AAARGH

Dear Mrs Steele
I am writing to you in my capacity as Chairman of the Anti-Defamation Committee of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry, the official roof body of Australia's Jewish community, about a serious and disturbing matter which concerns yourself.
The back cover of the recently published -- edition of John Bennett's Your Rights contains an endorsement of this book by yourself, together with a number of similar endorsements. I attach a photocopy of this back cover in case you are unaware of this fact.
Given your distinguished record of achievement on the South Australian and Australian political scene, you are probably unaware that by your endorsement of Bennett's booklet, you appear to lend the weight of your reputation, as well as that of the South Australian Liberal Party, to the approval of what the entire Australian Jewish community regards as one of the most vile and offensive pieces of anti-Semitic racism to be published in Australia in recent years.
Although Bennett's book may indeed contain...information of value, you may be aware that for some years Bennett has continuously been publicising the outrageous and wholly untrue lie that the Nazi Holocaust involving six million Jews during the Second World War - the mass murder of six million Jewish men, women and children by Hitler and the Nazis - did not occur but was a lie invented after the war by lying Jews for financial and political ends. Since you have read (John Bennett's book) you will be aware of the odious lie which he repeats on pages ... of his book, photocopies of which are attached. In an effort to whitewash the Nazis, Bennett also states ( page..., also attached) that "Hate sessions in the media directed against Hitler and the Nazis are so pervasive that a visitor from Mars might think WW II is still in progress". Numerous other statements attacking the Jewish people are also to be found in this book.
Internationally, such pro-Nazi and anti-Semitic statements have almost entirely been confined to obviously crank and extremist neo-Nazi groups in Europe and America while in Australia their main source of propagation, apart from John Bennett, is The League of Rights, the extremist right wing body known for its anti-Asian, anti-Aboriginal and anti-Semitic racist attitudes.
We find it both surprising and regrettable that a former public official of your distinction is seen to lend the weight of her reputation to a view which is an obvious and total distortion of history and an insult to the many millions ofvictims of Nazi suppression. Your endorsement of a book containing Bennett's extremist and racist views will, we believe, come as a considerable shock to your many admirers, both in South Australia and elsewhere and will tarnish your high reputation for fairminded public service. It also gives considerable distress to Australia's Jewish community, especially to the 10,000 or more Australian Jews who survived Hitler's concentration camps, while your endorsement may help to legitimise the use of Bennett's work in schools and universities. We are also sure that your endorsement would be greeted with both amazement and consternation by the South Australian Liberal Party and by the South Australian media, should it become known.
In all the circumstances it would seem desirable and appropriate that you should disassociate yourself from Bennett's anti-Semitic views and I would be most grateful if you could take some appropriate steps to this end.
Yours faithfully
Alan H. Goldberg Q.C.
Chairman, Anti-Defamation
Committee, E.C.A.J.

--------------------

I wonder who is being defamatory and intimidatory! Jeremy Jones is steeped in this culture, and he is known as the 'foreign minister' of Australia's Zionist.
My submitting this letter to Her Honour, Justice Branson, brought forth no response. Counsel for Jones, Stephen Rothman, claimed it was "irrelevant".
My aim was merely to show what tactics our Zionist friends use when they defend their self-defined turf.
Attached to this letter I also had copies of two well-known items by Terry Lane and PhillipAdams. Therein we can see that what is happening to me is nothing special - I'm just another one of those that Australia's Jewish Zionists find threatening, for whatever reason. It is a nonsense that these Zionists get away with their bullying tactics, then claim victim status and seek legal protection so that they can "get away with it".

Terry Lane

I Surrender - printed in the Australian Jewish News on 4 December 1992:
I have said publicly that I will never write or speak on the subject of Israel or Palestine ever again. Here is why.
The Zionist lobby in this country is malicious, implacable,mendacious and dangerous. They have caused me a great deal of lost sleep - and in the end my insomnia has not contributed anything to the resolution of the conflict of Palestine. I might as well keep my mouth shut and get some sleep.
What's more, once the expression 'antisemite' hits the air, or, heaven forefend, the sacred formula 'six million' is uttered, then I know from bitter experience that there is not one manager or editor in the country who will defend an underling. We are thrown to the jackals.
In the end the truly tolerant have no defence against intolerance. I surrender. To the Zionists I say: you win. To the Palestinians: forgive my cowardice.
Terry Lane is an ABC broadcaster and a newspaper columnist.
Phillip Adams

A difficult friendship - an excerpt from an article printed in, The Australian:

I then received an extraordinary letter from Bill Rubinstein which I found offensive in tone and remarkably patronising. As it illustrated some of the very points that I'd made in my talk to the doctors, I published it in The Australian and all hell broke loose. Lots more letters accusing me of being an antisemite.
All in all, it was such a bruising and unpleasant experience that I decided not to write on Jewish matters again. Or at least take a long sabbatical from matters semitic.
I could cover pages with evidence of my good-will to the Jewish community.
--------------------------------------

There we have it from two individuals who have been towing the official Holocaust dogma line for years. Were I to sign that piece of paper, then I would only be following notable media personalities into the wasteland of silence, and letting the liars and distorters and deceivers get away with it. Haven't I been up front claiming that we must not let them get way with it?
But Jeremy Jones' awowed aim has been to "stop them [anyone who is not with him] from functioning". My signing the piece of paper may avoid expensive litigation that in itself wouldnot remove the stupid Holocaust story from our school text books. Can you imagine a judge of the Federal Court of Australia daring to stand up to the Australian Zionist lobby and invoking common law principles in my favour? I think not.
On Monday 17 December, Mrs Olga Scully >olgascully@yahoo.com.au> is also in the Federal Court defending herself against Jeremy Jones' allegations that she is spreading anti-Zionist material.
Were it not so serious, then I feel like laughing that Jones claims to have been hurt by reading Olga's material. Jones is a politician who struts the world stage inciting hatred against anyone who disagrees with his Zionist world-view. So much for his tolerance!
So, what am I to do? Participate in a proceeding that cannot be objective about this nonsense claim because it is an historical issue and should thus never be litigated in a court of law? Most probably the proceedings in court will not worry about truth as a defence because the framing of the Racial Discrimination Act merely requires applicants to prove they have suffered hurt feelings. And Jones has to make credible that he is offended by the material of which he complains.
Many things have passed through my mind and as I privately indicated to a number of supporters, when you have to wipe a loved one's bottom because he is dying and incapable of doing it himself, then some priority-setting is in order here.
Is it important to continue exposing the Holocaust lies? Who cares anymore, except a handful of individuals world-wide?
Why is it that the world has remained silent on the related Palestinian plight for so long - three+ generations living in the largest concentration camp in the world run by Jewish Zionists?
In this sense I would be pleased to hear from you again on this issue and I thank you for making it all possible. We need your generous support.
While on this topic of support, we do have to consider what to do when individuals are faced with the situation that their valuable books are not wanted by their next-of-kin. Some individuals have already passed their Holocaust collection on to us because they cannot read anymore.
But all this can be a task that we'll focus on in 2002, and so I wish you a very happy, healthy and productive New Year.
Fredrick Töben

PS.: Sadly we farewell Henk and Michael as our trusted Associates of long standing, and welcome Mohammed Hegazi, who has been with us since the beginning. Please also excuse this letter format but I am working on WordPad because my Office 2000 disk number has stillnot arrived. Let me offer you two items for reflection: one gives a clear view of what ails the West, and the other what ails the Middle East and, by implication, why the West is saturated with protective Holocaust laws:

Steep slopes of Wadi Kziv in Western Galilee are covered by thick vegetation; oleanders and cypresses look into shallow ponds formed by its springs. I like this secluded canyon. In hot summer days one can hide in an intricate deep cave and lay in its cool clear waters, waiting for deer and hoping for a nymph. In cooler days, I would climb up the Crusader castle of Monfort rising on a hill amidst the canyon, sit in its donjon and gaze towards distant Mediterranean Sea.
It keeps many memories. The 12th century Zionists, Teutonic knights bought the castle and founded here the movable state of the Order. They were defeated by Salah ad-Din, this paragon of valour and compassion, who allowed them to depart with their weapons and honour for Eastern Europe. On the steep path leading to the spring, met and parted lovely characters of Arabesques, the exquisite novel by a Palestinian writer Anton Shammas. Shammas, a native of nearby Fassuta, is probably the only non-Jew in the world who writes his books and poems in Israeli Hebrew.
Farther west, the brook of Kziv flows into the sea at the ruins of a Christian village of Ahziv, destroyed by Jews in 1948. In this village, in long-gone 1920s, a local Palestinian girl was visited by another local Palestinian woman, the Virgin. In other words, it is a typical place in the unusual land of Palestine.
These days, you can roam it all by yourself. It is empty of people as the rest of countryside. The land of Palestine is in trouble, deepest trouble since black 1948. People do not venture down here anymore, leaving the canyon to its lean and wiry boar. Walking downstream, I spotted a few of these gracious animals, so different from their domesticated cousins. Only out of the gorge, on the plain of Acre, I came across some human presence. There were a few Thai or Chinese peasants working the fields of local kibbutz. A middle-aged kibbutznik sat in the shadow overseeing their work. I joined him for a smoke and a drink of cold water.
He looked like an epitome of a good Israeli, large, sunburned, with a friendly smile, bushy mustachio and brisk talk. Fifty years ago, he or rather his predecessor, a fighter of the Jewish Storm Troops, the Palmach, would seize the lands of Ahziv and expel its peasants to Lebanon. Some thirty years ago, he would work the stolen land with his own hands. Now, he oversees the Thais working this land. Very soon, he told me, he will go for a while to New York, to visit his son. Then, some Russians from Maalot town will do the overseeing for the kibbutz. Not many Jews are interested in working the land, or even in overseeing Thais working it, he said. Kibbutz hopes to get a building permit, build housing and sell the real estate. It is a valuable site, near Naharia and Acre, and it will sell well, despite the crisis, he said.
I shook hands and bid farewell to him, to the sweaty Thais, to the green fields, to the mountains of Lebanon to the north, concealing the refugee camps with the former dwellers of Ahziv, to the Galilee range with its Russian town of Maalot, and took train homewards, to Jaffa. The train carried a few Africans, probably illegal immigrants judging by their shy looks. A Romanian building team was gulping beer and burping loudly. They were imported from their impoverished East European land to build the houses for immigrants, as the Jews do not want to be employed in construction in Israel as well as in California. A Jewish Israeli lawyer in black yarmulke leafed papers in his semi-opened briefcase. A blond and armed Israeli soldier talked Ukrainian with its fricative h's to his corpulent girlfriend. He extolled his own heroic fight against multitude of Arab terrorists under her admiring eyes. A group of Moroccans discussed the closure of Acre steel plant and their slim chances to find another work. The crisis is deepening, one of them said, it is as bad as in 1966.
The train rode through Haifa, and I thought of hundreds of thousands, maybe millions of Americans, Jews and Christian Zionists, who lobby, pray, support and pay - no, not for the Jewish state built on the ruins of Palestine. It would be bad enough; but reality is worse. I thought of millions of Palestinians, rotting in refugee camps and jails, dispossessed, expelled - not by the monster of evil occupation and land grabbing, but by something worse - by a ghost.
The Jewish state is a virtual state that quickly loses all remaining connection to reality. This ghost of a state kills people and collects money in America; it continues some nefarious existence, like the legal term, `estate of the deceased'. Its fields are worked by imported guest workers, guarded by imported Russians and Ethiopians, explained by Israeli professors teaching forever in American universities and by brave generals on the lookout for a big shake. The unemployment grows daily, vital services are on strike; the tourist industry collapsed, hotels are boarded up and other branches of national economy are close to collapse. Israelis buy flats in Florida and Prague, while houses in Israel could not be sold. Sharon's desire to punish Palestinians was similar to punishing one's own left hand: Palestinians and Israelis are intertwined and integrated, and this separation kills the economy of both.
From far away of America, Israel looks like a giant, nuclear state, great friend of the United States, a Jewish state that is a source of pride for American Jews. A visitor leaves our shores with a strong feeling of our identity and prosperity. Only we, permanent residents, know that it is a cardboard sham. Israel is collapsing, as its active citizens emigrate in despair, while generals complete the destruction of the country. A cruel fate befalls the native Palestinians: a ghost kills them, a spiritless body walking in Zombie-like trance the corridors of the Congress and the deserts of Middle East.
For the sake of this spectre, important American Jews squeeze every penny from their employees and countrymen, cut down on pensions to old and assistance for children, reduce the health and education budget, dry up help to Africa and Latin America, build improbable coalitions with notorious racists of Pat Robertson's kind, demand destruction of Iraq, bless bombing of Afghani refugees, keep Afro-Americans in their ghettos, undermine their host society, making enemies to themselves and to America. These deeds are vile enough, but they are useless as well. Zionist experiment practically collapsed. It can run for many yeas to come on life-supporting machine, as a brain-dead vegetable. It can kill people, maybe even start the world war. It cannot become alive.
The Jewish state of Israel is a state of mind; it is but a projection of the American Jewish mind. Worries and problems it articulates are American Jewish problems. For Israeli `Jews', there is no need of segregation, of war, of subjugation of natives. We eat no bagels with lox, speak no Yiddish, read no Saul Bellow or Sholom Aleichem, and avoid synagogues. We prefer Arab food and Greek music. My neighbourhood has seven pork butchers to a kosher one. Forty per cent of Tel Aviv weddings are done outside Jewish framework: young Israelis prefer to go to Cyprus to get married, just to avoid contact with Rabbis. Tel Aviv is the gays' capital of Middle East, though according to Jewish law, gays should be exterminated. If American Jews would not bribe Israelis on a large scale, we would just forget about the Diaspora and dissolve into the hospitable Middle East. If they continue to bankroll us, we shall oblige them with a small show of Jewishness.
We are master-sellers of illusion, and as long as there are buyers, we shall provide. In 1946, a group of dedicated men from all over the world came to Palestine under the aegis of the UN. They were sent to prepare the ground for partition of the land. Among other places, they came to the southernmost kibbutz Revivim in the arid Negev, and came across a wonderful flowerbed with roses, anemones, and violets in front of the kibbutz office. In their report, the members of the delegation expressed their amazement and stated, `Jews make the desert bloom, let them have Negev'.
As they left, the kibbutz youngsters went out and pulled the flowers out of sand: they have bought fresh flowers same morning on the Jaffa market and have planted them as props for the duration of the visit. This small outlay transferred Negev with its two hundred thousand Palestinians to the Jewish state. Majority of them were expelled across the newly drawn border, to the camps of Gaza or Jordan. It was cruel and useless: even now, fifty years later, Negev south of Beersheba has smaller population than in 1948.
In order to populate depopulated lands, Mossad broke and terrorised Jewish communities of North Africa. The Jews were brought in, sprayed with DDT lice-killer and placed into refugee camps that soon became towns of Netivot, Dimona, Yerucham. They are still there, in the towns of unemployment and misery, drawing social benefits and probably disliking Ashkenazi Jews as much as anybody could. Not in vain, they write `Ashkenazim to Auschwitz' on the walls of their towns.
A few weeks before the Intifadah, Israeli establishment imprisoned hugely popular leader of Oriental Jews, Rabbi Arie Deri. Tens of thousands of Moroccans gathered at the gates of the jail demanding his release. Intifada saved the skins of Ashkenazi Jews from the civil war, but not forever.
Thus the conjuring tricks of Revivim, conquest of Negev, expulsion of Palestinians, destruction of Moroccan Jewish community succeeded separately and failed altogether. Zionist leaders dreamed to make Palestine as Jewish as England is English. They failed. Palestine is Jewish as Jamaica is English.
The land of Palestine is being ruined now, in front of our eyes. Its beautiful old villages are bombed to oblivion; churches are emptied of their flock; olives are uprooted. Such ruin did not befall the land since the Assyrian invasion 2700 years ago. Nothing could comfort us in face of this great destruction, and certainly people connected to it - whether Israeli killers or their American Jewish supporters - will be damned forever.
Still, a wry irony of history will remain as a footnote in the books of future: the Jewish leadership committed these crimes in vain, and received no profit out of it. Even if the last Palestinian would be crucified of the hill of Golgotha, even that would not bring to life the virtual Jewish state of Israel.

Israel Shamir is an Israeli writer and journalist living in Jaffa. His other articles could be found on his site, www.israelshamir.com <http://www.israelshamir.com> This article can be freely transmitted and published in electronic media; hard copy publications must ask for permission at Shamir@israelshamir.com <mailto:Shamir@israelshamir.com> If you do not wish to receive his articles, reply with the subject line `remove', if you would like to join this list, write with a subject line `subscribe'.
------------------------------------------------------------

Pat Buchanan's latest book, The Death of the West: How Dying Populations and Immigrant Invasions Imperil Our Country and Civilizations, is now available at WorldNetDaily's online store.
WND is discounting the price and offering autographed and personalized copies -- another exclusive from WND.
Pat's premise? "The West is dying. Collapsing birth rates in Europe and the U.S., coupled with population explosions in Asia, Africa and Latin America, are set to cause cataclysmic shifts in world power, as unchecked immigration swamps and polarizes every Western society and nation."
Drawing on U.N. population projections, recent U.S. Census figures and expert policy studies, Buchanan takes a cold, hard look at the decay of Europe and America and the decline of Western culture.
What The Death of the West foretells is astonishing:
Not a single European country has a birth rate that will enable it to survive in its present form through this century. By 2050, only one-tenth of the world's population will be Europeans and it will be the oldest tenth on earth, with a median age of 50. Russia, already in a terminal population crisis, will, by 2050, be driven out of the Central Asia by Islamic invaders, and lose huge slices of Siberia and her Far East to a China 15 times as populous. There are 30 million foreign born in the U.S. and between nine and 11 million illegal aliens, as many illegals as there are people in Massachussets, Rhode Island and Connecticut combined.
America is losing the cultural war. Militant paganism is crowding the old faiths. Separatism is triumphing over integration. The melting pot has become a salad bowl. And the impact upon American society, politics, and culture will be devastating.
In an even-handed, thoughtful tone, Buchanan documents the sea of changes that have already begun to take place in our society. The Death of the West is a timely, provocative book that asks a question that troubles millions: Is the America we grew up in gone forever?
Get this first edition now at a bargain price -- or, better yet, get it autographed and personalized by Pat.
<http://www.shopnetdaily.com/store/item.asp?ITEM_ID=332>

1. The first German serviceman killed in the war was killed by the Japanese (China, 1937), the first American serviceman killed was killed by the Russians (Finland 1940), the highest ranking American killed was Lt. Gen. Lesley McNair, killed by the US Army Air Corps. So much for allies. NB. an extra 'l' gives us all-lies.
2. The youngest US serviceman was 12 year old Calvin Graham, USN. He was wounded and given a Dishonorable Discharge for lying about his age. (His benefits were later restored by act of Congress)
3. At the time of Pearl Harbor the top US Navy command was Called CINCUS (pronounced "sink us"), the shoulder patch of the US Army's 45th. Infantry division was the Swastika, and Hitler's private train was named "Amerika". All three were soon changed for PR purposes.
4. More US servicemen died in the Air Corps than the Marine Corps. While completing the required 30 missions your chance of being killed was 71%.
5. Generally speaking there was no such thing as an average fighter pilot. You were either an ace or a target. For instance Japanese ace Hiroyoshi Nishizawa shot down over 80 planes. He died while a passenger on a cargo plane.
6. It was a common practice on fighter planes to load every 5th round with a tracer round to aid in aiming. This was a mistake. Tracers had different ballistics so (at long range) if your tracers were hitting the target 80% of your rounds were missing. Worse yet tracers instantly told your enemy he was under fire and from which direction. Worst of all was the practice of loading a string of tracers at the end of the belt to tell you that you were out of ammo. This was definitely not something you wanted to tell the enemy. Units that stopped using tracers saw their success rate nearly double and their loss rate go down.
7. When allied armies reached the Rhine the first thing men did was pee in it. This was pretty universal from the lowest private to Winston Churchill (who made a big show of it) and Gen. Patton (who had himself photographed in the act).
8. German Me-264 bombers were capable of bombing New York City but it wasn't worth the effort.
9. German submarine U-120 was sunk by a malfunctioning toilet.
10. Among the first "Germans" captured at Normandy were several Koreans. They had been forced to fight for the Japanese Army until they were captured by the Russians and forced to fight for the Russian Army until they were captured by the Germans and forced to fight for the German Army until they were captured by the US Army.
11. Following a massive naval bombardment 35, 000 US and Canadian troops stormed ashore at Kiska. 21 troops were killed in the firefight. It would have been worse if there had been any Japanese on the island.
++++++++++++++++++++


Nous avons donc décidé de republier ces lettres, en les tirant de nos archives:

THE FAURISSON FORUM
AN EXPERT TAKES US TO TASK
On 20 August 1996, Professor Gerald Fleming, Emeritus Reader in German at the University of Surrey, England, had a bone to pick with us. Here is his letter.

Dear Dr Töben
My attention has been drawn by colleagues to 'Internet' information emanating from the Adelaide Institute, under the date and time referred 07/15/96 17:30:00. I quote from the item in question:
Swiss historian Jurgen Graf and Italian expert Carlo Mattogno visited the once-secret Moscow archives. Their findings put to shame the work of the British Professor Gerald Fleming [ and the French pharmacist Jean Claude Pressac]
Since the comment in question is not only absurd and scurrilous but teetering on the brink of being libellous, I am giving you some factual information regarding my archival research sessions in Moscow ( and other) State Archives:
(i) I have worked in Russian State Depositories for seven years, several weeks on each occasion.
(ii) I have seen and examined all relevant Auschwitz documents and photocopied large numbers of these.
(iii) My reports and publications relating to my archival sessions in Russian Archives are well known.
(iv) The expression "put to shame", referring to my work, as compared with the recent visits by two named western revisionist writers, is inappropriately false and unacceptably polemical.
(v) Should such or similar comment reappear on Internet under the heading Adelaide Institute, I shall take action to protect my academic interests and factual historic position. The western revisionist writers named by you will be informed of the 'Internet' comment as here described.
Finally. also for your information, it is I who was the first Western
academic historian and researcher who gained access to these important collections of World War 2 files of German origin and important, previously closed materials closely related to these files, all in Russian State depositories.
Finally I note that you enter a caveat in Adelaide Institute The Intellectual Adventure of the 20th Century, where you say: "if I offend because I am politically incorrect.then I claim it as my right, under the free speech principle, to say these things." - The words "put to shame the work of" are not politically incorrect, they are downright malevolent and quite unworthy of any serious scholar. Let me say, that in 37 years of University work I have not come up against such nonsense before, and I will not allow it to pass again.
With regard to your comment about privileged free speech, I cannot easily put out of my mind Dr Goebbels' taunt:
It will always remain the best joke made by the democratic system, that it provided its deadly enemies with the means of destroying it. Quite so!
Sincerely
Gerald Fleming



OUR REPLY OF 30 August 1996
Dear Dr Fleming
The tone of your 20 August letter indicates to me that you have been getting away with huffing and puffing and bluffing for a long time. I refer specifically to the nonsense you espoused in the film Blueprints of Genocide ( See: Adelaide Institute newsletter, No 27). As a credible historian, I would suggest, your time is up for one simple reason: Over these past 37 years you set out to prove that homicidal gassings took place at Auschwitz concentration camp. According to Sir Karl Popper, a reasonable person can prove anything. The scientific method, however, sets out to falsify hypotheses. We know, of course, that anyone who attempts to approach the homicidal gassing hypothesis in such a way is immediately branded by you, et al, as Holocaust denier, or worst, as an antisemite indulging in hate-talk. What you have been doing in your research is attempting to maintain the ideology-religion of the Holocaust. The pain you may justifiably feel when reading our Web site may rest to a large degree on the fact, as Charles Morgan put it: The effect of superficial education among western peoples has been to make them gullible by the terror of being gulled. Bearing in mind that it is still not criminal in our western democracies ( except in Germany and France, et al, to demonstrate the falsity of premises, let me conclude by quoting Professor Robert Faurisson:
The Nazi gas chamber is alleged to have physically existed; yet no-one can provide us with a representation of it. This gas chamber is immaterial and magical.one cannot describe or draw the alleged homicidal gas chamber of Auschwitz as one cannot describe or draw a square circle or a circular square.
Most sincerely
Fredrick Töben
PS: I shall be placing our correspondence on our Web site.


AN EXPERT TAKES PROFESSOR FLEMING TO TASK
When we received Professor Fleming's letter, we asked Professor Robert Faurisson for a comment. Here is his response of 30 September 1996:

Gerald Fleming, emeritus reader in German, University of Surrey (GB) is, if I may say so, a KGB novelist. He is more a novelist than an historian. He was appreciated by the Soviet authorities and the Soviet publications. Even recently, after the Soviet Union disappeared, he kept paying tribute to the outstanding talent of the Red Army in interrogating German prisoners and extracting from them the desired confessions that the American Army had not been able to obtain.
In 1984, in a review of his book: Hitler and the Final Solution, a subservient journalist had to concede:
"His sometimes flamboyant writing and the structure of his book as a kind of thriller will annoy some historians" (The New York Times, December 28, 1984, p. c-23).
According to a Jewish fellow, "His book has been favourably reviewed in Riga and Moscow publications, and he believed that Soviet authorities would grant him permission for a visit to the Red Army archives", he said. (The Jewish Chronicle, October 12, 1984, p.4).
Hitler and the Final Solution ( University of California, 1984) is a
translation from his Hitler und die Endlsung ( Munich, Limes Verlag, 1982).
The book was supposed to answer David Irving's challenge for a single document showing that Hitler knew before the end of 1943 that there was an extermination of the Jews going on. Of course, Fleming was unable to provide such a document. So he should have refrained from presenting his book as an answer to such question, and he should have avoided writing that D. Irving's thesis ( that there was no Hitler order to liquidate the European Jews) amounted to "eine Fiktion" (p.37, footnote 56).
It was a nonsense to write a book about the existence of a document that could not be found and shown. But Fleming thought he could bring us another document, perhaps as sensational, a document proving that there was an extermination program of the Jews by the Nazis. This is how he dared to publish A Resettlement Action Report, now nearly forgotten but revealed at that time - 1982 - as an extraordinary discovery. It was a fraud. Even a layman, not intoxicated by the Holocaust propaganda, could have seen at first glance that this so-called Report with no date and no signature was full of preposterous details about Auschwitz.
Anyone interested in the matter should read an excellent analysis written by a young Canadian revisionist, Brian A Renk; see The Franke-Gricksch A Resettlement Action Report: Anatomy of a Fabrication, Journal of Historical Review, Fall 1991, p.261-279.)
Readers who wish to get, as quickly and as soon as possible, an idea of G. Fleming as an historian could look at some photos in his book. On one and the same page appear two photos coming from the Archiv des [Kommunist] Polnischen Justiz-ministeriums. One is supposed to show a Gaswagen to asphyxiate people and the other one two German prisoners holding Zyklon B cans as they were supposed to do when they asphyxiated inmates in Majdanek. In fact, the Gaswagen is an ordinary Magirus truck with nothing suspicious about it and the prisoners ( obviously afraid) are holding Zyklon B cans which were used for disinfestation.
In 1993, the media trumpeted all over the world that Fleming had discovered in the Soviet files the proof that execution gas chambers had been built and used in Auschwitz. He wrote a long and sensational article under the title Engineers of Death ( See The New York Times, July 18, 1993, p. E19; see also Protokolle des Todes, Der Spiegel, 40/1993 [4 October 1993], pp.151, 156, 158, 160, 162).
In fact, Fleming had not found any such document but only minutes of the Soviet military police interrogation of four German engineers who had, during the war, participated in the building of Auschwitz-Birkenau crematories for Topf and Shne company and who, after the war, were still working in the same company in Erfurt.
The American army had interrogated these engineers and had released them. When Erfurt was handed over to the Soviet Army, the Soviets arrested the engineers, questioned them and.got the confessions they expected. The most important of those engineers were Fritz Sander and Kurt Prfer. The first died from a heart attack right at the beginning of his interrogation. The second died from a cerebral haemorrhage in 1952; we have a photo of K. Prfer when he was a free man and a photo of the same when he was in the Soviets' hands; the difference speaks volumes and I would say that K. Prfer's face photographed by the Soviets is terrifying (See: Der Spiegel, p.160)
The confessions were extremely vague and in the style of; I heard I was told I saw from the outside (Ja, ich sah die Gaskammer - von aussen) (Der Spiegel, same page). And it happens that the very rare precise responses do not fit with the details of the story as given today, nor with what we can see today in Auschwitz. For instance, one of the confessed said: In der Decke (of the Krema II "gas chamber") waren quadratische ffnungen (25 by 25 zentimetre) (Der Spiegel p.162. The trouble is that even today you can see that not one square opening exists in the ceiling. [This fact gave rise to Faurisson's now famous quip: No Holes, no Holocaust!. Ed.] In 1994, G. Fleming was the author with the collaboration of architect Robert Jan van Pelt of the film [Auschwitz] Blueprints of Genocide. (BBC, May 9, 1994). The climax in this film was reached with a document introduced by the following words:
"It says very clearly, You will be able to kill and you will be able to burn simultaneously in this building"(Crematorium II).
But, first, in the film the document is surreptitiously shown and in such a way that nobody can see the German words. Second, the document in fact does not say anything of that kind. It is a simple Aktenvermerk of January 29, 1943, aboutelectricity supply. It has not even the very common Secret stamp. In reality, it mentions Verbrennung mit gleichzeitiger Sonderbehandlung which means cremation with simultaneous special treatment.
Note that the swindlers translated special treatment into to kill and that they went so far as to change the word order putting first to kill and afterwards to burn. The German text, even with such a translation, could never have designated a criminal activity consisting first in gassing people and, afterwards, burning the bodies of the gassed people. The word "Sonderbehandlung could mean, by its place in the phrase, anything except to kill because this special treatment was simultaneous with burning.
It is obvious that, if Fleming and Van Pelt had discovered any German text which says very clearly what the Holocaust historians had been trying to find for such a long time, that very text would have been published, shown and commented on in every newspaper, film, book and Holocaust Museum. R. Hilberg, E. Wiesel, S. Wiesenthal, S. Klarsfeld would have celebrated the discovery of the century. Instead, they did not say one word.
At the end of that film, G. Fleming totally misquoted what the German engineers had confessed to the Soviets. This film contains nothing on the technique and operation of the Nazi gas chambers and there is nothing about the alleged quadratische Offnungen in the roof of the Krema II gas chamber. On January 28, 1995, Jan Taylor announced in The Sydney Morning Herald that Van Pelt was due to construct a computer model of the [Auschwitz] camp. We are still waiting for the result. I. for one, would be interested to see if he dares to show the four special openings in the roof of that gas chamber through which, we are told, the Zyklon B pellets were dumped. People interested in the transcript of [Auschwitz] Blueprints of Genocide have the choice between the British and the American versions. The British version gives a text adapted from the programme transmitted on 9 May 1994; the German document appears on p.20 with a deceitful comment in English (1).
The American transcript is more faithful although we are told: This transcript has not been proof-read against the videotape. (2) Therefore, G. Fleming is in fact not only a KGB novelist; he is a fraud.

Footnotes

(1) Horizon, Blueprints of Genocide, Text adapted from the programme transmitted 9 May 1994, 26 pages + 6 pages. See Mariette Jackson, Acting Publishing Manager, Broadcasting Support Service, 252 Western Avenue, London W3 6XJ UK.
(2) Nova Show # 2204. Air Date: February 7, 1995, 8 pages ( 2 columns), WGBHEducational Foundation. Journal Graphics, Box 2222 , South Easton, MA 02375 (USA).

Robert Faurisson, Vichy, 3 September 1996

It has to be now admitted that finally there is no proof, no evidence whatsoever that the Nazi gas chambers ever existed, claims French "historian and novelist" Jacques Baynac.
Extremely hostile to revisionists and especially to Robert Faurisson ( with whom he had a dispute in October 1980) and a friend of exterminationist historian Nadine Fresco, with whom he published a few years ago an article in Le Monde against R Faurisson, J Baynac seems now desperate. In a long article published in two issues of a Swiss newspaper ( Le Nouvea Quotidien, September 2, p. 16, and September 3, p.14), he draws the conclusion that obviously no one can bring any proof that the Nazi gas chambers ever existed. The strange solution he advocates is to try instead to find the proof that the non-existence of the so-called gas chambers is impossible!
The article is bursting with hard criticism against the historians, the lawyers, the journalists who, in his opinion, have been, for so many years, accumulating so many methodological and tactical errors that today, as a result, the revisionists appear, on the scientific plane, as a winner. A major blunder, he thinks, was to trust and to use Jean-Claude Pressac. In France, according to the Fabius-Gayssot law ( 13 July 1990), inspired by Great Rabbi Ren-Samuel Sirat, it is a criminal offence to dispute the existence of "crimes against humanity" as defined and punished by the International Military Tribunal at Nrnberg in 1945-46, or by any French or international court. As a matter of fact, this means that, in Voltaire's country, anyone who questions the Holy Jewish Trinity - the alleged genocide, the alleged Nazi gas chambers and the alleged 6 million - is liable to a prison sentence ( 1 month to 1 year), or a fine (2,000F to 300,000F) and other possible penalties.
But, as we see now, the trouble is that none of those judges did care for any evidence of the Nazi gas chambers.
Therefore, how should anyone in France be sentenced for not believing something which obviously was not proven by those judges?



PROFESSOR FAURISSON'S TRIAL POSTPONED
The Jaques Baynac Affair


On 15 November 1996 Professor Robert Faurisson had to appear in a Paris court for having published on 19 April 1996 at the beginning of the Abb Pierre affair - a press release wherein he stated that he was pleased to see people like Roger Garaudy, Abb Pierre, and three of their friends, apparently coming on to the side of the Revisionists who claim that the alleged genocide of the Jews and the alleged Nazi gas chambers are one and the same historical lie. Faurisson and his defence lawyer, Eric Delcroix, raised the following argument: The 1990 Fabius-Gayssot law ( alias "Lex Faurissonia") which forbids anyone to contest so-called "crimes against humanity" as defined and punished in 1945-46 by the Nuremberg International Military Tribunal, is not a law but an "act of violence" against the French judges who, according to that communist-socialist law, are deprived of their normal right to look into the basic FACTS and to decide whether the accused has the FACTS right or wrong. Strangely enough, judges are left with only one right - to determine how hard they are going to sentence a revisionist.
E Delcroix and R Faurisson announced they had just asked the "Cour de cassation" (Supreme Court of Appeal) to decide whether such a law infringes not so much the rights of an accused or of any individual than the very rights of the judges themselves.
The Tribunal could have refused to wait for a decision of the Cour de cassation and could have immediately continued the proceedings, as demanded by the public prosecutor and the Jewish attorney and his five associates. The tribunal decided otherwise and Faurisson's trial is now postponed until the Cour de cassation hands down its decision.
Apart from the legal argument something else happened which unsettled the prosecutor, the Jewish attorney and the three judges. Faurisson had warned them that on 2 and 3 September 1996 in a Swiss newspaper, Le Nouveau Quotidien, French historian Jacques Baynac, had published two long articles in which he claimed that today - even if it was "heartbreaking to say it or to listen to it" - one has frankly to admit there is no real evidence that the Nazi gas chambers ever existed. Faurisson concluded that the difference between the historian and himself is this:

Further, Baynac enjoys freedom of speech, whereas Faurisson faces one month to one year in jail, a fine of 2,000F to 300,000F ($US400 to 60,000) and other penalties. The Jewish attorney, Serge Lorach, looked worried because he was not aware of Baynac's articles. After the hearing he approached Delcroix and Faurisson and requested a copy of Baynac's articles, and of Faurisson's press statement.




Another Expert Challenges Professor Fleming's Credibility
We asked Swiss historian Jürgen Graf to comment on Professor Fleming's letter to us. Here is Mr Graf's response.

Basel, 11 November 1996

In August 1996 I corresponded with Professor Fleming and although he did not answer a single one of my questions I was surprised by his letter's civil tone. Of the questions directed at him, here are the two most pressing ones:
1. During his research in the Moscow archives, did he find any documentary proof that there were homicidal gassings? I am still waiting for a reply. His silence leads me to conclude that he did not find any such documentary proof because no such documents exist. In January 1945 about 90,000 pages of Auschwitz files fell into the hands of the Soviet liberation army. It appears that the retreating Nazis had heedlessly left behind these documents which they could have easily destroyed before evacuating the camp. The Germans didn't think that these documents could later incriminate them! Had anyone found the much desired documentary evidence which would prove homicidal gassings, then this would have triumphantly been presented to the world. But no - for over four decades the Soviets hid in their archives the mountain of paper. Why?
Instead of offering us documentary evidence to prove the gas chamber Holocaust, Fleming produces the Soviet prison confessions made by Kurt Prfer and other engineers of the Bauleitung. If these confessions are acceptable as proof, then the 1937 confessions extracted from the old Bolsheviks for the Moscow show trials - who confessed to being Fascist and Imperialist agents - now also become a credible historical source.
2. For some unexplainable reason, Fleming cites in his Hitler und die Endlsung ( Limes, 1982) the so-called Franke-Griksch Report as an important documentary source for the Holocaust. This report is a crude forgery because it is full of absurdities. For example, it states that the ovens of Birkenau could burn 10.000 bodies per day; the corpses of recently deceased persons burned especially well; Jews hid jewellery in hollow teeth, etc. Besides Fleming, there is only Jean-Claude Pressac who takes this report seriously. Pressac refers to it on p.238 of his tome Auschwitz, Technique and Operation of the Gas Chambers, Beate Klarsfeld Foundation, 1989. Neither Reitlinger nor Hilberg, neither Paliakov nor the Enzyklopdie des Holocaust list Franke-Griksch in their index. Why not? They should if the document offers such clear proof that the gas chambers and the Holocaust happened. Fleming did not answer my question why the "Holocaust experts" do not take seriously the Franke-Griksch report. Without doubt Gerald Fleming is an expert in his field, German Linguistics.
However,
as far as the 'Holocaust' is concerned, he is a third-rate propagandist.

In 1993 French and Latin teacher at Therwil secondary school, Baselland, 42 year-old Jrgen Graf, published his book Der Holocaust auf dem Prfstand (Guideon Burg Verlag, Postfach 52, CH 4009 Basel, Switzerland). He was dismissed without notice from his teaching post. A little later Graf published an enlargened version of his book under the title Der Holocaust-Schwindel which summarises the revisionist arguments up to 1992.
Other books followed: Auschwitz Ttergestndnisse und Augenzeugen des Holocaust, August 1994, and Todesursache Zeitgeschichtsforschung, October 1995, both published by Verlag Neue Vision, Basel. In all his books Graf contends that there is no documentary nor forensic evidence which confirms the orthodox view that mass extermination of Jews in homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz is a proven historical fact. In July/August and November/December 1995, together with Italian Auschwitz specialist, Carlo Mattogno, Graf visited the special Auschwitz archives in Moscow. After carefully sifting each of the 90.000 pages of documents, he concludes that there is not a single document available which proves that the gas chamber Holocaust did not occur. After a particularly primitive and degrading campaign to have anti-racist laws in Switzerland, the referendum of 25 September 1995 adopted Paragraph 261 with 54.7%.
In April 1995 Sigi Feigel began an action against Graf and his publisher, Gerhard Frster, for having written and published the Auschwitz book. Graf hopes that because the book was written before the new law came into effect the judicial concept - nulla poena sine lege - ( no crime without a law) will not be replaced by a Stalinist show trial. Graf and Frster have been interviewed by police but to date nothing has followed therefrom. The obedience displayed by Austrian, French and German authorities towards religious and ethnic minorities is not, as yet, followed by the Swiss judiciary. On 15 February 1996 the Jewish paper, Maccabi, asked why Graf had not already been imprisoned on account of his political extremist views. Graf was likened to a serial rapist because there is little likelihood that he, and Frster, will stop their work. If such incitement to hatred continues, then perhaps the anticipated trial can only lead to a guilty verdict. Then the judge would have to display heroic courage in finding both Graf and Frster innocent. Sadly, heroic judges are far and few between because few persons with backbone are appointed to the bench. It is therefore expected that the Swiss judiciary will also adopt the Offenkundigkeit of the Holocaust ( taking judicial notice of the Holocaust without requiring any evidence to be led in court to prove the allegations).
Graf claims that the Swiss will then be forced to believe that 20 to 30 persons can fit into a space of one square metre; that the Sonderkommandos in Auschwitz were immune to Prussic blue gas; that it is possible to throw Zyklon granules through non-existing holes in ceilings; and that corpses would burn nine to fifteen times faster at Auschwitz in 1943-4 than in 1996. In this way police power turns a 'free democracy', which finds itself in its final phase of pure idiocy, into a state ideology. (Freely translated from Jrgen Graf's Vom Untergang der schweizerischen Freiheit, available from Zundelsite: http://www.webcom.com/ezundel/english )



Mr Le Pen Congratulates President Bill Clinton
(From our Paris correspondent, 13 November 1996)

Jean-Marie Le Pen congratulates Bill Clinton on his brilliant re-election and wishes him good luck in fulfilling his new mandate as president of the United States. Now that Bill Clinton is no longer tormented by election concerned, Le Pen hopes the President will return to a more humane foreign policy which is more in accord with freedom and consideration for all peoples as embodied in the spirit of the American constitution. Le Penn said, "It is highly desirable for the harmony of the entire world that the president of the United States at last distance himself from the internationalist lobbies and that he stop making his country be the executor of the dirty work of the New World Order. With this in mind, the first evidence of his good will could be to lift the deadly embargo which strikes the Iraqi civil population. Such a decision would be a good omen for all persons who seek peace and justice." It is hard for any non-French to imagine the pressure felt by the French: cars are burning every night somewhere in France, people can no longer find any work, but the ONLY concern of our president and government is to fight against the National Front.

oooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
Adelaide Institute Newsletter

Open Letter to: Mr Jeremy Jones, Executive Vice-President, Executive Council of Australian Jewry
In June 1996, Mr Jones lodged a complaint with the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission against Adelaide Institute claiming that material on our website was offensive to Jews. In our newsletter No 50 we reprinted an article Mr Jones wrote for the Australia/Israel Review. Here is David Brockschmidt's reply: Hi, J.J.! How are you doing, mate? Jeremy Jones sounds like Jesse James to me - a real redneck name. Were your ancestors real cowboys from Colorado or Texas? Did you grow up in Dodge City and was your old grand dad still riding the outlaw trail with Wyatt Earp? Well, J.J.., old eagle eye, when I watch you on TV I can see you in cowboy boots, a Stetson on your head and a mustang under your saddle riding off into the sunset looking for Scarlet O'Hara and Golda Myer - they are both gone with the wind. What a great scene, J J. I can really see you riding from Dodge City to Fort Laramie in company of Wyatt Earp, Tom Mix , Jesse James, Billy the Kid, Ronald Reagan and Little Johnny Coward - the Good, the Bad and the Ugly! Tough luck, J.J., that you got stuck here `down under' and had to swap the mustang for a brumby. Now let's have a look at the other easy rider marshalls you have on your team trying so desperately to keep David Irving out of Australia and the lid on the Australian revisionist movement. First you've got Marshall Doron Ur in Western Australia who would like to introduce the death penalty for every racist. Do you know the definition of a racist, J.J.? A racist is a person who wins an argument with a multiculturalist! Racists are very scarce in Australia, J.J. If you want to find a lot of racists, then go to Israel. The Falasha Jews, Sephardic Jews and Palestinians will show you plenty of them in the `Holy Land'. Second, you have Laurie Rosenblum from Queensland, the champion of freedom of speech in Australia. He wants to censor the Internet, especially to deny access to the naughty revisionists who ask uncomfortable questions to which. Laurie Rosenblü mchen has no answer. Well, a rose is a rose is a rose! Laurie I prefer Gertrude Stein to your offerings.
Third, you have the dean of multiculturalism ,`King Isi' Leibler, on your team. He believes and supports the interaction and intermarriage of the Goys ( Gentiles) but wants to stop the intermarriage between Jews and Gentiles! What kind of a multi-culti is he? And, of course, there is Simon Wiesenthal, Nazi-hunter and Nazi-agent, according to Bruno Kreisky. If the leaders of the Greek or Italian community in Australia, for example, produced a team with such an attitude in regard to intermarriage, I am convinced that the majority of the world-wide Jewish community, including Rabbis Cooper and Hier of the Simon Wiesenthal Centre in Los Angeles where these two holy men run the Museum for (in)- tolerance, would scream "racist". I heard they use about 80% of their time chasing Holocaust revisionists through the Internet. I'm happy to inform them that it is too late to put the Revisionist genie back into the bottle. You can shoot a few messenger boys and girls but the message and the questions for which you have no answer will not go away. The Holocaust racketeers , as the late Professor Knopfelmacher called them, have to come to terms with reality. This is especially so since Christopher Hitchens and Professor Yehuda Bauer relegated the lampshade and soap stories to the dust bin of history. Well, J.J., this is quite a law and order team riding with you for freedom of speech, multiculturalism, and justice. I had a look at your complaints against Adelaide Institute to the Human Rights Commission and the Attorney-General's Department. I think you have a problem distinguishing between Holocaust deniers and Holocaust revisionists. If you would like to know the difference, J.J., ask Philip Adams. He can send you a transcript of his interview with Christopher Hitchens. I think it is about time that you guys hopped on to the bandwagon of historical revisionism otherwise you'll miss the train of history. Remember what good old Gorbarchev said: "Who comes too late will be punished by life itself", especially after the death figures of the whole Auschwitz complex have come down from 4 million to a maximum of 8oo,ooo according to your big gun, Jean-Claude Pressac. Last but not least, we'll have a surprise for all non-haters in our cultural program. It is called The Longest Hatred; exploring anti-Gentilism in The Babylonian Talmud and the Schulchan Aruch.
Anti-Gentilism, as we all now know, is the cause of anti-Semitism. We will ask Deborah Lipstadt to run this lecture because she is a Professor of Jewish Religion. If she is booked out, would you, J.J., please be so kind to ask Rabbi Cooper and or Rabbi Hier whether they are prepared to run our seminar? We will also apply for funding from Wizo B'nai B'rith, Irv Rubin and his JDL stormtroopers, and the Kosher whiskeyman and head of the Anti Defamation League, Edgar Bronfman. We hope at least he supplies the booze. Remember him? He once called the Austrian people a bunch of anti-Semitic dogs. Love and compassion is the answer to the brotherhood of humankind - and not the anti-Gentilist hate of your Babylonian Talmud. J.J. Now, J.J., if you don't like to join us in the search for truth in history, we can have a high noon in Adelaide City. Let's shoot it out with the pen and not with a gun - or even better in an open-end live TV debate between revisionists and exterminationists in a world wide satellite link-up. We could call the debate: The Nazi-Jewish Holocaust experts from both sides look at the evidence and try to find out what happened and what did not happen, why it happened and who paid for it. Calling us haters, Holocaust deniers, racists, anti-Semites and/or neo-Nazis will not suppress the truth because doesn't need the protection of the racial vilification law. Truths stands on its own - and only a lie needs the protection of the law. Keep your bullets and your powder dry. May truth prevail. You are also invited to the world's first revisionist culture week in Adelaide: 14 - 20 April. We reserved the uncensored David Irving video The Dresden Holocaust for Doron Ur and all his freedom of speech mates. The kosher dinner for our honourable Jewish guests will be `gefillte' Fish prepared by our chef Benni Morgenstern and served by his Russian wife, Herta Deutsch. And for you, J.J., a special present: Voltaires, famous maxim: I may disagree with what you say but I shall defend to the death your right to say it.
This will be presented to you in a costly gold-plated frame with
non-reflecting glass and written in Yiddish.
You must reflect on it, J..J.!
Shalom, D. Brockschmidt

For over 50 years Mr Eric Butler, advisory director of The Australian League of Rights, has observed the Australian political scene. Where other conservative voices have become mute and shied away from mentioning names and organisations regarded as a problem, Butler speaks openly about a `perceived Jewish-Zionist problem' mainly concerning international world finance. Butler is a proud royalist and nationalist whom Zionist organisation and the media, owing for want of an argument, have tarred with the anti-Semitic brush. Here is the article, Immigration Debate Must Be Civilised, that he wrote for the League's On Target, published on 24 January 1997. Students of what is known as `anti-Semitism' are aware that `anti-Semitism' is defined as expressing hatred of the Jewish people, or anti-Jewish Acts, much of this type of `anti-Semitism' has been deliberately promoted by Jews for political and publicity purposes. In his classic work, The Zionist Connection, American anti-Zionist Jew Dr Alfred Lilienthal provides documented evidence of this type of provocative activity. Many of the illiterates masquerading as serious journalists reveal not only their illiteracy, but also their philosophic bias as they churn out their comments on immigration and race issues. Many are blatant totalitarians who resent the emergence of political representatives like Graeme Campbell and Pauline Hanson. Like a cracked record they keep sneering about "the threat of racism", this rarely defined, probably because illiterates are unable to manage this. The forced programme of multiculturalism, particularly at a time when there is large scale unemployment and economic tensions, is a guaranteed recipe for ethnic conflict. The minimising and progressive resolution of this type of conflict requires basically two steps: first being a drastic reduction in the immigration rate and the end of the policy of multiculturalism; and the second being implementation of an economic programme which will make it possible for those seeking to join the production system to do so. The fostering of any type of ethnic hatred at the present time should not only be deplored, but should be condemned by all those who genuinely want to halt any further social disintegration. An item in the Melbourne Herald Sun of Saturday, January 18, highlights the threat from those groups who are being deliberately provocative. Entitled, RACISM HAS A PRICE TAG, the report starts, T shirts with anti-Asian and other racist slogans are being sold by a new shop opened by the racist organisation National Action. National Action chairman Michael Brander said he hoped the shop would get the group's anti-Asian immigration message across middle Australia. There is a photo of Michael Brander outside the shop which displays the Eureka flag. One cannot help noting the number of self-styled nationalist movements which use a flag which has no relevance to Australia's genuine heritage. Although I have only met Michael Brander briefly on several occasions, I would say that he is probably a genuinely well-meaning young man. But he is politically naïve if he believes that the type of programme he supports is going to have any impact on `middle Australia'. The history of the National Action movement in Australia shows that some of the types it attracts are sometimes psychopaths, susceptible to manipulation by others. Growing social disintegration, with a growing younger underclass, must inevitably result in the recruitment of more social misfits into the ranks of those who are desperate about the future. Increasing numbers do not believe that they have a future, as witnessed by the suicide rate. Victorian Premier Jeff Kennett is so alarmed that he is going to have an investigation as to the cause. One
Church leader has bluntly said that the cause is well known: the rising unemployment rate among the young. But like all his Liberal Party colleagues Jeff Kennett has nothing constructive to offer. The best that Senator Amanda Vanstone, Minister for Employment, can suggest is that it will take time before the "benefits" of the Howard-Costello Budget are felt. Confidence will then be restored and, hey presto, more jobs will become available. Clearly a combination of developments is bringing Australia towards a major explosion. This is no time for creating fear amongst the Asian and non-European community. It is not the fault of the non-Europeans that they are in Australia in such large numbers at this time. As documented by researcher Denis McCormack in his work, The Asianisation of Australia, all the major political parties have been responsible for what has happened. The tactics of groups like National Action can only prove counter-productive. Anti-League of Rights smears have attempted to link the League with revolutionary groups. As the notorious National Action leader in West Australia, Jack Van Tongeren, is still in prison as a result of criminal activities against Asians, has been quoted as having said that he had tried to increase his education by "hanging around" the League, it is important to record that the last time I saw van Tongeren was when I had to have him and a colleague physically ejected from a public meeting. They had charged that I was "soft" on the immigration issue and threw an empty cartridge into the meeting shouting that all power flows from the barrel of the gun. This was one of Chinese Communist leader Mao's best known slogans. I stressed at the Perth meeting that National Action's tactics were simply making the task of constructive opponents of the nation's disastrous immigration policy that much harder. In a disgraceful cover story, The Bulletin, blatantly attempted to link the League with groups like National Action. A senior editor with The Bulletin, a pleasant woman, came to my Melbourne office to interview me for The Bulletin Story. She frankly admitted that she had not found what she expected. But this did not prevent the subsequent smear article in The Bulletin. Such is the morality of those determined to ensure that there is no constructive opposition to Australia's immigration and multicultural policies. But, fortunately, the tide is turning. The best contribution Michael Brander and other National Action supporters can make is to permanently close down their movement and take up some pleasant hobby.

Anthony Keane, The Advertiser, 24 January 1997

Aboriginal band Yothu Yindi came to Port Lincoln yesterday to help restore racial harmony - and came face-to-face with the man behind the controversy that split the town. But it was an amicable meeting between outspoken mayor Mr Peter Davis and the musicians led by singer Mandawuy Yunupingu. Mr Davis sparked a furore last year by describing the children of mixed race parentage as "mongrels". He later withdrew the remark and apologised. The mayor was among a crowd of more than 1000 which watched Yothu Yindi at the Centenary Oval last night at a concert on the eve of Port Lincoln's annual Tunarama festival. And Mr Davis said the town was "extremely privileged" to see the band perform. Yunupingu said the band decided to make its first visit to the town because of community requests and "that racial situation that happened here last year".
"I think it's a fitting situation to have us here - we are always on hand for this type of healing," he said. "I came out with a different view. He shares the same sort of common attitude. I think that I learned something and he learned something from me."
Mr Davis said Yunupingu "knows I'm not a racist. The racism factor is a factor of the media driving it. It's not a factor of Port Lincoln, or me, or Yothu Yindi. Port Lincoln is no different to any other city in rural Australia," he said. Mr Davis invited Yothu Yindi to camp on Port Lincoln's Boston island, which he owns, if they wanted a break from the pressure of touring. "We can have a barbie", Yunupingu said, and added that the band hoped to make Port Lincoln a regular venue on its Australian tour. Last night's concert was part of Artfeast, an arts and cultural program run in conjunction with Tunarama, which starts today. Yothu Yindi played songs from its recently-released album, Wild Honey/Birrkuta, as well as hits such as Treaty and Djapana.
In October last year, nine of Port Lincoln's 10 councillors resigned in protest over Mr Davis's "mongrel" comment. Only four of the councillors who resigned were re-elected at a special election in November. The other five seats were filled by supporters of Mr Davis. Yunupingu said it was appropriate that Mr Davis had apologised because his comments had created "a negative view about the whole issue of racial harmony". Port Lincoln's council was one of several major sponsors of last night's concert. Artfeast co-ordinator Ms Emma Baily said planning for the Yothu Yindi concert started last June, "long before" the racism controversy. "It's a very valuable experience for the town as a whole in terms of its arts," Ms Baily said. "There has been a real mix of people who bought tickets to the concert."
Yunupingu described music as a "very powerful tool" to inform non-Aboriginal people about the Aboriginal situation. "Music seems to have that magic that makes people understand what it's all about," he said. Last night's show was the first of a series of Yothu Yindi concerts on the Australia Day long weekend. The band will perform in Perth, Margaret River, Sydney and Melbourne before January 30. Earlier yesterday the band treated Port Lincoln's young people to a three-hour music workshop which included an impromptu performance.

Hillel Cohen writes about Israeli human rights activist, Professor Israel Shahak - first published in Kol Ha'ir, 22 November 1996.

After writing literally thousands of letters-to-the-editor which attacked the Israeli conquest of the Territories, the Zionist left and all those who violate human rights - whether Jews or Arabs - Professor Israel Shahak has founded his own publishing house. His first published book The Bible*1 as it is; without a coat of holiness, by Ya'akov Wolf, is intended to cause as many Yeshiva students as possible to forsake their faith. He also intends to publish his own book, a demolition of the Jewish religious law.
The Bible is a great book, some would even claim a divine book. From the Creation of the world described in its beginning to the Return of the Jews from Babylonia to Jerusalem described at its end*2, it is full of description of great deeds used now in order to obtain many political ends. The Bible is full of positive and negative commandments, prophecies addressed to the Jews and sometimes to other nations, and it is also one of the best-sellers of all times. Thousands of books have been written about it and this week another book by Ya'akov Wolf has been added to them. The book's name testifies to its contents. Wolf, who knows the Bible well, tries to prove that the Pentateuch is neither of divine provenance nor had been written by Moses. He and Shahak hope that the book will become a store of ammunition to be used against the religious Jews in the cultural mini-war waging in Israel. However, it seems that even the Jews who do not agree with Wolf will enjoy reading this book.
For Shahak the publication of this book is just another step in his struggle against Jewish religious views which in his view are primarily responsible for the worsening conditions within Israeli society. For Wolf the writing of the book has been an attempt to struggle against the phenomenon which has shocked him - secular Jews becoming religious again. For both men, more so for Wolf who is older than Shahak, the publication is also a return to the Jewish past where, in Europe before the Holocaust, Jews struggled against the Jewish religion*3.
Wolf was compelled to attend a Yeshiva in southern Poland but in secret read heretical books, including Zionist literature. This led him to rebel against the Jewish religion. Shahak had a similar experience, only later when he was already in Israel. Both hope that many Yeshiva students and pious Jews in general will follow in their footsteps and read Wolf's book in secret, perhaps under thick Talmudic folios which they have to study, then draw the necessary consequences.
"I see myself as one who continues the Jewish Enlightenment", says Shahak. "Stories of my mother showed me that many members of my family who almost completely perished in the Holocaust were avid readers of heretical books while studying in a Yeshiva. It was such readings that caused them to rebel against the Jewish religion. I hope that this will also happen to many pious Jews in Israel. In order to help them on this way I promise to sell the book to such persons only at cost price, or even less if it is necessary." Shahak is a well-known figure in Jerusalem. He is a veteran human rights activist who was the chairman of the Israeli League for Human and Civil Rights in the 1970s and 1980s. The League was the only organisation which protested against the Israeli violations of Human Rights in the early years of the Israeli conquest of the Territories. In the last years he is editing From the Hebrew Press, published in the US, a collection of translated articles sent to subscribers all around the world. Wolf, who is 80 years old, lives in Bat-Yam, near Tel Aviv. For years he worked as head nurse in a clinic, and has also written a book about his experiences as a prisoner in the USSR under Stalin. "We have each heard about the other", says Shahak. "I have read the book about his experiences and he told me about the next book he wants to write, a book that will criticise the Bible. He brought me the manuscript and I asked him to write more and undertook to publish it in the publishing house which I have founded. It was clear to me that if I would not do this, no one in Israel would dare to publish such a book. As an Israeli citizen who considers the problem of Jewish religion to be the most important problem which Israel is facing, I considered it my duty as a citizen to publish this book." For the sake of this publication, Shahak has postponed the writing of his own book, in Hebrew, which will survey and criticise the entire Talmudic law. The publication of the book was financed by both Shahak and Wolf. They do not expect the book to become a best seller but they hope that everyone interested in the Bible will profit from reading it. The first two chapters deal with important questions such as, is the Pentateuch of divine provenance or could it have been written by Moses? The book answers both questions negatively by pointing out the contradictions, the differences in the telling of the same story and the many errors therein. Those issues have also been dealt with by pious Jewish commentators and by the even more pious readers of the Bible who have explained them in various ways; some of them, perhaps, reasonably, others less so. Wolf, however, considers that the errors and contradictions are proof that the Bible is a collection of vague legends, passed orally from one generation to another. Even when the Bible was finally edited and written down it was not considered at first as holy, and this was the reason that no one took the trouble to edit it properly. In order to show this clearly Wolf discusses the Biblical story of God descending on Mount Sinai to give Ten Commandments to the people. He points out that there are in the Book of Exodus and Deuteronomy four different stories about this and about Israelites worshipping the Golden Calf afterwards. In some of the stories the worship of the Golden Calf or the breaking of the Tables of Law by Moses is not even mentioned.
Wolf ridicules the pious explanations given by Jewish commentators as being "hair-splitting" and concludes that the story of God descending on Mount Sinai is a legend*4.
The chapters which deal in detail with the differences, contradictions and the "hair-splitting" of the pious commentators constitute only one part of the book. Another and even more important is the chapter entitled "Cruelty", giving the book and claims raised in it by Wolf, their moral value. In this chapter Wolf enumerates the verses and stories which show that the Biblical God is shown in the Bible as cruel and that "the chosen people" are shown as committing many immoral deeds. Says Shahak, "The recent discussion in the Israeli media about whether Noah had exhibited his sex organ is of no interest to me*5. What I am interested in pointing out is that the Biblical God is shown as destroying by Flood all the people he had created, including innocent children and young animals." The cruelty of the Biblical God and its tame acceptance by the believers, Shahak says, is the real problem. Shahak attributes a special importance to this chapter. He was born in Warsaw, Poland, in 1933 and when he was a child he lived in the Warsaw Ghetto and in Bergen - Belsen concentration camp. In the concentration camp he had a Jewish prayer book from which he prayed every morning and he also had a Bible. After the war, when he had arrived in Palestine with his mother ( his father was murdered in the Holocaust), he still attended a religious school, and even afterwards when he changed to a secular high school, he continued to observe all the commandments till the age of 18. He ceased to believe at that age when he was preparing for his matriculation exams in the Bible. "The cruelty of which the Bible is full, prevented me from continuing to believe in God as described in this book," he says. He himself finds it difficult to understand why the cruelty he had witnessed earlier in his life, also caused by God, did not break his faith. "Perhaps because when preparing for matriculation exams I was more mature,' he says. He proposes a possible explanation. A short time afterwards, Shahak was inducted to the Israeli army and served first as youth instructor and grower of vegetables by hydroponics and then as checker of explosives in a laboratory*6. When he finished his army service he went to study Organic Chemistry in the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. During his studies [1953-60] he continuously distanced himself from the Israeli Jewish consensus. At the end of 1960 he received his Ph.D. and went to Stanford University in California for post-doctorate studies, where he spent more than two years. "It was in the U.S. that I became an anti-Zionist," he says. "I am not one of those who say that they are `non-Zionists' or `post-Zionists'. I simply oppose Zionism, root and branch."
In his apartment in the Rehavia neighbourhood, chock-full with books and containers holding newspaper cuttings, all carefully labelled with dates, Shahak tells proudly that he has finished another book in English, dealing with the Israeli foreign and nuclear policy. The book is mainly based on articles which had appeared in the Hebrew press. He analyses those policies, the Oslo process which he fiercely opposes, the Israeli attempt to form a coalition against Iran, and other subjects. He does not consider that treating the Hebrew press as his source is problematic since he thinks himself as a veteran reader of that press who is able to pick the correct material to use. "I consider the Hebrew press as being a better source than the many books written to please the Israeli propaganda abroad", he says. In addition, he fully acknowledges that the Hebrew press is being used by the Israeli government in order to justify policies, but by using those justifications one can get an idea what those policies really are, for example on nuclear affairs. "Before the Israeli invasion of Lebanon the Israeli Jewish public was prepared for half a year, through the press, that such an invasion is coming and that it will be just to carry it out. Exactly the same thing happened recently before the `Grapes of Wrath'", he says. In the same way, he says that one can learn from the Hebrew press or, to be exact, from the serious articles appearing in it, about the Israeli nuclear option. "For example, if a former commander of the Military Intelligence, Shlomo Gazit, publishes an article about possible uses of that option, or if a person called Brosh publishes a long article in Haaretz which asserts that Israel may use the nuclear option if the regime in Saudi Arabia will change then a few things can be learned from such articles about this option". This book will be published quite soon. Another book, as he says, "is yet mostly in my own head", is closer in spirit to the book written by Wolf. "I want to write a book, in Hebrew, which will cover most of the areas dealt with by the Jewish religious law which are socially important. If I will deal with the inferior status of women in Jewish religious law, I will not emphasise such minor discriminations as the women being not allowed to be cantors in synagogues, but those about the status of women in the Jewish society and the development of those discriminations. I will, for example, emphasise the fact that the position of women in the Jewish religious law has deteriorated through the ages. In `Mishna' (codified circa 200AD) it is stated expressly that all adults and sane Jews, male or female are allowed to slaughter animals. There is no `slaughterer' as a profitable Jewish profession as it exists now. This rule is followed in `Shulhan Aruch' (printed in 1560s). But a short time afterwards, Rabbi Moshe Iserlish ruled that all women are cowardly and thus, if a woman will try to slaughter an animal, her work will not accordingly be to that ritual for that reason. A little later Rabbi Shabbtay Cohen ruled (around 1640) that all women are lazy and will therefore not take the necessary care. Those discriminatory rules are now followed by rabbis*7, and this is the reason why all women are forbidden to slaughter."
Shahak says that his attitude to the Bible or the Talmudic literature is similar "It is plain that parts of the Bible and to a lesser extent of the Talmud are of high literary merit*8. But I absolutely deny that any part of them is holy. If some people sanctify those texts, I consider it my duty to wage a non-violent but also a holy struggle against them." He has rather ambivalent feelings about all the Jewish religious peace movements such as `Netivot Shalom' (Paths of Peace). "I admire what they do for the individual Human Rights of the Palestinians, but from the moment we pass from that to a discussion of principles I very strongly disagree with them. They fully accept the authority of the rabbis and the Jewish religious law. For example they are always quoting Rabbi Ovadia Yoself who ruled that territories may be relinquished if there is a danger that Jewish lives be lost if they will not be relinquished. I regard this as an immoral kind of reasoning," he said firmly. "For example, if the Palestinians will use only a non violent kind of resistance and there will be no fear of Jewish life being lost, Jewish religious peace movements will not support any Palestinian rights. Or, at least, Rabbi Yosef will not do so" *9. In addition to his long-standing war against the conquest and Jewish religion, Shahak now also wages what can be almost described as a private war against Arafat and Jibril Rajub*10. He claims that the Palestinians have become much poorer since Arafat rules them. He also says that their fear of Arafat's secret police is greater than the fear they had for the Israeli secret police and the tortures employed by Jibril Rajub which are worse than those employed by them. "I feel I must condemn those tortures of all Human Rights violations of Arafat's regime." He opposes the claim so often raised by the Israeli peace camp that those are only Palestinian matters. "Human rights are an universal matter. What happens in China or the horrors of the apartheid regime in South Africa were, rightly, my concern and the concern of people who were neither Chinese nor South African. What is more, violation of human rights of Arafat's regime are being committed on behalf of Israel and for the sake of Israeli interests, in cooperation with Israel and in areas which are under Israeli sovereignty" *11.
On this issue he opposes, more or less strongly, many of the Israeli left who tend to disregard the deeds of the secret police of the Palestinian Authority. However, even those of the Israeli left who oppose Shahak on this issue respect his consistency and dedicated pursuit of aims. He wages all those wars not only on pages of the Hebrew press in his frequent letters-to-the-editor, but also in English publications and translations. When asked about a Palestinian state headed by Arafat, he answers: "If Israel will withdraw from the Area C*12, then establishment of a Palestinian state in all the territories, even if headed by Arafat, will be a lesser evil because the Palestinians will then be able to rebel against Arafat's dictatorship, and will in my view do so". Paradoxically, those views caused Shahak to vote for Netanyahu in the last elections. He says that he had reasons to vote against Peres, some moral and some pragmatic. "I will not vote for a Labor-Meretz government which sells weapons to the most murderous regimes of the world such as the regime in Guatemala and other places. It is much easier to struggle against Israeli aggression abroad and violation of Human Rights at home when Likud is in power, than when Labor is. Only recently we have seen Labor Meretz supporters also supporting the `Grapes of Wrath'" He also claims that in general the secular Israeli left is worse than the right. "True, the right barks but the left bites," he says. He does not have any illusions that Zionists of either right or left will support a democratic secular state in the entire area of Palestine, or relinquish the Zionist principles which, according to Shahak, are continuing the discriminatory principles of the Jewish religion in a secular form. "But among Zionists it is Netanyahu who represents the lesser evil, since under him less suffering is caused to people, for the reasons I mentioned above."
As we have seen, it is the hate of cruelty and aversion from causing people to suffer which is guiding Shahak in his political views.

Notes:

1. The Hebrew term used here is equivalent to Christian `Old testament', but
I will use in this translation the term `Bible' for brevity's sake.
2. II Chronicles, 36:22-23. In the Jewish arrangement the two books of
Chronicles end in the Bible.
3. This phenomenon was quite unknown among the Jews who emigrated to the US and perhaps caused most of them to become what they have become. In Europe and especially in its Eastern and Central parts, many Jews became , during the period of 1860-1939, very anti-religious. They not only ceased to perform the commandments of the Jewish religion, but opposed and ridiculed the rabbis and the Talmud as much as they could.
4. The special emphasis on this story is caused by the traditional Jewish `argument' that superiority of Judaism over other religions ( especially Christianity and Islam) , and the `irrefutable proof' of its truth is `the fact' that God was heard by about two and a half million Jews. (The Pentateuch specifies that the number of the male Jews between the ages of 20 and 60 was then more than 600,000. With the addition of women, children and the old one can assume the figure of two and a half million Jews , assembled around Mount Sinai). All Israeli Jewish children are taught this in their schools, even in the supposedly secular schools. 5. The reference is to a comedian, Gill Kapotch, hired recently by Channel 1 of Israeli TV to interpret the Bible in a seemingly `modern' way. Kapotch had caused a scandal resulting in a discussion in the Knesset Committee by claiming that the verse "and [Noah] lay uncovered in his tent" ( Genesis, 9:21) means that his penis was then visible.
6. In my long reserve service, however, I was just an infantry soldier.
7. I mean Orthodox rabbis.
8. With regard to poetic parts of the Bible, their high literary merit is
especially apparent to those who read the Bible in Hebrew.
9. This is the comment of the interviewer. Let me add in this case that I had firmly stated that the Israeli Jewish religious peace movements are refusing to recognise that the Palestinians have any intrinsic rights and in this they are even worse than `Peace now', a movement I detest. Their argument rests only on the premise that peace is good for the Jews. This is one of the things that one still can not publish in Israel.
10. A head of one of Arafat's secret police in the West Bank who is very popular among the Israeli Jewish `peace camp'.
11. According to the Oslo Accords Israel retains the full sovereignty even over Jericho and the autonomous part of the Gaza strip.
12. All the settlements are situated in Area C.

In the No 50 newsletter we featured an item by Mr Jeremy Jones, vice president, Council of Australian Jewry. Among others, Jones attacked Mr Jack King, and his organisation, Australians For Free Speech (AFFS). Here is Mr King's letter to Mr Jones.

1. Lies of Jeremy Jones ( Prominent Australian Jew), and 2. Jewish religion teaches and condones lying, deceit and hatred.

18 January 1997

Mr Jones,

I refer to your article titled `Networking', in the Australia/Israel Review of 11-24 November 1996. You made four comments about me, two being outright lies and the others being misleading distortions.
As clearly and indisputably revealed in the five references quoted below, the Jewish religion ( based on the Talmud) teaches and condones lies, deceit and hatred ( in particular towards Christians). Hence the lies and distortions of your article in the Australia/Israel Review are not, in any way, unexpected.
You refer to me being "another notorious propagator of anti-Jewish myths". You should learn the difference between `myths' and `facts'. For instance the best known two Jewish myths are the so-called `holocaust' and that Jews are `God's chosen people'. I will not elaborate on the infamous holocaust lie ( that is left to reputable experts like Fredrick Toben and David Irving). When considering the history of Jews and the evils of Judaism's Talmud (which condones lies, deceit, perjury, brutality, greed, vile obscenities, sodomy, paedophilia, bestiality, hatred of Gentiles -Christians in particular - sadistic killings of Christians simply because they are Christians, etc.) it is impossible to believe how Jews could be `God's chosen people', unless of course our God's basic standard has now changed from `good' to outright `evil'. Under these circumstances such claims could only be considered as mass psychotic `delusions of grandeur' and clear evidence of mass racial and religious megalomania. It appears in reality that God has `chosen' Jews to demonstrate how people should not behave.
It is a pity, Mr Jones, that you can't get anything right about me - or could it be just an ingrained Talmudic habit of deceit and manipulation? The address from the steps of the Adelaide Parliament House that you refer to was an address opposing the Racial Hatred laws - laws mainly pushed by Australian Zionists intending to suppress Australia's right to free speech and the right to question certain historical and important sensitive political issues, especially the `holocaust' - as it is suppressed in France and Germany. We are aware, Mr Jones, that you have got the wording and the occasion wrong. You should have quoted me as follows:
Mr King considers that Zionism and Zionists and their supporters, including the international bankers and media monopolisers, are the main influences behind our serious economic problems and the main obstacles to world peace - and the primary cause of the traumatic upheavals, world wars and `holocaust' of this century, including the Middle East conflicts and tensions. He considers Kissinger to be one of the worst Zionist influences and that there is a small army of `pernicious and insidious' characters of various backgrounds who are corrupting and directing world governments and the UN - and frustrating the effort of all decent people. Mr King believes that people of integrity and good will, from all religious backgrounds, should band together in a co-operative way, oppose the Zionists and correct the situation, with the object of making the year 2000 the beginning of an era of real peace, hope and good will for all mankind.
Your accusation of me saying that I have "never known any Jews or Asians to make any useful contribution to Australia" is a complete fabrication and confirms you as liar. For a start, the behaviour and motives of such persons as Marcus Clark (SA State Bank fiasco) and Solomon Lew ( Coles/Myer `yannon affair') should be properly investigated. There are numerous other persons I could also name.
Lastly, I refer to your allegation that I called for "identification" and then "commercial and social isolation" of all Jews. Such comment was deceitful and totally misleading. What I did say, in writing, to all SA politicians, the media and church leaders, with copies to some well-known Zionists and rabbis, was:
You should not be dictated to by the Christian-hating Zionists. Judaism's Talmud is racist to the extreme and has been adhered to by most Zionist Jews whenever they can get away with it - in particular Palestine. The Talmud, in its dealings with Gentiles, requires and condones perjury, lies, deceit, killing and brutality. It is a religion of racism, hatred and `evil' - it produces diseased and rotten souls. Recently on the ABC, an enlightened well-known Federal MP appropriately referred to Australian Zionists as those "grubby little racists". An appropriate SA Racial Hatred law would be one which requires identification and then commercial and social isolation, of all Jews who won't renounce those racist, gentile-hating aspects of their religion.
It is most significant that, when criticising Zionist Jew behaviour over the years, I have always challenged the readers to an open public debate on the issues raised. So far no-one has taken up that challenge. Zionist Jews and their supporters all take the gutless, coward's and devious way out and resort to lies, to denigrating and misleading remarks, in their various media outlets. They also deny their victims any opportunity of proper redress. You appear no different, Mr Jones.
Jesus Christ, the Messiah and true philosopher, 2000 years ago said of the Jews, at John, VIII: 44: Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning and abide not in truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar and the father of it.
Martin Luther said of the Jews, among other comments on Jews: They are the real liars and bloodhounds.
Mohammed, in the Koran, said: You must not relent in your work which must show up Jewish deceit.
After over 2000 years it appears that nothing has really changed. Mr Jones, are you trying to maintain that despised reputation of many generations of Talmudic Jews?
Mr Jones, we are aware of the Jewish insidious ritual of Kol Nidre - a ritual which is conducted once a year and which revokes and annuls, ONE YEAR IN ADVANCE, any oaths and promises made by a Jew. How then can any Talmudic Zionist Jew be trusted under any circumstance? Such a ritual is clear evidence of the depth and intensity of Talmudic Jewish deceit. Mr Jones, next time you want to publicly lie about people of integrity who oppose Talmudic Zionist attitude and behaviour, I suggest you think twice about it. We will be out to expose you.

Yours faithfully, John (Jack) King
POBox 293 Belair 5052.

References:
1. Facts and Facts, by Benjamin H Freedman
2. Jewish History, Jewish Religion, by Israel Shahak
3 Jewish Religion: Its influence today, by Elizabeth Dilling
4. The Talmud Unmasked, by Rev I B Pranaitis
5 The Effects of the Talmud on Judeo-Christianity, by Colonel Jack Mohr.
NB: References 3 and 5 also reveal the vile baby molestation, obscenity, bestiality, immorality, asininity and pornography - incest, paedophilia, sodomy - condoned by the Talmud.


IN BRIEF

in: New York Review, 19 December 1996.

In his review of David Irving's Goebbels: Mastermind of the Third Reich, NYR, September 19, 1996, Gordon Craig astonishingly attempts to demonstrate that the book has merit despite its invidious purpose and dubious historical methods. Craig himself notes at the outset that Irving's "obtuse and quickly discredited viewshave proven to be offensive to large numbers of people." Yet in his zeal to defend the right of historians to take controversial, even outrageous positions, Craig loses sight of their obligation to write history that is true.
No doubt, as Craig pointed out, Irving is an energetic researcher who has gained access to useful documents. But as in the past, Irving's newest book deliberately distorts and obscures the facts in order to minimise the Holocaust and exonerate Hitler. Craig writes that "satisfactory explanations of the deaths of the Jews are hard to come by" in Irving's book, yet he praises Irving as knowing "more about National Socialism than most professional scholars in his field." It's what David Irving seems not to know about National Socialism - namely Hitler's deliberate murder of six million Jews - that is the problem. Gordon Craig replies: The issue raised at the beginning of my article of September 19 was not the historian's "obligation to write history that is true" but his freedom to express his views even if they are offensive, or appear to be false, to people like Mr Foxman. Why he should have this freedom was explained succinctly and unanswerably by John Stuart Mill in the second chapter of On Liberty.
Mill wrote: "First, if any opinion is compelled to silence, that opinion may, for ought we can certainly know, be true. To deny this is to assume our own infallibility. Secondly, though the silenced opinion be in error, it may, and very commonly does, contain a portion of the truth, and since the general or prevailing opinion on any subject is rarely or never the whole truth, it is only by the collision of adverse opinions that the remainder of the truth has any chance of being supplied. Thirdly, even if the received opinion be not only true, but the whole truth, unless it is suffered to be, and actually is, vigorously and earnestly contested, it will, by most of those who receive it, be held in the manner of a prejudice, with little comprehension or feeling of its rational grounds. And not only this, but, fourthly, the meaning of the doctrine itself will be in danger of being lost, or enfeebled." Death camp trial, AFP, Paris, in: Herald Sun, 24 January 1997 Alleged wartime Nazi collaborator Maurice Papon will stand trial for crimes against humanity.
France's supreme court today rejected an appeal by 86-year-old Mr Papon's lawyers against an earlier ruling that he should face trial over his alleged role in the deportation of 1690 Jews to Nazi death camps. The appeal was his final bid to escape trial over charges arising from the time he served in Bordeaux as a senior official of the wartime Vichy government, which collaborated with the Nazis. Chief prosecutor Jean-Pierre Dintilhac had rejected arguments put by Mr Papon's lawyers, in particular their contention that there was no proof of his intention to commit crimes against humanity.
"It is time that Papon answers forhis abominable crimes against people solely due to their birth," Mr Dintilhac had said. Mr Papon is the last survivor of four Frenchmen said to have collaborated with the Nazis and who were accused of crimes against humanity. He was given high office in post-war France, serving as police chief in Paris and budget minister.
The hearing was the latest step in a 15-year legal battle over whether he should go before the court in Gironde, south-western France. An appeals court ruled last September that he should stand trial but his lawyer appealed, arguing his client was a member of the French Resistance during the war and had never sympathised with Nazi ideology. Australian tycoon `spreading evil', Reuter, The Advertiser, 21 February 1997 Australian mining tycoon Joseph Gutnick has been blasted by Israel's opposition leader, Shimon Peres, for spreading "evil and hatred" by bankrolling settlement of occupied Arab lands in the West Bank. "Gutnick - he comes to pass out funds in order to argue, to spread evil and hatred, like all Habad now," Mr Peres told students at the religious Bar-Ilan University in Tel Aviv. The remarks were broadcast by Israel Radio. Mr Gutnick, 44, a follower of the ultra orthodox Jewish Habad sect (Schneerson), has privately funded building in Jewish settlements in the occupies West Bank - an areawhich Palestinians hope one day will be their State.
In elections last May Habad backed Mr Benjamin Netanyahu, leader of the right-wing Likud party, against then-prime minister Mr Peres, who heads the Labour party. Mr Netanyahu narrowly defeated Mr Peres. "Habad spread evil against us. Once it was a party that spread love of Israel. Now it is spreading hatred in Israel," Mr Peres said.



A sequel to the Irving's 8 November 1996 Banning From Australia
In our view the Minister's claim, that his decision to reject Irving's visa application did not take into account Irving's views on the Holocaust, is untenable - see: Newsletter No. 50 - nor is the Minister's claim that the Irving affair is not a free speech issue. In another twist to the sorry tale we now learn that Mr Irving did not "avail himself of the opportunity" to have the Minister's decision reviewed. The following correspondence says it all:

The Minister for Immigration Replies - 18 December 1996

Dear Dr Toben

Thank you for your letter of 28 October 1996 concerning the application to visit Australia lodged by Mr David Irving. As you would be aware I decided on 6 November 1996 to refuse to grant Mr Irving a visitor visa as I was satisfied that he is not a person of good character. All applications for visas are considered against the legal requirements of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act) and the Migration Regulations. If an applicant fails to meet all the criteria for entry to Australia he or she will not be granted a visa. Among these criteria is a requirement that persons entering Australia must be assessed for good character.
In 1992 Mr Irving was convicted of "defaming the memory of the dead", an offence under German law, and in 1993 expelled from Germany; in 1992 Mr Irving was detained by Canadian immigration officials and deported from Canada; in 1994 Mr Irving was found to be in contempt of the UK High Court and committed to prison for three months. Sworn evidence by Mr Irving, in an attempt to purge that contempt, was later rejected by a judge of the UK High Court. This conduct reveals a consistent pattern of behaviour which led me to conclude that Mr Irving is not of good character.
Mr Irving's last two applications for visitor visas were also refused as it was assessed that he did not meet the legal criteria for the grant of the visas. These decisions were the subject of an appeal to the federal Court by Mr Irving. In a judgement dated 30 July 1996 the Federal Court rejected that appeal. The Federal Court observed that `good character' should be taken in its ordinary sense as a reference to the enduring moral qualities of a person and not to the good standing, fame or repute of that person in the community. The Court also commented that lack of respect for the law and for sensitivities for which the law sought to win respect was relevant to the issue of character in Mr Irving's case.
My decision to reject Mr Irving's application had nothing to do with the issue of free speech. The Australian Government is committed to the principle of freedom of speech. Mr Irving's views and writings are readily available in Australia and Australians are free to come to their own conclusions about Mr Irving's views.
Thank you for bringing your thoughts on this matter to my attention.

Yours sincerely
Philip Ruddock


Fredrick Toben Replies - 23 December 1996


Dear Mr Ruddock

Thank you for your letter of 18 December 1996.
Contrary to your stated justification in banning David Irving I believe that it is a free speech issue because all of Irving's so-called `convictions' stem directly from his professional conduct, i.e., investigating World War II history. In particular, it is this fact - that Irving claims there were no homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz - that has brought about his being hunted by the judicial powers in Canada, Germany and the U.K. Special laws, designed to catch the questioners of the Holocaust dogma, have netted a number of people. This has a chilling effect on the exercise of free speech - and perhaps you are fooled into thinking that it is a matter of someone's feelings needing protection from a perceived hurt. It goes far deeper than that. We are talking about a billion dollar Holocaust industry to which you have unwittingly extended government protection.
You could have used your discretion and permitted Irving into the country.
You did not - and that means you have fallen prey to the powerful international Holocaust lobby as embodied in Messrs Jeremy Jones and Michael Kapel.. This lobby has now succeeded in stifling Irving for the time being. Further, our Racial Hatred law aims to stifle debate on the vexed homicidal gas chamber story within Australia. We at Adelaide Institute are in the forefront pushing for an open debate because we believe it is of fundamental importance. Our academic tradition is at stake here. Fear of speaking out and re-evaluating or revising historical facts is now very real among academics as well as within the general community. Let me ask you, Mr Ruddock: Do you believe that during World War II the Germans planned, built and used huge chemical slaughterhouses wherein European Jewry was exterminated? If you do, then you are levelling a serious allegation against the German people. Forget the law now for a moment and begin to question the veracity of your allegations. If you do not, then you are libelling the German people with an unproved allegation - that is all it is to this day, an allegation. Why? Because it is illegal in Germany and elsewhere to question the basic premise on which the Holocaust story rests. We find such legal interference a curtailment of free speech - and by your banning of Irving you have comforted the dictatorial mind which hates challenges.
We have expressed our views in our newsletter, No. 50, wherein our correspondence has also appeared. In the light of its contents - and I hope you received your copy - the penultimate paragraph of your letter indicates flawed thinking. The Holocaust debate and free speech are intertwined. The Holocaust lobby wishes to stifle debate. It is now in the process of using the Racial Hatred law to achieve this by forcing its opponents into courts or before the Human Rights Commission - as Mr Jeremy Jones has done with Adelaide Institute. The claim is based on your rubbery concept `good character', as detailed in your paragraph 4:

The Court also commented the lack of respect for the law and for sensitivities for which the law sought to win respect was relevant to the issue of character in Mr Irving's case.
I am not sure whether you know this but at our universities there exists a Holocaust orthodoxy which cannot tolerate free speech. Irving would have personally challenged the minds who maintain this orthodoxy. You have unwittingly protected the dogmatic minds from rigorous work. The all embracing subject matter subsumed under the Holocaust label is a legitimate topic for public debate. It is crucial if we wish to gain an understanding of where we as a nation are going. Please advise me whether you are aware that the powerful Holocaust lobby wishes to stifle debate on the legitimate problems surrounding the claims that Germans killed European Jewry in homicidal gas chambers?
Once again thank you for responding to my expressed concerns.

Most sincerely Fredrick Toben



Mr Andrew Metcalfe, Senior Adviser, responds -11 February 1997

Dear Dr Toben

Thank you for your further letter of 23 December 1996 concerning the decisions of the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs to refuse the applications of Mr Adams and Mr Irving for visas for Australia.
The Minister has asked me to reply on his behalf.
The minister has nothing further to add to his correspondence of 18 December 1996. It is noteworthy, however, that there was scope for a review of the Minister's decision in relation to Mr Irving but Mr Irving did not avail himself of that opportunity.
Yours sincerely

Andrew Metcalfe Senior Adviser


Mr David Irving Replies - 13 February 1997

One could weep at their hypocrisy and deviousness. He (Mr Ruddock) knows full well that while his ministry fights his legal actions at taxpayer expense, I have to pay for them out of my own pocket. Regardless of the fact that Ed Wall has been bravely fighting for no fee, the exclusion fight so far has cost me around $100,000, only partly funded by the Fighring Fund, and Canberra has now submitted a bill for $50,000 for their costs. What profit is there in winning court actions, as we did in 1993, if the government merely nods briefly to the courts, and then changes the Immigration law, as it did last time in 1994, introducing a new Lex Irving drafted with the specific aim of excluding me. Somebody, some MP, should ask in Parliament how many visitors have so far been excluded under this new `bad character' legislation, of all the millions who applied for visas.
David Irving



DAVID IRVING
David Irving's Nuremberg: The Last Battle .is now available from Veritas Publishing Company, POBox 42, Cranbrook, Western Australia, 6321

Last October I attended a lecture at Occidental College by Dr Gottfried Wagner, great-grandson of Richard Wagner, the German composer, on `Richard Wagner's Anti-Semitism: Consequences for German Culture and Politics Until Today.' As I patiently waited for the lecture to start, xeroxed copies of an article on Gottfried Wagner, published in the San Francisco Examiner ( Oct. 6, 1996), were distributed. It was written by a young, German-speaking Asian male, perhaps a member of Wagner's entourage.
Wagner's grandson is a very sad success story of the de-Nazification ( read de-Germanization) process perpetrated upon a militarily defeated Germany. "I am an alternative German," Wagner described himself. According to the interview in the Examiner, Wagner's indoctrination started at age 9, when he was made to watch films of his own family socialising with Adolf Hitler ( the Wagners affectionately called him "Uncle Wolfie"), followed by clips of alleged piles of dead Jews at Buchenwald, scenes all too common in the methodology of anti-Axis propaganda warfare. Wagner revealed he had severed all ties with his family when he accepted an invitation in 1989 to speak about the Holocaust at Tel Aviv University. Now at age 49, Wagner is occupied full-time lecturing internationally on what he calls "Germany's conspiracy of silence". The article also quotes him as saying, "Richard Wagner was a negative genius, an erratic moment in the history of music, important, but ultimately evil".
The Examiner article should have been adequate warning for anyone half-way savvy on matters of anti-German propaganda of the nature of the lecture to come. A well-groomed man, Wagner's manners were unmistakably European. Except for those moments in which he was contradicted, he displayed a full measure of courtesy. The audience of about 50 was composed of a variety of individuals, from typical generation-X college students to a wide range of Semites, some old enough to qualify as `survivors'. There were also some faces that seemed suspiciously and unapologetically Aryan and consequently out of place. Wagner brought a script to the podium and adjusted the entire lecture strictly to the script. The lecture was videotaped by a small crew consisting of a young , German-speaking Asian male and a few German-speaking Asian females.
A visit from Gottfried Wagner offers American college students an interesting opportunity to meet in person one of those individuals who emerge from years of harsh anti-German brainwashing. In his magnificent 1947 essay, `Nuremberg or the Promised Land', Maurice Bardeche observed that the enemies of Germany have begun one of the cruellest tasks in recorded history, "they not only plan to make the Germans accept defeat, but they also expect them to be happy about it!".
Today Germany in some important ways is intellectually and spiritually more of an occupied country than it was at WWII's end. The humiliation inflicted upon the German nationals extends from street corners in red light district infected with Turkish pimps to propaganda in the classroom of the Bundeswehr-Universitat, where an Israeli Professor, Michael Wollfsohn, teaches German history the Jewish way. He takes full advantage of this opportunity to spew his racial hatred when stating that Germans of earlier generations "carry the mark of Cain for the murder of millions of Jews". ( The biblical fable of Abel and Cain refers to fratricide, brother murdering brother. The conflict between Germans and Jews, needless to say, has nothing to do with fratricide.)
While listening to Gottfried Wagner, I could not help recalling the report published by several mainstream magazines, showing a tearful son of Adolf Eichmann, emotionally embracing the Mossad agent who kidnapped his father in Buenos Aires, as he thanked him for the abduction that, ultimately, led his father to a Kangaroo court in Tel Aviv. Gottfired Wagner is another one of those `alternative' Germans who are vocally joyous about the defeat of their homeland.
Gottfried Wagner's militant Zionism has a clear set of identifiable goals. Coinciding with the submissive attitudes and behaviour of all de-Nazified individuals, Wagner is also de-Germanised and misses no opportunity to advertise it. In his lecture, he attempted to convince his audience:
(a) that anti-Semitism is inherent in German Nationalism and not limited to national Socialists;
(b) that German Nationalism is a contradiction in terms, since there is no real German national identity;
© that his great-grandfather was an anti-Semite primarily because of his negative emotions, lack of self-esteem and envy for the superior musical talent of Felix Mendelsohn;
(d) that anti-Semitism is unique and finds no parallel;
(e) that America has no need to repeat the mistakes that Germans have committed in the past;
(f) that the discussion of the immigration issue in America should not be influenced by isolationists.
Gottfried Wagner's diatribes against his great-grandfather are for the most part based on obscure and unsubstantiated remarks, such as, "Richard Wagner's real father might have indeed been Jewish". No evidence was introduced to support this statement, which by Gottfried's own admission, had no foundation. He emphasised several times that his great-grandfather had an inferiority complex because, among other things, he was short, skinny, weak, ugly and had Jewish facial features. All of which amounts to utter balderdash. He went on to state that Cosima Wagner ( Richard Wagner's wife) was also of mixed ancestry, "the illegitimate grand-daughter of a Jewish merchant.".
Gottried Wagner argued that the concept of a German Volk is absurd, since
"Germany was not founded until 1871". Saying that a German Volk is non-existent is just as absurd as saying that there is no real Italian national identity because the Italian Republic was founded in the last century by Garibaldi. These national formations were inevitable historical consequences in the lives of societies that are rooted together, in contrast to the `social-designing' attempts to form Yugoslavia. Gottfired Wagner mentioned his desire to stay involved with the arts and listed a few of his philanthropic commitments. One of his projects, he declared, involved producing the majestic works of "a great contemporary American composer, Michael Shapiro". How noble of Mr Wagner, to cross the Atlantic and show his generosity by huckstering the creative dreams of Michael Shapiro. Some 90 minutes into his incessant harangue Wagner suggested that the homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz were inspired by the music of Parsifal. I politely raised my hand at a fleeting moment when he separated his eyes from the script. I just had to throw some light into this inquisitional darkness. He invited my question with a very clear, "Ja". "Excuse me," I said, "but I believe that there is no forensic evidence for those alleged gas chambers". At that moment the air grew very tense, as I became the focus of attention of many pairs of hateful eyes. The silence was absolute, except for one or two deep inhalations. Wagner's expression showed total disbelief. Raising his voice, he barked out, "What?" I repeated my question, but never obtained an answer. A member of the audience shouted, "This room is full of Nazis!" Instead of answering my question, Wagner lamented that he was not used to being questioned in that manner. He added that was the very first time "that" had happened to him. Gottfried's assistant, a man in his 40s, said loud and clear, very loud and very clear, that interruptions were "not to be tolerated!" Herr Wagner continued reading his script, with some signs of nervousness, such as mispronunciations of English words and clearing his throat with pronounced frequency. As the lecture dragged on, Wagner became more irritated by additional interruptions from members of the audience, who manifested their discontent over his unending display of German self-hatred. As the irritation continued, he slowly abandoned his initially displayed good manners and courtesy.
A final word. My comments on Wagner's lecture are not intended to discourage anyone from attending his future conferences. On the contrary, he and his hateful message should be extensively publicised. I only wish that every American could attend one of his sermons, if even only for one hour. His unabashed propaganda would make a Nazi out of Mother Teresa.

On Thursday, 13 February 1997, at 79 years of age, Thies Christophersen died at Molfsee, Kiel, North Germany. Terminally ill, Christophersen who had lived in Danish exile for many years was arrested in his son's home on 31 January 1997. The arrest warrant was issued after Christophersen wrote and published in 1973 his slim booklet Die Auschwitz Lü ge (Auschwitz: Truth or Lie?). The Court doctor found that Christophersen was too ill to be prosecuted. According to the notorious German hater, Simon Wiesenthal, Christophersen was in charge of a synthetic rubber research laboratory which employed 200 soviet women prisoners. Wiesenthal, his feverish mind devoid of any sense of justice, concluded that Christophersen must have known about the mass exterminations at Auschwitz. It would have been interesting to have had Christophersen in court. He would have been required to swear to tell the truth and that would have brought him into conflict with current German law. Christophersen has always denied the existence of the homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz. Such a denial in court - telling the truth as he saw it - would have earned Christophersen five years jail. This is the current legal situation in Germany: you tell the truth and you are convicted and criminalised, as happened to David Irving, et al. What follows is an extract from Christophersen's booklet:

I was in Auschwitz from January to December 1944. After the war I heard about the alleged mass murders of Jews and I was quite taken aback. Despite all the testimony submitted and all the reports in the media, I know such atrocities were never committed. I have said so repeatedly, everywhere and at all times, but it has always been useless for no one has wanted to believe me. The evidence, I am told, is unequivocal and confirmed without contradiction. Court cases have clearly established that gas chambers existed in Auschwitz and the Camp Commander, Hoess, has himself said so. Whoever dares to deny this, makes himself suspect of perhaps having personally participated in the murder of these Jews. I have been warned to take care because war crimes have not yet come under the Statute of Limitation ( as applicable in any civilised nation) and so I can still be tried and be prosecuted and it would be best to keep silent. Friends and acquaintances have said: "What would you serve were you still to try to correct history? You cannot change a thing! Acknowledgement of our guilt has brought us back into the community of nations. Remember, you have a family. No one will believe your reports.Keep silent, that's the smartest thing you can do". I never made a secret of my having been at Auschwitz. When asked about the destruction of Jews, I answered that I knew nothing about that. I simply marvelled at how quickly the populace was willing to accept and believe the stories about these mass gassings without any apparent resistance.

ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo


Adelaide Institute Newsletter 54

Doug Collins, Canada

In the struggle for free expression it sometimes happens that the good guys win a round. That has happened with radio station CKST-AM 1040's victory over Alan Dutton in the David Irving affair. In March of last year open-liner Charles Maclean invited Irving, the controversial British historian and author to come on his show, whereupon the usual would-be censors complained to the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC). A few years ago Irving was arrested while making a speech in Victoria and bundled out of the country in handcuffs on an immigration pretext. But his real sin was that he had enraged Jewish organisations with his views on the number of Jewish deaths in the `holocaust' and the alleged gas chambers. Foreign killers and crooks can roam this country but Irving is a no-no. What can't be stopped, however, is his voice. Ottowa can prevent him from crossing its sacred borders but it finds it more difficult to control the phones. Maclean interviewed Irving for 90 minutes and listeners got an earful. He was unbeatable in arguing his case, which is why his critics refuse to face him. As Professor Gordon Craig of Stanford University wrote in the New York Review of Books after a top American publisher was bullied into cancelling Irving's latest book, "The fact is that he knows more about National Socialism than most professional scholars in his field." The pressure groups have got him banned not only from Canada but also from Australia and Germany, in which latter country he was convicted of the `crime' of `defaming the dead,' a law that exists nowhere else. He was also barred from South Africa until Nelson Mandela lifted the veto against him. Maclean invited Toronto's Bernie Farber of the Canadian Jewish Congress to come on the air at the same time as Irving. Farber was in fact asked to appear with Irving but declined. Predictably. Enter Alan Dutton, he of the Canadian Anti-Racism Education and Research Society (CAERS), who gets funds from the feds and from his friends in Victoria to act as a freelancer, self-appointed watchdog over the politically incorrect. Dutton whined to the CRTC that Maclean had provided a forum for `historical revisionism, holocaust denial, racism and anti-Semitism.'
The CRTC threw the complaints into the trash basket. Not that Maclean had put a foot wrong. But these are strange times. It stated in the judgement that "while certain Jewish organisations were the subject of negative comments by Mr Irving and [by] callers to the show, the commission is unable to conclude that these comments, when taken in context, would tend or be likely to expose Jewish people to hatred or contempt." What is the world coming to? Someone in an official capacity believes that pressure groups like the CAC are not above criticism? Where will it all end?
Will freedom of speech be returned to this country?
The CRTC dealt Dutton another jab in the gut by rejecting his further complaint that Paul Fromm and Maclean had launched a personal attack on him in a subsequent broadcast. Fromm is a Toronto teacher [ who has now been dismissed from his English teaching post, and Doug Christie has taken on his case] who runs the Canadian Association for Free Expression (CAFÉ). He is also a critic of our immigration stupidities and foreign aid. The CRTC stated, dryly, that "the comments of Mr Maclean and his guest Paul Fromm appear to have been targeted at your [Dutton's] views, rather than your character." Dutton's charges of `racism' and `anti-Semitism' were carried in the Jewish Western Bulletin, and the station is suing that newspaper and Dutton for libel. Something tells me that the CRTC findings will not be of much help to the defendants.

A British historian banned from Australia for his pro-Nazi writings claims to be suing the Prime Minister, Mr Howard, for defamation. Mr David Irving said he had instructed his Australian solicitors to lodge a writ and statement of claims against Mr Howard in Melbourne's Supreme Court. Mr Irving, who claims the Jewish Holocaust was grossly exaggerated, has been trying to visit Australia for four years and received his last rejection in November. He was refused a visa on the grounds that he failed to meet the "good character" requirements of Australia's Migration Act. In defending the decision, Mr Howard said Mr Irving had criminal convictions in other countries. A spokesman for Mr Howard said last night they had no knowledge of any legal action taken by Mr Irving.
Mr Irving's Perth solicitor, Mr Ed Wall, wrote to Mr Howard on November 20 threatening legal action if he did not publicly apologise. Mr Irving said the Prime Minister had not acknowledged the letter. He had therefore instructed Mr Wall to proceed with a defamation writ. Mr Irving said he had no convictions in Canada. In Britain, he was found in contempt of court in civil proceedings, but this was not a conviction for a criminal offence. His only conviction in Germany was for "defaming the memory of the dead", an offence unique to German law. It resulted from his saying the gas chamber shown to tourists at Auschwitz was a dummy reconstructed after the war, a view he said had since been verified. Mr Irving said that while he would proceed against Mr Howard, he had decided against appealing to the High Court against the Government's decision to refuse him a visa. The prolific and controversial writer will next week publish a book on the Nuremberg war crimes trials. He said the book, Nuremberg, the Last Battle, was based on diaries of the judges, defence counsel, chief American prosecutor and some of the criminals.

David Irving, the British revisionist historian of the holocaust, has started defamation proceedings against the Prime Minister, Mr Howard. Mr Irving said yesterday that he had instructed his Australian solicitor to proceed with a writ and statement of claims against Mr Howard in the Victorian Supreme Court. He did not know if the writ had been served. The move is Mr Irving's latest in a four-year political and legal battle for permission to visit Australia. Australian Jewish groups strongly oppose giving him a visa because he argues that the holocaust has been greatly exaggerated. On November 8 last year, the Federal Government finally rejected his visa application because he did not meet the "good character" requirements of the Migration Act. Mr Howard, in defending the decision later that day, told ABC radio that Mr Irving had been convicted in Britain, Canada and Germany. On November 20, Mr Irving's Perth solicitor, Mr Ed Wall, wrote to Mr Howard threatening legal action if he did not publicly apologise. Mr Irving said yesterday the Prime Minister had not even acknowledged the letter. He had therefore instructed Mr Wall to proceed with a defamation writ.
Mr Irving said he had no convictions in Canada. In Britain, he had been found in contempt of court in civil proceedings, but this did not constitute a conviction for a criminal offence. His only conviction in Germany was for "defaming the memory of the dead", an offence unique to German law. It resulted from his saying the gas chamber shown to tourists at Auschwitz was a dummy reconstructed after the war, a view he said had since been verified.
"I don't enjoy being branded a criminal from one end of Australia to the other," he said. "The remarks were also published in newspapers round the world." Mr Irving said that while he would proceed against Mr Howard, he had decided against appealing to the High Court against the Government's decision to refuse him a visa.



From Academia: - Three Laws of Life

1. Only men are sexist.
2. Only teutonic caucasoids are racist; others, who exhibit traits which may normally be termed racist/sexist, are not exhibiting those traits but rather maintain their cultural integrity.
3. A right-wing extremist is a bigot; a left-wing extremist is an activist.

Canada is seeking to expel an 83-year-old Australian citizen allegedly involved in grisly war crimes against Jews, Communists and Red Army personnel during World War II, an immigration hearing was told yesterday. Konrad Kalejs, who is suffering from cancer, listened attentively at the hearing in Toronto as a Canadian Government lawyer detailed his alleged involvement with Nazi death squads in Latvia. The Government is in the final stages of a bid to expel Kalejs. Kalejs lived in Australia after the war, before moving to the United States in 1959. US authorities uncovered his wartime activities in the 1980s and he was deported to Australia in 1994, but was not prosecuted, despite the US Justice Departments' evidence.
In 1995, Kalejs was allowed temporary entry to Canada after being stopped at the airport by immigration officials. But he remained in the country. Kalejs, who also has a heart condition and is heavily medicated, waved dismissively yesterday as the Government sought to discredit his claim that he was a university student at the time and not a leader of special death squads against "destructive elements". "The testimony is incredible and totally unbelievable, " Immigration Department lawyer Donald MacIntosh told the hearing, which started in February last year.
Mr MacIntosh said Kalejs was at university but had long absences in the early 1940s due to his position as first lieutenant with the Arajs Kommando. Mr MacIntosh said the group murdered and kidnapped people to rid the region of so-called destructive elements. "They hunted down the Communists, the Red Army and Jews," the lawyer said. He described as incredible Kalejs's claim that he was not present when the Arajs Kommando participated in the massacre of Jews in a Latvian forest in December, 1941. Kalejs, in an interview with ABC's 7.30 Report screened this week, denied involvement with the death squads and said he spent the war fighting Russians. "The answer is no, never," he said when asked whether he was guilty of war crimes.
On arrival in Australia after the war, Kalejs was given a job as an immigration screening officer, letting in other death-squad commandos, the program claimed. The Immigration Department said it was investigating the claim that he was employed by them, but said even if it were true, he would not have been in a decision-making position. Kalejs told the ABC the case was a Russian conspiracy and his signatures on documents were forged.
Nazi-hunter Efraim Zuroff, head of the Simon Wiesenthal Centre, said Australia was seen as a haven for Nazis, and war crimes trials were just seen as expensive and troublesome. Former War Crimes Unit head Robert Greenwood, QC, said he believed there were 40 or 50 war criminals still in Australia because of lack of political will. The case comes amid concern that Canada has also become a haven for Nazi war criminals. The Jerusalem Post said in November that 157 alleged Nazi criminals had been uncovered living in Canada. The Canadian Justice Minister, Mr Allan Rock, has promised to investigate the new charges. The Government will finish its summary in the Kalejs case this week, while counsel for Kalejs will have its turn from Monday.

The January 1997 edition of Adelaide Institute newsletter contained an article about the `Mischlinge' (mongrel) of which the German `personnel office' in January 1944 announced 77 "high ranking officers of mixed Jewish race or married to a Jew" serving in the Wehrmacht, the German armed forces. All 77 had received a declaration from Hitler that they were "of German blood". Bryan Rigg, a 25-year-old American studying at Cambridge university who researched this topic discovered later that there were an additional 60 officers who fell into this Mischlinge category. He added that in 17 cases the Ritterkreuz, or Knights' Cross, Germany's highest military honour, was given to someone of Jewish parentage (The Weekly Telegraph, Dec. 11-17, 1996, pp 28-29). Jewish Nazi Officer Rescues Schneerson
One of the most interesting and remarkable comments in The Weekly Telegraph, article above is the section headed: "Uncovering mystery role of man who rescued Rebbe", which claims that a German Jewish soldier, Lt Col Ernst Bloch rescued Rebbe Joseph Schneerson, the leader of the ultra-orthodox Lubavitcher Jews, from Warsaw. To date, however, I have not heard a cry of gratitude from the Lubavitchers about the assistance of a Jewish Nazi soldier. It seems to have disappeared down the memory hole.
Who Were They And Why Don't Holocausters Want To Know About Them?
Although Mr Rigg was astonished at this discovery, there was nothing new about this news, but it had not been generally known, and Holocausters don't want to know about it. Why not? Because it doesn't fit the `kosher' image of all Jews suffering and being persecuted during the Third Reich. After all, promoting the Mischlinge to high rank in the army does not constitute persecution, and it also raises the question as to what extent the `semi-Jews' were guilty of any atrocities, a question not fully resolved. Special Treatment Those who want an assessment of the Mischlinge should read Special Treatment: The Untold Story of Hitler's Third Race, by Alan Abrams, ISBN 0-8184-0364-0.
The first words in the Foreword are so important that these deserve to be quoted:
The story of the Mischlinge Jews - the children of Jews in interfaith marriages who became Hitler's Third Race - has never been fully told. Instead, there exists a veritable litany of misconceptions centring upon the legal amount of `Jewish blood' an individual could carry in one's veins and still stay alive in Nazi Germany. With very few exceptions, if you were a Jew in a mixed marriage, you weren't necessarily sent to your death in a concentration camp. If one of your parents was a Jew, you didn't have to die. Nor were you sent to the ovens if you had two Jewish grandparents. The facts are that many of these Jews survived. But years of popular literature, Hollywood films, television shows, journalism and plain old-fashioned ignorance have combined to create a myth so powerful that it is taken for the truth. Beyond this, there were full-blooded Jews who, in order to survive, worked for the aims of the Nazis and their followers not only in Germany but in most of Nazi-occupied Europe as well. Sometimes they did so because they really believed in the fascist cause. Others were just `useful'. The numbers of these groups of special survivors is surprisingly high, considering that most people have managed to hear or read nothing about them.surely they are one of the Holocaust's best-kept secrets, (italics mine). Yes, indeed they are.

Abrams Not A Revisionist
Alan Abrams is a Jew and is not a revisionist - he believes in the homicidal gas chambers; the `six million'; and he keeps referring to the `Final Solution' as Extermination ( he even refers to the Wannsee Conference as the First Final Solution Conference), but his book helps lift the lid on one of the `Holocaust's best-kept secrets'. The Mischlinge are in the unfortunate position, historically speaking, of being ignored because neither Germans nor Jews want to claim them. They are in a kind of `no man's land'. The Jews didn't like them because to them the Mischlinge were `goyim'. Many Nazis were suspicious about whether their Jewishness would outweigh their `Germanity'. But the Mischlinge give the lie to simplistic Jewish orthodoxy in which every Jew was a `victim' (always unjustly of course) and every Nazi a brute, the kind of thinking outlined in Goldhagen's book accusing the German people in general of wanting to exterminate Jews. The Mischlinge help give the lie to that because, in spite of some Nazi suspicions, the Mischlinge, the `part-Jews' often rose to high positions in society and were protected by the government. Mischlinge Oppose Holocaust Legend The issue of the Mischlinge is another `black hole' in the Holocaust legend. The category of Mischlinge was created by the Nuremberg Laws which came into effect in 1935. It tried to answer the question of who was a Jew. It decided that Jews were those who descended from at least three Jewish grandparents.

Degrees of Mischlinge
Mischlinge of the First Degree were those descended from two Jewish grandparents who did not adhere to the Jewish religion as of 15 September 1935 and did not subsequently join it; and was not married to a Jewish person on that date or subsequently. Mischlinge of the Second Degree applied to those descended from one Jewish grandparent and who were not then Jews.

Exemptions To Nuremberg Law
Article 7 of the 14 November 1935 Ordinance gives the Fü hrer and Reich Chancellor the power to grant exemptions from the ordinances. Hitler could, if he wished, elevate Mischlinge of the First Degree to a higher and safer category, either a full Aryan or a Mischlinge of the Second Degree. Hitler Aryanises Jews According to Alan Abrams, Hitler knew of at least 340 `first-rate Jews' whom he either raised to the status of Germans or granted the position of half-Jews, Special Treatment, p.29.
Hitler Officials Who Married Jews
Another curious aspect, which Holocaustomaniacs won't mention is that Nazis often hesitated to use force against Jewish partners in mixed marriages because many officials had married Jews. For example, the stepfather of Goebbels was a Jewish pharmacist named Friedländer.

Privileged Mixed Marriages
Reichsmarschall Herman Göring called for a category of privileged mixed marriages. A marriage was considered privileged if the children ( the Mischlinge) were not raised as Jews. If the couple were childless, the marriage was considered non-privileged. Once deportations of the Jews commenced in 1941, Jews of the privileged and non-privileged category were excused deportation to the concentration camps.
Himmler's Move Against Mischlinge Aborted
Himmler organised a roundup of Jewish spouses in mixed marriages in what was called `Fabrik Aktion', but popular protest caused them to be released in March 1943.
Aryan Women Saved Lives
According to Abrams, attempts were made to persuade women in mixed marriages to divorce their Jewish husbands. If they had done so, the Jew would have lost his `privileged' status and be liable to arrest. Abrams says: By remaining loyal to their husbands, these Aryan women saved a significant number of Jewish lives. Yet, unlike other heroic Christians, they have never been memorialised on Jerusalems' Street of the Righteous Gentiles, the road of honour near the Yad Vashem Holocaust Memorial", ibid., p.40. So, how about it, Zionists, a memorial for them as Righteous Gentiles?

Sterilisation Abrams claims that suggestions were made to sterilise the Mischlinge, and were only abandoned when Dr Mengele could not prove to Eichmann that such measures were cost effective, ibid., p.42. He does not mention the recommendation to sterilise Germans and thus exterminate them, made by the Jew, Theodore Kaufman in his book: Germany Must Perish

Mischlinge In The Army
Abrams is wrong to insist that "the Mischlinge who entered the army after 1935 apparently did not rise to the higher ranks", ibid., p.48, now that Mr Rigg has shown that many became officers.

Wehrmacht Sympathetic To Jews
Abrams suggests that some Germans in the army were sympathetic to the "plight of the Jews" and some helped them escape. Will these people be classed as Righteous Gentiles?

Conversions of Convenience
As Abrams admits, many Mischlinge began a Rush to Conversion, being baptised into the Christian faith to escape the charge of being a Jew, ibid., pp.77-78.

Blue Knights Abrams also advises about another group called the `Blue Knights', a privileged group of Jews. First to receive the `Blue Knight' designation was a German-Jewish art historian who advised Hermann Gö ring which paintings were deemed worthy of display on the walls of Gö ring's Karinhall Lodge, ibid. p.149. The `Blue Knights', like the Mischlinge in Germany, didn't have to wear the Star of David and their passports were stamped as `Ongeldig', invaluable. Speer And Mischlinge Albert Speer, the Minister of Armaments is quoted as saying that there were Mischlinge in his department who were retained, such as the President of Mercedes-Benz, Happel, and his manager, Wermer; Meyer of MAN (Maschinenfabrik Augsburg Nü rnberg) and others, ibid., p.123.

Jews Employed By Gestapo
The plot thickens. Abrams lists some Jews and Mischlinge who worked for the Gestapo. During the last years of the Reich, the `infamous Jewish street spies' were used by the Gestapo to spy on and turn in other Jews, which they did. Some were said to have `"betrayed their own family as well - for money", ibid., p.159. Jews Join The Nazi Party Also remarkable from the point of view of the orthodox Holocaustomaniac is that "some of the first members of the Nazi Party were full Jews." Ibid. p 171. They were later expelled, and their names as Oskar Neumann, Hermann Samuel, a `Baron Irizu' and Michael Hornistein, and Abrams mentions Jewish Fascists fighting in Spain, ibid., p.171.
More shocks are ahead for the Exterminationists. Abrams mentions that Jews created much of Nazi ideology. The term `anti-Semitism' was itself copied by Wilhelm Marr, son of a Jew, who also created a separate racial classification for Jews. The Jewish Menace doctrine was invented by a Jew, Arthur Trebitsch. Houston Stewart Chamberlain's Foundation of the Nineteenth Century was dedicated to a Jew, Wiesner. But perhaps Abram's tops it off when he details the report that Adolf Hitler was himself a Mischling of the Second Degree, ibid. p. 180.

Mischlinge And The Big H
Few of the Mischlinge were sent to concentration camps, so they didn't suffer the kind of `persecution' the `poor Jews' suffered. In fact, the Mischlinge, although never fully accepted by either Jews or Germans, rose to positions of authority and power in Nazi Germany. Despite this, Abrams commiserates with them because they didn't receive the same degree of `reparation money' from Germany as the `full Jews', ibid., pp. 207-9. Jews Not Everlastingly As Pure As The Driven Snow Abram's book is remarkable because it refuses to perpetuate the simplistic view of Jews ( and Mischlinge) as Eternally Innocent Victims of Nazi brutality. It shows that some Jews could double-cross their own kind for money or power; could collaborate with the Nazi Party if it suited them; and even be more brutal than the `goyim' Nazis. He mentions Jewish Fascists and Jews fighting on both sides in the Spanish Civil War. He also suggests that much of Nazi ideology was derived from Jewish sources and mentioned the role of the Jewish Warburg bankers in financing and supporting Hitler, p. 160-61. It mentions `self-hating Jews' who betrayed other Jews and wrote `anti-Semitic' diatribes more vicious than the `goyim'. It even claims that a Jew, Jonas Wolk, was a key contributor to Julius Streicher's anti-Jewish newspaper, Der Stü rmer ( The Attacker) and wrote on Jewish ritual murders.

Dark Sunglasses Theory Disproved
Though not as well known as John Sack's An Eye For An Eye, is just as `controversial' in its claims, and Abram's bookrefuses to endorse "Jews As Eternally Innocent Victims' or its corollary, the Dark Sunglasses Theory of History, according to which the goyim should wear dark sunglasses to survive the intensely righteous glow of haloes over the Jews' head. Mr Rigg and his research have revived some of the debate on the Mischlinge and may present a deeper understanding of them. He says, "I am going to take this as far as I can, and take it to its proper conclusion if there is one", (Weekly Telegraph). The proper conclusion is strong modification of the Holocaust Legend.


IN BRIEF

The Church of Christ has apologised to Aboriginal and Asian Australians for staying silent on racism. The state president of the Churches of Christ, the Reverend Jeff May, issued a racial tolerance statement last week in response to a debate which has been building since September. "I think, maybe, we've waited too long to make a statement," he said yesterday. "Silence hurts. People can reasonably assume that silence is assent. We thought it would die down quickly but it just kept going on and on."
The move comes in response to anti-immigration comments made by Queensland Independent MP Ms Pauline Hanson, in September, and Port Lincoln mayor, Mr Peter Davis, in October. Mr May said some of the remarks had been felt keenly in his family which included four adopted children of various Asian backgrounds. The denomination's racial tolerance statement says, in part, the Churches of Christ:
EXPRESSES sympathy to those suffering persecution generated by statements in the media.
ASKS forgiveness for a slowness to express solidarity.
COMMITS to the reconciliation process and multiculturalism. Individual congregations have been encouraged to adopt the statement and place it as an advertisement in their local paper.

Melinda Brown, Herald Sun, 24 January 1997

A Holocaust survivor who made his home in Australia after World War II was today awarded the 1997 Rotary Citizen of the Year (Glen Eira) Award. Meyer Burston arrived in Australia 42 years ago. In 1984 he set up the Melbourne Holocaust Museum and Research Centre in Elsternwick. It is dedicated to the memory of people who died during the Holocaust and is visited by thousands of people every year. "I would like to accept this award in memory of the millions who perished in the Holocaust," he told guests at a Rotarian breakfast. "Thank you Australia for giving me an opportunity to become a member of your society. I have felt like a real Australian, or should I say fair dinkum Aussie, for a long time." There were eight nominations for the Glen Eira Citizen of the Year Award and two for the Junior Citizen which was won by chess player David Cordover. Mr Cordover has established a Victorian Junior Chess League to encourage young people to take up chess. Glen Eira Chief Commissioner Cliff Caldwell said winners had to be associated with Glen Eira in some way. He said Mr Burston's perpetuation of the Holocaust memories contributed not only to Glen Eira but to all humanity.

Herald Sun, 25 January 1997

Zurich - Switzerland is to set up a humanitarian fund for victims of the Holocaust as the country tries to counter charges it profited from the persecution of Jews during the Nazi era. The money will be used to compensate victims of the Nazi era and to back "the fight against racism and anti-Semitism", a government spokesman said.

Germans will today observe a memorial day for victims of the Nazi regime. In Frankfurt, 300 private family photographs donated by Holocaust survivors in Poland, Israel, the United States and other countries went on display at the city's Jewish Museum.

For Edvard Radzinsky, growing up in the Soviet Union after World War II, Joseph Stalin was a remote, god-like figure. His playwright father would tell him that one day he would write a book about the mysterious `Boss'. Now, more than 40 years after the Soviet dictator died alone in a pool of his own urine as his terrified aides awaited his orders, Russia's most popular historian has fulfilled that prediction. Granted rare access to the President's Archive and other closely guarded documents, Radzinsky spent years researching his book Stalin. "This is the secret Stalin, the Stalin hidden from us for half a century," Radzinsky says. He said he expected a "wild reaction" when the expanded Russian language version of the book is published in a few weeks. He has already whetted the Russian public's appetite with a series of historical television documentaries.
"I specifically did not want to divide the country over Stalin, who still
evokes powerful emotions here, but to build up a careful and balanced
picture of him," Radzinsky says.
Like many Russians, Radzinsky is still fascinated by the man who sent untold millions to their graves or to concentration camps while turning a backward rural land into a nuclear-armed super-power at the centre of an expanding communist empire. "I wanted to find out why Stalin did what he did and why he created a country like the Soviet Union," he says. In his final years, Stalin was a lonely, unhappy man. "He would complain that he was surrounded by great men but there was nobody to sit down with for a cup of tea," Radzinsky says. The truth was that he had had most of his friends shot. Perhaps the most controversial claim in the book is that Stalin was already drawing up plans to trigger a third world war just before his death on March 1, 1953. Citing Czech archival evidence, Radzinsky says Stalin wanted to strike against the West while the communist bloc, fresh from triumphs in China and North Korea, held what he regarded as a temporary advantage. Radzinsky's next project, on the eve of the 80th anniversary of the Russian Revolution, is a book about Grigory Rasputin, the mysterious monk who wielded great influence at the Romanov court.


John Laws on David Irving

Radio personality, John Laws, who has a morning show on Sydney Radio 2UE once described himself as a `mild fascist'. The program is relayed to 78 stations around Australia and his listening audience is estimated to be around 2.3 million. Radio 2UE is owned by Sky Radio which in turn is wholly Australian-owned by Broadcasting Investments, a private company owned by the Lamb family. In Adelaide the Lamb family also own TV station Channel 9 and the Hallett Winery.
On 20 January 1997 when news of David Irving's suing the Australian Prime Minister, Mr John Howard, created headlines, John Laws spoke freely about David Irving. Laws referred to Irving as an "alleged historian". As the Laws program is not heard in Adelaide, it was fortuitous that a supporter living in central Victoria rang Fredrick Toben to inform him of Laws' comments. Toben then quickly rang Radio 2UE and protested to Laws' producer who then put Toben to air. Here is the Toben-Laws exchange:

John Laws: 151532. If you like to give us a call.
Fredrick Toben: Fredrick Toben from Adelaide.
JL: I'm sorry?
FT: My name is Fredrick Toben, from Adelaide.
JL: Yep.
FT: A listener from Victoria rang me to say you called David Irving an
"alleged historian".
JL: That's quite correct. Are you using a regular sort of telephone?
FT: Yes.
JL: You're sounding very woolly.
FT: Woolly or not, I thought that your comment was woolly. I just wanted to check up because I don't understand how you, with your intelligence, can call him an alleged historian. Have you read any of his 30 books?
JL: Now, well, 30?
FT: Yes, 30.
JL: I'm certain, I'm surprised, I must say I'm very surprised to hear 30.
FT: Oh, yes.
JL: The reason I referred to him as an alleged historian is that I believe the majority disagree with many of the facts that he considers to be, that he considers are historically correct, particularly in relation to the
Holocaust.
FT: Specifically in relation to whether the gas chambers were real or not.
JL: Well, whether they were real or whether the Holocaust had been grossly exaggerated. Those two points in particular.
FT: You know that the figures from the Auschwitz death camp were reduced from four million to one million?
JL: Well, I've heard many figures and I've heard many alterations made to many figures, some of them made by David Irving. But David Irving is, you would have to agree, questionable.
FT: I can't, unfortunately, I've read his books, and John -
JL: I see, and you believe it? Well, I mean, people read books and believe them but it doesn't make them, because you believe the book, doesn't make it right.
FT: No, no, I want to know, John, I'm not in here to believe, otherwise I'd join a church.
JL: Well, there are many people who read the Bible and don't believe that either and I imagine you might be one of those too.
FT: John, how free are you ?
JL: When you say the figures from Auschwitz were reduced from four million to one million -
FT: In 1990.
JL: Yeah, by whom?
FT: By the Auschwitz Museum. They took away the plaques. There were about 20-30 plaques which the Pope in 1979 blessed - four million dead at Auschwitz. Now, that was reduced because the death books have been given back by Russia . I think they handed them back to Germany and Poland.
JL: Says who? David Irving?
FT: No, no, no - this is basic -
JL: So did they put new plaques up saying one million?
FT: About one to 1.5 million.
JL: OK.But does that make any difference to the fact that those people died under those extraordinary circumstances?
FT: John, John, we have to celebrate the fact that three million didn't die!
JL: That's fine, if you accept it but not everybody's prepared to accept it.
FT: Yes, but John, let's have a commission. You know what, John? You are a person of high standing in the media. Now, you have the clout. What I would like you to do is convene a conference on this matter, and stuff the politically correct because you're not. You're pushing through, you want the truth, don't you?
JL: Yeah - listen, listen -
FT: Once we have the truth, we know what the facts are, then we can stop believing. Why don't you, John, under your auspices, start a kind of commission or enquiry and find out the facts about the Holocaust? Then we can stop all this nonsense.
JL: But according to you and David Irving the facts have been found.
FT: Ha, but that -
JL: Could you tell me why Mr Irving was found in contempt of court in Britain? In Germany he was actually convicted by defaming the memory of the dead.
FT: Fancy that!
JL: Anybody who says the Holocaust (Laws pronounces this word Holicaust) has been grossly exaggerated isn't really a historian. He's distorting historical truth - he's a fibber. That's why he falls in the category of an alleged historian.
FT: But John -
JL: But whether one million, one hundred, one hundred million died under those circumstances at that time in our history, we can't deny the fact that it was a disgrace -
FT: I agree, but -
JL: and that it was something that should be seen to never happen again.
FT: I agree with that but -
JL: and in respect to the memory of the one, one hundred, ten million, 40 million, 4 million or whatever any plaque on any wall might say, we should not say that it was grossly exaggerated.
FT: I -
JL: For the people who are dead, it was not grossly exaggerated.
- musical sting -
JL: Very hard to exaggerate death and I'd like you to give it a little thought, my friend, very difficult to exaggerate death. You're either dead or you ain't. Adelaide Institute associates and supporters send Toben to the gas chambers

1 March 1997

Dear Supporters

Our short but intense fund-raising campaign has been a success and I am on my way in April. Although still short of spending money, your large and small contributions have paid for the flight. I will be taking off for Europe via the US and Canada and I have managed to arrange meetings with most of the dedicated members of this rather small and exclusive club of courageous individuals who dare to challenge the Holocaust taboo. For the sake of balance, I did ask to meet Rabbi Cooper of the Simon Wiesenthal Centre in Los Angeles, Jamie McCarthy of Nizkor, Professor Deborah Lipstadt, Mr Abe Foxman of the ADL, New York, et al, but am still waiting for a response from these individuals. This whole exercise has been very interesting for me in that I will now be revising our mailing list. Those of you who feel financially embarrassed need not be concerned that your name will disappear from the mailing list. What I did not appreciate was the deafening silence from a few individuals who have been on board since the beginning. After all, even the smallest contribution was crucial in making this trip possible. The motive for making this trip lies, of course, in the very nature of our work. Recently someone emailed me with a request that I explain my motives for what I am doing. Here is part of my reply:
I wrote my Ph.D. thesis on Karl Popper's theory falsification and CS Peirce's fallibilism principle. Anyone who attempts to stop my thought processes, anyone who wishes to tell me what to think and say is in trouble with me. I find that at my age - over the half-way mark - it is shameful for individuals to shy away from an investigation of taboo topics. Give me a good reason and I shall listen; give me a command and I shall evaluate that with the Kantian categorical imperative. It is from this perspective that I view my work and although some of you have informed me that I am rather naïve in my stance, I have always played with open cards. If I were now to join the conspirators, I would indeed be exposed as an amateur - and so I continue to have sleepful nights which brings with it a re-invigorating freshness. I always recall my Year 9 English teacher, Miss Kitty O'Shea, telling me to shy away from telling lies because liars need a good memory - add to this Karl Popper's advice to me on approaching every challenge without prejudice, if at all possible, then I conclude that human beings cannot change their personality. What happens is that the storm and stress years mellow with the passing of time - or, alternately, one's mind closes down. The closing of the mind is the mental phenomenon against which we are fighting, our final intellectual adventure of the 20th Century. There are ever so subtle messages floating about which always have your welfare at heart. Have you noticed the UV scare that follows every weather forecast? Some perceptive individuals see this as a means whereby we are once again persuaded to cover our body - and that may lead to the perversion of `the hole in the sheet'! Hence it pays to be fresh and receptive to new impulses - the heuristic principle! Some of you may feel this is rather naïve. Unfortunately at my age it is not possible to change this approach. It has already cost me dearly. However, Professor Faurisson has, in connection with the tragedy that befell one of David Irving's daughters, reminded us that by the time we get to 50 and beyond, most of us will have suffered some personal trauma. That's life!. It is this view-point which made me reveal my travelling plans to the German authorities. Here is my letter to the German Chancellor:

1 January 1997

Dear Dr Kohl

As I intend to visit Germany sometime this year, I am writing this letter to you in the hope that you can be of personal assistance to me. I am a German-born Australian who is engaged in historical research, in particular focusing on the Jewish-Nazi Holocaust. I am aware of the fact that your government has enacted laws which aim to protect the feelings and dignity of those who suffered in Germany at the hands of the National Socialists during World War II. My understanding is that such laws therefore make it almost impossible to openly discuss the basic premise upon which the allegation rests, namely that millions were killed in homicidal gas chambers. As I am aware of the Deckert/Irving case, I do not intend to break German laws during my visit.
In order to assist me in this matter I would appreciate from you a response wherein you detail for me the matters that I am not permitted to raise in private or in public. For your information, in February 1977 I received my doctorate in philosophy from the University of Stuttgart. I wrote my thesis on Popper's theory falsification and Peirce's fallibilism principle, and I can assure you that I do not intend to lose my Dr title, as did Dr Wilhelm Stäglich for having written the book Der Auschwitz Mythos.
Finally, let me assure you that I am not politically aligned with any so-called left-wing or right-wing extremist groups. Our institute's goal is to shed light on contentious historical episodes which need to be revised as new documentary evidence becomes available. We regard it as legitimate academic research to ask the difficult questions that may cause some pain to victims of the Holocaust. In our view knowing the truth of a matter is a higher moral value than merely believing in something to be the truth. I would be pleased to receive your assistance in this matter so that my Deutschlandaufenthalt is not marred by unnecessary legal entanglements.
Most sincerely,
Dr Fredrick Toben



Think on these things:
Herbert Runge, principal private secretary to General Ludendorff claimed that the general stopped a L beck Jewish pogrom by confronting prospective perpetrators with the following: For six days you persecute the Jew and on the seventh you pray to him.

From: The Advertiser, 1 March 1997:
Jacksonville: A Florida judge set a $1.3 million bond for Orthodox Jew Harry Shapiro, 31, charged with planting a bomb in a synagogue before a speech by ex-Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres on February 13. The building was evacuated after a tip-off, but the bomb was found nine days later.

Critical Support
Mr Jack Selzer supports the venture but also offers some advice:

8 February 1997

Dear Dr Toben
Your proposed trip to Auschwitz still makes about as much sense to me as might have an idea of dispatching Wernher von Braun to the Eastern front as just another regimental commander. You are quite obviously driven by a rather singular mind of a scholar, a scientific researcher - the mind that relies on facts, and facts alone. And yet, you must have noticed by now that all your facts appear to present about as much of an obstacle to the merchants of the `Shmolocaust' as the Maginot Line did to Mr Hitler. Indeed, facts don't matter: fiction does! An average human mind is - and will be - an infinitely imperfect cogitating contraption that still believes in fairies at the bottom of the garden. Is it then any wonder that it is primarily governed by the demands of the stomach that sustains it and, therefore, is compelled to swallow - or to prostitute itself - to the pseudo-religious dogma of the `Shmolocaust' imposed by the powers that be? A State-imposed religion cannot be destroyed by mere facts, but only by total and absolute public ridicule. ( Read The Protocols Of The Elders Of Zion - although a fake, they are a faithful documentation of the Judo-Communist methods of political subversion.) And only when enough broadsides of most contemptuous derision are fired off and caused greatest possible embarrassment to the `Shmolocaust' merchants, then - and only then - your postulations, not unlike the `heresy' of Galileo, could be accepted by the not-so-free `democratic society' as a perfectly plausible hypothesis. Bon voyage! Sincerely, Jack Selzer.

PS: Zundel is a good `bad example', in a sense. He was writing most readable texts containing most reasonable arguments for many years. But he is also a pretty able graphic artist who, however, never drew a single cartoon presenting the `image of the enemy'. And yet, just a few brilliant cartoons would have inflicted more damage than anyone could do with the written word. Perhaps he ought to be compared to a gladiator who happens to be a pro-life Christian: he dextrously defends himself with his shield but never raises his sword. How can he win? People can't be bothered to read: give them funny pictures.


Mr Selzer's Thoughts
22 August 1995

Dear Friends
Various pieces of political advocacy published in your newsletter are perfectly clear and convincing - but only to those who have been already politicised and share your point of view, as well. Moreover, your potential audience is further limited to those who actually bother to read - and to subscribe, in the first place. You may have created a solid shield of facts, which could be put to good use in a political debate, if and when such debate is allowed to take place - but it won't be, not unless it can be deliberately provoked. But in order to provoke anything in the political arena, in addition to the `shield of facts', you need a `sword' to provide the cutting edge. Otherwise none of those facts will ever reach the public at large. In Australian conditions you may also need some lower middle-class or working class or, let's face it, lumpenproletarian persons to wield that `sword' on your behalf, to act as political provocateurs, if necessary - and that's when your `shield' will come in handy.
Of course, here in Australia, most of those fellows are too laid-back or ignorant or both to forge their own `sword'. So if no one bothers to supply them with some sharp-edged material in the form of stickers or A4-size leaflets, then everyone loses out by default. Michael Brander puts out a very decent-looking tabloid, but it's more like Vö lkischer Beobachter than Der Stü rmer. And it was Der Stü rmer that carried out the bulk of the propaganda work in its time. In short, you need an A4 or A3 sheet with the sharpest and cleverest cartoons jumping off the pages, as it were, which should enable you to attack the enemy from the position of intellectual superiority, however low-brow may be this publication's outward appearance. Of course, in this banana monarchy with no First Amendment, `normal' people such as yourselves cannot handle hot things like that. But you don't have to, anyhow. Skinheads, bikies and other pro-Australian persons with nothing to lose can do it for you. You only need to supply them with a few pages of captivatingly boisterous material at a time.
Whatever may be its exact form, this material must be, at a glance, so fascinating and so obviously brilliant as to produce in the reader an instant feeling of most pleasurable `Schadenfreude' manifested by a lively outburst of self-gratifying laughter. This `high' eventuating upon the sighting of the cartoon or upon comprehending of the caption is a concrete physiological reward consummated by the reader, which he may well be eager to share with others. And the more eager he is, the more photocopies he himself bothers to make, so much the further your material is propagated. Ideally, an excellent propaganda product ought to be able to spread itself like an airborne contagion. Why not have skinheads got up as kosher Jews loudly protesting at the entrance of any major bank: "We deposited $6 million in 1939 - and they say they don't remember us!" Or "Don't bank with Jew-killers!" If only the radical right had half the sense of humour of the Jews, the Marxists and the c-suckers! Apparently M. Le Penn and his cohorts are better endowed in this regard.

Fredrick Toben comments: Mr Selzer's thoughts are stimulating. However, Adelaide Institute's role is not to peddle any form of ideology other than the `objective' scientific method - which has already discredited, as liars and falsifiers, those whom Mr Selzer calls "the merchants of the `Shmolocaust'". Interestingly, Mr Selzer, as a Jew, has himself objectified his own status in the following:

Kosher Confession
We, the Jews, are the conscience of the world!
We, the Jews, are absolutely innocent!
There is no one more innocent than us, Jews!
We perpetrated most of our murders by the hands of others!
We only brought forth the homicidal ideology
Which enveloped half the planet like a cloud of poison gas
And killed off hundred times more than lousy six million!
But we had nothing at all to do with it!
And anyone who begs to differ
Is an anti-Semite who wants to kill all Jews!

Mr Selzer's communication ends with two quotations taken from James Murphy's 1939 translation of Hitler's Mein Kampf:
By presenting this [Marxist] doctrine as part and parcel of just revindication of social rights, the Jew propagated that doctrine all the more effectively..For, under the cloak of purely social concepts there are hidden aims which are of Satanic character... This Marxist doctrine is an individual mixture of human reason and human absurdity; though the combination is arranged in such a way that only the absurd part of it could ever be put into practice, but never the reasonable part of it. (p.268). As soon as the Jew is in possession of political power he drops the last few veils which have hitherto helped to conceal his features..In the course of a few years he endeavours to exterminate all those who represent the national intelligence. And by thus depriving the people of their natural intellectual leaders, he fits them for their fate as slaves under a lasting despotism Russia furnishes the most terrible example of such a slavery. In that country the Jew killed or starved thirty millions of the people in a bout of savage fanaticism.so that a gang of Jewish literati and financial bandits should dominate over a great people (p.274).


From Real Life

Without wishing to dabble in ideology let me, for the sake of clarifying the approach Adelaide Institute has adopted in its work, reproduce below the AOPA (Aircraft Owners & Pilots Association) February 1997 editorial written by president, Mr Boyd Munro:
One of the most important things you do as a member of AOPA is to place your vote for the Committee. Your vote sets the Association's direction. This year voting papers will be circulated with the March magazine and I am very proud that we have a large number of well-qualified candidates who are competing to fill the six available positions. I am one of those candidates. I urge you to ensure that you vote for people who will take the Association forward in the direction you want it taken. Look carefully at what the candidate says he will do, and in the case of existing Committee members look carefully at what they have done.
Be aware that there are two schools of thought about how those of us who fly small `planes because we love it should deal with CASA (Civil Aviation Safety Authority). One school of thought is that we should be resolute and assertive, and that when CASA does something to us as a group, or to any one of our members, we should use all loyal and moral means, above all political means, to restrain CASA. The other school of thought is that we should quietly go off in a corner and discuss things agreeably with CASA, meanwhile publicly supporting CASA. You know where I stand on that. I believe that the only way we can keep recreational aviation alive in Australia is to stand up to CASA and call a spade a spade. When CASA attacks us, we should fight back. I urge you, before casting your vote, to decide which kind of Association you want, and to make sure that the candidates for whom you vote are going to deliver that kind of Association.
The fight will not go on forever. As soon as CASA realises that it is up against a group who know what they want, who are determined to get it, and who know how to get it - then CASA will come to the negotiating table and sensible relations will ensue. That time has not yet been reached. For the past 40 years, CASA and its predecessors have been dealing with a compliant user community, including a compliant AOPA, and have had things all their own way. The habits of 40 years will not be changed overnight. Be well aware that there are people standing for election to the Committee who want to `go quietly' with CASA, who want an end to AOPA's extremely successful political assertiveness. They cannot easily be identified because they do not say, in their election statements, the direction in which they would lead the Association.
Two years ago there was a major shift in the way the Association does business when the FREEDOM TO FLY RESPONSIBLY team ( which I led) came to power. Spare a moment to think about where we would now be if that had not happened. AOPA had just decided not to oppose `transponder veils', with Arthur Pape and Dick Smith the only Committee Members to say we should oppose them. We'd now have 30-mile exclusion zones around all the capital city airports into which you could not fly unless you had a working transponder! When AOPA said "No", the proposal was dropped. The CAA had just announced that it was re-introducing expiring pilots licences. So now you would have had to send your licence in to CASA every two years to be stamped and re-validated by an army of clerks for whom you would have been paying. As an ordinary AOPA member of the time I said to the CEO, "That's just a blatant means of making unnecessary jobs at our expense', and he replied, "Yes, Boyd, but you can't say that". That is what is meant by "working with CASA, not against them". I went on to say exactly why there was a proposal to re-introduce expiring pilots licences, and the proposal vanished. Think for a moment about CAA's (Civil Aviation Authority) 1995 attempt to change the major criminal provision (Section 20A) of the Civil Aviation Act. Here is what the CAA tried to introduce: S20A(2) An aircraft must not be flown or operated in such a manner, or in such circumstances, so as to be an actual or potential danger to any person or property. ( Penalty: 2 years jail)
What would that have meant to us? For a start, how can you have an accident unless, a moment before that accident, you are operating the aircraft in such circumstances as to be a potential danger to any person or property? You can't. So that provision would have made every person who had an accident a criminal. What if you have an engine failure in a single-engine aircraft? Gotcha! From the moment the engine fails, you are a criminal liable to two years jail. And what about your insurance when you have an accident? If the provision had become law, you would always have been in breach of air law when an accident occurred, and the insurers would have been able to deny coverage. AOPA fought that provision and won. Don't believe any BS you hear from other aviation organisations, AOPA fought it alone with only one ally, the pilots' union AIPA. All the other aviation organisations thought it better to work with CASA, not against them, and remained dutifully silent. Peter Morris, speaking on behalf of the Minister for Transport, said so in Parliament in June 1995 when trying to say that AOPA spoke for just a small minority. Remember CAR 252A which would have required that every aircraft have a fixed ELT, denying us the right to choose the safer portable ELT where appropriate? CASA justified that nonsense with a "careful case study analysis" of 40 accidents, an analysis which was in reality careless in the extreme and, at least in part, fraudulent. AOPA was the only organisation to stand up and say so. The others thought it best to "work with CASA, not against" and remain silent about CASA's outright deception. AOPA was the only organisation to publicly and politically resist CAR 252A. That much has been confirmed by CASA, first in its press-release of January 1996 and secondly in evidence given by its Director, Leroy Keith, to the Senate Estimates Committee in October 1996. CASA's version of CAR252A would have led to huge increases in cost and a less safe result. Who else has fought the increase in the avgas levy? No one. Because AOPA's efforts, two increases totalling 3¢ per litre were defeated and a reduction of 0.75¢ has been won. Thanks to AOPA, avgas is 4¢ per litre less expensive than it would otherwise be. Now spare a moment to think about Section 32AD of the Civil Aviation Act, introduced in 1991. It is a disgrace to Australia. It gives CASA Investigators the power to get a warrant to burst into any of our houses, or offices, or aircraft at any time, in order to see of the Act is being complied with. The Police have no power to burst into our houses to see if the law is being complied with. In order to get the warrant, the Police must have a reasonable suspicion that there is a breach of the law. Not so CASA. I personally feel very uncomfortable about the fact that a CASA Investigator may burst into my home, my car, my aircraft, my office or anywhere else he pleases, and spend 12 hours looking through my personal papers and correspondence in order to "find out if the law is being complied with". The only reason that CASA ever got this power is that neither AOPA, nor any other aviation group, objected to it being given to them. Parliament works on the assumption that if proposed legislation is objectionable to a group of people, the leaders of that group will make their objections known to Parliament. If those leaders fall down on that job ( e.g. by believing it's better to work with CASA than against, and therefore raising no objection) then the law goes through. That's the way our democratic system works. All the aviation organisations of the day (1991) took the approach that "it's best to work with them", so there was no objection and the law went through. Yuk. There is one nominee for the Committee who has told me he believes that CASA should have the power set out in Section 32AD of the Act, and who has told me he is pro-CASA. But neither of those statements appear in his description of himself! There is nothing wrong with believing Section 32AD is a necessary power, and there is nothing wrong with being pro-CASA. But it's only fair to tell the voters that's your position. What's more, this nominee was one of about 50 people who wrote me late in 1994 after receiving his copy of the first edition of the Weekend Warrior demanding that his name be removed from the mailing list. In short he is totally opposed to the present direction of the Association, and there is nothing wrong with that. But why not come right out and say so? So that your vote can be based on as full information as possible, we have circulated a brief questionnaire asking candidates their views on several key issues. Their answers will be included with their profiles in the March magazine. If you want an Association which negotiates secretly with CASA in the smoke-filled rooms, you do not want me or the people I recommend as its leaders. If you want an Association which fights with determination for our FREEDOM TO FLY RESPONSIBLY, an Association which fights publicly and
politically, then I recommend that you vote for the FREEDOM TO FLY RESPONSIBLY team.None of the team depends on aviation for a living, so we can stand up to CASA without fear of our livelihoods being arbitrarily taken away. We all fly very frequently at our own expense in the course of our business or for recreation. There is no `party solidarity' system amongst us. We do not follow a party line. Those of us who are present Committee Members frequently vote differently, but we always vote in favour of FREEDOM TO FLY RESPONSIBLY as we see it.
Make your own decision about the kind of Association you want, then vote accordingly. Be sure to vote, and above all be sure to satisfy yourself that the candidates for whom you vote really will deliver the kind of Association you want.


Food For Thought
Treason From Within - Marcus Cicero (106-43 BCE)


An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and he carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves among those within the gates freely, his sly whispers resounding through all the alleys, and is heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears no traitor. He speaks in accents familiar to his victims and he wears their face and their garments and he appeals to their baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation. He works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of a city. He infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to be feared.

ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
Adelaide Institute Newsletter 56

Waspishly Yours
V S Stinger, Instauration February 1997

How could the Germans - so cultured and so civilised - the heirs of Goethe, Schiller and Richard Wagner, how could the sons and daughters of Martin Luther and the saintly Alsation, Albert Schweitzer, how could the robot-minded sons and daughters of Beethoven and Bismarck, of Wallenstein and Stauffenberg, how could they all have been tone deaf to the discordant Gö tterdä mmerungen ding-dinging hammer blows of Herr Goebbels and his atonal lies? Indeed, it's a mystery ( Are you listening, St Augustine?). So cultured, so scientific and so crucified after WWI, those Teutonic brutes! And Yet? Ah, what a mystery, unless you're familiar with a holy con-job called the Book of Job or a philosophic hell-raiser named Thomas Hobbes ( who applied Occam's razor to life and shaved it to its bare essentials) or a hellfire fanatic named John Calvin, who honed his Jew-inspired gems of genius in old Geneva, the great God-convicted John Calvin who cut to the bone of contention by hacking off heads, who fought hellfire with funeral pyres that purified sinful human flesh with heavenly pain. Primeval Christians and their Chosenite Jewish cousins, all did God's work by rooting out heretics and burning them root and branch, and the true believers have been rooting for their ancestral killers for centuries ever since. And weren't they all civilised? And aren't we all civilised? Weren't we civilised at My Lai? (Bosnians and Cambodians don't count; Rwandans don't count; they aren't any more civilised than Biafrans or East Timorese.) But weren't the Jews civilised at Sabra and Shatila? At Duweimeh and Kafr Kassem? And weren't those Nazis at Lidice just as civilised as the AshkeNazis at Deir Yassin? Ah, what a mystery, unless life is nasty, brutish and short, and Jesus is a con-job and civilisation is a thin layer of lacquer as black as the carapace of an African cockroach, a shiny veneer for a heart steeped in darkness. No, evil is no mystery. Obviously, Jesus ( né Joshua) smelled a kosher rat when Satan offered Him the world; obviously, Jesus sensed that something was rotten in Jerusalem, if not in Denmark. So tell me, godfather, if not the great Satan, who can make me a kosher offer I cannot refuse?
Why should the Jews, of all people, find the Nazis a mystery? Aren't the Jews also, oh, so civilised? Don't they use Hollywood to purvey the truth, and nothing but the truth, so help them Yahweh, banging their narrow minds against the segregated Wailing Wall? Why should the Germans be a tragedy to the Jews, when all they have to do is scan the scandals they have committed and are still committing against the Palestinians? So where's the mystery? Physician, heal thyself. Goebbels - a genius at propaganda - claimed that the biggest lies were the most effective, for the heart of darkness in the heart of man is hypnotised by hypocrisy and awed into moral paralysis by the boldest lie. Naturally Jews have a name for it. They call it chutzpah. One can only watch in awe and gape in wonder at the Jewish propaganda machine at work in America. Jews tear open a tunnel in the dead of night, like sneaky grave robbers robed in no-account Dracula's black cloak, surrounded by a security guard of dishonour. And the Palestinians are at fault. Killer Bee-Bee Netanyahoo blames Yasser Arafat after he himself defiantly throws the fat into the fire. Previous killers like Peres and the Yitsucks, Rabin and Shamir, they knew what would happen if the tunnel were opened, but killer Bee-Bee has the chutzpah to claim, "So what's the big deal?" The infamous tunnel doesn't burrow under the al-Aksa mosque, the third holiest `shrine' in all of Islam, so what's the big deal? The tunnel is merely a couple of hundred metres from the mosque, so what's to worry? (How far from the Murrah building was the truck bomb that blew it away? How far from Saudi Arabia's Khobar Towers was the truck bomb that blew it away?) So what's the big deal? If it's such a little deal, why hack through the tunnel in the sneaky dark of night? Who cares about symbols anyway? Why should the Americans care about an old cracked bell in Philadelphia? Or Texans about their adobe Alamo? And why would Catholics be concerned about a tunnel which ran "alongside" St Peter's? It's been a marvel to watch the mezuzah-monitored machine-gun fire of the American media at work, mowing down the non-existent opposition, calling in pre-emptive strikes from monopolised magazines and TV networks. Ah, what a mystery! Filling anchor straw men and women with opinions already embalmed by AIPAC. Ah, what a mystery! It's been a wonder to behold history being "handled" and "Spin-doctored" before one's very eyes. Killer Bee-Bee Netanyahoo complains that Jews were being killed by guns which they had given to the Palestinians. (When did Jews ever give the Palestinians anything but grief: the guns they "gave" came from America, of course. Just like the Cobra helicopters stinging Palestinians to death in South Lebanon.)

voir la suite dans Adelcens2

L'adresse électronique de ce document est: http://aaargh-international.org/fran/actu/actu02/doc2002/adelcens1.html

Ce texte a été affiché sur Internet à des fins purement éducatives, pour encourager la recherche, sur une base non-commerciale et pour une utilisation mesurée par le Secrétariat international de l'Association des Anciens Amateurs de Récits de Guerre et d'Holocaustes (AAARGH). L'adresse électronique du Secrétariat est <aaarghinternational@hotmail.com>. L'adresse postale est: PO Box 81475, Chicago, IL 60681-0475, USA.

Afficher un texte sur le Web équivaut à mettre un document sur le rayonnage d'une bibliothèque publique. Cela nous coûte un peu d'argent et de travail. Nous pensons que c'est le lecteur volontaire qui en profite et nous le supposons capable de penser par lui-même. Un lecteur qui va chercher un document sur le Web le fait toujours à ses risques et périls. Quant à l'auteur, il n'y a pas lieu de supposer qu'il partage la responsabilité des autres textes consultables sur ce site. En raison des lois qui instituent une censure spécifique dans certains pays (Allemagne, France, Israël, Suisse, Canada, et d'autres), nous ne demandons pas l'agrément des auteurs qui y vivent car ils ne sont pas libres de consentir.

Nous nous plaçons sous la protection de l'article 19 de la Déclaration des Droits de l'homme, qui stipule:
ARTICLE 19 <Tout individu a droit à la liberté d'opinion et d'expression, ce qui implique le droit de ne pas être inquiété pour ses opinions et celui de chercher, de recevoir et de répandre, sans considération de frontière, les informations et les idées par quelque moyen d'expression que ce soit>
Déclaration internationale des droits de l'homme, adoptée par l'Assemblée générale de l'ONU à Paris, le 10 décembre 1948.

aaarghinternational@hotmail.com