof of the intent by National Socialism to completely or partially exterminate the Jews. There is no determination about decisions, planes, orders or documents not even in the form of references to other judicial sentences.

In addition there is no determination of the knowledge the accused had, or is supposed to have had, or must have had, or could have had.

As long as the courts do not name the location on which the mass murder was suppose to have happened; as long as the courts do not describe how the killing was done; as long as the courts do not mention any proofs; a judgment that mass murder has occurred is not possible. The same is the case for “it is known to the court.”
Without submitting proof as to actual facts a sentencing for Holocaust denial is not valid.

Without the determination of what knowledge of the so-called Holocaust the accused had or could have had, the charge that he acted against his better knowledge is void.

If the above mentioned points are not addressed a sentencing for the denial of the Holocaust is arbitrary and a corruption of the law.

A defense is not possible

The refusal by the judiciary to bring up for discussion the principle of “it is known to the court that the holocaust happened” makes any defense impossible. Not knowing the concrete facts on which the accusation is based emasculates the defense. The law used to sentence an accused without the defense being able to challenge “it is known to the court” defeats the ends of the law.

“The Holocaust as fact is known to the court.” Which facts however the court knows are not stated.

For example: Dr. Martin Broszart, director for the federal Institute fuer Zeitgeschichte published the following: “Neither in Dachau, nor in Bergen-Belsen, nor in Buchenwald were Jews or other inmates gassed.” (Die Zeit, 8/19/1960, p 16). On the other hand there are publications which talk about the gassings in Dachau, Bergen-Belsen and Buchenwald. Which of the two is, according to the judiciary, “…known to the court?” Is it “known to the court” that inmates were gassed at Dachau, Bergen-Belsen and Buchenwald, or is it “… known to the court” that nobody was gassed at Dachau, Bergen-Belsen and Buchenwald? Both cannot be “… known to the court.”

An entire event such as the so-called “Holocaust” can only be undisputed (facts known to the court) when the individual events are undisputed (facts known to the court).

The history Professor Dr. Gerhard Jagschitz of the Institute for Contemporary History at the University of Vienna wrote the following expert opinion: “Substantial doubts about the trials in question have been raised by the presentation of expert opinions to national and international courts. The relentless repetition of judgments using “ facts known to the court,” namely that the Jews were killed by gas in the concentration camp of Auschwitz, will not be enough on which to base sentencing in a democratic nation which is supposed to be founded on justice and right.” (letter to the state court Vienna, 1/10/l991, AZ:26b Vr 14 184/86)

The Ruhr –Nachrichten (Bochum) No. 277 (11/29/2005) printed a citation by the Israeli writer and musician Gilad Atzmon: “The historiography known to us about WWII and the Holocaust is a complete falsification initiated by the Americans and Zionists.”

Is the Holocaust indisputably “a fact known to the court” or is it indisputably “a fact known to the court” that the Holocaust is frequently challenged and therefore can not be “a fact known to the court?”

It is therefore illogical to call a certain alleged historical event which is frequently contested as “a fact known to the court”, a concept which the authorities then use to persecute and penalize the “deniers.”

Abuse of procedural rights

After reading the motion Guenter Deckert wanted to know what he has to accept as “facts known to the court.” The prosecutor, Andreas Grossmann replied (11/14). “That you will find out during sentencing.” During the sentencing however nothing was said.

The chairman, Ross, decreed to postpone the decision concerning the motion. He said: first  principles have to be established. Prosecutor Grossmann remarked (January 13, 2012) that the motion only will be dealt with after the pleading. The purpose became obvious when (January 13, 2012) the motion was denied. In the meantime Guenter Deckert took up his case again. In order to show that the “facts are known to the court” must be fully discussed he described in detail   circumstances and facts which made him doubt the “Holocaust.” For example he mentioned Dr. Benedikt  Kautzky who, for seven years, was in German concentration camps among others, in Auschwitz-Birkenau, and who wrote  that in no camp did he ever see a gas chamber.

The chamber denied the motion to discuss “facts are known to the court“ (chairman – Roos, jurors-Wolfgang W. and Helmut M.) using, among other arguments, the reason, “the Holocaust defined as mass killings of Jews especially in the gas chambers of the concentration camps during WWII is “a fact known to the court” (January 13, 2012). The Holocaust as historical event is considering evidence beyond discussion.”

“The facts are known to the court” is not to be discussed because “the facts are known to the court” is a circular argument incompatible with logic and beyond reason and the principles of justice.

The resolution goes on to accuse Guenter Deckert of abusing procedural rights. The need for proofs is not applicable since Guenter Deckert’s demands in that regard, during the main trial, are only designed to involve the court in order to spread his revisionist ideas. This is obvious from his presentation in which he declared that “facts known to the court” needs to be discussed.

According to the court it is an abuse of the justice system when an accused, before being sentenced, tries to move the court to examine the facts of which he is accused.  

The resolution furthermore implies that the chamber considers the discussion which forms the basis of the accusation as “court research” to which the accused is not entitled.

The court in this resolution has obviously ignored the laws of reason.

On one hand the court looks at the motion to discuss “the Holocaust, a fact known to the court” (contrary to what Guenter Deckert has said) as a move for proof, on the other hand, in contradiction to this, as a motion to obtain “court research”. The motion however implies neither one nor the other.

Historical facts are deliberately ignored

The resolution further states that Guenter Deckert deliberately ignores historical facts and obstinately refuses to accept the truth.

Reacting to the resolution (January 13, 2012) Guenter Deckert moved (February 2, 2012) that the chamber communicate the following:

According to the court’s knowledge “the ‘Holocaust’ is a fact” in which concentration camps and gas chambers existed.

According to the court’s knowledge in what ways did additional killings take place?

According to its knowledge what were the number of victims?

According to the court’s opinion which facts of the so-called Holocaust have I ignored and accepted?

Since the prosecutor and the court have not produced any facts in regard to the accusation I cannot know which facts I supposedly ignore.

I made the motion to discuss the principles of the “Holocaust is a fact known to the court” in order to be able to defend myself against the accusation of Holocaust denial. I stated in detail that the court is duty bound to discuss their determination that the “Holocaust is a fact known to the court.”

In addition I have pointed out that there is no concrete definition of the so-called Holocaust.

Furthermore no determination has been made about which knowledge of the so-called Holocaust I had or was supposed to have had or could have had.

In the resolution of January 13, 2012 the so-called decision does not contain any determination to the circumstances and “it is known to the court,” nor are there any references.

Without defining the deed in question a sentencing for Holocaust denial is not possible.

Without determining which concrete knowledge the accused had about the so called “Holocaust”, or could have had, an accusation to have acted against his better knowledge is void, and therefore a sentencing for denying the truth is not possible.

What is “fact known to the court”

During my argument I presented facts which show that there is a need for a discussion about “fact known to the court.”

“Known to the court” are historical facts which by means of historical research are considered proven and everybody therefore without specific knowledge can inform himself from history books, encyclopedia and similar reference books (Alsberg/Nuesse/Meyer, proof in a trial, 5. edition, Carl Heymanns publishing house, Berlin 1983, p.539.

The acceptance of “the fact is known to the court” rests on the preliminary condition that the fact is not challenged (vglAlsber/Nuesse/meyer, a.a.O., p. 568.

If however in historiography the truth of an event is contested it does not become accepted knowledge just because much has been written about it and disseminated (Alsberg/Nuesse/Meyer, a.a.O.,P. 540).

In my motion to discuss “the Holocaust happened is known to the court”  I cited examples of publications, especially non revisionist publications which prove that the Holocaust historiography is not in agreement, does not speak with one voice, is not unchallenged, and contradicts itself. The Holocaust therefore cannot be claimed as “a fact known to the court.”

A sentencing for denying the Holocaust on the basis of “the Holocaust is known to the court” is therefore not possible. I made the motion not in order to spread revisionism, as maintained by the chamber, but for the simple reason that I have been accused of Holocaust denial and that I want to use my right to defend myself.

To dismiss my motion because I intended for the court to deal with “the Holocaust is known to the court” is arbitrary. Before sentencing it is an essential duty and the task of the court to deal with the underlying facts.

It is factually and judicially not understandable why in a trial for Holocaust denial a motion is supposed to be abusive which is meant to bring clarity in regard to “a fact known to the court.”

“Fact known to the court” is in need of discussion

When a French historian, Jacques Baynac, a proponent of the Holocaust writes that for the existence of the Nazi gas chambers only the lack of documents, traces and other material proofs can be confirmed (Le Noveau Quotidien de Lausanne, Switzerland , September 2, l996, p.16 and September 3/l996, p.14) then this means that there is a need to discuss “the Holocaust is known to the court.”

Michel de Bouaerd, professor for history and dean of the faculty for the Arts and Sciences at the University of Caen (Normandy) states that the documentation concerning the Holocaust is rotten, that the documentation about the system of the German concentration camps is permeated by a mass of invented stories, relentless repetitions of falsifications, especially in regard to numbers, and confusion and generalizations (Ouest-France v. 2-3 August l986, p. 6). This again proves that there is a need to discuss “the Holocaust is known to the court.”

Historian Professor Ernst Nolte seconds the need for a discussion of “fact known to the court. “The testimony of witnesses rests to a large part on hearsay and mere surmises; the testimony of the few eyewitness are in part contradictory and create doubts in regard to their veracity.”

The director of the Yad Vashem memorial, Shmuel Krakowski, in the same vain states (Jerusalem Post, August 17, l986): “Most of the 20,000 witnesses’ testimony concerning the Holocaust are unbelievable, falsified, cannot be verified, or in other ways are not true.”

On January 13, 2012 during a pause in the proceedings (around 16:30) the chairman Ross directed the following words to me: “You would be surprised at the knowledge of history by the jurors.” But judges have to make an unencumbered decision, based on their conviction which they formed during the proceedings in question (& 261 StPO). In addition “facts known to the court” in order to be useable have to be introduced during the main trial in order to give the participants the opportunity to take a position.

It would therefore be useful if the members of the chamber would reveal their knowledge of history to the accused before they convict him on the basis of this knowledge.

If not it will remain obscure on which facts the members of chamber base their views. It (the Holocaust) is supposed to be a wrong removed from common categories and therefore &130 StGB is an exception to the prohibition of having a special law. (motion of cessation of the trial on account of  the special law & 130 which is contrary to the German basic law. The motion was denied January 13, 2012)

Permanent misjudgment

The chamber misrepresents my motion. It considers it a motion for proof which is obvious from their choice of words. “The chamber is supposed to furnish proof,” “makes proof unnecessary.” “proof is also inadmissible,” “a motion for proof is inadmissible (p.2 of the resolution).”

But it is unequivocally clear that the motion was not a motion for proof.

The motion to discuss the principle of “the Holocaust, a fact known to the court” does not mean, that the Holocaust did not happen (p. 2 of the resolution), but was a motion to examine the facts on which “fact known to the court” are based.

The chamber maintains that I contested “facts known to the court.” The chamber is mistaken.  I did not contest facts, but demanded the discussion of facts.

What is a circular argument?

A circular argument is to deny the motion for discussion of the principle of “fact known to the court” with the argument that a discussion is not necessary since the Holocaust is “a fact known to the court.” (p.2 of the resolution.)

The chamber misunderstands not only the meaning of a “circular argument,” but also the concept of “an established fact known to the court.” What is frequently contested can’t be “an established fact known to the court” since “an established fact known to the court” is defined as undisputed, unchallenged (see above).

It is a circular argument if I would say “the holocaust is not “a fact known to the court” because “it is not known to the court.” It is, however, not a circular argument if I say: “the Holocaust is not fact known to the court” because “known to the court” is equivalent to conformity and indisputability. The historiography of the Holocaust is not in conformity and is not unchallenged.  The resolution stated by the chamber shows a lack of capacity to reason.

It is inconsequential if it happened or not 

My motion of  January 13, 2012 in which I stated that the incriminating book is scientifically correct was denied. The following reason was given: It does not matter if the book is scientifically correct.  I am guilty since I assisted in the formation of the book.

It looks as if the chamber agrees with the view of the Mannheim court who convicted Ernst Zuendel. “It does not matter if the Holocaust did or did not take place.” The “tageszeitung (February 9, 2007, p.6)” writes about the Zuendel trial: “At the end the court denied all the motions with the lapidary reason (a shock to some of the antifascists among the audience): “It does not matter one wit if the Holocaust did or did not take place. Its denial is punishable under German law. Only this is what counts.”

[Read more…]

The Men Who Taste Jews in Their Sandwiches by Jim Goad

[EDITOR’S NOTE: Currently there’s some serious cyber fistacuffin’ going on in the alternative media ring between proponents who, as this poignant piece below points out, see everything as being a direct result of Jewish malfeasance and every “Jew” equally culpable when it comes to the multi-faceted query known historically as “The Jewish Question” and those who tend to discriminate (oi!) and assign guilt or responsibility only to the ones (and their sycophants) directly responsible for the woes that befall the self-chosen.

The article below is one of the best interpretations of this problem that I’ve come across. Please take the time to read and share it with others.

Oh yes, and lest I forget… This particular post is also for Det-Cst Terry Wilson of the BC HATE CRIME TEAM who arrested me, traumatized my dear wife, put me in jail and then illegally entered my home and stole all of my computers and firearms back on May 16, 2012. Ever since his shameful, ignoble performance he faithfully reads all of the posts on www.radicalpress.com each day (when he’s not reading all of my thousands of personal emails that were on my computers) in order to scrape together “evidence” that he then sends along like a good little school boy tattle tale to Crown council Jennifer Johnston in Quesnel, B.C. who further flaps pages of all of my posts before the eyes of the Judges so as to reinforce the Queen of England’s (Regina) false sec. 319(2) CC charge of willfully promoting hatred against “people of the Jewish religion or ethnic group.”

On occasion I like to reinforce this person’s traitorous behaviour with a graphic showing the evidence covering his face. I know how important it is for Terry to have his mugshot in the media as it helps him and his accomplices to justify in their own petty little minds not only their existence but also that fat pay cheque they get for acting as Orwellian thought police for the foreign lobbyists who currently control Canada’s Prime Minister and all of the opposition parties. I am, of course, referring to B’nai Brith ‘Canada’ the Israeli lobby 5th Column Mossad agency that is responsible for attacking me in the courts for the past six years.

WilsonFramedFinal-copy-2

http://takimag.com/article/the_men_who_taste_jews_in_their_sandwiches_jim_goad#axzz2GSd5taZI

Notes From the Edge

The Men Who Taste Jews in Their Sandwiches

by Jim Goad

November 19, 2012

I woke up this morning with a bit of a chest cold and decided not to blame the Jews for it. Some mystical yearning deep inside my heart—I believe it’s called “common sense”—led me to surmise that I am probably not afflicted with the Jew Flu.

It’s not that I hold Jews blameless, because they are human beings, too, Shylock, and are therefore not to be trusted. I hold other groups—blacks, feminists, and homosexual sausage-gobbling rump-wranglers—to the same standard. Merely because they find it fashionable to hide behind a shield of historic persecution to further their group interests and seemingly insatiable hunger for power doesn’t mean they are presumed innocent in all situations. I see Jews as human and therefore likely to be up to no good at any given moment.

Then again, neither do I blame the Jews for everything. But there is a tiny, bitter, and relentless subset of individuals who tend to do this reflexively. I call them “The Men Who Taste Jews in Their Sandwiches.” They also taste Jews in the soup they slurp and in the apple pie they eat for dessert.

Merely by stating this, I’m certain I’ll be accused of being afraid to admit that Jews control the sandwich industry.

These types inevitably turn any conversation toward Jews, no matter how little the topic at hand has to do with Jews. If Godwin’s Law predicts that every Internet discussion will inevitably lead to Nazi and Hitler comparisons, these creeps who eagerly leap across the line from logical to pathological are apparently bound by the inexorable forces of Goldman’s Law…or Goldstein’s Law…or Goldberg’s Law. In their diseased brains, all neurons lead to Jews. Perhaps one day this psychological disorder will be diagnosed and a book written about it called The Man Who Mistook His Hat for a Jew.

What’s ironic is the fact that although I don’t personally taste Jews in my sandwiches unless I’m eating a Reuben with kosher pickles, I likely ask some of the same questions as do the schmucks who even taste Jews in a slice of Wonder Bread with mayonnaise. I’m drawn to the Jewish Question merely because it’s such an untouchable topic. I realize that the mere act of questioning Jewish power and influence is a career-killer in much of the West, and that in certain countries asking certain questions about the Holocaust is enough to get you jailed. It’s one topic about which most “irreverent” and “non-PC” people are extremely reverent and effusively PC. I’ve also noticed that it’s a topic that many people are eager to talk about off the record but terrified to mention in public.

So here’s where I stand on Jews…OK, wait, roll back the tape…I don’t literally stand on Jews, because that would clearly be anti-Semitic. Here are some ancillary questions I have concerning the Jewish Question, and if it makes me anti-Semitic merely to ask them, I suppose I won’t be invited to your son’s Bar Mitzvah. If you want to crucify me merely for asking questions, well, I guess you’re one of The Men Who Tastes Nazis in Your Sandwiches.

The Jewish Question always seemed to lead to more questions than answers, so here goes:

• Are Jews members of an ethnic tribe or members of a religion? If the latter, how do you explain Jewish atheists? What exactly is a “Semite,” and why does the term “anti-Semitism” seem to embrace people who appear to be of Eastern European derivation while it tends to exclude Arabs and other indigenous Middle Easterners?

• If you’re so secure that the evidence surrounding the Holocaust is irrefutable, then why jail people who question the evidence? Why does the Western media feel compelled to mention the Holocaust almost daily while it routinely ignores the 30-50 million non-Jewish civilians—not soldiers, but civilians—who were killed in World War II? Were their lives not nearly as important?

• Why are certain “right-wing” writers brave enough to criticize communism, open immigration, the liberal media, and political correctness while they’re mortified to even consider that Jews were often the primary architects behind such movements—or at least disproportionately represented?

• Isn’t the idea of “God’s Chosen People” cosmically racist and supremacist? Is the Talmud not hostile to goyim? Haven’t the Jews historically been racially separatist, all while accusing other groups of “racism”?

• Is it even remotely possible that Jewish behavior, rather than a murkily mystical and ultimately unprovable notion such as “anti-Semitism,” sometimes led to negative perceptions about Jews? Even once throughout history?

• In a European Union document calling for “equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin,” why does it urge that we should focus “in particular” on “anti-Semitism” if everyone is to be treated equally?

• Why does our current cultural climate allow one to decry “white privilege” but never “Jewish privilege,” especially since Jews are undeniably overrepresented statistically when it comes to wealth and power?

• At the moment, Israel and some of its enemies are lobbing missiles at one another. Why should I care about Israel? Why should I deem this dubiously founded and eternally disruptive nation so important that it’s worth starting World War III, shoveling out tax dollars, and enduring much of the world’s wrath to protect it? What do I get out of the deal?

So those are my questions. I won’t hold my goyishe breath waiting for you to answer them. But dismissing them outright as “paranoid” or “anti-Semitic” is either dishonest or naïve.

My questions are honest and sincere rather than “hateful,” and calling me all the nasty names in the Torah won’t budge my feelings or cause me to relent. And I believe that a huge quotient of the population has similar questions but have been terrorized into silence at the mere thought of asking them. As a truth-seeker rather than a team-joiner, I find this troublesome. So sue me!

And this is the main reason why The Men Who Taste Jews in Their Sandwiches are such a pain in my tuchis. They live up to the crude stereotype of rabid, delusional anti-Semites, and by so doing, they tend to allow all criticism of Jews to be painted with the same broad Jew Brush. They’re the ones who tend to give so-called “anti-Semites” a bad name. It almost makes me suspect that some of them may be Mossad agents.

Making EVERYTHING about Jews gives Jews far too much credit. So ease up, fellas. There are no Jews in your sandwiches. There are no Jews in your soup. If you have a chest cold, you likely didn’t get it from shaking hands with a Jew…or maybe you did, but that’s what you get for being friendly to Jews.

——–

Please share this article by using the link below. When you cut and paste an article, Taki’s Magazine misses out on traffic, and our writers don’t get paid for their work. Email editors@takimag.com to buy additional rights. http://takimag.com/article/the_men_who_taste_jews_in_their_sandwiches_jim_goad/print#ixzz2GSfhBxgg

 

Radical Press Legal Update #6

NewLegalUpdateLogo-700

notice4RP

Dear Supporters of a Free Internet and Freedom of Speech,

Please bear with me as this update will be a bit longer than normal but I think highly informative as well.
It’s been two weeks since I last gave an update on my court case involving B’nai Brith Canada (aka Regina) versus Arthur Topham and RadicalPress.com, a pivotal, precedent-setting legal case that will ultimately determine whether Canada will succumb to the likes of all those other so-called “democratic” countries like Germany, France, Spain, Australia, etc. who have been co-opted by the Rothschild criminal cartel and now have their freedom of speech curtailed by “HATE CRIME” laws that don’t permit any questioning of either the rogue and racist state of Israel or any other aspect of the Zionist Jew agenda to turn the world into a giant gulag ruled over by the Star of David.

To say the least this session was particularly crazy in a number of ways.

First off we awoke in the early morning to find ourselves in the midst of a major snow storm! That meant getting the driveway cleared so we could get into town to attend court and as there was no time for me to shovel the 300 foot swath to the Barkerville Hwy we had to call the neighbour and get him to come over with his snow-clearing machine.

Meanwhile I tried to call my lawyer Doug Christie to check on things but I was unable to reach him on his cell phone. The court time for the bail hearing was set for 1:30 p.m. I called the local airport to see if Doug’s flight was still on schedule only to find that it wasn’t happening. As it turned out the plane made it from Vancouver International airport as far as Williams Lake (the next city about 90 km south of Quesnel), circled for awhile and then due to poor visibility was forced to return to Vancouver.

Realizing this of course created a number of questions in terms of what might occur when we got to the courthouse in Quesnel.

Upon reaching town over roads that were in dire need of plowing we went into the government building where the courts are located around 1 p.m. only to find the place basically empty with the exception of some supporters who had come to view the session. I went upstairs to the court registry to see what was up and was told that it wouldn’t be happening until 2 p.m. and that Mr. Christie would be appearing via telephone instead of in person. I knew right then that we would be encountering some difficulties as my lawyer and I had already discussed the importance of him being there in the flesh in the courtroom due to the strident actions of Crown council during the last session on November 30th.

Having a few minutes to kill, my wife and I went for a quick bite before the court resumed.

There are normally a number of different cases on the docket during the afternoon but on this day my case was the only one so the gallery was empty except for one mysterious elderly woman who was in attendance. She was probably in her mid to late 70?s and appeared to be following my wife and I around as we awaited the opening of the doors leading into the court room. My immediate impression was that she was a local sayanim (Isreali supporter and operative) sent out by B’nai Brith to observe the session.

Crown council Jennifer Johnston was there raring to go as usual with her mountains of files and folders stacked up on the table below the Judge’s bench. While we sat quietly awaiting the Judge’s entrance into the room CC Johnston added a new prop to her planned submission to the Judge by setting up an additional little podium on the table that looked a bit like a soap box or a preacher’s pulpit where I assumed she would be placing her papers and her Criminal Code book as she commenced her flamboyant actions against me on behalf of Rothschild’s front organization B’nai Brith Canada.

Judge Morgan, the Judge who has been sitting in on this charade for the majority of the sessions of late, came in and court immediately commenced the clerk having already called Mr. Christie on his cell phone a few minutes prior to the Judge appearing.

Crown council Johnston immediately rattled off the case numbers and proceeded to get right into it but the Judge had to soon interrupt her and allow Mr. Christie to state some things regarding the defence’s side of the issue.

During the last session on November 30th Mr. Christie had reiterated, as he has been reiterating for the past 6 months now, that he is STILL awaiting Disclosure from the Crown. What that means for those unfamiliar with court room procedure is that he has not received from the Crown the documents which state what exactly it is that I am being charged with, what the sentencing is that the Crown is asking and what the contents or evidence is that the Crown is planning to use in their offensive efforts to convict me of this spurious “HATE CRIME” also known as sec. 319(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada. This procedure of furnishing the defence with the Disclosure is standard practise in all litigation yet the Crown has been stalling and stalling and back-pedalling on the issue since I was first arrested on May 16th, 2012.

During the November 30th session Judge Morgan had asked Crown council to get the Disclosure documents to Mr. Christie by no later a date than December 11th, 2012 so that he would have (a very limited amount of) time to study the charges and prepare to address the proposed arguments of Crown as they pertained to the bail conditions which CC Johnston is hell-bent on imposing upon me. Well, as usual, this again didn’t happen and instead Mr. Christie got word at the last minute that instead of receiving the required information Crown council was now making an additional Application to the Judge wherein the Crown would be attempting to restrict Mr. Christie from divulging the contents of the Disclosure to his client, me!

Why you might reasonably ask? Allow me to explain. When the formal charge was handed down on November 5th, 2012 the Zionist controlled media in Canada were on it like a dog on a bone and all the major print media and Canada’s largest TV media, SunNews Network, were spreading their excremental slurs and the usual vilifying statements about me and my website around the country. In the case of the National Post aka the Zionist National Post as I prefer to call it, their intrepid reporter Stewart Bell had published some quotes from a document which another website, FreeDominion.ca had published on a thread on their forum. The quotes in question were extracts taken from what is called a “Warned Statement”. Allow me to explain what that is.

Prior to Det – Cst Terry Wilson of the BC HATE CRIME TEAM (the Zionist created police hit squad that orchestrated my arrest and that also works in tandem with Agents X and Y of B’nai Brith Canada – the two Zionist B’nai Brith agents who filed the sec. 319(2) charge against me) releasing me from jail on May 16, 2012 he and I went to a small interview room where he “interviewed” me in order to solicit further “evidence” to be used against me. I ought to have listened to my lawyer and told Wilson to stuff his interview up where the sun doesn’t shine but of course I didn’t and decided to humour him and gave him some facts to counter all the bullshit that he was spewing forth during our talk; bs that was pure Zionist disinformation most likely planted in Wilson’s lightning struck brain by Agent Y after decades of conspired with him back in Ontario (more on that in a subsequent post).

Anyhow, Wilson went back to his office in Surrey with his digital recording device in hand and proceeded over the next couple of months to transcribe it into text. Eventually (this is still not clear yet) he disclosed it to my lawyer Mr. Christie who, in turn, sent me a copy and unbeknownst to myself I didn’t realize that the document was confidential. Given that Crown Council has yet to disclose anything else it begs the question as to why Wilson would have given this document to Mr. Christie in the first place. After I read it through I sent it to the owner of the FreeDominion.ca website Connie Fournier in a private email to discuss some relevant issues to do with Det. Wilson in order to help me in my defence against these trumped up charges. My reason for doing this was quite simple. Agent Y has been filing charges against Connie and Mark Fournier for a number of years now and dragging them through court appearance after court appearance in order to stop them from publishing information related to his outrageous behaviour with respect to in the ongoing battle over the infamous sec. 13(1) provision in the Canadian Human Rights Act  that’s been taking place on the web for a number of years now. Agent Y is Canada’s #1 serial complainer working for B’nai Brith Canada and any other Jewish lobby group in the country always ready and willing to charge critics of Israel with “hate crime” offences and tie them up in endless litigation and then having obtained a conviction he reaps the financial rewards that come with the victim having to pay outrageous fines. Being a lawyer himself and having worked for the Canadian Human Rights Commission for a number of years Agent Y’s reputation for infiltrating websites and forums using false aliases in order to post “hateful” and “racist” comments and then turning around and charging the website owner with a sec. 13(1) “hate crime” complaint are well documented and known internationally.  It’s all part of an ongoing program initiated by B’nai Brith International to censor the Internet via the creation and implantation of “hate crime” legislation in the law books of unsuspecting democracies.

Well, as it turns out our sleuth Det Wilson has been collaborating with this same serial sidewinder Agent Y for years now pulling off on others precisely what they pulled off in my case, that is, coming up with some phoney “evidence” furnished to them by B’nai Brith Canada via Agent X their BC sayanim agent and then arresting the person and stealing their computers and copying all the information off of their hard drive and subsequently using the Canadian court system and the Zionist controlled media to first vilify the person and afterwards strive to find them guilty in the “human rights” tribunals (modelled on the Stalinist show trials of the 1930’s) of “spreading ‘hatred’ toward Jews and citizens of Israel”. Once those steps have been taken they then proceed to fine the shit out of their victim and order them to take down their websites and also issue cease and desist orders preventing the victim from publishing any further truth about B’nai Brith’s sinister actions. Agent Y of course greedily collects his blood money, pockets it and then proceeds to look for another website to sucker in to his hate crime scam. This has been the modus operandi of the Jewish lobby groups here in Canada for decades and began as soon as they were able to surreptitiously configure their “hate crime” legislation into Canada’s statutes via their sayanim Jewish Supreme Court Justices (Irwin Cotler being the primary Zionist agent and former Liberal Attorney General of Canada) and all the rest of their pro-Zionist lawyers and sycophants working on “commissions” and behind the scenes.

Anyhow, getting back to the scene of the crime de jure and what happened as a result of Connie Fournier (also unaware of its confidential status) posting this document on her website in the form of a pdf. Crown council Jennifer Johnston is now attempting to use that as an argument against my lawyer and an excuse for her holding back on sending Mr. Christie the long awaited disclosure and second, to file an additional Application to stop Mr. Christie from sharing any additional information regarding the Crown’s charges with me, the accused.

Then, to add insult to injury, she held up documents before the Judge saying that she did have the necessary information sitting on her computer just waiting (at the click of a button as she remarked) to send to Mr. Christie but of course she had to have the new Application approved beforehand so she could sleep at night knowing that Mr. Topham wouldn’t be privy to it and go and post it on someone’s website!

Some of course might think it lame and some lame-brained on her part to expect that Mr. Christie be subjected to such an outrageous set of conditions given the fact that the Crown itself hasn’t disclosed a damn bit of information from the get go! But given all the antics on the part of CC Johnston thus far in this little mini-series nothing that she attempts comes as too great a surprise. Mr. Christie of course outright rejected Crown’s claims and also argued that there were mitigating circumstances regarding the “Warned Statement” that needed to be addressed when he could be in court in person.

Mr. Christie then asked the Judge to set another date for these matters to argued as obviously Crown was making it supremely difficult for him to do anything without first receiving disclosure.

Then something occurred which bears mentioning as it’s not the first time that Crown council Johnston has pulled this stunt. When she began stating to the Judge that the Crown needed to get additional bail conditions imposed on me asap she held up in her hand a booklet that Wilson had prepared of all the posts I had placed on my website since November 2, 2012 when I first learned that I was able to do so legally. I gather it is one of his prime sources of entertainment and a justification for his otherwise unearned pay cheque when he’s not busy snooping about in all my private emails that he stole from me back in May. One could see that to her way of thinking she had in hand all the solid evidence needed to prove that I was continuing to publish “willful hatred” toward Jews and Zionists and that because of all these posts (up to at least November 30) it was imperative that I be restricted from using my website and posting my articles, news reports, other articles, political cartoons and unrelated stories.

This business of trying to misinform the Judge while at the same time intimidate me into somehow feeling guilty for doing what I’ve been doing for the past fourteen years of publishing is as pathetic as it is laughable. She still hasn’t twigged on the fact that I run an alternative News Service and that posting articles is what one does when providing such a venue for readers. It’s as if I’m supposed to hang my head in shame because these Zionist psychopaths have alleged that I’m a hate mongering anti-Semite and tuck my tail between my legs and slink off into the underbrush somewhere to await my conviction! My God! Is that the degree of intelligence that our legal beagles are functioning at? If so, heaven help the nation.

It was then that Judge Morgan began to repeat early statements and false accusations by Crown council Johnston (in her zeal to convince the Judge of the dastardly deeds I supposedly was committing), that what I was writing and publishing might be comparable to a website that was publishing child pornography and therefore had to be stopped as soon as possible. Child pornography!!! I couldn’t at that point help but groan and Mr. Christie was quick to rebut such statements stating to Judge Morgan that this was an unfair and inapplicable comparison. (Again, I will address this issue further in a separate article). The Judge listened to Mr. Christie’s argument and tended to agree although Crown council Johnston must have got a chuckle out of having influenced him to the point where he was beginning to regurgitate the same standard Zionist double-talk and lies that CC Johnston was attempting to use.

Given all the disjointed and conflicting accusations and misinformation that were colliding in the court room Judge Morgan suggested that court adjourn for half an hour so that Crown and Defence could speak privately and try to come to some agreement over the contentious issues at hand and also so Mr. Christie could speak with me as well. This was around 2:30 p.m.  We took a half hour break and returned to the court room at 3:00 p.m.

There was no possibility of Mr. Christie agreeing to anything that Crown council Johnston was proposing and so when court resumed Mr. Christie and Crown council Johnston along with Judge Morgan began to look at future dates where Mr. Christie could be in court to argue the case. A date of Wednesday, December 19, 2012 at 1:30 p.m. was agreed upon by all parties and Judge Morgan then ended the session.

Stay tuned folks! It can only get more interesting as this 2012 freedom of speech farce continues to unfold.

—–

NOTE: Again I would ask of readers that they try to assist me financially in my battle with the censors by sending donations to the cause. Due to the fact that the Crown is refusing to give the required disclosure to my lawyer I am not able to furnish legal aid with the required documents that they demand before looking at whether or not I might qualify for legal financial assistance. This leaves me in the unenviable position of having to rely solely upon donations to pay for my legal expenses and while I have been receiving some assistance from a few kind souls who realize the importance of this case to all Canadians the amount of money thus sent comes nowhere near that necessary to pay for my lawyer to appear in court in Quesnel to defend me against these false charges.

As such I would once again implore readers to give serious consideration to helping me out by either sending a donation via PayPal using either a PayPal account or a credit card or else sending a cheque or Money Order to me via snail mail at the following postal address. Cash of course also works.

Arthur Topham
4633 Barkerville Highway
Quesnel, B.C.
Canada
V2J 6T8

To access my PayPal button please go to either the Home Page at http://www.radicalpress.com or my blog http://www.quesnelcariboosentinel.com The PayPal button is up on the right hand corner of the Home Page on either site.

Sincerely,

Arthur Topham
Pub/Ed
The Radical Press

 

Word from Mike James

Word from Mike James


Mike James in Germany

November 22, 2008

Owing to the seemingly inexplicable, sheer dearth of income provided by my regular commissioners over the past few months, I have been forced to unsubscribe from my mainline telephone connection, the infrastructure of which supports my ISP. I shall be without any telecommunications “within the next three days”, so I have been informed.

According to another freelance friend in the business who has an ear for gossip, it is no coincidence that my commissions vanished shortly after the Central Council of Jews failed twice in their mendacious attempts to sue and imprison me, earning the ire of both the State Attorney and Senior State Attorney. This slap in the face was something the parasitic elite Zionist Jews had never experienced before in Germany. It represented an unprecedented shock to their arrogance and hatred of the German people. They finally took their revenge.

I shall therefore no longer be in a position to reply to every message sent to me by my Kameraden and Mitkämpfer, save for the opportunity afforded me by a weekly visit to a distant Internet café. I shall however read each and every one of them as time permits.

It was opportune that I learned of Fredrick’s inevitable victory (I haven’t been inactive behind the scenes in dealing with the BRD’s Zionist filth with my tactical threats of dire recriminations), because now I can lay down my sword and say, “I shall fight no more, at least until the final battle.”

Now, unemployed and moving to a cheaper apartment, I can at least claim free protein shots and proper medical treatment for my CFS/ME, recurrent muscle pain and autoimmune-induced food intolerances: conditions caused by a contaminated influenza vaccine in December 1993. I shall do everything I can to slowly regain my health and get back into the fray of battle, no matter if my struggle takes years.

Our parasitic, lying, thieving Ashkenazi friends extracted vengeance in line with the viciously evil ordinances of their Levitical god, Satan; but I neither forget nor forgive. I shall be back; and furnished with much more than mere words on paper. They will rue the day they picked a fight with an Englishman born on the banks of the River Tyne.

In the meantime, my fellow patriotic ancestral Europeans: NEVER SURRENDER! For I solemnly promise you this: neither our children nor great-grandchildren will ever be slaves to the Enemies of Humanity.

Michael James

New Police Raid at Dr. Faurisson’s home

From: “Ingrid” zgrams@zgrams.zundelsite.org
To: irimland@bellsouth.net
Sent: Monday, November 17, 2008 12:32 AM
New Police Raid at Dr. Faurisson’s home

By Robert Faurisson
November 13, 2008

Today, Thursday, November 13, at 6:15 AM, two investigators from the Police Judiciaire in Paris, having arrived in Vichy yesterday evening, burst into my house accompanied by three uniformed policemen, not without deliberately making a great deal of noise. This caused a severe nervous shock to my wife, who, at 77, suffers from a heart condition; I now fear the possible consequences. For the next hour and a half the armed policemen kept her, her brother and his wife (the couple had happened to be spending the night at our house) confined in a room, forbidding them to leave it.

The police’s loutish behaviour was all the more inadmissible as the two investigators (officiers de police judiciaire – OPJ’s) knew of my wife’s poor state of health. They had already visited us last January 24. That morning, upon reporting at Vichy police station to answer a summons, I was immediately placed in custody. When told that, after a questioning session, the policemen would be taking me back to my house and carrying out a search, I’d informed the OPJ’s that, as my wife had a weak heart, I had kept the matter of my summons a secret. I told them that at a certain time soon my wife would be leaving the house, and requested that they wait till then to show up for their search. However, they paid no heed to my warning and, with their untimely arrival, they had already given my wife a cardiac trauma.

This November 13 I hauled them over the coals. I told them what was what. And they calmed down.

The three men in uniform went away at 7:30 AM. The OPJ’s, a young woman and a youngish man, performed their search from 6:20 to 10:30.

I refused to answer their questions. For nearly thirty years I’ve been in the habit of responding to all questions from the police with the words: “No answer”, even if the questions are harmless ones. I refuse to collaborate with the French police and justice system in their repression of historical revisionism.

Once again, my two OPJ’s drew a blank. Once again, they found neither the computer nor the documents sought.

They came bearing five (!) warrants, the most important of these concerning my participation at the Tehran conference of December 11-12, 2006. The charges originated with then President Jacques Chirac and an essentially Jewish “anti-racist” organisation.

I ask indulgence of my correspondents beforehand should they find that, for a certain period, I leave their messages or letters unanswered. I am once more entering a time of turbulence. I have still not found a lawyer to replace Eric Delcroix, who has retired. By the way, I shall also ask my contacts not to come forth with recommendations of this or that reputedly courageous lawyer: there are in fact only cowards and inveterate swaggerers. (A model of the type: Jacques Vergès. It pains me to note how few people have seen through the act he puts on. His pet artifice, clumsy as can be, is anti-racist one-upmanship. “Barbie a racist? You must be joking! No one was ever more racist than the French colonialists or the Australians, exterminators of the Tasmanian race.”)

In France as elsewhere at this moment, the Jews are demanding a greater crackdown on revisionism. As long as the State of Israel persists with its repeated provocations of the Palestinians, it will be putting itself in growing danger and, eventually, bringing about, whether it likes it or not, the Zionist regime’s disappearance. For the time being, that regime must at all costs safeguard its number one propaganda weapon: the lie that is the religion of “the Holocaust” with its alleged homicidal gas chambers.

We may expect to be treated like Palestinians. For my part, I will not give in. People sometimes find fault with me for forgetting, in my struggle, that a man’s first duty is to preserve the safety of his wife and children. But that, perhaps, is only a man’s second duty. Perhaps the first duty of a man is to be a man.

I do not lose sight of the fact than my lot remains enviable when compared with that of a good many other revisionists such as, for example, Ernst Zündel and Germar Rudolf in Germany, or Wolfgang Fröhlich and Gerd Honsik in Austria, or Fredrick Töben in London. I also think of the heroic Frenchman Vincent Reynouard, his wife and their seven children.

_______________________________________________
Zgrams mailing list

Zgrams@zgrams.zundelsite.org
http://lists.zgrams.zundelsite.org/mailman/listinfo/zgrams