Frederick Toben: The fight against revisionism in the West

Report of the Australian scientist, historian revisionist Holocaust denier Frederick Toben at the International Conference on the Global World History in Moscow January 26, 2002. The report focuses on the problems of psychological, social and pravovovogo terrorism, which is practiced by the government against its citizens, subjected to critical review of the so-called "holocaust".

Frederick Toben

1. Introductory remarks

On behalf of my colleagues and supporters of the Adelaide Institute would like to thank sponsors, organizers and hosts, who have found the courage to proclaim the following European center of Moscow, where freedom of expression is tested.

For giving me the time can not be thoroughly and comprehensively describe every case of collision with the intrigues of the wicked and vengeful Holocaust lobbyists. I offer you a brief story about the difficulties and humiliations faced by the revisionists in the so-called Western democracy. Please excuse me, if I can not name all the victims of persecution.

Because I am an expert on literature and philosophy, so I ask you to treat condescendingly to the flow of my mind, which I intend to immerse you in the next 40 minutes. However, I will not address the issues already raised by previous speakers today. I will consider the psychological, social and legal terrorism, which is practiced by the government against its citizens, particularly in the four European countries — Austria, France, Germany and Switzerland, and then in the U.S. and Canada, and briefly about the situation in Australia. In the course of the report, I will give some personal comments that I think are important.

2. Introduction

I visited Moscow only once in 1971, and I am glad to be back in your beautiful city. For the past 30 years there have been significant political and economic changes. Economic progress is being made — Moscow today is replete with symbols of American global unlimited consumerism — I mean, "McDonald's." However, I can say here about those things for which I would be arrested in Austria, Germany and Switzerland.

For the U.S. and its current political and economic situation should be noted that due to the incident on September 11 the country will face a painful changes in the First Amendment of the Constitution, which guarantees freedom of speech. I believe that this disaster heralds the beginning of a terrible event. The dialectic of the Cold War will inevitably lead to the fact that the U.S. in its current form will cease to exist. While it is difficult to determine what will happen as a result. There are several scenarios. Will it be "The Empire of the United States," as some are trying to convince us, time will tell.

At September 11 involved more serious structure than trying to present the world's media. Revisionists instinctively feel that the phenomenon of Osama bin Laden can not be a satisfactory explanation for people trying to figure the issue. And note 15-year-old suicide praising Osama bin Laden, found in the "Cessna" rammed January 6 this year, the building of "Bank of America" in Tampa (Florida), does not explain what kind of forces inevitably come to the surface.

January 7, 2002 Hoggland Jim (Jim Hoaggland), a journalist from the "Washington Post", said in the news Jim Lehrer (Jim Lehrer):

"We need to pursue Osama bin Laden as the Israelis pursued Eichmann, even if it takes 20 years."

Thanks to all elements of the Internet is still a free flow of uncensored information that is available to anyone who wishes to find it through a search engine «Google». Not to "load" you numerous footnotes, I suggest you personally use this search engine, or whatever, and find materials on all the issues that I light. Enter a subject or name and you will be amazed at the huge amount of online library. More importantly, we continue to be in position to search for historical truth, keep our moral and intellectual purity before the avalanche of information that is dumped on us.

3. Consumerism as a new global thinking

Unfortunately, the crash of any ideology, whether communism or capitalism, above all, ordinary citizens suffer. Most people want to live a normal life: a family, raise children, work, enjoy life, and someone else wants and make a worthy contribution to social activities.

Revisionist wave of struggle with the unknown because the unknown puts us in a state of dependence. Therefore, we strive to provide the maximum amount of information available for processing. The importance of getting the free flow of information is that to create a picture of the world is our intellect must freely receive and process data as much as possible.

Our "global guardians" are trying to keep us in a straitjacket consumerism. The only freedom that exists in the West — is the freedom to go shopping! And woe to those who reject the consumer mindset and a different value, for example, a return to healthy moral values, allowing free from passions.

Freedom from passion is very important when it is considered along with the issue of free access to information.

That objective information first-hand what I call the maximization process. It is important to also get an authentic, reliable information from sources that preserve the moral and intellectual purity, for example, comments by Robert Fisk (Robert Fisk) and other Palestinian and Afghan events via e-mail. Interest to us are the stories of eyewitnesses, free of ideological burden. The only way a person can develop a personal, independent point of view and view of the world.

Unfortunately, the syndrome of Hollywood with all the unhealthy consequences penetrates well into the territory of the former USSR. The syndrome of consumerism and hedonism is the leading factor in the formation of personal worldview. This is the basis of the consumer society. Too often hedonism leads to nihilism, which in turn leads to the death — man, culture and society. It seems that Ivan Ilyin said many years ago: "In a consumer society inevitably produces two types of slaves — prisoners and captives passions of envy."

I should also focus on our financial and debt system, but then would have to deviate from the subject of the report, namely the struggle against the revisionists in the West.

4. Historical revisionism and freedom of speech

Historical revisionists and their supporters around the world quite a lot.

What is a revisionist? Revisionists are we all. Revisionist — it's a thinker, demanding free access to information, based on which he himself can get an idea of the problem. Revisionism is a method, a heuristic principle used by those who are reviewing their own views and opinions. And therefore, anyone who dares to go their own, lonely road of independence is seen as a threat to the power that seeks to enslave the minds.

Revisionists are people who dare to have an independent opinion on the historical problems, the risk of becoming social outsiders. These open-minded people, the opposition, dissent, revisionists, I would even say revolutionary brand in different ways, "haters", "nisprovergateli Holocaust," "anti-Semites", "racists", "neo-Nazis", "xenophobes".

When hung like labels, we must ask: Who does that? And who benefits? In whose interests defamation relatively small group of people who call themselves revisionists?

Prerequisites revisionists have varied, for example, I come to the problem with literary and philosophical positions. However, we share a love of truth, the search for truth.

Revisionist is a person who tries to rethink the issues and challenges as the result of new information, especially when the first closed state archives provide access to classified documents.

The Soviet Union and its former allies (which proved to pseudo-allies) has perfected the process of extermination in the Gulag. Your Russian literary giants of thought, Alexander Solzhenitsyn and others, with their literary brilliance described this tragic chapter in the history of Russia.

I mention this because in the West — in Australia, Europe, Canada, and even in the "free" of the United States, where the First Amendment still guarantees freedom of speech — the trend of movement to the very mentality of the Gulag, in which the psychological terror Ensuring the integrity of society.

5. Conceptual prison and human rights

Maxim "Fear breeds violence" has firmly established itself in all human societies, and ideology usually acts as a means of transport that fear and violence in society. How many of those present did not sign the elusive fear factor plays the role of social control? I think we all know that feeling, because we are all brought up by anyone — and public approval / disapproval are part of the process of education.

In many Western countries, the concepts of democracy and freedom literally worshiped. At the same time, promoting freedom, hardly anyone asks, freedom from what and freedom for what? We recommend to make a choice in everything, but then — in addition to the obvious financial pressures — we limit the notion of discrimination.

There is discrimination against the industry, which was created to enter into violent dissent in the conceptual prison, escape from which it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, "hater", "subversive Holocaust," "anti-Semite," "racist," "neo-Nazi", "xenophobe", " a threat to democracy, "and the latest definition seems to be displacing all previous -" terrorist ".

Such labeling is a popular control mechanism used in the Anglo-American countries. The so-called "human rights courts" — these pathetic generation of ideologues who despise concepts such as truth and justice — make decisions that would be proud of the former Soviet commissars.

For any such court, for example in Canada and Australia, the truth is no defense. The base of our civilization rests on the notion of truth, but on the other trials, it is ignored. This is a step backwards in the development of our civilization.

In order for the plaintiff wins the case, it is enough imbued with a sense of insult of any matter or statements of another person. The opinion of another person with whom the claimant does not agree, it may be challenged in these courts. So, you are easily brought to justice, if you have expressed opposition to the opinion of a historical problem, ie, the Holocaust, and this caused someone damages. Your views are considered racist, and therefore any criticism of a historical question, or the behavior of people of Jewish origin swept aside, and criticism branded as anti-Semitic.

Recently, former Representative of France to the United Nations Daniel Bernard (Daniel Bernard) said:

"… All these woes of the world are due to this high-handed small country of Israel. Why should the world experience the threat of World War III because of those people? "

Which caused the collapse of criticism is the so-called anti-Semitic remark!

And then, when the Danish people are demanding withdrawal of ambassadors of Israel because of his involvement in torture in his home country, this criticism is also considered to be anti-Semitic, to say the least anti-Jewish and racist. Thus, the moral problem having personal, swept aside, and the question remains unanswered.

In the New York Times on November 10, 2001 Paul Meller (Paul Meller) reports from Brussels that the European Council, composed of 43 countries, is trying to impose a ban on racist and hate speech on the Internet, the introduction of an additional protocol or secondary agreement, Convention on Cybercrime, which was presented for ratification on November 8. The Convention was formally approved at a meeting in Budapest on 23 November 2001.

Today united Europe has drafted a law to combat racism. Denying the existence of the so-called gas chambers — Holocaust denial — seen as a racist attack on the Jews, and therefore falls under the law against racism. As said Ahmed Rami (Ahmed Rami):

"Europe is today occupied the continent."

The literal perception or feeling resentment toward someone's words or written statements caused a rise of a new industry — victimology. Individuals develop a victim mentality — in many cases because of the money that can be obtained by posing as the victim.

The last 30 years there is a tendency to perceive all literally (to the detriment of figurative language) and sue. For example, in the past, professors of literature defines the essence of the drama as a conflict. Today, anyone who creates tension, causing hurt to another person saying their opinion is subject to prosecution. It's the death of drama, because someone's feelings were hurt. Similarly, the concept of the literary unity of form and content is rejected in favor of the teachers of literature review processes. Up until the 70's of the 20th century, the University of Oxford supported Barbara Hardy (Barbara Hardy) in its insistent demands strict adherence to principles.

Such literary devices today rejected highly flexible concept of abuse of the senses. Everything is taken literally, not figuratively — and people suing. The statement is a push. In German, there is the phrase «geistiger Brandstifter», meaning 'spiritual arsonist. " In other words, despite the principle of freedom of speech, we make criminal any opinion that does not coincide with the dominant point of view.

6. Review of the Holocaust — and persecutions

The year 1993 was significant for the study of the Holocaust, because there was a sense that the myth of the Holocaust is about to go into the dustbin of history. David Cole (David Cole) did in the 1992 video, where Dr. Piper (Piper) from the Auschwitz museum acknowledges that the "gas chamber" shown to tourists — Krema I — are the reconstruction, Germar Rudolf (Germar Rudolf) with its report on no residue of Zyklon B in the so-called gas chambers in Auschwitz; Hayward (Hayward) with his thesis for the degree of Master, the first scholarly refutation of the arguments of supporters of extermination; Irving (Irving), with its "explosive" video recording, which predicts the collapse of lies when he debunk the myth of the Holocaust in a couple of years, ie in 1995.

All this was too early, because it was a devastating counterattack. The most recent was a ban on the upcoming conference in March 2001 in Beirut (Lebanon). The pressure exerted on the government of Lebanon, was of course, financial. Paid to the United States to Lebanon, reportedly $ 10 million, for services rendered or not — I do not know.

December 18, 2001 the director of the Institute of Historical Research (IHR), Mark Weber (Mark Weber) reported that the U.S. State Department admitted that Lebanon was under pressure to ban the conference. December 10, 2001 Greg Sullivan (Gregg Sullivan) representative office of the Department of Near Eastern Affairs confirmed this fact in a telephone conversation with Weber.

Of course, the current Moscow conference is the direct successor to the revisionists prohibited Beirut, although the Conference 6-7 October 2001 in Trieste (Italy) can also be considered a "real" conference revisionists. In Trieste, I also had the opportunity to say something that is considered illegal in other European countries.

Again, any revisionist in Europe will be prosecuted for the expression of ideas monoculture and nationalism, which are contrary to the generally accepted multiculturalism, internationalism and material consumerism. Link between these two concepts is the Holocaust a lie about the gas chambers.

Despite the fact that different governments claim they are "democratic" and that they provide to their citizens "freedom of speech" in accordance with democracy, the fact remains that constitutionally and legally guaranteed freedom of speech thrown overboard the spirit of democracy in Austria, France, Germany and Switzerland lost and perverted by those who spread lies about the gas chambers!

I do not deny the obvious: the Germans have committed terrible atrocities during World War II. In fact, it is documented with typical German thoroughness. It is said that where the Germans had falsified documents, they even recorded the fact of forgery! However, there are important documents that confirm the Holocaust. There is no decisive command to start the genocide — can anyone imagine that the extremely bureaucratized German war machine began to slack off gas at the oral team?

The concept of the Holocaust is now so pervasive that it can be a let down by any conceivable event. The complexity of the history of the Second World War, instead of serious historical study are presented to students today in absurd and humiliating version of "Hitler hated the Jews that went to war in order to destroy them in gas chambers."

But the revisionists in charge of this aspect of the history of the Second World War, give a clear definition of the term "Holocaust". This is the statement that during the Second World War the German Nazis systematically exterminated Jews in Europe at mass slaughter, called gas chambers, particularly in Auschwitz.

The concept of the Holocaust rests on three pillars:

1. The Germans had a program of systematic extermination

2. 6 million Jews killed,

3. most of them were killed in gas chambers.

According to statements of the public organization "Amnesty International" and other human rights groups, who do not agree with this ideological construction for any reason, this can not be called a political prisoner or prisoner of conscience.

Why Amnesty International does not extend its protection to the so-called Holocaust revisionists as prisoners of conscience? Because, as quoted by Professor Arthur Butz (Arthur Butz) excerpt from a letter to Amnesty International in 1999, "it would have excluded from the ranks of prisoners of conscience, not only the people had committed or advocated violence, but also people sentenced to prison" for the support of ethnic, racial and religious hatred, which include incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence. " This decision codified desire to deprive the status of Amnesty International prisoners of conscience of those who deny the Holocaust, thus confirming the real nature of the actual interpretation of the definition of "prisoner of conscience" in Article 1 of the Statute of Amnesty International. "

Professor Butz further commented:

"This is nonsense … Amnesty refused to uphold freedom of expression for Holocaust revisionists for political reasons. So she does not deserve respect. The hypocrisy of the organization clearly demonstrated in the case of Nelson Mandela … "

(See Foreword to my book Where Truth Is No Defence, I Want To Break Free — I want to break free from a world where they do not believe the truth, p. Xv).

6.1. The countries of the former Eastern European bloc — Poland

In various countries of the former Eastern European bloc, with access to Hitler's book Mein Kampf, there was a revival of so-called "anti-Semitism". I ask myself — did not read the book or another textbook The Protocols of the Elders of Zion (Protocols of the Elders of Zion) — the reason for such interest in the publications were current before the start of the Second World War?

To illustrate how the system replaces one enslaves another, let's briefly discuss the situation in Poland. Prior to the April 1999 allowed Poland to join NATO, it was forced to replace the dominant Marxist ideology the other — the ideology of the Holocaust, which was done in January 1999 in the form of a law prohibiting the questioning event which became known as the Holocaust.

In little more than six months and the first scientist Dr. Dariusz Ratajczak (Dr. Dariusz Ratajczak) from the University of Opole, writing a book, fell under the new law.

Director of the Museum of Auschwitz and Birkenau, Dr. Jerzy Wroblewski (Jerzy Wroblewski) complained to the rector of the university, Professor Stanislaw Nica (Stanislaw Nicieja), prohibit the dissemination of the book on campus. In his book Tematy Niebepieczne — Dangerous Threads — Ratajczak says that he does not deny the Holocaust, but simply reproduces in his book, other people's opinions on this issue.

I, on the other hand, I am proud that I am called destroyer of the Holocaust, because I prefer to deny the Holocaust than to spread this lie.

6.2. Germany

Although it is difficult to refute or denounce what was not, three statements that make up the religious dogma of Holocaust revisionists occupy the minds of the end of World War II, and especially since the early 70s.

It was, it seems, in 1973, when a German judge from Hamburg Dr. William Shtoglih (Wilhelm Staglich) wrote a short essay in which cast doubt on the so-called gas chambers in Auschwitz, because he was there during the war. An article published in a small edition of the patriotic evolved in 1979 in a book entitled The Auschwitz Myth — Myth about Auschwitz. In 1983, the University of Göttingen, appropriated Shtoglihu doctorate in law from the 50s, deprived him of the power. Why? Because the book did not meet the highest academic rank, ie, it lacked the "academic purity." Ironically, the university has applied to the scientist law enacted by Hitler in 1939 and regulates the assignment of academic titles. Shtoglih was also partially discriminated against in pension rights.

This happened in 1983. Later, in October 1994, both houses of parliament — the Bundestag and the Bundesrat — equated the denial of mass murder to incite racial hatred. Thus, under Article 130 of any doubts the existence of the gas chambers, could be sentenced to imprisonment for up to 5 years. This is especially true for "inciting racial hatred — public condemnation, deny or disparage that lead to violations of public order and the law, any act committed by the Nazi regime, which falls under the scope of Article 220a (genocide)." Thus, the Jewish people received the privileged legal status. For the Germans, the vital historical questions have been forbidden, while negermantsy shamelessly continue to stigmatize and vilify the Germans, without fear of legal consequences.

Further, any German judge makes a legal notice (judicial notice) about the existence of the so-called gas chambers, and any new evidence rejected once and for all. Approval of the poisoning of gas based on the testimony of several witnesses, and a solid documentary and technical evidence contradicting the testimony of eyewitnesses, are not allowed for consideration. The reasons are clear.

On hearing of my case in the court of Mannheim you can read my book, Where Truth Is Not Defence, I Want To Break Free — I want to break free from a world where they do not believe the truth, which can be purchased at: TBR Books, PO Box 15877 , Washington, DC 20003, USA.

My case is fallen, along with others, the scope of Article 189 — "insulting the memory of the dead." Judges in Mannheim took into account that Article 130 can not be applied to materials on the Internet, put up for online Australian Institute of Adelaide. But December 12, 2000 the Supreme Court of Germany called for a revision of the case and ruled that a German law applies to Internet content — [BGH Judgement: AZ StR 184/00]. It's the same as if we arrested Germans traveling to Australia because, under Australian law, the Germans drive on the wrong lane road.

It is important to note that the German courts everything that is said, can be held against you, that is, you do not have "privileges". So my defender in court Ludwig Bock (Ludwig Bock) remained silent. Just a month before he agreed to take my case, Bock was fined for being "too vigorously" defend Günter Deckert (Gunter Deckert), thereby showing too great a similarity of views with the position of the revisionists — and it is a criminal offense.

Materials displayed on the website of the Institute of Adelaide>> devoted to the Holocaust and other related issues. We also have available two interesting CD-ROM issued by Amalek Productions: Historical Truths and Judea Declares War On Germany — Historical Truth and Judea declares war on Germany.

Was prosecuted chemical engineer Germar Rudolf. His name hit the headlines of all the newspapers in connection with the publication in 1993 of the Report of Rudolph (The Rudolf Report), in which he presented a chemical analysis of the so-called gas and disinfection chambers at Auschwitz, thus confirming the findings DokladaLeyhtera (The Leuchter Report) ot1988 year . Using the German law governing the assignment of academic titles, the University of Stuttgart refused to accept his doctoral thesis and present it to the oral examination. Rudolf was found guilty by the court in Germany in a major crime — authored by Rudolf Report. Rudolph "defamed high rank scientist", because of this university thought it was his right and duty not to award him the degree of Doctor of Science, guided by the same article of the Basic Law, which has been applied to Shtoglihu.

It is interesting to note that in 1994 when an American citizen and an expert on executions in the gas chamber Fred Leuchter (Fred Leuchter), author of the Leuchter Report was going to have a direct talk show, he was arrested to prevent a violation of the German law. That's how justice works in Germany — does a preemptive strike against those who would violate the law prohibiting the historical debate on the taboo subject of the Holocaust and the so-called gas chambers.

Similarly, a U.S. citizen and political activist Gary Locke (Gary Lauck) was arrested in Denmark, then extradited to Germany, where he spent four years in prison for being sent from the U.S. to Germany Nazi relics.

Published in 1994 a book by Rudolf Grundlagen zur Zeitgeschichte — Dissecting the Holocaust, 2000 — Anatomy of the Holocaust is in line with the books and Butsa Shtogliha. Add to these two above-mentioned report, and you will be clear for the German judicial system took up arms against Rudolph in June 1995. Rudolph was sentenced to 14 months in prison. He moved to England, but after the press began to demand blood, he fled to the United States. All this has destroyed his family life.

The method of prosecution is always the same: if there are holdouts, the first Jewish community in Germany filed a complaint to the employer of the accused — Max Planck Institute without hesitation fired Rudolph. Then the police conduct a raid on the residence of the publisher and the author and confiscate valuable materials. But during the actual trial, the subject of the charges, such as Rudolf Report, is not the subject of the claim.

Thus, you can not defend against the charges sophisticated German legal system. The decisions of the court is always mentioned that the act was committed to "a high level of criminal energy" and "manipulation" and "deception" leading to the "encroachment on the public peace."

In 1990, politician, teacher Günter Deckert (Gunter Deckert) Fred Leuchter was invited to launch an appeal to the congregation. Tape of the speech was enough to clap Deckert in prison for almost five years. Its quite emotive cues made in the course of translation of speech Leuchter, considered offensive to the memory of dead and inciting racial hatred. Thus, Article 130 worked in full force, did not help even Deckert vigorous defense of their rights in court!

Political analyst and journalist Udo Walendy (Udo Walendy) serving a prison sentence of more than two years because of their activities on the revision of the German history of the Second World War. His Historische Tatsachen — is a series of pamphlets, correcting historical errors. The court decided that because of Walendy old age (in 2000 he was in '73) has no prospects for social correction, ie not leave employment history. However, at about this time last year he was granted early release on the grounds of poor health. This case can be called a legal miracle. He was convicted "for the words he did not write."

This is an example of how the judicial system is trying to cope with the natural course of revisionism, poured a stream of German historical works.

Klaus Husher (Klaus Huscher), people still believe in the existence of the German Reich, de jure served 18 months in prison in Bayreuth in 80 years for the publication of a Denk Mit, concerning the forbidden topic.

The German justice took Now censorship in music. Author Frank Rennicke nationalist songs (Frank Rennicke) was sentenced to 10 months suspended sentence of three years for the song, which he wrote in 1986.

Political activist Manfred Roeder (Manfred Roder) has just been sentenced to two years and three months in prison without respite, and he has more than 70 years.

For many years, 76-year-old journalist and publicist Erhard Kemper (Erhard Kemper) be prosecuted. The persecution continued even after having served a prison sentence and the recent death of his wife. Among other things, Kemper publishes the following quote by Jean-Gabriel Cohn-Bendit, a European member of parliament from the Green Party: "We are fighting to destroy the false impression of the gas chambers shown to tourists in the camps. Today, we know that in fact they did not exist. Actually, in the reality of their existence we have little hard to believe, moreover, we absolutely do not believe it. "

Kemper Plantiko lawyer Klaus (Klaus Plantiko) bravely defended him, however, is useless, but at least Plantiko was the only lawyer who agreed to work for free.

Poet and literary critic Rohler Andreas (Andreas Rohler) is still grappling with the prosecutor in Berlin, using the argument of the Anglo-Saxon freedom of speech, as well as requiring the protection of the German Basic Law. To date, it has helped him to avoid prison, probably due to the fact that he left a Marxist. In this example, I can see how "the revolution devours its own children."

Later, I will give a similar example with Australia.

Ingrid Weckert (Ingrid Weckert), in her 70-something, had to endure many challenges to the court for what is published and compared the two diaries of a former prisoner of the concentration camp of Dachau — both positive and negative. It is "understated crimes of the National Socialists."

Reinhold Elstner (Reinhold Elstner) April 25, 1995 on an area of Munich doused himself with gasoline and lit a match.

Why did the Germans aggressively pursue our own? The answer is simple: Germany still has not signed a peace treaty with its former enemy of the Second World War — so the law is easy to operate. German law unprincipled and completely corrupt in matters of the Holocaust.

The Germans changed their National Socialism to national masochism — they like to feel guilty for what they did not commit! I believe this could happen only in Germany.

6.3. Austria

Austrian law indiscriminately condemning the activities of the revisionists as reviving national socialism, which is punishable by up to sign up to 20 years.

February 15, 2000 Vienna public prosecutor accused Pfeifenberger Professor Werner (Werner Pfeifenberger), professor of the University of Munster in Germany) of Article 3 (the revival of National Socialism), providing for a prison term of one to ten years. Pfeifenberger publicly voiced by some of the comments, from which, in the opinion of the prosecutor, he had to distance themselves clearly. It turns out that anyone who gives such comments and do not condemn them, disagree with them, but because the case falls under Article 3. May 12, 2000 Pfeifenberger committed suicide.

August 7, 2001 in Vienna, Robert Duerr (Robert Durr) was sentenced to three years in prison. They brought out the sentence the magistrate Alfred Ellinger (known as a student under the nickname "Rabbi Elly"), Dr. Carl Mitterhofer and Dr. Andrea Rozenshtayner. The Court of Appeal has reduced this period to two years, which means that Duerr can expect a minimum sentence of six months, followed by release for good behavior. What is the crime Duerr? He considers himself an Austrian German origin, it requires that political power was concentrated in the hands of the people, not the state, and he is opposed to the genocide, he rejects multiculturalism, it is against global fascism and capitalist exploitation, finally, he claims the right to autarky — independence in food industry.

Another seasoned fighter Wolfgang Fröhlich (Wolfgang Frolich) from May 1, 2000 is in political exile. Rumor has it that he took refuge in the Iranian Embassy in Vienna. Now he has published a book Der Gaskammerschwindel — Psychoterror gegen die Volker, which can be purchased from Frau Elfriede Froelich at: Elfriede Frolich Mauerbachstrasse 37/13, A-Wien.

In his book, Froelich summarizes and lists all the things that worries many Germans and Austrians:

Forgery of a state-level historical data; insult the memory of parents and grandparents; systematic poisoning the minds of young people through a false historical information; Stalinist show trials; Levofashistsky terrorism against scientists and their families; Falsified reports of experts in the courts, corrupt judges and prosecutors, in violation of the Austrian Constitution courts in sentencing political prisoner. And Froelich, and Durr require that political power in the country belonged to the people, not the state. They forget that the financial and judicial power to change this ideal state. Gerd Honzik (Gerd Honsik) left Austria a few years ago and lives in Spain, where the revision of the Holocaust is not illegal.

6.4. France

Since 1990, France has a law Fabius-Hesse (Fabius-Gayssot), which prohibits any findings challenge the validity of the section "Crimes against humanity" in the verdict of the Nuremberg Trials in 1946. Thus, the legal action against the revisionists are trying to freeze the common historical data at the level of the post-war hysteria of 1945-1946.

In 1979, the same year when the book appeared Shtogliha, the French scientist, Dr. Robert Faurisson (Robert Faurisson) raised the vital question of the real existence of the so-called gas chambers in Auschwitz now known saying: "Show me or draw me to the gas chamber! "He said the so-called gas chambers were physically and technically impossible.

His frank opinion cost him a fine:

The so-called Nazi gas chambers and the genocide of the Jews together constitute one and the same historical lie, which made a gigantic political and financial swindle, the main income from which is obtained the state of Israel and international Zionism and whose main victim was the German people — but not their leaders — and the Palestinian people as a whole.

In Le Monde on 21.02.1979 was published the classic response to a group of French historians to Faurisson's challenge:

We do not have to ask how much it was technically possible to mass murder. If it happened, it was possible. Here are a necessary starting point for any historical research on the subject. We must state clearly and simply: no, and there can be no debate on the existence of the gas chambers.

Faurisson is still waiting for someone who will take his call. Over the years, it is subjected to fines (up to prison until the case is reached), harassment and physical violence.

December 20, 2001 a coalition of five Jewish organizations, including the Union of Jewish Students (UEJF), the League Against Racism and Anti-Semitism (LICRA) and "Memory of 2000" entered into an agreement with a Quid, the most popular French encyclopaedia on the use of the work of Robert Faurisson. Under this agreement excludes Quid Faurisson data on the number of Jews killed at Auschwitz from all subsequent editions of the site and the internet. In the historical section on the Holocaust will be omitted any mention of his ideas, but in a more general description of the revisionism of his work will be presented. However, the encyclopedia will include in the application a reminder of conviction Faurisson.

Henry Roque (Henry Roques) wrote his doctoral thesis on Kurt Gerstein, an SS officer is engaged in supply of concentration camps with gas for disinfection. Conclusion regarding Roque Gerstein did not meet the orthodox views, and as a result he became the first French scholar, devoid of academic titles.

To Professor Jean-Paul Allard (Jean-Paul Allard) from the University of Lyon, the former chairman of the oral examination of the dissertation Rock, now under pressure, as well as his colleague Bernard Notena (Bernard Notin), which since 1990 has no right to work — but this unofficial ban. It reminds me of a case with a history teacher, whom I met in Berlin's Humboldt University in the former East Germany. He came to work every day, but he was not allowed to come into contact with students. In the beginning of his lecture being inspected, then he was not allowed to lecture at all, so nothing, he was waiting for retirement.

Sociology professor Serge Ton (Serge Thion) was fired from his job at the National Center for Scientific Research (CNRS) of revisionism.

Jean-Louis Berger (Jean-Lois Berger) lost his teaching position in the history of public education. What was his crime? He told his students that in time of war camp in Nordhausen, Germany was a concentration, not a death camp, and that the bodies in the photo of the French weekly, presented as "victims of Nazism," actually the bodies of victims of the American aviabombardirovki. At Berger has a family, he has to provide.

Raynuard Vincent (Vincent Reynouard), a history teacher lost his job at a technical school. He is prohibited from working in the public school system for what he published, beyond their teaching duties, his views on the history of 20th century Europe.

December 26, 2001 Lyon Court fined the French revisionist Jean Plantin (Jean Plantin) in the amount of 43,600 francs (US $ 5,880).

6.5. Switzerland

Since 1995, Article 261b of the Criminal Code of Switzerland is the main item on which persecuted revisionists. The law is aimed at combating ethnic and racial minorities. Here appear "belittling, defense and denial of genocide," even though the law does not define the term "genocide." In practice, this leads to the fact that Holocaust revisionists are the only ones who feel the full effect Article 261b. Such an application of the law contrary to the principle of any civilized society, according to which individuals can not be punished for the acts that are not prohibited by law. In the Swiss Penal Code nowhere mentions the "six million dead" and "gas chambers."

In 1998, René-Louis BERKELEY (Rene-Louis Berclaz), founder of the Society Verite et Justice was convicted of "Holocaust denial" with a suspended sentence. It awaits a new trial because Verite et Justice continues its activity.

The most famous Swiss, has experienced the effects of a new anti-racism law — Jurgen Graf (Jurgen Graf). A person who denies the existence of the so-called gas chambers in Auschwitz, is considered racist. For this reason, Graf received 14 months in prison. He left Switzerland not because he was afraid of prison, and because European prisons do not provide security revisionists.

The question is: how does the issue of racism is there something that aspires to the status of historical fact, that fact really is?

81-year-old Gaston Arman Amodruz (Gaston Armand Amaudruz) was sentenced to one year in prison, the reduced on appeal to three months. What was his crime? He publishes a small newspaper in which he expressed doubt — doubt, not denial — of the existence of the gas chambers and openly disagreed with the data of "six million dead."

Thus, the situation in Switzerland today is that question in a historical statement made by lobbyists of the Holocaust is a crime. Throw in the aforementioned situation in Germany. It turns out that we live in the era of the loss of freedom of speech and freedom of scientific research.

Thus, there are deep problems with the controversial issue of the Holocaust. And all the more apparent are behind him certain structures are the same as caused the tragedy of September 11 and its aftermath.

6.6. United Kingdom

Although there is no equivalent law that criminalizes denial of the so-called Holocaust, however, steps are being taken to bring the matter under the category of racism.

In May 1998, Nick Griffin (Nick Griffin), leader of the British National Party, received nine months suspended sentence for inciting racial hatred. Griffin supports the movement for racial separation, as well as his witness for the defense of the United States of Osiris Akkebala Pan African international movement.

Historian David Irving (David Irving), although he tries to distance himself from the revisionists, was convicted by a German court and paid a large fine, though he managed to escape the prison. This conviction does not allow him to travel to Australia. What did he do? In the early 90's, he claimed that the gas chambers at Auschwitz I are "fake." Today, it is perceived as factual truth. Since German law punishes the truth.

6.7. U.S. and Canada

In 1976, Professor Arthur Butz (Arthur Butz) of Northwestern University in Chicago wrote became a classic of twentieth-century work of Deception (The Hoax Of The Twentieth Century). The tenth edition of this book appeared in 1997. Professor Butsu had to endure a humiliating hit the press, but he still teaches at the university, which characterizes it as morally and intellectually courageous person.

In the U.S., the First Amendment to the Constitution guarantees freedom of speech, so any discussion on the Holocaust are suppressed by indirect methods, mainly financial way. However, the judicial systems of the United States adopted the "legal notice" of the Holocaust as an event had taken place.

On top of that, in 2001, the U.S. Congress passed the Act on the Holocaust (Holocaust Education and Awareness Act), which states:

The Holocaust — is organized at the state level event in Europe between 1933 and 1945., During which the Nazis and their allies — to suppress dissent in the name of racial, ethnic and social purity — systematically destroyed the 11 million people, including Jews, witnesses Jehovah's Serbs, Gypsies, homosexuals, Polish intellectuals and opponents of Nazism in Germany.

Another way to enforce "the dogmas of the Holocaust" in the United States by the Anti-Defamation League in the Jewish organization B'nai B'rith, which uses the open threats to stifle criticism.

Willis Carto (Willis Carto), founder of the Institute of Historical Research (IHR), the magazine The Barnes Review, and others are well aware of the dark deeds of the terrorist group. Incendiary bomb explosion in a bookshop IHR — their handiwork.

In 1993, the director-revisionist David Cole (David Cole) has gained recognition from the Director of the State Museum of Auschwitz, that I in Shtammlagere cream — not a real gas chamber, and reconstruction — a fact of which Faurisson and others knew long ago. Since then, Cole has refused to sing the traditional mantra of the 6 million Jews who perished in the gas chambers of Auschwitz.

Not so long ago, during the campaign against terrorism after the September 11 tragedy, a member of the Anti-Defamation League Irv Rubin was arrested on suspicion of plotting an explosion mosque. This same man threatened Canadian Ernst Zündel (Ernst Zundel) bomb factory-made. Fortunately, Zundel had the good sense to suspect that a package delivered "something is not right." Toronto police defused a bomb. But when a bomb was thrown into the house Zundel, the version of the involvement of the Anti-Defamation League were not considered. Why?

The trial for the Protection of Zundel's own reputation in Toronto has become a major process in the history of the Holocaust. In the early 80s Zundel involved sending materials which, in his view, corrected the distorted picture of the perception of the Germans in the world. He distributed the work of Richard Harwood's real is the figure of 6 million dead? (Did Six Million Really Die?) The trial began in February 1985 and ended on August 27, 1992, when the Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal brought against the charge of "spreading false information" as unconstitutional.

Despite the court victory in a Canadian court, Zundel then faced with the hideous quasi-legal Canadian Human Rights Commission, where "truth is no defense." He chose to go to his wife in the United States than to spend their time and money to fight legal perversion.

The last straw was the change in Canadian law on extradition in 1999. A year later, Zündel described it as a "custom-built to solve my extradition to Germany. It was the first change since 1886! Nobody paid attention when I rang all the bells — all for nothing! "

Revisionists today see in their countries, which are developed laws that sound superficially humane, but actually are designed specifically to protect the Zionist Jews, and not some other ethnic, racial or religious group.

Supplement: Dr. Norman Finkelstein, author of The Holocaust Industry (The Holocaust Industry), 10 years after the book has lost a teaching position at the University of New York. Now the French authorities pursued him for "Holocaust denial." He criticizes the Holocaust industry, but still holds on to its belief that such was the case, that is, 6 million Jews were killed, mostly in the gas chambers, and it was the destruction of the state program.

6.8. South Africa

May 8, 1998 Cape Town radio station — Radio 786 Muslim — ostensibly broadcast anti-Semitic remarks and supported "Holocaust denial."

In the Muslim historian Jacob Zaki (Jakoob Zaki) was interviewed during a talk show on the 50th anniversary of the establishment of Israel. Zaki gave his version of the events leading to the "Holocaust" and spoke about the historical differences between the Palestinians and the Jews:

"Therefore, I agree that during the Second World War killed about one million Jews, but I doubt that they killed it in the gas chambers. They died in the camps, as well as others from infectious diseases, epidemic disease, particularly typhus … The Germans felt quite justified outrage against the Jews, it actually led Hitler to power. " The Council of Jewish representatives in South Africa said that these comments are offensive because they support "Holocaust denial", but the Johannesburg High Court dismissed the case on technical grounds, since the independent Committee on Broadcasting (IBA) «entangled" in the procedure.

Radio 786 states that it is a matter of freedom of expression as guaranteed by the Constitution. But Merv Smith of the Council of Jewish representatives of South Africa said that they plan to appeal.

6.9. Australia — Oceania: Commission on Human Rights and Equal Opportunity and the Federal Court

This designation is our part of the world in the spirit of Orwell: Australia and New Zealand have inherited from the empire common heritage — the legislation is still based on British common law, where free speech is a legal principle, expressed in the concept of natural justice. This principle is not so much absolute power as the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, but close to it.

If we say something about someone, then we must give that person a right of reply. The denial of the right of reply contradicts the principles of natural justice.

Further, whatever is said in open court in Australia has an advantage. The situation is different in Germany, where the absurdity of the legal grounds reminiscent of the witch trials. To say anything in his defense was not there. This dialectical trick works well; sentenced tied up, placed in a bag and thrown into the river. If the bag is a time to stay afloat, it is proved that the convicted person has used witchcraft, trying to prevent a fair punishment. If the bag immediately sank, it was seen as a sign of a just verdict.

My court case and the case of Adelaide assistant Institute of Tasmania Mrs Olga Scully (Olga Scully) is studied by the Federal Court of Australia, that is, after a complaint to the Commission on Human Rights and Equal Opportunity. We are accused that the Adelaide Institute website on the Internet contains offensive material.

The problem is that the Act prohibits racial discrimination that might "offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate another person or group of persons." As noted by Professor Butz fine, then we are all guilty because "heated discussion — the price of public debate, the foundations of a healthy society."

[Commission on Human Rights and Equal Opportunity I submitted a copy of the dissertation in 1993 on a master's degree Hayward Joel (Joel Hayward) The Fate of Jews in German Hands: an enquiry into the significance of Holocaust Revisionism, where Hayward argues that there is no reason to maintain the myth of the Holocaust.

In 2000, Hayward has publicly repented, and University of Canterbury (New Zealand) has apologized for the "pain and suffering caused to the Jewish community of New Zealand." However, after a thorough investigation concerning the award of academic degree, the university refused to deny academic degrees or lower level by one notch (to BA), because no evidence was found that the study of Hayward was unfair.]

Our Commission on Human Rights has no legal binding force, so the case should be reconsidered in the appropriate court. For example, a lady member of the Commission has been so biased in its conclusions that not even mentioned the fact that on our website we refer to as friends, and the enemies, that is, in fact, fulfill the requirements of Natural Justice. Perhaps she experienced "the thrill of the Jews."

Because the act of racial discrimination, in which case it is opened, has been developed by Australian Zionists, it is itself deeply flawed — and can not ensure a fair outcome. Rather, the sample will be taken for the behavior of the Canadian Human Rights Commission.

Ms. Scully is accused of distributing anti-Semitic material via the mailbox in her home town of Launceston. She says that these materials are only correct historical errors. For example, being Australian Russian origin, Ms. Scully seeks to uncover the truth about the Jewish-Bolshevik Holocaust. Her accuser — Jeremy Jones of the Executive Committee of Australian Jews — says that the Jews have nothing to do with the above phenomenon.

Ms. Scully and I left in protest at the hearing before the Commission on Human Rights and Equality, as the members of the Commission refused to guarantee us self defense against any charges, arguing that our truthful testimony will make us protection. Our conclusion: where truth does not protect a thriving lie. Truth is — it is a moral virtue, so hearing of the Commission were immoral.

To our surprise, today one of the leading members of the Australian press left Phillip Adams (Philip Adams) appears before the Commission on Human Rights and Equal Opportunity for the comments at the United States regarding the events of September 11. Among other things, he wrote in one of his articles that the United States — "one of the most frequently use violent countries in the world."

I predict that by the Adams will not apply any sanctions. He is one of the biggest opponents of the Adelaide Institute, but he agrees with us on the issue of freedom of speech. I responded to this act of writing. However, I have a sneaking suspicion that he was reluctant to admit our right to free speech, to continue to publicly insult us of hypocrisy is not touching any more. Print censorship in any form would be stirred up the whole of Australia, and would have made his silence and poison pen.

6.9.1. Approach to censorship and persecution beyond the Holocaust

Let me elaborate on the issue of censorship that arises in connection with the case of Hayward, but not in the context of the Holocaust. The ban on academic censorship that exists in New Zealand, there is in Australia, but in a slightly different form than in Hayward.

The majority of Australians believe that they have full academic freedom to conduct research on any topic. However, recently fired University of Wollongong scientist Ted Steele (Ted Steel), who stated that students overestimate the assessment for transfer to another course.

In this regard, which included all Australian universities idea of economic feasibility to the leadership there is a problem of financing the educational institution. We now have a significant number of students who pay their tuition. Not so long ago a group of students of the candidate "in flight" were inflated marks for transfer to the next course.

This is nothing new, this long-standing practice, but in the last years of university teachers have had more freedom to put unsatisfactory ratings. In 1986, I was teaching at the university and encountered the same problem — what to do with careless students who do not pass a single work, but still awaiting transfer to the next course?

Even worse is the problem of academic standards was the case in high school, where I was reluctant to take the exams the students, who could not even read and write, but it is expected to get a positive mark in the English language. Read more I talk about this in his book The Boston-Curry Party. Peace Book, 1998.

Brave souls who speak the truth without looking back, is called "informants", they usually quickly dismissed from teaching positions. Ted Steele made public the fact that we have a few years know that students receive a university degree just because they pay tuition.

University teachers can not be just dismissed, because the ideal of academic freedom is a kind of protection. Therefore, the administration is trying to find some other cause. Usually this is some gross violation. Steele's case is not resolved by the end, and to win their lawsuit, the university must demonstrate that Steele committed a dishonorable act, that is lying.

We hope that Steele will be reinstated because he was telling the truth.

This case shows that the Zionists in Australia is not as all-powerful, and that we can lay the blame on them for the censorship of material on the Holocaust. I lay the blame on those who are not Zionists, who for whatever reason just agree with such nonsense.

Ideally, the university — a place where students and teachers can conduct scientific research and to freely express their opinions, even if it is unpopular or controversial. That's ideal, which, however, significantly subcorrected even in the so-called bastion of freedom of speech — United States. Enough to take someone else's words literally, then you can bring a lawsuit, regardless of the figurative sense of what was said.

Could sue for any reason, restricts our freedom, our intellectual ardor cools. If we do not have their funds to conduct independent research, then the Zionists will continue to flourish and to freely spread lies about the Holocaust.

I found it important to raise these issues of human rights and during my trips to Iran in December 1999 and 2000. There they are perceived rather peculiar, as an instrument of the United States against those who do not agree with the fact that the United States impose their will on other countries.

But this problem can not be considered now. I raise it only to designate another aspect of the conflict: the battle between nationalism and internationalism, which is alive and well.

6. 9.2. The political correctness in Australia

In his article «Email From The Edge, The Battle of the books» in The Adelaide Review for February 2000 Peter Coleman writes:

"When Barry Humphries, watching the planes landing in New York, wrote the other day about the severity of that Australia and Iran are similar in that their intellectuals are forced to emigrate, he thought of a viscous oppression of political correctness in our culture. Almost every journalist, editor, scientist, media consultant, a guru in the field of advertising, art historian, teacher of art, a "talking head", the priest or the master of the universal cliché — obey the same dogma of political correctness — multiculturalism, feminism, humanism, republicanism, etc . deviate from the course runs the risk of being excommunicated, or at least be subject to a boycott. No wonder some people emigrate.

Even Barry Humphries would be surprised intensity of recent attacks on the poet Les Murray for his "incorrect." This happened a few months, but the attacks have intensified as biographer Peter Alexander was going to publish his work Les Murray. A Life in Progress, in which the poet sympathetically described the battle with the political and cultural correctors. This is not only a brilliant biographical description, but also the history of literature of our time. Several writers (and writers) smartly rushed into the fight, bringing publisher Oxford University Press refused to republish the book. Murray then published a poem entitled «The Oxford Book of Alacrity», beginning with the words, "My life is written and then crushed," and ends with this: "The people are silent and watch …"

Immediately one rhymer sent a letter to the editor about the "whining" and self-serving sentimentality "Murray.

Publisher Oxford University Press has informed me that it plans to release a revised edition in April. Meanwhile, despite numerous attempts to revoke the first instance, many critics who have received them for information, do not give them back to keep the memory of decadent book battle.

Such censorship of books without having absolutely nothing to do with the Holocaust, confirms what I have stated: countering agonizing search for the truth and publish dissenting views is widespread not only in the specific "Jewish question." People trying to justify censorship, unable to understand one important fact: we allow such censorship exist. If we allow it to exist, then over time we get a society where people will consider it morally justified and will be ready once again to "burn witches at the stake."

7. Conclusion

The philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein language invited philosopher, a specialist in the theory of knowledge Karl Popper speak at a seminar at Cambridge University. Popper began his speech with the importance of awareness of the problems we morals.

Wittgenstein interrupted him, grabbed the poker and began to wave it, shouting, "What are the moral issues? We have to deal exclusively with the analysis of language. "

Popper said, "How about waving a guest with a poker face?" Wittgenstein threw the poker and jumped out of the audience.

Popper went on to create books, one of them, in particular, are back in fashion: The Open Society and Its Enemies (The Open Society And Its Enemies), where he describes in detail the ideological battle enemies and conceptual captivity. Another book Objective Knowledge (Objective Knowledge) confirms the reality of the physical world.

I wrote a paper on the theory of falsification of Popper and the fallacy of the principle of the American philosopher Peirce (Peirce) — ideal conditions for the mental block of lies about the Holocaust.

I also had to meet with people whose response was similar to the reaction of Wittgenstein. When I raised the question of the existence of the gas chambers, people moved away from me, or even started yelling at me and threatening. We must accept this moral and intellectual challenge. Revisionism — a method of study and not everyone gets the maturity to understand that. We should not give up the fight for their views.

Revisionists suggest that there is such a thing as objective reality, objective knowledge, and therefore our search for historical truth is worth the effort, even if it means isolation from society and prosecution.

What is the Truth? Truth is beauty and beauty is truth, and that's all we need to know how the poet wrote many years ago.

Historical revisionism is a risk, perpetual motion, finding that could clear up the problem. It's always something deeply personal — like love.

Ever seen the Marxist dialectic of the word "love"? In the Internet era to the fore once again nominated altruism. Brilliant minds create programs and distribute them. Such anti-materialism is a threat to the modern capitalist system. I do not believe in this, that we should reject the technological advances as unnecessary.

Philosophers call this "agape" — "love feast," the love of truth and beauty, universal abstractions, empty sounds, if we do not make it more meaningful.

Beethoven in his Ninth Symphony joyfully welcomes globalism musical expression of Schiller's Ode to Joy: let all people become brothers — the universal human brotherhood, then anguish is born — there has to be at the top of the Father, God.

The anthem of the European Union is Ode to Joy, where the idea of universality is clearly compensated particular. Schiller said: "Anyone who can say that he is master of his soul, may enter into Paradise." Because we are moving from the general to the particular, from the abstract to the concrete, to possess, to the zeal — we have to give meaning to their love, like Beethoven spiritualized his "Immortal Beloved."

Immanuel Kant, the philosopher from Königsberg, recognize human limitations and was in awe before the universe over him and the moral law within him.

The revisionists are always in search of a better explanation, a closer approximation to the truth — this is their "eternal becoming", their desire, their spiritual journey, their love.

Like Goethe's Faust, Mephistopheles asking to show Gretchen eventually rescued from evil, we crave additional evidence. Faurisson says, "Show me or draw the gas chambers of Auschwitz." We crave the evidence, but this is not an intelligent search for the fainthearted.

The choice is yours.

Like this post? Please share to your friends: