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

Farewell Hans! Memorial Service for Hans J. Krampe by Arthur Topham

HansFuneralHdrFinal copy

HansPortraitLrg

Farewell Hans!

Memorial Service for Hans J. Krampe

By

Arthur Topham

Publisher & Editor

RadicalPress.com

Our dear brother and comrade-in-arms Hans J. Krampe slipped out of his mortal coil on December 13th, 2014 leaving behind him a world fraught with endless war, political and economic turmoil and environmental destruction on a scale never before witnessed by humankind.

Those of us left behind who knew Hans personally came together to honour and pay our final respects to him on April 20th, 2015, a day that one of the participants remarked was most auspicious given that in B.C. April 20th has been, for the past 20 years, an official day of celebration for those who favour the use of the medicinal herb cannabis and, coincidentally or not, also the birthday of Adolf Hitler.  Both of these events were important dates connected to the life of Hans Krampe.

There were no large crowds of people in attendance on what turned out to be a warm and partially sunny, spring afternoon in Quesnel, British Columbia, Canada where Hans had made his home. The sky was filled with a combination of regular puffy white clouds and the usual chemtrails that are now a regular occurrence throughout the province. In his time spend in the Cariboo, Hans had befriended a small, eclectic group of people with whom he associated. He was not big on being a social animal and lived a relatively secluded life atop his mountain retreat a few kilometres outside the city of Quesnel.

Hans'Home

After Hans’ untimely passing I was able to assist in preparing a memorial service thanks to the Clayton Funeral Home in Quesnel who contacted me and offered their help. Being the dead of winter and also having to try and contact Hans’ next of kin who were in Germany, as well as other friends and associates, I decided to set the date for 4/20/2015. It turned out to have been a good choice.

A motley crew of men and women who, for assorted reasons, had become a part of Hans’ life over his years in the community gathered together at 1:00 pm in what is called Tranquility Gardens, now Hans’ final resting place, to sharing their thoughts and feelings about this unique individual who had left his mark on each one of us and so many more on the Internet.

HansServiceParticapants copy

The service itself was not planned out in advance as I had no idea who or how many folks would be showing up but once Hans’ friends arrived and settled into their seats I took to the podium that Christopher Fitzgerald, Clayton’s Funeral Director had kindly set up for the event and proceeded to read out the condolences that people had sent to me via email from around the world – touching tributes to a man who, in the past 16 years of his life, had established himself as one of the more knowledgable and passionate defenders of historical truth with respect to the history of his former home country of Germany.

ChristopherFitzgerald copy

I began by reading out a letter I received from Hans’ sister Gudula who lives in Germany. Her son Stephan, Hans’ nephew, translated it into English.

Having began his early life in Eastern-Germany (DDR) next to Berlin Gedula was the first to note Hans’ wanderlusting spirit and wrote that he began “globetrotting” early in life, traveling alone at the ripe old age of 5-6 on the train to Western Berlin to visit his aunt. As she said, “To the delight of his parents it was up to them to bring him back home again.”

Hans, being the persistent fellow that he was, continued packing his knapsack and fleeing his East German residence and so eventually his parents decided to send him to school in West Berlin.

I personally recall many an evening’s conversation with Hans when he would relate stories of his early years and his experiences while attending a Waldorf school where his education was geared more toward self-expression and artistic achievement rather than the usual rote memorization of facts, figures and logic. It suited his temperament and laid the groundwork for his later literary life as a writer and artist.

Upon completion of his high school Hans entered into an apprenticeship to become a Tool & Dye maker and trained in the profession until finally coming to the decision that he wasn’t cut out for such a rigid lifestyle. He decided at that point to join the German navy and head out on the high seas for fun and adventure. He spent some years aboard fast patrol boats in the North Sea off Germany’s coast where he became proficient as a signal man and sailor.

Gudula went on to write that Hans also spent time in Scotland and later in Greece where he lived an ascetic existence on a small island in the Mediterranean.  It was during this period that he met friends from Canada who told him about the country thus piquing his curiosity to the point where he eventually decided to leave Europe and head off to the “New World” of North America. He never looked back and remained in Canada for the last forty years of his life.

Landing in Montreal in 1974 Hans soon headed West where he found steady employment in Canada’s Northwest Territories working at a large Tungsten mine called Cantung where he drove heavy equipment until its closure in 1986. It was during his time spent at Cantung that Hans began to develop his writing skills which later on would serve him well with the advent of the internet.

Having worked hard and saved Hans then ventured down into British Columbia with grubstake in  hand eventually purchased the twenty acre parcel of land in the Cariboo region that would become his home and life’s love and work.

As Gudula also observed, Hans, while living up in the northwest, had witnessed the destruction of the old growth forests by the logging industry and being a sensitive man soon became a fervent defender of the environment and a “green activist fearing no confrontation in order that the public should know how they were being manipulated and cheated.”HansInGodWeTrustGraphic copy 2

One of Hans’ pen and ink graphics depicting Canada’s political realities

Summing up Hans’ life Gudula wrote, “He also worked as an illustrator and writer for a newspaper called “The Radical” beginning in 1998 and until his death he continued to uncover abuses in Canada. Possibly it now it will become a bit more silent there because Hans always stood up for what he believed in. He was a true campaigner.

My brother was a fervent supporter of justice who held strong convictions. And he loved his Canada! That how I will keep him in memory!

I am very unhappy and sad that he died alone. For sure his passing was unexpected by many of his friends. We all will miss him.

Until our last conversation he always called me “my little mouse”. For him I was always his 18 years old sister.

Thank you so much.

Gudula Schoen”

Following Gudula’s heartfelt letter I then read condolences coming from Australia and the USA and elsewhere in Canada where Hans’ literary achievements over the years had gained him a faithful following.

As Dagmar Brenne, writing from Australia, put it, “I wish to add my name to the list of people who are gathering in remembrance of Hans Krampe. May he rest in peace and may his name be engraved in the immortal book of life. The way, the truth and the life is our motto. May the truth be victorious over the avalanche of lies. Amen and amen.”

It is at this point that I must pay special tribute to some mutual friends of Hans’ and mine who are deserving of attention as their lives and our became inextricably linked in the early years of the publication of The Radical and have continue on to the present day.

When I ceased my former teaching career and started the alternative publishing business The Radical Press in June of 1998 both Hans and myself, while eager to begin telling the world about all the things that the mainstream media was not covering, were still naively ignorant as to actual events as they related to the history of Hans’ former home country Germany. Without a doubt both of us were well-versed in most of the controversial political issues of the day, having been dedicated environmentalists and social justice critics for decades, but when it came to Adolf Hitler and the “Nazis” (the ingrained epitome of the symbolic “bad guys”), our judgements were still severely crippled by the lack of reliable, factual information as well as a lifetime of having been mentally groomed (indoctrinated) by the media and publishing houses to be anti-Hitler and anti-National Socialist and so whenever we required a metaphor or simile to describe some gross injustice of massive proportions it was usually ol’ Adolf who became the scapegoat for all the world woes.

One of many topics of discussion in The Radical around the year 2000 was gun control. It was also the period when Canada’s then Prime Minister, Jean Chretien, suddenly called a snap election in the fall catching the official opposition party, the Canadian Alliance (formerly the Reform Party of Canada), off guard. The leader of the Canadian Alliance at the time was Stockwell Day who would soon be replaced by Stephen Harper in 2002. One of the topics of the time was the controversial Liberal long gun registry and the Canadian Alliance were challenging Chretien on their policies.

In my Vol. 3 No.4  November 2000 edition of The Radical I had published a Guest Editorial by Donna Young, then owner of a Dawson Creek, B.C. publication, on the topic of gun control titled “Gun Control Idealism” and along with it a cartoon graphic by artist Cliff Woffenden depicting Chretien and Day in election mode. It was also, by coincidence, the first edition of the paper after having joined forces with Sue Potvin, former publisher of another alternative newspaper called Discourse & Disclosure (D&D) in eastern Canada. D&D was inserted into my publication for distribution and that is how it found its way into the hands of Walter and Herta Ruthard of Lisle, Ontario who, at the time, were subscribers to D&D.

Cliff'sNaziCartoon copy 2

Soon after publication I received a letter from Walter Ruthard which is presented here in the graphic below. This was the turning point for both Hans and myself in terms of questioning the official status quo perception of historic events as they pertained to World War II and German history in general as written by the victors after 1945.

RuthardLet2RadJan2001

As a result of Walter Ruthard’s critique of The Radical’s stance on Hitler and the National Socialist government of 1933 – 1945 both Hans and I were brought back to reality and from that point on our interest in history took on a distinctive, revisionist perspective.

“Dear Arthur,

Thank you so much for your offer to read our obituary for Hans Krampe. Thank you also for the beautiful memorial picture you have sent us!

Hoping that you are OK.

Herta, Walter and Sonja Ruthard

For whom the bell tolls

For you, Hans, it tolled far too soon; you were our comrade in the “trenches”. Your fight was our fight too, and together we tried to break the web of lies and slavery that threatens to choke out the peoples of this world.

Ever a leader, you took the final step before us too. Your passing is a great loss for this small band of the faithful, but our numbers will grow, not least of all thanks to you and to the tireless work for truth that is your legacy: the great stone with your initials, is in the wall our Lord will build around us to protect us from the evil of the world.

In this certainty, we remember you with profound gratitude. How could we ever forget you!

Your friends Herta, Walter and Sonja Ruthard”

DSC_0009 copy 2

Hans’ living room and study

Another longtime friend of Hans’ who knew him well, Paul Dykstra, had the following to say in an email which I received just prior to Hans’ service.

“Greetings to all who are friends of Hans, and I definitely count myself among you! Hans is a loyal soul and was a devoted friend to those he chose to befriend, which included me and my family. He knew how to be with children, and he was always open minded and brooked no bullshit from anyone.

When we moved to the US in 1999, Hans graciously accepted our dog, Kai, and that dog became more his than he ever was ours, because once Hans decided to do something he did it right, and with all his resources. Kai and Hans became best friends.

Hans&Kai

Hans with his faithful friend Kai

Our bond stayed strong as I called him at whiles, and, especially on our mutual birthday, November 30th. Because we were both born on that day, we had a special kinship and understanding, a Sagittarian bond, and I enjoyed that all the time we were in Quesnel and knew him, and also in these later years.

He used to come and visit at B & B Music, and was a music lover and a fine storyteller also.

Hans never abandoned anything he knew to be the truth, and was not afraid to remind anyone of us when we were not paying attention to issues that, deep down, we knew were important.

I know that he is a Free Spirit, and can now continue on his Quest, as we all will.

Peace and Love to you, Hans, and we send you and all our friends NAMASTE!

Thanks, everyone”

Following the reading of the eulogies to Hans from his family, cyber associates and friends I turned the podium over to those in attendance and further stories and endearing tales were forthcoming.

One of Hans’ older friends told us about meeting Hans just after he had purchased his property on Birch Hill road. The ground had been recently logged and the first thing that Hans did was go up to Prince George, a city approximately 100 km north of Quesnel, where he purchased 10,000 young trees that he then proceeded to plant all over his 20 acre property. This project became Hans’ life work and today his land is covered with healthy, sturdy young pine, fir and spruce trees that give his estate a beautiful park-like appearance.

Another close acquaintance told us stories of Han’s great love for music and how he had influenced people to listen to some of the great bands that emerged during the 1960’s in Britain and on the European continent. Hans soon befriended many of the local musicians in Quesnel and was always to be found at the jam sessions and performances wherever music was being played.

HansShastahArthur

Fun times together at Hans’ home with my wife Shastah and I (circa 2003)

There were also humorous stories from others who had worked with Hans when he was a tree-planter back in the late ’80’s and early ’90’s. Being the fervent environmentalist that Hans was he often was at the forefront when it came to defending the land  and the natural resources and was always willing to speak out at demonstrations associated with government sponsored clear-cutting of BC’s wilderness areas.

DSC_0050 copy

The bronze plaque above where Hans’ urn rests epitomizes his life & work  

After much laughter and good cheer and stories it came time to lay Hans’ ashes to rest and Christopher Fitzgerald brought out the urn containing Hans’ last corporeal remains and sat it next to the place where it was to be held. The honour of placing his urn was mine and so I walked over to where it was sitting and carefully picked up the small gold-coloured square box. Having never participated in such a ceremony I was unaware of the actual weight of the urn and upon lifting it I surprised by this phenomenon and exclaimed, “Wow, I didn’t think it would be so heavy!” No sooner had I blurted it out than Christopher said, “He ain’t heavy, he’s your brother!” and everyone enjoyed one last laugh.

DSC_0036 copy 2

As I stood there holding Hans’ remains in my hands his friend Doug Gook took out his silver flute and began to play Amazing Grace. We listened in silence and said our final prayers and farewells to Hans.

DSC_0045 copy 2

 Hans krampe’s name will undoubtedly go down in the annals of cyber history as a German Revisionist who contributed to the growing wealth of information and historic truth that is now successfully challenging the old paradigm falsely created by the Zionist-controlled governments and media after World War II.

May God watch over him and may his soul be at peace.

Mehr Licht! Herr Krampe.

Memorial Service for the late Hans J. Krampe Monday, April 20th, 2015

HJK'sFuneralNotice

PLEASE SHARE THIS NOTICE WITH ANYONE WHO YOU FEEL KNEW HANS J. KRAMPE.

“More than any other person, Hans Krampe demonstrated to me the difference between honest non Jewish Germans and the Jewish purveyors of false history who have totally warped the facts of World War II and led the world into a prison of poison thought from which it might never emerge. Hans once told me we were a lot alike, which is one of the greatest honors I ever received. I always marveled, not only at the precision with which he wielded his second language of English, but of the lofty standards of logic and principle that infused his every statement that provided for me a standard of behavior to constantly shoot for. In fact, it was my observations of Hans that completely convinced me of the tragedy of World War II, in which the finest people in the world were incomprehensibly savaged by this heartless Jewish war machine now running rampant in the world today. The world desperately needs more people with the lofty standards and unflinching honesty of Hans Krampe.”

 ~ John Kaminski, Writer & Social Critic & friend of Hans Krampe
Dear Reader,
 
On April 20th, 2015 friends of the late Hans J. Krampe will be gathering at the Quesnel municipal cemetery in an area known as Tranquility Gardens to celebrate Hans’ life and work. Unfortunately, most of Hans’ friends and associates that he grew to know and respect in his latter years live thousands of miles away from the area in which Hans lived and worked as a writer and an historical revisionist.
 
It is hoped that those who knew Hans and wish to share their thoughts on his life and work will write something and send it to me (Arthur Topham) at my address above so that I can then read it out to those in attendance on April 20th.
 
As John Kaminski so rightly observed Hans was an exceptional personality and a stalwart defender of his nation and individual freedom and one of the few writers during these times who had the ability and fortitude to dissect all of the disinformation and lies that have emerged regarding Germany since 1933 when Adolf Hitler and the National Socialist Party of Germany were first elected to govern that ill-fated nation. 
 
It was Hans’ work that convinced many people who suffered mental confusion due to the historical perspective perpetuated by the Jewish press, that history as we were taught to believe was heavily biased against Germany and especially the National Socialist Party that came to office in in 1933 and ended in 1945. 
 
May God bless and keep Hans and may he rest in the peace which he so deserves.
 
Anyone wishing to attend who is not familiar with the local area can contact me about any details they may be concerned about.
 
Mehr Licht!
 

Sincerely,

Arthur Topham
Pub/Ed

The Radical Press
radical@radicalpress.com
Canada’s Radical News Network
“Digging to the root of the issues since 1998”

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

 

Hans J. Krampe: German Patriot & Defender of Historic Truth (1943 ~ 2014) R.I.P.

HansJKrampePortrait-800

Hans J. Krampe: German Patriot & Defender of Historic Truth (1943 ~ 2014) R.I.P.

By

Arthur Topham

December 23rd, 2014

It is with the deepest sense of sadness and grief that I find myself having to convey so close to Christmas the tragic news to Radical Press list members that my brother-in-arms and fellow compatriot Hans J. Krampe has suddenly passed away from this world and I only learned of his death days ago.

The sorrow of knowing that Hans will no longer be with us to carry on his relentless quest to right all the infinite number of wrongs that have been perpetrated upon the German people over the 20th and 21 Centuries by the Zionist Jew juggernaut now threatening the planet with global war and endless degradation is almost too much to bear for me.

Since the inception of the Radical Press in June of 1998 Hans Krampe was my indefatigable and stalwart feature writer for the former alternative monthly tabloid known as The Radical which, with his dedicated writing and financial support we were able to successfully publish 42 consecutive editions running until June of 2002.

Afterwards the hard copy edition went online and became known as RadicalPress.com and is still carrying on the struggle to adhere to the original motto of the former tabloid of “Digging to the root of the issues”  in order to bring truth, justice and honesty to the public domain via the Internet.

 Hans and I spent too many years together working on articles and sharing our life experiences for me to try and encapsulate all that’s gone down over the past sixteen years. Those who know of Hans’ work know what a powerful and poignant writer he was and how he could sift through the bullshit Zionist propaganda and cut to the chase cogently demolishing any and all arguments put forth against the National Socialist government of Adolf Hitler by Germany’s (and the world’s) eternal enemy.

I will, in the future, once the Christmas season is over try to put together a more comprehensive article and biography of Hans Krampe’s life and work. For now it is time only to mourn his loss and send loving prayers for his soul.

One of Hans’ email friends who he communicated with was the U.S. internet writer John Kaminski. John recently sent me an email containing his comments upon hearing of Hans’ passing. I would like to share them with readers.

JK writes:

More than any other person, Hans Krampe demonstrated to me the difference between honest non Jewish Germans and the Jewish purveyors of false history who have totally warped the facts of World War II and led the world into a prison of poison thought from which it might never emerge. Hans once told me we were a lot alike, which is one of the greatest honors I ever received. I always marveled, not only at the precision with which he wielded his second language of English, but of the lofty standards of logic and principle that infused his every statement that provided for me a standard of behavior to constantly shoot for. In fact, it was my observations of Hans that completely convinced me of the tragedy of World War II, in which the finest people in the world were incomprehensibly savaged by this heartless Jewish war machine now running rampant in the world today. The world desperately needs more people with the lofty standards and unflinching honesty of Hans Krampe.

May God bless and keep Hans and may he rest in the peace which he so deserves.

A Rebuttal to Russian MP Irina Yarovaya’s Proposed Tough Anti-Nazi, Pro-Allied Law by Hans Krampe

 

A Rebuttal to Russian MP Irina Yarovaya’s Proposed Tough Anti-Nazi, Pro-Allied Law

by Hans Krampe

July 12, 2013

Screen Shot 2013-07-12 at 10.55.22 PM

It would be interesting to know what kinds of crimes the “Nazis’ were supposed to have committed, according to Russian (Putin’s and Varovaya’s) opinions [expressed on a Russia Today article Ed.] . The mass murder in the Katyn forest perhaps? Or the “benign” activities of Soviet indoctrinated, trained and financed Bolshevik agents, Jewish to a man (and woman), in Germany, subverting Germany’s efforts of self-defense in WW I and her subsequent struggle to survive the Versailles Siege during the interregnum up to 1941, and by sabotaging and inciting violent insurrection in the Soviet spirit of “international peace and security”; as the result of which the KPD (communist party of Germany) was righteously outlawed by Adolf Hitler as enemies within?

Fact is, Varovaya’s, as well as Putin’s, generation wasn’t even born at the time in question and all they “know” is the indoctrination with the history of the victors, which everybody knows is always phoney, consisting of lies and the distortion of history into its 180 degrees opposite, with a sprinkling of suitable truth here and there, to provide a threadbare credibility; Soviet crimes simply being dumped upon the unblemished Wehrmacht’s record.

That’s a truth that the current generation of Russians avoids like the devil the holy water. To check if their “truth” is actually legit, i.e. to revise it if necessary, Varovaya and Putin, as well as the dutifully kowtowing MPs, perceive as a criminal offense, playing deaf, dumb and blind to the obvious inconsistencies and contradictions being revealed in the Kremlin’s own archives if merely glanced at with a minimum of sincerity. What good is free inquiry if publishing the results, let alone even whispering them to others, are soon to be punished in Russia harsher than rape and murder, just as in the Western democracies. Same difference!

Did the Wehrmacht commence with the attack on the Soviet Union just on a whim? Or was it a necessary preemptive strike, as a response to the Red Army’s string of prior aggressions, its attacks on Finland, the Baltic states, Poland and Rumania, including a Bolshevik coup d’etat in Belgrade, in the spirit of peace and security, of course, by way of violent World Revolution, another term for Soviet imperialism, which in Varovaya’s mind had apparently no part in it. That term, Soviet imperialism, is conspicuously absent from the Russian leadership’s idea of justice and truth. Only Germany had imperialistic ambitions, and that can’t be talked about enough. It’s practically being etched in stone. Although that claim is as phoney as a three dollar bill. And Varovaya knows it, too.

RussianMPYarovaya copy

Soviet military activities left no doubt about who would be next – with or without the Molotov/Ribbentrop pact – namely, the imminent attack on Germany with the biggest concentration of offensive forces, over 160 divisions, armed with a colossal amount of the latest military attack hardware; the largest such military attack force in the history of the world, lined up along Germany’s borders. Was it simply there to “protect the USSR”, without having made no (ZERO) defensive preparations? No trenches, no barbed wire obstructions, no mine fields, no anti tank barriers, no air defense, no interceptor fighter planes, no rearward ammunition and supply stores, none such. Just a huge concentration of offensive armaments ready to pounce. It was obvious, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the Red Army was poised to attack not just Germany, but all of Europe. And in doing so it offered itself as a perfect target to be destroyed in one fell swoop.

I’m sure Varovaya will have a perfectly innocent explanation for it. Russians are nothing if not apt in rationalizing their willful tunnel vision, if not outright lying, obviously.

And wasn’t “the great patriotic war” nothing but the vicious revenge of a fuming bully filled with hateful rage, out of humiliation for having been thwarted by a smart sucker punch from the Wehrmacht, a flea daring to sting Misha the bear, forced into chaotic and panicked retreat, nay run, and almost defeated within a year; if it hadn’t been for the massive amounts of material and financial aid of the Western allies? All that beautiful and expensive armament lost in less than a week, when Stalin had already been that close to realizing his world revolution with an overwhelming military leviathan and, as a fringe benefit, realizing his delusions of grandeur in the process? The Russian ego must’ve been hurt something fierce.

To boost their frail self-esteem, Russians now celebrate every year their “victory” with bombastic parades, ridiculous and silly in their pretentiousness, with their soldiers sticking their noses up into the wind as if they can’t get enough of the stink of decomposing corpses of the millions of German women and children the sadistic piss-tanks of a Red Army tortured, raped and murdered.

But hey, it’s water under the bridge, right? So let bygones be bygones . . . except for the Nazis who, as the old Soviet guard defensively clamors, did worse to peace loving Russians who were innocently minding their own business.

Germany, being openly threatened with extinction by the hostility and hate propaganda that surrounded her, was compelled to rebuild, with every justification, the Wehrmacht — a true defense force — which she had previously been conned into dismantling. Being a far smaller nation in terms of population and arms, with very limited resources of her own, Germany had to defend herself against enemies of vast numerical superiority, not just the USSR, each with their unlimited resources, bent from the get-go to finish what the Versailles Siege had not quite managed to accomplish, namely, the utter destruction of every trace of Germany and her people. Considering that it took the colossal Red Army and over fifty other nations, four long years to bring little Germany to its knees in a defeat that was from the start a foregone conclusion, Russia should be ashamed, rather than celebrating.

By most of her enemies, the Wehrmacht, unlike the Red Army, was being regarded after WW II, worldwide, with the highest respect as the most disciplined, spirited and fairest fighting army in the world. Even Stalin agreed with that. The real heroes, then, unlike the Soviets, were the German soldiers; and they don’t perform self-glorifying parades, like Russian peacocks.

nuremberg_defendants

Nuremberg Trials

As to the Nuremberg IMT as an international tribunal, it was a cruel joke. Most of the attorneys organizing it were Jews bent on revenge not justice, just as its Soviet members were (all of them war criminals on steroids). It was a lynch mob set-up who had to invent war crimes that weren’t any, and to torture confessions out of soldiers to have something, anything, to justify their insane bloody revenge, going through the fake motions of a phony tribunal that was just oozing with bias, hate and malice.

Over two hundred flag officers of the Western allies attested to this image of the IMT, and of the American and British attorneys who participated in it some expressed shame of having been part of it. Others don’t even want to talk about it . . . also out of shame. Only Russians, like Putin and Varovaya, and all those war criminals among the allies who have a lot to hide, are shameless enough to claim that it was a fair and legitimate tribunal. Even though the Soviets couldn’t make their accusation of the Katyn massacre stick, for lack of evidence, despite forged documents and affidavits, nine innocent German officers were strangled to death for it anyway. Russian revenge pretending to be just, even now, almost 80 years since.

KatynMassacresmlcopy

I have listened to Putin’s speech, in almost perfect accent free German, in the Bundestag, and couldn’t believe the arrogance and hypocrisy of that man. There he stood, pretending to be a veritable dove of good will, talking eloquently about the greatness of German culture in the past and how close the amiable traditions between Germany and Russia had been and how desirable it would be to reestablish such conditions again.

But not one word about the thwarted Soviet invasion or the subsequent atrocious and sadistic rampages of the Red Army, not only committed on German injured soldiers and POWs but also on their own populations, now being blamed on the Wehrmacht; let alone an apology or some expression of regret; all the while being applauded by former Stasi snitches and pedophile perverts, all of them greedy maggots at the trough, the worst traitors Germany had ever to endure, installed and micro managed by the former allies. This mob of felons got their guilty consciences soothed with Putin’s oily, dishonest and entirely specious rhetoric, to be sure.

PutinHolocaust

In fact, Putin, nay Russia at large, is terrified of the truth and the deleterious effect on Russian self-perception it might have. That’s what’s driving Varovaya and Putin to protect their lies in law; and that is also why Russia Today plays along by repeating nothing but lies with routine monotony.

The question is how Russia expects to ever normalize relations under these circumstances. No nation with a shred of self-esteem would associate with a nation of liars. Alas, Germans have no more self-esteem left and will bend over to kiss Putin’s arse in the spirit of sheer pragmatism. International peace and security, with justice buried under a mountain of other priorities, will go and fly a kite. And that’s what Putin, Varovaya and the MPs of the Duma want for Germany, and that’s what they’re going to get.

——-

Hans Krampe is a writer, researcher and Revisionist who lives in Quesnel, B.C. He can be reached at: HansKrampe hjk@quesnelbc.com

 

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…]

About Robin Mathews. Adolf Hitler. Stephen Harper. The Big Lie. By Hans Krampe

RADLOGOLATEST

E quindi uscimmo a riveder le stelle.”

~Dante’s Inferno

Editor’s Preface: Ten years ago I could not have imagined that a day would come when I would find myself in the unenviable position of having to openly criticize someone who, throughout the vicissitudes of the last decade, has been a friend, a colleague, a supporter and a contributor to RadicalPress.com albeit, at times, tested and tried due to changing times and the availability of new information that, back at the turn of the century, was virtually unknown.

Both Hans Krampe and Robin Mathews were two of my most prized contributing writers during the period when The Radical was being published in hard copy on a monthly basis. These were the years 1998 to 2002.

The truth be known both myself and Hans Krampe were quite ignorant of the ideology known as Political Zionism when we undertook the publishing of an alternative newspaper in June of 1998. Like the vast majority of people who had grown up in the 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s, we were basically products of a cultural milieu that for all intents of purposes was Zionist Jewish in essence. We were, like most folks, truth seekers who for different reasons found the status quo wanting in terms of answers to the big questions of the day. Why the endless wars, corruption, poverty, pollution, environmental degradation and so on? Who was responsible for these perennial crops of evil and injustice? How were we to address the questions and more importantly still, how were we to deal with problems when answers were forthcoming? These were the driving forces that kept us motivated and willing to undergo the assorted challenges that researchers and writers experience when they undertake to explore the hidden dimensions behind what the world perceives as historic truth.

During those early years of publishing we had yet to learn about who the real movers and shakers were that controlled the levers of power and along with our innocence we also were ignorant of the facts behind the causes of the two major wars of the 20th Century. Steeped, as we were, in the Zionist literature of the day that portrayed itself as mainstream, western history, we grew up believing that Adolf Hitler and the National Socialists who ruled Germany from 1933 until 1945, represented the supreme zenith of earthly evil and terror. That, combined with the “Jewish Holocaust” myth that eventually took form in the mid-1950s and continued to grow with the furor of a unchecked cancer thanks to the Jewish controlled media we were still under the spell cast upon us when we decided to “dig to the root of the issues” in search of answers to lingering questions.

With respect to Robin Mathews’ views therefore I was more or less in synch on all the major issues even though early in our relationship I detected a bias in his work that leaned toward a Marxist perspective on global issues and was reflected in Robin’s essays that inevitably aligned themselves with the political left.

It wasn’t until around 2005 that I seriously began to question the historical perspective of the west and its basis and only in earnest after a friend was kind enough to lend me a copy of Douglas Reed’s classic work on Political Zionism known as The Controversy of Zion. Upon completion of Reed’s opus an epiphany of sorts occurred in my soul/mind and I could no longer view the world through the rose-coloured, Zionist-tinted lenses that had hitherto been my standard mode of perception and upon laying them down and fashioning a new perspective I eventually came to the realization that what I and millions of other westerners had taken as political and historic truth throughout our lives was, tragically, one big lie, so monumental in scope and depth that it was for many people beyond comprehension.

It was at that point or juncture when Robin Mathews’ perspective and my perspective on world history began to diverge. It was also then that I sensed his gentle, yet grave disapproval of my new-found perspective on political issues and his cautionary words to not attempt to introduce the term “Jew” into anything political for fear of being tarnished with accusations of “anti-Semitism” and so on and thus losing any credibility that I may have gained over previous years.

I tried my best to persuade Robin that to overlook the Zionist Jew issue in politics could only lead to ill-conceived conclusions that would ultimately be of benefit only to the Zionists and their agenda for global governance but all attempts were met with adamantine resistance that usually resulted in long periods of silence where communications ceased.

When I was eventually accused by Agent Z and the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada of violating the infamous Section 13 “hate crimes” section of the Canadian Human Rights Act back in November of 2007, Robin, beyond expressing a faint semblance of sympathy, was more inclined to take the viewpoint that I had it coming because I had not heeded his cautionary words about stepping on the toes of the Jews. I didn’t hold this against him as by then I was well aware that a great divide existed between those who could see through the Jew’s Big Lie and those who could not.

Since 2007, thanks to the increasingly malevolent machinations of the state of Israel, the world has taken some rather dramatic leaps forward in terms of coming to terms with the Zionist Elephant that tramples and destroys economies and nations and environments and lives in the great living room we call planet Earth. Things that appeared but in vague form and outline back in 2007 today stand in stark relief as the world suddenly is forced to come to grips with the ultimate lie of the 20th Century – that of the Jewish controlled media’s ongoing propaganda against Germany and Adolf Hitler and the National Socialist party that guided the German nation from 1933 to 1945.

Both myself and Hans Krampe continued to question the historic roots of Zionism and along with that the lies brought forth against the German people. In doing so we have uncovered growing volumes of evidence that clearly vindicate the German nation of any guilt associated with a war that was purposely created in order to destroy the one nation that had the courage and will to stand up to the Jewish banking consortium of the 1930s. We now know that it was World Jewry who first declared war on Germany and then used their power of the “purse” and their media monopoly to bewitch the west into believing that it was Adolf Hitler and the German people who wanted to take over the world and turn it into a global concentration camp ruled by fear and terror.

Today, the world is finally coming to the realization that those who truly wanted to gain control of the world were the very ones who vilified the German people and made them out to be cruel, heartless monsters. By their fruits are they now known to the world and a bitter fruit indeed it is that now attempts to rule our planet by fear and terror and it’s name is Zionism and its ownership is restricted to those Jews who subscribe to the political ideology that supports its existence.

Unfortunately Robin Mathews is still labouring under the illusions that Marx’s dialectic provided to the world and his inability to come to terms with the reality of Zionism has somehow caused him to revert to the old Zionist ploy of dredging up the name of Hitler and the German people to justify his otherwise credible critique of Stephen Harper and the Conservative party of Canada.

Bearing this all in mind I would therefore highly recommend that readers take a close look at what Hans Krampe has to say about Robin’s recent article. The vital question, as always, is to discern what the “Big Lie” is actually about. I believe that Hans Krampe furnishes us with solid evidence that cannot be dismissed without serious consideration and subsequent proof.

*** Please bear in mind that Robin’s article is posted below Hans’ reply and should be read prior to reading Hans’ response.

Sincerely,

Arthur Topham

Pub/Ed

RadicalPress.com

“Digging to the root of the issues since 1998”

____________________________________

About Robin Mathews. Adolf Hitler. Stephen Harper. The Big Lie.

By Hans Krampe

March 17, 2011

AH monument
Our Fuehrer
________________________

I have been following almost every article of yours on the Vive le Canada website about the Basi-Virk-Basi case, the corruption of the B.C. judiciary and “Premier” Gordon Campbell’s — and his cronies — involvement in it and was struck by your meticulous — almost pedantic — attention to detail in your tenacious in-depth investigation. You have produced a complete record for present and future generations to be able to review the facts which are currently being suppressed in the mainstream.

But not so with your April 14, 2011 article “Adolf Hitler. Stephen Harper. The Big Lie.” [see below. Ed.] There your meticulousness, let alone your professed love for the truth and abhorrence of the Big Lie went poof, out the window.

Your comparison of Harper with Hitler is a cowardly, though politically correct, insult of the latter who can’t answer your ignorant attack on his good name. In this you’ve just joined the same mob that goes under what you ignorantly call neonazis.

In case you don’t know, neonazis have nothing in common with either Adolf Hitler or the National Socialists, but they have a lot in common with today’s Jews, as the entire world has ample opportunity to observe daily. By applying, in your hair raising ignorance, the fraudulent images and allegations which you are so fond of, to the German National Socialists, you have become indistinguishable from a Zionist fascist mouthpiece, i.e. a true fascist, that is; though you coyly call yourself a democrat.

I don’t think you know the difference between National Socialism and Fascism. In fact, hordes of Ph.D.s have bent over backwards to stick the label of fascism on Adolf Hitler, and failed miserably, because Hitler and the National Socialist movement were just what the name says. They were not run by, nor controlled by, nor in cahoots with corporate interests.

It was the other way around. Adolf Hitler and the National Socialist government put not only strict controls on corporate activities, allowing them just enough lee-way to operate profitably to the benefit of the German nation, but also controlled Germany’s money supply, an insignificant detail which apparently you’ve got not the slightest inkling about.

The result was, that Germany, under Adolf Hitler’s leadership emerged within four years from abject destitution and national bankruptcy in 1932 — thanks to the Weimar Republic’s spineless, corrupt, incompetent, yet democratic malfeasance — as the most prosperous nation on earth with the highest standard of living, which hasn’t been surpassed by any other nation to date, while the rest of the world, including “democratic” Canada, remained in a deep depression; even though Germany had no natural resources to speak of. Adolf Hitler was more popular, and not just in Germany, than any person dead or alive, on this globe since then, your ignorant and biased frothing at the mouth notwithstanding.

It may be news to you, but Hitler governed by referenda (six within four years). How many referenda have there been within Canada’s entire history, pray tell? And were they internationally supervised, as was the case in all six “nazi” referenda??

Compared with AH’s leadership method of government, Canada’s democracy has been a quisling and bungling basket case forever, despite rubber stamping votes every four years, whose parliaments serve no other function than as troughs for a never ending line-up of criminal swine, like Harper, to feed at. Compared to Hitler’s and National Socialism’s accomplishments, Canada’s so-called democracy is a disgrace and an utter failure, considering that it’s been sitting on a treasure trove of unlimited resources, unsurpassed in the world, for two centuries.

Here is a classical example of evil for you, a real genocidal and sadistic champion of sociopathy. Just take a closer look at your Commonwealth hero: the Jew Winston Churchill. A homosexual pederast with a genocidal record, having successfully starved millions of Bengalis to death with nary a twinge of conscience. He never had to tie his own shoelaces, having always had “his man” doing this job. He also was fond of welcoming diplomats in his bathroom, in the nude, a practice nick-named “the order of the bath”. Being soused out of his gourd was his normal everyday condition and the Canadian military, inspired by his booze soaked schemes on how to more effectively roast German women and children alive under a hail of phosphorous bombs — the more the merrier — were never in the least ashamed to participate in and enhance Churchill’s menace with a menace of their own. Canadians like you are blessed with a convenient tunnel vision and honor Churchill’s memory since the war with a bizarre sense of ignorant and self-satisfied approval that can only be described as criminally insane. In your historical version of the war, all responsibility for allied atrocities has been assigned to Adolf Hitler, allegedly because he didn’t want to unconditionally surrender. It’s like me saying, after I murdered you, it’s all your fault because you refused to surrender to me all your money, unconditionally.

As the photographic and documentary record shows, his refusal to unconditionally surrender was more than justified, judging by the demented and sadistic horrors allied ghouls then commenced to perpetrate on a defenseless and vulnerable German population after war’s end for years. Your unreasonable and vindictive malice shows me that you haven’t a clue of what really happened there.

This, in a nutshell was, and still is, real and manifestly obvious evil, no fabrications, fictions and unsubstantiated allegations necessary. The evidence is undeniable that this was what the allies indulged in with orgiastic glee, not Hitler.

Now let’s look at another hero of yours, Joseph Djugashvili Stalin, a paranoid and malicious psychopath, a megalomaniac and deadly enemy of not just Germany but all of Europe, undeniably the biggest mass murderer in the history of the world, having presided over the brutal, gratuitous and sadistic torturing to death of over 60 million of his own people, executed under the leadership and personal participation of Jewish Marxist fanatics, according to Alexander Solzhenitzyn, one of his more prominent victims, who survived and the testimonies of many others. To compare this guy with Harper would’ve been a much more fitting choice for you.

Compare this with Adolf Hitler, a highly decorated WW I veteran, EK1, a decoration normally only awarded to officers; who spent the entire first world war as a runner in the trenches, the most dangerous job there was; a non-smoking vegetarian and a teetotaler, who became a millionaire from the royalties of “Mein Kampf”. Contrary to your vitriolic allegations, he never broke a promise he made to the German people, in fact he exceeded their wildest expectations, which earned him the undying love and loyalty of especially the workers and farmers.

The image of Hitler you entertain, is your own biased embellishment of the fabrications of historical nitwits, a pathological case of Germanophobia. Hitler never shied away from his responsibilities. Taking responsibility and being accountable was a cornerstone of the National Socialist idea and he promoted it by example. He didn’t lie, nor did he avoid problems, he solved them. The evidence to this is overwhelming, but only visible to those who aren’t deafened, dumbed down and blinded by prejudice. It speaks for itself. But you keep shying away from the obvious because it exposes your ignorant malice.

This is a manifest obviousness you, brave Robin, wouldn’t be found dead acknowledging. You were just old enough to absorb your full measure of anti-German hate propaganda at the time, which seems to have unalteringly calcified within your brain since then.

Did you ever ask yourself what business Canadians had killing Germans, half way around the earth, who had never done them any harm, let alone being a threat?

To anyone knowledgeable about what you keep ignorantly mangling beyond recognition, it becomes immediately obvious that you haven’t done any — Zilch — research worth the name on National Socialism and Adolf Hitler; but you have swallowed, wholesale, the Big Lie you profess to deplore, as if it was candy, i.e. wartime anti-German hate propaganda, conveniently formatted by lynch mobs after the war and made available in literally billions of tons of vitriolic incitement to hate, disguised as historical literature, which you now chuck up and trumpet about as if it was divine gospel.

When Goebbels — and Hitler, et al — were talking about the Big Lie, they meant the common practice of Jews and not, as you suggest, a nifty proprietary method of theirs to deceive the German masses. It becomes immediately apparent when read in the context of transcripts and documents, which you apparently don’t even know exist. I have, but then again, I’m not a Ph.D., suffering from delusions of grandeur. Uncritically parroting other people’s regurgitated Big Lies as if they were established fact, does not make one a credible authority on history, only an ignorant parrot.

In your little anecdote of Winifred Wagner, spelled with one “n” — offered to illustrate your historical astuteness, no doubt — you allege that she complained about Nazi brutality; one among many fictitious allegations and distortions put into the mouths of countless prominent NS personalities, ex post facto, for the sake of emphasis and entrenchment of the Nazis’ “evil reputation”. It’s only a fact in your biased mind, Robin. For anyone who, like myself and unlike you, has diligently researched the period in question, it’s hackneyed and irrelevant nonsense.

That the National Socialist’s movement had to organize a volunteer guard (yes, the SA) to defend themselves against the constant and very real brutal attacks of well organized communist shock troops, led by Bolshevik Jews, fomenting strife and division among Germans at a time when Germany was in terrible distress, is in your mind Nazi brutality. Since Winifred is alleged to have said so, it must be true, eh?

Besides, Hitler would have to have been a Saint not to have had any enemies busily subverting, undermining and spreading rumors and venom about him, welcome fare now to feed your bias with.

As to Hitler’s alleged avoidance of truth, his alleged lying, or his alleged blaming of others, or any other offal you’re fond of splashing on his character, name your sources and provide the proof. When and on what occasions did he behave in that way? The traits you’re talking about are primarily Harper’s, not Hitler’s, and those of Soviet, Canadian, British and lately also of quisling politicians of the FRG who, after 75 years of relentless “denazification” (your kind) are now celebrating the total destruction of Germany by the allies and the mass murder of over 13 million POWs, old men, women and children AFTER THE WAR, as LIBERATION. The unmitigated insanity of it all!! There is no comparison whatsoever possible between Hitler and any despots, contemporary or otherwise, least of all Harper.

In fact, yours is the cowardly denigration of the memory of an honorable man who was not only an outstanding genius but probably the greatest statesman and leader of any nation that ever lived. Little backwoods Ph.D.s, such as yourself, couldn’t hold a candle to his unsurpassed accomplishments, his integrity and his unfailing commitment to Germany’s well being.

To think, that you once stood in front of students, teaching them your uncritically accepted baloney, laced with your own invented associations, is downright scary. It’s people like you who perpetuate the Big Lie, complete with all the malice you’re capable of loading it with.

Finally, for me, as an ethnic German, you’re an offensive and malicious hate monger who welcomes and celebrates his irrational hate of Germany with equally irrational satisfaction; broadcasting undigested rumors, unproven hearsay and personal invention, while ignoring any and all historical fact.

You’re also a coward, who only gets “brave” within the approved perimeters of political correctness, but lacks any and all civic courage outside of it, where it counts.

Maybe it’s an old age thing, like dementia setting in.

—————-

Hans Krampe is a former feature writer for The Radical. He lives in the Cariboo region of central B.C.

Contact Hans at hjk@quesnelbc.com

_________________________________

Adolf Hitler.  Stephen Harper.  The Big Lie.

By Robin Mathews

April 14, 2011

RobinMathews
Robin Mathews
__________________________

A column like this one opens a question that can’t be answered immediately – perhaps not for a long time.

Fifteen years from now an observer may say this column shows how far from reality a commentator could go in the contentious days of 2011 in Canada.

Or, the commentator may ask why only the writer of this column saw the inevitable coming … what became obvious to everyone else … but only when it was too late?

A clue that the second case might be true is the repeated  summing-up of the leaders debate on Tuesday, April 12 by Chris Hall (CBC parliamentary reporter).

Over and over he reported that the leaders of the NDP, the bloc quebecois, and the Liberals attacked Stephen Harper – and that he answered them.  Not once did Chris Hall – or any of the other (‘mainstream’) commentators I have observed say that very many of Stephen Harper’s replies were manipulations of fact to convey falsehoods … when they were not outright lies.

Stephen Harper repeatedly said there was no tax cut for corporations in the latest budget (before Parliament closed for the election).  That was not the point.  A six billion dollar tax cut for the large corporations will come into effect if the Harperites win government.

Those cuts need not come into effect.  And so, in fact, the Harperites are giving large corporations a six billion dollar tax cut.

Lying flagrantly, Stephen Harper insisted his Party is not in contempt of Parliament when it is so without question.

On the matter of the Harperites refusing to provide spending information  (one of the bases of the contempt ruling) Harper said his agents gave all information – a statement which is simply not true.

Perhaps most important of all, he denied the fundamental facts of parliamentary government, insisting that “Canadians” believe the Party with the most votes must govern.  What he argued, in fact, is a denial of the democratic parliamentary system.  In short, he lied.

This morning on an open line show a caller claimed his statement that the Canadian Labour Congress endorses his budget is an outright lie.

Those are five random examples.  Random, I say, because one would need a script of the debate to count up the number of times Stephen Harper lied outright or manipulated facts to convey falsehoods.

He didn’t disable his opponents by superior argument.  He disabled the whole debate by using persistent falsehood and near falsehood.

The latest, mid-election flurry of revelations of misdoing concerns expenditures on the G20 Summit. Allegations are of misleading Parliament by the Harperites (words for ‘lying to Parliament’?), misallocation of huge amounts of money, insider indulgences of Roman proportions.  All that through “leaks” of a forthcoming Report by the Auditor General Sheila Fraser.

In Ottawa, Harperite insider John Baird has spoken with apparent confident authority about what is contained in the confidential Report.  How can he do so?  Who gave him copies of the Report? Did Sheila Fraser? Stephen Harper (characteristically) is avoiding responsibility … for as long as he can. Canadians must ask how many such seamy revelations are waiting for an opening of the secrecy-bound activities of the Harperites?  They must ask the question.

Meanwhile, almost unnoticed, it has been revealed the Harperites took words of praise Sheila Fraser wrote about Liberal financial activities and quoted them about Harperite “work”.  Sheila Fraser is apparently upset!  Stockwell Day apologized profusely.  But the question remains – who did that piece of chicanery?  Did Stephen Harper order it? Can the Harperites be trusted on any matter whatever?

The conclusions which I have come to are quite clear.  I believe Stephen Harper is more comfortable lying than telling the truth.  I believe he is a psychopathic liar – which means I believe he will lie (and follow up his lies) in any way he can to gain his ends and aggrandize his position.

To take the logic of that position to its conclusion, I believe that – if Stephen Harper were to gain enough power – he would murder his political opponents, would have innocent Canadians shot down in the streets. [Remember the Toronto G20 violations of free assembly.]

If what I write is fair comment on observed public affairs, then Stephen Harper may properly be described as a neo-Fascist.

Historians of Nazism sometimes suggest the architect of “the Big Lie” in Nazi politics was Josef Goebbels, the only Ph. D in the inner circle and an early Party member.  But the ultimate author of all Nazi strategies of falsehood in that brutal despotism was Adolf Hitler himself.

He was a friend of Winnifred Wagner, manager – preceding and during the Second World War – of the famous Bayreuth (Wagner) Festivals. Early in Hitler’s time of growing power Winnifred Wagner would express dismay to him about Nazi street brutality against political opponents and others. Like Stephen Harper when faced with evidence of undeniable wrong-doing by the Party, Hitler would say he knew nothing about it, or someone else did it without his orders.  Or he would belittle the evidence or … change the subject or … lie outright.

When faced with inescapable need to act with courage and honesty, Hitler, like Stephen Harper, would take the coward’s way out.

In a moment of brazen bravado, for instance, Harper suggested a one-on-one election debate with Michael Ignatieff – who agreed immediately.  On April Fool’s day, the press announced Stephen Harper’s retreat, babbling nonsense and, again, repeating a simple lie – that a coalition exists and is led by Michael Ignatieff.

Harper’s campaign is built and based upon that and worse kinds of lying.  As the Encyclopedia Brittanica writes in relation to Fascism, Stephen Harper makes a “proud sacrifice of all ethical scruples to success”.  What Canadians must realize is that Stephen Harper employs a complex strategy of lies that are well thought out and employed in no accidental way.

To say Harper is fairly called a neo-Fascist may seem harsh.  But people in democracies must be clear-eyed if they wish to protect democratic freedoms. Even Plato – 2500 years ago – observed that Tyranny develops most naturally out of Democracy.

The characteristics of Fascism across Europe in the first half of the twentieth century were plain:  the sharing of State power with private corporations to pursue common goals.  Using the police to destroy civil freedoms.  Operating all activities under ‘the Big Lie”. Enrolling the Mainstream Press and Media as accomplices in political gangsterism.  Persecuting, starving, torturing, murdering any number of people opposed to the Fascists.

Hitler was determined to take power by constitutional means after having failed in a violent attempt at a coup in Munich in 1923.  Twisting, perverting, exploiting, debasing constitutional practice (like Stephen Harper), Hitler managed to bully and coerce his way to supreme power in Germany – with results we know too well.

Stephen Harper’s wholly perverse manipulation of prorogation to avoid votes in Parliament might have been learned directly from Adolf Hitler.

Harper’s actions to deny Parliament rightful information  and to support the alleged lies of a cabinet minister might, also, have been learned from the earlier “drive to power” of a dictator-in-waiting.

Like Adolf Hitler, Stephen Harper is, I have no doubt, the author of all his Party’s ‘strategies of falsehood”, all its attempts to destroy the democracy in which it presently works. Harper’s use of the RCMP to eject the unwanted from “democratic” election campaign meetings matches Hitler’s “strong-arm squads” created to protect Nazi meetings from  attendance by “the unwanted”.

Indeed, before the present election was announced, I wrote a column on the RCMP and its growing corruption.  In that column I guessed that the dismissal of the top man at the RCMP, William Elliott, was post-dated by Harper because the Mounties would be needed for dirty work in the election.

As happened, RCMP officers have been used as thug “security” in the Harper meetings.  Did those RCMP officers wear the brown shirts of the Nazis?  We know nothing about them.  Who are they?  What are their names?  Why have they not been identified? Who ordered them to act at those meetings?  Was it Stephen Harper?  We must know – before the election.

Nor is it accidental, I believe, that William Elliott – the recently fired top RCMP officer – was, earlier, a key actor in the Prime Minister’s Office undertaking the approval of much-charged Bruce Carson to become a top advisor to Stephen Harper.

Carson is presently under investigation by the RCMP for alleged improper behaviour in attempts to get contracts awarded.  He has a record of misdeeds and dubious connections.  Stephen Harper alleges he knew almost nothing of Bruce Carson’s past.

One may guess that for his good and faithful service first in the PMO, and then in Stockwell Day’s Public Safety Department, and then as head of the RCMP, William Elliot will fall from grace onto a very carefully prepared, soft, luxurious bed.

Under Guiliano Zaccardelli, the RCMP used its “investigation” of Ralph Goodale and the Department of Finance in 2006 to help defeat the Liberals.  Now the RCMP makes clear it can say nothing about the tale of Stephen Harper’s senior henchman Bruce Carson, involved, it is alleged, in a dirtier piece of business than any Ralph Goodale has ever been remotely connected to.

Having very recently discovered ethics, “ethics” is apparently the basis upon which the William Elliott RCMP refuses to report about Bruce Carson.

Carson’s close relation to Stephen Harper and the PMO has, we may be sure, nothing to do with the RCMP’s newfound “ethics” and “discretion”.

The same slippery dishonesty, I believe, is involved in the case of Elizabeth May’s exclusion from the leaders debate.  The key force rejecting her has been, I believe, Stephen Harper.  When the decision of the “media consortium” was announced, both Jack Layton and Michael Ignatieff said she should be included in the debate.

Characteristically shifting responsibility, Stephen Harper said he would accept the decision of the “media consortium” – which, of course – consulted the Parties.  Only when it became plain that public sentiment wanted Elizabeth May in the debate – only then did Harper change his tune and say he supported her presence.

If truth is ever told by members of the media consortium, I am almost certain they will report that Harper publicly supported May’s presence while privately telling the consortium he would withdraw if she was allowed in. Harper knows she threatens his nondescript candidate Gary Lunn.  And so I believe Harper – in typical covert fashion – acted to keep her out.

Consider the next minority government.  I believe the Mainstream Press and Media are doing what they can to secure a Harper victory.  If they were being genuinely impartial, they would have to be reporting simple, factual things they are not reporting.  1.  Minority governments occur commonly in parliamentary systems.  2.  Such governments often do excellent work.  3. Coalitions may form – and, if they do, they can govern effectively. 4.  If they don’t form, ‘agreements to govern’ (as has, in fact, been the case in Canada since 2006) can be effective.  5.  And so Stephen Harper’s attack on those possibilities is a sham.  It is a hoax which he is attempting to perpetrate on the Canadian public.

But … more!  The Mainstream Press and Media should expose Stephen Harper’s real goal … the one he is trying to use a pattern of lies to achieve.

Having gone Right to the point of having ‘nut case Yankee policies”, Harper knows they won’t be supported by a minority government.  $30 billions (plus) for fighter planes.  A $6 billion gift to large corporations.  Multi billions to build [who will get the contracts?] new nineteenth century jails to pack with people who shouldn’t be in jail.  And more….

Harper has set up a situation that is so obscene no minority parliament could accept it.

That means the minority parliament will vote him down and will seek from the Governor General the right to rule.  Stephen Harper has, I believe, anticipated that (as I believe he anticipated he would need William Elliott as head of the RCMP during the election).  And so he appointed a Harperite Hack as Governor General.  That opens huge and dangerous possibilities. If the Governor General attempts to work politically for Stephen Harper, instead of constitutionally for Canada, he will create a crisis in Canadian democracy.

In that situation a Harper attempted coup d’etat will be used to prevent a Liberal-led minority government.

If that happens, the Opposition parties will be forced into some kind of coalition.  To save Canadian democracy, the matter may demand an all-party Opposition coalition.  Stephen Harper knows that, I am sure.  He is trying to lie enough to make Canadians believe (in advance) that a coalition is undemocratic and illegitimate.  That is why he lies about it consistently…on and on and on.

Stephen Harper has never let the truth stand in the way of his ambition to rule as what Plato called a Tyrant.

The Mainsteam Press and Media – which opens up none of the facts on this matter, supports, I believe, what is in fact Stephen Harper’s baldfaced lying.  Even the CBC does.  In the face, for instance, of what the Friends of Canadian Broadcasting insist is an outright lie by the Prime Minister’s Office, by Stephen Harper, and by the arts and culture minister James Moore about cuts to CBC funding … the CBC remains mute.

Complicity with lies and wrongdoing can’t go much farther than that.

It is plain that Canadians are going to have to figure out the pattern of lying laid out by Stephen Harper and what it is intended to produce.  They are going to have to figure it out in the face of the failure of the Mainstream Press and Media to do their job. Canadians would be wise to be ready for a major attempt to hi-jack democracy in Canada and to have set up in its place a Harper Tyranny.

Canadians are going to have to realize they’re facing what I believe is a neo-Fascist leader of the Conservative Party of Canada.  And Canadians are going to have to reject him with all the energy they have.
———–

Contact Robin Mathews at rmathews@telus.net

Doenitz and the American Brass by Hans Krampe

Photobucket

Doenitz and the American Brass

by Hans Krampe

March 3, 2011

The Nuremberg Trials Show, a grand standing, self righteous performance launched under the name of “International Military Tribunal” (IMT) — none of its members, except for the Russians, having actually fought in the war — was a politically motivated orgy of revenge, malice, hypocrisy, humiliation and lies; the icing on the cake of the simultaneously ongoing allied mass murder of the German populace, then very much in progress.

It was a copy-cat Stalinist show trial, stage managed by Jewish controlled media hacks, whose principle contribution to the war had been the fabrication of anti-German hate propaganda throughout, performed by mean spirited lawyers, oozing with malice, principal among them high ranking Soviet war criminals; zealously assisted by largely Jewish torturers (interrogators) and sadistic murderers (executioners), often in brand new uniforms.

Ten years later, in response to invitations from U.S. Rear Admiral Dan V. Gallery, over 400 written and signed statements, made by hundreds of U.S. and international Flag Officers, congressmen, Supreme Court judges and diplomats, including the future U.S. President, John F. Kennedy, and prominent personalities of the time condemned the Nuremberg Trials as a disgraceful act of revenge by the victors over the vanquished; as a step back into the dark ages as well as a stain on civilization and a shameful slander of professional soldiers; because the German Flag Officers had done what all Flag Officers in the world do, namely, nothing but their jobs they had sworn an oath to do in case of war for their country.

This expression of belated public outrage happened on the occasion of the release of Grand Admiral Karl Doenitz in 1956 from ten years of incarceration.

Photobucket
To be able to incarcerate or sentence to death the German leadership, military as well as civilian, the Nuremberg “judges” had to break international law by inventing ex post facto crimes, had to suppress the evidence of the defense, produce forged copies of “confessions”, permit bizarre and fraudulent testimonies and ignore their own constitutional principle of habeas corpus by the American lawyers. That the Germans were guilty was a foregone conclusion, as casually accepted as the American’s indoctrinated Germanophobia and hate. No forensic investigation was necessary, neither then nor to this day.

Most bizarre was the presence of Soviet officers, the worst war criminals of WW II, presiding as judges over their German victims, on which they were guilty of having perpetrated unspeakably more heinous war crimes, on a humongous scale, than the horror stories that they had fabricated about the “Nazi Regime”. Their Katyn massacre of 20,000 Polish officers and members of the Polish intelligentsia, discovered and exposed to the international media in 1943 by the German Wehrmacht, they now accused the Germans of, using expertly forged documents and witness statements.

Photobucket

In Admiral Gallery’s opinion the Nuremberg Trials were a kangaroo court by the misnomer of “International Military Tribunal” and that this name was a libel on the military profession. He felt relieved that there was nothing military about it, that it was in fact a lawyers’ tribunal and sarcastically observed how the American Bar had kept bashfully silent on that topic since, not wanting its role in this disgraceful and macabre theater to be widely known. He was “glad that our military men had nothing to do with it”. Hundreds of U.S. Admirals and Generals not only agreed with Admiral Gallery, but some also spoke highly and with respect of Admiral Doenitz.

Doenitz, Raeder, Jodl and many others were being charged with 1) having conspired to wage aggressive war, 2) having waged aggressive war and 3) violated the laws of war at sea; all this applied especially to German submarine warfare. Referring to these charges Admiral Gallery exclaimed in exasperation: “How in the name of common sense a military officer can wage any kind of war except an aggressive one without being a traitor to his country, I’ll never know.”

Hitler,Keitel,Jodl
Doenitz requested U.S. Admiral Nimitz to be summoned as witness for the defense, to explain his style of submarine warfare in the Pacific. Nimitz was unable to appear in person, but declared in a sworn statement that U.S. submarine warfare was just as aggressive in the Pacific as the German submarine warfare in the Atlantic, that in fact no other mode of submarine warfare was possible in this day and age and that the outdated laws of war at sea were impossible to adhere to since they applied to the era of tall ships, which was long gone. This resulted in an awkward back-paddling by the kangaroos.

Admiral Doenitz was acquitted of the first charge but found guilty of the other two. To find fault with his impeccable and capable conduct of the war they accused him of having deliberately prolonged it, ignoring the fact that in 1945 Doenitz had to evacuate from East Prussia ten times more refugees than the British had evacuated from Dunkirk. As soon as he had brought as many refugees as possible to safety he surrendered. It seemed to be of no consequence to the kangaroos that it was in fact the allied demand of unconditional surrender which prolonged the war. The German leadership was fully aware what they would be facing in such an event and rather chose to fight to the last bullet than to submit themselves voluntarily to certain ignominy and horror. As it turned out, what followed proved them right, in spades.

Raeder was sentenced to life, Doenitz to ten years, while many others were sentenced to be executed and summarily strangled to death.

While all these high ranking allied officers commiserated with their enemy colleagues, none of them seemed to have known clearly, nor cared, why the war was fought. It was enough for them to get the order to fight, whipped into the mood by relentless hate propaganda. It sufficed for them to “know” that the German government was evil; just as General Colin Powell, presiding over the largest arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in the world, “knew” that Sadam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. Ten years too late, they remembered that they owed a debt of chivalry and an apology to Admiral Doenitz, et al, not to mention justice.

They couldn’t find it in their hearts to extend the same sentiments to Rudolf Hess, who languished in Spandau, a prison built for 600 prisoners, the only one there, kept in solitary confinement until 1987, when he was murdered at age of 93, strangled to death.

Such sentiments were also absent when they “merely did their sworn duty”, bombing the German civilian population to smithereens. And even in 1956, as they expressed regret for the treatment of German flag officers, they couldn’t have cared less what they had done to the German nation at large. Not one of them expressed any regret about what they had done to German women and children, by the millions; to the German POWs — AFTER THE WAR — by the millions; or the flattening of the beautiful towns and cities that had taken more than a millennium to build; not to mention the theft of trillions of dollars worth of German patents and industrial hardware. They had just followed their orders, as they had sworn an oath to do. What was a virtue for them had to be, of course, a vice for the Germans, rooted in evil Bismarck’s Prussia. It was the pin-point rationale of the kangaroos sitting in judgment, tailoring crimes to fit the anti-German war propaganda.

According to Admiral Gallery, however, just that is the proper conduct of flag officers, “after all, one thing the much maligned military brass must do, in a democracy as well as a dictatorship, is swallow their convictions, if any, and do as they are told by their politicians…” In other words, for a flag officer it doesn’t matter what kind of political creep gives the orders, it’s best not to have an opinion about anything, to avoid unnecessary problems with indigestion. By this rationale, Flag Officers are capable of ordering the shooting on their own unarmed people, if ordered to do so, as they did in 1970 at Kent state university, or as they are currently doing to innocent peoples all over the world.

It doesn’t seem to occur to any of them that they also swore an oath to defend the United States and its constitution against all enemies, foreign AND DOMESTIC. Yet, they are blind to the enemy within — their own government — and keep following the orders, with a few notable exceptions, of presidential morons with blatantly genocidal intentions, to wage aggressive war without there being ever a hint of a threat, other than manufactured ones. The American brass seems to have been oblivious that Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini were the only ones who had made every effort to avoid WW II, while their own government did the opposite.

The 400 expressions of regret about Admiral Karl Doenitz’s incarceration and their condemnation of the IMT were edited and published in book form in 1976 by H.K. Thompson, a Yale graduate of naval science and history; and Henry Strutz, a teacher of foreign languages and history. The title: Donitz at Nuremberg: A Re-Appraisal, War Crimes and the Military Professional.

Needless to say, it never became a bestseller.

________________

Hans Krampe lives in central B.C. and was a feature writer for The Radical 1998 – 2002. He was born in Germany during WWII and spent his early years in East Germany. After a stint in the German navy he immigrated to Canada back in the 1970s.

Hans can be reached at Hans Krampe hjk@quesnelbc.com