Who Are We?
The Revisionist is published by Castle Hill Publishers, a sole proprietorship of Germar Rudolf. Since 1993, G. Rudolf has been publishing and selling revisionist books and brochures, starting with his expert report on the alleged gas chambers of Auschwitz (see advertisement below). Since 1997, Rudolf has been publish- ing a revisionist periodical in German (see: www.vho.org/VffG), which is now in its 7th year of publication.
The Revisionist is edited under the aegis of G. Rudolf, but it is in fact "our" journal, since it is produced with the help of many volunteers from the worldwide revisionist community who trans- late foreign language material, coordinate research, write and edit articles, review books and journals, operate the world's largest revisionist website that hosts The Revisionist and thousands of other revisionist books and articles (www.vho.org), etc.
Formally then, The Revisionist is a co-production of Germar Rudolf (Castle Hill Publishers, Theses & Dissertations Press), Fredrick Toben (Adelaide Institute), Jurgen Graf, and volun- teers from the two largest revisionist websites in the world (www.vho.org and www.codoh.com/org).
Why This New Journal?
Between 1993 and 2002, the then existing English language periodicals featuring revisionism basically ignored the research and publishing activities going on abroad, and for various rea- sons, they alienated most revisionist writers and researchers. As a result, the English speaking world, i.e., almost the entire world, had no way of finding out about the tremendous scientific progress made by revisionism during those years. By the end of 2002, most revisionists had concluded that after years of trying,
without success, the old periodicals could not be reformed, and so, a new journal needed to be established. The purpose of this new periodical is to offer a flexible forum to a broad range of authors and topics, and to publish the thousands of articles which have piled up in the drawers of the worldwide revisionist com- munity.
What Does The Revisionist Offer? The Revisionist appears four times a year (February, May, July, October). Each single issue has 120 pp. in letter size format, bound as a paperback. It will address any controversial histori- cal topic, be it pre-, ancient, or medieval history, modern US or European history, or the era of the two world wars, including, of course, the so-called 'Holocaust'. More specifically, it will cover:
> Up-to-date contributions by the world's leading revisionists
> English translations from important articles which appear else- where in German, French, Italian, Spanish, Russian, Polish, Portuguese, Dutch...
> Cutting edge papers on the latest results of historical research
> Summary articles about controversial topics
> Supporting arguments for your daily disputes
> Inside stories on kangaroo courts and censorship
> A broad variety of various media reviews: books, journals, movies, etc.
> News about the Holocaust industry and Holocaust hysteria
If you are interested in receiving your own trial copy of The Revisionist, or if you want to subscribe to our journal, please use the form on the inside of this backcover.
After ten years finally available in English!
Germar Rudolf, The Rudolf Report
Expert Report on Chemical and Technical Aspects of the "Gas Chambers" of Auschwitz
i ii rmjir Undo!!
The Rudolf Report
l.\[u'ii Ltt'fllHl 41 L b < iH'cnk'ill [LIJCj |4-Clll]il*:ll VvfU'Ll-.
ai the 'Cm '. batsibws' ttf An jchwiiz
In the years after its first publication, the so-called Leuchter Report has been sub- jected to massive and partly justified criticism. In 1993, Rudolf, a researcher at the prestigious Max-Planck-Institute, published a thorough scientific study about the alleged gas chambers at Auschwitz, which irons out the deficiencies and discrepan- cies of The Leuchter Report.
During the following ten years, the author was subjected to all sorts of persecution, but also to several attempts at scientific refutation. In this updated and enhanced translation, this sensational scientific work is, for the first time, being made available in the English language. The author does not only investigate all the existing evidence on the Auschwitz gas chambers, but he also exposes the fallacies of various failed attempts to refute him. Rudolf's conclusions are quite clear: The conclusions of the groundbreaking Leuchter Report are correct: For technical and chemical reasons, the alleged Auschwitz homicidal gas chambers could not have existed.
In the appendix, Rudolf tells the story of his ordeal: PhD title withheld, pro- secuted and sentenced to jail, media smear campaigns, career destroyed, family destroyed, flight into exile, disinherited, homeless, but still fighting for his freedom of speech...
"These scientific analyses are perfect. " Hans Westra, Anne-Frank-Foundation, BRT 1 TV (Belgium), Panorama, April 27, 1995
"All in all, he relies on literature which was written long before this report was completed, and the report must be described as scientifically acceptable. " Prof. Dr. Henri Ramuz, expert report about the Rudolf Report, May 18, 1997
455 pages, 110 illustrations, 10 in color, bibliography, index; paperback: $30.-; hardcover: $45.- Order now! Send order to any of our addresses (see inside cover), or order online at www.tadp.org
ISSN: 1542-376X
J ournu] fear Crtta] ^Istofeul asraqpljy
Volume 1 •Number 2 »May 2003
On the Brink of World War III:
How the Euro Triggered a War, p. 124
Greenhouse Effect - Factor Fiction? Climate Controversy, pp. 131-138
Are All Men Equal?
The Ideology Behind Race-Denial, p. 139
Polish Population Losses in WWII: Polonization of German Victims, p. 151
Expulsion of Germans from J apan: Post-WWII Fate of Former Allies, p. 156
Lanzmann's Holocaust Movie Shoa: Exposure of a Fraud, pp. 166-176
Auschwitz 'Gas Chamber' Found!? Revelation of a Media Hoax, p. 176
Persecution of Revisionists: Zundel, Hayward, Eaton, pp. 183-202
Where is the Country Absurdistan? Civil Rights in Germany, p. 203
Internet Censorship
Blinded Search Engines, p. 220
The Revisionist •) ournal for Critical Historical Inquiry
Publisher: Castle Hill Publishers, PO Box 257768, Chicago IL 60625, USA; chp@vho.org
PO Box 118, Hastings, TN34 3ZQ, UK
Foreign Language Editor: Jurgen Graf Reviews: reviews@vho.org
Established: in Fall 2002, first edition in February 2003 Chief Editor: Germar Rudolf; tr@vho.org
News & Civil Rights Editor: Dr. Fredrick Toben; news@vho.org Copy Editor: Andrew Fuetterer; proof@vho.org Customer Care, Subscriptions, Orders: chporder@vho.org
Fax: USA: ++1(413) 778-5749; UK: ++44(8701) 387263 (faxes to both numbers reach us immediately by email) Internet: http://www.vho.org/tr
Advertisements : price list from Jan. 1, 2003; please ask us for our Media Data (www.vho.org/tr/MediaData.pdf). ISSN: 1542-376X
Publication Dates: quarterly: February, May, August, November; each issue currently has some 120 pages, perfect bound. Subscriptions (including shipping and handling):
- Normal: $55 (3 years: $150).
- Students: $38 (3 years: $96) (please send photocopy of ID).
- Supporter: $100 (3 years: $270).
- Free: donators with a yearly donation volume >$55 receive The Revisionist for free for one year, but are then asked to convert this into a normal subscription.
Single Issues: $15*
Trial Issues: free. Just ask us for one!**
Promotion Copies: We can send you free promotion copies as well as promotional material for The Revisionist on request. Please get in touch with us.
Shipping: The Revisionist is currently printed in, and shipped from, the UK; all subscription prices include airmail delivery worldwide. Single issues come with a shipping fee.* Payment terms: 60 days net.
- cash: preferably US$; we can also accept € and GB£.
- checks: make payable to Castle Hill Publishers
• in US$ only if drawn on a Canadian or U.S. bank!
• in GB£ only if drawn on a British bank!
• in € only if drawn on a bank within the European Currency Union.
- online with credit card: www.vho.org/chp.
- transfer: please contact us for our bank accounts in Germany, the UK, and the U.S.A.
Cancellation: 3 months before the end of your current subscrip- tion, otherwise the subscription will renew automatically for another (3) year(s).
Copyrights: Reprint of published articles only with written per- mission. All rights reserved.
Royalties: We pay scholars suffering persecution a royalty for contributions published in our periodical. This seems to be the most appropriate way to help them.
Support: Should you consider our work valuable, we cordially ask you to support us according to your possibilities, be it by subscribing to our periodical, by donating subscriptions to others, by hiring new (potential) subscribers, by volunteering for our editorial efforts (proof-reading, translations, marketing), or even by donating funds. Any financial surplus will flow 100% into researching important historical topics.
Requirements for the Publication of Articles in The Revisionist
Requirements of Content: Topics: History, especially modern history; also freedom of speech and freedom of science. If possible, new and hitherto unpublished reports, overviews, and research papers;
Style: Systematic structure; objective; backing up of factual statements with references; separation of opinion from factual statements.
External Requirements: For understandable reasons, we will also publish articles written under a pen name, which will, of course, be treated as highly confidential. Contributions sent in anonymously, which are also welcome, can only be published if their content is ready for print.
There is no restriction regarding the length of contributions. How- ever, contributions which exceed 10 pages of our journal (some 50,000 characters or 9,000 words), may be split in several parts and published in consecutive issues. In such cases, the structuring of articles should allow such a partition.
Articles of two pages and more should include illustrations to break up the text (covers of works dealt with, document facsimi- les, portraits of personalities and authors, pictures of historical events, maps, etc.).
Procedure: Except for articles sent in anonymously, proofs of all
articles considered for publications will be sent to the authors; no right for publication arises from this. The editors reserve their right to determine in which issue such articles will be published. Royalties are paid only in case the author(s) suffer under social and/or legal persecution for expressing her/his opinions. Authors receive only one proof copy. If expressively wished, we can send up to five proof copies.
Data: We prefer to receive contributions per email. We can process various data carriers (PC, 3.5"/l .44MB, and ZIP/100 or 250 MB, CD ROM). The file formats of all major type-setting and DTP programs can be read; for reasons of portability, file formats of *.rtf (Rich Text Format), *.html (HyperTextMarkupLanguage, i.e., Internet files) and MS -Word files are preferred. Please do not send manuscripts by fax, as this renders optical character recognition almost impossible. Images can be sent in all usual data formats (*.gif, *.jpg, *.png, *.tif...) and also as hard copies. 3.5" floppy disks as well as unsolicited manuscripts will not be sent back; solicited manuscript as well as image hard copy only if expressively desired.
Should you agree to these conditions, we are looking forward to receiving your papers.
'■ plus a shipping fee of $1.- for each started $12.50 of your entire order, if your order is not paid in advance. / ** Only one copy for each new customer
GET A CURRENT TRIAL COPY NOW!
□ Yes, I want a FREE trial copy of The Revisionist (Only one copy for each new customer!)
SUBSCRIBE NOW! I
□ Yes, I want to subscribe to The Revisionist (TR). The subscription starts with the next issue published "g.
after I subscribed. I will receive a renewal notice each time my subscription expires. %
(Please check the subscription type you prefer. When sending in this slip, you can include payment by check/money >%
order made out to Castle Hill Publishers, or you can wait until we send you an invoice with further instructions on how g
to pay.): »
3
Type of Subscription 1 year (4 issues) 3 years (12 issues)
Support: □ $ 100.-/ £66.- □ $270.- /£180.- &
Normal: □ $ 55.-/ £36.- □ $ 150.- / £96.- =
Student1: □ $ 38.-/ £24.- □ $ 96.- / £66.- *
&
Prices in US-Dollars/GB Pound Sterling, including shipping; f Proof required. Please send in a photocopy of your student ID. <r
o O
Name
Address
Town, State/Province, ZIP/Postal Code
Country, if not USA
Date
Signature
Send your order to: Castle Hill Publishers
USA: PO Box 257768, Chicago, IL 60625
Fax: ++1 (413) 778-5749
UK: PO Box 118, Hastings, TN34 3ZQ
Fax: ++44 (8701) 38 72 63
Email : chporder @ vho . org
The Revisionist Bestseller! Secure your copy!
Dissecting the Holocaust
The Growing Critique of 'Truth' and 'Memory'
Dissecting the Holocaust applies state-of-the-art scientific technique and classic methods of detection to investigate the alleged murder of millions of Jews by Germans during World War II. In 22 contributions each of ca. 30 pages, the 1 7 authors dissect generally accepted paradigms of the 'Holocaust' . It reads as excitingly as a crime novel: so many lies, forgeries, and deceptions by politicans, historians, and scientists are collected and exposed. This is the textbook for the greatest intellectual adventure of the 21st century.
The first edition of this book sold out in just 18 months. No other revi- sionist textbook in the English language has had greater success during the past 15 years!
Now available in an updated, handy and affordable paperback edition, Dis- secting the Holocaust is ready to sweap the world. It will certainly become the standard text of critical 'Holocaust' scholarship. Whether you are studying this topic privately, at school, or within an academic 'Holocaust' course, this book is the perfect companion to enlightened scholarship.
Grntttr Rm.li. If (Fd.|
issecting
the
olocau
■ lir < ir*m inn t riinfm
of 'TrwUf unit 'Mvm«r>
■
Now in paperback edition!
Available in June 2003; ca. 615 pages pb, 6x9 inches,
illustrations (partly in color), bibliography, index: $30.-
Order now! Send order to either of above addresses, or order online at www.tadp.org
Contents
The Elephant(s) in the Room 122
By Bradley R. Smith
On The Brink of World War Three 124
By Germar Rudolf
Climatology — Science or Ideology? 131
By Oswald Nettesheim
Critical Remarks concerning Greenhouse-Revisionism 755
By Germar Rudolf
All Men Are Equal— But Are They Really? 139
By Paul Grubach
Polish Population Losses during World War Two 151
By Dr. Otward Miiller
The Expulsion of Germans from Japan, 1947-1948 156
By Charles Burdick, PhD
Holocaust Movie Shoah Exposed as Propaganda
About the Shoa-Interview with the alleged Treblinka SS-Man Franz Suchomel, by Jean-Francois Beaulieu 166
Rudolf Vrba exposes himself as a liar, by Ernst Bruun 1 69
Abraham Bomba, Barber of Treblinka, by Bradley R. Smith 170
The 'Discovery' of 'Bunker 1' at Birkenau: Swindles, Old and New 176
By Carlo Mattogno
Ernst Ziindel: His Struggle for Germany 183
By Dr. Ingrid Rimland
Bing goes Hayward's Ghost 197
By Dr. Fredrick Toben
Discovering Absurdistan 203
By Germar Rudolf
Censorship of the Internet 220
By Germar Rudolf
Book Reviews
The Israeli Masada Myth Exposed, by Robert H. Countess, Ph. D 222
Revisionism: The Most Dangerous Topic, by Bruno Chapsky 225
A Provocative History of the Aryan Race, by Robert H. Countess, Ph.D 227
On Third Reich Flying Saucers, German Physics, and the Perpetuum Mobile, by Germar Rudolf. 229
Research News
The Sinking of the Battleship Bismarck, by Wolfgang Pfitzner. 234
From the Records of the Frankfurt Auschwitz Trial, Part 2, by Germar Rudolf 235
Letters to the Editor 239
In Brief. 240
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2 121
The Elephant(s) in the Room
By Bradley R. Smith
Most of us understand that it is unwise to draw a connection between the Israeli/Palestinian tragedy, 9/11, Afghanistan, and the U.S. administration's war against Iraq. The common under- standing is that to suggest such a connection publicly, and in many contexts privately, is to risk being condemned as an anti- Semite. This fear is perfectly well founded. You will be. No one wants to be accused of stupidity, or of committing a thought crime either.
"It is the proverbial elephant in the room. Everybody sees it, no one mentions it," as Michael Kinsley has it in Slate.1 The elephant in the room is Israel, and the influence that Israeli and American Zionists represent in the Bush administration. Mr. Bush is the fellow who said on national television that yes, he believes Sharon, the butcher of Beirut — not to go on about it — is a "man of peace." The way that Saddam is "evil," I would suppose. Whatever works.
While Kinsley and a few other journalists are willing to mention the fact that there is, indeed, an Elephant in the War Room, it doesn't occur to them — let's give them the benefit of the doubt that it doesn't occur to them — that the paternity of the beast in question might be of some interest to their readers. Who sired it, for example? Who suckled it until it found its pre- sent immensity? Who among us is dedicated to cleaning and feeding this unwieldy and dangerous pet? How has it grown to become the unlikely creature upon which even the values of American culture rest?
That fact is, there is more than one Elephant in the War Room. Behind the one that is visible, yet goes unnoticed, is the Mother of all Elephants-in-the-Room — the mother that protects her calf, encourages him, assures him that no one will ever question what he is doing, and will go on feeding and nurturing him forever until the final catastrophe reveals itself — the flood of war, retaliation, blood, and weapons of mass destruction. Who is she?
Her name is Holocaust. She is the living heart of memory and sentimentality upon which all acts by her overgrown calf are given moral legitimacy. On that very rare occasion when the calf is questioned about his contempt for Arabs, his brutal- ity, or his greed for Palestinian land, he raises his great flop of an ear for his mother's counsel. Without moving from the shadows, she extends her sinuous trunk and through it whispers to her son: "Take the conversation back to the ovens of Ausch- witz, my darling. Take it back to Auschwitz, my darling boy."
It isn't that the big lug had forgotten what had always worked so well in the past. Like every bull calf with a powerful parent, he wanted to be reassured. When you have on your con- science what this beast has on its conscience, reassurance is al- ways in order. Of course, he would never forget Auschwitz. Auschwitz was never out of his thoughts. Auschwitz was beau- tiful. Auschwitz was like a wonderful dream. Rolling logs, tak- ing people for rides to Yad Vashem, grabbing Palestinian land, trampling whoever got in his way, or cheerfully switching his short, ferocious tail among the glasses at cocktail parties in Tel
Aviv and Washington, Auschwitz was always there, the perfect cover. Auschwitz was like a magic blanket, thrown over his huge haunch, assuring him that while he would continue to be seen by everyone, he would continue to be ignored by every- one.
Like the Michael Kinsley s. □
Mel Gibson is producing a movie about what we know about the crucifixion of Christ. What we believe we know about it. Rabbi Marvin Hier of the Simon Wiesenthal Center is worried. He appears to be afraid that Gibson, a traditionalist Catholic, might portray with some accuracy the role that Jews played in the execution of Jesus. Further, Hier is worried that Gibson might imply that all Jews everywhere are responsible for the death of Jesus. Still, the rabbi exhibits a civilized re- straint.
"Obviously, no one has seen The Passion and I certainly
have no problem with Mel Gibson 's right to believe as he
sees fit or make any movie he wants to. "
But then there is the matter of Mel's father, Hutton Gibson. The old man (he's 84) is a radical conspiracy theorist who ar- gues that there is a growing tradition of "anti-popes" in the Vatican, that it could be a Masonic plot backed by "the Jews," and rejects the assertion that Al Qaeda hijackers had anything to do with the attacks on the World Trade towers.
I have nothing to say about any of that. However. . .
In the interview published in the New York Times Maga- zine? Hutton dismissed "historical accounts that six million Jews were exterminated. 'Go ask any undertaker or the guy who operates the crematorium what it takes to get rid of a dead body,' he said. 'It takes one liter of petrol and 20 minutes. Now, six million?'" He went on to assert that "...there were more [Jews] after the war than before."
And '"The entire catastrophe was manufactured,' said Hutton, 'as part of an arrangement between Hitler and 'financi- ers' to move Jews out of Germany. Hitler 'had this deal where he was supposed to make it rough on them so they would all get out and migrate to Israel because they needed people there to fight the Arabs,' he said."3
It's clear then that Mel Gibson has a handful with his father. I'm not saying that the old man is right or wrong about any of it, except that he is in the ballpark about the "six million" non- sense and the cremations. No cigar, but it's a start, especially when you're eighty-four.
When it comes to the old man, Rabbi Marvin Hier has a sudden change of heart about people having "the right to be- lieve as they see fit." When asked about the remarks of Hutton Gibson in the NYT Magazine article Rabbi Hier said: "To big- ots and anti-Semites, no amount of evidence or scientific proof is ever enough. In their world only hate matters."
Scientific evidence? There we go! That's more like the Rabbi Hier I'm familiar with. This is about the Holocaust! The Gibson's have their true beliefs, and the rabbi has his. No more
122
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
civilized chat about the elder Gibson's "right to believe as he sees fit." If he doubts what Rabbi Hier believes is true about gas chambers and cremations, the old man is going down. He's a "hater." To hell with the right to disagree! This is the Holo- caust!
For those curious about "scientific" evidence, or lack of it, for gas chambers see: Samuel Crowell, "Technique and Opera- tion of German Anti-Gas Shelters in WWII: A Refutation of J.C. Pressac's Criminal Traces."4
That's one problem with believing the sacred stories — any of them. The Holocaust story is merely the sacred story of reli- gious and secular Jews alike, among others. That's why you can't question it — it's sacred. There's no wriggle room inside a sacred story. Inside there, there is only room for the certainty of true belief, and the pleasure that that certainty brings to the true believer. Anything that breaks into that sacred place is a danger to that pleasure. The danger is that what is believed to be cer- tain might be exposed as doubtful, even false. That's where cer- tainty ends, that's where pleasure ends, and where pain and an- ger begin.
The threat, the fear that true belief has failed him and might fail him again, is the source of the Rabbi's anguish, his anger, and his desperation. Like all modern philo-Semites in America, he has put aside the jawbone of the ass (no pun intended) to wield slander as a destroyer of reputations, create thought criminals, and make taboo any kind of open debate on his own sacred story.
Okay. In the interests of full disclosure — the pun was in- tended.
For myself, I have no problem with issues of certainty and true belief. I'm uncertain about everything, while I believe in nothing. I do have prejudices. I desire many things. Looking for pleasure in all the wrong places. □
Regime Change. War can be a distraction, even when you are not a part of it. The immense drama of the events, the life and death issues for hundreds of thousands, questions of tyr- anny and liberty. This morning I hear our people beginning to emphasize "liberating the Iraqi people" rather than regime change. I like the change of emphasis. It doesn't take much to make me happy. Regime change can lead to the liberation of a people, or it can lead to something else. In 1948 there was a re- gime change in Palestine in favor of the Jews of Europe. Who did it liberate?
Regime change in Palestine led to war, the mass transfer of land from Palestinians to Jews, the confiscation of Palestinian real property in favor of Jews, and the creation of hundreds of
thousands of Palestinian refugees. It led to successive wars, the movement to found Jewish settlements on Arab land that does not belong to Jews, the creation of armed Palestinian guerilla groups to fight the "invader", and a growing hostility to Israel, Jews, and the Americans who pay for everything, all over the Arab and then the Muslim worlds.
So there is regime change, and there is regime change. Imagine if there had been a rhetoric about "liberating the Pales- tinian people" in 1948 rather than the cant about the coming re- gime change from an Arab one to one organized by Jews. Eve- rything in that part of the world today would be different. We do not know what would have gone on without the Israeli state squatting in the middle of an Arab world, but it would be dif- ferent. Jews would be living under Arab administrations, where Jews had lived comfortably for centuries, and the U.S. admini- stration might well have had to look elsewhere to find someone to liberate.
Rhetoric about liberating the Palestinian people was not on the table. All the rhetoric was about how the European Jews had been exterminated in gas chambers by Nazis and thus had the right to initiate regime change in Palestine. No matter that that charge of unique monstrosity against the Germans was never proven, but simply taken judicial notice of by the Nur- emberg court, on the evidence of "eyewitnesses," many of whom have since been shown to have been fools or liars. You are not supposed to say this. It's taboo. Truth has no role in the world of taboo. Truth is no defense against breaking a taboo.
When the Americans finish with Iraq, or begin the process of being finished with Iraq, the issue of the victimization of Palestinian Arabs by Israeli Jews will still be there, festering. Israeli contempt for the Palestinians, U.S. funding for whatever Israelis want, or want to do, the anger of Arab and Muslim radicals in response, it will all be there then, just as it is now. Can't talk about it. After the Germans exterminated the Euro- pean Jews, they swarmed (forgetting for the moment that they had just been "exterminated") into Palestine and grabbed the biggest part of it for themselves. The violence they precipitated has never ended. There is no reason to think that it is going to end any time soon. They had the right to take what they wanted. After all, they had just been exterminated.
Can't talk about it. □
Notes
1 http://slate.msn.com/id/2073093
2 www.nytimes.com/2003/03/09/magazine/09GIBSON.html
3 See http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/news/030903_nw_gibson.html
4 www.codoh.com/incon/inconpressac.html
Since 1980, Bradley R. Smith was fascinated by the taboo surrounding the 'Holocaust, ' which is protect- ing this historical issue from a free exchange of ideas even in "open societies." Between 1986 and 1991, Smith developed the Media Project for the Institute for Historical Review. In 1987, he self-published his book Confessions of a Holocaust Revisionist and co-founded the Committee For Open Debate on the Holocaust (CODOH). In 1991, Smith launched his "Campus Project," that is, running advertisements in student papers at colleges and universities around the USA calling for open debate on specific issues regarding the Holocaust story. In 1996, CODOH.com went online, which was the biggest revisionist website for many years. In 1999, Smith founded The Revisionist, which was taken over by Castle Hill Publishers end of 2002. In 2003, he self-published his second book Break His Bones. Smith writes edito- rials similar to those published here, which he posts on his website BreakHisBones.com.
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
123
On The Brink of World War Three
Why the USA must wage war, but cannot wage it against the country it ought to
By Germar Rudolf
The reason for most wars is massive economic tensions between competing nations or a huge economic crisis of a single nation that tries to solve it with violence to the outside. After all, war has to be financed, and without the support of big business and the big banks, no major war could ever be fought. So there must be at least the promise of a big fi- nancial profit for high finance to make them support it. The reasons for the U.S. war against Iraq are certainly multi- fold, but those given by the U.S. government — humanitarian assistance for the Iraqi people and destruction of phan- tom-like weapons of mass destruction — can easily be dismissed as something that would certainly not open the wallets of Wall Street. So what economic reason drives the U.S. to destabilize an entire region, pushing the world to the brink of a global conflict? The following will argue that nothing less than a looming collapse of the Dollar and subsequently the danger of a collapse of the USA, as the last super power, is the driving force behind the desperate, but futile, at- tempt of the U.S. government to try to force the world to recognize its economy and its currency as the central market place on earth.
1. A Close Look at the US Economy
I will not deal here with inflation, the growth of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP), unemployment rates, interest rates, or similar parameters, which are all subject to various factors and — unless they show extreme values — do not really reveal anything about the shape of a country's economy. What is deci- sive in the context of this article, though, are the follow- ing factors:
1) Public debt in relation to GDP
2) Private debt and savings
3) Foreign trade balance over an extended period of time
1.1. Public Debt in Relation to GDP Graph 1 shows the development of U.S.public debt,
Graph 2 gives figures corrected for inflation. Graph 3 shows the GDP between 1940 and 2002 corrected for in- flation (1996 dollars)
Hence, in 2002, the U.S. had a relative public debt of 60% of the Gross Domestic Product. Historically seen, the situation was much worse at the end of World War Two, when public debt was roughly equal to the GDP, but in the booming years thereafter, this ratio fell to a minimum in 1981 of just 30%. What followed thereafter has become known as "Reaganomics", that is, the governmental spending of huge amounts of money borrowed from the Federal Reserve Bank, which means it was created out of nothing. This tendency was slowed down under Clinton, but accelerated again in 2002 under Bush junior.
1 .2. Private Debt and Savings It is a well-known fact that Americans live on loans
and mortgages. This is also reflected in the nation's ac- cumulated private savings and private debts. Until 2000, private savings and investments rose steadily to a maxi- mum of 1.8 trillion dollars. However, since 1998, private savings grew considerably slower than the GDP, and since 2000, private net savings actually decreased, to reach a low of 1.55 trillion dollars by the end of 2002,
with the tendency of further reduction. Graph 4 shows the de- velopment of private savings in percent to the GDP. For dec- ades, savings grew almost steadily, but since 1998, U.S. house- holds as well as businesses spend more than they save. A simi- lar trend can be seen in debts. In 2001, the average U.S. busi- nesses had debts that were roughly 6.25 times higher than its
Graph 2: Real Public Debt of USA (based on 1990 dollars)
124
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
yearly profits. Overall, the ratio between debt and available yearly income rose steadily from 80% in 1956 to over 170% in 2001, with a sharp increase of this ratio since 1998, see Graph 5.
In total figures, private debts in the U.S. today amount to twice the GDP, or some 20 trillion dollars, compared to a total of private savings of only 1.55 trillion dollars.4 Some 80% of these debts are covered by real estate, but consumer debts amount to some 2 trillion dollars.
1.3. Foreign Trade Balance
Having debts is not necessarily a bad thing. It all de- pends on who owes whom and if it is possible to pay it off. However, a look into the foreign trade balance of the U.S. reveals that the U.S. is not just dealing with Ameri- cans owing Americans, but with Americans owing for- eigners. Graph 6 shows the accumulated trade balance of the US since 1940. The first year with a massive trade deficit (32 billion dollars) was 1983, which happens to be the same year in which public debt rose considerably for the first time since 1945. Ever since, the U.S. trade deficit has increased dramatically. Today, the U.S. owes almost 3 trillion dollars, or 30% of its GDP, to foreign nationals or nations.
1.4. The Consequences
Any company displaying such figures would have long ago gone bankrupt. But the United States of America is still functioning. The reason for this is that the world still has faith in the dollar. Most of the money that flows abroad as a result of the U.S. trade deficit comes back, by foreigners investing their profits mainly in U.S. govern- ment bonds, that is, by financing the public debt, which in turn fills the financial holes in the U.S. economy. This can, of course, work only as long as the worlds does not lose faith in the U.S. dollar and has no alternative to it.
2. The Euro, an Alternative to the US-Dollar?
2.1. Exchange rate to the Dollar
In 1999, the European Currency was introduced in 12 European countries. Since the participating countries are economically and politically very heterogeneous, it was assumed that this currency would not be very successful, but would steadily lose value compared to the US Dollar. Initially, this turned out to be true. The Euro reached its lowest point in late 2000 (1.20 € for 1 $). However, some- thing decisive happened which made this trend turn around, see further down below, and the Euro started to rise steeply, reaching its highest value on March 1 1, 2003, with 90 €-cents for 1 $, see Graph 7. 5
2.2. Europe's Economy Compared to the US Econ- omy
Regarding unemployment, growth and public debt, Europe's economy is certainly not in a better shape than the U.S. economy. Whereas the public debt of the US is at 60% of its GDP, it is on average at 70% in the European countries.6 But Europe has two advantages: it usually has
a trade surplus — in 2001 of some 25 billion dollars — and pri- vate savings and debts are basically balanced.7 As a result of this, foreign nationals and entire nations owe Europe roughly one trillion dollars.8
Particularly interesting is a look into the economy of the economical motor of Europe, Germany. Plagued with all the major issues of basically all European economies — high unem- ployment, high public debt, low growth — it is still the second biggest exporting nation on earth after the US and has the big-
6.0
3.0
■3.0
-6.0
Graph 3: Real Gross Domestic Product of USA (based on 1996 dollars)2
US private nat saving, % of GDP
Q1
1956
Q1 1961
Q1
1966
CM 1971
CM Q1 1976 1981
01 198<
Q1 1991
CM 1996
CM 2001
Graph 4: Private Savings in % of the GDP in USA
1,80 . |
US private debt outstanding ratio to annual private disposabk |
; Income |
||||
1.60 - |
||||||
1,40 . 1.20 - |
1955-1995 trend extrar |
olated \, |
||||
1.00 . |
||||||
o.so . |
||||||
CM 01 Q1 CM 19S6 1981 1966 1971 |
CM CM 1978 1961 |
CM 1986 |
1 01 1991 |
1 Q1 1996 |
CM 2001 |
Graph 5: Ratio of Private Debt to annual available income
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
125
o ■a
5-2
1.25
t- LO O) *~
LO
Grap/7 6: Accumulated trade balance of USA
Graph 7: Euro exchange rates for the Dollar
gest foreign trade surplus of all countries in the world, with a stunning 126.3 billion Euros in 2002, which was an increase of 45% compared to 2001 (87.1 Bill. Euros), after it had a fairly constant value of around 50 to 70 billion Euros over the last two decades.9 Hence, it comes as no surprise that private sav- ings in Germany are very high.
2.3. Japan is no Rival Anymore
Between 1991 and 2001, Japan's ratio of gross public debt to GDP rose from 6 1 per cent to 1 3 1 per cent, much the highest for any developed country, and it is growing quickly.11 Total private debts in Japan are almost four times as high as its GDP, which is more than three times the factor of the US private debt. Those ratios in Japan are being made worse every month caused by deflation, which at perhaps 4% annually in Japan (measured in consumer prices) is the most pronounced in the world. The reason for this deflation is the huge overcapacity of Japan's industry.
Deflation aggravated the Great Depression in the U.S. in the 1930s, and this new one, with its current center in Japan can spread. End of April 2003, I accidentally heard a radio com- mercial in the US, in which Mitsubishi offered cars for negative interest with a slogan like this:
"Buy a Mitsubishi and get 50 dollars every month for
one year! "
They give consumers money to have them buy their cars!
What if Japan devalued the yen, taking it from 133 to the dollar to 140 or 150? These Mitsubishis would then be even cheaper for U.S. customers.
At the same time Japan faces a debt bomb at home, it is also the world's largest creditor, which means that Japans savings are invested abroad, a result of decades of huge foreign trade surpluses. If its banks were panicked into calling in overseas loans, because the Japanese decide they have to pay back their private debts, an economic contraction would sweep America and the globe.12
In other words: After the economic crisis in East Asia in the late 1990s, Japan is at the brink of a collapse comparable to the Black Friday in the US in 1929. What holds the Japanese econ- omy together is pure fear of the consequences and the hope that world economy will sooner or later pick up again, allowing Ja- pan's over-capacity to be put into operation again.
3. The Euro, a Perfect Reason for War
3.1. Reactions to the Euro
What would it mean to the US economy if the Euro would be accepted by the world as an equal competitor of the US Dol- lar?
In the recently released book Behind the Invasion of Iraq, Indian economists have thoroughly analyzed the situation the U.S. finds itself in. I quote:13
"In the 1970s, there was no alternative to the dollar. On January 1, 1999, an alternative arose in the form of the Euro, the new currency of the European Union (EU). Of course, in- vestors did not immediately flock to the Euro. The Euro stut- tered at birth, falling 30 per cent against the dollar by the end of 2000. In the last year, however, it has picked up sharply, and in recent months has remained at parity with the dollar (i.e. about one Euro per dollar).
The Euro has become attractive for three reasons.
First, since the EU is a large imperialist economy, about the same size as the US, it is an attractive and stable investment for foreign investors.
Secondly, since foreign investors' holdings are overwhelm- ingly in dollars, they wish to diversify and thus reduce the risk of losses in case of a dollar decline: they are increasingly nerv- ous at the size of the US debt mountain and the failure of the US government to tackle this problem.
Thirdly, certain countries smarting under American military domination sense that the rule of the dollar is now vulnerable, and see the switch to the Euro as a way to hit back.
Thus even in November 2000, when the Euro was 30 per cent down against the dollar, Iraq demanded UN approval to be paid in Euros in the UN oil-for-food programme. This despite the fact that the currency markets at the time did not see a re- bound for the Euro and despite the fact that Iraq would make the switch at considerable immediate cost, losing 10 cents a barrel to compensate buyers for their currency conversion costs. Iraq also asked that the $ 1 0 billion in its frozen bank account in New York be converted to Euros. The UN, a plaything of the US, resisted the change until Iraq threatened to suspend its oil exports.14
Iran, which the US has now labelled, along with Iraq and North Korea, as part of an 'axis of evil', is also contemplating switching to the Euro. The Iran National Oil Company wel-
126
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 • No. 2
corned the launch of the Euro in 1998 itself, saying that 'This money will free us from the rule of the dollar', and we 'will adopt it'. The national oil company and other major Iranian companies have made it clear to both their European and Latin American oil partners that they would 'prefer the Euro'. While Iran continued using the dollar thereafter, there are indications it could follow Iraq's example. The Iranian government budget for the year to March 2002 was tabulated in dollars, but in De- cember 2001 an oil ministry official said that 'could change in the future'. Iran News (12/29/01) called for a switch to the Euro for both oil and non-oil trade:15
'The euro could become our currency of choice ' if it
made gains on the dollar. Since then the euro has climbed
14 per cent against the dollar. '
Some in Saudi Arabia have called for switching to the Euro as 'a more effective punishment [than an oil embargo] for the United States, Israel's principal source of financial and political support'.16
At the Russia-European Union summit in May 2001 :17
'EU leaders [...] made an audacious bid to lure Russia away from its reliance on the greenback [the dollar], calling on Moscow to start accepting euros instead of dollars for its exports, dangling the attractive carrot of a boom in invest- ment and trade.
In a report commissioned by Russia 's Central Bank in July 1999, the Russian Academy of Science said: 'The in- troduction of the euro directly bears on the strategic inter- ests of Russia and alters the conditions for its integration into the world economy. In the final analysis, the conse- quences are to the benefit of our country. ' Olga Butorina from the Academy of Science said whereas EU states ac- counted for 33 percent of trade turnover in 1998 compared with 8 percent for the United States, 80 percent of foreign trade contracts — mainly for oil, gas and other commodi- ties— were concluded in dollars.... '[Switching to the Euro] would increase dramatically the demand for euros in the world, ' she said. 'For sure, it would be an important strate- gic shift and the euro would start to compete with the dollar in international trade markets.
Another likely candidate for switching to the Euro is Vene- zuela, whose leader Hugo Chavez the US has been attempting to oust over the last year, without success (at the time of going to press). It is not only the oil economies that would make the switch (for example, North Korea too recently said it would convert its foreign exchange reserves to the Euro); but the shift of the major oil exporters to accepting payment in Euros would indeed have a major, potentially devastating, impact on the dol- lar.
The more countries that switch to the Euro, the more attrac- tive would be the Euro." End quote.
3.2. The Impact on the Dollar
What would happen if the Euro became an equal competitor of the US Dollar? The answer to this might be rather easy: with its imperialistic politics especially of the Post-Cold War era, the US has made so many enemies around the world that an accep- tance of the Euro as an equal competitor would probably lead to a massive relocation of the world's monetary values to the
Euro. This means that the US trade and public deficit could no longer be financed with incoming foreign investments and that a lot of older investments would be withdrawn. Hence, the con- sequence of a successful Euro would be nothing short of a total collapse of the US economy and thus the end of US imperial- ism, hegemony, yes, the demise of the United States as a super power, at least temporarily.
However, a collapsing United States would have a devastat- ing effect on the entire world economy, leading to a worldwide economic crisis compared to which the crisis that started in 1929 would look like a breeze. After all, it is not only the U.S. economy that is built on sand. It might be the weakest link in the chain, but most industrialized nations are in deep financial trouble as well, caused by massive over-capacity and huge pub- lic and private debts.
Normally, one way out of an exploding trade deficite would be the devaluation of the nation's currency, to make imports more expensive and exports cheaper. Such a solution, however, would mean that the dollar becomes less attractive to foreign investors, again with the Euro as the winning currency. To keep investors in America, interest rates would have to rise, but this would throttle domestic consumption, which is already danger- ously low. Hence, the USA finds itself in a no-win situation.
3.3. Backing the Dollar with Oil
Even though the US imports huge amounts of oil, it is far less dependent on these imports than other industrial countries in Europe and East Asia, thanks to its own natural oil resources. Being able to control prices and distribution of the Arab oil re- serves be means of dictating the currency to be used for pay- ment and by politically and militarily controlling this part of the world would not only stabilize the dollar, but would also put all the other competing industrial countries at the mercy of the USA. If, on the other hand, the Euro would be accepted as a currency in the oil trade, this would certainly mean general economic upheaval for the US. Since the oil exporting coun- tries are also those who pioneer the idea of accepting Euro as payment for their oil — Iraq being the first to actually do it — nothing is more logical than trying to get those oil exporting countries to stick to the dollar, no matter what it costs. At stake is the mere existence of the US as a dominating power. Being able to control the oil market with its currency and with its military power is the only option left to the US. And since all peaceful attempts have failed, war seems to be the only solution left.
However, a war will only increase the world's hostility to- ward the US, hence also the inclination of many countries to switch over to the Euro, and it will furthermore increase the domestic economic problems of the US by massively increas- ing public debt. Hence, war will perhaps delay America's eco- nomical problems to surface for a short period of time, but it will not prevent the coming crisis.
4. Other Reasons for War — Real and Imagined
4.1. Religious Fundamentalism
In this situation, Israel plays an important strategic role in the Middle East as a country equipped with a huge arsenal of conventional weapons and weapons of mass destruction and the
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
127
determination to use them. Israel will serve as a tool — with its own imperialistic and expansionistic agenda — to subjugate the Middle East.
On the other hand, the Jews in Israel and all Zionists around the world know pretty well that a major economic collapse of the US would mean the end of Israel in the long run. Therefore, Israel will be more than ready and happy to assist the US in its imperialistic conquest of any petrol exporting country in the Middle East.
As such, it cannot come to anybody's surprise that many of those individuals in the Bush administration and in the US me- dia who pushed for or promoted the war are Zionist Jews, often euphemistically referred to as "neo-Conservatives," as
18 19 20
Chalmers Johnson, Jason Vest, Pat Buchanan, and Con- gressman James Moran, a pro-Zionist Democrat,21 and other individuals and oorganizations22 have pointed out recently. As a re- sult of his harmless remark, J. Moran is now strongly advised not to run for re-election,23 which is evidence enough of the real power of the Jewish lobby.24 Ironically, the leading Israeli newspaper Haaretz admitted shortly thereaf- ter that Moran is right:25
"The war in Iraq was con- ceived by 25 neoconservative
intellectuals}1^ most of them
Jewish, who are pushing
President Bush to change the
course of history. "
But it should also be men- tioned that some of the most ar- dent opponents of this war are Jews as well: Noach Chomsky27 and Gore Vidal.28
Another contributing factor is Christian fundamentalism in the form of the Southern Baptist Church and the Pentecostals, two protestant denominations which dominate the southern parts of the U.S., the so-called "Bible Belt." A considerable part of the U.S. Republican Party is strongly influ- enced by these groups, e.g., George W. Bush and Attorney General John Ashcroft are active members in them. Many of these Christians are fervent supporters of the Jewish right to de- fend and even expand the territory of their "Holy Land" with any means, and they generally have a very hostile, crusade-like attitude toward Islam as being an evil to be fought. These radi- cal Christians do not shy away from risking a major war in the Middle East, because in their eyes this would just be the ful- fillment of the New Testament's prophecy of the upcoming Battle of Armageddon and the second coming of Christ.
No need to say that Islamic fundamentalism is contributing to the tensions as well, meaning that not all accusations of civil right infringements leveled against Arab countries are totally unfounded. The problem is that Iraq is the most secular country
U.S. Rep. James Moran during his criticized speech on
the Jewish role in pushing the U.S. into war against Iraq.
of all Arab countries, and that there is no evidence that it ever supported Muslim extremists.
4.2. Weapons of Mass Destruction
In August 1945, U.S. bombers dropped two atom bombs on Japanese cities. During the Vietnam war, U.S. airplanes poured out thousands of tons of agent orange over thousands of square miles. And just recently, in the wake of the eternal war on ter- ror, the U.S. administration declared publicly that it keeps its option open to use tactical nuclear weapons even against coun- tries which do not have such weapons.
There is neither doubt that Iraq once owned and used weap- ons of mass destruction in its war against Iran, nor that it re- ceived those weapons or the supplies and technology to build them mainly from the United States and her allies. There has
been plenty of speculation, how- ever, whether or not Iraq has weapons of mass destruction to- day. The most stunning revelation about the bogus nature of claims made in this regard by the U.S. administration was broadcasted in early 2003 during the first issue of the political TV magazine Active Opposition by the American left- wing opposition TV station World Link TV, dispelling the myth that Iraq had any such weapons. Fact is that during the first day of the war, CNN announced that Ariel Sharon, minister president of Is- rael, had remarked there would be no danger for his country because Iraq had no capabilities to attack Israel, which is revealing enough.
On the other hand, there can not be any doubt that other coun- tries do possess weapons of mass destruction, starting with China, North Korea, Iran, Egypt, Paki- stan, India, and many more.
Hence, when it comes to the amount of weapons of mass de- struction accumulated, the history of its (ab)use, and the de- clared will to use it, the United States of America should be the first nation on earth to be declared war against, if any. This is not meant to encourage war against the U.S. I merely want to point out that the argument of having produced, abused, and declared to keep using such weapons can easily be turned around and used against the USA. So the U.S. administration should watch out what arguments they use to justify their wars.
4.3. Humanitarian Reasons
The ruling Baath party in Iraq rose to power after a putsch in 1963, which had been massively supported by the U.S. It was also the U.S. which pushed Hussein into the war with Iran after the Iranian fundamentalist revolution in 1979. As is gen- erally known, the U.S. has repeatedly supported and even in-
128
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
stalled dictatorships all over the world, also by supporting putsches against democratically elected governments. Finally, there is a sheer endless number of non-democratic societies on earth, starting with all Arab nations, some of which are mas- sively supported by the US (like Kuwait, Saudi-Arabia, Alge- ria, Egypt, Jordan. . .).
Furthermore, the current humanitarian crisis in Iraq is mainly a result of sanctions imposed on Iraq which, in the opin- ion of most countries of the world, are unfairly harsh. For ex- ample, the current sanctions do not even allow for the delivery of basic chemicals (Chlorine) to treat Iraq's water so that it is potable, to give just one example. Despite many protests by UN representatives, the sanctions are upheld mainly due to U.S. and British pressure. The despicable cynicism of U.S. politics to- ward the people of Iraq became more than obvious when the then U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, asked whether the death of 500,000 innocent Iraqi children that occurred be- tween 1991 and 1996 would be worth continuing these cruel politics, cynically answered that she thought it was worth it.30 In the meantime, some 2,000,000 Iraqis, half of them children, have died in excess of the normal death rate as a result of the imposed sanctions, which, accord- ing to Denis Halliday, humanitarian co- ordinator of the UN in Iraq, is nothing short of genocide.31
Of course, fighting a dictator who suppresses his own people is permissible. But who can still remember the lies in- vented prior to the first war against Iraq, claiming that Iraqi soldiers had ripped babies from incubators and killed them?32 The whole story was invented, but played a major role in convincing the U.N. Secu- rity Council to vote for war. And who remembers the grotesquely exaggerated story about Hussein's army killing hun- dred thousands of innocent Kurds in the north of his country? It is still repeated today, with great effect but no supportive
cruel civil war against its own population with tens and hun- dreds of deaths daily? Or should we remind the reader of Pino- chet, to name only one cruel dictator installed and kept in power by the U.S. for decades?
The truth is that humanitarian arguments are of interest to the U.S. government only when they are in line with their po- litical agenda. Then they are emphasized, exaggerated, or even invented and used as arguments to convince the gullible public which is more than eager to accept humanitarian reasons as a justification to the mass murder called war. But a gigantic mili- tary apparatus financed with the help of corporate America and the high finance can hardly be convinced to go to war in order to install a (most likely unstable) democracy in a remote desert country or to (temporarily) enforce human rights. They have power and money on their minds, not civil rights and fair vot- ing systems.
BUSH
AT WAR
BOB
WOODWARD
evidence. It should also be pointed out
that after the 1999 war against Serbia, the mass atrocities alleg- edly committed against the Kosovo Albanians turned out to have been massively exaggerated.
Truth is the first casualty of war. That has always been so, and just because the U.S. wages an allegedly just war doesn't change this old wisdom. So we may be up for some surprises about certain humanitarian claims with regards to the second war against Iraq as well.
Still, Saddam Hussein is no angel. But then again, if looking for crimes against indigenous populations by ruling govern- ments, why not turn an eye to Israel that is currently ethnically cleansing its occupied territories from the Palestinians, that is, committing genocide? Or why not ask the questions why the U.S. sat and sits still while tribes in Africa kill each other in the hundreds of thousands? Or just look to Algeria, where the mili- tary dictatorship installed with the help of the U.S. is waging a
The long-term strategy for world domination exposed
4.4. World Domination
And that is where the last reason to go to war against Iraq comes from. On March 5, 2003, ABC Nightline's Ted Koppel presented a documentary entitled "The Plan," which revealed how "neo- Conservatives" like Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Robert Zellic, Richard Perle, and John Bolton, to name only those who are now high up in the Bush administration, have been planning a U.S. world domination since 1997, in- cluding the replacement of Hussein in Iraq with a system friendly to the U.S. Their plan with the title "Project for the New American Century," and a letter suggesting such politics, signed by 40 neo-Cons, was sent to Clinton in 1998, but obviously rejected.
In this blueprint for a more aggressive U.S. policy for world domination, it says, the process of transforming U.S. policies shaped by the Clinton administration would likely be a long one, provided there would not be some catastrophic and catalyzing event, like a new Pearl Harbor. If 9/11 wouldn't have happened, it reads as if it needed to have been created. . .
According to Bob Woodward,34 it was only 30 hours after the 9/11 attacks that Rumsfeld asked the President, why shouldn't the US go against Iraq, not just al-Qaeda? At the Pen- tagon on September 13th, Wolfowitz, for the first time, alluded to that broader goal.
William Kristol, chairman of the Project for the New American Century, explained during this ABC Nightline docu- mentary that North Korea and the removal of any other Arab dictatorship might be the next steps, which would also include the instable Saudi Arabian Monarchy — but probably not those dictatorships installed or massively backed by the U.S. in order to avoid hostile regimes, like Egypt, Jordan, or Algeria.
Though it is doubtful that the U.S. will go against North Korea with force — after all, there is no oil in North Korea and
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 • No. 2
129
they do have nuclear weapons ready to be used also against the U.S. west coast — the concept of re-colonizing the entire Middle East becomes clearly visible, which brings it all nicely together: Israel/Jewish interests, securing of oil, enforcing the domina- tion of the U.S. dollar, threatening the entire world with inter- vention in case of lack of compliance, and all of this behind the cover of spreading democracy and fighting terrorism and tyr- anny.
5. On March 18, 2003, World War Three Began
What we witness unfolding in Iraq is nothing more than the very beginning of World War III, of the Anglo-Saxon countries (USA, England, Australia) and Israel against the rest of the world. It is a desperate attempt of the Anglo-Saxon world to postpone the collapse of its world domination, and it is the des- perate attempt of Israel to prevent its final demise.
But they can buy only some time. They may be able to sub- jugate Arabia and to scare the rest of the world away from the Euro, but they cannot prevent the collapse of the US economy in the long run, since this country's economy is rotten to the core. If it does not collapse this year, then perhaps next year. But it won't take very long before it comes crashing down. In other words: Even if the U.S. wins the war in Iraq — and there cannot be any reasonable doubt that they will — it will lose in the long run anyway.35 And since the world can openly see the massive Jewish assistance in this ugly, bloody, imperialistic game, it spells disaster on them as well.
At the core of it all lies one country's economic superiority and political wit: Germany. Already World War One and World War Two were fought by the Anglo-Saxon countries with the assistance of Zionist lobby groups to crush this most dynamic and successful competitor. This time, Germany was very smart: It has merged itself into a framework of European nations, has given up control over its own currency, and has done nothing that would allow anybody to accuse it of being nationalistic, imperialistic, xenophobic, anti-Semitic, militaris- tic, or what have you. To the contrary: Germany is fiercely per- secuting any individual or group that promotes anything which could and would be interpreted by certain lobby groups as be- ing nationalistic, xenophobic, anti-Semitic, revisionist and so on.36 But the Euro's Central Bank is in Frankfurt, Germany; its policy was and is shaped according to the successful model of the Deutschmark; and the driving engine behind Europe's economy is without any doubt Germany.
The only way the US has to gain back its currency monop- oly would be by destroying the country that is at the heart of the Euro, that is, by waging a Third World War against Germany. But that it cannot do because Germany has been a good girl since 1945, and the nuclear power France is standing at Ger- many's side, encouraged by Russia and China in the back- ground.
Notes
1 www.brillig.com/debt_clock/
2 www.bea.doc.gov/bea/dn/nipaweb. If not indicated otherwise, all data re- garding the U.S. taken from this website of the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis.
3 www.ubs.com/e/globalam_uk/research.Referenzl .pdf
4 See also "Debt and Deflation: Till Debt Do We Part", The Economist, 10
October 2002.
http://www.arabbank.com/review/vol4_nol/(35- 37)_Some_Expec ted_Effects_of_the_Euro.pdf
www.staatsschuldenausschuss.at/html/inhalt/bericht200 1 /pdf/kap_5 .pdf
I did not find reliable figures for this other than occasional references, but
private debts don't seem to be an issue in Europe.
That was end of 1998; www.wsws.org/de/1999/janl999/euro-j23.shtml
www.destatis.de/indicators/oVtkah613.htm;
www.ftd.de/pw/de/1014399060152.html?nv=rs
www.oanda.com/convert/fxhistory.
www.jubilee2000uk.org/analysis/articles/japan_onthe_brink.htm www.forbes.com/global/2002/02 1 8/022.html
Edited by the Research Unit for Political Economy, Mumbai, India, March
2003, ISBN 1-58367-093-9. See www.rupe-india.org/34/pillar.html
"Iraq: Baghdad Moves to the Euro", Radio Free Europe, 1 1/1/00; "Iraq uses
the euro in its trade deals," Arabic News.com, 9/7/01; compare www.gold-
eagle.com/editorials_00/hickel092900.html;
www.tompaine. com/feature. cfm?ID=41 10%20
"Iran sees euro as way to 'free' itself from the US dollar", Agence France Presse, 12/31/01.
"Protest by switching oil trade from dollar to euro", Oil and Gas Interna- tional, 4/ '15/02. Asia Times, 5/19/01.
"Iraqi Wars", extract from his upcoming book The Sorrows of Empire: How the Americans Lost Their Country, Metropolitan Books, 2003; http://www.antiwar.com/orig/johnsonl.html "The Men From JINSA and CSP ", The Nation, Augl5, 2002; ww.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20020902&c=l&s=vest "Whose War?", The American Conservative, March 24, 2003; www.amconmag.com/03_24_03/print/coverprint.html; compare the funda- mentalist Jewish view on this: Ariel Natan Pasko, "This War is for Us", Is- rael Nation News, March 26, 2003; www.israelnationalnews.com/article.php3?id=2125
David Harrison, "Moran: War, Politics and Inevitability", The Connection Newspaper, 3/5/03;
www.connectionnewspapers.com/article. asp?article=18374&cat=104; this re
See James Rosen, "Divisions deep over claims of Jewish influence" , The Sacramento Bee, Apr- 6, 2003;
www.sacbee.com/24hour/special_reports/iraq/bee/story/6408561p- 7360864c.html; J. Rosen, "Claims that Jewish cabal driving Iraq war stir debate," ibid.,
www.sacbee.com/24hour/special_reports/iraq/homefront/story/843659p- 5926190c.html
See www.counterpunch.org/cockburn03152003.html
For that, see Paul Findley, They dare to speak out, 3rd ed., Lawrence Hill
Books, Chicago 2003.
Ari Shavit, "White man's burden", Haaretz, Apr. 7, 2003;
www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=280279
Here are some names of prominent Jews pushing for the war, most of them
neo-conservatives: Richard Perle; Paul Wolfowitz; Douglas Feith; Ari
Fleischer; Kenneth Adelman; Elliott Abrams; James Schlesinger; William
Cohen; Joe Lieberman; Martin Peretz; David Wurms; Norman Podhoretz;
Daniel Pipes; Bill Kristol; Mortimer Zuckerman; David Frum; David
Brooks; Charles Krauthammer; William Safire; Jonah Goldberg.
N. Chomsky, Power and Terror: Post 9-11 Talks and Interviews, Seven
Stories Press, New York 2003.
G. Vidal, Dreaming War: Blood for Oil and the Cheney-Bush Junta, Thun- der's Mouth Press, New York 2002; G. Vidal, Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace, ibid., 2002.
See www.worldlinktv.com; compare Seymour M. Hersh, "Who Lied To
Whom?", The New Yorker, March 3 1 , 2003 ;
www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?030331fa_factl
CBS, 60 Minutes, May 12, 1996.
Behind the Invasion of Iraq, op. cit. (note 13), p. 46.
German political TV magazine Monitor (ARD) April 8, 1992, 21:00 MET. For this, see, e.g., Stephen Pelletiere, Iraq and the International Oil System. Why American Went to War in the Gulf, Praeger, Westport, CN, 2001. B. Woodward, Bush At War, Simon & Schuster, New York 2002. To send a chill down your spine, compare Tom Engelhardt's comparison between the development in Iraq and in Vietnam: www.nationinstitute.org/tomdispatch/index.mhtml?pid=525 See my contribution "Discovering Absurdistan" in this issue.
130
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
Climatology — Science or Ideology?
By Oswald Nettesheim
In 200 1 , US President George W. Bush declared that the United States will no longer participate in any negotiations with other United Nations members about the reduction of carbon dioxide emissions, the gas frequently named as the main culprit for the so-called greenhouse effect, that is, the slow but steady increase of the lower atmosphere's tem- perature.
Around the same time, a scientific controversy erupted with focus in Germany about whether or not carbon dioxide is at all to be blamed for the greenhouse effect, or if there is even something like a greenhouse effect in the first place. The most prominent figure of the dissenters, claiming that there is no greenhouse effect, is a former rather prominent German meteorologist who used to present the most recent weather forecasts in Germany's primary TV news broadcast heute (today), Wolfgang Thune.
The following article presents some of the arguments brought forward by dissenters around W. Thune, followed by some critical comments and an attempt to make a critical survey of the state of the current discussion.
DEH SPIEGEL
Most readers will probably not realize that there is a Ger- man award for ideology-free scientific research, known as the Woitschach Prize for Research. Certain media have mentioned that, in 1999, this prize was awarded to Dr. Wolfgang Thune, a man who has a Masters degree in meteorology, for his book Der Treibhaus-Schwindel (The Greenhouse Hoax)} At first glance, it would appear that the notion of ideology-free science constitutes a pleonasm. However, the sponsors of the prize did indeed have an eye on reality. A look towards the past, into his- tory, will also teach us that science has often been under the in- fluence of ideology, and still is today. This is especially true for historiography,2 a field in which ideologists frequently appear in the disguise of (self-proclaimed) scientists, or merely em- ploy— somewhat selectively — the results of scientific work. A precarious position is occupied by all those scientists who need financial funding for their work, which they receive only as long as they work in line with the ideas of their sponsors.
What, now, is the matter with the "Greenhouse Hoax"? As everyone knows, the "Greenhouse Effect" is nowa- days legal tender in the realm of the lead- ing climate researchers, ecologists, and — last but not least — politicians who are in- volved in environmental matters and mat- ters of energy. Our dictionaries have in- corporated this modern word and define it for example as follows:3
"Heating of planetary atmos- pheres by the radiation of sunlight, if heat radiation towards the universe is impeded by trace gases such as car- bon dioxide ".
In his book "Der Treibhaus-Schwin- del (The Greenhouse Hoax)", published in March 1998, Dr. Thune has proved that this effect does not stand up to scientific scrutiny.4 The only established fact is the purely statistical finding that, from around 1860 onward, the carbon dioxide
Title page of Germany's leading political magazine Der Spiegel, August 11, 1986: Cologne Cathedral submerged by ocean waters.
(CO2) content of the air has gone up in toto, from 0.028 to 0.035 percent by volume.5 One is struck by the observation that the media generally refer to the more spectacular increase of 30% in the C02-content. Statistical data also confirm the in- crease of the average global temperature by 0.7°C over the same period. Clever "climate experts" have now deduced a nexus between these data, claiming that the man-made (anthro- pogenic) increase in CO2 is the cause of the rise in temperature observed.
On the basis of this theory, the Deutsche Physikalische Ge- sellschaft e.V. (German physical society) first addressed the public in 1986 with the warning of an impending "climatic ca- tastrophe"; the "Greenhouse Effect" was born. True to the jour- nalists' creed that only bad news is 'good' news, writers were eager to seize upon this doomsday-scenario. The title page of the German weekly Der Spiegel at the time even showed Co- logne cathedral being covered by the wa- ters released by the polar ice-caps melting as a consequence of the predicted rise in the lower atmosphere's temperature.6
Inspired by their belief in a connec- tion between rise in carbon dioxide and increase in temperature, climatologists embarked upon the search for a fitting theory, according to which the so-called trace gases (mainly water vapor, carbon dioxide, methane, ozone, and laughing gas) absorb the radiation emitted by the earth's surface towards space. This phe- nomenon was named "counter-radiation", later dubbed "greenhouse effect" by the media, in view of the more impressive nature of this word. Action was concen- trated upon carbon dioxide, because it had increased by 30% over the last 140 years, i.e., since the beginning of indus- trialization. It is taken for granted that the cause of temperature increase is the com- bustion of fossil fuels for industrial and private processes (generation of power
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 • No. 2
131
and heat, traffic etc.)- Thiine's book argues against such a rela- tionship.
Any book on physics tells us that heat radiation consists of electromagnetic waves in a wavelength range between 0.8 urn and 100 um (infrared radiation). In addition to visible light with its shorter wavelengths (0.45-0.75 um), the range between 0.8 um7 and 3 urn is still part of solar radiation. The radiation emit- ted by the earth is in the range between 5 um and 60 um. In line with all other electromagnetic waves, heat radiation travels with the speed of light (300 000 km per second). Thermal pho- tography of the earth's surface makes use of the specific radia- tion from earth, which allows us to identify and interpret differ- ences (due to land structure or land use) in the surface tempera- ture. The range of wavelengths available for such remote ob- servation lies between 7 um and 13 um and constitutes a per- manently open radiation window, unobstructed by C02 gas as claimed by the "greenhouse"-theorists.
As has been stated correctly by the German parliamentary commission "Precaution for Protection of the Earth's Atmos- phere", trace gases in the earth's atmosphere absorb infrared emissions emitted from the earth's surface intensively in most wavelength ranges, but only minimally in some, as for example in the range from 7 to 13 um. It is within this range, however, where we find the greatest portion of radiation emitted by the earth. This range is, therefore, called "open radiation window," because it is here that the least amount of absorption by water vapor and C02 takes place. This window allows 70 to 90 % of the radiation from the earth to escape into space. The statement by the commission is thus correct. However, quite unexpect- edly, the report continues further on by saying:
"The greenhouse effect due to CO2 is caused essentially
by its absorption band at 15 pm. "
It is precisely at this point that opinions diverge, for when one has recourse to "Wien's law of displacement", a wave- length of maximal emission Xmax of 15 (am yields a temperature of minus 73°C of the emitter. With this "counter-radiation" it is, however, impossible to heat the earth's surface with its aver- age "global temperature" of plus 15°C. It should be noted that all major "climate experts" collaborated in the report of this commission.
Incident solar radiation atmospheric back-radiation
Fig. 1: Radiation model of the "greenhouse" theorists
As everyone knows, a cloudless night sky leads to a strong cooling of the earth's surface, the sun's radiation taken up dur- ing the day being returned to the universe during the night as "temperature radiation". Doctor Thiine says in his paper:8
"The C02 molecules in particular, with their absorption bands at 2.8 jum, 4.5 jum, and 15 jim, which are as charac- teristic and as unchangeable as a human fingerprint, have no effect on the daily course of temperature, because they cannot close the "open radiation window" between 7 and 13 jum. This would be valid even if the earth were sur- rounded by an atmosphere of pure carbon dioxide ". Fundamentally, according to the Second Law of Thermody- namics, heat will flow only from a hot body to a cold one (in this case the universe). The "greenhouse effect" is thus only an illusion, and it is absurd to designate C02 as a "greenhouse gas". Carbon dioxide is neither a glass roof nor does it reflect the heat radiation from earth. Even a greenhouse cools down during the night and must be heated during the winter months. The warming effect consists only in its ability to store the radia- tion it receives by preventing horizontal and vertical move- ments of the air. The glass walls do not prevent it from cooling down overnight on account of the radiation it gives off. It is thus unrealistic to attribute to C02 the power to cause a "green- house effect" and the reduction of C02-emissions, demanded by "climate experts," is without any scientific foundation.
As opposed to this argument, the established climate re- searchers explain the "greenhouse effect" as follows:
"Without an atmosphere, the earth 's surface would be at an equilibrium temperature of minus 18°C. In reality, the air temperature near the ground is, however, plus 15°C, the difference of 33°C being due to the trace gases [!] with their effect on climate. As an analogy, let us imagine a glass pane placed between the sun and the earth 's surface. The glass allows the incident radiation from the sun to pass nearly unimpeded towards the earth, but absorbs part of the radia- tion emitted from the earth, itself radiating heat in both di- rections: towards the earth and towards the universe. This increases the radiation balance of the earth 's surface, be- cause the additional energy stemming from the glass pane is almost totally absorbed at the surface of the earth and pro-
Incident solar radiation no back-radiation
Fig. 2: Radiation model according to Dr. Thune
132
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
vokes an increase in the heating up of the surface of the earth ".
Anyone who does not understand or who cannot believe this, can read up on the details in an expert paper.9
"Climate" is the average state of the atmosphere and its characteristic weather phenomena of a certain region, measured over a certain period of time. A "global climate" as construed by the "climate researchers" is as artificial a statistical notion as the so-called average world temperature. Both "values" have always been subject to unexplainable variations. Polar ice-core investigations have revealed that between around 860 and 1 860, the infamous C02-concentration of the air was actually con- stant. Strangely enough, though, "climate" throughout that pe- riod was not constant at all and showed considerable variations. For instance, between 60 BC and 600 AD we have a tempera- ture dip, followed between 600 and 1310 AD by a higher tem- perature level, with the temperature in the North Atlantic region rising by 1.2°C. No explanation for this rise has so far been found. In the year 1200 AD, temperatures reached their maximum. Between 1310 and 1860 AD the so-called "Little Ice-Age" oc- curred. From the middle of the 19th century on, average temperatures have been rising in an irregular fashion. Clever "climate research- ers" have been quick to attribute this to the C02-increase caused by modern industrial so- ciety.
This "problem" is permanently on the agendas of the well-known conferences on climate change, also called "climate summits". The following such meetings have been held so far: Rio de Janeiro 1992, Berlin 1995, Kyoto 1997, Buenos Aires 1998, Bonn 1999, Den Haag/Bonn 2000/2001, Marrakech 2001. The objective has been to achieve a worldwide reduction of the emission of "greenhouse gases", C02 in particular. In Kyoto, it was agreed that the industrial nations would reduce C02 emissions by 5.2% by 2012, as based on 1990 figures. In Buenos Aires, one could agree only upon an activity plan for the next two years, allowing various flexible mechanisms to fulfill the norms in addition to individual national efforts. The industrialized nations were granted the right to trade in emission rights and emission duties or to be credited for investments aimed at climate protection in other countries. This amounts to a commercialization of the 'problem,' including a full-scale trade in 'indulgences.' The "Buenos Aires Action Plan", as voted, contained a mandatory timetable for the clarification of any open questions by the end of 2000. A total of 60 nations had voted for this protocol. The convention was to become effective, however, only when rati- fied by 55 nations, provided that these states were responsible for at least 55% of all emissions. With 25% of all emissions oc- curring in the USA, ratification by the US Congress would have been crucial.
If the climate convention of the United Nations were to be- come a reality, enormous bureaucracies would have to be estab- lished at the UN and in every individual country to organize,
Cover of the book Der Treib- haus-Schwindel (The Green- house Hoax) by Wolfgang Thune. The "Greenhouse Theory" in shambles.
coordinate, and regulate matters — a massive effort, to be fi- nanced, of course, by the tax-payer or the consumer. Remember Parkinson's Laws!
The "international community", with its adoption of the UN-climate convention at Rio de Janeiro in 1992, has recog- nized the existence of an additional "greenhouse effect" caused by man (i.e. anthropogenic) and having a "self-evident nature". Since that time, "recalcitrant" individuals who disregard the welfare of mankind as a whole may be labeled quite officially as "liars". The discussion of the energy policy of the future- bears the imprint of Max Horkheimer's "critical theory" and its postulate of the "social duty of science". Thus, this branch of science has also been gobbled up by both politicians and ide- ologists. We are waiting for legal action to be brought to bear against "recalcitrant revisionists" in the area of climatology. Obviously, a new law would need to be added to the Penal Code covering such things as "negation or verbal minimization of the greenhouse effect."
Surprising and frightening at the same time is the solid front of leading organizations to have adopted the new theory: Max-Planck- Institute for Meteorology (MPI-Met), German Physical Society (DPG), German Meteorologi- cal society (DMG), as well as university insti- tutes for meteorology and geophysics. Appar- ently, the major incentive seems to be the abundant sources of money that the state is providing for research in this area. Meanwhile, the said effect has been raised to the level of an axiom, for example if we read in relevant pub- lications:
"It is well known (!) that the green- house effect is caused by trace gases, C02 in particular, which absorb the heat radi- atedfrom the surface of the earth ". Invariably, such authors invoke the broad consensus among scientists as "proof of their theory. Does history not teach us, though, that revisionists who acted up against established teachings and helped new visions to be pro- moted were in general a minority or even a minority of one? The majority principle as applied in a democracy cannot seri- ously be used here to prove a point. We note with some alarm and a greater dose of suspicion the hectic activity exhibited by established institutions at the sight of Dr. Thiine's first publica- tions. Once his book appeared, insults and defamations voiced against the author became widespread. The German Meteoro- logical Society had nothing better to do than to recommend to its member that he leaves the society, his membership record of 30 years notwithstanding.
Aroused by Thiine's attacks, the camp of established clima- tologists appears at least to start having second thoughts about the validity of their theory. While it was heretofore accepted dogma that the warming noted since 1 860 was anthropogenic in nature, the Max-Planck-Institute Report no. 287 withdrew from such a position quietly — i.e. without a major press confer- ence— and almost completely. It stated that the C02-concentra- tion in the atmosphere had been, for all intents and purposes,
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
133
constant over the last 8000 years, in spite of considerable varia- tions in temperature over this period.10 One starts hearing doubtful statements such as:11
"It is, however, difficult to live with uncertainty and so a
lack of knowledge is often replaced by convictions. The only
certainty about this unique global experiment launched by
mankind is that its final issue is uncertain. "
We note the admission of such self-doubts with some satis- faction.
With all this taking place, the German energy suppliers are finding themselves in a bind. If Dr. Thiine's assumption is cor- rect, namely that the nuclear power plant lobby eagerly seized upon the greenhouse theory in order to instill new life into nu- clear energy, the promoters of such a strategy seem not to have taken into account the fact that politicians in Germany nowa- days have to reckon with the Greens. Since the Greens, how- ever, are absolutely hostile to nuclear energy, the energy supply industry is now in the defensive on both fronts, nuclear as well as fossil.
With the advancing liberalization of the German energy market and the parallel im- position of the obligation to accept energy transmission via their power grids by foreign third parties, the energy supply firms might have to fall back on trading the cheapest en- ergies available in other European countries, such as electricity from Polish coal or nu- clear power from France — certainly not very palatable alternatives for ecologists or estab- lished climatologists. We can only recom- mend to the energy industry who have be- come, in a way, the prisoners of "climate protectors" to start reviewing seriously and critically the crumbling C02-theory and no longer to ignore the counter-arguments. This could lead to substantial savings in obviously nonsensical 'ecological' investments that they now have to make.
Similar recommendations can be made to politicians, who are known to be very biased to ideological constructs. The "Ecotax", invented by the united Red-and-Green front in Germany, would lose its justification to a large degree, to the tax-payer's great delight.12
Last, but not least, scientists who are now stuck in the blind alley of a dubious theory should face up to an honest dialogue with their opponents. A book entitled The Greenhouse Hoax may sound to them like a provocation, but they should realize that this slogan is only an understandable reaction to the myth of an impending "climatic catastrophe" they themselves have launched.
Totally unperturbed by such fundamental considerations, some 5,000 delegates from 166 countries gathered in Bonn in October 1999. The main topic of dispute was the implementa- tion of the decisions arrived at in the Kyoto agreement regard- ing the reduction of that most important "greenhouse gas", car- bon dioxide. All manner of technicalities were discussed, such as the trade in emission credits (bonuses for C02-sinks in the form of forests and agricultural areas), measurement of the lim-
spruch
- fur CCV
Title page of the Book Acquittal for CO2, by Wolfgang Thune
its imposed, recognition of climate protection measures in de- veloping countries, investments in countries of Eastern Europe reforming their economies, etc. No breakthrough was achieved, however, because positions with respect to the instruments of implementation differed too strongly.
After another climate summit at The Hague in November 2000 landed on the rocks, talks were taken up again at Bonn in July 2001 with 178 nations participating in the effort to come to terms with the Kyoto protocol, i.e., to achieve a worldwide re- duction of C02-emissions by 5.2% as compared to 1990 and a participation of at least 55 states responsible for at least 55% of total emissions.
By that time, the USA had announced — to the horror of most of the other participants — their withdrawal from the cli- mate debate.13'14 Japan, Canada, Australia, and Russia de- manded concessions with respect to credits for C02-sinks. Ja- pan viewed the surveillance measures and the exclusion of nu- clear projects as unacceptable. In the end, the conference was on the verge of collapse, and environmental freaks conjured once more the threat of a "climate catastrophe". In an effort to save the Kyoto protocol by any means, a "limping" compromise was arrived at, but no valid so- lution was achieved. The result was a global reduction of 1.8% in C02-emissions, instead of the original goal of 5.2 percent.
Environmental activists showed their dis- satisfaction with the emasculation of the Kyoto protocol by dragging a lifeboat through the streets of Bonn, carrying the slo- gan "After Bush the deluge". This "funeral procession" was led by an activist disguised as George Bush and by an "Uncle Sam" turned into a skeleton with a scythe — the USA were declared Environmental Enemy Number One. Thus, this meeting achieved a mere semblance of success, and specialists opined: "The job is only just starting". The next round of the whistle-stopping climate summit took place in October 2001 at Mar- rakech, Morocco. There, 167 ministers of the environment ar- rived at a minimum consensus aimed at averting a "global col- lapse" of climate protection. Meanwhile, C02-emissions worldwide went up, not down, by 8% in the year 2000, a far cry from what was originally envisaged. The meeting agreed on mandatory sanctions against "climate sinners" and on a quanti- fication of forest resources and agricultural areas. This com- promise closed the summit.
The latest UN-sponsored function on climate and environ- mental protection took place from 29 August through 4 Sep- tember 2002 at Johannesburg (RSA) under the name of "World Summit for Sustainable Development" (WSSD). This mam- moth-like meeting attracted 60,000 participants, among whom one counted 100 heads of state or heads of government. It was a "summit of the least common denominator", the accountants of national interests having attained the upper hand over the vi- sionaries of sustainable development. A celebration to mark the coming into force of the Kyoto protocol had to be cancelled,
134
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
because the Russian Duma had not yet ratified the paper. All participating nations managed at least to accept the engagement towards reducing the "greenhouse gases detrimental to climate" such as carbon dioxide. The agreement is to come into force by the end of the year 2002.
In the meantime, violent inundations swept through Ger- many, Austria, and the Czech Republic, pouring water on the mills of climate ideologists who took it as tantamount to 'proof of a change in climate caused by man. The German federal elections in 2002 allowed the Greens to capitalize on these events and to increase their votes.
On the other hand, voices critical of "climate protection" have become louder recently, particularly in letters to newspa- per editors, but also in the form of books on the subject written by independent scientists and journalists who do, thank God, still exist.15'16 The author mentioned above, Dr. Wolfgang Thtine, came out with a second book in May, 2002, entitled An Acquittal for C02 and consciously destined to break a taboo and to focus more strongly on reality.17
A "mature citizen" looking at these publications beyond the mainstream must wonder why such voices remain generally unheard. The reasons have been outlined above. Let's face it: panic is a boon for the shapers of opinions and for politicians. In addition, the end of the Cold War called for a new field of activity in which politicians, environmentalists, and researchers might find employment. The "greenhouse effect" has by now become the bread-and-butter of our journalists, and the State finds the hauling-in of an "Eco-levy" easy going. The motto is: "CO2 — End of the World as a Source of Revenue".18 The Ger- man federal ministries for economics and for construction have already given way to "climate protection" and have become ac- tive in this regard. New regulations for existing heating systems are to reduce "pollution by carbon dioxide". While it may make sense to increase the efficiency of combustion plants, the reduc- tion of CO2 is only a side effect and in no way a contribution to the "improvement of our climate". Aside from energy re- sources, only our purse reaps a benefit from such actions. The energy industry is now trying to encourage consumers to buy energy-saving appliances with the misleading slogan "climate protection pays off.
Once the critical citizen has seen through the mad activity in this field and has recognized the vanity of the climate debate, he needs no longer worry about the future of mother earth and can turn to more important matters. In doing so, he is only sub- ject to the whims of the weather with which he knows by ex-
perience how to cope. There is no such thing as "climate," the notion has been abstracted mathematically from our weather. Anyone claiming to be able to change climate ought logically to be in a position to influence our weather. This, however, is something that man will never achieve, neither by reducing C02-emissions nor by any kind of sophisticated "climate re- search". It follows without fail that man will never change cli- mate, and that "climate protection" is sheer illusion.
Notes
1 W. Thiine, "Das Klima im Dilemma", Rheinischer Merkur, May 28, 1999.
2 Quotation from Bertold Brecht (1898-1956): "Immer noch schreibt der Sie- ger die Geschichte des Besiegten.... Aus der Welt geht der Schwachere und zurlick bleibt die Luge." / The victor still writes the history of the vanquished... The weaker leaves the world, and what remains is the lie.
3 Knaurs Lexikon 1993.
4 W. Thiine, Der Treibhaus-Schwindel, Wirtschaftsverlag Discovery Press, Saarbriicken 1999; it can be purchased from the author: Wormser Str. 22, D-55276 Oppenheim, Fax ++49-6133-933 796; www.treibhaus- schwindel.de/.
5 C02 as a normal part of air; it is a colorless, odorless and chemically almost inert gas. It is indespensible for the growth of plants. They use it to synthesize carbohydrates from it with the help of water and sunlight (assimilation). Carbohydrates, in turn, are indespensible for the nutrition of humans and animals.
6 Der Spiegel, Aug. 11, 1986: "Die Klimakatastrophe - Polschmelze, Treib- haus-Effekt: Forscher warnen" (Climate catastrophe — polar melting, green- house effect: researchers warn)
7 One micrometer (um) is a millionth part of a meter, a thousandth part of a millimeter.
8 W. Thiine, "Wettersatelliten widerlegen Treibhaus-These", (weather satellites refute greenhouse theory) VDI-Nachrichten, Nov.ll, 1998:
9 Christian-D. Schonwiese/Bernd Dieckmann, Der Treibhauseffekt. Der Mensch andert das Klima, Rowohlt, Reinbeck 1989.
10 W. Thiine, "Newtons Gesetze widerlegen den Treibhauseffekt", (Newton's laws refute greenhaus effect) geospektrum, 5/99, Zeitschrift der Alfred- Wegener-Stiftung (AWS), Berlin.
11 Klaus Hasselmann, "Was verstehen wir vom Klima?" (What do we under- stand about climate?), VDI-Nachrichten, June 11, 1999
12 W. Thiine, "Klimakatastrophe durch Oko-Steuer" (climate catastrophe by eco-tax), Brennstoffspiegel, 1 1/2000
13 W. Thiine, "Bush hat Recht" (Bush is right), Brennstoffspiegel, 7/2001
14 W. Thiine, "Der 'nattirliche' Treibhauseffekt" (The 'natural' greenhouse ef- fect), Deutschland in Geschichte und Gegenwart, issue 2/2001
15 Ulrich Berner, Klimafakten. Der Riickblick - ein Schliissel fur die Zukunft, Ehlers Verlag.
16 Manfred J.W. Miiller, K/imaliige? Wissenschaft - Politik - Zeitgeist, Eneri Verlag.
17 W. Thiine, Freispruch fur COi. Wie ein Molekiil die Phantasien von Experten gleichschaltet, edition steinherz, Wiesbaden, 2002.
18 Headline of a chapter in the book by Giinter Ederer, Die Sehnsucht nach einer verlogenen Welt, C. Bertelsmann Verlag 2000.
Critical Remarks concerning Greenhouse-Revisionism
By Germar Rudolf
Science without Ideology?
What some people polemically call the dictatorship of the ecologists, and the ideology that goes with it, seem to be par- ticularly active in Germany. It is thus not surprising that quite a few personalities of public life are turning against the putrid exaggerations of this philosophy. Any kind of political fanati-
cism calls for a fundamental critique, and so this countercurrent effort is in our opinion a good thing.
For many years now, Wolfgang Thiine, at one time one of the most popular meteorologists of the German TV-channel ZDF, has been indefatigable in his private war against many of his professional colleagues. He is certainly right in his massive
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
135
Density of permanent temperature probes on the surface of the earth in 2000. Most probes are located in densely populated and highly industrialized areas where heat generation from human activity increases ambient temperature considerably. 1
criticism of the hysteria that has sprouted around carbon diox- ide, this gas which is not only fundamentally harmless but, moreover, essential for our existence. Germany in particular, with its high population density and its basic lack of natural re- sources, is vitally dependent upon its industry. Unfortunately, over the last four decades, this industry has increasingly come under attack from various sides, covered with abuse, and indeed been met with truly irrational hate. It is, therefore, entirely justi- fied to suspect political motives behind the hysteria surround- ing carbon dioxide and the greenhouse effect. This is not to mean, however, that the arguments which support the thesis of the greenhouse effect are, in themselves, erroneous.
On the other hand, skepticism regarding Dr. Thtine is not without justification, considering the fact that this man did not obtain his doctorate in the field of meteorology, but rather in political science, with a thesis on a person's love for his native area (Heimai) — a topic frowned upon today as being overly conservative, if not uncomfortably far right. I fondly remember how Thiine, in his ZDF weather forecasts, had the highs and the lows hover over East Prussia, Pomerania and Silesia, although what pleased me, a child of a father ethnically cleansed from Silesia, may well have irked others. Today, Dr. Thiine is vice- president of the Association East-Prussia to which I once indi- rectly belonged as a member of a student fraternity with roots in Konigsberg, the former capital of East Prussia, and in whose youth organization I was briefly active in the nineteen-eighties.3
It is no secret that relations between the German refugee or- ganizations with their patriotic-conservative or national orienta- tion, and the Greens, rooted as they are in anarchistic tenden- cies of the radical left, are somewhat strained, to put it mildly. We can therefore assume with some justification that Dr. Thiine, too, did not approach in a completely non-political way this favorite subject of green propaganda when launching his frontal assault against it. It is thus more than just a little surpris- ing to note that Dr. Thiine has been awarded the Woitschach prize for ideology-free science, in the light of the fact that Dr. Thiine' s books and other texts are far from being devoid of any polemics, political and otherwise. While he may be quite right in his criticism of the political exploitation of ecological prob- lems, his own science is no longer free from ideology as soon as he himself enters the political arena.
An average increase of 0.6 °C over 100 years in the tempera- ture of the air, detected by a non-representative network. A sound reason for hectic activity?2
I do not write this to distance myself from Dr. Thtine's po- litical views — quite the contrary. From his publications and a brief correspondence with him I perceive many similarities in our views. However, I do not indulge in the belief that my own scientific work in a field that is a hotbed of ideologies is at all times totally independent of my own views of the world. It is true, of course, that a scientist, in his search for the truth and in the presentation of his discoveries, must strive to shed any in- fluence of ideology. Moreover, any scientist working in a field that has any political relevance should declare his political con- victions for others to be able to judge the conscious or subcon- scious premises he may start out from. To believe, however, or to demand that a scientist be in a position to attain without fail the golden goal of absolute objectivity is, for all intents and purposes, an illusion. Man, as a zoon politikon, is not able to comply with such a request.
Such a skeptical judgment need not even be regarded as a negative one, for are we not all placed between the opposing forces of, on the one hand, an aspiration towards objectivity — which can be held against us as being socially and politically callous — and, on the other hand, a social and political engage- ment aimed at truth and justice — which can be construed as be- ing ideological infatuation. It is always a matter of point of view. The important thing is to maintain the proper balance, to announce one's colors, and not to affirm oneself as the only true and objective hunter for the truth. Such an affirmation of being the sole holder of the truth, in itself, is already a measure of a possible ideologically motivated fanaticism.
Scientific battle-lines
It is generally undisputed that the C02-content of the earth's atmosphere has gone up by 30% over the last 50 years. To what extent the average temperature of the earth's surface has in- creased over the same period is, however, much less well estab- lished. The problem is primarily that there exists no network of temperature probes spread out evenly, in the statistical sense, over the whole surface of our planet. Something of that nature came into being only since the earth is surveyed completely with weather satellites, which observe and record such data on a global scale, starting in the early eighties. This period of 20 years, however, is a very short time span if statistically valid
136
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
the energy content of the atmosphere may well be overesti- mated, but it is not zero.8
Such an overestimation of the effect of the C02 content may also be related to the general belief that doubling the CO2 con- tent would also lead to a doubling of the insulation potential. This is not true, though, as the intensity of the absorption ap- proaches logarithmically a limiting value of 100%. Hence, a further increase in the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere will no longer have as strong an effect upon climate as has been the case so far.
Political Debate
All the hurly-burly surrounding the actual or suspected ef- fect of man's contribution to the increase in trace gases obfus- cates the real political scandal of the whole debate. It is neither the unwillingness nor the lack of insight of the industrial na- tions to reduce these emissions. The scandal starts with the question of which energy sources should be used for the gen- eration of energy.
statements are to be made regarding the average temperature of the earth, or rather of its surface. In view of the possible exis- tence of other factors that might cause an increase in tempera- ture— such as other effects attributable to man, or, last but not least, variations in the activity of the sun — it is debatable why carbon dioxide should be declared the main culprit.
Things change slightly, though, when you consider Thiine's thesis regarding the radiation balance of the earth. The basis of his theory is the tenet that the atmosphere cannot radiate energy back to earth. To support his claim he uses the Second Law of Thermodynamics which, according to his interpretation, pre- vents energy from being radiated by the cold atmosphere to- wards the warm surface of the earth and thus causing a further warming of the latter. Doctor Thiine's use of the Second Law is, however, erroneous — no law in the world can bar a cold body from radiating towards a warmer one and causing a slight warming. The Second Law of Thermodynamics only states that in a closed system the net flow of heat will be from hot bodies to cold ones, with the warm earth thus giving off more heat to
the atmosphere and to space than it receives from
them in return. It does not mean that nothing comes back to earth.4 The slight back-flow only re- tards the net flow of heat.
Fundamentally, the heat balance around our planet is in a dynamic equilibrium in which the ra- diation received from the sun is equal to the heat loss to space. In this case, the average temperature (the energy content) of the lower atmosphere de- pends upon the quality of the insulation, i.e., upon the average time it takes a quantum of energy cap- tured to escape back into the universe. For a planet devoid of an atmosphere, such as the moon, there is no insulation, and the energy is almost com- pletely given off during the night. On the other hand, a planet with an extremely dense atmos- phere, such as Venus, retains for a rather long pe- riod the energy received and thus attains a fairly high temperature.5
Thus, it becomes quite evident that the equilib- rium temperature of the earth is a function of the composition of the atmosphere. This being the case, C02 plays however only a minor role among the many other trace gases, such as water vapor, methane, laughing gas, ozone, and chlorofluoro- carbons. These gases claim a much greater effect with respect to the heat balance around the earth than does carbon dioxide,6 because their absorp- tion bands are located in the infrared window of the earth's atmosphere, whereas, as Dr. Thiine cor- rectly noticed, the absorption bands of C02 (at 2.8 um, 4.5 (xm, and 15 um) lie outside of this win- dow, with the exception of the 4.5 urn line. It is a little irritating to note Dr. Thiine's rigorous rejec- tion of the possibility that trace gases in the atmos- phere can close a radiation window and can radiate energy back. Even though C02 cannot close the in- frared window of the earth's atmosphere, a certain Infrared determination by satellite of the average temperature of the lower spectral range will still be reduced.7 This effect on troposphere (near earth's surface). No significant temperature increase.2
Infrared determination by satellite of the average temperature in the lower stratosphere (8 - 30 km, ozone layer). Significant lowering of the temperature due to ozone depletion, causing a lower conversion of incident uv-light into heat at this altitude.2
1.60 1.40 1.20 1 .00 0.80 0,60 0.40 0.20 0.00 -0.20 -0.40 -0.60 -0.80 -1 .00 1
NASA Temperatures Lower Troposphere
~\ |
|||||||||
-itf |
|||||||||
380
1990
2000
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
137
Oil has earned its epithet "black gold" not only because it indeed represents something of a gold mine for certain oil bar- ons, but also because its value for the modern industrial econo- mies can hardly be overstated. Oil has taken over the role that coal played in the early part of the 20th century. What comes to our mind immediately when we think of oil is fuel for our cars and our airplanes or heating oil for our homes. Oil's greatest value, however, comes from being the most important raw material for the chemical and, even more importantly, the phar- maceutical industry for practically all of those chemical pro- ducts that enable our life to take on the character that we have assigned to it.
Fundamentally, fuels for vehicles or airplanes can be based on other sources. The most promising candidate that comes to mind is hydrogen. With respect to its energy density, it does not quite measure up to the oil-gasoline-kerosene group, but it does have a number of highly convincing advantages:
a. Hydrogen can be produced from water by electrolysis. The only by-product is oxygen which can be released into the atmosphere.
b. The electrical energy necessary for electrolysis can be generated by means of solar cells.
c. Hydrogen can be compressed and liquefied, thus enabling it to be transported via pipelines or large tankers.
d. The basic requirements for the construction and use of solar cells — sand and sun — are abundantly available in the countries which today are producing oil. We can therefore make use of the existing infrastructure built for this purpose.
e. When hydrogen is burnt with air, the only exhaust gas produced is water (aside from minor traces of nitrogen oxides).
Models for converting modern industrial societies to the use of hydrogen have been around for some three decades. The technologies are ready; what is missing is the political will and the economic feasibility.
Meanwhile, we keep on burning vast amounts of black gold, a raw material that is almost irreplaceable for chemical and pharmaceutical industries. If the reader had the choice of heat- ing his home either with hydrogen or by burning all the plastic and textile products of his home as well as all medical supplies it contains, what would he decide to do?
This is the true madness of our present state of affairs. By burning oil we burn the basis of the production of modern plas- tics, of textiles, of medical products, although we have at our disposal a far better source of energy, if we would only decide to exploit it.
You have three guesses as to why this crime of setting on fire the future of our children and our children's children goes on unimpeded. Ask the likes of Dick Cheney and George W. Bush; maybe these oil-barons can give you a clue while taking a break from bombarding to death some recalcitrant human be- ings in order to keep the oil market under control.
Thus, the fundamental scandal about the greenhouse effect is not the uncritical disposition of the meteorologists of this world, but the power of Big Oil with all its downstream industries.9
Basic questions of scientific theory
Even a cursory survey of the internet reveals immediately that the discussion of the greenhouse effect is not a latter-day
taboo. One encounters the author Wolfgang Thiine in many of the major German newspapers and magazines. Books on Widerlegte Klimatheorien (Climate Theories refuted)10 and Umweltmythen (Environmental Myths),11 written by reputable authors are offered by large publishing houses. Arguments and counter-arguments abound, even in the camps of the experts.12 It would be far-fetched to compare Thtlne's greenhouse revi- sionism to the revisionism regarding the Holocaust, because a suppression or a ban does not strike Thiine' s thesis.
Doctor Thiine is not alone in his critical attitude. Others, some of them much more highly qualified, are joining his ranks. The fact that many of them have some sort of a relation- ship or may even be financed by emission-intensive industries renders them untrustworthy in the eyes of their opponents.12 This is of course no argument for casting doubts on the green- house revisionists, although it does cause one to wonder as to the nature of a science allegedly free from ideology.
The Holocaust brand of revisionism is not supported by worldly or industrial powers, and its promoters reap only dis- advantages from their efforts. Aside from scientific or social al- truism, Holocaust revisionists cannot claim any motives that might make their actions comprehensible. . .
Notes
1 www.zum.de/Faecher/Ch/RP/ozon/temperaturl .html
2 www.wuerzburg.de/mm-physik/klima3 .html
3 Accordingly, Thiine 's contributions can be found in the Ostpreufienblatt, a paper closely associated with the Association East-Prussia, e.g.: "Nein zur Okodiktatur" (No to the economic dictatorship) Nov. 1, 1997; cf. online http://konservativ.de/umwelt/thuene44.htm
4 That would be just as absurd as to claim, regarding diffusion (Fick's law), that no particles can diffuse from locations of lower concentration to lo- cations of higher concentration. This is contradicting the diffusion proc- ess which is purely statistical, i.e., equal into all directions. Only as a sta- tistical average, more particles diffuse from locations with higher concen- trations than from locations with lower concentrations.
5 According to calculations, the temperature on Venus would be around 100°C without greenhouse effect, but it actually is around 450°C; cf. www.as.ysu.edu/~adhunter/Teaching/Chem500/notes3bw.doc
6 www.geo.arizona.edu/geo4xx/geos478/GC2002.GHG.html: in compari- son to C02, the following factors apply: methane: 24; laughing gas: 300; chlorofluorocarbons: 5,000- 1 0,000.
7 As is known in spectroscopy, an increase of concentration leads to a broadening of absorption bands. Due to this effect, an increase of CO2 leads to a slight narrowing of the radiation window.
8 Compare also the critique by Dipl.-Ing. Peter Dietze, Langensendelbach, http://krahmer.freepage.de/klima/thuene/kritikO 1 .html.
9 My Master thesis focused on a section of the onboard energy supply sys- tem of the once planned European space shuttle Hermes, which has been abandoned in the meantime. The system was planned as an oxygen- hydrogen fuel cell. As such, I got in intensive contact with the hydrogen technology as well as with the power of big corporate industries to sup- press this technology. Furthermore, during my chemistry studies, which included spectroscopy, I also studied a few semesters of meteorology just for the sake of it, since I had made weather observations a hobby of mine in my youth.
10 Nigel Calder, The manic sun. Weather theories confounded, London. Pil- kington. 1997
11 Dirk Maxeiner, Michael Miersch, Lexikon der Oko-Irrtiimer. Fakten statt Umweltmythen, Piper, Munich 2000.
12 Cf. e.g., www.germanwatch.org/rio/skept.htm. In this, Dr. Thiine is ac- cused of having stubbornly ignored critiques written against him, which is an accusation that I did not check.
138
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
All Men Are Equal — But Are They Really?
Was There a Jewish-Zionist Agenda Behind the Racial Thought of Stephen Jay Gould?
By Paul Grubach
In 1994, Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray published their highly controversial book, The Bell Curve, in which they claimed that the American Black population has a lower average intelligence quotient than the American White population, and genetic differences between the two groups are to a large extent responsible for this. Of course, this raised a major earthquake in U.S. society and resulted in numerous attacks on the authors, not all of which were scholarly.
Long before The Bell Curve was published, world famous paleontologist and evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould attempted to refute the scientific theories of this book by claiming that there are no significant biological differ- ences between human racial groups. Whereas this article does not raise the question of whether or not blacks have, on average, a lower IQ than whites, it does show that Gould's attempt to prove that there are no significant genetic differ- ences between racial groups went well beyond what is scientifically tenable. Author Grubach also shows that Gould was plagued with a heavy ideological bias.
Introduction
Science assumes a factual reality to exist, and with the proper use of scientific methods one can learn about it.
However, in every society there are social groups whose special task it is to provide an interpretation of the world. These social groups, the culture-bearing strata, sometimes enjoy a monopolistic control over molding a society's world-view. When the values and interests of these cultural elites act as dis- torting influences upon the acquisition of scientific knowledge, progress becomes impeded.1
America is no exception to this sociological process. It too has its culture-bearing strata, intellectual and cultural estab- lishments, and media elite that effectively mold the worldview of the masses. One of the most powerful and influential of these mind-shaping groups is the Jewish political and cultural estab- lishment.2 In the words of the social scientists, Stanley Rothman and S. Robert Lichter:3
"Americans of Jewish background have become an elite group in American society, with a cultural influence far be- yond their numbers. "
As noted film critic Neal Gabler pointed out in his study of the Jewish movie moguls who came to dominate Hollywood:
"The Hollywood Jews created a cluster of images and ideas — so powerful that, in a sense, they colonized the American imagination. [...] Ultimately, American values came to be defined largely by the movies the Jews made. " A similar statement could be made for the Jewish intellectu-
Paul Grubach holds an Associ- ate Arts degree in liberal arts, and a Bachelor of Science de- gree in physics, with a concen- tration in chemistry and minor in history, from John Carroll University (Ohio). He received a scholarship for his work in chemistry, and is a member of the Phi Alpha Theta history honor society.
als that had, and continue to have, a considerable influence upon the social sciences. They created an ensemble of images, ideas, and 'moral' evaluations — in short, an entire group of dif- ferent ideologies that reflects and serves Jewish interests and profoundly influences the thinking of American and Western intellectuals. Ernest van den Haag, professor of social philoso- phy, stated it in these terms:5
"The literate American mind has come, in some meas- ure, to think Jewish, to respond Jewishly. It has been taught to, and it was ready to. "
Definite forms of social consciousness derive from the fact that this Jewish elite controls the substances of power in the United States to a significant extent and has the authority to impose its viewpoints upon the American people. Some never think to question these preformed patterns of thought, and thus, remain locked in a dogmatic slumber.
Prominent Jewish intellectual, Harvard biologist, political leftist, and a leading intellectual of the Jewish establishment, Stephen Jay Gould was one of the most acclaimed and widely read scientists of our time. He received innumerable honors and awards and had written many books. In 2001, the Library of Congress named Gould one of America's eighty-three "Living Legends" — people who exemplify the American ideal of crea- tivity, conviction, dedication, and exuberance. In May of 2002, he passed away at the relatively young age of 60.
In a series of books and essays he had proven himself to be one of the most able and dedicated proponents of racial egali- tarianism, the theory that all human races are equal or relatively the same with respect to genetic endowment. His famous tome, The Mismeasure of Man, first appearing in 1981 with a revised edition in 1996, was widely praised in academia and the main- stream media as a definitive refutation of past and present sci- entific work on race, brain-size, and intelligence. He spent a good part of his career attacking the alleged biases, ulterior agendas, and foibles of scientists, past and present, who claim there are biologically based mental and behavioral differences between the races.
There is no question that Gould was a gifted writer and able scientist who made contributions to science. His theories on
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
139
race, however, are another matter all together.
The psychologists Arthur Jen- sen and J. Philippe Rushton have already exposed many of the dis- tortions, omissions, and fallacies in Gould's work on racial differ- ences.7 In a review of the relevant literature, evolutionary psycholo- gist Kevin MacDonald concluded that some of Gould's work is char- acterized by plain old intellectual dishonesty.8
Rushton' s expose is the most devastating, as it opens up the pos- sibility that Gould's errors were not "honest mistakes," but rather the end result of a pattern of in- tended deception. In spite of all this, Gould's racial ideology is alive and well.
Gould never responded to Rushton' s devastating critique and
expose, nor to this writer's knowledge did he ever address Jen- sen's critique. MacDonald noted that Gould "took no steps to deal with the objections of his critics."9 According to Gould's own way of thinking, this is unscholarly behavior on his part, for he wrote that ignoring or suppressing counter-arguments is a "conspiracy of silence" and a sign of unscholarly behavior.10 Thus, a similar judgment would apply to Gould's conspiracy of silence in regard to critiques of his racial theories.
Most likely there was an ulterior reason for his refusal to re- but his critics. If he had publicly responded to Rushton and Jen- sen, this would have called attention to the errors, omissions, dis- tortions, and shortcomings in his work on racial differences. Ul- timately, he would have been drawn into a debate with these maverick psychologists, and he could have ended up on the los- ing side — and I think he realized this. In addition to his racial theories, a public debate with Rushton and Jensen may have de- stroyed his credibility and carefully cultivated public image.
Therefore, the best strategy (from Gould's perspective) would have been to simply ignore Rushton's and Jensen's cri- tiques. Gould's work would then still enjoy wide acceptance in the academic community and the mainstream media, because most people would remain unaware that Rushton's and Jen- sen's work discredited Gould's fallacious views on race. After all, their essays would remain buried in obscure intellectual journals that have a very limited readership, and his credibility and carefully cultivated public image would remain unsullied. By not responding to his critics, Gould ensured that his racial theories would enjoy wide acceptance.
This paper will cover new ground. I will provide a rebuttal to those aspects of his racial theories to which no one else (to my knowledge) has; namely, his theory on the evolution of al- leged genetic equality between human races, and his views on the genetics of the Jewish people. Finally, I will focus upon some of the sociopolitical interests that Gould's racial theories reflect and serve.
Gould's Scientific Arguments Scrutinized
In a chapter from his popular book, "The Flamingo's Smile," Gould summarized his anthropo- logical ideas as to how the alleged biological equality of mankind came about.11 It suffices to say that his viewpoints are presently ac- cepted by a large segment of the mass media and scientific commu- nity.
It is generally agreed that Aus- tralopithecus, Homo habilis, and Homo erectus — all members of the human family Hominidae — made their first appearances on the Afri- can continent. Then, between 1 million and 2 million years ago, Homo erectus emerged out of Af- rica to populate Eurasia. As a con- sequence, Homo erectus and ar- chaic Homo sapiens were broadly distributed throughout Africa and Asia about a million years ago.12
How are these ancient populations related to the different human races of today? Were the descendants of the Homo erec- tus groups that walked out of Africa into the Eurasian world — the Neanderthal of Europe, the Bejing Man of China, the Java man of Indonesia and others — really the ancestors of the mod- ern Africans, Europeans, and Asians? Or were these descen- dants of the erectus populations evolutionary dead ends sup- planted by a wave of anatomically modern people arising in Af- rica less than 200,000 years ago?
Gould subscribed to the "Eve theory" or "replacement hy- pothesis" in regard to human racial origins. This theory pro- poses that the descendants of the Homo erectus groups that emerged from Africa about a million years ago — the Neander- thals, Bejing Man, and Java Man — were evolutionary dead ends supplanted by a wave of anatomically modern people aris- ing in Africa less than 200,000 years ago. In short, the replace- ment hypothesis proposes that fully modern humans emerged recently (around 200,000 years ago) from H. erectus groups on the African continent, and then migrated into Europe and Asia, replacing the existing H. erectus populations (Neanderthals, Bejing Man, and Java Man) in these areas. An African/non- African split is envisaged as occurring 110,000 years ago fol- lowing a dispersal event in the Middle East, the pathway out of Africa, with a Caucasoid/Mongoloid split occurring 41,000 years ago.13
Human equality is a contingent fact of history, Gould claimed. That is to say, evolutionary forces determined that there are only minor and insignificant biological differences be- tween the races. A myriad of different and plausible scenarios for human evolution would have yielded other results. They didn't happen.14
The Harvard academic further asserted that human races "are recent, poorly differentiated subpopulations of our modern
140
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
species, Homo sapiens, separated at most by tens or hundreds of thousands of years, and marked by remarkably small genetic differences."15 Later on he added: "Homo sapiens is a young species, its division into races even more recent. This historical context has not provided enough time for the evolution of sub- stantial differences."16
In other words, mankind evolved all of its major character- istics (including intelligence) in Africa, and then spread else- where through Asia and Europe. Because the division of hu- manity into separate races had occurred so recently in human evolution, there was not enough time for significant biological differences between the races to evolve. Consequently, the races must be "biologically equal," or relatively the same.17
It must be emphasized that Gould's theory of the evolution of racial equality is based upon three arguments.
I. The evolutionary history of man did not provide enough time for significant genetic differences be- tween the races to evolve.
II. As a result, there are only minimal and insignificant genetic differ- ences between the races.
III. Finally, it is not possible to ade- quately classify humans into racial categories.
If there are no racial categories, it is not possible to make racial com- parisons and there are no significant, biologically based racial differences. It is important to note that these are currently some of the most important arguments in the arsenal of those who believe that there are no significant genetic differences between the races of man.
Even if, as Gould maintained, hu- man races are of recent separation {i.e., the division of humans into modern racial groups happened only twenty five or a hundred thousand years ago), significant genetic differ- ences could have evolved in this rela- tively small amount of geological time. Biologist Richard Goldsby noted that in nature, evolution at the racial level can be extremely rapid. Citing a study of ra- cial formation in the house sparrow, he pointed out that from a founding population of sparrows into America in 1 852, more than a dozen racial varieties have evolved. All of these races of house sparrows evolved within one hundred generations. In a human population, one hundred generations cover a time span of about 2,000 years. Goldsby concludes:18
"These studies suggest that given a reasonable degree of isolation and selection pressure, relatively short periods may be required for the elaboration of some racial charac- ters in man. "
Indeed, consider the case of the Bushmen of southern Af- rica. As the late biologist John R. Baker pointed out in his monumental study of human races, the Bushmen
"are very different in physical characters — indeed, in certain respects astonishingly different— from both Eu- ropids [Europeans] and Australids [Australian aborigines], and thus show particularly clearly how wrong it is to sug- gest that there are few differences between races, apart from skin-color. "19
Let us assume that Gould's claim is correct: namely that human races are separated at most by tens of thousands of years. Then, in this very short span of geological time, evolu- tionary forces were able to create Bushmen who are very dif- ferent from the other races of men, thus refuting Gould's claim that there was not enough time for the races to evolve signifi- cant differences between them.
The irony of it all is that Gould's own theory concerning evolutionary change — "Punctuated Equilibrium" — may very well account for the evolution of sig- nificant genetic differences between the human races in a relatively small amount of evolutionary time. He pos- tulated that a species changes rapidly as it comes into existence {i.e., di- verges from the parent species), but quite slowly thereafter. In his own words: "species form rapidly in geo- logical perspective (thousands of years) and tend to remain highly sta- ble for millions of years thereafter."20 Why then couldn't the human races, as they came into existence, have evolved substantial genetic differ- ences between themselves in a small amount of evolutionary time?
Gould himself describes "Punctu- ated Equilibrium" in these terms:21
"[...] most species are stable for most of their geological life- times, often lasting many millions of years — the equilibrium — and that change does not usually occur by imperceptibly gradual altera- tion of entire species but rather by isolation of small populations and their instantaneous transformation to new species — the punctuation. " He continues:22
"An isolated population may take a thousand years to speciate, and its transformation would therefore appear glacially slow if measured by the irrelevant scale of our personal lives. But a thousand years, appropriately re- corded in geological time, is only an unresolvable mo- ment. "
In short, "Punctuated Equilibrium" theory proposes that species change little over extended periods of geological time (the equilibrium or stasis), but when they do evolve, they change quickly from one state to another; that is, the stasis is punctuated by rapid genetic change.23
Two different species that evolved from a parent species are genetically more different from each other than two races of the
J. Gould's definite failure
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
141
same species. If, according to Gould, it takes only a thousand years to form a new species that is biologically very different from its parent species, why couldn't human races have formed very rapidly in just a few thousand years that are significantly different from each other in a genetic sense?
In a book Gould edited, it is written the groups that left Af- rica and spread to other continents were "changing [in a bio- logical sense] along the way according to climate and condi- tions."24 Gould's own theory of evolutionary change provides more than enough time for said groups to have evolved signifi- cant physical and mental differences between them.
All of this highlights Gould's tendency to adopt arguments that support his biases and to ignore just as plausible argu- ments that contradict them. He totally ignored the implica- tions of his own view of evolutionary change in regard to the evolution of racial differences, and just accepted the argument that "there was not enough time for significant racial differ- ences to evolve." According to Gould's view of evolutionary change, there would have been more than enough time to form human racial groups that are significantly different from each other.
Let us assume Gould's next claim — modern races are char- acterized by remarkably small genetic differences — is indeed correct. Very small genetic differences between two racial groups can lead to dramatic, observable, phenotypic results. He would have to admit this, for Gould himself has written:25
"Small underlying [genetic] changes can yield large ac- cumulated effects if introduced early in growth, with cas- cading consequences thereafter. "
In regard to the differences between humans and chimps, he has written:25
"[...] are we [humans] so different from chimps as we so confidently and arrogantly assert? In appearance, sure. [...] In brain power, undoubtedly. [...] But the underlying biological differences need not be so great. [...] Small [ge- netic] changes [between humans and chimps] can have cataclysmic effects. "
Consider the example of sickle-cell anemia, a severe heredi- tary disease that afflicts a large percentage of Black Africans, and a significant percentage of Black Americans, but is virtu- ally absent among American whites. The sickle-cell condition is under the control of a single gene.26 If a person is homozy- gous {i.e., has two identical versions of a gene) for this charac- teristic, he dies in childhood or suffers from chronic anemia. If heterozygous (i.e., has two different versions of the same gene), the person shows signs of anemia only under conditions of stress, but also displays significantly greater resistance to ma- laria than those lacking the gene. Thus, a small genetic differ- ence, brought about by only one gene between two racial groups leads to significant differences between them in resis- tance to malaria and susceptibility to anemia.
There are other examples of "one-gene-differences" be- tween ethnic groups that have a dramatic effect. Tay Sachs dis- ease (TSD) is a fatal genetic disorder in children that causes the progressive destruction of the central nervous system. If a child inherits a recessive TSD allele from each parent, he will have TSD. Approximately 85% of the children affected with TSD are Jewish.27
Krabbe disease, another genetic disorder in children, occurs in all ethnic groups, but it is most common among the Scandi- navian countries. If both parents pass the abnormal, recessive gene for the disease to the child, the latter will develop the dis- ease.28 Indeed, Gould seems to be aware of the fact that small genetic differences between racial groups can give rise to an ar- ray of differences between them. In a book he edited, it is writ- ten:29
"One of the more trivial symptoms of these [genetic] changes [between racial groups] is our present-day spec- trum of skin colors, estimated to be controlled by a possible five to seven genes, out of a total of about 300,000. " Why then couldn't certain behavioral differences between
the races also be under the influence of a similar, small number
of genes?
There is an egregious example of how a genetic difference between two different ethnic groups will have dramatic military consequences. The respected London Times reported:30
"Israel is working on a biological weapon that would harm Arabs but not Jews, according to Israeli military and western intelligence sources. The weapon, targetting victims by ethnic origin, is seen as Israel 's response to Iraq 's threat of chemical and biological attacks. " The article continues:
"The intention is to use the ability of viruses and certain bacteria to alter the DNA inside their host's living cell. The scientists are trying to engineer deadly micro-organisms that attack only those bearing the distinctive genes. " A scientist involved with the Israeli facility that is sponsoring the project was quoted as saying the researchers "have succeeded in pinpointing a particular characteristic in the genetic profile of certain Arab communities, particularly the Iraqi people."
One wonders if Gould would have dared tell the Arab peo- ple who are targeted by such a weapon that "genetic differences between you and the Jews are of little consequence."
Two groups, A and B, can share 99.9% of the same human genes and characteristics. They can be virtually identical. Nev- ertheless, if the 0.1% variation occurs in a characteristic that helps determine success in a certain endeavor, say sprinting, then group A might produce the majority of great sprinters, group B only a small minority.
In an attempt to bolster his argument that the genetic differ- ences between the races are minor and inconsequential, Gould posed this rhetorical question:31
"How much genetic difference exists among races? The answer [...] soon emerged without ambiguity: dammed lit- tle. [...Gene] Frequencies vary, often considerably, among groups, but all human races are much of muchness. " These claims ignored important evidence, and are now known to be outdated. In an attempt to determine how the Jew- ish people differ from the non- Jewish world, Israeli scientists conducted studies that show that Jews as a group differ signifi- cantly from non- Jews in a genetic sense.32 More recently, an- other major study found that Jewish communities have, to a considerable extent, retained their biological identity separate from the surrounding Gentile populations, evidence of rela- tively little intermarriage or conversion into Judaism over the centuries.33
142
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume I ■ No. 2
The Sunday Times of London recently revealed that British police can predict the odds, based upon DNA samples, that a suspect belongs to such ethnic groups as Oriental, Afro- Caribbean, Caucasian, Indo Pakistani or Middle Eastern.34
Ergo, the fact of the matter still remaining is that science can distinguish between groups on the basis of their genetic characteristics. This was true even at the time Gould pro- claimed, "human races are much of muchness."
In order to 'prove' that genetic differences between the races are of no significance, Gould then fell back on the key egalitarian argument:36
"[...] the great preponderance of human [genetic] variation occurs within groups, not in the differences be- tween them. [...] If God forbid, the holocaust occurs and only theXhosa people of the southern tip of Africa survived, the human species would still retain 80% of its variation. " But the 20% variation not present in these Africans may be one of the major reasons as to why they never reached the level of civilization of the Japanese.
The distinguished psychologist J. Philippe Rushton, who has studied human racial differences for over 20 years, nailed down with perfect accuracy the fallacies in these Gouldian ar- guments. He wrote:37
"Sometimes it is claimed by those who argue that race is just a social construct that the human-genome project shows that, because people share roughly 99 percent of their genes in common, there are no races. This is silly. Human genes are 98 percent similar to chimpanzee genes and 90 percent similar to those in mice, which is why these species make good laboratory animals. But no one claims that mice, chimpanzees and humans are nearly the same! That would be laughable. Similarly, although men and
J. Philippe Rushtonin a cable car on his way up to the "Niederwalddenkmal,
Rudesheim, Germany.
35
women are genetically 99 percent the same, it is foolish to believe that sex is just a social construct.
Much confusion arises because there are several sets of genetic measures. A much more realistic story comes from looking at the 3.1 billion base pairs that make up the 30,000 genes. People differ in one out of every 1,000 of these base pairs. Each change in a base pair can alter a gene. Techni- cally, base-pair differences are called single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). The 99 percent figure is based on DNA sequences which do not differ between people or even most mammals. These can give the impression that human groups and chimpanzees are almost identical because these genes code for similar internal organs, eyes, hands and so on. Though humans and mice look very different, any anat- omy student can tell you that even their internal bone struc- tures are very similar.
The February 23 [2001] issue of Science magazine re- ported that 2.8 million SNPs were already being sold by Celera Genomics to scientists trying to crack the code of human behavior. Base-pair differences are important and SNPs clump together in races. Just one change in the base pair for hemoglobin, for example, causes sickle-cell anemia, from which many blacks suffer. Other base-pair differences affect IQ, aggression and mental illness. The 3.1 billion base pairs provide plenty of room for large racial differ- ences. "
Finally, Gould relied upon a series of questionable argu- ments in an attempt to discredit the practice of classifying hu- mans into races. They are as follows.38
"First, discordance of characters. We might make a reasonable division [of humans into racial categories] on skin color, only to discover that blood groups imply differ- ent alliances. When so many good char- acters exhibit such discordant patterns of variation, no valid criterion can be established for [the] unambiguous defi- nition of [races]. Second, fluidity and gradations. We interbreed wherever we move, breaking down barriers and cre- ating new groups. Shall the Cape Col- ored, [...] the offspring of unions be- tween Africans and white settlers [...], be designated a new subspecies or sim- ply the living disproof that white and black are very distinct? Third, conver- gences. Similar characters evolve inde- pendently again and again; they con- found any attempt to base [racial cate- gories] on definite traits. Most indige- nous tropical people, for example, have evolved dark skin. "
Here, he seems to be arguing that since there are no real racial divisions, there can be no real racial differences.
Gould defined "race" as a "population inhabiting a definite geographic subsection of a species range and sufficiently distinct in any set of traits for taxonomic recogni-
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
143
tion." Even if modern races are not presently confined to definite areas, East Asians/Mongoloids, Europeans/Caucasoids, Africans/Negroids, and Australian aborigines/Australoids did originate and evolve in definite geographic subsections of the range of Homo sapiens?® and they are in fact distinct in certain sets of traits for taxonomic recognition.41 For example, the dif- ferent racial types have developed specializations in parts of their skeletal anatomy that can be used to identify them with relative certainty.42 Consequently, a trained scientist is able to classify skulls by race.43 Contrary to Gould, a valid criterion has been established by researchers for an unambiguous defini- tion of different races.
Continuing with his line of argument, Gould adds:44
"We are not well enough divided into distinct geo- graphic groups, and the naming of human subspecies makes little sense. "
A recent study published in Science shows that humankind falls into five continental groups — broadly equivalent to the common conception of races — when a computer is asked to sort DNA data from people from around the world into clusters.45 This suggests that the races are well enough divided into dis- tinct geographic groups, and they are distinct enough in their genetic constitution for taxonomic recognition.
Once these broad categories are established, the "discordant patterns of variation" among the races which Gould refers to begin to make biological sense. It is the total ensemble of gene frequencies, morphological traits, and geographic and behav- ioral characteristics that differentiate the races, not just one or two characters which display discordant patterns of variation among the races.46 Years before Gould put his views in writing, Goldsby made this perfectly clear when he wrote:47
"a race is a breeding population characterized by fre- quencies of a collection of inherited traits that differ from those of other populations of the same species. " And of course, there has been interbreeding between the races. But this in no way undermines the validity of racial clas- sifications. The biologist Baker nailed down the fallacy in Gould's argument some time before the latter put his views on race in print. He wrote:48
"If every specimen could be identified with certainty as belonging to one population [race] or the other, it would be evident that no gene-flow occurred between the two, and they would therefore be regarded as different species in the genetical sense of the word. [...] It is the fact that [racial] intermediates do occur that defines the race. " He added:
"the existence of intermediates is one of the distinguish- ing characters of the race: if there are no intermediates, there are no races. " As the biologist Goldsby noted:49
"[...] one finds that natural races, unlike the rigidly iso- lated races of domestic breeds, tend to be separated by intergrading zones rather than by sharp lines of demarca- tion. "
Thus, from a scientific standpoint, the Cape Colored which Gould refers too is simply an intermediate between a Caucasoid and Negroid. Whether or not this type is to be designated as a new subspecies or as "living disproof that white and black are
very distinct" is something for future scientific research to de- termine.
And even if "convergent characters" are sometimes prob- lematic to the racial taxonomist, ongoing scientific research can help alleviate this problem.
There is one more Gouldian proclamation that is worth dealing with. He asserted:50
"Intense studies for more than a decade have detected not a single 'race gene ' — that is, a gene present in all mem- bers of one group and none of another. " A recent study published in Science noted:51
"This overall similarity of human populations is also evident in the geographically widespread nature of most al- leles [different variations of a single gene]. Of 4199 alleles present more than once in the sample, 46.7% appeared in all major regions represented: Africa, Europe, the Middle East, Central/South Asia, East Asia, Oceania, and America. Only 7.4% of these 4199 alleles were exclusive to one re- gion; region-specific alleles were usually rare, with a me- dian relative frequency of 1.0% in their region of occur- rence. "
In other words, there are genes specific to particular re- gions— regions that are broadly equivalent to the common con- ception of races. Thus, in a sense, these "region-specific" genes are "race genes."
Like much of Gould's work on the subject of racial differ- ences, his theory as to why racial equality allegedly evolved is very questionable at best. Some have suggested that his 'scien- tific' theories of race are simply a reflection of his deeply held, leftist political beliefs, or they are simply fashioned to serve a Jewish agenda.52
It is important to note that just because Gould's racial theo- ries reflect and serve a sociopolitical agenda (as we shall soon see), this in no way falsifies those theories. His theories are to be examined for their truth and falsity independent of the mo- tives, agenda, and psychological makeup of Stephen Jay Gould.
The same is true for theories of racial inequality. Even if the scientist who formulates a theory of racial inequality has strong "racialist-nationalist feelings," his political sympathies in no way falsifies his theories.
As the philosopher of science Karl Popper noted, it doesn't matter where hypotheses come from, only whether they explain the evidence they are based on, whether they are subject to dis- proof, and whether they can hold up to attempts to disprove them.53 The truth or falsity of a scientific theory is independent of the political sympathies of its proponents. On this matter, Gould himself approvingly quoted the socialist Karl Kautsky:54 "That an idea emanates from a particular class, or ac- cords with their interests, of course proves nothing as to its
truth or falsity. "
Gould's Attitude Toward His Jewish Heritage
Gould attempted to debunk the claim that Jews are a distinct hereditary group. He writes:55
"Jews have been dispersed throughout the world, re- viled and despised, expelled and excluded. Many subgroups have been lost by assimilation, others diluted by extensive intermarriage. "
144
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
In short, the Jews are strongly commingled, and therefore do not represent a distinct genealogical group.
This viewpoint ignores data that suggests something quite different. As far back as 1970, the geneticist Theodosius Dobzhansky discussed the evidence that suggested that Jewish groups differ in a genetic sense from non-Jews:56
"The Jews evidently are not a homogenous or unified race. [...] At the same time, the Jews remained genetically distinct from their non-Jewish neighbors and to some extent preserved genetic similarities most likely attributable to a common descent. Mourant stresses particularly the uni- formity of the populations of Ashkenazim (Jews of Central and European descent) and Sephardim (Jews of Western Mediterranean descent), despite their centuries long resi- dence among different peoples. In agreement with this, there exist data showing that the incidence of a number of diseases differs considerably in the Jewish and non-Jewish populations sym- patic with them. A part of these different disease susceptibilities is almost certainly genetic. " In an attempt to determine how the Jewish people differ from the non- Jewish world, Israeli scientists con- ducted studies (published during Gould's lifetime) that show that Jews as a group differ significantly from non-Jews in genetic sense.57 Gould was undoubtedly aware of these stud- ies, as his colleague Jared Diamond discussed them in an article for Natu- ral History, a prestigious scientific monthly that both wrote for.58
Once again, there may have been a political motive for Gould's omission of significant data. A prominent Is- raeli journalist, Aaron Meged, may have revealed Gould's possible mo- tive. On November 8, 1981, in the Is- raeli newspaper Davar, he noted:59
"In our [Jewish] bitter fight against the race theories of H.S. Chamberlin and the Nazi Alfred Rosenberg, the theories that brought terrible disasters to us, that allocated evil characteristics to all of us as being naturally inherited ones, so that no Jew could escape them, we tended to disregard totally the existence of biological characteristics that are common to all Jews. "
In other words, like many Jewish intellectuals, Gould may not have wanted Jews to be perceived by non-Jews to be ge- netically different, as this supposedly brings trouble for the Jewish community.
Gould's Ideological Bias
Gould espoused a Marxist interpretation of science. In this view, social science is inclined to promote ideologies that re- flect and serve a society's dominant elements and ruling elites,
RICHARD J. HERRNSTE CHARLES MURRAY
With a New Afterword by Charles Muri
The book that rocked the boat in 1 994
reinforcing their position of political, social, and economic power.
Science is embedded in culture, as cultural beliefs and prac- tices influence the fashioning of scientific theories. In this vein Gould has written:60
"Many scientists fail to recognize that all mental activity must occur in social contexts, and that a variety of cultural influences must therefore impact all scientific work. " There is certainly some truth to his views, and ironically, Gould's biased views on racial-ethnic matters are demonstra- tion of his thesis. As we shall see, Gould approached the sub- ject of race with a biased ideological orientation, one that ulti- mately reflects and serves the interests of the group that he was a part of — the liberal Jewish-Zionist power elite.
Since Gould hypothesized that the personal psychology and social circumstances of the sci- entist are important determinants of the latter' s thinking, let us begin with a look at his own psychosocial back- ground.
The Harvard intellectual was raised in a Jewish environment.61 In a three volume study of the Jewish Question, California Psychology Pro- fessor Kevin MacDonald concluded that the Jewish community, in gen- eral, has been an alien, non-assimila- tive, and at times, even hostile ele- ment within European and non- Jewish societies. Judaism has been characterized by genetic and cultural separation from others, and an ex- plicit double standard of morality — altruism and cooperation among Jews, but competition with non- Jews.62
There is ample evidence from in- dependent sources to corroborate MacDonald' s viewpoint. For exam- ple, political scientists Stanley Roth- man and S. Robert Lichter found that one of the outstanding psychological characteristics of the Jewish leftist is
his feeling of alienation from and his hostility towards Western culture.63 Since Western civilization is the product of Europe- ans, it follows that leftist Jews would attack the culture's bio- logical foundations. By blurring the genetic distinction between races, alienated Jews are able to chip away at the genetic heri- tage of Westerners.
Gould's parents retained pride in Jewish history and heri- tage, although they rejected all theology and religious belief.64 Commenting upon his childhood, Gould pointed out that he "learned his Marxism from this daddy's knee," although he added his political beliefs were "very different from [his] fa- ther's."65
When he visited the Caribbean island of Cracao, he spoke warmly of his visit to the Jewish synagogue, and hinted that Jewish ethnic survival was important to him:66
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
145
"I felt privileged, and more than a little awestruck to at- tend the Friday night service and to think that people of my heritage have been saying the same prayers in the same spot for more than 250 years with this New World of con- stant change. "
Some more legitimate light may be cast on Gould's motiva- tion by an examination of those groups with whom he associ- ated. That Jewish-Zionist interests were indeed important to Gould is suggested by the fact that he was, for a time, on the Editorial Advisory Board of Patterns of Prejudice, a publica- tion sponsored by the ardently pro-Zionist and pro-Israel Insti- tute for Jewish Affairs (London) and World Jewish Congress.67 Although these Zionist groups oppose all forms of alleged non- Jewish "racism," they remain ardent supporters of the apart- heid, ethnically segregated Israel.
Towards the end of his life he became a huge supporter of Michael Shermer's Skeptic magazine and "Skeptics Society," and he wrote the introduction to Shermer's Why People Belive Weird Things.6* The magazine, organization, and book attempt to debunk Creationism (Christian fundamentalism), Holocaust revisionism, alleged white racism, and even so-called "extreme Afrocentrism" (the latter is often associated with Black Ameri- can opposition to Zionism). These are four movements the Jew- ish-Zionist power elite views as dire threats to their interests and power.
Gould presented himself as a humanist who is interested in social justice and racial equality for all mankind, as he was an ardent activist in the Black American civil rights movement, taking part in activities to end segregation between Blacks and Whites:69
"I grew up in a family with a tradition of participation in campaigns for social justice, and I was active, as a stu- dent, in the [Black American] civil rights movement at a time of great excitement and success in the early 1960s. " One should not automatically assume that Gould was moti- vated mainly by a desire to aid Black Americans. Historically, Jews have long been in the forefront of the movement for Black- White racial integration in the U.S. and South Africa. These same Jews, however, are most usually ardent supporters of the racially segregated, apartheid Israel, where Jews lord over and dominate non-Jews. Gould failed to reveal how Jew- ish involvement in the Black American civil rights movement served Jewish-Zionist interests.
As the late Israeli scholar Dr. Israel Shahak pointed out:70
"The apparent enthusiasm displayed by American rab- bis or by the Jewish organizations in the USA during the 1950s and 1960s in support of the Blacks in the South, was motivated only by considerations of Jewish self-interest. [...] Its purpose [...] was to try to capture the Black com- munity politically, in the Jewish case to an unthinking sup- port of Israeli policies in the Middle East. " Black intellectual Harold Cruse and California psychology professor Kevin MacDonald discussed the self-serving socio- political Jewish agenda behind Jewish involvement in Black- Jewish Civil Rights coalition. As stated before, the Jewish community has been an alien and inassimilable element within European and non- Jewish societies. Judaism has been charac- terized by genetic and cultural separation from others, and an
explicit double standard of morality — altruism and cooperation among Jews, but competition with non- Jews. Thus, the Jewish Community needs a society that tolerates their long-term policy of non-assimilation and group solidarity.71
Cruse and MacDonald observe that Jewish organizations view White nationalism as their greatest potential threat and they have tended to support Black-white integration policies presumably because such policies dilute Euro-American power and lessen the possibility of a cohesive, nationalist Euro- American majority that stands in opposition to the Jewish Community. It is very difficult to develop a cohesive Gentile movement opposed to Jewish interests in a racially integrated society composed of a variety of different and competing ethnic groups, all with divergent interests. In other words, because of their small numbers, Jews best succeed in politics by making coalitions with non-white groups that stand in opposition to gentiles of European descent.
As anthropologist Roselle Tekiner noted:72
"Race has often been a powerful unifying force and an effective ideological spur to nationalist movements. Whether announced biological relationships are real or feigned a belief in blood brotherhood helps to mobilize peo- ple toward common goals. "
It is important to note that Gould made persistent efforts to breakdown racial categories, arguing that racial distinctions are "meaningless" and "misleading." He attempted to 'prove' that all ethnic groups are, in a biological sense, the same and equal.
It just so happens that Jews outside of Israel flourish in ra- cially integrated societies in which the surrounding non-Jews have only a weak and feeble sense of their own racial identity. The reasoning goes something like this: 'If there are no racial differences or racial categories among the Gentiles, then there are no racial interests for the white gentile to defend. And if there is no 'white race,' then organized Jewry can never be identified as a threat to the white race, because such an entity does not exist.' One can readily see how thinking like this can reap benefits for the Jewish community, if inculcated into the minds of the Europeans that the Jews view with fear and hostil- ity.
'Tolerant' Gentile populations that have only a weak and feeble sense of their own racial identity are less likely to iden- tify the Jewish Community as an alien element against which they must defend themselves. Gentile populations that have a strong sense of their own racial-cultural-religious identity are more likely to identify certain Jews as 'alien outsiders,' against which they must compete.
One can now see how Gould's racial thought satisfied two goals. It tended to deprive European peoples that are viewed by the Jewish community as a potential dangerous enemy of a powerful ideological weapon — a belief in a racial brotherhood. Yet, simultaneously, Gould's racial thought fostered group solidarity among Jews and other non-white groups, for Gould applauded the social and political unity of "demeaned groups" (read: Jews and their allies)." He wrote:73
"The groups so stigmatized [by racial theorizing] may be races, [...] religions, or national origins. Biological de- terminism [the belief that there are genetic differences be- tween groups, and these differences are significantly re-
146
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume I ■ No. 2
sponsible for group differences in behavior] is a general theory, and particular bearers of current disparagement act as surrogates for all others subject to similar prejudices at different times and places. In this sense, calls for solidarity among demeaned groups should not be dismissed as mere political rhetoric, but rather applauded as proper reactions to common reasons for mistreatment. " Further evidence supporting the view that Gould's main concern was with opposition to White Gentiles and bolstering Jewish political power is suggested by his totally different reac- tion to Israeli and South African apartheid. If Gould was truly interested in ending all forms of apartheid, racial segregation, and inequality, we should expect that he would have spoken out against Israeli racism and apartheid just as vociferously as he did against South African apartheid and racial segregation in the US. But this was not the case. As noted previ- ously, Gould was on the Editorial Board of Patterns of Prejudice, a pub- lication sponsored by the pro-Zionist Institute of Jewish Affairs and World Jewish Congress. Although the latter groups rabidly oppose all forms of gentile 'racism,' they remain ardent supporters of the racially segregated, apartheid Israel. For the moment, we must digress and discuss the racist na- ture of Israel and Zionism.
The Racist Nature of Israel and Zionism
In Israel, Zionism created an Athenian democracy for Jews but second-class citizenship, even feudal servitude for non-Jews. Modern Israel is a racially segregated, apartheid state where Jews lord over non-Jews, espe- cially Palestinian Arabs.74
Dr. Oren Yiftachel, an Israeli pro- fessor at Ben-Gurion University, pointed out that Israel is not a democ- racy in the sense in which it is cur- rently understood in the West. Rather, it is an "ethnocracy" — a land con- trolled and allocated by ethnicity. In his own words:
"The Israeli regime is ruled by and for one ethnic group
in a multi-ethnic reality. "
Factors that make Israel an "ethnocracy" include the facts that 1) immigration to the Jewish state is restricted to Jews only. Some 2.5 million displaced Palestinians who would like to return are not allowed to migrate to Israel; 2) military service is according to ethnicity; 3) economic control is based on race, religion, and ethnicity; 4) The country's land regime entails transfer of land ownership in one direction, from Arab to Jew- ish control, but never back again.75
As the Jewish scholars Ian Lustick and Uri Davis have
fhe Science of Mental Ahili
Arthur R. Jensen
After years of controversy over The Bell Curve, this 1997 book was a powerful confirmation of genetically caused differences of mental abili- ties.
Jews and Arabs functioned as social and political equals, the Jews who founded Israel created a society in which Israeli Jews dominate 'Israeli' Arabs, a separate and unequal society in which discrimination is part of the established social order.76 For example, 93% of Israel's territory had been (until the Su- preme Court decision of March 2000) legally defined as land which can be leased and cultivated only by Jews. Key institu- tions such as the kibbutz (collectivist Jewish settlements, mainly agricultural) are reserved exclusively for Jews, as Israeli scholar Uri Davis has reminded us in his thorough study, Is- rael: an apartheid state.17
Dr Lustick has pointed out that the Israeli military is by and large a segregated institution. Most Muslim Arabs, who consti- tute the overwhelming majority of Israeli Arab citizens, do not serve in the armed forces — they are not conscripted nor are they permitted to volunteer for service. This has im- portant social consequences. In Israel, participation in the armed services is a prerequisite to social advancement and mobility. Cut off from the mili- tary, they are cut off from access to one of the main avenues of social ad- vancement.78
Christians and Muslims cannot marry Jews in Israel, and if they are married elsewhere the marriage is not recognized by the rabbinical court in Israel.79
Consider the following facts about Israel, which by contemporary defini- tions of 'racism' make Israel a racist state. The Law of the Right of Return grants any Jew, but no-one else, automatic Israeli citizenship. The Na- tionality Law discriminates against non-Jews so stringently that many Palestinian residents of Israel (stuck there when Israel captured their land in 1948) were denied citizenship even though their families had lived in Pal- estine for many generations.80
During the 1980s, Gould was ac- tive in the anti-apartheid campaign in South Africa. As Franklin Hugh Adler of the Department of Political Science at Macalester College (Minnesota, USA) points out, Jews were overwhelm- ingly represented among whites in the anti-apartheid cam- paign in South Africa, and anti-apartheid activism was (so he argued) deeply rooted in Jewish culture and values.81 This is only partly correct. It cannot be emphasized enough that Jews have a long history of promoting racial integration, open im- migration, multiculturalism and anti-apartheid activism in so- cieties outside Israel where they are a minority.82 Yet, in Is- rael most of these same Jewish groups ardently promote and support an apartheid society where there is Jewish ethnic dominance and racial segregation between Jews and non-
shown, far from working for an integrated society in which Jews.
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
147
Prominent Jewish writer I.F. Stone acknowledged the hypo- critical double standard that plagues contemporary Jewish val- ues:83
"For Israel is creating a kind of moral schizophrenia in world Jewry. In the outside world, the welfare of Jewry depends on the maintenance of secular, non-racial, plural- istic societies. In Israel, Jewry finds itself defending a so- ciety in which mixed marriages cannot be legalized, in which non-Jews have a lesser status than Jews, and in which the ideal is racist and exclusionist. Jews might fight elsewhere for their very security and existence against principles and practices they find themselves defending in Israel. "
Gould bemoaned the fact that he was a visitor to South Af- rica, a "nation most committed to the myths of inequality." He gave a series of anti-racist lectures in South Africa — but this writer can find no anti-racist lectures he has ever given to Jews for racism in Israel.84 Here his Jewish-Zionist prejudices shine through loud and clear. An objective observer would have named Israel along with the former South Africa as a nation devoted to apartheid, the strict separation of ethnic groups. In fact, in spite of Gould's obvious hatred of South African apart- heid, nowhere to this writer's knowledge did he ever condemn Israeli apartheid. If he was so vociferous in his criticism of apartheid in South Africa and racial segregation in the United States, why was he silent about apartheid and racism in Israel? This double standard says something important about Gould's real political agenda.
Gould mentioned white Gentile South Africa as "the authors of apartheid and antimisegnation laws."85 From time immemo- rial, long before there even was an apartheid South Africa, the Jewish religion and Jewish societies promoted strong prohibi- tions against intermarriage and assimilating/integrating with non-Jews.86 Jews in Israel are forbidden by religious law, ap- proved by the state, from marrying non-Jews.87
This raises another bias of Gould. In numerous essays he had condemned theories of "biological determinism" (the belief that there are genetic differences between groups, and these dif- ferences are significantly responsible for group differences in behavior), in part because they were used to justify the restric- tion of Jewish immigration into various nations.88
Yet, when his Jewish colleague Jared Diamond revealed in the magazine that both of them wrote for, Natural History, the proposed Israeli policy of restricting immigration into Israel only to those who carry "Jewish genes," Gould was silent.
In an article that appeared in the prestigious Natural His- tory, Diamond discussed the genetic studies on how Jews differ from non-Jews. He made this astounding statement:89
"There are also practical reasons for interest in Jewish
genes. The state of Israel has been going to much expense to
support immigration and job retraining of Jews who were
persecuted minorities in other countries. That immediately
poses the problem of defining who is a Jew. "
The implication here is obvious. The Zionist elite is plan- ning to refuse a person the right to settle in Israel if they do not have "Jewish genes." With this in mind, consider point #4 of the German National Socialist Party program of May 25, 1920. It reads:90
"None but members of the nationality may be citizens of
the state. None but those of German blood, irrespective of
religion, may be members of the nationality. "
In contemporary terms, only those with "German genes" could be citizens of National Socialist Germany. I can't empha- size enough that this is similar to the type of Israeli policy that Diamond describes — and Gould failed to publicly condemn it, in spite of the fact that he was almost certainly aware of Dia- mond's statement.
Diamond and Gould apparently both oppose dividing up human populations into racial categories — except of course populations of Jews and non-Jews. Both apparently gave their silent assent to the proposed Israeli-Zionist policy of defining and classifying Jews and non-Jews on the basis of whether or not they possess "Jewish genes."
How does one know that Gould's pronouncements on racial issues ultimately reflect and serve the liberal Jewish-Zionist power elite? His double standard on the issue of racial-ethnic problems certainly suggests this. He was a prominent critic of all of forms of alleged racism, except for one — he was silent about Jewish-Zionist and Israeli racism. He was very vocal about all of those forms of alleged racism that have historically threatened Jewish interests, but he was silent about Jewish- Zionist racism. His "anti-racist" campaign was very selective and discriminatory indeed. It seemed to have been so de- signed so as to promote racial integration in societies outside of Israel (where Jews are a minority and alien element, and thus, stand to benefit by creating a racially integrated and multicultural society), yet it gave its silent assent to an ethni- cally segregated society in Israel where Jews lord over and dominate non-Jews.
Jews gain power in societies in which the surrounding gen- tile populations have a weak and feeble sense of their own ra- cial/cultural identity. They are not perceived as an alien, differ- ent, and hostile element. Furthermore, in a racially integrated, multicultural society with numerous different competing ethnic groups with divergent interests, it is very unlikely the surround- ing gentiles can ever develop a united and cohesive majority to oppose the very cohesive Jewish community. In societies in which the gentiles have a strong sense of their own ra- cial/cultural identity, Jews are identified as 'outsiders,' an alien, unassimiable element. Societies such as these make it very dif- ficult for Jews to gain power and influence.
Hence, a Jewish strategy of breaking down cultural, ethnic, and racial distinctions among non-Jews while encouraging unity among Jews has an understandable goal. Indeed, as Pro- fessor MacDonald has so persuasively argued, Gould's racial thought was a part of a well-established and remarkably suc- cessful Jewish intellectual offensive that seeks to advance sec- tarian Jewish interests by attacking traditional cultural, racial, and religious values of other nations. Jewish power and influ- ence has grown enormously under the auspices of this "intellec- tual offensive."91
In summary, what lines of evidence suggest that Gould's bi- ased views on racial matters served liberal Jewish-Zionist inter- ests? First, he condemned racial segregation in the U.S. and the former South Africa, yet he was silent about the racially segre- gated, apartheid Israel. Second, he was for a time on the Edito-
148
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume I ■ No. 2
rial Advisory Committee for Patterns of Prejudice, a publica- tion of groups that support the ethnically segregated, apartheid Israel. Third, his racial thought is a part of an overall historic Jewish pattern of attacking traditional racial, cultural, and eth- nic categories of other nations in order to promote the welfare of the Jewish community. Fourth, he vehemently condemned all forms of discrimination based upon race, yet he was notori- ously silent when his colleague Jared Diamond pointed out that Israel is planning to use studies of Jewish genetics to discrimi- nate against non-Jews on the basis of race. Finally, he omitted evidence that would have identified Jews as genetically distinct from non-Jews.
So Stephen Jay Gould had proclaimed: science is embedded in culture, as cultural beliefs and practices influence the fash- ioning of scientific theories. In this vein he wrote:92
"[...] science must proceed in a social context and must be done by human beings enmeshed in the constraints of their culture, the throes of surrounding politics, and the hopes and dreams of their social and psychological con- struction. We scientists tend to be minimally aware of these human influences because the mythology of our profession proclaims that changing views are driven by universal rea- soning applied to an accumulating arsenal of observations. But all scientific change is a complex and inseparable mix- ture of increasing knowledge and altered social circum- stances. "
Ironically, Gould's biased views on racial-ethnic matters is a demonstration of his thesis. Gould approached the subject of race with a biased ideological orientation, one which ultimately reflects and serves the interests of the liberal Jewish-Zionist power elite.
Gould has written:93
"Racism has often been buttressed by scientists who
present a public fagade of objectivity to mask their guiding
prejudices. "
A similar statement applies to Stephen Jay Gould. Jewish- Zionist interests were buttressed by his public facade of "objec- tivity" and "a humanitarian concern for the evils of racism." It certainly appears as though he used calls for "racial equality" as a mask under which he advanced sectarian Jewish-Zionist in- terests.
A word of caution here. It cannot be said that every Jew is a leftist who subscribes to Gould's theories. Some prominent Jewish intellectuals, such as Dr. Michael Levin, the author of Why Race Matters, and the late Dr. Richard Herrnstein, co- author of The Bell Curve, would reject Gould's racial theories. And they are not the only ones. But the fact of the matter re- mains that Gould's racial thought reflects and serves the inter- ests of a predominate element within the Jewish community — the liberal Jewish-Zionist establishment.
Gould is correct on at least one point. He claims that theo- ries of "racial differences" have been used to justify and excuse such evils as slavery and racial domination.94 But this in no way falsifies these theories. Modern physics, for example, has created nuclear weapons, which in turn have led to the evils of mass destruction. This in no way falsifies Quantum Physics. Of course, it must be remembered that Stalinism embraced an ide- ology of racial equality very similar to Gould's — and under its
auspices, millions suffered and died. Likewise, this in itself in no way falsifies Gould's racial ideology.
The views expressed here are not to be confused with 'white supremacy,' which implies that whites should dominate non- whites. The belief that Europeans have the right to preserve their distinct biological-cultural identity is not synonymous with the belief that they should lord over and oppress non- Europeans.
International law says that a race or culture has the collec- tive right to self-preservation and self-determination. Self- preservation literally means the right to preserve for posterity those factors that make a people unique, exclusive, and separate from other peoples. How is Western Civilization to endure if its members are inculcated with a distorted ideology of racial egalitarianism that discourages Westerners from preserving their unique heritage? Let us be wary of distorted ideologies and the power elites that promote them.
And of course, all of this applies equally well to all races, ethnic groups and cultures, including the Jewish community. All of them have the right to collective self-determination and self-preservation. If they value the preservation of their ra- cial/cultural identity, they too should be wary of ideologues like Gould and the distorted racial thought that he promoted.
Notes
1 Karl Mannheim, Ideology and Utopia (Harcourt, Brace and World, 1936), p. 10, passim.
2 The following list is just a small sample of the works that document the power and influence of Jewish political and cultural establishment. Alexan- der Bloom, Prodigal Sons: The New York Intellectuals and Their World (Oxford University Press, 1986); Neal Gabler, An Empire of Their Own: How the Jews Invented Hollywood (Crown Publishers, 1988); Benjamin Ginsberg, The Fatal Embrace: Jews and the State (University of Chicago Press, 1993); Ernest van den Haag, The Jewish Mystique (Stein and Day, 1969); Paul Findley, They Dare to Speak Out: People and Institutions Con- front the Israeli Lobby (Lawrence Hill & Co., 1985); Alfred Lilienthal, The Zionist Connection II: What Price Peace? (North American, 1982); Charles Silberman, A Certain People: American Jews and Their Lives Today (Summit Books, 1985).
3 Stanley Rothman and S. Robert Lichter, Roots of Radicalism: Jews, Chris- tians, and the New Left (Oxford University Press, 1982), p. 98.
4 Gabler, p. 7.
5 van den Haag, p. 98.
6 http://www.socialistviewpoint.org/june_02/Gould.jpg
7 Arthur R. Jensen, "The Debunking of Scientific Fossils and Straw Persons," Contemporary Education Review, Summer 1982. Online: www.debunker.com/texts/jensen.html. J. Philippe Rushton, "Race, Intelli- gence, and the Brain: The Errors and Omissions of the Revised Edition of S.J. Gould's The Mismeasure of Man (1996)," Personality and Individual Differences, Vol. 23, No.l, July 1997, pp. 169-180. Online: www.lrainc.com/swtaboo/stalkers/jpr_gould_paid.html
8 Kevin MacDonald, The Culture of Critique: An Evolutionary Analysis of Jewish Involvement in Twentieth Century Intellectual and Political Move- ments (Praeger Publishers, 1998), pp. 30-38.
9 Ibid., p. 35.
10 S.J. Gould, The Structure of Evolutionary Theory (Harvard University Press, 2002), p. 513.
11 S.J. Gould, "Human Equality is a Contingent Fact of History," Chap. 12, The Flamingo 's Smile: Reflections in Natural History (Norton, 1985), pp. 185-98.
12 Douglas Futuyma, Evolutionary Biology, 3rd Ed., (Sinauer, 1998), pp. 730- 735.
lj Christopher Stringer and Robin McKie, African Exodus: The Origins of Modern Humanity (Henry Holt, 1996); J. Philippe Rushton, Race, Evolu- tion, and Behavior: A Life History Perspective, 3rd Ed., (Charles Darwin Research Institute, 2000), p. 219.
14 Gould, "Human Equality is Contingent Fact of History," p. 186.
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
149
Ibid., p. 191. Ibid, p. 198.
Ibid., pp. 192, 194-195, 196.
Richard A. Goldsby, Race and Races (Macmillan, 1977), pp. 88-89. John R. Baker, Race, (Oxford University Press, 1974), p. 303. Gould, The Flamingo 's Smile, pp. 241f..
S.J. Gould, "Life in a Punctuation," Natural History, November 1992, p. 12. Ibid., pp. 12-14. Futuyma, p. 137.
S.J. Gould, ed., The Book of Life: An Illustrated History of the Evolution of Life on Earth (Norton, 1993), p. 249.
S.J. Gould, "We Are All Monkeys' Uncles," Natural History, June 1992, p. 21.
Edward O. Wilson and Thomas Eisner, Life on Earth (Sinauer, 1978), p. 651.
Karen Bellenir, ed., "Tay-Sachs Disease," Chap. 18, Genetic Disorders
Sourcebook, Vol. 13, Omnigraphics 1996, pp. 235-237.
Ibid., "Krabbe Disease," pp. 249-250.
Gould, S. J. ed., The Book of Life, p. 249.
Sunday Times of London, November 15, 1998, p. 1.
S.J. Gould, "Human Equality is a Contingent Fact of History," p. 196.
Nechemia Myers, "Genetic Links for Scattered Jews," Nature, March 21,
1985, p. 208.
M.F. Hammer, et al, "Jewish and Middle Eastern non- Jewish populations share a common pool of Y-chromosome biallelic haplotypes," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 97 (12), June 6, 2000, pp. 6769-6774. Online available from http://www.pnas.org. For a laymen's description of this study, see Nicholas Wade, "Y Chromosome Bears Witness to Story of Jewish Diaspora," The New York Times, May 9, 2000.
Adam Nathan, "Police Use DNA to Find Suspects' Race," Sunday Times (Great Britain), February 25, 2001. www.ssc.uwo.ca/psychology/pictures/Rushton_2.jpg Gould, "Human Equality is a Contingent Fact of History," p. 196. J. Philippe Rushton, "Is There a Biological Basis For Race and Racial Dif- ferences?" Insight, May 28, 2001. Online: http://www.lrainc.com/swtaboo/stalkers/jpr_insight.html Gould, "Human Equality is a Contingent Fact of History," pp. 193-194. Ibid., p. 193.
C.B. Stringer and P. Andrews, "Genetic and Fossil Evidence for the Origin of Modern Humans," Science, Vol.239, March 1988, pp. 1263-1268; Stringer and McKie, pp. 53, 178. Also, see the discussion along with appro- priate documentation in Rushton, Race, Evolution and Behavior, pp. 217- 219.
Baker, passim.
L.S.B. Leakey, Adam 's Ancestors: The Evolution of Man and His Culture, 4th ed., (Harper and Row, 1960), p. 161. Ibid., pp. 161-166.
Gould, "Human Equality is a Contingent Fact of History," p. 1 94. Noah H. Rosenburg, et al, "Genetic Structure of Human Populations," Sci- ence, Vol. 298, December 20, 2002, pp. 2381-2385. For a laymen's descrip- tion of this study, see Nicholas Wade, "The Palette of Humankind," The New York Times, December 24, 2002, p. D3. Baker, passim; Goldsby, passim. Goldsby, p. 21. Baker, pp. 99-100. Goldsby, p. 21.
Gould, "Human Equality is a Contingent Fact of History," p. 196. Rosenberg, et al, pp. 2381-2382.
Rushton, "Race, Intelligence and the Brain..."; MacDonald, pp. 30-39. K.L. Popper, Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowl- edge (Basic Books, 1962).
S.J. Gould, The Panda 's Thumb (Norton, 1980), p. 68.
S.J. Gould, The Mismeasure of Man, rev. ed., (Norton, 1996), pp. 396-397.
Theodosius Dobzhansky, Mankind Evolving: The Evolution of the Human
Species (Bantam Books, 1970), pp. 253-254.
Meyers.
Jared Diamond, "Who Are the Jews?," Natural History, November 1993, pp. 12-19.
Roselle Tekiner, "The 'Who is a Jew?' Controversy in Israel: A Product of Political Zionism," Chap. 3, Anti-Zionism: Analytical Reflections, Roselle Tekiner, Samir Abed-Rabbo, Norton Mezvinsky, eds., Anti-Zionism: Ana- lytical Reflections (Amana Books, 1988), p. 88. Gould, The Structure of Evolutionary Theory, p. 121. MacDonald, p. 31.
Kevin MacDonald, A People That Shall Dwell Alone: Judaism as a Group Evolutionary Strategy (Praeger, 1994); MacDonald, Separation and Its Dis- contents: Toward an Evolutionary Theory of Anti-Semitism (Praeger, 1998); MacDonald, The Culture of Critique. Rothman and Lichter.
S.J. Gould, Rock of Ages: Science and Religion in the Fullness of Life (Bal- lantine Publ., 1999), p. 8.
Gould, The Structure of Evolutionary Theory, 1018. S.J. Gould, Dinosaur in a Haystack (Harmony Books, 1995), p. 347. For example, see Patterns of Prejudice, Summer 1990. Michael Shermer, Why People Believe Weird Things: PseudoScience, Su- perstition, and Other Confusions of Our Time (W.H. Freeman and Com- pany, 1997).
Gould, The Mismeasure of Man, p. 38.
Israel Shahak, Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thou- sand Years (Pluto Press, 1994), p. 103.
Harold Cruse, "Negroes and Jews: The Two Nationalisms and the Blocked Plurality," in Bridges and Boundaries: African Americans and American Jews, J. Salzman, ed., (George Brazillier, 1992); MacDonald, The Culture of Critique, pp. 254-258. Tekiner, p. 78.
Gould, The Mismeasure of Man, p. 28.
Louise Cainkar, ed., Separate and Unequal: The Dynamics of South African and Israeli Rule (Palestine Human Rights Campaign, 1985); Uri Davis, Is- rael: An Apartheid State (Zed Books, Ltd., 1987); Ian Lustick, Arabs in the Jewish State: Israel 's Control of a National Minority (University of Texas Press, 1980); Donald Neff, '"If It Walks Like a Duck.': The Racism of Zi- onism," WASHINGTON REPORT ON MIDDLE EAST AFFAIRS, Novem- ber 2001, p. 26; online:
http://www.wrmea.com/archives/november01/01 1 1026.html Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, July/August 1999, p. 120. Davis, passim; Lustick, passim. Davis, passim. Lustick, p. 93-94.
Tekiner, ed., pp. 74, 86-87 (note 21); Washington Report on Middle East
Affairs, June 1993, p. 75.
Neff.
Franklin Hugh Adler, "South African Jews and Apartheid," Patterns of Prejudice, Vol. 34, Issue 04, October 1, 2000. Online: http://www.sagepub.co.uk/journals/details/issue/abstract/ab015362.html MacDonald, Separation and Its Discontents, passim; MacDonald, The Cul- ture of Critique.
Quoted in Moshe Menuhin, The Decadence of Judaism in our Time (Insti- tute for Palestine Studies, 1969), p. 210.
Gould, "Human Equality is a Contingent Fact of History," p. 186. Ibid, -p. 194.
MacDonald, A People that Shall Dwell Alone; MacDonald, Separation and Its Discontents, passim.
Tekiner, ed., pp. 74, 86-87 (note 21); Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, June 1993, p. 75.
S.J. Gould, The Lying Stones of Marrakech: Pentultimate Reflections in natural History (Harmony Books, 2000), pp. 270-278; S.J. Gould, Hen 's Teeth and Horse's Toes, pp. 291-302. Diamond, p. 12.
See Robert Vexler's Germany: A Chronology and Fact Book: 1415-1972, p. 129.
For a good discussion of these issues, see Peter Harrison, "What Causes Anti-Semitism?: An Important New Look at the Persistent 'Jewish Ques- tion'" The Journal of Historical Review, May/June 1998, pp. 28-37. Gould, ed., The Book of Life, p. 7. Gould, The Panda's Thumb, p. 176.
Gould, "Human Equality is a Contingent Fact of History," pp. 186-187.
150
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
Polish Population Losses during World War Two
By Dr. Otward Miiller
The following claims are continually put forth by Polish personalities: "Six million Poles lost their lives during the Second World War, a fifth of the entire population"; or "Three million Christian Poles [...] were victims of the Nazi terror." This article shows that statements of this sort are not compatible with the easily accessible population statistics of the pre- and post-war Poles. The conclusion is therefore that these loss figures are extremely exaggerated.
1. Introduction
In June 1983, Pope John Paul II visited Poland for the sec- ond time. The US press reported the following about this event from the city of Zschenstochau:1
"The Pope was in a somber mood and seemed to be close to tears when he recalled the Polish losses of 6 million people during the Second World War. " In his article entitled Poland's Enduring Faith, James Reston wrote:2
"The Pope stood up for the liberty and independence of Poland. He never mentioned the Soviet Union, but he ex- plained that Poland had paid for its freedom and independ- ence with six million of its citizens, who had sacrificed their lives at the various fronts of the war, in prisons and concen- tration camps. "
The Pope has already made similar claims on other occa- sions. The Catholic weekly The Wanderer published an article on September 24, 1981, with the title "Pope says price of Po- land's liberty was six million dead." This RNS report from Cas- tle Gandolfo begins with the following sentence:
"In remarks apparently directed toward the Soviet Un- ion, Pope John Paul II said that Poland had paid the price for its independence with the blood of six million Poles who had died in the Second World War. "
During his first visit to his homeland in 1979, the Pope also visited Auschwitz. On June 24, 1979, the weekly National Catholic Register published the official English text of the ser- mon which the Pope gave during a mass in Birkenau. Accord- ing to this text, he made the following statements:
"[...] I would like to pause with you over the inscription in Hebrew. This inscription awakens in us the memory of those people whose sons and daughters were intended for mass extermination. [...] No one is permitted to pass by this inscription unmoved. And finally, the last inscription, which is in Polish. Six million Poles, one-fifth of the entire popula- tion, lost their lives during the Second World War. " The last claim clearly assumes that, in addition to the losses of the Polish Jews, six million Christian Poles died. At the very least, this is the impression which the reader not familiar with the complexity of the population statistics in pre-war Eastern Europe must obtain from this statement by the Pope.
Naturally the Polish Pontiff is not imparting to us anything new. He is merely repeating, in a very effective manner, what the Communist government in Warsaw has claimed since the end of the Second World War. Even critical historians such as the British A.J.P. Taylor appear to credit these numbers. In his book The Origins of the Second World War, he writes:3 "Six and a half million Poles were killed. "
German post-war politicians did not hesitate to accept these kinds of figures as 'historical facts' without putting themselves to the trouble of proving such accusations. West German Presi- dent Gustav Heinemann, for example, stated on the occasion of the 30th anniversary of the outbreak of the Second World War:4 "But Poland had a blood toll of six million. [...] These
numbers of the dead include six million Poles. "
Even encyclopedias cite this figure. Even today, these fig- ures are still propagated, for example in the Church periodical St. Anthony Messenger of December 1998. They have already become 'common knowledge.'5
The author of this article is of the conviction that these casualty figures need to be examined for their content of truth. This is necessary because professional historians, especially in Germany, are not dealing with this unpleasant topic. This arti- cle, therefore, poses the question:
Did six million Poles really die during World War Two?
2. Definition of the term "Pole"
First of all, the term "Pole" must be defined. Who is a "Pole"?
Should, for example, a Polish Jew, who lived in Israel after the war — perhaps the former Minister President Menachem
POLAND AFTER THE YALTA CONFERENCE
Curzon Line Ribbentrop-Molotov Line •••• Oder Line
So called Botha Line A line suggested by some private English Circles.
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
151
Begin — be counted as a "Pole" who was murdered by the Na- tional Socialists? He was, after all, no longer in Poland after the war. Or should a German soldier from Brelau, Danzig, Konigs- berg, Stettin or Oppeln, who was killed during the war as a member of the Wehrmacht, now be counted as a "Pole" exter- minated by the National Socialists, merely because these cities were annexed to Poland after the war? What about the case of a Ukrainian who was declared on the spot to be a Polish citizen after the Polish incursive raids against Russia shortly after the end of the First World War, but who received Soviet nationality in October 1939? Is he a dead "Pole"? These few instances make it clear that the issue to be dealt with here is highly com- plex. An exhaustive investigation would rightly fill a thick book. To simplify our subject for this relatively short examina- tion, a Pole will be defined as a person who is of "Polish na- tionality" in the sense of ethnic membership. In other words: this study attempts to record the fate of ethnic, Christian Poles.
The statements cited in the introduction are clearly formu- lated in such a manner that the average newspaper reader would believe the six-million-loss figure refers to ethnic Christian Poles. Yet, on the other hand, it ought to be recognized that there is a tendency, for example, in Polish propaganda to claim the losses of Polish Jews simultaneously as Polish losses. Thus, one can read in one of the official histories of Poland prepared by the Polish embassy in Washington, D.C., that Poland had endured heavy losses during the war, "including the total de- struction of cities like Gdansk, Szczecin and Wroclaw." The destruction of the German cities of Danzig, Stettin and Breslau are therefore claimed here as "Polish losses." This is a plain ex- ample of the methodology of Polish propaganda. Historical jus- tice, however, requires that Poland does not claim German and Jewish losses as "Polish losses."
3. The Pre-War Population of Poland
Pre-war Poland, with its 37.339 million inhabitants was a state with minorities of many nationalities. Among them were 24.388 million ethnically Poles, mostly Catholics. The remain- ing 10.951 million consisted of non-Polish nationalities who merely had Polish citizenship. These figures are given by Ed- ward J. Rozek in his book Allied Wartime Diplomacy— A Pat- tern of Poland.6 At the time of the publication of this book, Dr. Rosek was Assistant Professor of Political Science at the Uni- versity of Colorado in Boulder. On page 37 of his book, he lists the composition of the non-Polish population for the year 1939, in particular the Eastern portion of pre-war Poland:
Ukrainians 4.529 Million
White Russians 1 . 123 Million
Polesians 0.822 Million
Russians 0.134 Million
Lithuanians 0.084 Million
Czechs 0.035 Million
In addition, there were also:
Jews 3.000 Million
Germans 1.041 Million
The number of Jews living in Poland in 1939 was taken from the Jewish Chronicle?
"Once three million strong, Poland's Jewish population today has shrunk to a dwindling remnant of 20. 000 "
Finally, the last figures for the Germans in pre-war Poland were taken from an excellent treatment of the same topic.8 The question confronting us now is: What happened to these people after the Second World War? The main focus of this investiga- tion is the fate of the 24.388 Christian Poles.
It is an incontestable historical fact that the Ukrainians, White Russians, Polesians, Lithuanians and 30-40% of Po- land's Jews, as well as some millions of ethnic Poles became Soviet citizens after September/October 1939. (The Lithuanians actually first became so in the year 1940.) After that time, these people no longer lived under Polish sovereignty. Their war losses must in reality be attributed to those of the Soviet Union and not to those of Poland, whatever may have happened to these people during the war. Were it otherwise, these losses would surface as doubled in the loss statistics of the World War. However, one would except from this the approximately 4.3 million ethnic Poles living east of the Curzon Line.6
The approximately one million Germans (ethnic Germans) became German nationals after September 1939.
4. The Post- War Population of Poland
What happened after the war? The Soviet Union kept the territories which they had conquered since 1939. One third of the newly created Polish state had been German soil. The Ger- man populace of these eastern provinces of Germany were driven out of their home, in which their forefathers had lived long before the discovery of America by Columbus.
On February 14, 1946, and on December 3, 1950, censuses were conducted in Poland. The results of the first census, how- ever, are worthless for the purposes of this investigation, since the expulsion of the Germans was then still in full swing. In ad- dition, the immigration of the Poles from the areas conquered by the Soviet Union had not yet ended.
According to the census of December 1950, after the great- est ethnic cleansing in history had just about been concluded, living in post-war Poland, which had been created in Yalta, there were:
24.6137 Million Poles, or 24.533 Million Poles The first figure is given by Reichling,9 the second by Bar- nett.10 These numbers are slightly less than those given by In- formation Please Almanac for 1949 (p. 50) gave for the year 1947: 24.775 million. The difference may be explained by the fact that in the years 1948-1950 approximately a quarter million Germans were expelled.11 The ethnic composition of this popu- lation is described in Collier's Encyclopedia as follows:12
'Although a great number of minorities lived in pre-war Poland, who altogether made up one third of the total popu- lation, post-war Poland became a homogeneous country: 98% of the population are ethnic Poles. " According to Reichling, on December 3, 1950, approxi- mately 1.7 million Germans were still living in Poland, i.e., persons who until 1945 had possessed German nationality. However, this number must be subtracted from the total num- ber, if one wishes to determine how many Christian Poles sur- vived the Second World War.
But what happened to the ethnic Poles who, according to Rozek,6 were living east of the Curzon Line in 1939, i.e., east
152
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
of the post-war border between Poland and the Soviet Union, and therefore in areas annexed by Stalin? Up until June of 1948, the Soviets permitted only about 1.5038 million persons of Polish origin to emigrate to Poland. Even after the end of the war, approximately 2.8 million Poles continued to live in areas of pre-war Poland which since that time had come to belong to the Soviet Union.12
During the war, many Poles fled to the West, i.e., to France, England, and to the USA. At least half a million Poles, mostly members of the army of the Polish government-in-exile, who fought on the side of the Western Allies, refused to return to their Communist-ruled fatherland after the end of the war. 12
Breaking down this segment results in the following list:
Population of Poland in December 1950 24.6137 Mio.
minus Germans remaining -1 .7 Mio.
plus ethnic Poles in the Soviet Union +2.8 Mio.
plus permanently emigrated ethnic Poles + 0.5 Mio. Ethnic Poles who survived the Second World War including the natural population growth
in the period 1939-1950: 26.2137Mio.
This post-war census count of 26.2 million ethnic-Christian
Poland and the Curzon-Line*
Poland's Population in 1939
Total: 35,339,000
Poland's Territory in 1939
Total: 150,500 sq. miles
16,125 |
I-.. J--.; |
66.5%
53.5%
Ethnically Polish Population (1939)
Total: 24,388,000
20,084,000
Area West of Curzon-Line
Area East of Curzon-Line
82.4%
17.6%
Catholics in Poland ( 1939)
Roman Catholics in Poland (1939)
Total: 22,919,000 |
||||
19,380,000 |
||||
in |
||||
Poles must be compared with the corresponding number from the year 1939, i.e., 24.388 million.6 The conclusion ought to be plain: In the year 1950, the number of ethnic Poles was about 1.826 million greater than before the war. Easily accessible population statistics of the pre- and post-war period clearly show that there is no proof that "six million Christian Poles were killed during the war." Their true numbers lost probably amount to the scale of a few hundred thousand at most.
The result of this statistical examination fully confirms the more general determination made by Barnett in his book Po- land on page 43 :
"Despite the enormous effect of the Second World War, the structure vis-a-vis age and sex of the population re- mained rather the same as it was in 1939. " The article from the New York Times by J. Reston, men- tioned in the introduction, ends with the following findings:
"In spite of all the suffering and death, they [the Poles] are now a million more than before the bloodbath of the last war. Their beautiful children can be seen here in the streets, and they were clearly the addressees of the Pope 's mes- sage. "
In actuality, the number of Christian Poles increased not by a million, but rather jumped from 24.388 in 1939 to 36.3 million in 1982! 13 And this increase of 12 mil- lion does not even include those Poles who live in the Soviet Union or who emigrated to the West. Therein lies further proof for the fact that the bio- logical substance of the Polish people survived the Second World War very well indeed — far better than that of Germany. Such a phenomenal popula- tion growth — at least for European conditions — would have been impossible if "six million Poles" or even only three million had been "victims of the Nazi terror."
If one now dares to doubt that "six million Poles died," it will be suggested by, for example, the Pol- ish-American Congress Inc., that one had misunder- stood what the Pope was saying, and that "three mil- lion Christian Poles as well as 3 million Jews, who were all citizens of Poland, were victims of the Nazi terror."14 The fact that today many Jews originally from Poland are living in Israel, America, and Western Europe proves that even the second figure is exaggerated. It is also interesting that Polish losses due to measures taken by the Soviet Union are hardly ever mentioned.
Up to the year 1998, the Polish population climbed to 38.7 million, by the way, without immi- gration of millions of "asylum-seekers," "guest workers," "refugees" etc.15
46.5%
74.9%
25.1%
84.6%
: acc. to E. J. Rozek, op. cit. (note. 6)
5. Natural Population Growth: A further Argument
According to Barnett,16 the natural rate of growth of the Polish population in the last year of peace was slightly over one per cent. In the year 1983, the rate of increase of the Polish population was about 0.9%. 13
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 • No. 2
153
It is obvious that this rate of increase was smaller during the war but afterwards it climbed again, especially since approxi- mately 694,000 Polish soldiers at least initially were held as prisoners of war by the Germans, and 217,000 by the Soviets.
After the end of the war there was a baby boom in Poland. Therefore, an average one per cent rate of growth appears to be acceptable. Now let us consider the time span between 1939/40 and 1955, i.e. 15 years. Two cases are considered:
Case A: Relatively small losses
Case B: An accepted war loss of 3.0 million.
In 1955, the population of Poland amounted to 27.533 mil-
lion:1
Population of Poland 1955 27.554 Mil.
minus Germans remaining -1.6 Mil.
plus ethnic Poles in the Soviet Union +2.0 Mil.
plus permanently emigrated ethnic Poles +0.5 Mil.
Total:
Case A:
Ethnic Poles 1939:6 1% factor of increase/year from 1940-1955 (15 years) Poles 1955
28.444 Mil.
N = 24.388 Mil.
M = (1.01)15= 1.1610 MxN = 28.314 Mil.
Conclusion: The losses of the Poles in the Second World War were relatively small. Their number would even have been about the same had there been no war.
Case B: Accepting a war loss figure of 3 million Ethnic Poles 1939:6 24.388 Mil.
Alleged extermination of Christian Poles in the period of 1 93 9- 1 945 -3 .000 Mil.
Poles 1945: P = 21.388 Mil.
1 % factor of increase/year
from 1945-1955 (10 years) M = (1.01)10 = 1.1046 Poles 1955 M x P = 23.626 Mil.
Conclusion: If claims by Polish propaganda were correct, that 3 million Christian Poles were killed during the Second World War, the number of Poles in the year 1955, calculated on the basis of pre-war data, should be close to 23.626 million. But in 1955, there were actually 28.444 million, which corresponds to Case A. From this emerges the following good news: Dur- ing the Second World War, three million Poles were not mur- dered by the "Nazis" or by anyone else.
In Case A the number of Poles remaining in the Soviet Un- ion were assumed to be merely 2 million, in order to avoid the objection that I was "exaggerating" the starting number to be- gin with. As reference for this number, I give the Encyclopedia Americana, which states:17
"A large number of Poles— probably more than 2.000
million — did not succeed in crossing over the border to
post-war Poland, and were incorporated into the eastern
side of the Polish-Soviet border. "
One could also find other sources for this number.
One issue is still open and awaits an answer: why should the Catholic and the Communist Poland exaggerate its losses in this way? The answer to this is simple: the Poles wish to 'justify' their genocide of the German people committed after 1945 in
the Eastern provinces of Germany. They are trying to justify the unjustifiable. In this sad affair, Polish Communists and Catho- lics, atheists and Christians are of the same feather.
The claim put out by the Polish-American Review, that "Poles suffered the greatest losses of human life of all the coun- tries of the Second World War,"18 is simply not true.
6. An Interesting Table
Barnett has published a very interesting table entitled "Population of Poland," which is frequently quoted. In this ta- ble, the number of the respective populations of the individual Voivod districts of post-war Poland is given. This means that the regions which belonged to Poland between the world wars, but which were conquered by the Soviet Union in 1945, are not given; yet the eastern provinces of Germany annexed by Poland are. This table now compares the population of this region in the year 1931 19 with that in the years 1946, 1950 and 1955. The total population is stated as follows:
1931 1946 Difference
29.892 Mil. 23.625 Mil. 6.267 Mil.
This corresponds to a relative change of -21%, a "fifth of the entire population" or a loss of 6.267 million people. But the number of 1931 contains the districts of Allenstein (Olsztyn, East Prussia), Danzig (Gdansk, West Prussia), Koslin (Kosza- lin, Pommerania), Stettin (Szczecin, Pommerania), Grilnberg (Zielona Gora, Silesia), Breslau (Wroclaw, Silesia) und Oppeln (Opole, Silesia), which were all part of Germany in 1931 with an overwhelming German majority in population (95-100%).
According to Reichling, in 1944, 11 million Germans were living in the region which would later be a part of post-war Po- land.20 After the majority of this population had been killed or brutally expelled by the victors of the Second World War, a process which had was no way complete in 1946, these areas naturally had to record an enormous population Toss.'21 These facts, however, are nowhere rendered in this table.
The following suspicion thus arises: Is it perhaps possible that the Poles are counting those Germans as "Poles extermi- nated by the Nazis," whom they killed in the campaign of their genocide in Eastern Germany or hunted out of their homes? This is only a suspicion. After all, how the Poles arrived at their 6- or even 3 -million-figure has not been made known up to this point. But wherever the truth may lie: the striking similarity of the Tosses' in this widely used and known table on the one hand and the officially claimed losses on the other hand is at the least surprising and amazing.
7. "Polish" Ukrainians
The population of pre-war Poland encompassed many Ukrainians, White Russians, Lithuanians, Russians, and other nationalities. The legitimate question is, therefore, how these people have become 'Poles.' The answer to this is interesting, but unfortunately little known. After 150 years of non-existence as a state, the independent state of Poland was founded anew in 1916 as a monarchy by Germany and Poland. After the defeat of Germany, however, the monarchy fell and was replaced by a military dictatorship, which immediately turned aggressively against its neighbors. Against the conditions of the armistice of November 1918, but with the support of the victorious Western
154
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
powers and of the League of Nations, Poland conquered ar- eas in Upper Silesia, West- and East Prussia from Germany whose population had a strong German majority. In so doing, Poland and the supporting League of Nation breached the conditions of the armistice and the recently codified and recog- nized right of self-determina- tion. Not satisfied with these enormous territorial gains, Po- land subsequently turned against the Soviet Union, which at that time was still struggling through its civil war. On April 28, 1920, the young Polish army under the leadership of the Pol- ish dictator Pilsudski invaded the Ukraine. On May 6, 1920, the Polish army reached Kiev. This first war of aggression af- ter the end of the First World War finally ended on March 18, 1921, with the peace treaty of Riga, signed by Poland and the Soviet Union. This determined that the Soviet Union ceded large territories from parts of
Lithuania, White Russia, and the Ukraine to Poland. Millions of Ukrainians, White Russians, Lithuanians, and Russians thus became 'Poles.' It was a matter of course that Moscow would not put up for long with this defeat inflicted upon it by the Poles. The Poles then laid the foundation for the later Hitler- Stalin Pact of August 1939.
C. R. Barnett: Table 1. Population of Poland
In Percent |
|||||||
In Thousands |
1931 |
1946 |
1950 |
||||
TO |
TO |
TO |
|||||
WOJWODSCHAFT(a) |
1931 |
1 O/l £ |
1 Q<{\ LyjV |
1955 |
1946 |
1950 |
1955 |
Warsaw ¥ V CI 1 lj CI VV |
3,552 |
z,ooz |
z,ouy |
3,245 |
-25.1 |
5.5 |
15.5 |
find cit\A \ 111^1. Vl L ¥ 1 |
|||||||
Bydgoszcz |
1,566 |
1 A C7 1,45 / |
1,4 /(J |
1,597 |
- 7.0 |
0.9 |
8.6 |
Pnznan A \ > / .1 1 CI 1 1 |
2,311 |
z,Uso |
Z,1U9 |
2,304 |
- 9.7 |
1.1 |
9.2 |
Lodz |
2,385 |
2,210 |
-15.5 |
1.6 |
8.0 |
||
And ntvi TOdop 1 vl v 1 V v |
1,858 |
1, /Uz |
1,039 |
1,763 |
8.4 |
- 2.6 |
6.3 |
T nhlin J 1 LI VJ 1111 |
2,069 |
1 £A A l,o4U |
1,719 |
-15.3 |
- 6.5 |
4.8 |
|
Rialvstolc J__J L CI L V JlWlV |
1,194 |
C\A A 944 |
OCT 95z |
1,040 |
-20.9 |
0.8 |
9.2 |
Olsztvn |
1,030 |
A A") 44z |
6/5 |
811 |
-57.1 |
52.8 |
20.1 |
Crdansk v_j v4ctx±oxv |
1,065 |
TIT 1 51 |
1 |
1,082 |
-31.3 |
21.6 |
21.4 |
TCoK7a1in 1 W / J/. CI 1111 |
789 |
585 |
514 |
632 |
-25.8 |
-12.1 |
23.0 |
Szczecin |
941 |
308 |
508 |
661 |
-67.3 |
65.1 |
30.1 |
Zielona Gora |
884 |
347 |
560 |
678 |
-60.7 |
61.4 |
21.1 |
Wroclaw |
2,604 |
1,769 |
1,735 |
1,986 |
-32.1 |
- 1.9 |
14.5 |
Opole |
1,040 |
792 |
811 |
887 |
-23.8 |
2.3 |
9.4 |
Katowice |
2,608 |
2,363 |
2,635 |
3,040 |
-9.4 |
11.5 |
15.4 |
Cracow |
2,195 |
2,133 |
2,147 |
2,359 |
-2.8 |
0.7 |
9.9 |
Rzeszow |
1,801 |
1,535 |
1,371 |
1,530 |
-14.7 |
-10.7 |
11.6 |
Total Population |
29,892 |
23,625 |
24,533 |
27,544 |
-21.0 |
3.8 |
12.3 |
(a) Pre-war borders adjusted to 1950; pre-war borders of the provinces as in the year given.
Source: Acc. to: Mauldin, W. Parker and Akers, Donald S., The Population of Poland, p. 122, and from Polska Rzec- zypoupolita Ludowa, Glowny Urzad Statystyczny, Rocznik Statystyczny 1956 (Polish Peoples Republic: Statistical Main Office, Statistical Yearbook 1956). p. 44.
Polish interests. But by so doing, they should not claim Jewish, German, Ukrainian, and White Russian losses as Polish losses.
In view of this result, I propose as conclusion that all casu- alty figures of the Second World War be checked and scientifi- cally investigated by an international commission of experts from neutral historians and demographers.
8. Summary and Conclusion
Polish claims that "Six million Poles [...] a fifth of the entire population" were killed during the Second World War or be- came "victims of Nazi terror," have never been supported by facts by the Polish government. The same is true for the claim that "3 million Christian Poles" died.
The comparison between the pre- and post-war population statistics performed in this study shows that, on the contrary, the losses of the ethnic Christian Poles are relatively small. The 6- or 3 -million-figures are exaggerations of propaganda which have spread worldwide, in order to 'justify' Poland's post-war policy of genocide of the German people, i.e., of the expulsion of the Eastern Germans with wholesale mass murder and the annexation of East Germany.
The actual losses are probably in the order of one tenth of the figures claimed.
The population figures used in this investigation can be checked by any interested person in well-stocked university li- braries.
Naturally, the Polish government and the representatives of Polish interests have the right to exert their efforts on behalf of
Further Reading
Next to the works listed in the Notes, I recommend as litera- ture for further study:
- Albin Eissner, "Personelle Kriegsverluste des polnischen Volkes," Aufienpolitik (Foreign Policy), 14(1) (1963), pp. 44-52
- Stanislaus Sopicki, Mehr Genauigkeit in den Zahlen! (More Exactitude in Numbers!), in: Wiadomosci, Vol. XXV, No. 1247, Feb. 22, 1970; Ger.: Institut fur Osteuropakunde, Uni- versitat Mainz, Nov. 27, 1970
Notes
This article first appeared in volume 8 of the Ingolstadter Vortrage as Verof- fentlichung der Zeitgeschichtlichen Forschungsstelle Ingolstadt, Ingolstadt, 1984 (without tables and maps). This revised version translated from Viertel- jahreshefte fur freie Geschichtsforschung 3(2) (1999), pp. 159-164, by Regina Belser.
1 Sunday Times Union, Albany, N.Y., Combined Wire Service, June 19, 1983, p. A12. Re-translated from German.
2 New York Times, June 19, 1983, p. E19. Re-translated from German.
3 Premier Books, 1965, p. 292. Re-translated from German.
4 The German Tribune, Sept. 16, 1969, No. 388, p. 4.
5 E. Dybicz, "Crosses at Auschwitz Appropriate", St. Anthony Messenger
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
155
(circulation: 315.000), December 1998, p. 3-4: "In six years of war, Poland lost over six million of its citizens, 22 per cent of its entire population."
6 John Wiley & Sons, New York 1958, p. 348.
7 London, edition of March 22, 1968, p. 7, re-translated from German. I am aware of the problem of this number, probably excessive by several hundred thousand Jews, but I forgo making any needed corrections here, since this would not basically influence the result of my study; cf. W. N. Sanning, Die Aufldsung des osteuropdischen Judentums Grabert, Tubingen, p. 16-22; Engl: The Dissolution of East European Jewry, Institute for Historical Re- view, Costa Mesa 1983.
8 "Die polnischen Kriegsverluste 1939-1945" (Polish War Losses), Zeitschrift furPolitik (Cologne) 25(3) (1978), p. 279-296.
9 Gerhard Reichling, Deutsche undPolen — 1945 bis 1970 im Spiegel der polnischen amtlichen Statistik (Germans and Poles — 1945 to 1970 as re- flected in official Polish statistics), Kulturstiftung der deutschen Vertriebe- nen (Cultural Institute of German Expellees), issue 1, Verlag Osmipress,
Bonn 1979, p. 21.
10 Clifford R. Barnett, Poland: Its Society, Its Culture, Its People, Hraf Press, New Haven, Conn., 1958, Table 1
11 G. Reichling, op. cit. (Note 9), p. 23
12 Vol. 19, 1979, p. 181; re-translated from German. Information Please Almanac, 1983, p. 246.
14 Times Union, July 17, 1983.
15 The World Almanac, 1998, p. 810.
16 C.R. Barnett, op. cit. (note 10), p. 42.
17 13th Edition, 1968, p. 287; re-translated from German.
18 Edition of March/ April/May 1983; re-translated from German. " The last official population count in Poland took place in 1 93 1 .
20 G. Reichling, op. cit. (note 9), p. 43.
21 Cf. Alfred de Zayas, The German Expellees: Victims in War and Peace, St. Martin's Press, New York 1993; Cf. also in German Anmerkungen zur Ver- treibung, (Notes on the Expulsion) Kohlhammer, Stuttgart 1986.
The Expulsion of Germans from Japan, 1947-1948
By Charles Burdick, PhD
After the End of World War Two, almost all German property outside of Germany was confiscated: valuables, cur- rencies, real estates, patents, copyrights etc. The value in today's money may have amounted to many trillions of dol- lars. Most of this property was later auctioned and sold to companies or individuals, the incoming assets kept by the re- spective governments. Any attempts of German individuals or the West German government to regain confiscated property years after the war failed. A particularly sad chapter in this greatest looting in mankind history is that of Ger- many's former ally Japan, who willingly aligned itself in the expulsion of German nationals and the plundering of Germany property in Japan, and refused any reconsideration even after it had signed a peace treaty with the USA.
"There must be eliminated for all time the authority and influence of those who have deceived and misled the people of Japan into embarking on world conquest. [...] The Japa- nese Government shall remove all obstacles to the revival and strengthening of democratic tendencies among the Japanese people. "'
Vae Victis2
On August 28, 1945, the first elements of the American oc- cupation force started landing on Atsugi airfield in Japan. In- stead of the anticipated violent reaction, they encountered a re- ception committee serving orange juice.3 The Americans en- tered a totally different world where they lacked direction, ex- perience, or understanding. Whereas their conquest of Germany had created immediate physical occupation and control of that country, the Japanese surrender created far more uncertainties. Hatred, mistrust, doubt, and outright fear characterized Ameri- can thought. The policies for Japan would be very different from those employed in Germany.
The major difference came in the original approach to the occupation. At the outset, President Harry Truman appointed General Douglas MacArthur as the Supreme Commander Al- lied Powers (SCAP), a unique position under the circumstances of an allied war.4 Despite some planning and multi-national ex- changes, the initial phase of the occupation would be domi- nated by the Americans.5 The uncertainties between the United States and Russia in Asia, the preponderance of American mili- tary power in that war theater, and the actions of the imperious
MacArthur precluded any substantive collaboration.6 The in- definite, ill-defined arrangements created in July 1945 at the Potsdam Conference remained the basis for American interpre- tations and, given their dominating physical presence, for their control.
MacArthur seized complete authority immediately and brusquely rebuffed all attempts at sharing any power or respon- sibility. At the outset he insisted that all contact between for- eign governments would pass through his headquarters and that he would employ the Japanese authorities to execute his orders. This indirect approach assured American power from behind the scenes, as did his insistence on English as the language of communication. His instructions appeared as directives, called SCAP Instructions, to the Japanese Government (SCAPIN). These normally terse, forcefully stated orders provided the di- rections governing all occupation activities.7 The Americans wasted no time in advancing a policy built on disarmament, demilitarization, and democratization. This approach antici- pated a simultaneous revolution and reformation. Removing the military armaments, both human and material, was a mechani- cal undertaking. Creating a democratic society demanded a longer period for adjustment, education, and direction. The de- militarization issue was the thorniest immediate concern, both because of definition and implementation. Punitive action was the first order of business.
SCAP (MacArthur' s headquarters) purged the entire admin- istrative structure of Japanese life. Within a few months, SCAP liquidated economic cartels, dismissed thousands of officials,
156
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
and arrested hundreds of people as war criminals.8 The two cul- tures collided over every issue, as bureaucracies stumbled over all controls, as conqueror and conquered sought accommoda- tion.
These extraordinary administrative issues provided fertile ground for numerous surprises for everyone. On the one hand, the impact of unconditional surrender, the physical damage of aerial bombing, and the arrival of so many Caucasians provided an obvious shock to the Japanese. On the reverse side, the Americans made the unexpected discovery of some 2,000,000 foreign nationals in the four main islands of Japan. While the vast majority of these people were Asians from Korea, For- mosa, the Ryukyu Islands, and China, there were representa- tives from many lands. Some were United Nations nationals, others were neutral or stateless individuals, and a few were citi- zens from other enemy countries. Within all of these groups were individuals who had lived their entire lives in Japan with- out any interest in or concern for politics or ideology. This body did include many pro-Axis individuals who had served as officials or propaganda agents of the defeated powers. There were also members and representatives of religious, business, and cultural groups. There were numerous dependents, many of them barely surviving.
MacArthur's first obligation in this area was the repatriation of prisoners of war and displaced United Nations nationals. His instructions from President Harry Truman on August 29, 1945, had specified the earliest possible return of these individuals. Repatriation would require individual registration with the oc- cupying authorities and certification that the person had not participated in the war against the United Nations.
On October 31, 1945, SCAP delineated the term "United Nations" and listed 49 nations as signatories of the United Na- tions Declaration, six countries as neutrals and five countries (Bulgaria, Germany, Hungary, Japan, and Rumania) as "enemy nation."9 The resulting, expedited release of some 110,000 prisoners of war allowed quick attention to repatriating the Asian nationals. This effort, largely voluntary at the beginning, lent itself to rapid movement of these people. The large-scale return of Japanese troops from overseas involved an extensive shipping commitment, which created a surplus of space on the outward trips. As part of this operation SCAP created repatria- tion centers for the transshipment, detailed instructions for the Japanese authorities, and rules for property transfers. By De- cember 1945, over 650,000 people had left Japan for their original homes.10
With the steady progress in returning allied nationals, the next issue was the status and disposition of Axis nationals. The number of Rumanians and Bulgarians was negligible, while there were 463 Italians.11 The Germans had approximately 2,800 (which included some Austrians). Included in that num- ber were 700 refugees from the Dutch West Indies, 400 naval and merchant marine personnel, 100 individuals trying to return home from the United States and caught by the German inva- sion of Russia, plus 1,600 long-term residents in Japan.12 Fol- lowing the Allied victory in Europe, the Japanese had restricted German civilian movements and loosely interned their official representation.13 The Americans changed this situation rapidly. They ordered the Japanese to impound all German property and
assets on September 13, seized the official German food stores, and dissolved the German relief organization. The Japanese had orders to supply the destitute Germans, an awesome task given Japan's own shortages and shattered infra-structure.14 Given the disarray of the Japanese system, the Germans suffered from ne- glect and their low-priority status.
These restrictions added to their wartime problems of bombing, crowded housing, transportation difficulties, and food shortages. Many had fled to Japanese summer houses for sur- vival. The flimsy construction and social stigma of cowardice discouraged the Japanese from using their own housing. Under the circumstances, the Germans survived as best they could through black market activity, some canned foodstuffs in ware- house storage, the produce of their own gardens, stealing, and begging from the Americans after their arrival. They did keep up their schools, churches, and clubs for morale and unity.15
In Washington D.C. the American Joint Chiefs of Staff had not forgotten them. The Potsdam Declaration had a loose direc- tive calling for the elimination of those in authority and influ- ence who had led Japan into aggression. While the rule lacked all specificity, it provided an imperative prescript. At the outset the first issue was the purging of the Japanese officials, people of influence, and those in public positions. This methodical re- moval of 'evil' provided an emotional outlet for the victors.16
That was not sufficient for the distant American military command. They believed that German military, diplomatic, and economic representatives had unduly influenced Japanese ag- gression. As an international precedent against future totalitar- ian machinations, they decided to remove the dangerous Ger- man influence.
On December 7, 1945, the Joint Chiefs dispatched a long telegram to MacArthur. They reaffirmed earlier instructions concerning the transport of United Nations nationals but added directions for enemy citizens, suggesting that the latter groups should be identified and registered immediately. All property, real and personal, owned or controlled by these people should be placed under strict control. Those individuals who had served as National Socialist agents should be interned for pos- sible trial or repatriation. The term "agent" was the operative word and included a wide range of professional activities: re- searchers, scientists, administrators, businessmen, etc. They had no choice. Those Germans outside these loose terms could vol- unteer for return to Germany. In any event, the Japanese au- thorities would pay the costs and do the work.17 An immediate follow-up, on December 12, carried orders that objectionable repatriates should be permitted only the minimal personal ef- fects, no foreign currencies, and only minor personal jewelry.18 These brief, direct instructions brought the German issue to the forefront.
With such forceful thought from Washington, D.C, SCAP's staff seized the opportunity and made the repatriation issue a priority. Using a Japanese memorandum of January 10, 1946, which estimated some 2,700 German nationals in Japan, the staff reported, on January 21, 1946, their own informal total of 2,632 Germans, with 2,409 wishing repatriation to Germany. While the source and reliability for these figures remains a mystery, the determination to rid Japan of these unwanted peo- ple was clear. The only reservation was the need for approval
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
157
from the authorities in Germany.19 On January 31, 1946, SCAP ordered the Japanese to prepare a detailed roster of all Germans with names, sexes, addresses, ages, and German relatives' ad- dresses.20 The report was due March 10, 1946.
In various discussions, both with staff and with the Japa- nese, the Americans discovered a new figure (811) for Germans seeking repatriation. They found this second figure insufficient and unacceptable. In their opinion, the Joint Chiefs wanted the majority of Germans removed from Japan. In the new interpre- tation, only those Germans who had permanent Japanese resi- dence before January 1, 1939, and could maintain themselves while contributing to Japan's welfare, might be considered for residence. Only those who could prove both points conclusively would be allowed to stay.22
While the Japanese met the assigned deadline, the Ameri- cans complained about numerous shortcomings on June 5, 1946. They argued that the Japanese had omitted some 756 in- dividuals, including many known National Socialist enthusi- asts.23 The angry Americans objected also to other errors of fact as well as form. The Japanese would have a correct list by June 20, 1946; there would be no delays.24
As the Japanese labored on the corrections and the SCAP staff pursued their preparations, the Joint Chiefs of Staff estab- lished categories for determining the objectionability of the Germans. They defined three categories:
"A" — those Germans who had traveled to Germany or to German-controlled territory after September 1, 1939;
"B" — any German who had belonged to any National So- cialist organization or helped the German war effort (which in- cluded scientific researchers or industrial representatives);
General Douglas MacArthur greets Mr. John Foster Dulles, Republican Consultant to the State Department, at the Haneda Air Force Base, Tokyo, Japan, June 21, 1950.21
"C" — those non-objectionable individuals not in the first categories.25
While these instructions added little genuine guidance to SCAP, they did complete the decision process for repatriation. The combination of activities at such distance divided the re- sponsibility between SCAP and the Joint Chefs but cemented the purpose. The Germans would leave Japan.
Before SCAP could implement the program, two addi- tional issues slowed the process. Given the fact that the Ger- mans were enemy nationals with differential amounts of property, SCAP had concerns over administrating that prop- erty. On one hand they had the serious dilemma of responsi- bility for that property; on the other hand they had legal con- cerns over ownership of the goods, real estate, patents, etc. On September 13, 1945, they had impounded all enemy assets and property. At the same time, they had required the report- ing of these holdings to the Japanese authorities.26 The reports suggested German holdings of 1,178,900,000 yen.27 Having frozen and listed the property, SCAP needed help with the fi- nal disposition of the assets.
The guidance came from Germany where American occu- pation authorities had finally adopted a vesting law in Novem- ber 1945 directing the seizure of property belonging to the Na- tional Socialist leaders and party as well as various branches of the government. They did not officially address the issue of overseas Germans until May 18, 1946, when they amended the original law. Under the expanded regulation, SCAP became an agent of the German External Properties Commission. This des- ignation legitimized SCAP's creation of the Office of Civil Property Custodian on March 8, 1946, for control of German and Japanese property. Within that body SCAP created the En- emy Property accounts Section to record, control, and reflect the disposition of all German assets, liabilities, etc.28 All of these administrative activities and concerns delayed the repa- triation issue.
A further complication was the eventual acceptance of the repatriates. SCAP had hoped for a mass transfer in early 1946, but negotiations in Germany proved difficult and protracted. Living conditions in Germany were harsh and the authorities wanted no added difficulties. The critical fuel, food, and hous- ing shortages precluded accepting more refugees before spring 1947.29 Since many of the returnees had neither close relatives nor domiciles in the homeland and little awareness of local conditions, they would be a problem. A second planned depar- ture for June 1946 fell apart because the four powers in Ger- many could reach no agreement. Finally, on October 11, 1946, they accepted the return of the objectionable Germans. SCAP now could move these individuals whom they deemed security threats to the Japanese occupation. After more review SCAP determined that there were 1,353 objectionable Germans.30 The selection criteria depended on the uncertain interpretation of the Joint Chiefs categories.
With these matters essentially resolved, SCAP created, on December 1, 1946, a Repatriation Section in Eighth Army. Un- der Colonel Ernest T. Barco it would organize and execute the actual movement. With the experience gained from transporting Asian nationals to their homeland, his office could proceed quickly. While Japanese authorities would execute the repatria-
158
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
tion — collection, processing, movement, customs search, and property custodial duties — Eighth Army personnel would su- pervise and control the operation. As well, they would be re- sponsible for the warehouses containing confiscated or im- pounded property and the reception centers for the final transfer to a ship. The availability of shipping remained an uncertain factor but would not delay any preparations.
Barco wasted no time in organizing his assignment. On De- cember 5, 1946, he issued calls in the name of Lieutenant Gen- eral Robert Eichelberger, Commanding General, Eighth Army to the two Army Corps, I and IX, for assistance. Barco wanted thirteen field grade officers, 117 company grade officers, 139 enlisted men, and 110 interpreters. He listed out the custodial warehouse locations, detailed the general locations of the Ger- mans, and estimated a January 1947 departure date. Finally he called for a two day conference on December 18.31
At the meeting he conducted a thorough review of the proc- ess, sketched out the specific duties for the Japanese personnel, the command obligations of the senior American officers, the assignments of the small American teams, and the instructions to the repatriates.32 Clearly he and his small team had worked out the plan in all of its details.
On January 13, 1947, information that the ship Marine Devil would reach Yokohama about January 28 galvanized more activity. SCAP assigned missions to the two corps for administrative personnel, including guards and medical techni- cians, for the voyage to Bremerhaven. Additionally, the Civil Property Custodian would assign seven observers to oversee the property inventories.33
A redirecting of the Marine Devil forced a sudden change to the Marine Jumper which delayed the expected sailing date to February 14. The time change allowed consideration for a brief halt in Shanghai where the Americans wanted to include an- other group of Germans.34 Unfortunately the Marine Jumper was already loaded with cargo and passengers' baggage which had to be offloaded in favor of reprovisioning for the longer trip to Bremerhaven.
With the delay, Barco completed the administrative needs, and on January 22, 1947, the Eighth Army issued Operational Directive No. 12, which provided fulsome instructions for eve- ryone. For the Americans, the responsibilities meant developing command and control, forming 89 three-man inspection teams with 6 six-man units, establishing collecting warehouses (Ka- gohara, Kurihama, Tokyo, and Kobe), and providing material support needs.
The Japanese would supply the work personnel needed for the inventory and custodial duties; processing, packing, and shipping moveable items; transporting all repatriates and their personal baggage to Uraga, providing all rations for the move- ment; satisfying the customs inspections. They would also pay all of the costs.
The Directive also had combined the orders for the deporta- tion of the Germans. The instructions were in English, Japa- nese, and German. The German translation was more imperious in tone and contained some misunderstandings. It opened with "Orders have been received directing your repatriation." In a military format the directions then provided an approximate departure date, the fact that the Japanese would execute the op-
eration under American supervision, and of the luggage limits (350 pounds per individual or 1,500 pounds per family).
The financial restrictions were just as direct. Irrespective of position, wealth, or possessions each adult could bring two watches, one camera, two necklaces, and two bracelets. Other valuables or bullion were not allowed. In the English version they could take $50 each; the German translation allowed 750 yen as an alternative. In all events, the money had to be ex- changed in Germany for marks. The Germans with property would have an armed Japanese custodian appointed for that property. The custodian would reside on the premises at the di- rection of the American inspecting team which would facilitate the inventory process. Under all circumstances the custodian would move in and live on the premises, assume custody of all property and guard it. The repatriates could furnish two lists of their holdings: (1) small items of high intrinsic value and (2) moveable property. The teams would verify the accuracy of all statements, decide on the property scheduled for storage, and provide receipts.35
Because of the ship's delay the house inspections began on January 30, 1947, but without any specific departure date. On February 6, Eighth Army informed the Japanese authorities that the movement would begin two days later. The announcement gave them 24 hours to inform the repatriates about any final needs and to transfer them to entraining points. Despite the ear- lier team visits, many Germans had not believed in their forced repatriation. The surprise was unpleasant. In most areas the Japanese picked them up in dirty, open trucks with armed po- lice guards and drove them through the city streets. The nor- mally placid Japanese often cried out "losers" and "good rid- dance" to them. At the train stations they boarded trains for designated receiving camps. There they answered a roll call and elected group leaders as their representatives to the authorities. Japanese doctors then examined them for contagious diseases and general health. After receiving a medical certificate they could rest. At 6:30 a.m. the following day they boarded trucks again and moved to Uraga Repatriation Center for customs in- spection, weighing of all hand baggage, and a body search for hidden valuables.36
With completion of these preliminaries, the repatriates climbed into lighters which ferried them out to the Marine Jumper. Aboard ship, Colonel Charles Amy was in command of thirteen Army officers, five nurses, and 56 enlisted men. This group provided health and security responsibilities. The repatriates would serve as cooks, orderlies, sanitation workers, kitchen police, etc. They would take care of the functional ac- tivities, whatever their experience.
An immediate, serious concern was the ship's store which sold small necessities for American currency only. Since the Uraga authorities had impounded all American funds, the Ger- mans had to struggle with their resources. It was a poor begin- ning. On February 15, the Marine Jumper put to sea with 536 adult males, 306 adult females, and 226 children.37
From Japan the ship turned for Shanghai. She spent only a short time there, ostensibly to pick up certain war-criminals be- fore turning for Germany.38 With the addition of a few Chinese- Germans, the Marine Jumper departed on February 20 for Bremerhaven.
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
159
Aboard ship the Germans settled down for the long voyage. Given their unfortunate lot they accepted their situation stoi- cally. Divided into nine different living areas they lived their fate. They organized musical concerts, skat games, chess tour- naments, educational lectures, language courses, and a multi- tude of activities. They were busy. Each day the Americans made certain that everything was in order (and gave certain privileges for housekeeping accomplishments). The American crew also furnished motion pictures (with ratings!) as well as other forms of ship's entertainment.39 There were few distur- bances because people, whether through fear of the future or shock over their departure, tended to be quiet and reserved. The abundance of food far exceeded the experiences of the Ger- mans, who had more than they could eat. They arrived in Bremerhaven on March 23, 1947.
American troops impounded any funds before moving them to trains for Ludwigsburg (near Stuttgart). Once in camp they went through a lengthy screening process. For the most part the interrogators were searching for hardcore National Socialists. They could not always differentiate the level of party commit- ment and tended to lump everyone together. For most of the re- turnees the interrogations and filling out forms concerning po- litical memberships, activities, etc. lasted three weeks. With some exceptions the Americans then dismissed the repatriates to fend for themselves. The combined experience of their arri- val in Germany was a difficult one filled with pain, suffering, and uncertainty.40
In Japan, SCAP ordered another survey of the remaining na- tionals. There remained some 800 Germans subject to return. During the earlier review of the first transport various persons had missed repatriation. These individuals were, for the most part, members of religious orders, long-term residents in Japan (who had, for whatever reasons, missed the Marine Jumper), individuals with confused citizenship (dual, mixed United Na- tions, etc.), and the families of Germans evacuated from the Dutch colonies. The latter, now almost half of the remaining Germans, had been hurriedly evacuated to Japan from the for- mer Netherlands colonies in 1942. 41 They had survived as indi- gents on Japanese charity. Without funds, language, or needed skills they posed a serious humanitarian challenge. They had survived by bartering their few belongings, by employing their
The Marine Jumper, used to deport "objectionable" Germans from Japan after World War Two46
children as beggars, and by stealing. This group had little choice but to return to Germany, which accorded with SCAPs interest in removing Germans from Japan.42
The German diplomats were also still present. They pos- sessed certain privileges because of international law. In addi- tion, the Japanese had allowed them various advantages which SCAP could not violate easily. Nonetheless the Americans wanted them on the next boat home:43 Before any action could be organized, however, SCAP had to obtain approval in Europe for the reception of the Germans. Living conditions in Germany remained poor and the expanding discordance between the former allies made movement more problematical.44 As well as this, the issue of the families from the Dutch colonies presented a moral dilemma. They had no property, lived on Japanese charity, and most wanted to return to Germany (the free ticket was a major motivation). Messages between the American oc- cupation authorities moved back and forth, as each struggled to cope with the problem.45 SCAP had some 140 diplomats and 198 objectionables to transport. The refugee numbers were un- certain.
By July 1947, SCAP had sufficient assurance of acceptance to proceed with the process. They issued instructions to the Japanese authorities which replicated their earlier format. While the orders were less emphatic, they did not reflect the changes recommended in the earlier review of the first trans- port. The currency regulations now allowed $50 in any cur- rency other than yen, but all of the other restrictions remained the same. The diplomats could take $250 and 8,000 pounds of personal effects, but could only count on handling 500 pounds on debarkation in Germany. 7
Everything went according to the organizational directions, and the repatriates boarded the transport General Black on Au- gust 19, 1947. The movement commander, Colonel Douglas Pamplin, had eighteen officers, 42 enlisted men, and five nurses for security, control, and health purposes. Given these limited numbers, the repatriates would provide the labor force. The dip- lomats received the few private accommodations and no duties. Everyone else lived in the compartments. The General Black left Yokohama on August 20 for Shanghai. Aboard were 806 passengers. She remained in the Chinese port nine days while loading 514 more Germans and waiting out a typhoon. She de- parted on 1 September. Colonel Pamplin was anti-German and forbade any exchange between the Americans and Germans. Given the number of children and the unpleasant heat aboard the ship, his rules had little success. The crew allowed them, via trade or gift, to acquire foodstuffs and cigarettes, which the Germans carefully sewed into their clothing. They had heard about the cigarette economy in Germany. The General Black docked in Bremerhaven on October 1, 1947. 48
In Bremerhaven the reception authorities had major difficul- ties. They found that the "objectionables" had not been sepa- rated from the others, that the baggage had not been divided by occupation zones, and that the personal histories arrived two weeks after the ship (regular mail instead of the directed air- mail). As a result, the receiving office sent everyone to Ludwigsburg rather than dividing them among other stations. The result was chaos and inconvenience for everyone. There was not enough food, nor were there sufficient blankets or
160
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
beds; conditions were very bad. The authorities dispatched a blistering communique to SCAP, which could rectify the prob- lem.49
Because of illness arid bureaucratic error, SCAP still had 28 "objectionable" Germans in Japan. Given the numbers and shipping problems, SCAP made arrangements to fly them to Germany. They feared possible legal problems with any flight over the United States and selected a Pan American route — Tokyo, Calcutta, Istanbul, Frankfurt. Confiscated former Ger- man Embassy funds paid for the costs of the Germans and their guards.50 When these "objectionables" landed in Germany on April 4, 1948, they completed the deportation phase of repatria- tion. SCAP assumed no responsibility for those Germans re- maining in Japan. The issues of the transfer and the impounded, confiscated, stored property, however, remained unresolved.
As soon as the expellees aboard the Marine Jumper had found a measure of stability, they sought out the American oc- cupation offices for their property. They encountered a misin- formed and disinterested bureaucracy at every turn. Given their poor fiscal status on arrival, their confiscated funds, and their absence from Germany, they could protest but without any suc- cess. Many of them rallied behind Johann Lipporte, a fellow repatriate, who spoke excellent English and resided in Lud- wigsburg. His efforts to meet the General Black in Bremer- haven to obtain the release of the impounded funds and to ex- tract clarity about the repatriates' property accomplished noth- ing.51 The American occupation representatives declared that any promises made in Japan had no authority in Germany. Lip- porte organized a letter writing campaign while maintaining ac- tive contact with the military claims offices. He also brought the Ostasiatischer Verein in Hamburg into the struggle. They achieved little beyond making some officers feel guilty about the legal and human uncertainties.52
On March 14, 1948, the American licensed Japan Times and Advertiser announced the imminent liquidation sale of German property. The first Tokyo auction included thirty pi- anos, four automobiles, furniture, curios, clothing, etc. The ac- credited purchasers were occupation personnel and licensed commercial representatives.53 The announcement indicated that the sale would be the first of many which would liquidate all salable German property. Lipporte protested the action, pre- sented the property receipts of his associates, and demanded a halt to the action. As a result of his efforts, the Public Welfare Office in Stuttgart asked for clarification, which created some exchange with the various claims authorities in the European Command. In a brusque opinion, the Claim Division rejected any claims for the property. No authority in Japan could have made any promises to the repatriates concerning their property. All impounded effects came under vesting decrees and would be treated accordingly. There was no understanding concerning money conversion.54 No one would do anything. Clearly the bureaucracy could not, would not question itself. The rebuff forced the petitioners back, via Washington, D.C., to SCAP for redress.
With the planned sale the authorities in Japan began unrav- eling their already unclear situation. The earlier emotional commitment to remove Germans now confronted the adminis- trative realities of their property. In part the complexities of the
issues and, in part, the uncertain legal ambiguities of the seizure confused everyone. Besides this, SCAP delayed all considera- tion of the issues until the end of the repatriation process. Thereafter language, trust, methodology, control, etc. de- manded an inordinate amount of time. The search for corporate and scientific assets provided challenges in tracing, locating, confirming, and impounding them.55
On October 13, 1949, after intense exchange with Washing- ton, D.C., SCAP issued a declaration of property ownership. Any property in Japan owned or controlled before July 1, 1948, by any Germans residing in Germany or any German living outside that country after September 1, 1939, belonged to France, Great Britain, and the United States.56 SCAP was the trustee for that property with full powers of control and dis- posal. The Japanese authorities would provide the necessary preservation, maintenance, administration, and accounting for the sale of German assets.57
With that clear statement, the liquidation could begin, but the allies could not find any agreement on the process. For the Germans still in Japan, SCAP cut down the local controls and gave them back their personal property. For the repatriates there was no discussion. Finally on February 7, 1950, the au- thorization for disposal of the German assets arrived at SCAP. As the result of a British proposal, they formed a Tri-Power Advisory Committee (TRIP AC) on March 9, 1950. The accep- tance of TRIP AC allowed much progress in the technical is- sues. It cut through official disclaimers over substantive, proce- dural, and administrative issues.58
As they commenced selling the assets SCAP reviewed the repatriation policies and uncovered various individual inequi- ties. Included in this group were those who had had no, or only nominal, membership in the National Socialist Party, those who had lived most of their lives in Japan and could not earn a live- lihood elsewhere; those who were not a security risk; and those who had suffered unduly from the confiscation practices. TRI- PAC recognized these problems and treated each one on an "ad hoc" basis. In response SCAP set up the German National Re- classification Committee for redress. Unfortunately, the body had no time for major action; it could act on some pending re- quests, but not hold up the sales process.59
For administrative convenience, TRIPAC proposed that a wide range of moveable property, including personal effects, be sold locally. SCAP moved quickly and established the auction rules. Local experts would set a floor price, with the right to re- fuse all bids. The basic bidding currency was the dollar. A re- strictive resale clause would prevent any resale to German ownership.60 In studying the issues, TRIPAC discovered the considerable amount of personal property registered to the re- patriates. A goodly portion of this property was of a sentimental nature, objects with limited actual value. The cost of storage and liquidation far exceeded any auction proceeds. TRIPAC proposed that the Japanese separate, pack, and ship these items to a German port. SCAP accepted the idea and ordered the Japanese to make the arrangements. The goods should be shipped aboard the German registered Bogota Maru and charged against German funds. The ship left with a large con- signment on July 17, 1950.61 The Germans could pick up their property in Bremerhaven and pay the costs.
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
161
Thereafter TRIP AC turned its attention to the more pressing issues of selling institutional enterprises, business assets, li- cense agreements, retail shops, film rights, etc. Included here were bullion, precious stones, and bank accounts. Land was a particularly thorny issue since it included residential, farming, and business buildings and properties. The holdings belonged to social clubs and schools as well as individuals and firms. For those properties released, for various reasons, to Germans, the owners received bills for maintenance costs and repair charges. For those already sold by auction, the previous owners received the monies realized from the sale and for all outstanding bills.62
Beginning in 1950, SCAP expedited the sales. Over the next months they held over 300 auctions at different sites. When SCAP discovered that they could not sell everything for dollars or sterling, they invited the Japanese public to secondary sales where the yen became acceptable currency.63
Despite extensive and widespread protests from the repatri- ates, ably coordinated by the Ostasiatischer Verein, SCAP paid no attention. No matter how the group employed their argu- ments, i.e., human justice, the changing world, international law, etc., they received no recognition.64
The Japanese Peace Treaty, signed in San Francisco on Sep- tember 8, 1951, made a major adjustment in the issue. With Ar- ticle 20 Japan agreed to assume responsibility for disposing of German assets as determined by the three allied powers and to take care of the conservation and administration of them.65 This blank check maintained the former relationship relative to German assets. Everything would continue along the same path, i.e., the Japanese doing the bidding of the victors.
Since SCAP would go out of existence on the Treaty's ef- fective date (April 28, 1952), the headquarters hastened to reor- ganize these issues. Both TRIP AC and the office of Civil Prop- erty Custodian went out of business on May 2, 1952. These functions merged into a Tripartite Commission (TPC) charged with maintaining the rights of the three powers. The new body also absorbed the trustee rights of the earlier organizations.66 As a result, the Japanese would continue as executors of earlier decisions while assuming greater responsibilities. They ac- cepted legal accountability for a legalistically confused pro- gram based on an uncertain interpretation of a victors' meeting at Potsdam concerning foreign nationals.
Concurrently, the Japanese found a new player emerging in the property issue. West Germany's emergence as a fledgling power created new exchanges. On April 5, 1952, the Germans opened a Mission under a charge d'affaires, Heinrich Northe, who immediately set to work. He understood the basic argu- ments of morality, of a changing world, of the Marshall Plan, of the Japanese peace. His protests helped postpone the auction of two houses in April 1952, but could not halt the auction.67 The issue was clear, i.e., the allies advertised, the Germans pro- tested, the Japanese auctioned the property. This time, however, they did so with the yen as the only accepted currency.68
The German representatives argued in favor of releasing the impounded funds and of reviewing the entire repatriation issue. Because the Japanese continued the auction process, the Ger- mans found difficulty in sorting out the bureaucratic maze. In August 1952, they gained access to the warehouses containing the last remaining sentimental objects. They could not make
headway with their return, with the questions of royalties, pat- ents, etc., or any reconsideration. No one wanted any responsi- bility for anything. Within the TPC any member could block any transaction, and the Japanese would not act independ- ently.69 The Germans fully understood that the auctions were, essentially, complete, Their desire was to extend the issue until they could gain access to the records, assure proper control of surviving properties, express moral concerns about earlier deci- sions, and initiate compensation questions.70
At the outset, they had no grasp of the realities. The TPC and the Japanese refused all access to their files. Even the available approximations contained problems, i.e., land val- ues, especially in urban areas, had escalated considerably, the yen's value had changed within a short time (in 1947, 15 to $1; in 1953, 360 to $1), accounting practices lumped personal property into simple figures (in 1953, each object was carried with a value of 100 yen or 1.20 marks). The changing times had adjusted the value of patents, businesses, libraries, films, etc. As outsiders, the Germans could not change this proc- ess.71 Rejection precluded consideration, adjustment, or recti- fication.72
In June 1953, they did manage to gain control of the last sentimental items — some furniture, but basically only photo al- bums, diaries, and personal papers. Doing the paper work, co- ordinating the customs issues, and locating the owners in Ger- many took more time. Ultimately, in May 1954, the Embassy could collect the last objects, pack them into 26 crates, and re- turn them on the steamer Hamburg. The Ostasiatischer Verein had accepted responsibility for forwarding everything prop- erly.73 While this action terminated the return of small items, it did not conclude the many issues of restitution or rehabilitation. The key issue was the term "objectionable," which had been the justification for the forced repatriation. That clarification was vital to all discussions and encountered generalized responses. The basic defense was that the Counter Intelligence investiga- tions, the relationship of the individuals to the National Social- ist Party, and the value of persons to the Japanese war effort combined for the final designation.74
Time passed in desultory exchange as the Germans sought access to the records. The authorities, Japanese and the TPC, found varying grounds for refusal — personnel shortages, shift- ing responsibilities, file transfers, etc. Only the diligence of the Ostasiatischer Verein kept the issues alive. While business in- terests continued their individual efforts, the Verein spoke for everyone.75
In 1954, some changes in the German- American discussions over similar property seizures in the United States brought a ray of hope. Both countries had an interest in resolution. They en- countered the same issues as the representatives in Japan: in- adequate accounting, unknown commitments, impractical de- mands, uneasy legal interpretations. At least the Americans ex- pressed some interest in a potential maximum individual award of $10,000. The changes in world diplomacy, the German economy, and an uncertain conscience motivated the Ameri- cans, who broke ranks with their allies. While these exchanges continued for some time, various misunderstandings, the cost of compensation to individuals damaged by the war, and the un- certain price to the American taxpayer eventually scuttled any
162
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
resolution. Domestic concerns in both countries precluded satisfaction.
These efforts did bring limited movement in Japan. In Sep- tember 1956, the Germans made some headway through the wall of denial and refusal. Mr. Howard Staub, the General Sec- retary of the TPC (and long-term member of TRIP AC), agreed that the designation "objectionable" had led to many errors. He pointed out that the German National Reclassification Commit- tee had adjudicated the concerns of diplomatic privilege and had changed eight individual cases. The Commission's insis- tence on unanimity on all reclassification requests had ham- pered all restitution.77
In Bonn, the German Foreign Office tried to follow up on this information. They adjusted their position to rehabilitating the "objectionables" as a precedent for returning or reimbursing the property, to establishing a fiscal fund (from the auction sales) for repatriates in harsh circumstances, and to blocking further sales. By pressing for a general amnesty or rehabilita- tion, they hoped to rescue something.78
The idea found no echo in Tokyo. A meeting between Em- bassy representatives and the TPC on March 18, 1957, brought a sharp rejection of the German proposals. The Allies refused all discussion of any changes. The members accepted the pos- sibility of some form of rehabilitation in the future, but totally independent of any past claims or demands. They found that the term "objectionable" was neither politically nor discriminato- rily wrong and that it did not impose any travel restrictions. In closing, the allied representatives finished with the fatal obser- vation that they would make their time-consuming recommen- dations to their home governments.79 The answer was clear; in- action and obfuscation would continue.
Subsequent efforts for clarification received a common an- swer that the term "objectionable" was an administrative term and did not reflect on patriotism nor indicate criminal activity. To question the issue would lead to extraordinary legal compli- cations which lacked any factual basis. The TPC remained to- tally negative to any property questions. Since the liquidation process was complete and the records lost or scattered in differ- ent archives, changes were impossible.80
To cement their point, the TPC quietly informed the Japa- nese, and not the Germans, on June 24, 1957, that, after July 1, they would renounce their rights, titles, and claims to undiscov- ered German assets in Japan. The Japanese informed the Ger- mans, but underscored their fear of potential German recovery demands. They wanted an official German statement renounc- ing such claims, which was not forthcoming. A meeting with the TPC on September 13 brought no progress.81
In February 1958, Staub reported his impending departure (on March 12) and the completion of the TPC's work. The French, British, and American embassies would take care of any subsequent questions under the TPC imprimatur. There were neither apologists nor suggestions. The Japanese and Germans could address their respective problems between themselves.82
The Japanese quickly accepted the idea of halting all sei- zures and set April 1, 1958, as the terminal date. The departing TPC made no protest.83 Concurrently, however, a judgment in the Japanese courts brought the entire process to a conclusion.
A German plaintiff had sued the Japanese government for the 1953 auction of his real estate. He had come to Japan in 1929 and acquired several properties which he had lost to seizure shortly before his forced repatriation. He argued that the loss violated international law, that the Potsdam Proclamation and the Japanese Peace Treaty provisions were in disagreement, and that the confiscation was without due process. The Japanese de- fense maintained that the United States, Great Britain, and France had entered into agreements with the West German government, which obligated the latter not to make claims for requisitioned German overseas assets. These agreements further precluded individual claims. Given those facts, the suit had no merit. The court decided against the plaintiff and charged him all court costs.84 There could be no more claims against the Japanese or the Allies.
As the Germans tried to pursue other property concerns, they encountered major opposition. The English chairman of the TPC, Cooper Blyth, bluntly told a German representative that all future requests would be denied without comment. His explanation was that the constant change of administrations (SCAP, TRIP AC, TPC, Japanese officers) had destroyed any documentary accuracy. In addition, no one had sufficient per- sonnel for answering individual questions. Finally, arguments over the true value of auctioned items could never be resolved, nor could anyone answer the problems of currency relation- ships.85 Blyth' s comments provided the indicated evidence that the wall of refusal and denial remained intact.
On June 30, 1960, the TPC finally closed its doors and gave up its authority. Subsequent questions should be addressed to the member embassies.86
The announcement effectively terminated the repatriation issue and the property dislocations. The path had been long and convoluted.87
Notes
Charles Burdick was Professor of History Emeritus at San Jose State University in California. He died in 1998.
1 United States, Department of State, Foreign Relations of the United States. The Conference of Berlin (Potsdam Conference) 1945 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1960) (hereafter FRUS, Vol. II 1475-1476. Observation by a forced repatriate in 1947.
3 Merion and Susie Harris, Sheathing the Sword: The Demilitarization of Japan (New York: Macmillan, 1987) 23.
4 In Europe General Dwight Eisenhower served as Commander, Supreme Headquarters, Allied Expeditionary Force (SHEAF). The variance in titles was a serious matter, which provoked much criticism in Japan. John M. Allison, Ambassador from the Prairie (Tokyo: Charles Tuttle, 1973), 143.
5 Hugh Borton, American Presurrender Planning for Postwar Japan (New York,: Columbia University, 1967). An interesting account is Leon V. Sigal, Fighting to a Finish: The Politics of War Termination in the United States and Japan, 1945 (Ithaca: Cornell University, 1988).
6 Allied powers created, in December, 1945, two governing bodies: the Far Eastern Commission and the Allied Council for Japan. In conception the dip- lomats had aspirations for some form of collective governance, an attitude not shared by General MacArthur. Some of the frustration in this struggle over prestige and authority is in Roger Buckley's Occupation Diplomacy: Britain, the United States and Japan, 1945-1952 (Cambridge University, 1982) See also George H. Blakeslee, The Far Eastern Commission: a Study in Interna- tional Cooperation, 1945 to 1952 (Washington, D.C. Department of State,
1953) .
7 They often employed a distinctive jargon, part harsh military directive and part conciliatory civilian persuasion termed Scapanise by many, Henry E. Wildes, Typhoon in Tokyo: The Occupation ant Its Aftermath (New York: Macmillan,
1954) , 1.
8 For a discussion of the legal basis for these actions see Nisuke Ando, Surren-
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
163
der, Occupation, and Private Property in International Law: an Evaluation of US Practice in Japan (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1991). Useful studies on the occupation are Richard B. Finn, Winners in Peace: MacArthur, Yoshida, and Postwar Japan (Berkeley: University of California, 1992); John M.Maki "United States Initial Post-surrender Policy for Japan," in Han-Kyo Kim, ed., Essays on Modern Politics and History: Written in Honor of Harold M. Vi- nacke (Athens, Ohio: Ohio University Press, 1969), 30-56. The major study on MacArthur is D. Clayton James, The Years of MacArthur, Vol. 3, Triumph and Disaster, 1945-1964 (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1985). SCAP Instructions to the Japanese Government (hereinafter SCAPIN) 217: Definition of "United Nations," and "enemy Nations," 3 1 October 1 945 . Na- tional Archives (hereafter NA, Record Group (hereafter RG) 33 1 , Box 3. For a more detailed account of these activities see Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers, General Headquarters, Statistics and Reports Section, "His- tory of the Non-Military Activities of the Occupation of Japan," vol. 17, "treatment of Foreign Nationals," 1-15. NA, RG 331, Box2. Note, also, Eric H. F. Svensson, "The Military Occupation of Japan. The First Years Planning, Policy Formulation, and Reforms" PhD dissertation, University of Denver, 1966), 144-157.
After some lengthy discussions SCAP allowed the Italian government to send a ship that took all the Italians home in April 1947. "Treatment of Foreign Na- tionals," 61-62. CINCAFPAC to WARCOS, 2 October 1946. MacArthur Memorial, (hereafter MM). Norfolk, Virginia, RG-9, Radiograms, WD OUT. Edward J. Boone, Jr. was most helpful with these files.
These figures come from a later report by the German representation in Japan. Ber. Nr. 237/53, 24 Marz 1 953, Politisches Archiv des Auswartigen Amts (he- reafter AA), Tokyo, Bd. 6662. Maria Keipert was very supportive to my re- search.
A description by a diplomat is Erwin Wickert, Mut und Ubermut. Geschichten aus Meinem Leben (Stuttgart: Deutsche Verlags Anstalt, 1992), 436f. See also his Der fremde Osten: China und Japan gestern und heute (Stuttgart : Deut- sche Verlags Anstalt 1968) 286=-334. A daily record is in Paul Werner Ve- mehren, "Kriegstagebuch " Bundesarchiv Militararchiv. The human suffering was severe. The bombings;, crowded housing, transportation difficulties, food shortages made the restriction difficult. Letter from Reiner Jordan, 6 March 1993, letter from Margot Lenigk, 13.4.93. See also Thomas R. H. Havens, Valley of Darkness: The Japanese People and World War Two (New York: WW. Norton, 1978).
Central Liaison Office to SCAP, 10 January 1946, NA RG, 160, Box 449. Letters from Reiner Jordan, 15.3.93, 20.3.93; letter from Margot Lenigk, 15.4.93, letter from Ursula Reinhard, April 1993; Jurgen Lehmann, Zur Ge- schichte der deutschen Schule Kobe (Tokyo: Deutsche Gesellslchaft fur Natur- und Volkerkunde Ostasiens, 1988, 4-48. See also Helmut Krajewicz "Das Kriegsende in Japan am FuBe des Fujuyama", Vierteljahresschrift derVereini- gung Deutscher Auslandsbeamaten e.v. (3-4/90), 167-172. Hans H. Baeerwald, The Purge of Japanese Leaders under the Occupation (Berkeley, University of California, 1959) remains a fine treatment. Harris and Harris, Sheathing the Sword, chap 5, presents a colorful version. Joint Chiefs of Staff to CINCAFOAC, WARX 875m 7 December 1945, NA, RG319, Box 507.
Civil Affairs Divisions Operations to CINCAFPAC, WARX 88430, 12 De- cember 1945. NA, RG 319, Box 507.
Memo for Record (AG), 30 January 1946. NA, RG 260, Box 449: Washington to USFET, 24 January 1 946. MM, RG-9: Radiograms W.D. SCAPIN 686: Repatriation of German Nationals in Japan, 3 1 January 1 947. NA, RG 331, Box 3. SCAP subsequently published a lengthy compendium of over 800 SCAPINS. Only two of them mentioned the Germans. www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/archive/photos/67_7376.htm SCAPIN 769: Repatriation of German Nationals and Nationals who claim Austrian or Czechoslovakian Citizenship now in Japan, 23 February 1946. NA, RG 260, Box 449.
Much of the research material and emotional fuel for these early efforts came from the Army's Counterintelligence activities in Japan. The 441 CIC De- tachment, with over fifty small subordinate units, had the mission to locate the suspect individuals. These units lacked jurisdictional boundaries, careful su- pervision, or hierarchical rales. They enjoyed great authority and freedom in 1945-1946. See "History of the Counter Intelligence Corps," Vol. XXVIII, "CIC in the Occupation of Japan" (Baltimore: US Army Intelligence Center, 1960). A major source for this study, "Representative History of CIC Activi- ties in the Occupation of Japan (Sep 1 1945 to 1948)" has disappeared from the files. Letter from John Allshouse, Federal Records Center- Kansas City, July 16, 1992. The Counter-intelligence records are fragmentary and difficult to use. Letter from Jane B. Sealock, US Army Intelligence and Security Command, Fort George G. Meade, MC 30 March 1992. SCAPIN, 1000: Repatriation of German Nationals, 5 June 1946. NA, RG 331, Box 3. The Japanese subsequently reported 2,679 Germans with 1191 indi-
viduals as head of households containing 1488 family members. The Allied occupation forces in Germany had forwarded extensive lists of the Nazi party members in Japan. These lists, drawn from the captured Nazi records, pro- vided detailed personal information as well as address in Japan. Letter and ma- terials from David Marwell, Berlin Documents Center, 16 April 1993.
25 Radio WCL 25844 to SCAP, 5 December 1945, MM, RG-9: Radiograms, W.D.; 10 Information and Historical Service Headquarters Eighth Army, "Special Staff Study of the Repatriation of German Nationals from Japan"( 6 June 1947), Center of Military History, Department of the Army, Washington, D.C. This brief study, completed just after the final phase of the repatriation, has valuable material as well as some errors.
26 SCAPIN 26: Protection of Allied and Axis Property, 13 September 1945. On October 2, 1 945 SCAP relaxed these controls slightly and allowed families to utilize some personal funds for living expenses and tax payments. SCAPIN 87: Authorization No 1, Living Expense Allowances to Axis Nationals Domi- ciled in Japan, 2 October 1945. NA, RG 331, Box 3.
27 Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers, General Headquarters, Statistics and Reports Section, "History of the Non-Military Activities of the Occupa- tion of Japan," Monograph 21, "Foreign Property Administration," 106. NA, RG 33 1, Box 2. Of the total, individuals owned 1 15,080,000 yen; business firms claimed 286,362,000 yen; official German agencies possessed 764,482,000 yen, and other sources had 13,002,000 yen. Ibid.
28 Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers, Vested Assets in Japan. Final Report of Trusteeship 9n.p. , 28 April 1952), part XI. Library of Congress, Washington, D.C. This report is valuable because most of the documentary material is misplaced or destroyed. I am indebted to Marin T. Hanna and her colleagues in the National Archives for their exhaustive search for these files.
29 Telegram, Military Government Germany to SCAP Pacific, 1 1 October 1946. NA,RG260, Box 141.
30 SCAP "Treatment of Foreign Nationals," 52-53; Cable OMGUS to CINCAF- PAC, 5 Nov 46. MM, file RG-9: Radiograms, State Department.
31 Letter to Commanding Generals I and IX Corps, 5 December 1946. NA, RG 94, Box 2726. Barco had a clear image of the Joint Chiefs of Staffs' views be- cause of an extensive exchange between SCAP and that command in October. These messages are in MM, RG-9: Radiograms, WD out.
32 Agenda, Reparation Conference, 18 December 1946, with enclosures. NA, RG 94, Box 2726.
33 SCAP to CG Eighth Army, 13 January 1947 in Administrative Papers of G-l Reparation Section, Center of Military History, Department of the Army, Washington, D.C.
34 The reparation process in China had begun much earlier but moved slowly. Accounts on the removal are in Klaus Mehnert, Ein Deutscher in der Welt. Er- innerungen /906-/9S;(Frankfurt am Main: Fischer, 1983), 324-336; Karl H. Abshagen, Im Lande Arimasen (Stuttgart: Deutscher Verlag, 1948), 347-374.
35 Headquarters, Eighth Army, Operational Directive No. 12, 22 January 1947. NA,RG 94, Box 2726. There was some confusion over mixed marriages. If a Japanese wife elected to stay in Japan she could do so but only with the prop- erty she had held before the marriage. Anything acquired after the marriage was subject to the same rales.
36 This description comes from the 10lh Information and Historical Service, "Special Staff Study," and its Annex No. 1 , "Interrogation of Repatriated German Nationals" The latter were voluntary responses to a questionnaire is- sued just before embarkation.
37 Ibid. The decline in numbers came from the removal of the sick, unfit and a decision not to include any diplomats- as well as administrative confusion. On the other hand some Germans held in Sugamo prison did find accommoda- tions on the ship. Ibid. See also Friedrich J. Klahn, ed., Kapn,. Kolhabach: Der Blockadebrecher mit der glucklichen Hand (Biberbach: Koehlers Verlag, 1958), 220-222.
38 Since China was an ally the German issue was different than in Japan. None- theless, the Chinese, for unclear reasons, did not cooperate in moving the Germans. This unhelpfulness led to a major protest from the U.S. Department of State. The "fiasco" was a major embarrassment to the Allied powers. Wash- ington (Acheson) to SCAP, 10 March 1947. MM, RG-9: Radiograms, State Department.
3' "Jumper Journal." The ships mimeographed publication contained information on world events as well as ship's activities. Reiner Jordan shared his file of the publication. Letter from Heinrich Pahls, 15 April 1993; letter from Wilhelm Osterfeld, 28 February 1 993 .
40 See Dietrich Seckel, Schriften-Verzeichnis. Mit einem autobiographischem Essay. Mein Wegzur Kunst Ostasiens (Frankfurt.a.M.: Hang & Herchen, 1981), 94-96. The completed forms are inNA, RG 338, Boxes 669-674.
41 The Dutch and the British took the German males with their evacuation forces to India. This action led to a major disaster on January 20, 1942 when the Japanese bombed the Dutch ship, van lmhoff in the Indian Ocean. The Dutch crew took the few lifeboats and left the Germans to their fate. Subsequently a
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
Dutch rescue ship, Bollongan, arrived on the scene but refused to pick up any Germans; 411 perished. Those who survived the evacuation traveled to in- ternment camps in Dehra Dun, India. They returned home in 1946. For the tragic reality, see C. Van Heekeren, Batavia Seint Berlyn (Den Haag: Bert Bakker, 1967) 159-371, Erich Klappert, Erlebnisse (?: Klappert, 1978) 46-50. C. Towen-Bouwsma and Margot Lenigk provided these materials. Letter from Ursula Reinhard, April 1993.
CINCFE to MOGUS, WAR, 6 August 1947. MM, RG-9: Radiograms, Outgo- ing. Report by Margot Lenigk, May 25, 1993.
Wickert, Mut unci Ubermut, 480-482: H.G Stahmer, Japans Niederlage- Asiens Sieg: Aufsteig eines Grofieren Ostasien (Bielefeld: Deutscher Heimat Verlag, 1952), 192-195.
There were extensive discussions concerning the diplomats. Until they reached German soil they enjoyed a special position; once landed in Germany, they lost this protection, i.e., they became responsible for their baggage, valu- ables, transportation, security, etc. The records concerning the diplomats' re- patriation are in a lost file, which makes research virtually impossible. Letter from Joseph Dane Hartgrove, National Archives, March 19 1992. MM, RG-9: Radiograms, State Department and RG-9: Radiograms, WD WX have these exchanges. An interesting proposal came from the American Presi- dent lines, which proposed a commercial transport on their ships; i.e., those Germans able to pay their passage could do so while the American authorities could pay a reduced price for the others. WAR to CHICFE, Berlin, 3 May 47; MM RG-99: Radiograms, WD WX. Since the Japanese were paying the costs, the Americans declined the offer.
www.veteransearch.homestead.com/files/Liberty_Ship_Marine_Jumper J945.jpg
Telegram SEC STATE to SCAP, 17 June 1947. NA, RG 260, Box 141 ; SCAPIN 1750: Repatriation of German and Austrian Nationals, 21 July 1947. NA, REG 331, Box 5; Operational Directive No. 51,21 July 1947.NA.RG 94, Box 2726. The State Department employed the descriptive term, "obnox- ious" Germans as opposed to SCAP's " objectionable" Germans. Orders to Colonel Douglas Pamplin, n.d., Ibid: CINCFE to WAR, 10 August 1947. MM, RG-9: Radiograms, Outgoing.
"Destination and Accompanying Documentation of the Refugees aboard the USAT General Black," 21 October 1947. NA, RG 260, Box 141; OMGUS to Department of the Army, 30 October 1947. MM, RG-9: Radiograms, Misc. For insight into the corrupt conditions in Ludwigsburg see Wicken, Mut unci Ubermut, 483-486.
DA to OMGUS, 20 December 1947, NA, RG 260, Box 141. State Department to SCAP, 16 March 1948, State Department to SCAP, 4 April 1948. MM, RG- 9: Radiograms, State Department; SCAPIN 1869: Repatriation of German Na- tionals, 10 March 1948. NA, RG 331, Box 5. For a description of the return flight see Marie Balser, Ost- unci westliches Geldnde: Unser Leben in Ost und West den Enkeln erzahlt (Geissen: Munchowsche Universitatsdruckerei, 1958), 158-161.
Many of his letters are in Bestand JL 525 12/77-2/18, Staatsarchiv Ludwigs- burg (hereafter SL).
The organization, founded in 1 900, devoted itself to helping German interests in East Asia. Expanded to encouraging cultural matters in 1 9 1 1 , it became an influential force by 1914. After the damage inflicted by the loss of the First World War, the leadership developed a different focus: as a facilitator for joint interests and as a representative for business administration. It became more political and published a journal, Ostasiatsche Rundschau.. In 1945 the or- ganization began operations relying on former contacts and the members' en- ergy. They did achieve some moral support. See Chief Claims Division to Budget and Fiscal Director, European Command, "Property Claims of Japa- nese Repatriates," 3 June 1948. SL 12/77-2/18.
Office of Military Government, Land Wurttemberg-Baden, "Property Claims of Japanese Repatriates," 29 Jan (sic) 1948. NA, RG 260, Box 141: "Expellees from the Orient," October 1947. SL JL 525 12/63-1/6. Office of Military Government to Office of Military Government for Wurt- temberg-Baden, 8 July 1948. NA, RG 260, Box 141. Headquarters, Claims of- fice team 7728, "Property Claims of Japanese Repatriates," 24 May 1948. SL JL 525 12/63-1/6.
SCAP, "Foreign Property Administartion," 121-124.
Under the terms of the Potsdam Declaration, the Soviet Union had surrendered all claims to German overseas assets. FRUIS, The Conference of Berlin, II, 1486.
SCAPIN 205 1 : Notification that the United Statres, United Kingdom, and France are Owners of Certain Categories of Former German Property in Ja- pan, 13 October 1949, NA, RG 33 12, Box 5.
SCAP, Vested Assets in Japan, Part I, 4. The report provides a general account of the German assets. It includes a section listing various individual accounts which held sums down to $3.00 or another with 1.67 yen. Ibid, 4-5.
TRIPAC Minutes, 31 May 1950; Memos for Information, Nrs. 5,10, 11 as
cited in SCAP "Foreign Property Administration," 150.
Ibid.
SCAP, Vested Interests in Japan, Part II, 13. The American and British gov- ernments each purchased two residences for their use. Ibid, Part I, 5. Ibid, Part 1,3.
Copies of these papers are in AA, Tokyo, Bd, 6663.
United States, Department of State, United States Treaties and Other Interna- tional Agreements, Vol. 3, Part 3, 1952 (Washington D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1955), 3188. SCAP did not overlook the issue and spelled out Japan's continuing responsibilities after gaining sovereignty. SCAPIN 2195: Property in Japan Formerly Owned by Certain Persons of German Nationality. 25 January 1952. NA, RG 331, Box 5.
SCAPIN 2203: Property in Japan Formerly Owned by Certain Persons of German Nationality, 17 April 1952. NA, RG 3312, Box 5. The transfer of per- tinent records to the Japanese had already begun. Just the papers for the cases awaiting completion exceeded 100 linear feet! SCAP Check Sheet: Disposi- tion of German Records 3 January 1952; note of Major D.L. Luques, 1 No- vember 195 1 . NA, RG 331m, Box 7564. There were over 2,000 linear feet of total records.
The Germans did so from unofficial sources. The Americans had already de- cided that there were no grounds for considering compensation for the vested German property. They found no reason to provide information on that proc- ess. DEPTAR to SCAP, 4 December 1951. NA.RG 331, Box 7564. Northe remained in charge until May 1955 when the first German Ambassador, Hans Kroll, arrived in Tokyo. Hans Kroll, Lebenserinnerungen eines Botschafters (Berlin: Kiepenheuer & Witsch, 1967), 293.
Vertertung der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, Tokyo, an das Auswartige Amt, 30 Mai 1952, Tokyo, Bd 6662.
Rechtsabteilung Tokyo, Vermerk, 1 September 1956. AA. Bd 6662. Botschaft Tokyo Ber. Nr. 515/52, 4 Oktober 1952, AA, Tokyo, Bd. 6662. Dres. K. Vogt & R. Sonderhoffan Dr. H. Northe, 29 Oktober 1952. AA, To- kyo, Bd. 6662. A careful explanation of the realities, with useful inclusions, is in a letter to the Ostasiatischer Verein. An den Ostasiatischen Verein, 10 Mdrz 1952, AA, Tokyo, Bd. 6663.
The frustration is clear in Ostasiatischer Verein, Mitteilung Nr. 24/53, 31 Mdrz 1953. AA. Tokyo, Bd. 6663.
Bescheinigung, Dr. Jakob, Tokyo, 12 Mdrz, 1954, AA, Tokyo, Bd. 6662. An excellent description is in Botschaft Tokyo Ber. Nr. 710/53 "Lage und Be- handlung des deutschen Vermogens in Japan, "11 August 1953. AA, Tokyo, Bd. 6663.
The files in AA, Tokyo, Bde. 6663, 6665 are filled with their correspondence. See Hans Dieter Kreikamp, Deutsches Vermogen in den Vereinigten Staaten: Die Auseinandersetzung um seine Ruckfuhrung als Aspekt der deutsch- americanischen Beziehungen, 1952-1962 (Stuttgart: Deutsche Verlags Anstalt, 1979), especially 81-85.
Botschaft Tokyo an Auswdrtiges Amt. Ber, 1693/56: Politische Einstufung ehemaliger Japan-Deutschen 13. September 1956. AA Tokyo, Bd. 6664. At the same time the Japanese demonstrated their resistance to returning any German business interests. Botschaft Tokyo an Auswdrtiges Amt Ber. Ches Vermogen in Japan.... " 19. Oktober, 1956, AA, Tokyo, Bd. 6665. Aufzeichnungen, Dr. Schmidt-Dornedden, Ref. 506, Auswdrtiges Amt "Deut- schen Vermogen in Japan....," 19. Oktober 1956. AA, Tokyo, Bd. 6665. Aufzeichnung "Besprechnung mit Vertreten der amerikanischen, britischen und franzosischen Botschaft uber die Frage der Klassifizierung von Japan- Deutschen und beschlagnahmtes Vermogen in Japan. " AA. Tokyo, Bd. 6664. Botschaft Tokyo an Auswdrtiges Amt Ber. Nr. 407/57. Betr. Deutsches Vermo- gen in Japan,; hier: Rehabilitierung der Japan-Deutschen, 19 Mdrz 1957. AA, Tokyo, Bd. 6664.
Botschaft Tokyo Ber. Nr. 1529/57 Betr. Deutsches Vermogen in Japan, 13 De- zember 1957. AA, Tokyo Bd. 6664.
Botschaft Tokyo an AA BR. Nr. 340/58 Betr. Deutsches Vermogen in Japan, 14 Februar 1958, AA, Tokyo, Bd. 6664.
Botschaft Tokyo an AA Ber. Nr. 620/58 Betr, Deutsches Vermogen in Japan, 10. April 1958. AA Tokyo Bd. 6664.
Translation of Judgement, rendered 29 March, 1958. AA, Tokyo, Bd. 6664. Botschaft Tokyo anAA Ber. V, 980/58: Deutsches Vermogen in Japan....," 14 Juni 1958. AA, Tokyo, Bd. 6664.
Cooper Blyth to Dr. Ernst Jung, June 27, 1960, AA, Tokyo, Bd. 6665. As of April, 1952, the Japanese had paid 19,000,000 yen for repatriating the German nationals. They had invested 39,000,000 yen for the investigation, ac- counting, and reporting of German property. These accounts were incomplete. SCAP, Vested Interests in Japan, Part XH,5. As of April 1952 SCAP had transferred 355,265,877 yen to thirteen countries with another 344,734,123 yen scheduled for distribution from German assets. Ibid, Part X,3.
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
165
Holocaust Movie Shoah Exposed as Propaganda
The French Jew Claude Lanzmann is regarded as one of the most vehement promoters of the established 'Holo- caust' story. He is perhaps best known as the director of the movie Shoa, a 9/4 hours' marathon of taped interviews of Lanzmann with individuals who claim to have witnessed a broad variety of cruelties during the National Socialist per- secution of the Jews. Not only does the sheer quantity of material compiled by Lanzmann have a tremendous psycho- logical effect on many uncritical viewers, but also the highly suggestive techniques used by Lanzmann, which gives many viewers the impression they saw iron-clad proof for the claims made that were actually not delivered. Proud of his deceptive art of persuasion, Lanzmann told the New York Times, how one of his movie's viewers went right into his mental trap: "There was one man who wrote to me after seeing the film saying it was the first time he had heard the cry of an infant inside the gas chamber. It was perhaps because his imagination had been put to work." (10/201985, Sect 2, p. H-l). In order to unmask Lanzmann' s fraudulent methods, we present the analyses of three key witnesses that were interviewed by Lanzmann. After close examination, each one of them turns out to be untrustworthy, either due to their incredible claims or because the circumstances, Lanzmann's admissions, or his witness's later confession revealed that their interview was orchestrated.
About the SYzoa-Interview with the alleged Treblinka SS-Man Franz Suchomel
By Jean-Francois Beaulieu
SS-Unterscharftihrer Franz Suchomel is an important wit- ness who is said to confirm the reality of mass gassings, in his case regarding the alleged extermination camp Treblinka. Claude Lanzmann, a French Jew and filmmaker, succeeded to get a 850,000$ subvention from the Israeli government in 19771 to produce a holocaust 'documentary' whose aim was mainly to convince skeptics in a period where revisionism had started to be a concern for some people. Subsequently, additional funds were provided by the French government and private sources. The film was finished only in 1985, 8 years later.
In the movie's acknowledgment section, no word is uttered about the fact that it received massive funding from Israel. And what is even more revealing, no word is mentioned either that all the German witnesses that agreed to participate as witnesses in this movie received 3,000 DM, but had to agree not to reveal this fact for 30 years.2 Thus, the German witnesses 'testified' for money.
The movie Shoah is terribly long (9 lA hours), something that can partially explain its success. One of the key testimonies used today is that of Franz Suchomel, a former SS guard, born in 1903, who had already spent a few years in jail a decade before. Due to his health condition it is probable that Suchomel died somewhere in the early 80 's.
Before discussing Suchomel's testimony in detail, I will briefly review the extermina- tion charges for Treblinka and the reasons that make such a story improbable.
In brief, the story is that between sum- mer 1942 and summer 1943, some 800,000 mainly Polish Jews were deported to the Treblinka camp and vanished without a Claude
trace in the gas chambers over a period of 13 to 14 months. The bulk of them were allegedly killed prior to the spring of 1943 and buried in mass graves from August 1942 onward. In the spring of 1943, the corpses were excavated and burned on open fires in order to remove any trace of the crime, although gas- sing continued on a smaller scale. Treblinka was supposed to be a 'pure' extermination camp, which is why we wouldn't expect post-war testimonies. However, the story offered is that an up- rising took place at the end of the camp's existence (August 1943), i.e., when most of the corpses were already destroyed, and that about 50 regular inmates succeeded to escape, which enabled them later to testify about the crime the Germans had try to cover.3
Someone who reads the available Holocaust literature may think that the contradictions and inconsistencies are not exceed- ing the degree which one would expect from a witness whose memory unavoidably faded after so many years, but the actual literature is just presenting a sanitized ver- sion. Mark Weber and Andrew Allen,4 Ar- nulf Neumaier,5 and in particular Carlo Mat- togno and Jiirgen Graf have presented a much more exhaustive and balanced review of the early testimonies, which are in fact much more contradictory, inconsistent, and outright impossible than they are usually presented in the mainstream literature.
The technical absurdity of the claim that Diesel exhaust gases were used as a poison gas for mass murder in Treblinka was best explained and refuted by Friedrich Paul Berg7 and Walter Liiftl,8.
The already mentioned study by Arnulf Neumaier also exposes in detail the difficul- Lanzmann ties and absurdities associated with the cre-
166
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
mation of bodies on open fires and the claimed size of the re- quired mass graves according to the stories told by the 'survi- vors.' I will comment here only the weirdest aspect concerning Herbert Floss, this specialist who allegedly came from Germany to advise camp commander Stangl on the best way to burn corpses 'economically:' According to testimonies, the key for a successful incineration almost without or with very little fuel was allegedly to use the corpses of women, who were said to have burned all by themselves, to ignite the corpses of children, eld- erly people, and men stacked on top of those female corpses. Certified engineer A. Neumaier shows in detail the absurdity and technical impossibility of the mass cremation scenarios described by the witnesses. This fishy story was perhaps invented to cir- cumvent the problem that no records exist at all which would prove the shipment of large quantities of fuel to Treblinka over the years 1942-1943. But I won't go into details here.
It is well known that many atrocity stories circulated about Treblinka during the alleged event and that both the Polish and the Jewish resistance diffused actively those claims. We know also from the author Yuri Suhl,9 that in "nearly each ghetto and each camp" there were Jewish cells of resistance, and that "thousands of Jewish fighters were hiding in the Polish forest to harass the Germans," attacking munitions convoys, German soldiers, etc.10 Today, some Jewish organizations accuse the Poles for their failure to attack Treblinka during the war, but even the Jewish partisans did neither consider it necessary to at- tack Treblinka's weak garrison nor to dynamite the railroad system that was leading to it.
Neither the Polish resistance nor the Jewish resistance tried to take photos of the huge amount of corpses dragged out of the gas chambers or burned in the open during those months. It is claimed that the inner fence was kept covered with tree branches to conceal the activities within, but Treblinka was partly surrounded by trees. Climbing on one of these with a zoom lens was thus possible. The resistance knew that a photo of mass graves or burning pyres, with recognizable features like wire fences, buildings, and SS guards was priceless if they wanted to back their charge. They had one year to do it, but did not do anything. Even the photo album of former camp com- mander Kurt Franz is useless in this case.
Alleged mass grave in Treblinka with several corpses: The only forensic "evidence" for the murder of 800,000 humans!11
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
It is claimed that the communists discovered seven meters high heaps of human ashes and bones covering a large area when they reached the camp, but they didn't consider it neces- sary to invite neutral representatives from the Red Cross to back their charge as the Germans did in Katyn. Some isolated human remains were indeed found and photographed, but we shouldn't be surprised about this considering that hundreds or even thousands of Jews certainly perished during their trans- port.
Let me now go back to Shoah. In the sequence discussed here, we have this man, whether it is Suchomel or not, who gives an interview in his apartment. A map of Treblinka is dis- played a few meters away from him and he often uses a stick to point at locations during his description. The interview is con- ducted in such a way that one could consider Suchomel as a nice guy, human, who was led into a nightmare that he never wished.
Lanzmann explained in the New York Times, October 20, 1985, page H-17, how he succeeded to film Suchomel: his fe- male assistant was carrying a bag in which a camera was hid- den. A little hole allowed the camera to record those sequences. Occasionally a mini van was brought to the front of the build- ing, where technicians were watching on their monitor the im- ages which are normally retransmitted in real time.
If one places oneself in the shoes of the assistant, it is obvi- ously necessary to be careful since such an interview is a unique chance. Someone who is taking those pictures should certainly bear in the mind that each gesture is important and that the man must not suspect anything. There is no second chance. It must also be expected that the pictures recorded by a camera hidden in a bag will sometimes be blurred and out of focus, which would not always show what is important, since it is almost impossible to aim properly with such a camera. How- ever, if one puts down the bag with the camera, the resulting picture is necessarily inflexible, always showing the same fo- cus.12
And indeed: The quality of these sequences is extremely poor, although one can recognize roughly a face in spite of the blurred aspect. In contrast to that, Schalling's figure is pretty clear when he is interviewed under similar conditions later in the movie (Schalling is another former National Socialist inter- viewed by Lanzmann, although he is not supposed to have been involved in Treblinka.13)
At the beginning of the interview, Suchomel is asking not to reveal his name, so he is not supposed to be aware that a cam- era is used. However, already the subsequent exchange of words is strange:14
"Lanzmann (interviewer): Are we ready? Suchomel: Yes. We can begin. "
If Lanzmann wanted to create the impression that his inter- view with Suchomel was not being taped, why then such a strange question at the very beginning of the interview? Ready for what? Formless chats do not have an official beginning! Since I must assume that most readers have not seen the movie, I will analyze in more detail what happened during this inter- view. For those who want to check it out, since literal state- ments are less strong than real images: Suchomel's interview is located on the second cassette of the Shoah series.
167
During an important portion of the interview, the camera is at the same level as Lanzmann's shoulders. We see it when Lanzmann raise his hand with a cigarette very close to the lens. However, the image is not even shaking lightly during the in- terview, as one would expect if a person is holding the bag. That the bag is moved around at least once in a while is evident because this interview consists of different camera focuses. At one point, we have a closer picture, where the man (Sucho- mel?) is looking directly into the camera, fixating it during a long period of time while talking. The question is, of course: why does he look at a totally unimportant bag?
Several times the man who is filmed will take his stick to describe a location on the map. At this moment we have a very close-up view of the map, from 30 or 40 centimeters, and when the camera turns back to the man's face, we know that this was not due to a later enlargement. But before that, when the tip of the stick moves up and down or in diagonal to show some ele- ments on the map, the camera follows carefully the movement from a very short distance to catch the wand. Vertically, hori- zontally, in diagonal. This happens about 12 minutes after the beginning of the interview and lasts about 12 or 13 seconds. Following the movement of the wand from such a distance to
Peculiarities
Suchomel's statement has two claims in particular which render the entire testimony very suspicious:
1. In one scene he reports — in contrast to all other witnesses — that the Germans had to remove the corpses in Treblinka all by themselves:15
"No one wanted to clean it out [the rotting heaps of corpses]. The Jews preferred to be shot rather than work there. [...] So Wirth went there himself with a few Germans and had long belts rigged up that were wrapped around the dead torsos to pull them. [...] they themselves helped with the cleanup. Lanzmann: Which Germans did that? Suchomel: Some of our guards who were assigned up there. Lanzmann: The Germans themselves? Suchomel: They had to. Lanzmann: They were in command! Suchomel: They were in command, but they were also commanded. Lanzmann: I think the Jews did it. Suchomel: In that case, the Germans had to lend a hand."
2. And of course, in Suchomel's account as well, those victims led to the smoking and stinking burning pits, where an uninterrupted shooting is going on, no- ticed nothing unless they actually stood at the very edge of the burning pits; and in Suchomel's story as well, the corpses burned almost without any fuel:16
"Suchomel: [...] Until they reached the end, they saw nothing. Then they'd see the dead in the pit. They were forced to strip, to sit on a sandbank, and were killed with a shot in the neck. They fell into the pit. There was always a fire in the pit. With rubbish, paper and gasoline, people burn very well."
catch a minor detail is evidently useless and more than risky and revealing for somebody who is trying to hide a camera in a bag. But such a scene happens several times during the inter- view, each time he uses his stick, the camera is getting very close to the map, following each movement of the stick, even in diagonal. Then it turns back to his face when he goes back to his chair. But it misses the head a little bit for 1 or 2 seconds: a bit too high, too much to the left, from a distance of a few me- ters. But the camera turns immediately to catch most of his face correctly for the rest of the interview, and this several times. I imagine that some people have a third eye.
The first time that I saw Suchomel's interview I was struck by this, thus I replayed the same scenes perhaps two dozen times, each time with a bag near me. Each time I tried to imag- ine how I should handle the bag without raising Suchomel's suspicion and how the man in front of me could be blind enough not to discover that something very odd was happening. After 20 or 25 times perhaps I gave up.
Claude Lanzmann seems to be dishonest. Either regarding his claim that the interview was taped with a camera hidden in the bag of his assistant and without the knowledge of the inter- viewed man, or regarding his claim that the interviewed man was Suchomel — or regarding both claims.
Notes
1 The Jewish Journal, New York, June 27, 1986, p. 3, and the Jewish Tele- graph Agency, June 20, 1986.
2 "Ce que je n'ai pas dit dans Shoah," VSD, interview by Jean-Pierre Chabrol, July 9, 1987, especially p. 11; this information was first discovered and published by Robert Faurisson, Journal of Historical Review, 8(1) (1988), pp. 85-92, here p. 87.
First published in German in Vierteljahreshefte fur freie Geschichtsforschung 4(2) (2000), pp. 168f.
3 The most frequently quoted mainstream books on Treblinka are probably: Yitzhak Arad, Belzec, Sohihor, Treblinka. The Operation Reinhard Death Camps, Indiana University Press, Bloomington and Indianapolis 1987; Alexander Donat (ed.), The Death Camp Treblinka, Holocaust Library, New York 1979.
4 Weber, Mark, Andrew Allen, "Treblinka", in: Journal of Historical Review, 12(2) (1992), pp. 133-158.
5 "The Treblinka Holocaust", in: Ernst Gauss (ed.), Dissecting the Holocaust, The Growing Critique of,, Truth " and „ Memory ", Theses & Dissertation Press, Capshaw, AL, 2000, S. 467-495.
6 Treblinka. Vernichtungslager oder Durchgangslager? , Castle Hill Publis- hers, Hastings 2002.
7 Friedrich P. Berg, "The Diesel Gas Chambers: Ideal for Torture - Absurd for Murder", in op. cit. (note 5), pp. 435-465.
8 W. Luftl, "Sollen Liigen kiinftig Pflicht sein?", Deutschland in Geschichte und Gegenwart 41(1) (1993), pp. 13f. At the time this paper was written, Walter Luftl was President of the Austrian Association of Civil Engineers.
9 Yuri Suhl, The story of the Jewish resistance in Nazi Europe, Anthology on Armed Jewish Resistance (1939-1945), Vol. 4, 1984, pp. 73ff.
10 Ibid., p. 75, and Vol. 2, p. 48 and 609.
1 1 From Yitzhak Arad (ed.), The Pictorial History of the Holocaust, Macmil- lan, New York 1990, p. 299,
www.fmv.ulg.ac.be/schmitz/Holocaust/trebln01.html.
12 With today's technology, almost anything could be remote controlled, but back in the late 70s and early 80s, cameras and remote controls were rather big and clumsy and not easily available!
13 Schalling testified about the alleged use of the so-called gas wagons close to the camp Chelmo.
14 Ibid, p. 52.
15 This was taken from the book Claude Lanzmann, Shoah: An Oral History of the Holocaust, Pantheon Books, New York 1985 pp. 56f.
16 Ibid, p. 63.
168
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
Rudolf Vrba exposes himself as a liar
By Ernst Bruun
In his book, Pieta, Professor Georg Klein, Stockholm,2 relates a conversation he had with Rudolf Vrba in Vancouver in 1987. Professor Vrba is notorious for being the only one of the hundreds of Auschwitz escapees3 who wrote a famous report4 in 1944 and later also a book about the camp.5 When Klein met Vrba in 1987, they naturally talked also about the film Shook, which Claude Lanzmann had made a few years before.6 Vrba was one of the survivors interviewed by Lanzmann in his film. During the first Ztindel trial in Toronto in 1985, Vrba admitted that when he wrote his book he had "used my licence of poet".7 In the book, however, the same Vrba claims that his report on the camp and the figures concerning Jews gassed was the truth and a very accurate ac- count.
The now published report that he wrote after his escape from Auschwitz is dated "Bari, 20. April 1945," and titled „Zeugenaussagen von zwei Fluchtlingen aus den Auschwitz-Birkenau-Vernichtungslagern in Oswiecim, Po- len" (Witness testimony of two escapees from the exterminati- on camps Auschwitz-Birkenau in Oswiecim, Poland). It is said to be a German translation from a Hungarian original. At the end of the report by Vrba and his comrade there is a table with the heading:
„A conservative estimate [by the two refugees] about the number of Jews who were exterminated in Birkenau be- tween April 42 and April — according to their nationality. " The supposedly conservative sum of all the Jews killed is given as "ca. 1,765,000." It should be kept in mind that this figure does not include the hundreds of thousands of Jews de- ported from Hungary after April, 1944. No serious researcher has been able to find evidence for a number of victims higher than a million — including non-Jews and the group of Hungar- ian Jews. The number of French Jews killed in Auschwitz given by Vrba is 150,000 — to be compared with the 75,000 of the detailed name lists of Jews deported from France to all the camps until August 1944 (in- cluding survivors).9
In the film interview Vrba says that between August 1942 and April 1944, he saw about 200 trains arriv- ing to the camp — which would mean about 200,000 deportees — and that he also knew that within two hours 90% of these people would have been gassed. He claims to have been
Rudolf Vrba before the war8
one of those who hauled out dead bodies from the railway trucks at Auschwitz main station, to be carried by lorries to the crematoria two kilo- meters away (in Birkenau). And he added that all of the first 1,765,000 Jews killed landed on this old plat- form, two kilometers away from the crematoria. Later, he stated, a new platform was built to receive the one million Hungarian Jews to be "blitz- vernichtet." (lighting-fast extermi- nated). Anyone who tried to tell the arrivers of the gassing was slain or shot dead.
Beside the gassing (the 'main product'), Auschwitz also yielded some other products. Vrba said that Krupp and Siemens had plants there. (He did not mention IG Farben.) Ar- yan prisoners had a certain influence and attained a systematic improve- ment of the conditions. But the lower the death rate, the more prisoners were gassed instead in order to keep manpower constant.
Later in the film, Vrba mentions the Jewish families from Theresienstadt who were allowed to keep their hair and their luggage. They were marked "SB [for German Sonderbehand- lung = special treatment] with a six month quarantine." He knew that "special treatment" equaled "gassing," but why the half year respite? The reason for this was something this almost omniscient man did not know. When the six months were at an end, a rumor was spread that the Theresienstadt group was to be sent to the Heydebreck camp. Vrba knew better, of course, and tried to persuade a certain Freddy Hirsch to lead a revolt. Hirsch felt that he was responsible for the welfare of the chil- dren and refused to resort to violence. He committed suicide in- stead. The lorries with the SB-Jews did not turn towards Hey- debreck, so Vrba concludes that the whole group was gassed. Since nobody wanted to revolt, Vrba decided to escape, which he did on April 7, 1944. All this he tells us in the film Shoah.
Vrba in 2000: The smile of a liar
Dr. Rudolf Vrba 10
Professor Emeritus
Department of Pharmacology & Thera- peutics
Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia
2176 Health Sciences Mall
Vancouver, British Columbia
Canada V6T 1Z3
Tel: (604) 822-3852
Fax: (604) 822-6012
E-mail: vrba@interchange. ubc. ca
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No.
2
169
rom Auschwitz
Propaganda Lies
And Vrba's camp experiences naturally became the topic when he met another Holocaust survivor. Klein asked Vrba if his colleagues knew what he had experienced during the War. To begin with, Vrba did not answer the question. Later, how- ever, he mentioned, sardonically smiling, that one of his col- leagues had been upset when he unexpectedly had seen Vrba in Lanzmann's film. The colleague had wondered if everything that Vrba said in the film was really true, to which Vrba an- swered:
"I do not know. I was just an actor and I recited my text. "
Which was commented by his colleague as follows:
"Most extraordinary! I did not know that you were an actor. Seeing that, why was it said that the film was made without actors? "
Hearing this revelation, Klein turned speechless and re- frained from asking any more questions. In his book he says
that he will never forget Vrba's sar- donic smile. Any informed reader certainly knows that much of what Vrba says in Shoah is at variance with well established facts. Vrba is simply a reckless liar, to put it in plain language. But was he perhaps for once telling the truth when he said "I was just an actor and I recited my text"? That would certainly ex- plain his sardonic smile that made such an impression on his credulous colleague.11
Notes
First published in German in Vierteljahreshef- te fur freie Geschichtsforschung 6(4) (2003), pp. 447f.
Stockholm 1989, p. 141.
2 G. Klein is a Jew who was born in Hun- gary from where he emigrated to Sweden in 1947. There he studied medicine and became active in cancer research in subse- quent years. He is now retired.
3 Krystof Duni-Wascowicz, Resistance in the Nazi concentration camps 1933-1945, Warsaw 1982, p. 213.
4 Together with Alfred Wetzler; cf. Heiner
Lichtenstein, Warum Auschwitz nicht bomhardiert wurde, Cologne 1980, pp. 133-181.
5 Rudolf Vrba, / Cannot Forgive, London 1963.
6 Claude Lanzmann, Shoah, Paris 1985.
7 Cf. protocol, Queen versus Ziindel, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, starting Jan. 7, 1985, pp. 1244-1643, especially pp. 1447f. and 1636; see online www.vho.org/aaargh/engl/vrbal .html
8 www.fiba.dircon.co. uk/fibaNEW-2000/text/fiba_00_kasztner.htm
9 Cf. CO. Nordling, "Was geschah den 75.000 aus Frankreich deportierten Juden?", VffG 1(4) (1997), pp. 248-251.
10 http://www.pharmacology.ubc.ca/vrba/RudolfV rba.html
1 1 Hans Rudolf von der Heide, who translated this article into German, re- marked: During the week of September 22, 2002, 1 saw a large poster in the pedestrian zone of Bad Kissingen (Bavaria) indicating that the cultural of- fice of the City of Bad Kissingen would be featuring Lanzmann's movie Shoah. In emphasized fonts, the following could be read on this poster: "Lanzmann: T know very well that all witnesses are liars. [...] However, I succeeded to recall into memory of the people the almost forgotten Shoa. [...] Because so far, only a bit more than two percent of the population have watched my movie.'"
Abraham Bomba, Barber of Treblinka
By Bradley R. Smith
I have seen the complete nine and one half hour documen- tary, Shoah, which purports to be "An Oral History of the Holocaust." It was produced, directed, narrated and is now be- ing promoted by Claude Lanzmann. From the newspapers I gather that Lanzmann is an assimilated French Jew who speaks neither Hebrew nor Yiddish. Born in 1925 in Paris, he is pres- ently 78 years old. He worked as a journalist for many years in association with Jean Paul Sartre and the prestigious French philosophical magazine Les Temps Modernes until 1970, when
he turned his attention to making movies. The reputation he gained, first of all due to the movie Shoa, enabled him later to become a professor for documentary films.
That is, Claude Lanzmann worked for twenty-five years in the eye of the intellectual storms that swept across France fol- lowing the end of World War II. As a journalist he certainly learned during those twenty-five years how to conduct profes- sional interviews. He certainly learned, through his associations with Sartre, de Beauvior, Camus, and those who criticized the
170
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
great triad, how to pursue a train of thought, considering the high-powered company he kept. It is a real eye-opener then to watch Lanzmann reveal his intellectual corruption in scene af- ter scene of this shoddy movie, which he claims took ten years to complete.1
My favorite interview in Shook is the one with Abraham Bomba, the Barber of Treblinka. Lanzmann has given this scene the title "crying out with truth". I am not alone in my fondness for Bomba either. Many critics have commented on his performance. They gave him rave reviews. George Will of ABC Television, for example, wrote in the Washington Post that Bomba' s narrative was "the most stunning episode in this shattering film." Some alleged eyewitnesses to gas chamber horrors recount stories that are so lacking in credibility that they can be dismissed out of hand. Others repeat stories that cannot easily be shown to be false but reveal the characters of the talebearers to be so sniveling and shameless that one feels compromised by even listening to them. Bomba is an important character in the Holocaust-survivor-eyewitness scenario in that he embodies much of both of these characteristics.
The lack of credibility starts already with the way this entire scene was filmed. It looks like Bomba is in his barber shop cut- ting the hair of a customer while imitating the gestures he used to make 40 years earlier when cutting the hair of people who al- legedly were about to die in a 'gas chamber.' However, as R. Faurisson has shown, this entire scene was staged. During the interview in Israel, Bomba was already retired and had given up his barbershop in New York. Lanzmann simply rented a shop in Israel and had Bomba pretend it was his.2
If one follows Bomba's story, he had been interned in Treb- linka about four weeks when the Germans announced that they wanted some barbers for a special detail. Bomba volunteered, of course, then helped the SS identify 16 other Jewish barbers among the internees. They were all taken to the second part of the camp where the alleged gas chambers were. They were led inside the gas chambers where a Kapo3 (almost certainly a Jew) explained that the 17 barbers were to shear the hair from the women who would arrive to be gassed.
Here, Lanzmann asked Bomba about the greatest murder weapon of all time, the German homicidal 'poison gas cham- ber':4
Lanzmann: "How did it look, the gas chamber? "
Bomba: "It was not a big room, around twelve feet by twelve feet. "
And there you have it. Claude Lanzmann is finished with his in- depth investigation of how the Treblinka gas chamber looked. It takes all kinds. If I had been in Lanzmann' s shoes I could have thought of a few more questions to ask about 'how it looked.' Par- ticularly if I had some feelings about the stories that maybe a million of my kinsmen had been exterminated in it. Maybe I would have wanted to know what
Abraham Bomba, the barber of Treblinka, here during his inter- view for Claude Lanzmann 's movie Shoah in Tel Aviv (VHS Video).
Bomba could tell me about what material the walls of the gas chamber were made of, what the roof was made of. How would Bomba describe the ventilation system? Where and how, ex- actly, did the 'gas' enter the room? Maybe Bomba would have remembered if the room had been illuminated or not. If it had been, how? What were the doors made of? How did they seal them so that the 'gas' could not escape? As historians have not bothered to ask these simple questions, Lanzmann could have done their work for them and helped uncover one of the great mysteries of the 20th century — what the fabled 'Nazi gas chambers' really looked like.
As to whether Bomba is being honest about having seen a gas chamber at Treblinka, consider Rachel Auerbach's descrip- tion of that gas chamber in her The Death Camp Treblinka.5" Auerbach is given a place of honor in this, the most compre- hensive book published on the camp. As she was (she died in 1976) a permanent research staff member of the Yad Vashem Holocaust Memorial museum in Jerusalem, her description of the gas chamber should not be dismissed out of hand:
"The floor of the gas chamber was sloping and slippery. The first ones in would slip and fall, never to rise again. Those who followed would topple over them [...] About 25 to 45 minutes later [after the 'gassing' began, that is], the chutes on the other side could be opened and the corpses tumbled out. "
And if that is not convincing, then consider what the 1965 verdict of the German trial against the former camp commander Kurt Franz summarized about these gas chambers after many years of thorough criminal investigation, during which all available witness testimony had been collected and evaluated:6 "The solidly built edifice, made of bricks and erected on a concrete foundation, contained 3 gas chambers of an area of some 4 x 4 m (13 x 13 ft) and a height of 2.6 m, as well as a machine room for the Diesel engine and the electric generator of the camp. [...] Opposite to them [the entrance doors], every gas chamber had a folding door made of thick wooden planks. These were some 2.50 m wide and some 1.80 high and when opened could be folded upward like modern garage doors. They ended at a ramp 0.7 m above ground, which ran around the entire building. The floor of the gas chambers was tiled and inclined towards the ramp. " This was similar to a report compiled by Zdzislaw Lukasz- kiewicz on behalf of a Soviet in- vestigative commission, based upon several witness statements:7 "A large shutter was in the exterior wall of the cham- ber, which could be opened upwardly and served to re- move the corpses. The cham- bers was tiled, the floor in- clined to the outside, which facilitated the removal of the corpses. "
It would seem that while he was being interviewed for Shoah Mr. Bomba forgot about how slippery the floor is supposed to
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
171
have been in his little gas chamber. It seems he forgot how it slanted steeply in the direction of the chutes/folding doors. As a matter of fact, Mr. Bomba forgot to mention the chutes or large folding doors. If Lanzmann had read the literature even superfi- cially, he would have been aware that Bomba was leaving a few things out of his story. As Lanzmann claims he worked for ten years on Shook, I'm going to guess that Lanzmann is aware of the three description of the Treblinka 'gas chamber' quoted here, which are the main pillars on which the story rests.
In any event, once Lanzmann 's curiosity was satisfied about how the gas chamber looked (not big), he wanted to know what happened next.
Lanzmann: "Can you describe precisely? "
Bomba: "Describe precisely... We were waiting there...
inside the gas chamber... until the transport came in.
Women with children pushed into that place... They were
undressed, naked, without clothes, without anything else —
completely naked — because they come from the undressing
barrack... where they had undressed themselves. "
Lanzmann: "What did you feel the first time you saw all
those naked women?" [That kind of stuff is called Holo-
Pornography, B.S.]
Bomba: "I felt that accordingly I got to do what they
[Germans] told me, to cut their hair. "
There you have in a nutshell how eyewitnesses to the gas chamber atrocities typically describe their behavior. They did whatever the Germans or anyone else requested of them. When they received a request to help prepare their kinsmen — and even their own families as well as we shall soon see — to be ex- terminated, or genocided or whatever, these fellows say they hopped right to it. I don't believe them, but that's the persona that they have chosen to project to the world at large. In the neighborhood where I grew up men who behaved like Bomba claims he behaved would have been spit on. In the upside-down world of Holocaust survivordom, however, the Abraham Bom- bas are seen as martyrs and even heroes. It's a peculiar psycho- logical slant on manly behavior, for hasn't Bomba according to his own story become a working partner in the alleged genocide of his people?
Lanzmann expresses a little more curiosity about how Bomba cut his victims hair than he did about how the gas chamber looked. He asked if Bomba had shaved them, if he had used scis- sors, and if there had not been mirrors available inside the gas chamber. Bomba said that he did not shave the women, and that the Germans had not provided the barbers with mirrors. Lanzmann: "There were no mirrors? " Bomba: "No, there were no mirrors. There were just benches — not chairs, just benches. "
There's an interesting note. According to Bomba the Ger- mans had provided benches inside the little gas chamber for the ladies and their children to sit on. We're not told how many benches. There could have been 17 individual ones, but more likely Bomba would have said — if Lanzmann had thought to ask him — that there were maybe four or five, half a dozen per- haps. Two or more ladies with their kids could have sat on each bench. No matter how you slice it, traffic is picking up. Seven- teen barbers, the benches for 17, and now the 17 women and their kids are all there together inside the gas chamber, which is
about the size of a small bedroom in the rear of an ordinary tract house — and the hair is flying. And all this on a slippery floor with a steep slope toward these folding doors or chutes. Of course, none of the benches start sliding, or did they? But we are not finished yet:
Lanzmann: "You said there were about sixteen [... Lanzmann has forgotten that Bomba makes the seven- teenth...] barbers? You cut the hair of how many women in one batch? "
Bomba: "In one day there was about, I would say, going into that place between sixty and seventy women in the same room at one time. "
You might think that Claude Lanzmann is about to express some doubt about how Bomba is blocking out this scene for him: 17 barbers, benches, and sixty to seventy naked women in the 160-square-foot room. Lanzmann isn't going to express doubt, however, about anything told to him by a survivor. Lanzmann is a Holocaust fundamentalist. The role of the fun- damentalist in any cult is to accept absolutely the testimony of those who claim to have been eyewitnesses to the original sa- cred event. Once the original story is made to fly, the most ele- gant minds can elaborate on it endlessly in good faith.
Lanzmann urged Bomba to say something more about how he felt as he went about preparing the women and their children to be exterminated. Something more perhaps than the homely: "I felt that accordingly I got to do what they told me, to cut their hair."
Bomba: "I tell you something. To have a feeling about that... It was very hard to feel anything... your feelings dis- appeared, you were dead. You had no feeling at all. " This is a universal response by eyewitnesses to the alleged gas chamber murders. The claim Bomba makes that his feelings were "dead," that he had "no feeling at all," resembles the 'temporary insanity' claim murderers use to diminish their re- sponsibility for their behavior in the eye of the State. The ordi- nary murderer claims that his mental process was so diminished at the time he murdered that he was not responsible for his act. The eyewitness to the alleged gas chamber murders claims that his sensibilities were so diminished while he worked as a link in the murder process that he was not responsible for his behav- ior. The murderer was out of his 'mind,' while gas chamber eyewitnesses ran out of 'feeling.' When Bomba describes him- self as being inwardly "dead," he is saying that he cannot be judged guilty of being an accomplice to mass murder. He can accuse Germans of whatever he likes — participate in the crimes he accuses them of — yet remain forever innocent while Ger- mans remain forever guilty. It's a nice set-up.
In the film Bomba goes on to illustrate how dead he was inwardly while working for the SS at Treblinka. He describes how he shared the hair from women he knew personally from his hometown, from his own street: "[...] and some of them were my close friends." They would ask Abe Bomba: "What's going to happen to us?" But Abe would hold his tongue. With Abe it was just snip, snip, snip. "What could you tell them?," he asks Lanzmann. "What could you tell?" Snip, snip, snip.
Now Bomba relates to Lanzmann the story that reviewers have remarked on more than any other in Shoah:*
172
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume I ■ No. 2
Bomba: "A friend of mine worked as a barber — he was good barber in my hometown — when his wife and his sister came into the gas chamber... I can't. It's too horrible. Please. "
Lanzmann: "We have to do it. You know it. "
Bomba: [holding back tears] "I won 't be able to do it. "
Lanzmann: [very quietly] "You have to do it. I know it 's very hard. I know and I apologize. "
Bomba: [struggling] "Don 't make me go on, please. "
Lanzmann: "Please. We must go on. "
Bomba: [unable to control tears, leaving the frame for a moment, returning] "I told you it 's going to be very hard. They were taking that [hair] in bags and transporting it to Germany. "
Lanzmann: "Okay, go ahead. What was his answer when his wife and sister came? "
Bomba: "They tried to talk to him and the husband of his sister. They could not tell him this was the last time they stay alive, because behind them was the German Nazis, SS, and they knew that if they said a word, not only the wife and the woman, who were dead already, but also they would share the same thing with them. In a way, they tried to do the best for them, with a second longer, a minute longer, just to hug them and kiss them, because they knew they would never see them again. "
To tell the truth, this is my kind of story, simple and lurid. There is also some new information in it. In addition to the 60 to 70 women and their kids, and the barbers and the benches, there were also "SS men" inside the 12ft x 12ft gas chamber. We don't know how many, but as Bomba speaks in the plural he must mean that there were at least two. If Lanzmann had thought to ask him about it, Bomba might have said that there were 10 or 15 SS men in there. And then there is the welcome news that the SS would allow the Barbers to hug and kiss certain of the naked women inside the gas cham- ber. Bomba speaks only of married couples. Lanzmann might have asked perhaps how the SS were able to identify which of the naked women were married to which of the barbers. It must be doubtful that the naked women entered the gas chamber car- rying their marriage certificates. Maybe the barbers had previ- ously petitioned the SS to keep their own copies of their mar- riage certificates on the chance that just such a reunion as Bomba claims he witnessed would take place. On the other hand, maybe the SS men took the barber's word for who was married and who wasn't. If they did, it would betray a generosity of spirit that is not usually ascribed to the SS by Jewish survivors.
Imagine trying to visualize this scene from the wife's point of view. Try imagining what might have gone through her mind at the moment she spied her husband. The hope that must have jumped in her heart. Then what her thoughts were as her hus-
band sheared off her hair without speaking to her. Imagine what she must have felt as he held her silently for a minute or so, his cheek pressed lovingly against her scalp, then turned with scis- sors and comb to the next patient lady waiting her turn. Did his wife run her fingers over her skull and think:
"Ah, I've always known what kind of man you are. A schmuck when I married you and a schmuck today. " There are a number of observations that can be made about my presentation of Lanzmann's presentation of Bomba's testi- mony. It could be observed that while Rachel Auerbach's re- search suggests that Bomba is inventing his gas chamber story out of whole cloth, it can still be claimed that we are left with Auerbach's scholarly outline of the alleged Treblinka gas chambers. Therefore, while Bomba's investigations may de- stroy his own credibility as a witness, the Treblinka gas cham- ber story itself remains as it was, a documented story of a weapon used to annihilate about a million Jews. To give you a quick fix on Ms. Auerbach's scholarly in- stincts and her even-handed objectivity, I will quote from her famous essay "In the Fields of Treblinka":
As I read such passages in Rachel Au- erbach's essay, I take the trouble to re- mind myself that after the war she was "one of the first active members of the Jewish Historical Committee in Poland;" that after emigrating to Israel she became a "permanent research staff member of the Yad Vashem Holocaust Memorial Museum," and that this essay "In the Fields of Treblinka" was thought worthy of reprinting as recently as 1 979 by The Holocaust Library, which was found and is managed by survivors themselves and is distributed by a major Jewish publish- ing house, Shocken Books:9
"Polish people still talk about the way soap was manufactured from the bodies of Jews. 'Sent away for soap! ' was the expression the Poles would use when they spoke of transports to Treblinka, Belzec, and Sobibor. The discovery of Professor Spanner's soap factory in Langfuhr near Danzig proved that their suspicious had been well founded. Witnesses tell us that when the corpses were burned on pyres, pans would be placed beneath the racks to catch the fat as it ran off, but this has not been confirmed. But even if the Germans in Treblinka or at any of the other death factories failed to do this, and allowed so many tons of precious fat to go to waste, it could only have been an oversight on their part. They were fully capable of doing things like that. It was en- tirely in keeping with their proclivities. Only the newness of this branch of manufacturing was to blame for this omis- sion. If the Germans ever would make another drive across Europe, they would not make this mistake again. " Professors Spanner's 'soap factory' in Langfuhr near Dan- zig was apparently an invention of active members of self- proclaimed Jewish historical committees, based upon the entre-
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
173
preneurial reports of professional slanderers, and has since been kept alive by research staffs at Jewish Holocaust memorials around the world. A photograph of this 'factory,' with no documentation, appears in the scholarly Encyclopedia Judacia, published in Israel and shelved in many of the larger libraries across the United States.
Rachel Auerbach surprises her readers even with trailblaz- ing scientific findings:10
"In Treblinka, as in other places, significant advances were made in the science of annihilation, such as the highly original discovery that the bodies of women burned better than those of men.
'Men won 't burn without women. '[...] For this reason, the bodies of women were used to kin- dle, or, more accurately put, to build the fires among the piles of corpses, much as coals are utilized to get coke to burn... Blood, too, was found to be first-class combustion material. "
Mrs. Auerbach herself gives us a clue what some of her tales are worth, though. On page 48 of the quoted book, she tells us how Heinrich Himmler, while allegedly visiting Treb- linka in February 1943, had the honor and pleasure to witness the gassing of several nude women, which is just another ex- ample of Holo-pornography. In a rare flare-up of honesty, Au- erbach writes:
"As the Italian saying goes: 'Se non e vero, e ben trovato. ' (Even if it's not true, it's well invented.) " Forensic research on the territory of the former Treblinka camp, conducted by a Polish commission just prior to the Nur- emberg trials, concluded that no traces of mass graves could be found in the camp itself or its immediate vicinity, but that sev- eral mass graves with a maximum of several thousand victims of, in most cases, non-violent deaths were located some 500 m south of the camp.11 Interestingly enough, R. Auerbach partici- pated at one of these investigations, but instead of correcting her views, she simply hid these very important revelations.
Polish Jews such as Rachel Auerbach witnessed Germans destroying their culture. They witnessed Germans tearing apart Jewish families during the gigantic, brutal resettlement pro- grams. Those Jews can be forgiven their credulity and even some of their hatred, expressed in their eagerness to believe every accusation made against Germans, no matter how cor- rupt. Americans, however, who suffered nothing of what Euro- pean Jews suffered at the hands of Germans, have little right to indulge themselves with it.
Which brings me to Mr. George Will, Washington Post col- umnist and ABC Television commentator. I am willing to ac- cept Mr. Will's own assessment of himself. He is a brilliant and principled man. I disagree with some of his viewpoints, particu- larly with his obsessive-compulsive attachment to the state of Israel, but I can't show that attachment to be morally wrong. As luck would have it, Mr. Will has written a column about Shoah where he makes a remarkable observation:12
"The most stunning episode in this shattering film lasts about five minutes and involves 'only ' the talk of a barber now in Israel. While he clips the hair of a customer he talks, never needing to raise his voice to be heard over the small sounds of a familiar ambiance. He describes his duties in
Treblinka, cutting hair from naked women on the threshold of the gas chamber, and the day a fellow barber saw his wife and sister enter the room. "
Remarkable, eh? Cutting hair from naked women on the 'threshold' of the gas chamber. Do you see it? The threshold is the place directly below the door to a room. A doorsill perhaps. An entrance or a doorway. According to Mr. Webster it is a "place or point of beginning." Taking Mr. Will's own obvious assessment of himself, he is the proud possessor of a formida- bly organized intellect. A man who always distinguishes care- fully between similar but different points of fact. While doing so enrages those lesser men who cannot do it themselves, it gives Mr. Will a lot of pleasure, which is why he does it so regularly. That being so, what am I to make of the fact that Mr. Will has changed the wording of Mr. Bomba's testimony?
Lanzmann: "Excuse me. How did it happen when the women came into the gas chamber? Were you yourself al- ready in the gas chamber? "
Bomba: "I said we were already in the gas chamber, waiting over there for the transport to come in. Inside the gas chamber — we were already in. "
If Mr. Bomba swears that he was inside the gas chamber at that particular time, why does Mr. Will write that he barbed those naked women on the "threshold" of the gas chamber? Mr. Bomba can be seen on film saying that he was inside the gas chamber when he did it. In the text of the film published by Mr. Lanzmann, Mr. Bomba again insists he was inside the thing. What happened in Mr. Will's brain as he wrote "threshold" rather than "inside" or "in"? Is it possible that Mr. Will found Mr. Bomba's story ludicrous? He wouldn't want to say so pub- licly, of course, as Mr. Will is one of our brightest and best Holocaust fundamentalists. Nevertheless, having the kind of re- lentlessly rational mind that he does, something at the bottom of it might not have bought Mr. Bomba's story the way Mr. Will would have preferred to buy it. Maybe a single wire got crossed in the depths of Mr. Will's brain, out of the millions that are twisted around in there. Maybe Mr. Will wanted to ex- press some doubt about Mr Bomba's story but could not bring himself to do it. He may have been in that peculiar place where writers sometimes find themselves — where they are smart enough to know that something needs to be said but haven't got
174
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
enough character to go ahead and say it. When this happens it causes a psychological malfunction described cravenly as writer's block; he's got the habit of full production, but if he wasn't to spill the beans he had to turn somewhere. He turned to invention. I suppose in the moment it was easy enough for a man wired the way Mr. Will is wired to invent a threshold im- age and use it to replace the one Mr. Bomba invented. You can judge how more intelligent Mr. Will is than Mr. Bomba when you compare the rationality of the two opposing visualizations.
Now that Mr. Will had Mr. Bomba on the "threshold" of the gas chamber rather than "inside" it, Mr. Will could go on in- dulging his fantasy about Mr. Lanzmann's Shoah. As the "threshold" to an exterior door not only leads inside, but turn- ing about, leads to the great outdoors and indeed to the rest of the planet surface, there would be enough space out there for Mr. Bomba's barbers to ply their trade comfortably for the SS, and for all the naked ladies Mr. Bomba and Mr. Will together can conjure up. Mr. Will can indulge his other fantasy as well — that no serious criticism can be made of the testimony of any of that handful of alleged eyewitnesses who claim to have actually seen a 'poison gas chamber. '
In this scenario, as the eyewitness testimony is not allowed to be challenged, the genocide theory can't be challenged ei- ther, and if that is so, then European Jews had every right to conquer Palestine and the U.S. Government is morally obli- gated to protect forever the state of Israel. That's the line of thought programmed into the American citizenry. Mr. Will's threshold caper is a small example of how Holocaust Funda- mentalists use invention on the one hand and suppression and censorship on the other to bolster U.S. foreign policies and cover up hypocrisies and ethnic chauvinism of the largest part of organized Jewry here and abroad.
What could be plainer than that the worldwide Jewish community is being betrayed by this nonsense? Jews are being betrayed by their own leadership, and they're being betrayed by Gentiles like Mr. Will who profess to be friends and allies of the Jewish community but who in reality are merely allies of a disastrous Zionist leadership trapped within its own rhetoric, too ashamed to reveal the immense fraud upon which so much of its influence has been built.
Claude Lanzmann's Shoa may be seen as the masterpiece of Holocaust documentaries. But if that is so, then it is also the clearest declaration of bankruptcy ever delivered. After all, in his entire 9Vi hours of documentation, Lanzmann doesn't show us any documentary or physical proof for the claims he and his witnesses make. Most of these 9Vi hours are actually silent se- quences of railway tracks, stones, buildings, and countrysides, whose relation to the 'Holocaust' claims exists only through suggestion and imagination. He himself made his brainwashing technique pretty clear when he stated:13
"As a result of our filming the stones at Treblinka from
all angles, they have finally spoken. "
With the stones of Treblinka, Lanzmann meant the field of stones erected after the war on the area that once was the Treb- linka camp. Of course, those stones cannot speak about any- thing that happened before they were placed there. The stones in the soil underneath this memorial, however, could speak, if only one would ask them to: A thorough geo-physical examina-
tion of this entire area could confirm still today, if the Polish fo- rensic investigations of 1946 were correct, that is, whether or not the soil in and around Treblinka was ever disturbed by mas- sive mass graves and huge scale open-air incinerations.
But those stones Claude Lanzmann would never want to speak out, and probably for good reasons, since it would de- stroy his life's work and shatter his firm beliefs. It was in 1994 that Claude Lanzmann explained why he did not include any documentary or forensic evidence in his movie, but restricted himself to psychologically impressive, but scientifically unten- able witness statements:14
"There is not one second of archival material in Shoah because it is not the way I work or think, and besides it does not exist. [...] If I had found an existing film — a secret film because that was forbidden — shot by an SS and showing how 3,000 Jews, men, women and children, were dying to- gether, asphyxiated in the gas chamber of Krema 2 in Auschwitz, not only would I have not shown it, but I would have destroyed it. I cannot say why. It goes by itself. " If it sounds like the statement of an imbecile, as Serge Thion has put it,15 then read what Lanzmann had to say about his own movie Shoa in 1997: 16
"Not understanding has been my iron law. " So what is Shoa all about? It is about— NOTHING. Master Lanzmann himself explained it frankly:17
"It was necessary to make this film from nothing, with- out archival documents, to invent everything. "
"It is therefore a case of making a film with traces of traces of traces, [...]. With nothing one comes back to noth- ing.",s
Andre Glucksmann was a bit more sophisticated when he explained that this movie is not about what happened, but about what could have happened, what would have been possible, what is imaginable:19
"The strength of this film is not in showing what took
place — in fact it refrains from doing that — but in showing
the possibility of what took place. "
Se non e vero, e ben trovato
Notes
This article is an enhanced and updated version of chapter 11 of B. Smith's book Confessions of a Holocaust Revisionist, Prima Facie, Los Angeles 1987.
1 For other critical reviews of the movie, cf. Robert Faurisson, Journal of Historical Review, 8(1) (1988), pp. 85-92, on which I partly relied when quoting Lanzmann's statements about his movie; Theodore O'Keefe, ibid., pp. 92-95; Serge Thion, ibid., 16 (6), pp. 8-10, who also collected some of the quotes reproduced here.
2 Jean-Charles Szurek, L 'Autre Groupe, 10, 1986, p. 65; Times (London), March 2, 1986; L 'Autre Journal, May 985, p. 47; see Robert Faurisson, Journal of Historical Review , 8(1) (1988), pp. 85-92, here p. 87f.
3 Inmates with some authority over other inmates.
4 Claude Lanzmann, Shoah: An Oral History of the Holocaust, Pantheon Books, New York 1985. Unless otherwise noted, all the passages quoted in this article are from the Pantheon Books edition, pages 1 1 1-117.
5 Rachael Auerbach, "In The Fields of Treblinka", in: Alexander Donat (ed.), The Death Camp Treblinka, Holocaust Library, New York, 1979, p. 35f.
6 Quoted in Adalbert Riickerl, NS- Vernichtungslager im Spiegel deutscher Strafprozesse, dtv, Frankfurt 1977, p. 203.
7 URSS-344. Gosudarstvenni Archiv Rossiiskoi Federatsii (State Archive of the Russian Federation), Moscow, 7445-2-126, p. 321 (p. 5 of the report). I took this information from the excellent work by Carlo Mattogno and Jiir-
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
175
gen Graf, Treblinka — Vernichtungslager oder Durchgangslager? , Castle Hill Publishers, Hastings 2002, pp. 145-147.
8 The parenthetical descriptions of Bomba's reactions here are not in the pub- lished text. I have added them from memory. While I watched the film, I could not help but be touched by Bomba's sincere distress. His tears brought tears to my own eyes. At the same time I was aware of what a laugh I thought his story is. A nice irony for the psychotherapists to explain.
9 R. Auerbach op. cit. (note 5), pp. 32f.
10 ft/rf.,p. 38.
11 See C. Mattogno, J. Graf, op. cit. (note ), p. 104-114.
12 The Washington Post, Nov. 15, 1985.
13 Liberation, April 25,1985, p. 22.
14 Le Monde, March 3, 1994.
3 Serge Thion, "The Dictatorship of Imbecility", Journal of Historical Re- view, 16(6) (1997), p. 8-10,
16 Le Monde, June 12, 1997.
17 Le Matin de Paris, April 29, 1985, p. 12.
18 L 'Express, May 10, 1985, p. 40.
19 Le Droit de vivre, February-March 1 986, p. 2 1
The 'Discovery' of 'Bunker 1 ' at Birkenau: Swindles, Old and New
By Carlo Mattogno
Seven buildings in the infamous Auschwitz concentration camps are claimed to have been equipped with one or more homicidal gas chambers. Five of those buildings were the former Auschwitz crematoria. One smaller cremato- rium was located in the Auschwitz main camp, and four big crematoria were erected in the huge sub-camp Auschwitz- Birkenau. Since the end of World War Two, it was claimed that the gas chambers in those crematoria were the loca- tions of the biggest mass slaughter that ever took place in human history. Allegedly of minor importance were two former farm houses outside of the immediate perimeter of the Birkenau camp that are said to have been converted into gas chambers as well. A sudden turn happened in the middle of 2002, when a German mainstream journalist published a thesis according to which the Auschwitz crematoria did not, after all, serve as locations for mass slaughter. In his view, the two farm houses were the real location of this atrocity.1 Though this thesis was badly flawed,2 it came in quite handy that just a year prior to the publication of this journalist's provocative thesis news spread through Europe's me- dia that finally, after over 55 years, the actual location of one of these farm houses had been located — meaning that so far, no traces of this ominous farm house were known. The following article proves that the 200 1 media reports about the alleged discovery of this farm house were nothing but an unfounded hoax, produced by unscrupulous researchers and the media who are always eager to discover some 'Nazi' relics.
The 'Discovery'
According to the Kalendarium der Ereignisse im Konzen- trationslager Auschwitz-Birkenau two Polish farm houses at Birkenau were converted into 'homicidal gas chambers' by the camp administration prior to the construction of the four crema- toria. The 'Red House,' known as 'Bunker 1,' is said to have been put into operation on 20 March 1942, and the 'White House,' or 'Bunker 2' is said to have been put into operation on 30 June of the same year. "Bunker 1" is said to have been de- stroyed in 1943, and no traces of it are said to remain. The de- struction of 'Bunker 2' is said to have taken place at the end of 1944, but the foundation walls of the house referred to as 'Bun- ker 2' and which are said to have been used for this purpose, are still in existence and can still be seen, even today.
On November 20, 2001, the Italian daily paper Corriere delta Sera published an article by Gian Guido Vecchi4 on page 35 entitled "Shoa. L'inferno comincio in una casa rossa" (Shoah: Hell Began in a Red House). The article claims that a certain Marcello Pezzetti discovered the location of the alleged 'Bunker 1' of Birkenau at precisely this location. A private house occupied by a Polish family is said to have stood on the spot until only a few months ago, but that the house has since
been torn down. According to Marcello Pezzetti, the house in question was none other than 'Bunker 1' ("[the author] won- dered how anyone could live in a gas chamber with a clear con- science").
This is absurd, since the alleged 'Bunker 1' was destroyed in 1943.
The 'discovery' is said to have taken place in the summer of 1943, when "Schloma" (correctly: Schlomo; in Polish, Szlama) Dragon, his brother, and Eliezer "Esisenschmidt" (correctly: Eisenschmidt) are said to have taken 'discoverer' Pezzett to the house which appears to the left of the small photograph on the above mentioned page of the Corriere delta Sera.
Who is Marcello Pezzetti?
Marcello Pezzetti is a researcher for the CDEC (Centro di Documentazione Ebraica Contemporanea, Centre for Contem- porary Jewish Contemporary Historical Documentation) in Mi- lan. He is chiefly known for his activity as an adviser during the filming of several Holocaust films (Spielberg's Schindler's List and Benigni's La vita e bella) as well as for the release of the CD Destinazione Auschwitz (Destination Auschwitz). The latter is a sort of video game for the purpose of brain-washing the
176
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
younger generation. Among Italian jour- nalistic circles, which make a great deal of space available to him for the presenta- tion of his arguments, Marcello Pezzetti is considered "one of the world's best- known experts on Auschwitz and the Shoah", something which he himself, tragically, also appears to believe!
The first announcement of the 'Discovery'
Marcello Pezzetti had already an- nounced the remarkable 'discovery' of al- leged 'Bunker 1' at Birkenau four years ago. Pages 94-97 of the February 26 edi- tion of the Italian weekly paper Pano- rama, carried an article by Valeria Gan- dus under the title "Operazione memoria" relating to the UNESCO decision to in- clude the former Auschwitz concentration camp
"into a program for the restora- tion and maintenance of the world's most important museums. " (p. 94) The journalist announced that the re- mains of Crematoria II and III of Birke- nau were constantly:
"desecrated and plundered by Nazi skinheads in search of macabre souvenirs as well as by negationists greedy for 'scientific' proof. " (p. 94) For this reason, UNESCO cooked up a program, which
"provides that that which remains of the two buildings should be pro- tected (presumably by glass walls), and only made accessible to scien- tists. " (p. 96)
The object of the project is obvious. Revisionist researchers are to be pre- vented from accessing the ruins of both these alleged extermination installations to prevent in-depth research into the highly significant question of the 'chem- istry of extermination' and the existence of the alleged Zyklon B introduction holes. Fred Leuchter and Germar Rudolf have obviously put the fear of God into the official purveyors of history.
The journalist furthermore tells us that "an Italian, Marcello Pezzetti, his- torian and researcher at the CDEC (Centro di documentazione ebraica contemporanea), is one of the world's leading experts on the sinister location of the collective conscience of Europe, UNESCO Delegate for the project and the control execution. " (p. 94f.)
|ht»gT-»iaai. *lflH
■ IHi a M*riajL* L«w i, i*. JlwEa lntU.a, «r, jj. l*i«f* ■. fit i. uiiMiuli- IraniKi. iL. I-Iimi** Uilail l-t 2",
PPPPpla "1—71 -« L_l Li_ I ■ la a p J *aaa h a. ll —
plakt — laJMa a*aa*a*a | I II I ■ i I j, I 1 1 Jairi* raaa.laaa.Uhi
1a baiaaka aaJaM a*l|l ibaaall lEHat HI *■ '»» a aaJlLLIll-4 aO-IMM-tJ '"a"T «t aJUL*
»lal aPralLalT, ^ratf ipmi I**' ■ XEa-a* aBU
1 I
■v'aaa aiiataj dap a '*» fj ILHIrllHai,. *+ami iaaftMl -jaaJaaaa^ a LaLaaai HIE -JHC Prill ImLtl. frjftla "1*1* + LP-- ! I JHlfi HaraalT. "''F l*ralrE I IL» lEIIUal, ¥ WEU Bl» 1 ra Ut.1 «M LM VPIJLIj lijal I I ■> PI ITTja. JaP'Ta E(™l|,
* ; ■'■ ' : .. . . >j. ft-,-.: . i. i.
raai aauaTp KajaajLp I Ja^* iLeaLa. JrTllhai BE Ed Hipp I BaaaLpf, L'Lalj J .1 phi Ja* L*J I kl ? ■* M al]IIP JLIH- LMIb
■ ILL aa Baa -a » aar— -iiiaau* aaaiaar laala |z alaaaaVl
I hlllt V ■. UPJPHHL. h«lllLaap kjk lupai pippp paJl
*ipr»pp" Ta -r-"l -Iraal. aaa.ia.alp ill Jlkl Irtr
m«aaaaUt a >~ la—] a jaaaa laaa I llallli a p. ip. .'ft -* M" aaLra. M Jaaal. Eatl. Ilka aa.pl»4.lp pa Ma Ilka, apaal *-aa—1ai
r+il, araaaa aaaaaa., typw li uaja"a*r pIt - .-ii^iati
•aaJH IEJB I m Flat] aXip araaajparpj aa ■ ■ 1 -
* ipjiiiiirr- aaalaaataia mmfti afa ,L+ a»iiaa-ihH h|jllii aaap aapaaaalaa .V HMar. 111HIIH lafap laar/ I LaJ-
F/'g.. 1' F/rs/ page of the report by Mrs. Jozefa Wisihska (full sized on the Inter- net www.vho.org/tr)
Fig. 2: Topographic sketch by Mrs. J. Wisihskas, attached to the report. The sketch shows conditions in 1941. The upper side corresponds to the western side.
I TV-*! ■. plrT-iiiu.
Fig. 3: Caption of sketch
This is followed by the announcement of the extraordinary 'discovery':
"In studying the original plans of the camp and interrogating the last survivors of the first 'Sonderkom- mando ' unit (the prisoners who had to undress the victims and collect [!] the corpses), Pezzetti discovered the loca- tion and the building. 'Few inmates spoke of Bunker 1 in the post-war tri- als. But none of them was brought into the camp to identify the location and building', Pezzetti relates. Politi- cal realism, mistakenly intended to soothe old wounds, prevented uncom- fortable research on terrain which should have remained protected and dedicated to memory; instead, it was settled by Poles who were on the lookout for cheap land on which to rebuild houses destroyed during the war, as well as a few earlier residents of the area driven away by the Nazis and who returned there. The latter in- cluded returning persons who, prior to the construction of Birkenau, re- sided in the house later converted into a gas chamber. And on the ruins of the old farm house partially blown up by the SS in November 1944 [sic!], they built the new house. " (p. 95) At that time this extraordinary 'dis- covery' hardly attracted notice, but today things look differently, since this time the Holocaust Industry had its hand in the matter.
Let us first examine how the historical value of this 'discovery' was readapted. The following includes several findings from a current study on the alleged 'Bun- ker' of Birkenau, a study which is not yet completed.
The historical value of the 'discovery'
Let it be stated first of all, that the 'Bunkers' of Birkenau never existed as extermination installations. On the con- trary, the Birkenau camp was surrounded by several Polish houses, some of which were torn down, while others were taken over by the Auschwitz camp administra- tion, given a "Bauwerk" number and name, and used for the intended purposes. For example, the Polish house to which the number 44 was assigned was desig- nated "Bauwerk 36c", converted accord- ingly, and made available to SS-Sturm- bannfuhrer Casar, the head of the agricul-
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 • No. 2
177
tural operations, as a dwelling house. Other buildings were left in an unconverted condition, but not taken over by the camp administration and remained unused. Two of these houses were finally given the designations 'Bunker 1' and 'Bunker 2,' but only as the result of a laborious literary procedure which began in August 1942, continued between 1942 and 1944, and finally took concrete form in February 1945 thanks to Szlama Dragon.
But the problem which is of concern to us here is of quite another nature. The location of 'Bunker 1 ' indicated by Mar- cello Pezzetti is in complete contradiction to the only source available to official historiography. This is a report given on August 5, 1980, by a Mrs. Wisihska, and made available to the Auschwitz Museum, taken down by Franciszek Piper, and pub- lished in the anthology "Oswiadczenia" (Testimonies), volume 113, pp. 77-78 (see Fig. 1).
Mrs. Wisihska stated that her family had lived in the imme- diate vicinity of the Birkenau Camp before WWII. In 1941, the house, owned by her uncle Jozef Harmata (as well as by her son-in-law Gryzek), was confiscated and converted into 'Bun- ker 1' by the Germans. In 1949, Mrs. Wisihska returned to the
Fig. 4: Photograph of the alleged house owned by Mr. Czarniks taken by Franciszek Piper on September 20, 1985. Below: The courtyard between this house and the adjacent house is easily visible in my photograph (Fig. 6, next page).
property which had belonged to him. The house owned by her uncle (alleged 'Bunker 1') no longer existed. A few meters away from the location where it had existed, a house was later built which at that time belonged to a Mr. Stanislaw Czarnik. Mrs. Wisihska appended a topographic sketch of the location to her report (see Figs. 2 and 3), showing the exact positions of the old house owned by J. Harmata (alleged 'Bunker 1') and the new house owned by Mr. Czarnik.
Mrs. Wisihska obviously had no proof that the house owned by her uncle J. Harmata and her son-in-law Gryzek was con- verted into any 'Bunker 1' by SS men stationed at Auschwitz. This was quite obviously suggested to her by the Auschwitz Museum, which, in 1978, in an official camp plan of Birkenau, had already indicated the exact location of the alleged 'Bunker 1 ' on an official map of Birkenau camp at the exact location indicated by Mrs. Wisihska in 1980, and needed this fictitious, subsequent 'proof in order to justify itself. That the choice fell on a member of the Harmata family is explained by the fact that the judgment of the HoB Trial (2 April 1947) states that the Pol- ish houses converted into 'Bunker 1' and 'Bunker 2' had be- longed to the peasants Wiechuja und Harmata living in Brez- inka (Birkenau). But the names of these two peasants were arbi- trarily chosen from among people who had lived in the area and whose houses had been taken over by the SS, so as to conjure up fictitious 'proof of the location of the 'Bunker.' In their specious reasoning, the judges equated 'Bunker 1' with the house owned by the Wiechuja family, and 'Bunker 2' with the house owned by the Harmata family. In so doing, they followed the findings of the expert Roman Dawidowski in his report dated September 26, 1946. In contrast, Mrs. Wisihska stated that the house converted into alleged 'Bunker 1 ' had belonged to the Harmata family and not the Wiechuja family, which amounts to further proof that the identification of the two 'Bun- kers' with the houses of the two families was completely spe- cious.
On September 20, 1985, Franciszek Piper produced four photographs of a house which had, according to him, belonged to Mr. Czarnik. One of the photos, bearing the archive number "neg. no. 21225/3" in the inventory of the Auschwitz Museum, shows a frontal view of the house in question (see Fig. 4), which is identical to the photograph appearing in the above mentioned article (see Fig. 5). But this house, also photo- graphed by myself in August 2000 (see Fig. 6), is located on the other side of the street which now runs outside and along the western barbed wire perimeter of the camp (see Fig. 7), while the house owned by J. Harmatas (alleged "Bunker 1"), as clearly shown by the topographic sketch drawn by Mrs. Wisih- skas, was located further to the east, inside the camp's barbed wire perimeter and only a few meters north of the sewage treatment installation, which can still be seen today.
The house indicated by Marcello Pezzetti is located west of another symbol which cannot be overlooked: namely the monument to Soviet prisoners of war. This monument is lo- cated approximately 200 meters west of the sewage treatment installation and, therefore, west of the location where the house owned by J. Harmatas (alleged 'Bunker 1') formerly stood, close to the western fencing of the camp and the street running along this line (see Fig. 7). Access to this monument is by way
178
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
Photograph of the same house taken by F. Piper and published in the Corriere della Sera.
of an old barred gate. If one walks from there to the right or north, the house in question is located approximately 100 m away.
This house, which, according to Mr. Pezzetti, stood on the ruins of 'Bunker 1' or was even exactly identical with 'Bunker 1,' lies, as the crow flies, more than 300 m away from the loca- tion of the house owned by J. Harmatas, and, therefore, the former location of alleged 'Bunker 1.'
Based on the above, three conclusions can be drawn:
1) That a house (owned by Mr. Czarnik) was located only a few meters away from the house formerly owned by J. Harmats ('Bunker 1'), is in no way a discovery made by M. Pezzetti, but rather, a revelation by Mrs. Wisinskas.
2) The identification of the Czarnik house with the house in the photograph in the article in the Corriere della Sera had already been made by F. Piper eight years before the article by M. Pezzetti.
3) The identification of this house with 'Bunker 1' is incorrect, since the house in the photograph taken by F. Piper and M. Pezzetti, as well in as my own photograph, cannot be identi- cal to the house owned by Mr. Czarnik and cannot, there- fore, have been located on the ruins of 'Bunker 1.' It cannot, therefore, be the Czarnik house indicated by Mrs. Wisin- skas.
M. Pezzetti's 'discovery' therefore lacks all historical value.
Marcello Pezzetti's 'Witnesses'
M. Pezzetti reports that in 1993, Szlama Dragon, his brother Abraham, and Eliezer Eisenschmidt had led him directly to the house where 'Bunker 1 ' allegedly stood. But as will be seen be- low, Szlama Dragon was interrogated in 1945, first by the So- viets and then by the Poles, and had, at that time, shown him- self unable to give any information on the location of 'Bunker 1.' How can one then seriously believe that Szlama Dragon could, with complete certainty, find a location which he had been unable to find 48 years earlier? The matter becomes even more unbelievable when the witness, at the 26th session of the Vienna Trial against the architects of the Auschwitz crematoria Walter Dejaco and Fritz Ertl (March 2, 1972), after confusing Crematorium I with 'Bunker 2' on the previous day (!), found himself compelled to admit:5
"I can no longer remember after 30 years [...]"
The Revisionist ■ 2003 • Volume 1 • No. 2
Photo taken by myself in August 2000.
By a first-class miracle, therefore, Szlama Dragon remem- bers something 48 years later, which he had forgotten after 30 years, and which he didn't know three years later!
Szlama Dragon's brother Abraham did not appear as a wit- ness at either the H6B Trial or the trial of the Auschwitz guard personnel. Even later, he made no sworn statements and wrote no reports of any kind as to his experiences. The same is true of Eliezer Eisenschmidt. Both told their stories in the 1990s for the first time!6 In the interview published at that time, the Dragon brothers testified that they had worked at "Bunker 2" for one single day, in December 1942. 7 Szlama furthermore claimed to have worked there for only two days in 1944.8 That's all! Nei- ther Szlama nor Abraham were ever taken to alleged 'Bunker 1 '. How could they identify it in 1 993 with such certainly?
Eliezer Eisenschmidt, on the other hand, testified to having worked six full months at 'Bunker l,'9 but was nevertheless un- able to provide even a vague indication of its location.10 But that's not all: he was not even aware of the designation 'bunker' for the alleged 'gas chamber;' rather, he believed that the "bun- kers" (plural) were identical to the alleged "cremation pits":11
My photograph, taken in August 2000, showing the street (from south to north) to the house in question. The building stands to the left rear (to the west), in front of the last tree on
the edge of the street. To the right rear (in the East), the barbed wire perimeer of Birkenau camp is visible; in the clear- ing visible in the foreground is the gate providing access to the monument to the Soviet prisoners of war.
179
"The pits, or 'bunkers ', as we called them, were large and deep. "
In his book mentioned above, Gideon Greif reports that in the summer of 1993, during Szlama Dragon's interrogation at the ruins of alleged 'Bunker 2,' "a friend from Italian televi- sion" had come and shown him a page from Szlama Dragon's affidavit drawn up in Polish in 1945. Based on this document, the Italian had wanted to find the location of the "cremation pits". Greif told him to ask S. Dragon himself, who was, after all, on the spot. The Italian is said to have been "speechless".12 But E. Eisenschmidt was also in Birkenau in the summer of 1993, 13 so that the "friend from Italian television" obviously was no other than Marcello Pezzetti. On this occasion, he then spoke with three 'survivors' and 'discovered' the alleged 'Bun- ker 1' — but why doesn't Greif mention this 'discovery' with a single word?
EM
0 Q Q D D 0 OQOODQDQtk
DQOODDQOGD
! |
1=3 |
; |
|
[ — i |
BIN
Plan von Birkenau, entnommen dem Buch Auschwitz. Der „Bunker 1" nordlich der Klaranlage des Bauabschnitts III ist mit dem Buchstaben J" gekennzeichnet, der in der Bildlegende wie folgt erklart wird: „Erste provisorische Gaskammer".
Greif s book reproduces the map of Birkenau15 which al- ready appeared in the Kalendarium der Ereignisse im Konzen- trationslager Auschwitz-Birkenau (p. 27), in which the "1st provisional gas chamber" is indicated at the same spot (and with the same symbol) as in the book Auschwitz. Nazi Exter- mination Camp.16 1 will have more to say about this book be- low. The "gas chamber" was allegedly located north of the sewage treatment installation of Bauabschnitt (construction section) III, on the spot indicated by Mrs. Wisihska. But if it is true that Szlama Dragon, Abraham Dragon, and Eliezer Eisenschmidt had already indicated the exact location of 'Bunkers 1' as early as 1993 (naturally in the presence of Greif, who had asked them to come to Birkenau in order to in- terview them), why doesn't he mention it with as much as one single word? And why didn't the three witnesses correct the map of Birkenau reproduced in the book?
M. Pezzetti claims that the three witnesses had led him, without being asked, "starting out from Crematorium III" to the above mentioned Polish house. This is a mere allegation, about which every person who is only moderately familiar with the topography of Birkenau can only laugh, since the zone around the camp had changed enormously between 1943 and 1993.
If the story of the meeting between these four men is cor- rect, the three pitiful old men simply took M. Pezetti wherever he wanted to go!
The views of the Auschwitz Museums on the 'discovery'
On November 20, 2001, he Monde published a short article by Henri Tincq, entitled "Le mystere enfin leve de la premiere chambre a gas d'Auschwitz-Birkenau" (The Secret of the First Gas Chamber of Auschwitz-Birkenau Finally Solved), which was nothing but a pale repetition of the article in Corriere della Sera. Via the Paris daily, news of the 'discovery' finally found an echo in the European and American press. The Auschwitz Museum also heard of M. Pezzetti's 'discovery' from Le Monde and answered it with an article written by Jerzy Sadecki, entitled "Auschwitz-Birkenau. 'Le Monde' Reveals a Secret That Never Was", in the Polish newspaper Rzeczpospolita (Re- public). In it, Jerzy Wroblewski, Director of the Museum, and Franciszek Piper had their say. I quote the most important ex- cerpts from the article, which I found in English on the website of the Auschwitz Museum:17
„It is not possible to live in something that does not ex- ist.
'That family could not have lived in a gas chamber, be- cause the Germans tore down the Little Red House in 1943. Not a trace of it remained; the Germans did not leave even a bit of its foundation there, ' explains Dr. Franciszek Piper of the Auschwitz-Birkenau State Museum. 'Only in 1955 did the owners of the property build a new house at the site of the gas chamber and move /«.'[...]
Wroblewski is puzzled by the Le Monde assertion that the site has only been discovered now. 'The location has long been well known, and did not constitute any sort of mystery. The location was identified in 1945 in the reports of both the Soviet and the Polish commissions. It was pointed out by prisoners who gave testimony at the time, in- cluding Schlomo Dragon. Camp Commandant Rudolf Hoss
180
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
described it in his memoirs, which were published later. 'All the guides who lead visitors around the camp know the lo- cation, ' Piper and Wroblewski both state. 'If the Le Monde journalist had wanted to obtain information at the source, in the Museum, we could have shown him the popular study Auschwitz: Nazi Death Camp, first published by Interpress in 1977, which contains a map of the Birkenau camp where the site of the first gas chamber is marked. Back in the 1980s, before anyone here had ever heard of Signor Pez- zetti, I consulted the property records and established loca- tion of the Little Red House to the meter, ' says Piper. A blueprint of the house can be found on page 114 of the third volume of the five-volume compendium Auschwitz, which was published in Polish, German, and English, ' he notes. [•••]
Marcello Pezzetti appeared in Oswiqcim several years ago and joined in the deliberations over how to settle the problem of the site of the Little Red House. Pezzetti found a sponsor, Richard Prasquier. After protracted negotiations, the Museum managed this year to purchase the property and move its occupants to another house, which was re- modeled. Teams of technicians from the Museum dismantled the structure on the site of the gas chamber, and landscaped the area. 'In the spring, ' says Wroblewski, 'we want to fence off the property, sow grass, plant thuja, and place a commemorative plaque in the middle bearing a brief history of the site and a floor plan of the first gas chamber. '
Today, Dr. Piper notes bitterly that 'we had been so happy that we would finally be able to do something at Auschwitz in a planned, deliberate way, without outside pressure or any sensationalism. Once again, however, it turns out that not even the noblest initiative connected with the history of the Auschwitz-Birkenau Nazi Death Camp — and there have been many — can be taken without misunder- standings and falsification.
The swindles of the Auschwitz Museum
The Auschwitz Museum therefore claims to have made the alleged 'discovery' itself, but does not dispute that the house re- ferred to by M. Pezetti stands on the spot where 'Bunker 1'
Erste Gaskammer entdeckt
Paris - Die erste erbaute Gaskammer des Konzentrati onslagers Auschwitz-Birke- nau ist gefunden worden. Es handelt sich um ein 1942 enteignetes polnisches Bau- ernhaus.
First Gas Chamber Discovered
Paris - The first constructed gas chamber of the concentra- tion camp Auschwitz-Birkenau was discovered. It is a Polish farm house which had been confiscated in 1942.
Brainwashing of the public by the German tabloid Bild, November 20, 2001. On the same day, the same sensational news was announced in Italian, French, and Ger- man media. A coincidence?
once stood. But Wroblewski und Piper can only defend this claim with risible arguments.
Wroblewski alleges:
"The location [of 'Bunker 1'] was identified in 1945 in
the reports of both the Soviet and the Polish commissions. It
was pointed out by prisoners who gave testimony at the
time, including Schlomo Dragon. "
This is completely untrue. None of the eyewitnesses in- terrogated by the Soviets immediately after the liberation of Auschwitz was able to indicate the location of 'Bunker 1,' neither on the terrain nor on topographical maps. This is true in particular for Szlama Dragon, the star witness to the al- leged 'Bunker,' who was interrogated on February 26, 1945, by the Soviets and later, on May 10 and 11 of the same year by the Poles. He was never able to identify the location where 'Bunker 1' had stood. Quite the contrary. Regardless of the presence of Dragon and other witnesses, the Soviets were so uncertain as to this structure that it appeared in quite a differ- ent location on the map drawn up on March 3, 1945, by Engi- neer Nosal for the Soviet Investigating Commission:18 outside the camp, approximately 300 m away from the north barbed wire perimeter of construction section III of Birkenau, i.e., approximately 500 m north of the location marked by the Auschwitz Museum on its official maps (beginning with the one in the book Auschwitz: Nazi Death Camp) and approxi- mately 500 m north of the location indicated by M. Pezzetti. The expert Dawidowski limited himself to accepting the loca- tion on the map drawn up by Nosal. This constitutes further proof that the Harmata and Wiechuja families had nothing to do with the houses converted into the alleged 'bunkers.'
None of the witnesses trotted out in the trials of H6B and the camp guards held in 1947 were able to identify the location of the alleged 'Bunker 1,' and this is also true of the witnesses who made statements about this building at a later time.
Wroblewski and Piper finally refer to the
"[...] popular study Auschwitz: Nazi Death Camp, first
published by Interpress in 1977, which contains a map of
the Birkenau camp where the site of the first gas chamber is
marked. "
It is true that the above mentioned book (published in 1978 and not 1977) contains a map of Birkenau indicating the location of 'Bunkers 1' but the bunker is not located outside the camp, where fust Franciszek Piper and then Marcello Pezzetti claims to have 'dis- covered' it, but rather, north of the sewage treatment installation, at the exact spot in- dicated by Mrs. Wisihska (see Fig. 8)!
Thus, both representatives of the Auschwitz Museum did not make an error in good faith, but they lie consciously.
The swindle is completed by Fran- ciszek Piper with the following statement: "Back in the 1980s, before anyone here had ever heard of Signor Pez- zetti, I consulted the property records and established location of the Little Red House to the meter. "
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
181
Here, Piper refers to the report drawn up by Mrs. Wisinskas and taken down by himself personally on August 5, 1980. But as already mentioned, this woman indicated an entirely differ- ent location of 'Bunker 1,' "to the meter", so that F. Piper is ly- ing in this case as well.
It is true that F. Piper, in his already mentioned work, Auschwitz 1940-1945. Studien zur Geschichte des Konzentra- tions- und Vernichtungslagers Auschwitz (Auschwitz 1940- 1945: Studies on the History of Auschwitz Concentration and Extermination Camp) published a 'plan' of 'Bunker 1,' but this contains no reference to the topographical location of the house and, moreover, in regards to structure, orientation, and size of the house, not only contradicts the plan of the house sketched by Mrs. Wisihska in 1980, but also the plan drawn by Engineer Nosal in 1945, based on information from Szlama Dragon!
Marcello Pezzetti is no better than Piper. In the Corriere della Sera article, he turns Mrs. Wisihska' s report into a:
"Plan of the plot of land, a document certified by signa- ture of the owner, containing a reference to the 'gas cham- ber '[sic] "
This is pure fantasy. The fact is that according to various German plans of the area of Birkenau, including the ex- tremely important plan of October 5, 1942, east of the future Construction Section III of the camp, within 500 m of the barbed wire perimeter, there were only six structures corre- sponding exactly to the structures indicated on the plan sketched by Mrs. Wisinskas (apart from Building no. 6, a stall, which does not appear on the plan). In the area in which, according to Mario Pezetti, the house built on the ruins of 'Bunker 1 ' stood, no building ever existed at that time!
This is irrefutable evidence that the 'discovery' of alleged 'Bunker 1' was not a pardonable error, but, rather, a vulgar swindle.
'Discovery' as a business
It is obvious that there are propagandistic and economic grounds for the alleged 'discovery.' With relation to the house which, according to Marcello Pezzetti, stood on the ruins of 'Bunker 1,' the Corriere della Sera writes:
"Today, the house and terrain have been sold, and the house torn down, in order to expose the foundations of the old bunker; the area is included in the tour of the Museum [during camp visits by tourists], and thought and prayer are dedicated thereunto ", Pezzetti explains. All this thanks to him and Dr. Richard Prasquier, a Paris cardiologist, who, as a small boy, survived the liquidation of the Warsaw ghetto together with his entire family and financed the en- tire operation. "
The very title of an article published in the Bollettino della Comunita Ebraica di Milano reveals the true purpose of Marcello Pezzetti's miraculous marvellous 'discovery':20 "Shoa [sic]: la prima camera a gas di Auschwitz diventa museo" (Shoah: The First Gas Chamber of Auschwitz Becomes a Mu- seum). The contribution begins with the following piece of news:
"Two Polish peasant families, the Harmata and Wichaj families (six persons with grandparents, son and daughter-
in-law, as well as two small nephews), moved to a brand- new house equipped with all types of finery. " The new house, the article continues, has been built thanks to the generosity of the Jewish cardiologist in order to "dedicate thought" to 'Bunker 1 "':
"Yes, since the family returned to the house in 1947, which had been confiscated by the Nazis in 1942 and was used as a gas chamber for the Jews until April 1943. " Therefore, the house that "the family" (which of the two families was it?) moved into in 1947 was no less than 'Bunker 1.' As a mitigating circumstance it may be assumed that this gigantic piece of idiocy was suggested to this anonymous jour- nalist by Marcello Pezzettia, who is quoted in this article as fol- lows:
"Eight years ago, when I discovered that the house in- habited by this family was none other than Bunker 1, i.e., the first gas chamber of Birkenau ", states Marcello Pezzetti of the CDEC foundation, "it became soon clear that this was a particularly important place for Jewish memory, which ought to be included in the tour organized for visitors by the Auschwitz-Birkenau Museum. " Marcello Pezzetti finally reports as to the shameful methods by means of which he succeeded in forcing the family — "who had no intention of leaving the house" — to leave the house. Af- ter eight years of pressure from the "local political authorities", "the new Director of the [Auschwitz] Museum, Stefan Wilka- nowicz", and, finally, from the "Officials of the Vatican in France for Relations with the Jewish World", as well as thanks to money from the "French philanthropist Richard Prasquier, the Chaiman of the Yad Vashem of France," the family finally capitulated and agreed to move to a new house 500 meters away. In the meantime, Marcello Pezzetti himself did not re- main inactive. He in fact unashamedly admits that the members of the Polish family had, if at all, "welcomed the move as the end of a nightmare",
"[...] since, to induce them to move, I had begun to have tour buses run past the house, which I described as the first gas chamber, and its garden as a graveyard. For years, upon our arrival, the old grandmother used to come out of the house and try to drive us away with rude words and ges- tures. "
The pitiful family was psychologically tormented by the 'visitors' in this manner, i.e., with the crudest violation of their property rights, "for years", to soften them up and force them to leave their house. Marcello Pezzetti adds that the new house was officially paid for by the Polish government,
"[...] because the family did not want the neighbours to
think that they received money from Jews. "21
The money invested in this transaction by the "French phi- lanthropist" was unquestioningly repaid with interest and com- pound interest, thanks to the propagandistic exploitation of this new pavilion by the Holocaust Industry. We can be certain that the first commercial transaction will be a video film — to be sold in the millions — on the 'discovery' of 'Bunker 1.' There is no doubt that the 'discovery' will even help the Auschwitz Mu- seum increase its sales.
There is also a significant ideological-propagandistic objec- tive to the 'discovery': it comes at a time when a severe crisis is
182
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
building up around the official historiography. After the col- lapse of the hot-air balloon blown up by Jean-Clause Pressac,22 the official historiography has nothing else to offer than a ster- ile rehash of arguments that are already threadbare, and is mak- ing no scientific progress at all. After the collapse, from Pres- sac, van Pelt, and Fritj of Meyer,23 it is caught up in its own me- diocrity, and no longer knows what to do to counter revisionist criticism.
The swindle with 'Bunker 1 ' is therefore becoming the new media weapon against revisionism.
Notes
This article first appeared in German in Vierteljahreshefte fiir freie Geschichts- forschung, 6(2) (2002), 139-145. A badly edited English version with the wrong author, no footnotes, no documents, and no appropriate illustrations ap- peared in The Barnes Review, 9(2) (2003), pp. 29-34. Translated by Carlos Por- ter.
1 Fritjof Meyer, "Die Zahl der Opfer von Auschwitz. Neue Erkenntnisse durch neue Archivfunde" (Number of Auschwitz Victims: New Insights from Recent Archival Discoveries), Osteuropa, 52(5) (2002), pp. 63 1 -44 1
2 For this, see Germar Rudolf, "Cautious Mainstream Revisionism", The Re- visionist, 1(1) (2003), pp. 23-30; Carlo Mattogno, "Auschwitz. Fritjof Meyer's New Revisions", ibid., pp 30-37.
3 Rowohlt Verlag, Reinbek 1 989, pp. 1 86 and 239.
4 The German tabloid Bild carried a short article on the matter the same day. Editor's note.
J.-C. Pressac, Auschwitz: Technique and Operation of the Gas Chambers, Beate Klarsfeld Foundation, New York York 1989, p. 172. 6 See Gideon Greif, Wir weinten tranenlos ... Augenzeugenberichte der jiidi- schen "Sonderkommandos" in Auschwitz, Bohlau Verlag, Kotn 1995.
I Ibid, p. 77.
8 Ibid, p. S3.
9 Ibid., p. 180.
10 Ibid., p. 177.
II Ibid., p. 178.
12 Ibid.,p.49l
13 Ibid., p. 167.
14 Ebd., unnumbered page.
15 Ibid., p. XLIVf.
16 Nazi Extermination Camp, Interpress Publishers, Warschau 1978
17 www.auschwitz.org.pl/html/eng/aktualnosci/czerwony_domek.html
18 Reproduced in J.-C. Pressac, op. cit. (note 5), p. 179.
19 Verlag des Staatlichen Museums Auschwitz-Birkenau, 1999, vol. Ill, p. 160.
20 Mitteilungsblatt der Judischen Gemeinde Mailand (Newsletter of the Jewish Community of Milan), 57 (1) (January 2002), p. 1 1.
21 Note that the Polish population around Auschwitz is perfectly well aware of the game played at this location by Jewish lobbyists! - Editor's note.
22 The best refutation of Pressac is the following German anthology, available in English online: Herbert Verbeke (ed.), Auschwitz: Nackte Fakten, Vrij Historisch Onderzoek, Berchem 1995 (online: www.vho.org/D/anf; Engl: www. vho . org/GB/Books/anf) .
23 See note 2 regarding F. Meyer; regarding van Pelt, see online: G. Rudolf, www.vho.org/GB/c/GR/RudolfOnVanPelt.html and . . ./CritiqueGray.html.
Ernst Ziindel: His Struggle for Germany
A Curriculum in Historical Dates and Keywords
By Dr. Ingrid Rimland
Without any doubt, Ernst Ziindel certainly deserves the title of being the most courageous, active, resourceful, pug- nacious and also the most effective "Holocaust" Revisionist that ever existed. One may or may not agree with his views and may or may not endorse his methods. But this judgment is unavoidable for both friend and foe. After a twenty years lasting uninterrupted struggle for the restitution of the honor of his German people and his fatherland Germany, the war-weary Ernst Ziindel intended originally to retreat to the Tennessee Mountains and to retire together with his wife Ingrid Rimland. For the last two years he dedicated almost all of his time to his hobby, which is painting landscapes. For him, the struggle of his life was over; others were supposed to rule the roost. But fate had other, quite cruel plans with him, that is, to have him spend the rest of his life behind bars in a German dungeon. As a tribute to the accomplishments of this great German, whose struggle will now unfortunately keep on going, his life will be summa- rized and honored in this article. May his courage and perseverance be a shining example for the young generation.
1939-1958: Childhood and Youth
Ernst Ziindel was born on April 24, 1939, in Calmbach in the Black Forest, Germany, the fourth of six children of lum- berjack Fritz Ziindel and his wife, Gertrud Ziindel, nee Meyer, who came from the Augsburg region. From 1938 to 1947, his father, a confirmed Social-Democrat, was in the military as a medic — first at the front and then in American captivity. His mother was a devout Christian.
World War II and its dreadful aftermath for Germany made a lasting impression on the little boy, especially the Allied bombing attacks and the aggravating and dangerous strafing at-
tacks of the fighter bombers, called Jabos, which attacked eve- rything in Germany that moved in the fields, forests, meadows, and on the roads and rails. Added to this were the hunger, the cold, and the bitter privation following Germany's collapse.
Ziindel' s first school days found him in the basement of his hometown's Protestant church, because the French occupation authorities had billeted soldiers in the local school. Despite malnutrition and the resultant illnesses such as pneumonia, hunger edema etc., the youngster turned out to be a good stu- dent, a talented and intelligent but painfully shy boy. Art, his- tory, and essay writing were his favorite subjects in school.
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
183
Starving and frequently ill, he was nonetheless soon draw- ing beetles, bees, and flowers for his classmates or helping them with homework assignments and writing essays for chil- dren of "wealthy" parents. In this way, he earned his first "extra rations" — a jam sandwich every now and then.
Before long, the teachers alerted Mother Ztindel to her son's artistic talent, and as a result she found an apprenticeship posi- tion for him in Pforzheim, known as the "Golden City" before the war, a city which had been almost entirely destroyed by massive bombing raids just shortly before the war's end and where up to 20,000 people had been cremated alive in a hor- rendous fire storm.
Ztindel completed his apprenticeship years in a Graphic Arts Institute in bombed-out Pforzheim, 20 km away. He also attended classes for three years in the Graphic Arts Department of the Trade School. He passed his journeyman's exam with good grades and tried to advance in his profession by applying for a job in Osnabrtick, in far-distant northern Germany. One of his reasons for this first "emigration" was to learn proper Ger- man— until then he had spoken only Swabian, a dialect which is rather different from High German — and also to rid himself, unobserved by his family and friends, of his troubling shyness. In both he succeeded only to a degree.
1957 was the time of Allied-imposed German re-armament, a process pushed by Konrad Adenauer. Ztindel had been raised as a Christian and pacifist and for this reason soon found him- self facing a dilemma regarding the impending term of military service. He decided to emigrate a second time, this time for real to overseas, in order to avoid conscription into the Bundeswehr, the German Armed Forces. At that time Canada was the only country in the Western world, which did not require compul- sory military service of young men. Canada became his country of choice.
New Home Abroad
September 3, 1958: 19-year-old Ztindel arrived in French- speaking Montreal, Quebec, Canada. He did not know anyone there. He spoke only a few words of English, which he had learned through a correspondence course. He did not speak any French. Soon afterwards he boarded an immigrants' train to To- ronto, where English was spoken.
In the English night school for immigrants in Toronto, which Ztindel attended immediately after his arrival in Canada in order to improve his language skills, he met an intelligent and pretty French-Canadian woman who became his wife one year later. This very young marriage produced two sons.
Soon after, the Ztindel family relocated back to the French-speaking part of Canada and settled in Montreal, Quebec, where Ziindel met Adrien Arcand, the French-Canadian author, newspaper publisher, political philosopher and party leader of a pre-war, pro-German, National-Socialist Christian Party.
Prior to WWII, Mr. Arcand had been a well- known man in Canada. During the war, he had been locked up for six years in a Canadian concentration camp for his political views — without a charge, with- out a trial, without a sentence, only on the suspicion that he might pose a "risk to Canada" during the war.
In this camp Arcand contracted a kidney ailment from which he never fully recovered. Neither he nor other party members who had been imprisoned along with him, among them Camillien Houd, the French-Canadian Mayor of Montreal, Quebec, Can- ada's largest metropolis, ever received so much as a cent in "restitution"!
Like all young people of his post-war generation, Ztindel had been taught to hate Hitler and all he stood for and had been brainwashed by Allied occupation authorities-produced books in post-war German schools. Canadian business associates soon suggested to Ztindel that he should visit Arcand, due to the lat- ter's political background and historical knowledge, especially of German- Jewish matters and World War II history. Even though at that time Ztindel, like all the young people his age who had gone through the post-war German school system un- der Allied occupation control, had never doubted the officially taught, Allied-imposed version of Third Reich history, the books and documents he found in Arcand 's library soon made him first curious, then suspicious of what he had been told re- garding World War II. This new information eventually changed his life.
Arcand took the young German under his wings because he understood and knew how to counter the poison of "re- education," the false picture of history instilled in Ztindel's young mind by the Allied "re-educators". He did this with his- torical truth from original sources, documents and books in or- der to enhance Ztindel's understanding of historical analysis. Under Arcand' s influence and guidance, his knowledge and his personal library encompassing more than four thousand vol- umes, to which he granted the young German free access, Ztindel's thinking soon began to detoxify and to recuperate. It was thus a French-Canadian who turned the young immigrant, thirsting for historical truth and political knowledge, into a thinking German — in distant Canada!
And so it happened that, as news reports reached him in Canada about the first great Auschwitz show trial in Germany in the early 1960s, Ztindel already felt the first doubts and Re- visionist stirrings. Despite a demanding day-job as graphic art- ist and photo retoucher he continued to attend evening classes at Sir George Williams University in Montreal, where he stud- ied political science, history and architecture. He wrote his own column, titled "Politics: Past, Present and Future", for the stu- dent newspaper, and contributed items to the university televi- sion broadcasts, as well as articles for the ethnic press.
About that time, the Cuban Crisis awakened the Canadians' interest in the threat of Communism, and Ztindel began to give
Ernst Zundel in trade school 1954
Zundel with Adrien Arcand 1963— his Politi- cal Mentor, prior to leaving on a 3 1/2 month tour of Europe to meet and interview famous writers, politicians and former soldiers
184
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
anti-Communist lectures at private clubs such as Kiwanis, Ro- tary etc., in churches, schools, lodges, at businessmen's lunches etc. He also discovered his talent for political radio commentar- ies and live debates. Almost every evening or night, Montreal residents could hear Ziindel on well-known radio talk shows, where he soon became the local Communists' and Zionists' verbal nemesis. Often, stations invited him as guest panelist or participant for hours long broadcasts.
Ziindel painted a great deal in his spare time and soon be- came widely known for his landscape paintings and watercol- ors, of which he sold more than 700 in Canada and around the world. His paintings and graphic artwork also earned him extra cash, awards and public recognition. In his free time, by writing about current events to newspaper offices and radio and televi- sion stations, he persistently defended his homeland, Germany, against anti-German hate propaganda, which was ever more on the rise.
First Political Activities
Soon a group of like-minded people found themselves drawn to him. Together with his friends, he organized demon- strations and protests outside movie theaters and newspaper of- fices, which presented slanderous anti-German films, articles and sentiments and which engaged in negative stereotyping and hate propaganda against his homeland. This resulted in frequent television and radio interviews on the topic of the German con- centration camps, the National Socialist government's policy toward Jews, Gypsies etc.
Thus, Ziindel saw himself forced to deal psychologically, intellectually, and historically with National Socialism and with the phenomenon later to be referred to as "the Holocaust". At that time, the word "Holocaust" had not yet entered the Cana- dian vocabulary as a synonym for the alleged extermination of the Jews. The term did not become generally accepted until 1977 through the television miniseries by that name, based on a novel by Gerald Greene.
In 1967, Lester Pearson, head of the Liberal Party and Ca- nadian Prime Minister, resigned for health reasons. Ziindel ran for the position of Head of the Liberal Party who would auto- matically become Prime Minster of Canada, if elected as Party leader. Even though he was an immigrant and the youngest candidate ever to run for that office in the history of Canada, he made it to the finals and addressed a live audience of 25,000 people in the Sports Stadium of Ottawa. There, he pleaded for an end to anti-German propaganda in the Canadian media and for the reunification of his homeland. The speech was broadcast by all the radio and television stations in Canada.
Zundel declaring his candidacy for Ernst Zundel as commercial artist, Prime Minister of Canada, Spring, 1973 1968
To his amazement, his then pending application for Cana- dian citizenship was turned down by the government of the day — without explanation!
In 1968, having become financially independent thanks to his talent as graphic artist and painter, Zundel embarked on an almost one-year-long tour of Africa, the Middle East, Israel, India, and Asia all the way to Japan, to expand his political ho- rizon and understanding of political conflicts. He read, ana- lyzed and digested everything about history he could get his hands on, especially from Jewish sources, and worked hard on acquiring an independent education. Intensive studies of, and interviews with, political thinkers from every persuasion and nationality, as well as with politicians, writers, military leaders and eyewitnesses of World War II to university professors and book authors from many parts of the world, followed next.
The Becoming of a Holocaust Revisionist
In the early 1970s, Zundel again roamed the world with notepad, tape recorder and film camera. He met Thies Christo- phersen who wrote a booklet entitled Die Auschwitz-Luge (The Auschwitz Lie), which Zundel translated into English and then published. This was a key event for the young German national.
Christophersen was a German agronomist who had been stationed in Auschwitz during the war and, together with Auschwitz inmates, had worked in the satellite camp at Raisko to produce natural rubber, which the Germans desperately needed, from dandelions and other plants. He even spent his honeymoon in the Auschwitz camp area. After the war, he wrote a frank and honest account of his observations and ex- periences there. In this booklet, he stated that he saw no gas chambers in Auschwitz, even though he had free access to all areas of the camp for over a year.
Soon Zundel also published the writings of American Pro- fessor Dr. Austin App, one of the best-known German- American community leaders of the post- War period, and trans- lated and published his study The Six-Million Swindle.
Because Zundel rebelled and, unlike anybody else in Can- ada, did something against anti-German hate propaganda, his name soon became a household word. Time and again, his anti- Holocaust demonstrations were mentioned in the press and shown on television. Rapidly he became very well known over- seas as well.
In the winter of 1977 and spring of 1978, together with friends, Zundel organized letter-writing campaigns to govern- ment agencies on all levels in Canada, the United States, and Germany, and protested against the growing and ever- escalating anti-German propaganda in the press and the broad- casting media. In these early years, well-known Cana- dian politicians and journalists commented in a positive vein on this topic and his activities.
In summer and fall of 1978, Zundel and his friends protested almost on a daily basis against anti-German hate films on TV, especially against the historically false, emotion-laden miniseries Holocaust, which was broadcast throughout North America every night for a week, along with much maudlin promotional hype in the press. Many interviews on the radio, on TV and in the press followed. The Holocaust Lobby reacted
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
185
fiercely to Ztindel and his friends, who were soon viciously verbally attacked and slandered as "Nazis" by commentators, columnists, and politicians looking for votes.
Spring/summer 1979: Ztindel and his rapidly-growing worldwide circle of like-minded friends continued to demon- strate publicly against anti-German hate films on the topic of the "Holocaust," which were being broadcast ever more fre- quently throughout Canada, the United States, Europe, and even in Argentina, Chile, and Australia. Ztindel organized counter-demonstrations in many places and countries. The Jo- hannesburg/South Africa office of the German weekly maga- zine Der Spiegel — embarrassed by being called "Nestbe- schmutzer" (befoulers of their own nest) — called Ziindel in To- ronto and asked that the demonstrations outside their downtown offices be stopped. In return, Der Spiegel offered to report about Ziindel' s worldwide "anti-Holocaust campaign".
Ztindel' s friends agreed to stop. A team of Spiegel reporters did, in fact, come to Toronto from New York, took pictures and made tape recordings of Ztindel's group at work. However, the interview with Ziindel was never printed in Der Spiegel, This was a painful but valuable lesson for Ztindel.
At the end of 1979, Ztindel attended a conference at North- rop University in California, where the "Institute for Historical Review" was founded. There, he conferred with Revisionists from around world, all of whom, to his amazement, had also re- searched and questioned the so-called "Holocaust" for years. It was there that he found stimulating intellectual reinforcement, as well as companions and invaluable contacts.
Ziindel was most impressed by Dr. Arthur Butz, Professor at Northwestern University and author of the trailblazing study and soon-to-be standard Revisionist text The Hoax of the Twen- tieth Century, and by Professor Dr. Robert Faurisson of the Lyon II University in France. Ztindel was impressed by Dr. Faurisson' s downright fanatical devotion to detail and historical truth and by his research and document discoveries in the ar- chives in Auschwitz and other former German concentration camps in the East. Especially Dr. Faurisson' s scientific, photo- documented comparisons of American gas chambers and al- leged German "gas chambers of the Third Reich" amazed and astounded Ziindel. This had a profound impact on him. He promised Dr. Faurisson to pursue these clues independently in North America.
Spring/summer 1980: Ztindel met Ditlieb Felderer, the Swedish Revisionist, who, beginning in the 1970s, had under- taken numerous arduous trips and had conducted more than 30 examinations and investigations of Auschwitz and the other former German concentration camps in the East, collected many artifacts, recorded valuable interviews and taken over 30,000 color slides of the sites. Ziindel also went on America- wide lecture tours with Thies Christophersen, Udo Walendy and other Revisionists.
Ztindel's publishing firm, Samisdat Publishers, also at first purchased and then produced the first Canadian edition of a British publication Did Six Million Really Die?, authored by Richard Harwood, an Englishman. In the middle 1970s, this publication — a most fateful one for Ziindel — had already begun its triumphal march as an international revisionist bestseller through 18 nations and 12 translations. In the fall and winter of
1980, Ziindel distributed many tens of thousands of copies of Did Six Million Really Die? worldwide in several languages, free of charge, financed by donations, to university professors, teachers, clergymen, politicians, and media outlets in North America and Europe.
The Holocaust Lobby sounded the alarm about this "Ztindel Truth in History" campaign! There were many interviews from all parts of the world, and this politically uncomfortable publi- cation was even sent to the British Columbia Minister of Justice by someone in the hope that he would move to prosecute Ztindel. He did not!
Beginning of Persecution
In spring and summer 1981, Ziindel distributed tens of thou- sands of audiocassettes with Revisionist content worldwide — again free of charge, again financed by donations. An almost simultaneous mass mailing of tens of thousands of his autobio- graphical booklet An mein Volk (To My People) to friends and European recipients of his newsletters resulted in a media up- roar in Germany and Canada — and house searches in Germany: Late March 1981 saw a flood of almost 2,000 German police raids on the homes of Ziindel supporters, from Flensburg all the way to Garmisch-Partenkirchen, to confiscate this revisionist ma- terial. Everywhere, the search teams demanded and confiscated Ztindel's tapes and the so-called "hate-mongering green booklet" titled An mein Volkl It is said that truckloads of seized material were sent to Stuttgart, where legal proceedings had been insti- tuted against Ztindel for "incitement of the people". These Ger- man raids caused a big stir in the Canadian media as well.
On May 31, 1981, 2000 Jewish demonstrators gathered in front of the Ziindel-House in Toronto's downtown streets, wav- ing placards and chanting in unison to demand charges against Ztindel and his deportation from Canada. The police could hardly restrain the milling, agitated crowd. Ztindel's team guarded the building from the inside. Equipped with tape re- corders and movie cameras and disguised as reporters, other friends and supporters mingled with the demonstrators and pho- tographed and documented the pandemonium and their threats of assassination and arson against Ztindel. This resulted in the first educational video Genocide by Propaganda made of the footage gathered that day. This color video dealing with anti- German hate propaganda, the Holocaust etc., was also distrib- uted to the North American media, mostly free of charge, again financed by donations. Again, many press, TV and radio inter- views followed.
In November 1981, in an unprecedented move, the Cana- dian state denied Ziindel his postal privileges! Ziindel was banned from mailing anything within Canada, or from Canada to abroad. No letters, no bills, no tax papers, nothing at all could now be mailed to or by Ziindel anywhere or anytime! Failure to comply with the postal ban, he was informed, would mean four years' imprisonment. This decree was not based on any kind of verdict in a trial; it was imposed dictatorially and unilaterally by the Postal Minister alone and was immediately put into force by "Postal Police" with no prior warning. Fortu- nately, Canadian law granted Ztindel the right to appeal to a Postal Tribunal and to have the matter investigated. Ztindel ap- pealed the ban and asked for the establishment of a tribunal.
186
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
The government had no choice to create such a tribunal, since Ziindel insists on his right. During that tribunal, the wealthy Jewess, Sabina Citron from the "Canadian Holocaust Remembrance Association" and none other than the notorious "Nazi hunter" Simon Wiesenthal turned out to be the true insti- gators of the persecution directed against Ziindel.
As a result of this, Ziindel was now fighting for his profes- sional survival. Fortunately, he achieved several legal modifica- tions. For one, his graphic arts studio was exempted from the postal ban, and so Ziindel managed to survive economically, albeit only barely. The once-thriving company Samisdat Pub- lishing, however, began to lose its financial footing due to this postal ban. Only over-the-counter sales were possible. Tapes and book sales fell off rapidly. Frightened supporters sent fewer donations. His enemies gloated and already saw victory in sight.
All the while, the name "Ziindel" and his message were spreading despite or because of the ban. Educational revisionist mailings from the United States maintained the connection via an American address with his ever-growing, worldwide circle of friends, especially in the English-speaking world.
End of 1982, a new era of mass education starts for Ziindel: VHS tapes with documentaries about Holocaust revisionism are being copied by the hundreds in the far-flung corners of the world by supporters. Hundreds were sent to Ziindel's now global circle of friends via the still-functional American out- post. These videos were a big hit with supporters all over the world. It was American free-speech supporters and financial donors who kept Ziindel's operation alive in these critical eleven months. The American pillar of his work stood firm! The technical conversion to video was made possible particu- larly by generous donations from elderly German women and men who could still clearly remember the Second World War. These oldsters made great personal sacrifices at that time. Ernst Ziindel became their spokesman and hero. He closed the gen- eration gap. Finally here was a voice which spoke of their suf- ferings during the War and which defended their Generation and Germany's honor!
In late summer of 1982, Ziindel's German passport expired. The German Consulate refused to issue him a new one. Now Ziindel could not even travel to the neighboring country, Amer- ica. He was stuck in Canada like a mouse in a trap. In Ger- many, attorney Jiirgen Rieger fought for Ziindel's freedom in the Stuttgart proceedings conducted against him for "inciting the people" as well as for his right to receive a new German passport. In the course of these proceedings, Rieger was able to look at 200 pages of top-secret documents from the German state. These documents, for the first time ever, provided written evidence of the Federal Republic of Germany's vassal status to the Jewish lobby and made this state of affairs shockingly clear! These papers also included letters from snoops and in- formers, which the German Consulates and the German Em- bassy in Canada evidently utilized in Canada to obtain informa- tion on German-Canadians in that country, including their names and addresses.
A brief example, stated in one document: On the occasion of a visit to the Consulate, the German Consul in Toronto re- ceived a petition from one of the Jewish leaders of Toronto, re-
questing that the Consul provide him (the Jewish leader) with incriminating materials on Ziindel. The Consul assured him that he had none! Seeking help and advice and trying to be obliging, he wrote to the Foreign Office in Bonn. The people there prom- ised to help him out. The Bonn Department of the Interior was also contacted. Bonn's efficiency proved to be truly amazing! More police raids took place in Germany! Only a few months later, the Department of the Interior in Bonn wrote to the For- eign Office in Bonn, which in turn had its lackeys stationed on- site in Toronto at the consulate and whom it now advised to please see to it that the incriminating material, which was even then being shipped to Canada as diplomatic papers, would be passed on to the Jewish leader in Toronto! It was that easy! And Bonn was that eager to cater to Jewish wishes directed against a German citizen living abroad, a man who had fought for decades to clear Germany's name! This is what went on be- hind the scenes in the Federal Republic of Germany!
The First Legal Victories
In winter 1982, Ziindel surprisingly won his postal ban case before the Canadian Postal Tribunal. The mail, which had been held back, was now delivered to Ziindel by the truckload. Most of the checks had expired. Much of the mail had been rifled and even stolen — by whom, remains a mystery to this day. Ziindel suffered staggering financial losses. His publishing company, Samisdat, recovered only slowly, the ban had caused an 80% drop in income. Many supporters became disheartened and withdrew, frightened of the consequences of being linked to Ziindel.
Perversely enough, Ziindel never received a copy of the Postal Tribunal's verdict. Only after more than 12 years, he was finally granted the right to see his own verdict in this matter through the courts and Freedom of Information requests! He was not given a copy, however; rather, his lawyer had to copy it by hand, and type it into the computer she had brought along — right there in the Postal Administration Office! Why such elaborate secrecy? Today Ziindel knows from other documents which he has gleaned from the government via the courts: the government was seized by panic because the Postal Tribunal, which had been impaneled by the government itself, told the Postal Minister, i.e., the government, clearly and unequivo- cally: Hands off these Holocaust issues! Ziindel's work, the documents stated, involved "a conflict between two peoples, the Germans and the Jews." The Jewish community, on the other hand, was already in possession of the decision one week after the verdict was handed down, and quoted it in the press! Equality before the law — Canadian style!
Shortly afterwards, attorney Jiirgen Rieger also won total victory in the Stuttgart, Germany proceedings against Ziindel for "inciting the people." The state was ordered by the court to release Ziindel's bank account and even to pay for Ziindel's le- gal fees and court costs. Ziindel heaved a sigh of relief, al- though the media are totally silent about his victory.
At the beginning of 1983, Ziindel and his team, entirely free from legal restrictions once again, worked at full swing! Due to the revocation of his passport, Ziindel could not yet leave Can- ada. Instead, he invited well-known Revisionists from all parts of the world to come to Canada to work with him there. Docu-
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
187
mentary videos were produced in Ziindel' s studios and lecture tours were arranged with these guests. Tens of thousands of press releases, brochures, audio- and videotapes on various top- ics were being sent by him around the world.
An American citizen of German-Polish extraction, Frank Walus, fell victim to the virulent "Nazi war criminals" hysteria, which was suddenly being stepped up in the U.S. Frank Walus came to Ziindel in Toronto, seeking help, advice and support. Ziindel immediately made a documentary film with him, ar- ranged and widely publicized a press conference and organized lecture programs for Walus before friends. He also raised funds for Walus for appeal proceedings against the US 'Nazi hunters' and against Simon Wiesenthal, the man who was responsible for the wrongful persecution and the misery being inflicted on this quiet, gentle, innocent little man. With Ziindel' s help, ad- vice and contacts, Walus was finally exonerated in full. As a re- sult, new allies from the United States joined up with Ziindel' s and support his work.
The First Ziindel Trial in Toronto
Without Ztindel's knowledge, the Canadian state had con- ducted Canada-wide investigations against him for years at the behest of Simon Wiesenthal. On highest orders, fliers, press re- leases, tapes of radio broadcasts, and television appearances by Ziindel had been collected.
Finally, in November 1983:, Sabina Citron, defeated in Ot- tawa before the Postal Tribunal and, by then, Ztindel's well- known Jewish adversary, brought criminal charges against Ziindel "for knowingly spreading false news", under the Cana- dian Criminal Code's ancient Section 177, a law that dated from 12th century England.
Many centuries ago, England's aristocrats, including the King, intended to rid themselves of their critics by means of this paragraph. This ancient legal provision was now dusted off by the Jewish activist Citron and her attorneys and used against Ziindel because he questioned the Holocaust.
Shortly before Christmas 1983, Ziindel was duly dragged before a Canadian Criminal Court. The media were there to re- cord the event. On his way to court he was met by dozens of demonstrators. He was knocked down, spat at, and beaten by thugs from the "Jewish Defense League", the JDL. The media had a field day, with the entire booklet Did Six Million Really Die? prominently splashed on the nation's TV screens. Time and again, Canada saw nationwide headlines and broadcasts on the topic of "Freedom of Speech" and "the Ziindel Holocaust Trial". This would not last for long.
In early 1984, Ziindel became the target of a wave of Jewish terrorist acts that shocked even the Toronto police. Every time there was a court date, Ziindel and his attorneys had to run the veritable gauntlet. In plain view of the press, and under the watchful eye of the police, Ziindel and his lawyer and friends were now being threatened, pushed, beaten, and spat on. Every day, he and his team had to fight their way into the courthouse.
Ziindel went on a major media-wide offensive. He alerted the entire world to this scandalous state of affairs with fiery press releases and the distribution of hundreds of videos and thousands of audiotapes with these threats, providing audio- visual documentation of the violence and often death threats
aimed at him by Jewish thugs and telephone terrorists, while the police stood by in the beginning and did nothing.
Press people from throughout the world began to approach Ziindel for interviews. Each of Ztindel's court appearances were now accompanied by massive media turnouts. Newscasts about his case on nightly TV were commonplace. Due to the daily violence — and for the first time ever! — Ziindel organized his "yellow-helmeted bodyguards." He himself wore a blue hard hat, so the cops could easily locate him in the crowd. This was a bold move on Ztindel's part, since private "uniformed" guards are not permitted by law in Canada. These hard hats made him a political celebrity and somewhat of an easily rec- ognizable folk hero. From England, France, Austria, America, and Argentina — from all parts of the world! — volunteers now flocked to Ztindel's side to protect him from these Jewish ter- rorists! The police proved tolerant and let them wear their yel- low helmets, glad that they could easily distinguish the disci- plined Ziindel team from the shrieking Jewish bandits. Time and again, Jewish thugs or violent demonstrators were now shown in the process of being arrested. Everywhere there was talk of Ziindel' s "media spectacles." So crass was the differ- ence between the "yellow hard hats" and their assailants that the Jewish thugs began to look like movie "extras" who were in Ztindel's pay! Before the public's eyes, they turned into "the bad guys" — the so-called "Nazi" in the blue hard hat and his friends wearing yellow hard hats had turned into the "good guys"!
The Jewish forces were beside themselves. They now at- tacked television reporters verbally and publicly and soon with fists and clubs for showing Ziindel in such a positive light in their nightly news reports
Meanwhile, the state moved in the heaviest legal "expert witness" guns it could muster, among them Dr. Raul Hilberg, the "Holocaust Pope", who in the course of decades had put to- gether several weighty tomes on the topic of "the extermination of the Jews in Europe". The pro-Holocaust forces also sum- moned an 84-year-old Jew, Dr. John Fried from New York, who — much to the prosecution's horror — ended up testifying how he, as editor of the Nuremberg Trial court transcripts, had been in charge of deciding which of these transcripts would make it into print for posterity. He testified and showed how he had edited and selected prosecution-useful transcripts — and thrown everything that was detrimental to the Allie's case into the waste paper basket of history! Until then, it had been as- sumed by practically all historians that the dozens of volumes were the "complete" sets of those thick transcript volumes in the libraries of the world that issued from the Nuremberg Trials contained everything that had come to light in Nuremberg. It was not until the Ziindel trial preliminaries in Toronto in 1984 that the world — and the astonished reporters, most of all — found out what had really taken place in Nuremberg!
As a consequence, to almost everyone's amazement and to the Jewish side's horror, the judge, who was of Ukrainian ex- traction, decided not to admit these court transcripts as evi- dence in this trial, since after all they were deemed only "ex- cerpts"— selected fragments of testimony and documents. This decision shocked the Jewish leadership present in the court- room so badly that the judge had to call for order several times.
188
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
In a great hurry, a new judge for the main hearings was selected by the powers-that-be to replace the "uppity" Ukrainian judge!
Meanwhile, on Ziindel's request, the Judge decided to have the public excluded from the proceedings. The media inter- preted Ziindel's wish for censorship of the trial as a sign of weakness. Throughout North America, reporters, radio and television commentators and public speakers now attacked Ziindel for his alleged cowardice. They sensed disgrace and de- feat in the offing for Ziindel in the upcoming trial. They thought they were in for a spectacle. For this reason, the press concentrated heavily on the new trial. The intent was to show Ziindel up for a fool and a loser. The level of media interest was astounding!
September 1984: Despite massive security measures, some- one detonated the first bomb in Ziindel's annex. His building and his neighborhood were shaken up by the explosion. Fortu- nately no people were injured. Political terrorism a la Beirut had now come to Toronto! Jewish circles contacted the media and claimed responsibility for the pipe bomb, stating brazenly that they had done it in order to scare Ziindel and teach him a lesson. To this day, the Toronto police have never identified or arrested the perpetrators. With the explosion of the bomb, Ziindel lost all insurance protection.
As a result of the media hype, Ziindel lost most customers of his graphics studio. The once flourishing business lost ac- count after account. At the beginning of 1985, Ziindel's busi- ness was ruined; only a few smaller clients and personal friends remained faithful to him. This proved to be a mixed blessing: Ziindel could now devote his undivided energy and all his at- tention to the preparations for his First Great Holocaust Trial. Soon, Ziindel's house serves as a university of forbidden thoughts!
On January 7, 1985, the First Great Holocaust Trial began. This trial, lasting 39 court days, was a worldwide media sensa- tion. All of Canada's television stations and most of the radio stations reported through well-known reporters or columnists almost every day, prominently and in detail, about the events in court.
Ziindel now engaged in "public education" on a grand scale, via Canada's media, far above and beyond the courtroom scene — in the country's living rooms, offices, and universities. By default, Sabina Citron's vengeance had caused a vivid sprouting of Holocaust Revisionism. Shock about this public relations disaster followed tangible panic among the Jewish cir- cles. They had not counted on this massive free publicity for Ziindel's cause!
The Ziindel media juggernaut rolled on unstoppable und un- interruptedly. Ziindel's good-looking and fearless attorney, Doug Christie, dominated the court. Non-stop, Ziindel witness testimony appeared in newspaper headlines and the evening news broadcasts. By contrast, the government's witnesses showed themselves to be weak and without much credibility, even detrimental to the entire traditional Holocaust story. Day by day, the Crown attorney became ever more nervous, lost 12 pounds and was getting quite haggard! Quite literally, the Holocaust was melting before the public's incredulous eyes!
By contrast, the atmosphere inside the courtroom became nasty and then downright toxic. The Judge, a visibly hostile
man named Locke, intervened ever more spitefully and fre- quently in the proceedings against Ziindel, turned red in the face with anger, and even threatened to charge Christie himself for lack of respect for the Court because Christie questioned some of the judge's obviously biased rulings. There were scenes of abuse by Jewish spectators against Ziindel's friends. Even his collaborators and witnesses were threatened. The po- lice stepped in, time and again, to separate the fighting parties. Outside, not far from the courthouse, one of the translators was punched in the face by some thugs. He appeared, dripping blood, in the courtroom.
On March 25, 1985, after the jury returned its guilty verdict, the judge sentenced Ziindel to 15 months' imprisonment and three years on probation. During this time he would be forbid- den to say, write or show anything about the Holocaust in pub- lic.
The cold steel handcuffs closed about his wrists even while he was still in the courtroom. That very same day, he sat, con- victed of thought crimes for the first time in his life, in a lonely, dank and dark prison cell in Canada, far from home. He had dared what no one dared before him. He had confronted the powerful Jewish lobby with a Holocaust question that simply demanded an answer: Did six million really die? Now it was time to pay the price. Prison, ridicule, and relentless defamation in the media were that price.
Attempts of Deportation
On April 12, 1985, the Canadian Department of Citizenship and Immigration ordered a "deportation inquiry." The inquiry starts on April 29, 1985. Ziindel, by then wise to the political use of media props, had painted his face black so as to demon- strate that if he were a black immigrant, he would perhaps be able to enjoy all his rights or even preferential treatment. He pointedly informed the press that as a member of the much- vilified white German minority, he was not granted these ad- vantages. The Immigration judge took precisely 1 1 minutes to reach his verdict about Ziindel: Ziindel had to be deported as an "Undesirable" without delay, against which Ziindel filed an ap- peal that same day
On January 23, 1987, the Appeal Court decided in favor of Ziindel due to grave procedural errors. As usual during such court processes, Ziindel was in jail again while this happened, where he was detained for the weekend out of sheer bureau- cratic chicanery, despite his victory. The excuse he was given by prison authorities was that the judge's decision came too late in the day — there were no prison officials available during the weekend to release him!
On Monday morning, Canada's foremost representatives of the press awaited Ziindel at the jail's exit in an almost festive atmosphere. Ziindel held a jail gate press conference and settled the score with his opponents — publicly before the press! Once again, the fickle reporters treated him like a folk hero. There was enormous public interest in the reasons for the verdict, and articles and editorials, some even in favor of Ziindel, swept the country.
Shortly thereafter, however, the state was taking the Ziindel case right to the highest Canadian court, the Supreme Court in Ottawa, in an attempt to overturn the appeal. This failed, how-
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
189
ever, and subsequently the first attempt to have Zilndel de- ported failed as well.
The Second Ziindel Trial in Toronto
The second Zilndel trial was scheduled for early 1988. Hence, in late 1987, Zilndel doubled and tripled his media out- reach with press releases, all of which indicated the content and substance of the coming Holocaust Trial. Again, he invited the world media to participate in the trial in Toronto. Even before the trial began, there was a vigorous debate in the Canadian press as to how best to stem the tide of the "Zilndel- phenomenon". As early as February 11, 1987, Lorrie Goldstein, a Jewish columnist with the Toronto Sun, had snidely opined that the trial ought to be reported "on page 90, hidden among the soap ads." On June 8, 1987, the Calgary Herald, the largest daily newspaper of Calgary, Alberta, reported:
"Leading members of the Jewish community visited the major news media of Toronto and implored them to report differently about the new trial than they had about the last. " The Globe and Mail, Canada's best-known newspaper, edi- torialized on August 26, 1987 that a decision ought to be reached "in the public interest" to place "extra restrictions" on the trial reports.
One of the best-known senior reporters in Canada, George Bain, later reported in Maclean 's Magazine of May 23, 1988:
'*[...] how unusual it was, and how quickly and unani- mously the media managers had responded to the question that they had not been put under any pressure, and that no one had gone to them with the intention of influencing them. "
Only Ian Urquhart of the Toronto Star later admitted openly that a delegation of Jewish leaders had informed him of the wishes of the Jewish community that Ziindel's "hate-filled news and views ought not to receive any publicity."
On January 18, 1988, the 117th anniversary of the founding of the Second German Reich, the Second Great Holocaust Trial began against the German Ernst Zilndel in Canada. Media at- tention is huge.
All the experiences gained in the 1985 trial now bore fruit. He and his team, the witnesses, attorneys, translators etc., were working round the clock. Everything ran like a well-oiled ma- chine.
The editors of the Toronto Star had promised the Jewish delegation of leaders that the paper would print its Zilndel court-reports always on the same place and page inside the newspaper, and that it would take the personal approval of one of the highest bosses of Toronto's largest daily to print an ac- count of the Zilndel trial elsewhere in the paper, much less on the front page. Ironically, the bottom line of this decision was that the 66 articles printed in the Toronto Star about the 1988 Zilndel Trial appeared on the same page and at the same place every day, easy for all the readers to find! It was like having a "Ziindel column" in Canada's largest circulation newspaper. Once again Jewish censors had shot themselves in the foot!
The Jewish Defense League and its thugs were of course on duty again on the first court day of 1988, at- tacking Ziindel's party, just as they had done during the
1985 Ziindel Trial. Ziindel's bodyguard was numerically stronger this time and soon had the situation under control. Again, as they had done before, they steadily fought their way through to the entrance of the courthouse. The Toronto Police were also better prepared, and after only a few minutes the ringleaders of the Jewish thugs were handcuffed and lying face- down in the slush and snow on the sidewalk, while Toronto po- licemen knelt on them and held them down, waiting for the paddy wagons to haul them off to jail.
The media couldn't have asked for anything better! Their cameras clicked and whirred, and the none-too-pretty picture of the Jewish terrorists lying handcuffed on the ground soon ap- peared on TV screens and newspaper front pages throughout the country. Prompt sentencing of the thugs was the result — which meant safety for Zilndel and his friends on their way to the court, and orderly legal proceedings.
In the courtroom itself, Judge Thomas immediately dove for cover and hid behind the principle of "judicial notice", which is a rarely used concept in Canadian court tradition — but which occurs routinely in Revisionist trials in Germany, Austria and Switzerland. "Judicial notice" is a legal term and indicates that certain matters are not open to doubt — such as, for example, that the sun rises in the east and sets in the west, or that night follows day. This was to be the guiding principle pertaining to the "Holocaust" topic for this trial!
To apply such a legal principle in such a serious and con- troversial historical court case in Canada, where so many issues were disputed, violated the Anglo-Saxon tradition of freedom of speech and opinions and civil rights, even the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. In fact, it was unheard-of! At- torney Doug Christie had to fight with the judge over every word and every sentence. In the end, he was able to tone down the judge's "judicial notice of the Holocaust" ruling — unfortunately, he could not prevent it entirely. In the Second Great Holocaust Trial, Judge Thomas coyly refused to talk about the "Six million"!
This was important, because it meant that Zilndel would not be allowed to defend himself with all the facts and documents at his disposal. The Judge forbade it. The only question that remained was whether Zilndel was "too dumb to understand the self-evident", or whether he acted "with malicious intent against the Jews" when he dared to raise his questions about the "Holocaust"!
Thus, Zilndel stood before the jury like one who was not quite "normal", or "right in the head" — for according to the Judge's decree, was it not crystal clear that a "Holocaust" had happened and that any normal person must be able to grasp that? After all, the "self-evident" nature of the Holocaust could
Ernst las
Ziindel with his lawyer Doug- Ernst Ziindel with some of his fri- Christie in front of the court ends during the second Ziindel house in Toronto trial in 1988
190
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
be shown and proven with hundreds of books written by eye witnesses, Holocaust survivors and historians whose material was freely available in any library!
Lawyer Christie told Ziindel that under these conditions, and given Judge Thomas's "judicial notice", he could not pos- sibly win the case for his client. He advised Ziindel to restrict his defense to a minimum, not to waste his time, and to save the money required for the enormous costs entailed in the defense of a losing proposition. Christie kept beseeching Ziindel:
"Before this judge, in this courtroom, in this court, the
battle is hopeless! I can 't win it for you! "
Ziindel requested time to think it over. A few days later he called his inner circle team together, outlined the situation and told them:
"We're soldiering right on! This time I am not fighting for myself. I'm fighting for the honor of my Fatherland. I want to have our extremely important witness testimony re- corded in the Canadian court transcripts and the history books for posterity. We're fighting this together — down to the bitter end! "
The media pressure and the threats of violence against Ziindel diminished markedly after the judge has taken "judicial notice" of the Holocaust. The uniformed policemen, who to date had accompanied Ziindel' s every step, even in the court- house and on his way to the washroom, now disappeared. Clearly even the uppermost echelons in the Police Department knew what a favor had been handed the Holocaust Lobby! There was an air of anticlimax in the halls of justice. The Holo- caust Lobby triumphed openly, as though the ruling of "judicial notice" had already guaranteed forever the lie's victory over truth.
Ziindel and his attorney Christie took hours-long walks through the snowy parks near the Ziindel-House and discussed in detail the possibilities that were still open to them. Next on the discussion agenda were the specialists, witnesses and court experts who had come from all parts of the world to help. Ziindel sounded out their attitudes, and in the end he himself set the course for the trial: in spite of his attorneys' and some of his foremost advisors' recommendations, he would see the trial through as planned — in-depth and as though no "judicial no- tice" ruling had occurred.
He declared that it would be attorney Christie's task to block, to undermine, to by-pass, to ignore the judge's "judicial notice", to hollow it out and to cut it down to size, bit by bit via "salami tactic" with a kind of "policy of small steps", until in the end the Ziindel Team would be able to demolish or at least neutralize and invalidate the government's evidence. The wit- nesses for the defense would attempt to have all their docu- ments submitted and discussed in court, regardless of the out- come. In this way the Ziindel Team would engage in judicial positional warfare, digging down into the subject matter in a kind of judicial trench warfare — much like many battles were fought in the First and often in the Second World War on the battlefields of Europe!
This turned out to be a tough decision! The Ziindel-House became a Command Bunker extraordinaire, from where the court battle was planned and prepared with many helpers. In- side the courtroom, day in, day out, Ziindel' s team of lawyers,
witnesses and advisors now revised and rewrote Germany's re- cent history — "judicial notice" or no "judicial notice"! The Crown attorney and the Judge could hardly believe their eyes and ears, clearly frustrated by the happenings. Slice by slice and day by day, the old and false Hollywood fake history ver- sion of the Holocaust version was dissected, scrutinized, de- bunked!
The Leuchter Report
In the midst of the legal proceedings, electrifying news hits the Ziindel-House much like a lightning bolt! The warden of one of the largest American prisons, Bill Armontrout, who was to serve as Ziindel-witness and to testify about the involved technical procedures in American gassings of felons sentenced to death, suggested an expert, Fred Leuchter from Boston, as witness for the defense in questions pertaining to gas chambers! Fred Leuchter, he said almost in passing — not knowing that history would be forever changed — was just the right man. He was currently the only expert and consultant in the entire United States on matters of execution equipment, including electric chairs and gas chambers! Armontrout even had the ad- dress and telephone number of this potential expert witness on hand!
What a sensation! The legal team had not even known that such an expert still existed! They had been under the impres- sion that most had retired or died!
Ziindel reacted with lightning speed, even though he was al- ready in the midst of the actual trial proceedings. Without hesi- tation he sent his foremost adviser, Professor Robert Faurisson, to Boston to check Leuchter out thoroughly.
It turned out that Leuchter believed in the Holocaust and that he did not doubt the gas chambers, insofar as he had heard about them. However, everything else about him indicated that here was a man who knew what he was doing, that he under- stood his job, and that he was honest and professionally ethical.
Dr. Faurisson flew back to Toronto to report to Ziindel. Leuchter was asked to come to Toronto himself to meet with Doug Christie and speak with the other experts and to analyze and to familiarize himself with the documents and testimony of both sides, especially Dr. Raul Hilberg's trial transcripts of the 1985 trial and the statements in his books. The models of Auschwitz and Birkenau, which the Ziindel team had con- structed to scale from German blueprints discovered by Dr. Faurisson at the Auschwitz archives were also shown and ex- plained to him.
Ziindel asked Leuchter for a cost estimate for his expert re- port and testimony. The price was steep; but the testimony was extremely important. Now what to do? From where was the ex- tra money for Leuchter' s report to come? Ziindel examined bank statements and current income from donations. He com- pared the constantly accruing expenses and considered tapping his strategic financial reserve. He sounded out his supporters near and far to see whether any extra donations might be ob- tained.
Meanwhile, Leuchter flew back to Boston. Time was of the essence, since the trial was already approaching half time. Ziindel spent entire nights on the telephone and explained the situation to donors both large and small. In the end, some larger
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
191
contributions from several elderly German women and men be- came the deciding factor in this historically so exceedingly im- portant move.
At that point, Ziindel made a bold decision. Leuchter would not merely testify. He would go after evidence first-hand! To- gether with a small, quickly-assembled group consisting of a translator for Leuchter, his wife who would double as typist and secretary, a draftsman and a video- and cameraman, it was de- cided that the Leuchter team would fly to Auschwitz and Ma- jdanek in what was then still Communist Poland. He would ex- amine and measure the facilities and draw up precise technical building and floor plans. Working meticulously to prevent con- tamination, he would take material samples, wrap them up care- fully, and smuggle them back to the United States, where a well-known laboratory would examine and analyze them for their Zyklon B content. This dramatic expedition would be car- ried out clandestinely while the trial still continued in Toronto!
At the Ziindel-House it felt like at General Staff Headquar- ters during wartime! People were busy planning, testing, meas- uring, weighing and packing. Work plans were drawn up. Vi- sas, passports and plane tickets were arranged in a great hurry. And then the word was: "Silence!"
The Ziindel-Leuchter-Holocaust-Expedition left North America and Europe at different times and via different air- ports. Friendly Poles awaited them, to be of assistance, at the other end. Everything went off without a hitch.
The rest is Revisionist history! Leuchter' s investigation was first rate pioneering work. Today millions of people around the world already know that the forensic evidence of Leuchter' s re- port and Professor Roth's Auschwitz sample analysis have ac- quitted Germany of the crime of having carried out or at least attempted the genocide of the Jews by means of "gas cham- bers."
On April 20, 1988, 99 years after the birth of a certain man, Ziindel introduced the witness Leuchter and his report to the Court in Toronto. Panic! Horror! The faces of the Jewish repre- sentatives showed total disbelief! The Judge and Crown attor- ney were speechless at this development! The Judge ordered a lengthy break to recover his composure. Then the jury members were sent from the courtroom.
In their absence, and under orders of strict secrecy and a ban on publication for the media, negotiations were conducted to determine what the extremely important "Witness Leuchter" could or could not testify to, and what the Court would gra- ciously "accept" and allow as evidence to be put to the jury!
What happened next was a legal disgrace! Leuchter was forbidden to say anything about his findings in the presence of the jury! The Crown and the Judge wanted to rescue what could still be rescued, and felt that they would be able to embarrass the defense by demanding the personal appearance, for cross- examination, of the expert chemist who had performed the analysis in the American laboratory — the analysis which would consign the claim of Jewish mass murders by Zyklon B gas to the dust heap of history. This decision to get the chemist could indeed prove dangerous to the defense, since the man in ques- tion worked thousands of kilometers away in the United States. No one could force him to fly to Toronto to testify. It was truly touch and go! Ziindel was on the phone for hours! But in the
end, late at night, everything was arranged! Professor Dr. Roth, for ten years professor for chemistry at the famous Cornell University in the United States, would testify personally the very next day! Of course he demanded a horrendous fee of USS 300.00 per hour from the instant he left his house until the mo- ment he returned. These funds, too, were somehow raised by Ziindel.
The next morning in court, Christie stood up and calmly in- formed the judge that he intended to call as his next witness the chemistry expert, Dr. Roth, who had, in an American labora- tory, analyzed Leuchter' s brick sludge and concrete samples from Auschwitz! The Judge and Crown attorney were flabber- gasted! Again, they had shot themselves in the foot!
The next day, April 22, 1988, David Irving, the famous British historian and best-selling author of over 30 books on World War II, who until then had also believed in the Holo- caust, took the stand in Toronto as the last witness for the Ziindel defense. To the amazement and shock of all present, Ir- ving publicly revised his previous views on the gas chambers and the Holocaust! He called the Leuchter report a "shattering" document. Looking over at Ziindel in the dock, he said that it was "a stroke of genius" on the part of the defense to have commissioned these first ever forensic investigations of Auschwitz!
Leuchter's and living's testimony were the culmination of the 1988 trial. But they were unfortunately also the beginning of massive persecution that both Leuchter and Irving were sub- jected to ever since.
On May 11, 1988, Ziindel was found "guilty" by Judge Thomas and the jury as predicted. "Judicial notice" made no other verdict possible. The jury had no choice. Night follows day. Certain "facts" may not be called into question, all the fo- rensic evidence notwithstanding — not even at the end of the twentieth century! Remember Galileo! In a hate-laced, vicious judgment, Judge Thomas sentenced Ziindel to nine months im- prisonment without parole. Again, Ziindel was led off in hand- cuffs straight to Toronto's Don Jail.
However, thanks to generous donations, Ziindel was soon released on cash bail. The gag order, stricter this time than in 1985, was re-imposed. Ziindel was not allowed to leave down- town Toronto. He was ordered to report twice a week to the po- lice and a parole officer in the inner city, along with dope push- ers and pimps. The political thumbscrews were being re- applied. The media were given carte blanche for months and even years to come. Venom, filth and lies were dumped on Ziindel by the bucketful. He could not answer back. His reputa- tion was severely damaged. It was media sharks in a feeding frenzy all over again. Now he was a disreputable, convicted "Nazi" whom the media, the politicians and the mob could at- tack and vilify with impunity at every opportunity. He is fair game — as were once Hutten, Hus, and Luther!
On the very day of the "guilty" verdict, Ziindel' s attorneys registered their "leave for appeal" with the court, since they had preparing it already in advance in wise expectation of the com- ing verdict.
During the first week of May, however, just prior to his conviction, Ziindel had mailed more than 20,000 brochures that bore the title Es ist vollbracht ("It is done!") to Germany. In it,
192
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
he had summarized the substance of the Second Great Holo- caust Trial. Copies were sent to all German Members of Par- liament, Members of the Landtag, the German press, and the Federal German elite per se. This would keep Germany's elite from pleading ignorance of the historical truth and of Leuchter's findings. No one would be permitted to say at some later date they had been uninformed of sensational findings and facts unearthed in this second Ziindel trial. The list of recipients of this brochure is still held in the Ziindel archives. "There shall be no excuse!" The truth and the facts are now known to every member of the German vassal state!
German Defeat, Canadian Victory...
September 18-22, 1989: The Ontario Appeals Court heard Ziindel's case. The Judges were Brooke, Norden and Galligan. The atmosphere was charged with clearly visible disdain and dislike — quite the opposite of the first appeal proceedings where Justice Howland had still presided. The media vilifica- tion campaign had been effective. This time the judges were clearly opposed to Zilndel. Zilndel could anticipate the outcome of this second appeal trial in advance. That very week in France, Dr. Faurisson, Europe's most noted Revisionist, was nearly beaten to death by unknown assailants.
Early 1990: The Ontario Appeals Court decided against Ziindel, just as he had expected. Subsequently, Ziindel appealed to the highest court in Canada to hear his case. In the meantime, Ziindel helped to organize the "Leuchter Congress" in Munich with the help of German friends during the fall and winter months of 1990-1991. The best-known Revisionists in the world would meet at this "Congress of Alternative Historians" in Munich — at least that was the plan.
In early 1991, however, the County Court Munich issued an arrest warrant against Ziindel relating to an old charge of "incit- ing the people", because a person or persons, unknown to Ziindel, had conveniently and anonymously mailed edited Ziindel videotapes, "enriched" with European news programs and footage, to addresses in Germany. Unaware that this had happened, Ziindel flew to Germany to participate in the prepa- rations for the planned "Leuchter Congress" and to film inter- views with some of the attendees. He did not know of the arrest warrant, and flew straight into the arms of disaster.
The Leuchter Congress — first permitted, then forbidden, then permitted again by authorities in Germany — was forbidden for good again in the end. The meeting hall owners canceled the agreement. DM 6,000 in rent for the German museum was gone. Legal bills were staggering. Harassment of this kind was becoming more frequent in Germany. These acts of censorship were permitted there by law. Repression ruled ever more bra- zenly.
On March 21, 1991, Ziindel was arrested in Munich during an interview break with the well-known German book author Ingrid Weckert and thrown in jail. He was soon convicted in absentia — meaning, while he was still imprisoned in Mu- nich!— for newsletters, videos, a revisionist publications about The Diary of Anne Frank and, on the whole, "for denigrating the memory of persons deceased", meaning for questioning the Holocaust. The fine was enormous: DM 30,600.00 (some $15,000)!
In early November 1991, the second Ziindel trial in Ger- many began. These proceedings, too, turned out to be a joke. Not one of the witnesses who had been admitted by the court in Canada was permitted to testify in Germany. Noted experts such as Leuchter or Faurisson, expressly qualified by a Cana- dian court in his Toronto trials, were forbidden to testify — no expert witness, not a single exonerating document was admitted in Munich! On December 22, 1991, Ziindel was once again convicted, but the fine was reduced to DM 14,600.00.
Back in Canada, Ziindel was surprised by an unexpected testamentary bequest, which enabled him suddenly to buy commercial radio or even television airtime in the regular me- dia in the United States. He quietly produced on-air commer- cials and new brochures in his publishing house, as well as a 567-page book about the Second Great Holocaust Trial in 1988, compiled by one of his attorneys, in readiness for the day when his gag order would no longer be an impediment, either through the start of his incarceration or his victory before the Supreme Court, when the gag order would cease to be in force. He in- tended to launch this book on the market immediately — in jail, or free!
In various parts of the world, other books were being writ- ten and published about Zundel's work and sacrifices. Friends composed hundreds of thousands of fliers and small brochures in many countries, from Brazil to Australia, discussing the Leuchter Report. Despite the Canadian gag order, Ziindel's re- visionist seeds began to bear fruit in even the most remote cor- ners of the globe. The "Revised Holocaust" genie was out of the bottle!
In revisionist history, the Leuchter Report was a milestone. It rapidly expanded into a "Total Truth Campaign". The Ziindel case and the Leuchter Report were now being discussed every- where and served as the springboard for debates. The Leuchter Report became the foundation for further investigations of Auschwitz by the well-qualified and courageous young German chemist, Germar Rudolf, and the distinguished Austrian engi- neer, Walter Liiftl.
David Irving, the British historian, also pushed the Holo- caust debate forward in worldwide speaking tours. He even published a special English edition of the Leuchter Report, with his own foreword and color photos, which caused a sensation, and sent it to all the members of the House of Lords, as well as to all chemistry professors in England.
This move marked the start of David Irving's own suffering. He was arrested in Canada, convicted, and expelled from the country. He was thrown out of Rome and banned from Austra- lia and New Zealand. He was forbidden to enter South Africa. In Germany, he was convicted and thereby criminalized, with grave consequences for his career as an author and for his per- sonal life.
In summer 1992, the miracle happened! In a 4-3 decision the Supreme Court of Canada decided in favor of Ziindel — after nine years of litigation! The sensation was complete! Briefly, Ziindel's star shone brightly on the firmament of history. Re- porters and commentators for the television networks — everyone crowded round him.
Repeatedly, Ziindel reached out to his political opponents, pleading: "Let us reason together!" His conciliatory offers of
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
193
dialogue with these Jewish circles were turned down coldly and arrogantly. There was no interest in any communication with the tenacious champion of the German cause.
Publicity Offensive
Now that the gag order was gone, Ztindel's information out- reach rolled on inexorably for weeks and months on end. The passing of two elderly Ziindel supporters had resulted in unex- pected extra funds in the form of testamentary bequests. Ziindel used the funds to buy more airtime with American radio and TV stations and kept on broadcasting state-of-the-art Revision- ism across America and Canada. He also paid for television time on U.S. satellites. His programs were now on the air from Mexico to the North Pole and the Caribbean, broadcast all across Canada, the United States and right across the ocean to Hawaii. Salaries, printing and postage expenses keep emptying the coffers, but it was vital now to break new ground for truth.
The Holocaust Lobby found itself on the defensive and was changing its tactics accordingly. On all sides it exerted eco- nomic pressure and indirect emotional and sometimes financial terrorism on the broadcasters, stations and satellite firms that ran Zilndel's programs. It met with limited success. In many cases, intimidation worked. Some broadcasters canceled Zilndel's contracts. Some satellite owners drew back. One radio station burned down after it announced it would carry Ziindel broadcasts. Time and again Ziindel sought and found new of- fers. His information broadcasts and videos seemed to be eve- rywhere all at once — from Los Angeles, Detroit, Houston and Chicago right up to Anchorage. All the hard, dedicated work behind the scenes by his volunteers and staff, in between the trials, was now paying off. The Ziindel Truth Campaign was on a roll, and nothing seemed to stop it!
End of 1993, after a 30-year wait, Ziindel re-applied for Ca- nadian citizenship for the second time. Meanwhile, Ziindel had recovered his right to a German passport from the German Fed- eral Administrative Court, and now he could travel again. He flew to Spain, England, France, Belgium, Holland, Denmark and Poland. In Auschwitz he made a sensational video with the young Jewish Revisionist David Cole, a highly intelligent bud- ding filmmaker. This video disgraced the Holocaust Lobby where it hurt them the most, because in it, this young Jew, yar- mulke and all, showed and explained to Ziindel, the German, and the world, via film, all the things about Auschwitz that had been faked, reconstructed and fabricated by the Polish Commu- nists in order to deceive the gullible! 1
Since summer 1994, Ziindel could be heard at his "Voice of Freedom" program on worldwide short-wave radio, and throughout America on short wave and the AM band. Six Ca- nadian provinces and 18 American states were receiving Ztindel's programs via AM radio. For months, the Holocaust Lobby resorted to special "intervention commandos" which showed up as delegations everywhere Ziindel broadcast from, to exert pressure on stations broadcasting Zilndel-programs — sometimes to success, often in vain! Undeterred, the Ziindel media avalanche rolled on!
In 1994, Ziindel addressed the annual conference of The In- stitute for Historical Review, summarizing the decades-long, often arduous path of Revisionism. At this conference, he met
Dr. Ingrid Rimland, a California resident and award-winning writer of German ethnic descent.
Starting in 1995, Ziindel produced a great quantity of TV documentaries, which were broadcasted by various U.S. sta- tions. In October 1996, for the first time ever, Ziindel broad- casted into Germany — from Europe via Radio Moscow, based in Konigsberg, now called Kaliningrad. It was an ironic twist of fate that Zilndel's German-language "Stimme der Freiheit" (Voice of Freedom) programs were also broadcast into Russia by this same station from this ancient German city.
Revisionism on the Internet
In winter of 1994/95, Ziindel took the first steps into cyber- space with the help of American friends. This again unleashed a worldwide avalanche of protest. The first Internet Provider for the Voice of Freedom content was put under massive pressure and canceled the account after only a few months. Eventually, in the summer of 1995, Ingrid Rimland found another Provider, Web Communications in Santa Cruz, California, one of Amer- ica's and perhaps the world's largest Internet providers with 1,300 customers.
In the meantime, the Revisionist website on the Internet, known as the www.Zundelsite.org, was becoming more sophis- ticated through the work of Dr. Ingrid Rimland, its originator, designer, owner, and webmaster. After much wrangling and correspondence back and forth, primarily between Ingrid Rim- land and one Jamie McCarthy, webmaster of a traditional Holocaust website called "Nizkor" — hostile to Revisionism and operated and financed mostly by tax deductible donations from Jewish donors — McCarthy pressed for a worldwide electronic debate (later he backpedaled and called it a "rebuttal") about the Holocaust.
Both parties agreed that both sides would make an honest effort and coordinate this electronic confrontation in order to clear up misunderstandings about the Holocaust and to focus on historical truth — whatever the facts in the case! In two faxed letters of January 5 and 8, 1996, Ziindel informed the Simon Wiesenthal Centre in Los Angeles that this electronic debate would take place and invited them to be a part. Within 48 hours the Simon Wiesenthal Centre wrote to 2,000 University Presi- dents and Internet Service Providers, calling for "self- censorship" by ISPs against the "Revisionists".
The Simon Wiesenthal Center's attempts at censorship jolted the American media. In the first weeks of January 1996, all hell broke loose on the Internet and in cyberspace. Report- ers, television crews, radio shows and computer magazines fo- cused on the Zundelsite. Even the New York Times ran an arti- cle on January 10. Within a few days, the news of the impend- ing electronic debate whipped up such waves of frenzy and panic that Deutsche Telekom, the recently privatized German communications outfit, actually tried to block reception of all 1,300 American websites of the Zundelsite Internet provider, Web Communications, just to prevent access to the Zundelsite by Germans!
The numbers of visitors to the Zundelsite grew astronomi- cally. Electronic Internet traffic to the Zundelsite became so snarled that the hosting company had to install a "governor", a sort of electronic emergency brake.
194
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
There had never been anything like it: an electronic World War was raging in cyberspace, with freedom-of-speech fighters on one side and the dark forces of the Holocaust censors on the other! Media folks scrambled and screamed for interviews. Within days, the Zundelsite became the fulcrum for a global anti-censorship movement.
Students at various American universities and also in other countries all the way to Australia for the first time decorated their Web pages with the blue ribbon of freedom, defying the censorship of the Holocaust Lobby! More than a dozen indi- viduals— total strangers all over the planet, mostly students — rushed in to save the Zundelsite from the rabid rabbis of the Simon Wiesenthal Center! Computer buffs who understood the technical side of this "War of the Blue Ribbons" started to copy the Revisionist content of the Zundelsite and mirrored it on their own computers or that of their universities!
Like a miracle, the Zundelsite doubled, tripled, quadrupled! A website was cloning itself! On air!
Within days, mirror sites spontaneously sprang up to un- dermine the German government's attempt at censorship. All this was taking place in California, where the Zundelsite was located in a small tourist town by the Pacific Ocean and was observed, uploaded and managed from San Diego. Ingrid Rim- land would later comment that it felt as though she was sitting at the controls of an electronic jumbo jet — with no idea what kept it in the air!
In the third week of February the German government threw up its hands in frustration, and the world press declared: "Zilndel victorious in Internet battle!"2
On Mai 21, 1998, the Discovery Channel shows a documen- tary about the Zundelsite at its best time. Visitor numbers to the Zundesite skyrocketed once more.
Who Lacks Arguments Will Resort to Violence
In spring of 1995, the opposition turned to the mob. For months the Ziindel-House was the target of malicious, violent multicultural demonstrations, often 2,000 to 3,000 strong. Post- ers repeatedly showed up by the thousands throughout Toronto in that period, urging violence against Zilndel. These posters contained explicit instructions as to how to make Molotov cocktails to burn the Zilndel-House down. There were also posters bearing death threats, showing Zilndel in the cross hairs of a rifle, giving his full address, photo, a map to the Ziindel- House etc. Security measures in and around the Ziindel-House were stepped up one more time as a precaution.
Zundel doing one of his T.V. shows in Moscow in 1994
Damaged inventory after the arson against the Zundel House in 1995
On April 4, 1995, an "Anti-Fascist Militia" organization sent Zundel an anonymous threat with a razor blade and a mousetrap, culminating in a bomb threat.
On May 7, 1995, shortly before 5 o'clock in the morning, an unknown arsonist threw a napalm-like fluid against the Ziindel- House and lit a match. The building was soon engulfed in flames. At that time, Zundel was on a speaking tour at the other and of the country, so he saw the fire on the TV news. The fire marshal estimated the loss at $400,000. Ziindel's furniture, equipment, and archival material was almost completely de- stroyed
During the week of May 20, 1995, Zundel received a well taped up "book parcel" in the mail. The house still reeked of fire and smoke and the wrecked roof was leaking through countless huge gaps. Therefore Zundel put the mysterious par- cel aside and warned his employees and comrades not to open it; he would take care of it himself as soon as he had time. He sensed that something was wrong.
The next Saturday, he took this parcel, shook it gingerly, photographed everything — the sender's return address, the stamps, etc. — and then prepared to open it outside. By a lucky coincidence a friend called, telling a weekend staffer, when asked if he had ever heard of this return address, that it was fake, that he had used that address for his political group two years earlier.
Now Zundel knew that, in all likelihood, the parcel con- tained a bomb. He placed the parcel in his car's trunk on a bag of birdseed to make sure that it would have a smooth ride, and drove it personally to the police station. The police bomb squad x-rayed the parcel and indeed discovered a powerful bomb that would have killed everyone in a 90-yard radius, had it ex- ploded! Later in the day, a special unit of the police detonated the bomb harmlessly by remote control in a quarry near To- ronto. Television crews were present to film the event. Zundel watched it on the evening news.
Thanks to some larger donations, Ziindel's house was re- paired quickly and equipped with new furniture.
Legal Harassment
On August 5, 1995, the Canadian Minister of Citizenship and Immigration informed Zundel that the Canadian secret ser- vice had classified him a "security risk" to Canada! Thus, Ziindel's application for Canadian Citizenship was in serious jeopardy, but Zundel decided to challenge this classification le- gally. A bit more than a year later, the Canadian government lost this court case, but won the appeal at the Su- preme Court on April 30, 1998.
Early 1996, Sabina Citron filed another criminal complaint against Ernst Zundel for "defamation of the Jews," but the case was thrown out by the court for lack of evidence. A few months later, Citron sued Zundel civilly, this time for "slander" and "damages" to the tune of $3.5 million! For his part, Zundel sued his Jewish persecutor to pay him $8 million for her malicious prosecution and for vilify- ing him.
As a reaction to this, Sabina Citron came up with yet another persecution wrinkle. She brought a
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
195
complaint against Ziindel before the Ca- nadian Human Rights Commission. Not to be far behind, the Toronto Mayor's Committee on Community and Race Re- lations likewise brought a complaint against Ziindel before the same Human Rights organization.
What followed was an almost four- years lasting legal trench-warfare, during which the Canadian authorities applied methods which can only be compared with the methods used during the infa- mous Stalinist show trials. This was pos- sible because so so-called Human Rights Commissions in Canada are not bound by procedural rules, but can define their own rules and apply to the disadvantage of the defendant.3
On May 25, 1998 the Tribunal issued its by now famous, or infamous, ruling by proclaiming that "Truth is not a defense!" Hence, in these tribunals the truth is irrelevant! The only thing that counts are the feelings of the so-called "victims." Shortly thereafter, in an unanimous decision, the Canadian Parliament banned Ziindel from the entire precincts of Parliament! During June of 1998, this banning is one major topic in all Canadian media.
C-PAC, the Canadian Parliamentary Channel, filmed and broadcast the entire Ziindel press conference in full on June 6, 1998. On June 8, Canada's Globe and Mail and the Ottawa Citizen wrote strong-worded editorials on Ziindel' s ban from Parliament, excoriating the Human Rights industry as a weapon of political interests. On June 15, 1998, the Canadian news magazine MacLeans and the London Free Press demanded the dissolution of the Human Rights Commissions.
On August 2, 1998, The New York Times (p. 18) published a remarkably fair and objective article about the Zundelsite and the Toronto Tribunal hearings, which was syndicated in dozens of large U.S. newspapers: As a result, the visitor count to the Zundelsite shot up to 40,000 documents accessed within 24 hours and remained heavy for weeks.
Early 1999, Ziindel's lawyer Doug Christie, too, was banned from the press room located in the Parliament build- ings— his "crime" was merely being Ziindel's lawyer! The Christie ban made headlines across Canada. He was repeatedly interviewed by major media.
In March 1999, Ziindel managed to have a hearing about the legality of the Human Rights Tribunals, but one by one, he lost not only this case but all the others as well.
The Last Stronghold of Freedom — End of the Line
Early 2000, Ernst Ziindel married the U.S. citizen Ingrid Rimland and immigrated to the United States. Due to his mar- riage to a U.S. citizen, he applies for permanent legal residence. The couple bought a house in a valley of the Tennessee Appa- lachian Mountains and retreated almost completely from any revisionist work. Only Ingrid Rimland continued to send out her daily email newsletters to a restricted number of subscrib- ers. The proceedings for legal residence were started properly, but some communication problems apparently evolved between
The arrested Ernst Zundel at his arrival in Toronto, Feb. 19, 2003
Zundel and his immigration lawyer. As a result of this, Ernst Zundel missed a scheduled hearing at the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service in spring 2001. Since neither Ernst Zundel nor his lawyer followed up with the U.S. authorities in this matter, the U.S. authorities decided some two years later that Ernst Zundel had abandoned his application for perma- nent legal residence, that he had mas- sively overstayed his visitor visa waiver which he had used to enter the USA, and that he would be deported. Hence, on Feb- ruary 5, 2003, Ernst Ziindel was arrested and taken into custody. On February 17, the U.S. authorities tried to deport him to Canada without having informed the Ca- nadian authorities, but the Canadians refused to accept him back. Thus, Ernst Zundel had to stay temporarily in the Batavia Federal Detention Facility near Buffalo for two days until the U.S. and the Canadian authorities agreed upon the proceedings. After that, Zundel was finally deported to Canada, where he is kept in custody in a high security prison close to Toronto.
Since Ernst Zundel has lived outside of Canada for more than three years, his permanent legal residence in Canada has expired, so that only one reason can prevent him from getting immediately deport to his country of citizenship Germany: As soon as he crossed the border to Canada, Ernst Zundel applied for political asylum in Canada.4 Meanwhile, the German gov- ernment has requested Ziindel's extradition,5 and the Canadian government has assigned its "top Nazi hunter" to prosecute Ziindel.6 Statements by the Canadian Immigration authorities indicate that Ernst Ziindel is viewed as a crystallization point for right-wing extremist „hate propagandists" and violent criminals, due to which he is considered to be a danger for Canada's security and will be deported under any circum- stances.7
Notes
The original Internet article has been slightly abridged, revised, and updated for this printed version. We apologize for the small size of the pictures reproduced in this article. We could have asked Mrs. Zundel for higher resolution pictures, but we did not want to bother her with such irrelevant questions during these hard times of struggling for the freedom of her husband.
1 Cf. "David Cole Interviews Dr. Franciszek Piper, Director, Auschwitz State Museum", VHS Video, distributed by CODOH, P. O. Box 439016, San Diego, CA 92143, USA (online: codoh.com/cole.ra); for an abridged text version see: David Cole, "A Jewish Revisionist's Visit to Auschwitz", JHR 13(2) (1993), pp. 11-13 (online: codoh.com/gcgv/gcgvcole.html)
2 Cf. I. Rimland, "Revisionismus im Cyberspace", VffG 1(2) (1997), pp. 91- 99.
3 For more details see the reports posted at the Zundelsite, www.zundelsite.org.
4 Cf. The Mountain Press, Feb. 12, 2003;
http://www.zwire. com/site/news. cfm?newsid=7010847&BRD=121 l&P AG =461&dept id=169689&rfi=6; The Globe & Mail (Toronto); 20.2.2003; http://www.globeandmail.ca/servlet/story/RTGAM.20030220.wxzund0220/ BNStory/National
5 National Post, Feb. 2 1 , 2003
6 Ibid., Feb. 28, 2003; cf. www.nationalpost.com/search/site/results.asp?keywords=emst%2Bzundel
7 Ibid., March 5, 2003.
196
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
Bing goes Hayward's Ghost
On the Destruction of Academic Freedom Down Under
By Dr. Fredrick Toben
New Zealand is not exactly the counrty that causes headlines in the world's media, nor is it a place where one would expect infringements on civil rights of academics. But this is exactly what happened during the past couple of years. In the early 1990s, two young historians had written their master's theses on controversial topics of World War Two his- tory. Their studies were highly praised by their supervisors, but several years later, mainly Jewish pressure groups claimed that these theses are an abomination simply because these Jews did not agree with the theses' conclusion, and they also demanded that the two young historians should lose their academic titles. Fortunately, they did not succeed with this. But both young scholars were harassed and humiliated, and an example was made for all historians to learn: should they dare to come to research conclusions that are unwelcome by Jewish pressure groups, they will be fair game. This proves once more that academic freedom does not really exist anymore, not even in the remotest corner of the world.
1. Introduction
In December 2000, the University of Canterbury, Christ- church, New Zealand, thought it had pleased New Zealand's Jewish lobby by going to extraordinary lengths to accommo- date a complaint lodged against the university. The Jewish community lodged a complaint because in 1993 Canterbury had awarded to one of its students a masters degree that dealt with the 'Holocaust'. Now seven years later, Canterbury pub- lished its Report By The Joel Hayward Working Party, wherein a written apology to New Zealand's Jewish commu- nity almost took precedence over the maintaining of its own academic integrity.
The small but vociferous New Zealand Jewish lobby had taken great exception to the granting of an MA with First Class Honours to Joel Stuart Andrew Hayward for his thesis on revi- sionism,1 thereby making so-called 'Holocaust denial' a 're- spectable' branch of academic study. The dogmatists could not let this happen. For them the academic ideal consists of nurtur- ing self-authored taboo topics that bolster and uphold their own fragile intellectual bankruptcy, where a regard for objective knowledge is discarded and despised.
2. Background
The early so-called warning signs that something was going on in academia, which could damage Jewish-Zionist interests, were sounded eight years earlier. On May 5, 1992, a group call- ing itself "Opposition To Anti-Semitism Incorporated", Christ- church, sent a letter of complaint to the University of Canter- bury's Registrar, Mr A W Hayward. Therein the president, Kingsley N McFarlane, details a discussion the group had with Joel Hayward, and cite Hayward's reporting that his supervisor Dr. Vincent Orange in November 1991 had stated to Hayward, "OK! I agree there were no gas chambers!"
On May 25, 1992, Professor and head of the History de- partment, W David Mclntyre, advised the Registrar:2
"Further to our conversation on the phone about Joel Hayward's MA thesis and the persecution that he has been subjected to [...] I think it important that the University re- ply blandly but firmly to these people as the interference they have attempted is intolerable. Indeed, the inclusion of
the quotation about the conversation with Vincent Orange in the letter to you was probably illegal since it was taken from a tape which was illegally filmed and is the subject of an injunction. "
This courageous stand against Jewish blackmail was also adopted by the External Examiner's Report, written by Waikato University History Department's Professor John H Jensen. Dated April 15, 1993, it states:3
"This study is a brave attempt to deal in a cool and critical fashion with one of the most emotional and political issues of our century. The candidate is to be congratulated on his courage in undertaking it. Nevertheless I have tried to deal with it as I would deal with any thesis, ignoring its political implications, and concentrating on the skillfulness or otherwise with which the writer has carried out his re- sponsibilities as an historian. "
Hayward's Chief Supervisor, Professor Vincent Orange, Reader in History at the University of Canterbury, in his as- sessment of March 23, 1993, hits a raw nerve with anti- Revisionists when he states in his report:4
"Hayward's thesis is that the Nazis did not attempt the systematic extermination of Jews during the Second World War. In particular, he finds the evidence that gas chambers were built and used for this purpose unconvincing. His ar- gument for and against this key point is based on a detailed, careful study of documentary, oral and scientific evidence. He may, of course, be mistaken, but in my judgment his case is nowhere flawed by improper use of evidence or extrava- gant language. More positively, he earns credit for adopting a scholarly approach to matters that most historians have flinched from investigating. For example, how many human beings can be packed into a particular space and how long does it take for a body to be wholly consumed by fire? " That the thesis would become contentious had been ex- pected by Hayward. As early as 1991, Hayward had written an article on Holocaust Revisionism in New Zealand for the Aus- tralian Institute of Jewish Affairs journal, Without Prejudice. Hayward's article was titled "The Thinking Man's Anti-Semi- tism?" Therein Hayward clearly focuses on the political aspect of Revisionism, and is quite critical of British historian David
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
197
Irving and France's Dr. Robert Faurisson for their attempt to deny the National Socialist genocide of six million Jews.
Yet two years later, after having submitted his thesis in 1993, Hayward requested that his thesis be embargoed for three years. Although this was an unusual request by any academic who thrives on the 'publish or perish' maxim, Professor Vin- cent Orange approved the request.
It is little wonder Hayward was in panic mode because the final chapter of his thesis states:
"A careful and impartial investigation of the available evidence pertaining to Nazi gas chambers reveals that even these apparently fall into the category of atrocity propa- ganda. "
In 1996, Hayward requested another extension to the publi- cation of his embargoed thesis until January 1, 1999, and again it was granted.
At the beginning of October 1998, Hayward sent his thesis to Adelaide Institute for photocopying, saying that it may be used in any way. Copies were made and distributed to all As- sociates. A copy was also handed to the Commissioners of Australia's Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, hearing the complaint laid by Jeremy Jones against both Fredrick Toben and Olga Scully.
Also in October 1998, Joel Hay- ward even contemplated being a wit- ness in the Toronto Ziindel trial.5 The dilemma facing him was the worry that he may say something helpful for the defence, for example his view that Revisionism "can promote anti- Semitism (although I naturally don't think that it does in its own right)."6
Dr. Robert Faurisson anticipated this in one of his comments. Hay- ward's opinion, says Faurisson,7
"is that the Revisionists are right but that they have no heart and do not care distressing the Jews. He believes in Babi Yar and all sorts of stupid things. His testimony could be very harm- ful in a 'Human Rights ' 'tribunal ' since that kind of 'tribu- nal' thinks that 'truth is no defence'. Hayward could even be the ideal witness for the prosecution: Ziindel is all the more dangerous since he is right! " Faurisson also advised Fredrick Toben:8
"[...] there is nothing confidential, at least today, with this thesis since I see that in 1 996 /purchased my own copy. Hayward asked me for the money (because of the photo- copy), got it and never asked me to keep all this secret. He asked me my opinion about his thesis. I sent him my draft and asked him two questions:
1. Would it be right to say that, for you, at the beginning of 1993 the revisionists were generally right as reason is concerned but wrong as sentiments are concerned?
Dr. Joel Hayward, 1998
2. I heard you were from Jewish descent; is that right?
I asked those questions on 24 August, 18 November and 27 November. I told him that, being overworked, I need first his answer to my first question to go and read carefully his thesis. He sent me finally a rather rude answer but without addressing my two questions. " Faurisson also pointed out that Hayward's thesis
"seems also to say that the revisionists tend to distress Jewish people. If he really says so, what are his arguments and, anyway, is this the role of an historian? [...He] ig- nores that there is absolutely no physical violence from the Revisionists against the Jews. "
In the December 1998/January 1999 issue of the New Zea- land Jewish Chronicle, a report appeared headed "NZ connec- tion to Internet incitement case":
"Evidence submitted by Dr. Toben days before the hear- ings included a 500-page Master 's thesis on Holocaust revisionism by New Zealand Canterbury Univer- sity student, Joel Hayward. " When Hayward made another re- quest to have his thesis embargoed for another period in 1999, the University of Canterbury refused and invited Hayward to add an addendum to his thesis, which he did. In essence the two-page Hayward Addendum states that his thesis contains "several errors of fact and interpretation".9
Hayward also wrote a letter to the New Zealand Jewish Chronicle, which was published in its February 1999 edition at p. 7. Among other things, he stated:
"First, Dr Fredrick Toben vio- lated my rights as an author by presenting a copy of my 1993 Masters of Arts thesis to the Hu- man Rights and Equal Opportu- nity Commission (HREOC) in Sydney. He did so even after I had expressly forbidden him — in writ- ing on October 17— from repro- ducing or distributing my work in part or in whole [...] / have no involvement in the ferocious debate between Holo- caust Revisionists and their opponents. I find it distasteful and refuse to be drawn into it. As a scholar I am much too busy; as a person I am much too sensible. I am sending a copy of this letter to Mr Jeremy Jones, Executive Vice- President, Executive Council of Australian Jewry. " Hayward went further into damage control. In a letter dated December 8, 1999, headed "Strictly Confidential" and ad- dressed to Canterbury's Vice Chancellor, Hayward stated, among other things:
"Toward the end of 1998, an Australian racist named Dr. Fredrick Tobin [sic], who has just completed a prison term in Germany for Holocaust denial, attempted to present a copy of my thesis to the Human Rights and Equal Oppor-
198
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
tunity Commission (HREOC) in Sydney as proof that the Holocaust did not happen. I immediately wrote to the HREOC and asked them to withdraw the thesis from their proceedings. They kindly agreed to do so. " Commissioner Cathleen McEvoy, now dean of the law fac- ulty at University of Adelaide, never informed Fredrick Toben of this Hayward communication, nor did Hayward forward a copy of his letter to Toben, though he did send an Email re- questing that Toben stop using his thesis.
Graeme Wake, Dean of Postgraduate Studies, and Professor of Applied Mathematics at Canterbury, responded in a letter dated 3 May 2000 (with a hand-written note "Today's date January 2000 sent"):
"We share your distaste for the actions of racist persons like those you mention. Nonetheless it is incumbent on us, as a premier research University, to maintain open access to scholarship produced, and accepted for, a research degree. To act otherwise could lead to accusations of a cover-up and compromise us in other ways. So we have sought an- other alternative (which we broached with you by tele- phone).
In the interest of all, and especially the victims of the Holocaust, the University invites you to write a (brief) ad- dendum to the thesis. This would presumably state your more recent views and insights on this topic and summarise results of any post-1993 scholarship which might point to
different conclusions than you made originally [...] it would further strengthen the stand against the likes of Dr Fredrick Tobin and his ilk. "
On December 15, 1999, Hayward wrote a letter to Greg Ra- ven of the IHR: 10
"Thank you for notifying me about this ratbag's attempt to post my old MA thesis on the Internet. I appreciate your kindness. Truly. I succeeded in having the server company delete my thesis after this mysterious person posted it last time, and I will try this method again. " Also in 2000, Professor Dov Bing came on to the scene. A political science lecturer at Hamilton's Waikato University, Dr. Bing broadcasted the fact that Hayward had distributed his the- sis to Faurisson, Irving, and Toben.
The New Zealand Jewish Chronicle of April 2000 whipped up a storm that was picked up internationally. Hayward apolo- gized to New Zealand's Jewish community:
"I stuffed up. The conclusions are wrong [...] without doubt, around six million Jews perished during World War Two. They were murdered by Nazis and their allies. The perpetrators used a range of methods, including gas cham- bers, shooting, physical exhaustion and starvation, to carry out this monstrous crime. "
K. R. Bolton, a New Zealand observer of the controversy, sums up the 89-page and 29 appendices Working Party Report thus:11
J. S. A. HAYWARD, THE FATE OF JEWS IN GERMAN HANDS: AN HISTORICAL ENQUIRY INTO THE DEVELOPMENT AND SIGNIFICANCE OF HOLOCAUST REVISIONISM (MA THESIS, 1993)
[...] . Hayward' s [...] "understanding of the principles of historical research and ability to ap- ply them" are demonstrated with exceptional industry, skill and judgment throughout. It is the most convincing piece of work that has been submitted to me at this level and, in fact, makes a positive contribution to knowledge. [...]
Hayward has used an exceptional range of sources [...] . These sources have been thoroughly mas- tered and skillfully woven together. He argues cogently and, given the extremely sensitive na- ture of his subject, consciously and consistently strives to achieve a balanced judgment. [...] He writes clearly and fluently. Overall, the breadth and depth of research, the maturity of judg- ment and the ability to absorb, transmute and present material are of doctoral standard. His ba- sic enthusiasm for historical research has already been so well honed and disciplined while pre- paring this thesis that he seems to me perfectly capable of a successful academic career.
Hayward' s thesis is that the Nazis did not attempt the systematic extermination of Jews dur- ing the Second World War. In particular, he finds the evidence that gas chambers were built and used for this purpose unconvincing. His argument for and against this key point is base on a de- tailed, careful study of documentary, oral and scientific evidence. He may, of course, be mis- taken, but in my judgment his case is nowhere flawed by improper use of evidence or extravagant language. More positively, he earns credit for adopting a scholarly approach to matters that most historians have flinched from investigating. For example, how many human beings can be packed into a particular space and how long does it take for a body to be wholly consumed by fire?
No question of denying Nazi brutality arises. [...] These crimes, nevertheless, did not amount to genocide. They are no unique crimes; [...].
[...] Hayward [...] singles out those valid points (while refuting many invalid points) that Re- visionists have made in criticism of some charges made by Jews and their sympathisers against the Nazis. He also demonstrates how far most Holocaust scholars have retreated from accepting all the charges made during the war and at the subsequent war crimes trials. The extent of this retreat, as Hayward shows, has not yet filtered down to mainstream surveys and much less to popular opinion. [...]
I recommend four A+ marks [...] . Overall, his thesis amply supports the award of First Class Honours .
Vincent Orange, Reader in History, [University of Canterbury, New Zealand] , 23 March 1993
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
199
"After some five months and $200,000 a tribunal of eminent persons reached conclusions so predictable and cliche-ridden that a fiver and a day spent over a cuppa could have reached the same result.
The Party found that Dr Joel Hayward, now an eminent military historian and lecturer in his own right, did not merit an MA with First Class Honours from Canterbury University for his 1993 thesis: The Fate of Jews in German Hands: an enquiry into the significance of Holocaust Revi- sionism.
Upon seeking legal advice, the Working Party was un- able to revoke the MA Hons. Degree, which had been de- manded by the New Zealand Jewish Council because it could not be demonstrated that Hayward had acted dishon- estly. However, the opinion was that Hayward did not merit such honours. The Working Party found that although Hayward had demonstrated superior abilities as a re- searcher and had put together his thesis with exceptional skill, his conclusions were flawed. He should not have of- fered an opinion as to which side of the Holocaust debate, revisionism or orthodoxy, was correct on the weight of evi- dence. Also, a particularly contentious point was that Hay- ward's thesis was three times longer than required. [...] What irked the Jewish Council was that by awarding the Hayward thesis First Class Honours, this appeared to give academic legitimacy to holocaust revisionism. [...] The Working Party was only required to consider if Hayward had acted dishonestly and therefore whether his MA Hons should be revoked. It found that he had not. It offered that Hayward was not required to render an opinion on the evi- dence in the Holocaust debate and that the thesis was too lengthy. What the Party should not have done is indulge in a large amount of unfounded criticism of revisionists and re- visionism, on the basis of comments supplied by and for the Jewish Council. Outside submissions were not accepted. [...] Despite the recommendations of two reputable New Zealand scholars the thesis 'did not deserve the highest ac- colade ', and therefore the opinions of two acclaimed and experienced New Zealand academics are trashed in favour of Jewish ethnocentrists and their ally, a less than dispas- sionate Professor Evans from England. " This same Professor Richard Evans was the so-called 'ex- pert witness' at the 2000 London Irving-Lipstadt trial. Evans is professor of German history at Cambridge University. Things began to quiet down a little for Hayward.
3. A detour covering similar grounds
While the University of Canterbury had its problems caused by the New Zealand Jewish community's representatives with their particular 'Holocaust' obsession, Waikato University at- tended to its own as well. The Jewish community had sniffed out a right-wing extremist who had been accepted into the uni- versity's doctoral program:12
"Berlin-born Hans-Joachim Kupka was accepted to study the role the German language played in contemporary New Zealand — a field which critics said would have meant his having to interview German-speaking Holocaust survi- vors. Kupka, the former deputy chair of the Bavarian
branch of the extreme right-wing Republikaner Party, with- drew his candidature in the wake of the controversy. " The restless paranoid Jewish community leaders would not
let things be and demanded that the university investigate and
apologise — which it did.
4. Updating the old issue with a new one
On October 9, 2002, Waikato University released its report A Review of the Case of Hans Joachim Kupka.13 The Report, prepared by Mr Bill Renwick, detailed the University's han- dling of the Kupka case.
The Waikato Times, the regional newspaper, ran the story, and Professor Dov Bing weighed in heavily. However, gener- ally there was not much community interest in the Kupka affair, and observant individuals realized that the alleged hysteria had been artificially whipped up by the leaders of the Jewish com- munity. It seems that this displeased Bing somewhat. And so he issued a Press Release and sent it to the Waikato Times, which journalist Lester Thorley turned into an article that was pub- lished on October 23, 2002:
"ESSA Y WAS REVISIONIST: PROFESSOR
By Lester Thorley
A Waikato University professor believes he has uncov- ered a Holocaust revisionist thesis at Canterbury Univer- sity.
Waikato political science professor Dov Bing, who led Jewish academic outrage during Waikato 's Kupka Holo- caust denial affair, wants answers from Canterbury over the history thesis Judgment On Nuremberg, by Steven [sic] Eaton.
It was produced one year after the 1 993 Hayward thesis, which attracted worldwide attention for its conclusion that the Nazis did not systematically exterminate Jews in gas chambers.
Prof Bing said the Canterbury theses had been hailed on an Alabama, US, Holocaust revisionist website. The Theses and Dissertations Press home page says it started in 1994 in response to 'the reception of two unpublished masters theses in history from a foreign university '.[141
The company says its aim is to publish views which are 'suppressed' elsewhere.
Mr Eaton's thesis, which argued the 1945 Nuremberg war criminal trials were illegal, was part of an honours masters degree. He credits Joel Hayward: 'who first intro- duced me to Nuremberg and it is to him that I owe my en- thusiasm for the subject '.
Prof Bing said, 'Holocaust revisionism, especially when it enters the halls of academia, is a matter of considerable public interest. '
A 2000 investigation into Hayward' s paper led to Can- terbury 's apology to the Jewish community for accepting a 'seriously flawed thesis'. A working party said standards had 'slipped on just one occasion '.
Canterbury's chancellor Dame Phyllis Guthardt said yesterday the Hayward case was investigated fully.
From the university's point of view the matter is closed. '
200
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
Canterbury would not investigate Mr Eaton's thesis unless there was clear evidence of fraud or dishonesty in his work.
Waikato professor John Jensen, who has since left, was the external marker for Hayward's work, which was given anA+.
Canterbury would not name Mr Eaton 's external
marker, but said it was not Prof Jensen. "
As this item mentioned the Hayward affair, it became rele- vant for the press in Christchurch, and the Canterbury Press 's Amanda Warren elaborated and fabricated that the Eaton the- sis15 is about the Holocaust — which it is not — and that it is ac- tually on Dr Robert Countess' website, when this is not a fact because Countess does not have a website:16
"Second Holocaust thesis under fire
By Amanda Warren
Canterbury University is under fire after claims that a second thesis by one of its students is being used by the Holocaust denial movement.
The thesis, by Steven Eaton, was supervised by Dr Vin- cent Orange who supervised Joel Hayward's controversial thesis questioning key aspects of the Holocaust [...].
Mr Eaton 's thesis questions the validity of the Nurem- berg trials, conducted by the Allies after World War Two, to punish German war criminals. His thesis concludes that 'the Allies evidenced scant regard for the system known as international law', and their disposal of major Nazi war criminals was an 'arbitrary exercise of power '.
Mr Eaton, whose masters degree in history with first-class honours was confirmed in May 1994, ar- gues that in 1945 no law existed to give the Allies the legal right to punish Nazis to the full extent. [...]
An international law expert at the University of Canterbury, Alex Conte, said Mr Eaton 's thesis was not the first to question the Nuremberg trials.
Mr Eaton 's thesis has been seized upon by a well- known Holocaust denier, the Rev Dr Robert Countess, who posted details of it on his website.
Waikato political science professor Dov Bing yes- terday said it was one of the base tenets of the Holo- caust denial movement that the Nuremberg trials had no standing in international law and that German war criminals were falsely convicted.
Canterbury University could have prevented this latest controversy if it had identified other theses in- volving Holocaust denial, Professor Bing said.
The university's Chancellor, Dame Phyllis Gut- hardt, said it would be a huge undertaking to re-exa- mine old theses. 'There is no suggestion of an investiga- tion into the Eaton thesis. There is no evidence of fraud or dishonesty, there had been no criticism of it, and it had never been embargoed or withheld. ' She did not believe a shadow had been cast on other history theses written in the mid-1990s. Dr Orange did not return The Press' calls and Mr Eaton could not be found. " Adelaide Institute's call to the University of Canter- bury yielded the following response from a source that
did not wish to be named, though the speaker met Fredrick
T6benin2000:17
"The Hayward thesis is behind us. The Eaton thesis is on the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials. It is not a Holocaust issue. The issue at any university is the freedom to research [...] with sensitivity. "
5. The latest on the Hayward Affair
The above Press article spawned the following in New Zea- land's premier Radio and Television magazine, Listener, No- vember 2-8. 2002, but actually printed on Friday, October 25, 2002. Its article was introduced with the now famous libel suit British historian David Irving had launched against American Jewish Theologian Deborah Lipstadt, which Irving finally lost in 2002. It then went into detail about the Hayward, the Hupka, and the Eaton 'scandals' and ended with a statement by Richard Evans, Prof, for German history at Cambridge University, who testified against Irving in London. In a report prepared for Massey University about the Hayward thesis, Evans suggested to revoking Hayward's academic degree, and the Listener ended it article with quoting Evans accordingly:18
"There is a precedent. Evans cites the case of Henri Roques, a protege of French Holocaust denier Robert Fau- risson, who had his 'revisionist' doctorate revoked in 1986 by the French Ministry of Higher Education. Evans 's report concluded: Allowing a work of Holocaust denial to appear with the imprimature of a university gives it scholarly
PERMISSION TO PUBLISH 'JUDGEM ENT ON NUREMBERG'
I agree to the following conditions:
1) T&DP have the right to publish my thesis in book form.
2) I have ihe right to make minor corrections, fix typos etc.
3) I will right a brief FOREWORD and AFTERWORD to the published edition.
4) Royalties will be paid to me only after publishing expenses have been recouped by T&DP.
S. Daniel Eaton
Hliiiinm
DANIEL EATON
ANALYST: STRATEGIC AND INTERNATIONAL POLICY POLICY DIVISION
(STVsis. sliSt,-
ftJf ft! pbrwel , ttOi)
Cnj Iti&l «\t I itvA >i? tt {? (»rj'i>Ve
tti'te - eMtrntWra fc+»e«Jd li/ cut
re rtt*l
Written permission by Daniel Eaton to have his thesis published by Theses and Dissertations Press
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
201
credibility. In the present case, this has also been exploited by anti-Semites and political extremists seeking to argue for the validity of Holocaust denial. If a de- gree is awarded to a candidate who is subsequently found to have plagiarized his or her work, or who has systemati- cally violated the canons of scholarship which the degree is intended to certify and endorse, then it is reasonable to ask the university in question to withdraw recognition of the degree originally awarded. This indeed happened in the case of Henri Roques. It should happen in the case of Joel Hayward, too. ' "
6. Conclusion.
Whenever a former Soviet-controlled country joins NATO, then it is required to pass before the joining date a specific law that outlaws 'Holocaust' denial. Poland passed a law in January 1999, and in April of that year it was permitted to join NATO.
The pattern has repeated itself, all for the well being of the 1500 families that control the thriving business enterprise called NATO, and of course for the 'memory of the victims of the Holocaust'.
New Zealand is as yet not going down this road — not yet. But the Jewish lobby's attempt to stifle debate on matters 'Holocaust' indicates it is well on its way. Outright 'Holocaust' denial is as yet not on the New Zealand legal books, as is the case in Australia, where the 17 September 2002 Federal Court of Australia judgments in Jones v Scully and Jones v Toben has enshrined in law a European-style 'Holocaust denial' law, al- beit without criminal sanctions.
New Zealand is focusing on academia to reign in dissident thinkers, the road that Germany walked along in 1983 when Gottingen University withdrew its doctorate conferred upon Justice Wilhelm Staglich during the 1950s for having written in 1979 the classic The Auschwitz Myth.19 France has done like- wise. Switzerland and Austria have not, as yet!
A call to New Zealand's well-known current affairs TV program Paul Holmes indicated that a general interest in the matters raised by the Listener article seemed not to warrant a specific program on the Hayward affair, so according to pro- ducer Vicky Poland. It remains to be seen whether Professor Dov Bing will let matters rest.
Editor's Note
Joel Hayward visited Rev. Dr. Robert Countess in early 1994,20 and in 1999 he agreed to have some of his articles pub- lished by Castle Hill Publishers.21 In 1994, Daniel Eaton agreed to have his thesis published by Theses and Dissertations Press,22 as had Joel Hayward. All this indicates that Joel Hay- ward considered Dr. Countess and other revisionists to be friends. But according to the Listener, he is said to have told them:
Joel Hayward during his visit at the home of Dr. Robert H. Countess in 1994, here while shooting a gun in the backyard.
"I also absolutely hate the fact that these people [Dr. Countess, Theses & Dissertations Press] wish to use my aca- demic credibility to bolster their work, which commonly has anti-Semitic objec- tives. I detest anti-Semitism and other forms of racism. "
From private communications with both Daniel Eaton and Joel Hayward, where they apologized for their denigrating language, I can only conclude that both fear for their fu- ture. They both literally begged me not to publish anything anymore they had written, though I had written permission to do so. Dr. Hayward' s health is severely compro- mised, which he puts forward as one ex- cuse. However, both academics certainly did not prove that they have a spinal column capable of carrying the load of professing academic responsibility.
Notes
Joel S. A. Hayward, "The Fate of Jews in German Hands: An Historical Enquiry into the Development and Significance of Holocaust Revisionism", Master Thesis, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand, 1993; it was once posted online, but had to be removed after threat by Dr. Hay- ward, see www.aargh.vho.org/engl/hay/hayindex.html. Appendix I, in: Report By The Joel Hayward Working Party, December 2000, University of Canterbury . Ibid., Appendix M. Ibid., Appendix L.
See the contribution by Ingrid Rimland in this issue. Email from Hayward to F. Toben, dated October 5, 1998. Letter dated October 16, 1998, from R. Faurisson to E. Ziindel. Letter dated October 18, 1998, from R. Faurisson to F. Toben. Report..., op. cit. (note 2), Appendix B.
From: www.aargh.vho.org/engl/hay/hayindex.html. For an account of the Hayward File it is well worth reading Serge Thion's comprehensive treat- ment of the moral and intellectual problems raised by Hayward's behavior and failure of moral nerve. In: Western Destiny, February 2001, Issue #23. Australian Jewish News, January 5, 200 1 . http://unipr.waikato.ac.nz/news/kupka-report.shtml
Since summer 2002, Theses and Dissertations Press is the English language book publishing imprint of Castle Hill Publishers; see www.tadp. org/about.html
Daniel Eaton, Judgment On Nuremberg. An Historical Enquiry into the Va- lidity of Article Six of The London Charter as an Expression of Contempo- rary International Law, Master's Thesis, University of Canterbury, Christ- church, New Zealand, 1994; online: http://vho.org/aaargh/engl/hay/bobprefaceEa.html October 24, 2002, www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,2089615all,00.html See the university's response: www.canterbury.ac.nz/search/intro.htm Philip Matthews, "Special Report: Holocaust Denial and the NZ Connec- tion. In Denial. The continuing story of why a New Zealand university re- fuses to dishonor a thesis denying the Nazi Holocaust." Wilhelm Staglich, Der Auschwitz Mythos, Grabert-Verlag, Tubingen 1979; Eng. : The Auschwitz Myth: A Judge Looks at the Evidence, Institute for His- torical Review, Newport Beach, CA, 1986; the German Federal Constitu- tional Court confirmed the revocation of Staglich's PhD title, ref. 1 BvR 408f./83.
See his account "Die Neuseeland-Saga", Vierteljahreshefte fur freie Ge- schichtsforschung 5(3) (2001), pp. 330-333, and the photo in this article. Joel S. A. Hayward, "Eine Fallstudie friiher integrierter Kriegfiihrung", Vierteljahreshefte fur freie Geschichtsforschung 3(1) (1999), pp. 4-16. See the document reproduction.
202
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume I ■ No. 2
Discovering Absurdistan
The Deterioration of Civil Right under the Influence of Wartime Propaganda
By Germar Rudolf
- What kind of a country is it where a considerable part of the people think that singing their national anthem could be for- bidden?
- What country is it where folksingers might be put in jail for singing peaceful songs?
- What kind of a country is it where a mother of five gets a prison term for having sold one CD with peaceful music on it?
- What country is it where a pastor raising his national flag in his church would get kicked out of his parish for being an extremist?
- What country is it where somebody raising his country's flag would be harassed by his neighbors for being an extremist?
- What country is it where a teacher suggesting that all stu- dents should sing the national anthem first thing every morn- ing would lose his job for being an extremist?
- What country is it where showing uncompromised flags of its past is considered a threat to "public peace"?
- What country is it where people can get fined for raising an arm to wave their hands at a person?
- What country is it where people can be fined for collecting and displaying full-scale models of historical weapons?
- What country is it where one can be fined or sent to jail for showing symbols and insignia that have been, and still are, used in many cultures for centuries and millennia?
- What country is it where a professor who writes his disbelief about certain historical events in a footnote, written in Latin, in a scholarly anthology can be prosecuted and threatened with jail?
- What country is it where a judge, writing a well-founded, but highly controversial book on historical topics, sees his book confiscated and burned, his pension cut, and his PhD title withdrawn as a result of this?
- What country is it where a highly renowned historian writing a well-founded book of his country's history can be threat- ened with prosecution because what he found out is not liked by the authorities?
- What country is it where a history teacher is sent to jail for uttering historical dissent in a private letter to a high-profile personality?
- What country is it where a professor criticizing international- ism can be kicked out of his job, harassed, prosecuted and driven into suicide?
- What country is it that sends a historical dissenter to prison for more than two years just because he published peaceful, scholarly historical material?
- What country is it that denigrates, defames and humiliates its war veterans to such a degree that finally one of them burns himself publicly in protest against what he calls a "Niagara flood of lies" against his generation?
- What country is it that outlaws the commemoration of such a self-sacrifice and punishes everybody who dares to publish
this man's last appeal?
- What country is it where well-founded, heavily footnoted books on political and historical topics, authored by academ- ics with solid credentials, can be confiscated and burned by the authorities?
- What country is it where authors, editors, publishers, print- ers, wholesalers, retailers, importers and exporters, ware- houses, and customers buying more than two copies of a cer- tain medium can be prosecuted for producing, stocking, im- porting/exporting, distributing dissenting political and his- torical literature?
- What country is it that hides from its citizens which media are outlawed, so that one cannot possibly know whether or not one commits a crime when distributing such media?
- What country is it where judges are threatened with prosecu- tion because they did not punish political and historical dis- senters harshly enough?
- What country is it that outlaws the introduction of exonerat- ing evidence?
- What country is it that prosecutes defense lawyers if they try to introduce exonerating evidence on behalf of their clients?
- What country is it that does not keep records of what is said and is happening during trial proceedings?
- What country is it that has institutions designed to conduct political trials?
- What country is it that has a huge spy agency designed to snoop on opposition groups?
- What country is it where members of certain political oppo- sition groups considered constitutional can nevertheless be deprived of some of their civil rights?
- What country is it that, according to experts, will be a totali- tarian state very soon, if things keep developing as they have so far?
- What country is it where even the mainstream media admit that this country is in a state of hysteria while persecuting political dissidents?
- What country is it where the head of state asks for children to spy on their parents and parents to spy on their children to make sure they do not harbor unwanted political views?
- What country is it where authorities and the public declare publicly to fight everything that is deemed to be politically on the right?
- What country is it where the authorities declare that half of their population deserves to be ostracized for harboring po- litical views?
- What country is it that is proud of conducting more than 10,000 criminal prosecutions against persons for having committed peaceful "thought crimes"?
- What is the country in the world with the second harshest censorship after China?
What country would that be???
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
203
The correct answer is: Germany
Surprised? If so, read on.
Singing Forbidden!
Germany's national anthem was written in 1848 by Ludwig von Fallersleben, and it is sung to a melody of Joseph Haydn. In contrast to many other national anthems, it has no military, imperialistic or violent content, but restricts itself to a descrip- tion of Germany, Germans, and their ideals. By a misrepresen- tation of a section of its first verse, however, certain anti- German forces managed to give it a bad reputation. The first verse reads in translation:
Germany, Germany above all in the world, When it stands together for protection and defense, From the Maas until the Memel, From the Etsch until the Belt. Germany, Germany above all in the world, When it stands together for protection and defense,
This verse is obviously totally defensive, but by omitting the second line, it can be misrepresented as a claim of German superiority, which is contrary to the actual content. The third and fourth lines describe characteristic borderline rivers (Maas, Memel, Etsch) or parts of the Baltic Sea (Belt), which in 1848, when this song was written, were actual geographic, political and/or ethnic borders of Germany. That they are no longer to- day, is a result of two lost world wars, after which the victori- ous powers conquered and annexed huge parts of German terri- tory and partly expelled and killed millions of Germans. Today, singing this verse is often viewed as if territorial claims are be- ing made against Germany's neighbors, though strictly seen it isn't Germany that has territorial claims, but its neighbors, who simply managed to realize their claims with brute force since 1918, killing millions of Germans along the way. Hence, sing- ing this verse should not be seen as an aggressive territorial claim, but as an eternal reminder of the huge illegal losses in territory and human life Germany suffered since the beginning 20th century.
The two other verses of the German national anthem are pretty harmless, the second describing what the Germans are proud of (German loyalty, German wine, German singing, and German women), and the third is an appeal to unity, justice and liberty, three ideals that were not given in the politically splin- tered and often despotic Germany of 1848.
As a result of these historical and territorial problems, the first two verses of this anthem are never sung at official occa- sions, since the first verse is considered to cause diplomatic trouble with Germany's conquering neighbors and public rela- tion problems with the media, and the second verse simply has a style considered by many to be embarrassing. But even sing- ing the third verse or merely playing the melody of Germany's national anthem is everything but common practice in Ger- many. It is basically restricted to international events in sports and politics, for example when the German national soccer team plays against another team, or when some high foreign of- ficial is greeted with his country's anthem, followed by the melody of the German anthem.
Otherwise, singing the German national anthem is consid- ered to be something for either morons or 'neo-Nazis' in Ger- many, as a British newspaper observed correctly in 200 1.1 In the 1980s, there were still a few public radio stations in Ger- many that would play the melody of the German anthem at midnight, and once in a while I used to pop up the volume of my radio to maximum, and put it right at my opened window to let all the neighbors and all the students in my dormitory hear it. This was and still is quite a provocation, as most people really think that somebody who does that must be either insane or a National Socialist. Consequently, this was one of the rea- sons why a lecture announcement (about abortion) that I posted on one of those days was nicely embellished with a swastika af- ter just one day.
To understand the degree to which German self- denigration has lead, I had to come to the United States and experience myself — with great surprise and a bit of an uncom- fortable feeling — that the first thing the entire school did in the morning was to sing the national anthem as it was broad- casted over the loud speakers. If any teacher or headmaster would even dare to suggest such a practice in Germany, s/he would probably lose his job on the spot for being a right-wing extremist. Not even I, who considers himself to be a patriot, would have thought of letting all students sing the anthem each and every morning. This seems extreme to me, that is to say, right-wing radical. But here in the U.S., it is considered to be just perfectly normal.
Because of the artificial controversy about the first verse of the German national anthem, domestic as well as foreign media are spreading rumors or false news that it is actually illegal in Germany to sing this first verse. This is not true at all. But to- day, many Germans believe it.2
What should one think of a country where a considerable percentage of the population believes that it is illegal to sing its national anthem? What should one think of a people, who con- siders it to be alright that its national anthem is (allegedly) ille- gal? And what is one to think of a country where considerable parts of the population find it not irritating that songs could possibly be outlawed in the first place?
Unfortunately, things are just as bad in Germany, and even worse. As a matter of fact, many songs are actually outlawed in Germany, most of them because they have a military connota- tion, others only because they were sung during the third Reich, and others again because they allegedly or actually incited un- favorable feelings against identifiable groups. As an example, I would like to refer to the case of Frank Rennicke, a German folksinger who composes and sings patriotic and nationalistic songs. Rennicke is as old as I am. He lives in a small town in southern Germany, only a few miles away from where I once lived. Eventually, I had the chance to meet him, and though his music is not always my style and I also do not agree with all of his political views, we became friends.
In 1986, Frank composed a song in which he describes the terrible experience of Germans who lost their home, their goods, and many of them even their lives during the last war. In a second part of this song, Frank draws parallels with today's Germany, where Germans are supposedly again expelled from their home by a massive immigration of foreigners, in his view
204
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
forced upon Germany by the then occupying forces (Americans and Russians). The song ends with the following two lines: "Americans, Russians, alien people leave - finally again masters in our own house. "
Mainly because of these two lines, the song was banned from distribution in Germany in 1996. As a consequence, Frank rewrote the song and simply omitted these two lines. I won't translate the entire song here, but these two lines are really the only ones that could possibly be interpreted as causing some ir- ritations for "alien people" (foreigners). The rest of the song is much milder. Though still expressing discomfort with the pres- ence and activities of aliens, it doesn't ask for their removal.
Because Frank kept distributing this truncated song, he was sentenced to 17 months in prison without probation in early 2003. Frank is a father of five children and has no criminal re- cord. His wife, who was found guilty of having taken ONE or- der over the phone for one copy of this song, was sentenced to five months on probation. And this is just one case out of many, one that touched me personally.
So what kind of a country is it where folksingers are sent to prison for their (unpopular) songs, and where mothers are threatened to go to jail for taking just one(!) order for a music CD?3
Forbidden Flags and Symbols
For centuries, Germany had no flag, or at least not a flag ac- cepted to represent the entire nation, since Germany was split into many principalities for most of her history. The first flag that was seen by many Germans to represent the nation was the one adopted from the colors of one of the student fraternities whose members volunteered to fight against Napoleon in 1813: Black, Red, Gold. However, because of the lack of an all- encompassing German national state based upon the will of the people, it was not to be accepted officially by any German monarchy. Only after the demise of the German Kaiserreich af- ter WWI was it introduced in Germany, but it was not accepted by a considerable part of the nation. For many, the so-called Reichskriegsflagge (Imperial War Flag, see picture) represented a more glorious Germany. This flag was introduced by the Sec- ond German Reich, the Kaiser, as a symbol of its Army. Since the Kaiserreich was a confederation, where all membership states, kingdoms and smaller monarchies, had their own sym- bols, flags, rulers, independent police forces and armies, the Imperial War Flag was a symbol representing the whole, which was accepted by many people. Hence, still today, this flag is a strong symbol of German glory.
The first official flag to be accepted by the huge majority of all Germans was — unfortunately — the swastika flag used be- tween 1933 and 1945. After WWII, the Black-Red-Gold flag was introduced again, this time to be accepted by all, except for the Austrians who, forced by the victorious powers, had to say goodbye to their German motherland and stay independent.
As with singing their national anthem, the Germans have similar problems with showing their flag, though it is not his- torically compromised at all. The first time I realized that there is something different with Germany as compared to other countries was during a summer vacation in Switzerland when my mother and we kids visited a Swiss catholic church. The
ceiling of that church showed a scene from the New Testament where Jesus rises from his tomb in glory, holding the Swiss flag in his hand. It is incomprehensible to me, why Jesus would hold any flag in his hand, not to mention a Swiss flag, a country that did not even exist 2000 years ago. I considered this a kind of displaced patriotism.
However, having lived in the US for a while, I have realized that in this country, too, having the national flag somewhere hoisted in the church doesn't seem to be anything unusual. However, if any pastor or priest in Germany would suggest having the German flag displayed anywhere in his church, I as- sume he would be ousted as a right-wing extremist and, if per- sisting, would be kicked out of his parish.
Similarly, if a German mayor of any city would suggest having German flags decorate the city throughout, as it is quite common in the US, particularly after 9/11, he would need to have an extreme patriotism which, if detected while running for office, would prevent him from coming into office in the first place, and if exposed only while in office, the media would make such a huge right-wing radical scandal out of this, that this mayor certainly would be forced to resign.
It can be a similarly unpleasant experience to try to hoist the German flag in one's front yard, if there is no particular reason to do so. This would be taken as evidence for right-wing ex- tremism by the neighborhood and would lead to a social ostra- cizing, which can become quite unpleasant. As The Independ- ent recently noted correctly, raising the German national flag, like singing her national anthem, is considered to be something for "morons and neo-Nazis".1
In the early 1990s, when a wave of patriotism was going through Germany after its reunification, many people dared showing the Reichskriegsflagge again, that is, the imperial war flag of the Kaiser's time. As a reaction to this, the authorities declared it a misdemeanor to show this flag in public.4 It is that simple in Germany to ban the showing of uncompromised symbols, just because some media and politicians didn't like it.
Needless to say that showing any flags of the Third Reich is outright illegal in Germany and can be punished with heavy prison terms. Similarly, all kinds of symbols used during the Third Reich are illegal to show in Germany today. This in- cludes not only the swastika and the SS-Runes, but also many other rune symbols and insignia that are identical or only simi- lar to symbols and insignia used during the Third Reich period. Some of these symbols were in use in various cultures of the world for many centuries or even millennia. Showing them in
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
205
Germany today, however, leads to prison terms.5 This is a legal practice that was totally unheard of during the Third Reich, where any flag or symbol of any period of German history could be displayed.
Let us assume somebody collects models of warplanes and tanks, as so many people do. What to do with the German weapons of WWII, which all had certain insignia on them? Displaying such models with the historically correct, but politi- cally incorrect insignia in Germany is a crime. Even if you have such items only in your private collection, if you are so unfor- tunate to tell your neighbor about this, he might be so mean as to denounce you to the authorities, which can lead to a house search, confiscation of the items in question, and a prosecution for displaying illegal symbols. This, too, is an extreme overre- action, which was not even heard of during the Third Reich.
Another topic is the so-called "Hitler salute" (stiff arm sa- lute, originally a Roman tradition, as were so many things used by Hitler Germany). It is illegal in Germany and can be pun- ished with fines or imprisonment. However, consider this:
Two friends of mine, who are certainly not National Social- ists and would never consider using this salute, once visited an ongoing trial against a historical dissenter. The local Jewish community sent one of their representatives to this trial, as is usually the case during such trials. As my friends approached the courtroom, they saw an acquaintance in the hallway waiting to be admitted as a visitor. My friends greeted their acquaint- ance by briefly lifting an arms and waving at him. The repre- sentative of the Jewish community filed a criminal complaint against both for having used the "Hitler salute". They were both indicted. The older of my two friends could prove that a) he had no National Socialist views because had resisted becoming a member of the National Socialist party during the war, and b) his right arm was disabled, which proved that he could not pos- sibly have made a stiff right-arm salute. So he was acquitted. My other friend cannot prove in the same way that he had no National Socialist views, simply because he was born after the war and thus had no chance to resist becoming a member of the National Socialist party during the war, and he also could not prove that he cannot lift his right arm, since he was healthy. So he was convicted and had to pay a hefty fine. Hence, any Ger- man encountering anybody lifting his arm to a greeting, and if only for a wave, will experience what I do: a Pavlovian reflex like somebody had given me a high voltage shock. Seeing somebody rising one arm, for what reason so ever, is frighten- ing to Germans. Yes, we Germans are paranoid; we were made paranoid by our society. But this is only the start. Just read on.
This Book Must Burn. . .
In 1979, German historian Prof. Dr. Hellmut Diwald pub- lished a book simply entitled „German History".6 It covered 2000 years of history, of which an appropriate amount of pages dealt with the Third Reich. When dealing with the concentra- tion camps and the Holocaust, Diwald ended his section about this topic by stating that what really happened during this time is still not really clear, that many questions are still open, and that much more research needs to be done. This sufficed to trigger a storm of outrage both in the media as well as in aca- demia. Eventually, Diwald' s publisher changed this statement
in a second edition — without asking the author — to the effect that it then expressed horror and outrage about the unimagin- able atrocities committed during the Holocaust, an emotional statement that is quite common, but is neither scholarly nor does it solve any of the scientific problems surrounding this event in history.7
After Prof. Diwald had died in 1993, several prominent German scholars compiled a commemorative anthology honor- ing him.8 One of the contributing authors was Dr. Robert Hepp, professor for sociology in Osnabrilck. In his contribution, he re- told the story of this "Diwald scandal." While so doing, he mentioned in one footnote:9
"Sunt apud nos cogitationes liberae in foro interno, constrictae tamen in foro publico. Quoniam in re publico nostra per regent non licet historicum quoddam factum ex officio approbatum ad incertum revocare, in dubio ponere, quin etiam negare, et cum omnis dissensio aperte declarata iudiciis severe puniatur, haereticam opinionem coram pub- lico diligenter dissimulare oportet. Si quis nihilominus pervestigationibus omni studio peractis factum approbatum maxime dubium esse videt et veritatis gratia incorruptam rerum fidem collegas eruditos celare non vult, opinionem suam publicare non potest nisi abscondito modo. Itaque lin- gua doctorum antiquorum abutens statuo interclericos (quos quod sequitur obsecro, ut vulgus celent): Ego quidem Mud iudaeorum gentis excidium, ratione institutum et in 'castris extinctionis ' gaso pernicioso methodice peractum, veram fabulam esse nego. Sed documentorum et argumen- torum scholae revisionisticae ratione habita haud scio, an hoc verum sit. Dixi quod sentio. Unica cura Veritas; ne- minem in dubitationem inducere, neminem laedere cogito. Sol lucet omnibus, attamen non cuivis la'ico contingit adire Corinthum. Quandoquidem vulgus vult decipi decipiatur! " In brief: Prof. Hepp declares here that in Germany every- body is punished who publicly expresses certain dissenting views. If one nevertheless does want to speak out because truth demands it, one has to use certain methods. For this reason, this footnote is in Latin. Next, Prof. Hepp denies that the story about gas chambers used during the genocide of Jews in so- called extermination camps is a true story. He says he has been convinced by scholarly revisionist arguments.
Because of this footnote in Latin language, Prof. Hepp was prosecuted for "Instigating to hatred" and "Incitement of the masses". Since the statute of limitations had already passed, he could not be convicted, but the commemorative anthology was subsequently confiscated10 and burned in waste incinerators under the supervision of the German police.11 How a Latin footnote can incite anybody to hatred, not to mention "the masses", remains a riddle. And what kind of a system is it that burns scientific, commemorative anthologies written on behalf of one of the nation's great post-war historians?
A single case? Far is this from being true. In these matters, this is actually the rule in "democratic" Germany. The first and most spectacular burning of a scholarly, heavily footnoted his- torical book by the German authorities occurred in the early 1980s. Victim was a book written by a retired judge, Dr. Wilhelm Staglich, who analyzed the historical and legal foun- dations of several trials held against defendants, who were ac-
206
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
cused of having committed crimes in the former concentration camp Auschwitz.12 Since the author openly showed his dis- agreement with the "official" version of history and came to "wrong" conclusions, the book was confiscated and destroyed. Not enough with that, Staglich saw his pension cut down, and the University of Gottingen, where Staglich had made his PhD in 1951, withdraw his PhD title.13 This was done with reference to a law introduced in 1939 by Adolf Hitler.14 The law says that an academic degree can be withheld or revoked if the owner of a title proves to be "academically unworthy." Today's legal un- derstanding in Germany assumes such unworthiness, if the aca- demic credentials have been used to commit a crime leading to a prison term of more than one year.15 Though Dr. Staglich was not sentenced to anything — he could not be prosecuted because the statute of limitations had expired — the German Federal Constitutional Court nevertheless decided that the University of Gottingen acted perfectly legally.16
The most rabid reaction of the German authorities so far was doubtlessly caused by an anthology authored by some 15 scholars from various countries. The book critically analyzed various aspects of the Holocaust and came to several quite con- troversial conclusions.17 Though two well-renowned German mainstream historians testified publicly and in court on behalf of this book, endorsing it as a scholarly book which ought to be protected by the constitutionally guaranteed freedom of sci- ence,18 the book was nevertheless confiscated and burned,19 criminal proceedings started against authors, the editor, the publisher, the printer, wholesalers, and retailers.20 After the au- thorities confiscated the customer list of this book, over 100 house searches where conducted all over Germany at custom- ers, who had bought more than two copies of said work, indi- cating that they had an "illegal" intention to distribute the work.21 All books found were confiscated and burned. In pro- test against this rampage, some 1 ,000 German academics pub- lished an "Appeal: Freedom of Expression is Endangered" in various German newspapers22 — to no avail.23
In a further example, another famous German historian barely escaped criminal prosecution for his historically accu- rate, but politically "incorrect" findings. For decades, Dr. Joachim Hoffmann was a leading scientist at the German gov- ernment-owned Research Institute for Military History. His field of expertise was Russia, and the German-Russian war 1941-1945 in particular. Just prior to his retirement, he pub- lished a thoroughly researched and well-documented book on the way Stalin planned and conducted this war. Hoffmann shows how Stalin planned as early as 1939 to overrun and con- quer all of continental Europe, what extremely cruel method he used to force his soldiers to fight an unwanted war, how he unleashed a reign of terror over not only his own people, but all people that he (re-)conquered during the years 1943-1945. But what enraged many left-wing politicians and media personali- ties most was the fact that Hoffmann exposed some of the So- viet atrocity propaganda unleashed against Germany exactly as what it was: untrue or exaggerated war-time propaganda. Since Hoffmann also touched upon certain aspects of the "Holocaust" in this context, proving the propaganda origin and untruthful- ness of certain aspects, this lead to voices calling for Hoff- mann's prosecution and the confiscation of his book. Only be-
cause the judge responsible to decide whether or not a trial should be held was a personal friend of Dr. Hoffmann, was he left unharmed.24 He was also told that a prosecution could not be avoided anymore, should he change only one word in his book, because this would renew the statute of limitations.25
The sad story of this attempt of censorship is described in the book itself, which I published in English in 2001. A longer, clearer, and more courageous preface attacking the restriction of freedom of speech in Germany was initially written by Prof. Topitsch, an Austrian historian who had published on the Ger- man-Russian war himself. But facing an escalating wave of prosecution of historians (see next section), Prof. Topitsch got so scared that only a very brief preface was finally approved by him.26
...and so Must This Man!
Prof. Werner Pfeifenberger once taught political science at a fine German university. Then he committed the crime of quot- ing the German communist Kurt Tucholsky out of context. Tu- cholsky once wrote that the German bourgeois should be as- phyxiated. As dramatic as this sounds, read in context it is not that dramatic anymore. Since Prof. Pfeifenberger had used this and other quotations in an article he wrote juxtaposing national- ism and internationalism, he was massively attacked for being a right-winger. First, Prof. Pfeifenberger temporarily lost his job at the state university where he worked. He fought against this dismissal and won. But in a later case, he lost and was hence removed from his chair and "promoted" to a small university in nowhere-land. Next, certain political and media lobbies de- manded that he ought to lose this job as well and that he be prosecuted for his writings. After many years of harassment by his colleagues and students, and after having lost his job, he fi- nally was indeed indicted for allegedly having committed a crime by writing critical comments about internationalistically inclined Communists. On May 13, 2000, when Prof. Pfeifen- berger received notice of the initialization of criminal prosecu- tion with the threat of up to five years in prison, he committed suicide.27
One may consider this suicide unreasonable, but it was also tragic and went like a Shockwave through Germany's conserva- tive and patriotic academia. Prof. Pfeifenberger was considered an Austrian patriot and conservative who had many friends in academia and politics, most of them conservatives and patriots themselves. I myself know quite a few of those academics, and the fear I heard and read expressed in communications, panic stricken fear of facing possible persecution against anything right-wing, conservative, patriotic in Germany and Austria, has stunned and frightened me.
Since the mid 1990s, an exhibition organized by communist propagandists is shown all over Germany, with public approval and support, depicting the activities of the German armed forces during World War II in a one-sided, derogatory way, as a formation of mass-murderers and criminals.28 Most German WWII veterans, of course, feel heavily offended by this, but they are not listened to anymore. The propaganda-warfare against the Wehrmacht in particular and the German nation in general has become so bad that some elderly people are getting massively upset. A defense against these lies is almost impossi-
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
207
ble, since any dissent from the official line can lead to ostraciz- ing and in extreme even criminal prosecutions. In 1995, after years of suffering under what he perceived as a "Niagara flood" of lies and distortions poured out about and over him and his generation, Reinhold Elstner, one of the many surviving Ger- man war veterans, wrote a flaring appeal to the German people to stop these lies and distortions. He went to the Munich Feld- herrnhalle, poured gasoline over himself and set himself ablaze. He died shortly thereafter.29
Again, one might consider such self-sacrifice foolish, but even more foolish was the reaction of the authorities to this: they confiscated Elstner's final appeal and outlawed its publica- tion. They also outlawed any commemorative gathering at the Feldherrnhalle on his behalf, and they seized and destroyed any wreath and flowers that were laid down on Elstner's behalf.
Compare this with the reaction of the communist authorities in Czechoslovakia in 1968 when the Prague student Jan Palach burned himself in protest against the Russian suppression of the "Prague Spring". As Germany suppresses any commemoration of Reinhold Elstner, so did the communist authorities in Czechoslovakia until 1989, when their system finally collapsed.
Censorship as far as the eye can see
In 1 994, 1 was invited by a small historical society to lecture on some historical research I had done in 1991 and which had been published in 1993. The president of this society is the Furth high school history teacher Hans-Jiirgen Witzsch. After my lecture, this society gave me an award for my research ac- companied with a small donation. During later years, I stayed in touch with Mr. Witzsch and learned more about his activities and ongoing research projects, which focus on the post-war Nuremberg trials and other post-war trials. Having analyzed a massive amount of original documents as they are stored in several Nuremberg archives, he had come to well founded con- clusions regarding some of those trials which did not conform with the "officially" held view. Of course, in a democracy, there is no "officially" held view on history, since science is a field where no authority can prescribe any research results or opinions on any topic. But in Germany, things are a bit differ- ent when topics are touched which could undermine the reputa- tion or self-proclaimed moral superiority and the justification of the existence of certain pressure groups who define themselves primarily by being opposed to anything that did actually or only allegedly happen during the years 1933 through 1945. Hence, anybody daring to revise the black-and-white all-negative his- torical image of this period of German history, no matter how well founded such revisions may be, will feel the heat of those pressure groups, which mainly consists of anything liberal and left-wing as well as anything Zionist, Jewish, or philo-Semitic. And since almost all relevant social groups in Germany are at once leftist, Zionist, and philo-Semitic, anybody daring to ap- proach the Third Reich history from a "politically incorrect" angle will unavoidably unleash a hurricane of slander, insinua- tions, ostracizing, persecution, and possibly even prosecution.
Mr. Witzsch did exactly this. As an honest researcher and scholar, he felt obligated to publish his research results despite the fact that the authorities would not like his results. For ex- ample, he proved in detail that most foreigners who worked in
Germany during the war were not, as widespread media propa- ganda wants us to believe, forced laborers or even slave labor- ers, but that they were paid, received social benefits, vacations, decent living quarters, and even enjoyed their own social activi- ties and access to media in their own language. Hence, in most cases, the working and living conditions for those foreigners were probably by far better than the conditions they could ever have enjoyed in their countries of origin which in most cases did neither grant social benefits nor decent working and living conditions. In another work, Witzsch was analyzing the condi- tions of one of the post-war trials against Oswald Pohl, head of the economic branch of the Third Reich concentration camp system. Witzsch proved the illegality of the court procedures used by the allied victorious powers and that the verdict handed down against Pohl was legally and historically untenable when considering the evidentiary situation.
As a result of these works, Witzsch first got suspended as a high school teacher, and the State of Bavaria tried to kick him out of this position forever and to reduce his pension.
In the late 1990s, Mr. Witzsch wrote a private letter to a Jewish Professor of history at the University of the German Army at Munich, asking him to intervene and put a stop to the ongoing false historical atrocity propaganda against Germany. In Witzsch' s mind, this propaganda would not only harm the German people, but since the inaccuracies of the historical pic- ture spread by media and pressure groups would sooner or later be revealed as distorted, this will, in the long run, also do tre- mendous harm to the German Jewish community as one of the pressure groups which pushes this propaganda most inten- sively. In reaction to this private letter, said Jewish professor filed a criminal complaint against Mr. Witzsch for inciting the masses to hatred. In early 2003, Mr. Witzsch was sentenced to three months imprisonment for having written this private let- ter. After his conviction, Witzsch also lost his position as a teacher, and his pension was considerably cut down.30
Another representative example is Udo Walendy, a political scientist who edited a historical series called "Historical Facts" which focused on the history of the two World Wars. Walendy is best described as an old Prussian: stiff, stubborn, sometimes arrogant, and not very diplomatic. He also is a dedicated Ger- man nationalist, which made him the target of social and crimi- nal persecution. Many of Walendy' s historical writings, most of them featuring right-wing views on Third Reich history, were put on the "Index", a list of publications deemed dangerous for the mental development of young people. Publications listed on this Index may no longer be offered and sold in public; hence they exist only as underground literature.
A particularly tragicomic case was the attempt of the Ger- man authorities to ban Walendy's book "Truth for Germany",31 in which Walendy tries to dispel the claim that Germany is solely or even mainly responsible for the outbreak of World War II. Walendy sued the German government repeatedly for their censoring his book. Walendy won each case, but after the German government was forced to release the book, they sim- ply put it back on the index the next day, with only a slightly different reason given. Walendy sued again, won again, and this case was developing into a madhouse play. In one of their writings, the German authorities were stupid enough to state
208
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
that Walendy's book was well-founded, and that his thesis about Germany's lack of guilt for the outbreak of WWII could not be refuted, which, in their eyes, was even more reason to ban the book, since young people, when exposed to such a the- sis, must necessarily become mentally disoriented after hearing the opposite claim of Germany's sole responsibility in all media and at the schools for decades. In other words: The German government admitted that Walendys' book was scientifically correct, that all government school books were a bunch of lies, and that the fact that kids, who are learning about the fraudulent nature of their government, might get upset, which would be reason enough — not to change the school books, but to censor Walendy! Eventually, the ban of Walendy's book, which had been imposed for almost 30 years, was lifted by the decision of Germany's Constitutional High Court. In essence, this verdict says that the German government lies to all students (in Ger- many, almost the entire school system is public), and that it is highly active in illegal censorship.32
Of course, such a victory for Walendy could not be left un- punished. As a consequence, the German authorities indicted Walendy for several issues of his historical periodical, where he had critically analyzed certain aspects of National Socialist anti- Jewish politics, in particular regarding the so-called Holo- caust. Since Walendy had dissenting views to those prescribed in Germany by its harsh penal law, he was eventually found guilty of inciting the masses etc., and sentenced to 29 months imprisonment.33
The Legal Foundations of German censorship
In German history, censorship unfortunately is more of a rule than an exception. It was introduced by the Catholic Church in the form of the Inquisition. However, it was left to the well-known Austrian statesman Metternich to perfect the system of suppressing freedom of speech by means of a com- prehensive spy and surveillance apparatus introduced in the early 1800s. Neither the German Empire nor the Weimar Re- public were particularly soft in their dealings with unwelcome literature,34 but the worst reputation was doubtless acquired by the Third Reich, which managed, within the twelve years of its existence, to black-list some 10,000 books.35 While these books were not burned, they did disappear from the shelves of book- stores, to be banned to library archives.
What is not nearly as well known is the fact that it was the Allied "liberators" of Germany who staged the greatest cam- paign of book destruction that mankind had ever seen. Among the victims of Allied displeasure were 34,645 titles as well as, comprehensively, all school textbooks published between 1933 and 1945; not only where these no longer permitted to be printed and sold after the war — they also had to vanish from the archives of many libraries. In the years from 1946 to 1952, the Soviet Occupation Power published four such lists ("Liste der auszusondernden Literatur", or list of literature to be destroyed) of titles earmarked for destruction. In accordance with the in- structions in the censors' introduction to the second and third volumes, the first three of these lists also went into force in the western Occupation Zones.36
In modern Germany, things are not quite as arbitrary and rigorous, but censorship is still an intrinsic part of German so-
ciety. Though the German Basic Law (similar to a constitu- tion) expressively prohibits general censorship, it allows cen- sorship by "general laws." The German Constitutional High Court rule that such "general laws" may not be sweeping in na- ture and may not prohibit a specific opinion, and may be used only to protect other fundamental human rights, like human dignity. However, the same court ruled that media can be banned from public distribution already if they are "a constant threat" to the mental development of young people.38
The German Criminal Code has at its disposal several laws facilitating censorship. One is used to prevent or punish libel (§185), another to prevent the defamation of the memory of dead persons (§ 1 89). Both activities are considered to be an at- tack on the fundamental right or human dignity. Two other German penal laws are used to prevent or punish the "stirring up of the people" (§130) and the "incitement to hatred" (§131), offenses which are considered to be an attack on human dignity and/or on public peace.39 Though German courts originally ruled that an attack on human dignity (libel, defamation of the dead, incitement to hatred) is committed only by the use of in- sulting/denigrating words, legal practice has shifted the border line from which onward a crime is committed more and more from insult to justified criticism.
Also, the question of when "public peace" might be threat- ened is handled more and more arbitrarily. There has never been a need that "public peace" was actually disturbed (for ex- ample by demonstrations and riots caused by a certain publica- tion). It suffices that some authorities think that if a certain dis- senting view would be widespread in Germany and would be accepted by a certain portion of society as being true, than a scenario could be thought of where certain unpeaceful activities could occur. This construction, of course, can be applied to al- most all views dissenting with the views held by the current au- thorities, and is thus the perfect tool to suppress any real and fundamental opposition.40
Following this changing practice, the German penal law was revised in autumn 1994 to reflect these changes. The re- vised law now includes regulations, which expressively criminalizes dissenting historical views of certain aspects of German history (primarily about National Socialist persecution of minorities), and additionally in a certain sense anything, which could be considered a "politically incorrect", yet perhaps justified criticism of population subgroups of potentially any definition — though only those subgroups will find protection from insult and criticism under this law which are considered "politically correct" (foreigners, Jews, homosexuals, but not Germans, German veterans, patriots, right-wingers, etc.).
In this regard the foremost German criminal law commen- tary observes that this amendment means that practically any kind of criticism of population subgroups — however they are defined — can become a criminal offense, since the legal right that is supposed to be protected (the anti-discrimination rule) and the feature it is supposed to protect (public peace) are ren- dered too general and vague in this law.
Also, the outlawing of dissenting historical views about a narrowly defined historical event is precisely the scenario, which the German Federal Constitutional Court ruled out years ago (but is ignoring today): this law criminalizes a specific
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
209
opinion about one detail of the history of only one single, past regime. From this perspective alone, this "hastily passed and not well thought-through",41 "special law against freedom of speech"42 would seem to be unconstitutional, and it has been criticized commensurately in German legal subject literature, where it is described as being, in effect, "an attack on the intel- lectual freedom of dissidents"43 and "virtually the classic ex- ample of a norm [...] directed against a specific opinion."42
"The legitimacy of this regulation is dubious at the very least. One can already question whether a[n opinion con- sidered by the authorities to be a] lie is a criminal wrong at all; one must question whether the mere denial[, correction, or refutation] of [what the authorities consider to be] a his- torical fact, in the absence of any characteristics of agita- tion, may be described and dealt with as incitement of the people, of all things. "44
The concept of "denying" something, which the authorities deem true, is a new element in German criminal law and poses problems, which it seems quite impossible for criminal proce- dure to solve, except with the means of political show trials, where nothing else is accused than one's "wrong" historical views. In order for denial to objectively constitute a criminal offense, it must be done deliberately; that is, the "denier" must know that he is not telling the truth and the Judge must prove this knowledge, which in and of itself is already virtually im- possible. But in order to be able to also punish (especially) the so-called "criminals of belief who are convinced that they are telling the truth, in particular when the accused are academic experts with dare trying to prove in public and in the courts in a scholarly way that they are right, the German judiciary has con- cocted an entirely new definition of "intent":45
"In this case, intent can only be the knowledge that one 's conviction puts one into conflict with that which 'gen- eral opinion ' indisputably regards as a historical fact. Ad- mittedly, in a state under the rule of law this places a system of criminal law based on guilt squarely at the crossroads [between a state under the rule of law and a tyranny]. " The new law also permits preventive censorship, as it were, by providing for the confiscation of publications or other data carriers considered to be inciting or posing a potential threat to "public peace", which are allegedly "intended for" distribution. The judiciary holds that the intent to distribute prohibited pub- lications exists if a person has in his or her possession more than one single copy of a data carrier.
That this new German law cannot be reconciled with inter- national human rights standards — this was also thoroughly demonstrated by a PhD thesis analyzing this problem46 — is a fact openly acknowledged by Germany's leading politicians, but it is excused by virtue of the country's particular history. The flawed logic goes something like this:47
"In order to prevent the reoccurrence of book-burning and the persecution of minorities, we must burn certain books and persecute certain minorities. "
Banning Books
The first step in the process of German censorship is the blacklisting or "indexing" of, for example, a book or pamphlet. This indexing is done by the Federal Review Office for Youth-
Endangering Media (Bundespriifstelle fur jugendgefahrdende Medien, BPjM), which can decide without any court or gov- ernment order which media is to be indexed. This indexing means that the blacklisted work may no longer be advertised and that it may not be sold or otherwise made available to per- sons under 18 years of age. In practical terms this means that the work ceases to exist for the public, as one can then legally learn of its existence only by private means — or, alternately, via the list of indexed works which the BPjM regularly publishes in its Report. By now this list includes thousands of printed, audio and audio-visual works.48
While the BPjM was initially created primarily to protect German youth from pornography and the glorification of vio- lence, it has increasingly also engaged in the battle against po- litically or historically unpopular literature. As early as 1990 Eckhard Jesse, who is today a Professor of Sociology in Chem- nitz, criticized that the BPjM had in many ways turned out to be a gateway for a one-sided fight against everything, which is deemed to be on the right of the political spectrum.49 According to Jesse, the censorship measures of the BPjM are "difficult to reconcile with the principles of a liberal society [...], because, on principle, in an open society the printed and spoken word may not be stifled."50
While Jesse regrets that the printed word is being stifled in our society, he considers it a comforting thought that these blacklisting decisions were published in those years, thus al- lowing the public to review them.51 However, in 2002, the German Law for the Protection of the Youth was changed to the effect that from now on, media, which are considered to be a serious threat to the youth, will be listed in a non-public list.52 Affected by this new rule are mainly political and historical works which breach penal laws like "incitement to hatred" and "stirring up the people". The public can now no longer learn which media are outlawed and which are not. Hence, one of the most important rules of a state under the rule of law, that its le- gal decisions and laws must be made public so that all citizens can learn about them and hence abide by them, is breached: The German authorities keep their decisions secret, and the German citizen who distributes banned media will run afoul with the law without having had any chance to prevent this. This is a first class example of a totalitarian law.
Book Burning by the Government
The second stage of German censorship is the so-called confiscation (or seize-and-destroy) stage. This stage is hardly known by the public, and even Professor E. Jesse, whom we quoted earlier, seems either not to be aware of it or to ignore it. The confiscation of a publication takes place on the order of a court. What happens to the confiscated copies of such a publication is not quite clear, but it probably varies with the police station in charge. One publisher who is quite frequently the target of such book confiscations reported that he had been told that the books are burned under police supervision, and this was also confirmed by various mainstream media re- ports.53 This seems logical, since dangerous books are, in the eyes of the German authorities, to be treated like drugs: they poison our minds and turn us into defunct members of the so- ciety. Hence the weapon of the crime — drug or book — must
210
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
be destroyed by fire (or for the book the shredder, as an alter- native).
According to information from the German Federal Gov- ernment, and unlike for indexed works, there is no office or authority which publishes an even remotely complete list of confiscated books;54 similarly, the confiscation orders issued by the courts are not published anywhere. According to a hardly known administrative rule of the German police, every court that orders or revokes the confiscation of a medium is required to communicate its decision to the German Federal Bureau of Investigation (Bundeskriminalamt), which there- fore ought to have a complete and current list, particularly as it serves the courts as information central regarding confisca- tion orders already issued.55 However, inquiries to receive a copy of this list are never answered by this German FBI, a behavior in concordance with the secrecy the above men- tioned list of "dangerous" banned media.56 So here as well, the public is left completely in the dark about which media are confiscated and which are not. Should a person dare to import, export, stock, reprint, distribute, or sell such a confis- cated media, he will find himself in front of a judge charged with thought crimes.
Although pornographic or pro-violent publications are also affected by confiscations, which will find approval by most people, and justly so in most cases, these media are not a par- ticular focus here, since the destruction of political or historical publications is a much more explosive issue from a human- rights point of view.
Whereas no author, printer, wholesaler, retailer or multi- copy purchaser can be punished for having distributed a banned book prior to its banning, all of these individuals can be, and usually are, prosecuted for such activities even if these activi- ties occurred prior to the actual court decision which declared the confiscation of such media a legal fact. According to Ger- man law, a medium that will eventually be confiscated is illegal not by its declaration of illegality by a court, but by its content. Subsequently, the act of bringing into existence such a medium is a crime, even if the authorities did not yet know of this me- dium at the time when it was produced. Hence, authors, transla- tors, editors, publishers, printers, warehouse owners, wholesal- ers, retailers, and customers who bought more then one copy of such media — indicating an intention of distribution — are all subject to criminal prosecution even if their activities took place prior to any court decision.
In reply to an inquiry the Ministry of Justice of the Federal Land of Baden-Wiirttemberg has stated that in the time between the end of 1994 and mid- 1996, in Baden- Wurttemberg alone, there were 32 cases of preliminary proceedings being instituted against private individuals for their multiple purchases of con- fiscated books of political and/or historical nature.57 Extrapo- lated to cover all of Germany, this figure indicates some 250 to 300 such criminal cases. Exactly how many persons have been punished in recent years for their will to produce and/or dis- seminate media which were confiscated afterwards is not known; the aforementioned figure of several hundred prelimi- nary proceedings, however, would indicate that the number is substantial.
Most people prosecuted under these censorship laws adhere
to more or less right-wing views, starting from simply conser- vatives and patriots via nationalists to fascists and National So- cialists. However, it does not really matter what one thinks of the views advocated by this group of persons. The fact is that the human right to freedom of speech must be indivisible, as Professor R. Dworkin stated it in an issue of the British peri- odical "Index on Censorship" that addressed the German wave of censorship.58 Not a single one of the cases described here in- volved any calls to violence, instructions for violent acts, or trivializations of violence — at most, violence is disputed for certain historical events, or portrayed as less than generally usual in other accounts. Hence, the harshness with which the German judiciary proceeds against these dissidents is incom- prehensible and unjustified.
If the cases described herein affected any other persons or groups, such as Jews, homosexuals, women, left-wingers, there would be a worldwide outcry in the press, denouncing such human rights violations. But since the victims are after all only the "right" ones, the matter is ignored and hushed up. But from an objective perspective there is no difference between, for ex- ample, Communists and Jehovah's Witnesses being imprisoned in the Third Reich for their beliefs, and right-wingers and histo- rians skeptical about certain aspects of Holocaust history being thrown behind bars in the Federal Republic of Germany today for the sake of their publications. Human rights remain human rights. They go for leftist radicals just as much as for right-wing radicals.
It seems that Germany's tradition of free speech is rather underdeveloped. In light of her history, the only correct posi- tion for Germany to take would doubtlessly be to strictly and impartially grant human rights for everyone — and not to simply deny those human rights to the other side of the political spec- trum, as happens right now. Obviously, where human rights are concerned, Germany is caught in a historical vicious circle, or, to use a different metaphor: the pendulum is swinging wildly from one extreme to the other. It is high time that it came to rest in the middle.
Denunciation, Wire-Tapping, Mind-Control
One of the Allied conditions for establishing the Federal Republic of Germany was the creation of a "Federal Bureau for Protection of the Constitution." This Orwellian device's name was chosen in order not to give German citizens the impression that they were exposed to governmental snooping, which was of course the mission of the Bureau, and as such it was just a kind of successor of the infamous Gestapo, the Secret State Po- lice of the Third Reich. From this bureau subsequently evolved, within the Interior Ministry, the Department for Protection of the Constitution.
Recently, Claus Nordbruch exhaustively documented the scandalous jurisdictional expansion of this domestic spy ser- vice.59 Although this Department possesses no police or legal resources, it nevertheless wields tremendous power. If an indi- vidual or organization is mentioned in one of its "Constitutional Protection" reports, it is the social equivalent of a death sen- tence. The person or institution targeted is ostracized and shunned like a leper, often fired from his job and denied right of appeal before the employment courts.
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
211
The role of the victorious allies is evident also in the first disfranchisement of a political party, which occurred early in the 1950s. In those days the newly organized German Reich Party, which was very popular among former soldiers and the patriotically inclined, was enjoying rapid growth and electoral successes. The leading personality and draft horse of the new party was Major General Otto Ernst Remer. Because of his suc- cess he was visited by an Allied delegation. They issued him an alternative: either quit the Reich Party or else the Allies would ban it. Remer refused to knuckle under and the party was banned. For the sake of appearances the KPD (Communist Party of Germany) was also banned, but it promptly re-emerged as the DKP (German Communist Party.)
The introduction of the Emergency Decrees ("Notstandsge- setze"), which occurred toward the end of the sixties, was a de- cisive step toward gutting constitutional rights. Theses laws were intended to enable the government to restrict civil rights in case of a severe conflict with the Soviet Union. Before the Emergency Decrees were introduced, it was legally impossible for the government to restrict individual rights. It has now be- come commonplace.
Controversy over the Emergency Decrees also gave impetus to the student revolts of the late 1960s. With good reason, the students feared that the decrees would open the door to despot- ism, which they mistakenly believed would be "fascistic" in na- ture.
When the emergency decrees were finally accepted under the Grand Coalition of Christian Liberals and socialist at the end of the sixties, the "extraparliamentary opposition" ("Aufler- parlamentarische Oppostion", APO) was organized, which challenged the accumulation of power within the established parties through struggles in the street. Out of this APO devel- oped the terrorist movement of the seventies, which gave the government a pretext for restricting human rights still further. It became permissible to search domiciles, tap telephones and open mail, even without official court permission, provided the intent was to head off "development of a potentially dangerous situation." ("Gefahr im Verzug")
With the expansion of organized criminality in the eighties, basic human rights (inviolability of the home, and privacy of mail and telephone) were weakened still further. Now came an- other striking innovation: such measures could be applied with- out judicial permission, under the simple pretext of "Suspicion [sic] of potential danger." This is commonly called "Salami tac- tics."
No one seems interested in the fact that combating organ- ized crime is not caused by inadequate legislation, but rather by lack of support for the police and lack of will on the part of politicians, who are frequently involved in organized crime. The period around 1980 also saw the first flowering of Holo- caust revisionism. The government responded to this challenge with another streamlining of its procedure for prosecuting thought crime. It raised such violations to the level of crimes that are to be prosecuted automatically, i.e., they do no longer be initiated by complaints by anybody.
Since Germany's reunification in 1989/90, a flood of patri- otism and patriotic organizations has been sweeping across Germany. International power brokers were then exerting tre-
mendous pressure upon Germany to repress the patriotic movement. During this time, several xenophobic attacks against foreigners occurred, some of which may well have been engi- neered. The German government has certainly exploited all these attacks in order to create the specter of a "brown threat," a resurgence of fascism. As a result of this, on December 1, 1994, Germany's Penal Code was changed on an unprecedented scale. Freedom of opinion regarding German social taboos such as foreigners, multi-culture, Jews, Holocaust and the Third Reich has been banned altogether.
The government's most recent step toward total surveillance occurred at the end of the nineties. This was the so-called "Great Spying Assault" ("Grofier Lauschangriff), which legal- izes constant residential surveillance with microphones and cameras under certain circumstances. Simultaneously, the German judiciary launched prosecutions of foreigners as well as German nationals for disseminating "contraband" documents over the Internet.
In Germany at present, all the following are treated as ille- gal items or activities:
- Anything that might be construed as a threat to "public peace" can be prohibited at the discretion of a prosecutor or judge.
- All symbols, gestures, songs, speeches, and poems, which directly or indirectly suggest anything associated with the Third Reich, are prohibited.
- Criticism of "multicultural" society and immigration policy can be construed as an illegal act.
- It is unlawful to publicly voice dissenting research results about the circumstances surrounding National Socialist crimes, whether actual or alleged. Every critical researcher who investigates the Third Reich works under the threat of persecution and suppression.
- The punishment meted out for "inciting to hatred" can be up to five years in prison.
Suddeutsche Zeitung
(Germany's biggest newspaper, left-wing) 30.9.98
»According to a French study, there are currently more political prisoners in Germany than in the [communist] German Democratic
Republic in the year before its collapse. However, these politically motivated offenders, who were sentenced for inciting the people, denying the Holocaust, and continuation of banned organizations, are not perceived as political prisoners in this country, [...]. These are mainly young people who thus turn into martyrs of the national resurrection of Germany. «
Horst Mahler
212
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
- Even criticism of established parties, government and its representatives can be prosecuted as an offense (denigration of symbols and representatives of the state).
- As a result, thousands of books have been burned, tens of thousands of German citizens punished for thought crimes, hundreds of citizens thrown into prison, and numerous op- position parties and other organizations outlawed. Other parties and political groupings are severely restricted in their constitutionally guaranteed rights. They are subjected to social and criminal punishment, if they openly oppose or expose the conditions mentioned above. The formation of a parliamentary or extra-parliamentary opposition to these conditions has thus been made legally impossible.
- If one criticizes despotic measures, one makes oneself liable for prosecution on grounds of maligning the government, its representatives and symbols. The government has hermeti- cally sealed itself off from all criticism and possibility of re- form.
In view of such conditions it is not surprising that political scientists, sociologists, and historians no longer dare to call things by their real names. They are afraid of being hauled be- fore the German "State Protection Police" and the courts' "State Protection Chambers" and sentenced to severe punish- ment over more or less trivial expressions of political opinion.
In all the years I have been asso- ciated with representatives of German intellectual life, I have been hearing formulaic expressions such as "Free- dom is in peril" and "Are our opin- ions really free?" It has now become clear that freedom is not "endan- gered"— it no longer exists. Likewise there is no longer any question about whether one's thoughts are still free. Given the present climate of anxiety
in Germany's society, media and government, many citizens are actually afraid to express their opinions. More and more of- ten one hears it said: "You can't even think that!" People are afraid to openly discuss conditions in Germany because they could suffer serious consequences if they did.
Prof. Gottfried Dietze, Emeritus of Johns Hopkins Univer- sity, responded to my request to comment from the unassailable position of retired emeritus in a foreign country. His response was discouraging: the world has already dragged Germany through the mud so badly that he chooses not to make the situa- tion even worse with negative comments about present day conditions in his beloved fatherland. What a heartbreaking ob- servation!60
There is a little German witticism going around that illus- trates the difference between the former DDR and the present government. Today's Germany does the opposite of what the DDR used to do: it keeps its citizens fat and politically impo- tent and takes away their hope of escape by incorporating all German territory and pressing its neighbors to act as she wishes, and so she has no further need of walls and self-firing robot guns at the borders.
In 1994, Germany had a president named Richard von Weizsacker who publicly called upon children to spy upon their
Currently, it is the moral terror of political correctness, which turns free speech into a neck- breaking risk.
Martin Walser, famous German writer
parents and vice versa in order to denounce them should they harbor right-wing views. In the meantime, Germany even has a toll-free number where German citizens can denounce their co- citizens in case they harbor unwanted right-wing views: 011- 49-1805-234566. Only totalitarian states can sink this low.
On January 19, 1993, Mr. E. MuBmann, Professor of Police Law at the Ludwigsburg Academy for Public Administration, delivered a lecture to the German Catholic Student Organiza- tion Nordgau Prag in Stuttgart, entitled "How the Police Change with the Times." In this lecture he criticized the relent- less undermining of constitutional rights and the expanding power of the police apparatus. Prof. MuBmann remarked that, if these trends were not reversed, he would not want to live in Germany in forty years, because it would have become a police state with pronounced Orwellian tendencies. Prof. MuBmann was mistaken. It took only ten years.
Today, the leaders of the 1968 student revolt have become Germany's political leaders — almost all of them radical social- ists, Communists, Marxists, Spartacists, or even supporters of Red Army terrorists, like Trittin (Minister for Ecology), Schro- der (Federal Chancellor), Fischer (Minister for Foreign Af- fairs), Schilly (Minister for Internal Affairs) -, and the persecu- tion they unleash against the German people has no parallel in German post-war history. Factually, Germany has turned into a left-wing extremists state, closer to the former communist East Germany than to the U.S.
In such an atmosphere, everybody visiting Germany should be aware that telling the wrong kind of jokes with the wrong kind of audience — and if it is only the guy on the table next to you in the restaurant who doesn't like your joke — might be a free ticket to a German jail, because making jokes about certain minorities (Jews, Turks, homosexu- als, gypsies...) might be interpreted as "Incitement to hatred." So you better watch your back when visiting Germany!
A Legal System Bound to go Berserk
One certain law of the German criminal rules of procedure enables German judges to disallow evidence or testimony if the point to be proven is considered by the legal system to be common knowledge. The purpose of this law is to create obsta- cles to a possible defense tactic of prolonging the trial, or mak- ing it more expensive for the authorities.61
There is, however, one topic where the German legal sys- tem misinterprets this rule, and that is in connection with his- torical events of the Third Reich period, with criticism of the Jewish religion, or with criticism against multiculturalism or mass-immigration. If anybody publicly utters beliefs that are not in accordance with the officially decreed truth, he might find himself in front of a judge, not able to present any evi- dence that would possibly substantiate his views. The reason is that according to present day German legal practice, certain as- pects of Third Reich history are considered to be proven facts, and criticizing victims of the Third Reich — Jews, foreigners, any minority in general — is considered a crime, whether the
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
213
criticism is justified or not. Regarding criticism of such groups, truth is no defense. What matters is the impact a dissenting view could possibly have if a majority in Germany agreed with it. Therefore, defendants holding such dissenting views have no right to prove their point. The public prosecutor does not have to prove he is right, since the judges decree "common knowl- edge" of the fact that the public prosecutor is always right, and the defendant has no right to introduce evidence, since the judges decree "common knowledge" of the fact that the defen- dant is always wrong.62 Trying to prove his point nevertheless only results in more severe punishment, since it proves that the defendant is willing to repeat his crime of dissent in front of the court and is not willing to submit.
It has been ruled that "common knowledge" can be aban- doned if there is evidence which is new and/or superior to any other evidence ever produced in a German court of law, or if there is noticeable public dissent.63 However, all attempts of lawyers to introduce new, superior evidence or evidence prov- ing that there is noticeable public dissent have been dismissed due to — guess what — "common knowledge" that the defendant is wrong. In perversion of every proper legal system, historical and forensic experts who prepared evidence far superior to any other evidence ever produced have always been rejected — due to "common knowledge that they are wrong" — and also been sub- jected to prosecution and sentenced, without having a chance to even in- troduce their own evidence — due to
"common knowledge that they are
More and more, I get the im- pression that one now lives in an Orwellian-like State in Germany
wrong .
Public personalities who dare to start creating "noticeable public dis- sent" are also prosecuted without having a chance to present their own public activity as "noticeable public dissent", because it is "com- mon knowledge that they are wrong".
Most recently, the German Federal Supreme Court has even decided that any defense lawyer, who dares to present or ask for the introduction of evidence challenging the officially de- creed historical truth of the Third Reich, has to be prosecuted and sentenced for collaborating with the defendant in harboring and spreading his dissenting views, hence "incitement of the masses" and "stirring up the people".65 That is exactly the di- rectly analogous to the medieval witch trials, when lawyers try- ing to prove that there is no devil or no witchcraft were prose- cuted themselves for collaborating with the devil and the witches.
To top all this, in 1994, German judge Rainer Orlet who, in the opinion of the media and many politicians, did not punish a historical dissenter and leader of a nationalistic op- position group harshly enough and even showed some sympa- thy with the sympathetic, thus far law-abiding defendant, was threatened with prosecution and finally had to resign. All the right-wing defendant had done was to translate a speech by an American who expressed dissenting, but peaceful views on Third Reich history. This case made it clear to all judges in Germany that they better punish all dissenters on certain his-
torical topics without mercy, or they might find themselves persecuted.66
The organizational framework of the German legal system is somewhat awkward as well. For example, as I experienced myself while active as an expert in several court cases, German prosecutors as well as judges in conference with defense law- yers openly admit that trials against political and historical dis- senters are political trials whose outcomes are predetermined from the beginning by order from higher up. Thus it happened that a prosecutor of the court in Bielefeld let slip the following "lapsus linguae" in a conference with Attorney H. Herrmann during court recess:
"Counsel, it is obvious that you have prepared yourself extremely well for this case, and I obviously can not com- pete with your expertise. In this trial I am merely substitut- ing for my colleague who normally handles political cases. " This was by no means an exceptional case. To Munich At- torney Klaus Gobel, who frequently represented revisionist de- fendants during the early 1990s, a judge in the evidentiary phase of a trial expressed himself quite candidly, as follows:
"Surely you do not think your expert witness will be ad- mitted. Surely you know that this court has a political mis- sion. Our mission demands that without exception those
who express doubt about certain aspects of Third Reich history must be brought to trial and convicted. You will never be al- lowed to present your evi- dence. "
Attorney Gobel shared this with me on July 22, 1992, during the pre- liminary proceedings of the trial for which I was to be summoned as an expert witness. He did this in order to make it clear to me that our tactic of "considered, innovative, up-to- date evidence" in order to break the "common knowledge" could not prevail. German courts are charged with suppressing all exculpatory evidence in such trials, and to disqualify expert witnesses without a hearing.
Toward the end of 1992, 1 accidentally learned about the ex- istence of a certain "Department of State Protection" of the Dis- trict Criminal Court of Baden- Wiirttemberg. I was so flabber- gasted to see a title with such an obvious political program that I investigated. It turned out that there really exist such State Protection Departments in Germany's police headquarters, whose mission consists of prosecuting crimes, which could threaten the existence of the Federal Republic and/or the "basic principles of freedom and democracy." Evidently, in the eyes of the criminal police, harboring certain dissenting political and historical views represents just such a threat. The State Protec- tion Department is divided into three units: Rightwing Extrem- ism, Leftwing Extremism, and Political Extremism by Foreign-
Hiltrud Schroder, former wife of German Federal Chancellor Gerhard Schroder
ers.
66
One would assume that the bureaucrats in their respective units have been instructed in these respective ideologies so that they will be able to recognize their particular brand of "extrem- ism", be able to combat it, and avoid falling victim to it. A con-
214
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
versation with one of these bureaucrats showed me just how thorough his instruction had been. One certainly cannot accuse these people of ignorance, and most particularly not of ideo- logical insensitivity!
In the fall of 1994, 1 learned that even the German courts of laws have their political section, doing nothing else but prose- cuting crimes with a political background, or crimes consisting of nothing else but expressing "illegal," dissident political or historical views. They are internally referred to as "Chambers of State Protection."
Nothing of this is actually kept secret in Germany, yet the average citizen has no idea of how deeply the principle of poli- ticized judiciary has taken root in the German criminal justice system, penetrating even into organizational structure. As far as the public is concerned, there has been a complete news black- out on the subject. Nobody asks if there could or should possi- bly be such things as State Protection Departments in a state under the rule of law, specialized Courts of State Protection and political trials in a system which, after all, pretends to be a lib- eral democracy.
To make matters worse, the German criminal rules of pro- cedure are awkward as well, to say the least. Every TV viewer is familiar with court procedures as they are common in most countries. While a trial is under way, the court secretaries are sitting at a stenographic table and are industriously typing away creating an official court record. Today, much of this work is done by automatic voice recognition. That is the way it is done in the USA, England, Austria, and even in German civil trials.
But not in German criminal trials! Here, no court record is kept! ! ! This is extremely ominous, since afterwards it cannot be pointed out just what the judge, prosecutor, defendant, defense attorney, or witness has said.66 This opens the door very wide for lies and errors on the part of the judge. As a matter of fact, there is absolutely no excuse for German criminal courts' not keeping a court record, considering the state of modern steno- graphic technology. The absence of such a record invites for all kinds of judicial misconduct, which, as I may add, does occur especially frequent in the political trials discussed here. Not even the best judge remembers everything that was said during his trial, but even if discrepancies resulting from such errors could be remedied, there would still remain the worst evil of all: That is the very existence of a political judiciary, which is bound to find a way to convict whomever it targets.
How it all evolved
The avalanche of persecution described here is mainly di- rected against anything on the right side of the political spec- trum. To understand this, one must look back into the early his- tory of post-war Germany. After their conquest of Germany, the allied powers instituted a rigorous policy to uproot and de- stroy any German nationalism, militarism and historical pride.67 To achieve this, they introduced several measures:
a) A system of media licensing guaranteed that only left- wing oriented media could be established during the first ten years after the war. These media do still dominate the German media market. Basically, no noticeable patriotic, right-wing media do exist.
b) All German academics who were deemed right-wing lost their positions and were replaced with left-wingers. The most important positions in the humanities at the most important German universities were occupied with dedicated anti- German, left-wing radical (Marxist) individuals.
c) No right-wing political party was allowed to establish it- self. The only one that had initial success (Deutsche Reich- spartei) was outlawed by the Allies.
d) A program of re-education was introduced which turned German history into a horror cabinet, with the intention to break German pride and self-confidence.
After some 50 years, the allied post-war re-education pro- gram showed full success. Today, German society is lead by personalities who are filled with contempt for anything patri- otic, right-wing, conservative, and who view German history mainly under the perspective of the (often exaggerated and dis- torted) events of the Third Reich. To quote The Independent once more: German individuals who dare to declare that they are proud to be a citizen of their country are called neo-Nazis and Skinheads in Germany, even if they are mainstream politi- cians. For comparison: An American individual who would de- clare that he is not proud of his country would never be elected into any US office. In Germany, the opposite is true: A person who would declare that he is proud of his country would never be elected into any office.
In the meantime, the word "Rechts" — right-wing — has be- come synonymous with evil in Germany. Virtually every- body— political parties, religious groups, commercial associa- tions, social entities, the media and corporations... — is joining in the fight against "right." Note: this is not a fight against radi- calism, extremisms, fascism, or 'neo-Nazism,' but against eve- rything deemed to be "right". Government agencies spread bro- chures entitled "Laws against right",68 showing how everybody can help to fight anything deemed to be politically right. The situation has become so hysterical that in late 2000, Germany's leading, left-wing political magazine Der Spiegel justly head- lined that Germany would be in a hysteria against right, caused mainly by a media paranoia that falsely (!) suspected a right- wing conspiracy behind almost each and every crime that had shattered Germany during that year.69
The climax was reached in 2001, when a German public prosecutor rejected the criminal complaint of a conservative ac- tivist who had been slandered as a "Nazi" by certain media. As a reason not to allow this complaint, this prosecutor stated that the German public would consider everybody on the political right to be a "Nazi," whether they are conservatives, patriots, right-wingers, radicals, extremists, fascists, or National Social- ist. Since "Nazi" had become a collective term for everything on the right, nobody could be insulted by such a designation as long as he indeed belongs to any group considered to be right- wing in any regard. That means that everybody who is politi- cally on the right is a "Nazi" by definition of the German au- thorities.
As a result of this climate of hatred against German patriotic self-confidence, anybody who happens to end up on the right side of the spectrum quickly moves a little to the left to avoid be- ing called "right," i.e., evil. Of course, this then leaves somebody else on the right margin of the spectrum, who is next to move to
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
215
the left. As a result of this, the entire political spec- trum in Germany has been shifting to the left over the last 4 decades. German society today can be compared with an airplane that has no right wing to balance errors and misconceptions of the left. Such a society is bound to crash in the long run.
Nowadays, one is tempted to support the re- pression of 'neo-Nazis,' who are depicted in the media as intolerant, racist, anti-Semitic, brutal, and disgusting. However, one should consider this: whoever blithely agrees that "Nazis" ought to be prosecuted solely on account of their dis- senting political views, should not complain if tomorrow he finds himself slandered as a "Nazi" and persecuted only because a neighbor de- nounces him for waving a national flag or singing the national anthem. Because that is exactly what is happening in Germany: Those who express plain normal patriotic feelings, as it is quite common and considered normal in the U.S., are considered to be "Nazis" in Germany — so far to the left has the political spectrum drifted there. Everybody has the duty to protest the persecution of unconventional thinkers. This is true not only if persecution comes from a dictatorship, but also if it emanates from a state that claims to be a con- stitutional democracy!
To give another example of the mental condi- tions of Germans, I want to tell a story of my own making, using true data I had learned about in 1989. During a business management course in 1994, I once had to hold a spontaneous lecture about anything. I walked to the overhead projector and began:
"I want to present to you the result of a re- markable poll that was conducted a few years ago. In this poll, 1000 representatively chosen Germans should answer the question, who was guilty for the German-Hungarian war of 1880. The results of this poll are as follows: " With color markers, I drew the columns for each answer:
"83% of all Germans answered that Ger- many was responsible for this war.
7% of all Germans answered that Hungary was responsible for this war.
10% had other answers. " The classroom was silently listening, as I con- tinued:
"Now comes the catch: There was never a German-Hungarian war. Actually, most of the Germans of these 10% 'other answers' knew that. Now, what does that tell us, apart from the fact that the historical knowledge of Germans isn 't that good? Well, it tells us that the Ger- mans in their vast majority tend to blame them- selves for crimes even if these crimes were never committed. "
Staatsanwaltschaft Chemnitz
Slaatsanivafccban ChematLlz Aimaberger SlraSe 79, 09120 Chemnitz
Herrn
Alexander Kleber
Cfcowkz. dm 17. OUober 2000 Tefcfoo: D371S4S34I14 Ecaxljciier. Hat SA a.GL Zallner / leu AJtfeiizekliea: (Sine bei Amwott wgeben)
Erir.ittlungsverf ahren-gegeiv L
wegen Beleidiguiig'
Strafanzeige vora 30.05.2000 Sehr geehrter Herr Kleber,
das Ermittlungsverfahren babe ich mat Verfugung vom 25.10.ZOOO gemafl § 170 Abs. 2 StrafprozeGordnung eingestellt.
Grunde:
Dem Beschuldigten wurde vorgeworf en, den Anzeigenerstatter in einem Artikel der Zeitung "Freibarger " , A-usgabe Mai 2000 als Neonazi bezeichnet und so beleidigt zu haben. Desweiteren sei- chne Erlaubnis ein Bild des Anzeigenerstatters verof f entlicht worden.
Eine strafbare Beleidigung im Sinne von § 185 StGB liege nicht ■/or, der Beschuldigte hat die Grenzen der Pressef reiheit nicht jbejcsuhxitleu. "Ms'Sg&bend bei der Beurceilung der Frtuj«s, ob" die aezeichnung als Neonazi eine Beleidigung darstellt, ist, wie ein unbefangener verstandiger Durchschnittsleser die Aufierung verseht . Entscheidend ist damit der objektive Sinngehalt (Er- klarungsinhalt) , nicht also, was der Beschuldigte zum Ausdruck bringen wollte Oder .was der Anzeigenerstatter als Betrof fener darunter versteht, sondern was mit dem Begriff Neonazi zum Ausdruck gebracht wurde. Gerade vor dem Hintergrund der aktuell haufig in der Of f entlichkeit diskutierten "rechten Gewalt" wird der Begriff Neonazi als Sammelbegrif f fur saratliche Personen, die in irgendeiner Art und Weise dem politisch rechten Spektrum zuzurechnen sind, verwendet, i-ohne..das.s dabei hinsichtlich siner Gruppenzugehorigkeit innernalb des rechten Spekcrums differen- aiert wird. Die hier verwendete Bezeichnung stellc also keine Sftleidigung dar. sondern ordnet den Anzeigenerstatter lediglich
^VihtnttunjL" Miilknhjlincn UlIK ! jik] fi.
einer Gruppe zu, der er tatsachlich angehort . Er ist als Landesvorsitzender der Jungen Landsmannschaf t von Sachsen und Niederschleaien zweif elsohne als rechtsorientiert einzustufen. Hinsichtlich des verof fentlichten Slides des Anzeigenerstatters war seine Erlaubnis wegen S 23 Abs. 1 Nr.. 3 KunetUrkG ent- behrlich.
Hochachtungsvoll
gez. Zollner
Staatsanwalt als Gruppenleiter
Diese" Mitteilung wurde elektronisch. erstellt und enthalt d-es halb keine Unterschrif t , wofur ura Verstandnis gebeten wird.
216
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
Now one could hear a needle drop on the floor. I carried on:
"This becomes really interesting when compared with polls in other nations. When the guilt-question about any similarly invented war is asked in Great Britain or the US, for example, the results usually look inverted: Most people there blame the other nation, but not themselves, for such a war they cannot remember.
I think that this should make all of us wonder about the psychological state of the German people.
I thank you for your attention. " This shocking revelation even flabbergasted the most left- wing radical students in that course.
Persecution by Prosecution
Just recently, the Canadian media re- ferred to Germany as a country with one of the toughest "hate crime" legislation in the world.70 This choice of words is un- fortunate, since what we are dealing with in Germany has nothing to do with what is called a "hate crime" in Canada or the U.S. In North America, a hate crime is a normal criminal offense (theft, robbery, rape, murder, assault, etc.) driven by ha- tred against a group, which is considered to be worthy of protection against such hatred. Feelings themselves, be they hate or love, are not a crime in both America and Canada. Expressing feelings or opin- ions is never a crime. But it is different in Germany: If one expresses hate, con- tempt, disgust or any other negative feel- ing for somebody or a certain group, this by itself can be a crime. There is, of course, one big exception: Everybody is allowed to spread unlimited hatred, con- tempt, and disgust against Germany, the German people, and its culture. This is not an offense. But doing the same against any other group may very well constitute a crime. And even worse so: Expressing views out of love, affection, and altruism can be a crime as well, that is, if somebody expresses opinions driven by his love for the German people, the German nation, or the German culture, this can be regarded as a denigration of other nations, people, and cultures and can get one into legal trouble.
And even worse, in cases where no feelings are expressed, but simple, unemotional facts and opinions are claimed, a "hate crime" can be committed in Germany if any identifiable, influ- ential group hates that such facts or opinions are voiced pub- licly. For example, if one has dissenting views on certain his- torical topics, this does, of course, not come with any emotional statement about any identifiable group. But such dissenting views are very often hated by certain leftist and/or Jewish groups, hence they are classified as "hate crimes" — allegedly
Germany today: 83,610 Criminal prosecutions
Because of "Thought Crimes" During The Last Eight Years:
because they incite to hatred against those groups, but actually because those groups hate such opinions.
It would therefore be helpful if the German prosecution of such "crimes" would not be referred to as "hate crimes", since they do not consist of crimes in a legal sense, but as Orwellian "thought crimes" or, as the German authorities call them, as "propaganda offenses".
To summarize the situation: Germany and its leaders have fallen from one extreme to another, from extreme nationalism to extreme self-hatred and self-destruction, from the brutal sup- pression of anti-patriotic forces to the brutal suppression of pa- triotic forces. The pendulum swings to the other extreme, but hopefully it will not get stuck there, which would ultimately lead to the destruction of Germany, its people, and its culture, to a geno-suicide.
Year |
Right |
Left |
Foreign |
Sum |
1994 |
5,562 |
185 |
235 |
5,982 |
1995 |
6,555 |
256 |
276 |
7,087 |
1996 |
7,585 |
557 |
818 |
8,960 |
1997 |
10,257 |
1,063 |
1,249 |
12,569 |
1998 |
9,549 |
1,141 |
2,098 |
12,788 |
1999 |
8,651 |
1,025 |
1,525 |
11,201 |
2000 |
13,863 |
979 |
525 |
15,367 |
2001 |
8,874 |
429 |
353 |
9,656 |
• Right: "Offenses with right wing extremist background", that is: "Propaganda Of- fenses" and "Stirring up the People"
• Left: Offenses with left wing extremist background", generally referred to as "other offenses"
• Foreign: offenses committed by foreign extremists, mainly against the German law of orsaniza,!,,,,* ("Vereinsgesetz") by Kurds in the prohibited Kurdian Libera- tion Army PKK
Source: Report of the German Office for the Protection of the Constitution (1995- 2002), acc. to the German Federal Bureau of Investigation ("Bundeskriminalamt")
Total Silence of Media and Human Rights Organizations
But why do not hear about this in our media? Must one not expect that at least some human rights organization would speak out about it?
The reason for this total silence is sim- ple: Would you dare to defend individuals who are called "neo-Nazis" by the German authorities and media?
The president of one human rights or- ganization, the German Internationale Ge- sellschaft fur Menschenrechte (IGFM, In- ternational Society for Human Rights), clearly spelled it out when approached to assist the victims of modern day German persecution. Though they know about the injustice done to many scholars and pub- lishers, they decided not to assist:71
"I believe that the IGFM does not have the strength to get through such a proceeding without harming the entire society. "
The background of this is that this so- ciety has already come under massive at- tack by the German media and left-wing organizations for its firm stance against communism and for assisting ethnic Ger- mans who experience persecution due to their ethnic background in eastern European countries (mainly Poland and Czechoslovakia). Assisting individuals who are ac- cused of being "politically incorrect" due to their (alleged) right-wing views would most likely unleash a wave of persecu- tion against the society itself, which it thinks it could not deal with.
400 years ago, nobody would dare to defend those made out as witches by the authorities. In the Soviet Union, it could prove fatal to defend someone depicted as a capitalist. In Na- tional Socialist Germany, you would better not dare to defend a Jew or a Communist. The labels that dictatorial systems place on people to ostracize them change. But neither do the methods
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
217
of persecution change, nor the indifference or even active ap- proval of the public.
What will you say if they call you a 'neo-Nazi' tomorrow because you dared to sing your national anthem in public? So think twice, if somebody is called a 'neo-Nazi' by the media. It is perhaps only a patriot.
Notes
1 The Independent, March 21, 2001, p. 5.
2 Most prominently the Student edition of Germany's biggest political maga- zine, Der Spiegel, see
http://www.spiegel.de/unispiegel/studium/0,1518,125322,00.html#v; when searching the internet on this, German websites discussing the anthem ex- pressively state that it is not outlawed, and emphasis which is necessary to give to visitors, see, e.g., http://www.deutschlandlied.de/; http://www.frankfurter-verbindungen.de/studentenlieder/ liedderdeutschen.html; http://www.deutsche-
schutzgebiete.de/deutschlandlied.htm; English media frequently wrongly report that it is outlawed, see, e.g., the British Searchlight (http://www.searchlightmagazine.com/ stories/DefendingWehrmacht.htm).
3 On F. Rennicke's case, see court case from Sept. 18 to Oct. 15, 2002, Dis- trict Court Stuttgart, ref. Ns 6 Js 88181/98; see the description by Johannes Heyne, "Patriotenverfolgung: Der Fall Ute und Frank Rennicke", VffG 7(1) (2003); compare also Rennicke's website at http://go.to/Rennicke.
4 Regulations about this vary from State to State, see an article published in the periodical of the German parliament, e.g., Aus Politik und Zeit- geschichte No. 39 / September 22, 2000; www.das- parlament.de/2000/39/Thema/2000_39_095_3076.html
5 For this, see, e.g., the free brochure Recht gegen Rechts, distributed by all German authorities, e.g.:
www.hamburg.de/Behoerden/Landeszentrale/archiv/pdf/recht_gegen_rechts .pdf; also: http://www.recht-gegen-rechts.de/
6 H. Diwald, Geschichte der Deutschen, Propylaen, Berlin 1978.
7 Ibid., 2nd edition, 1978 (actually printed in 1979).
8 R.J. Eibicht (ed.), Hellmut Diwald, Hohenrain, Tubingen 1994.
9 Ibid., endnote 74, p. 147. This article is available online at www.vho.org/D/diwald/hepp. html.
10 County Court Tubingen, Ref. 4 Gs 1085/97.
11 Abendzeitung (Munich), March 7./8., 1998: "The remaining copies are oc- casionally being burnt in a waste incinerator"; Zur Zeit (Vienna), no. 9/1998 (Febr. 27): "65 years ago this still happened publicly, today this is being achieved on the quite in waste incinerators."
12 Wilhelm Staglich, Der Auschwitz Mythos, Grabert-Verlag, Tubingen 1979; Eng.: The Auschwitz Myth: A Judge Looks at the Evidence, Institute for His- torical Review, Newport Beach, CA, 1986.
13 Cf. Wigbert Grabert (ed.), Geschichtsbetrachtung als Wagnis, Grabert, Tu- bingen 1984; see also DGG, "Bundesverwaltungsgericht im Dienste der Umerzieher. Erstmalig Doktorgrad aus politischen Griinden aberkannt", in Deutschland Geschichte und Gegenwart 36(3) (1988), p. 18 (online: vho.org/D/DGG/DGG36_3_2.html); DGG, "Unglaubliches Urteil im Fall Dr. Staglich", ibid, 36(1) (1988), p. 7 (online: ..VDGG36_l_l.html); DGG, "Vernunft wird Unsinn ... Spate Rache fur den 'Auschwitz-Mythos "', ibid., 31(1) (1983), pp. 19f. (online: ...'DGG31_l.html); DGG, "Ende der Wissenschaftsfreiheit?" , ibid, 29(3) (1981), p. 38 (online: ..7DGG29_3_l.html).
14 Reichsgesetz iiber die Fiihrung akademischer Grade, June 7, 1939 (Reichs- gesetzblatt I, p. 985) (Reich Law for the Carrying of Academic Degrees) as well as Durchfiihrungsverordnung, July 21, 1939 (Reichsgesetzblatt I, p. 1326).
15 Administrative Court of Baden-Wurttemberg, Ref. IX 1496/79, decision on March 18, 1981. At that time, a person who had been convicted to five years imprisonment for drug trafficking, which was entered in his police record, was certified as having the necessary ethical qualification, and the Univer- sity was ordered to admit him to the Rigorosum. In this decision, it was held that this Hitler law is still in effect because it does not contain National So- cialist thinking and should be considered as having been legally enacted.
16 German Federal Constitutional Court, ref. 1 BvR 408f./83. A similar case occurred in 1996, when a PhD title was withheld from a candidate at Stutt- gart University because he had used his academic credentials to prepare a chemical and engineering expert report coming to "wrong" conclusions on
the same taboo topic. The victims was the author of this article. In France, similar cases have occurred against the historians Henry Roques (PhD title revoked by the Ministry of Education; Andre Chelain, La these de Nantes et I 'affaire Roques, Polemiques, Paris 1988) and Jean Plantin (Bachelors and Masters degrees revoked by the University of Lyon III in 2000/2001).
17 Ernst Gauss (ed.) Grundlagen zur Zeitgeschichte. Ein Handbuch iiber strit- tige Fragen des 20. Jahrhunderts, Grabert, Tubingen 1 994; Engl. : E. Gauss, Dissecting the Holocaust, Theses and Dissertations Press, Capshaw, AL, 2000.
18 Dr. Joachim Hoffmann and Prof. Dr. Ernst Nolte. Dr. Hoffmann's expert opinion was published in E. Gauss, Dissecting the Holocaust, ibid., pp. 561- 564. Prof. Nolte's expert opinion has not been published. It is part of the trial records of County Court Tubingen, ref. 4 Gs 173/95.
19 So the statement of Wigbert Grabert, publisher of said book, in private communications. According to Grabert, one of the police officers involved in this confiscation told him that those books will be burned in waste incin- erators under police supervision. Cf. note 1 1 .
20 County Court Tubingen, ref. 4 Gs 173/95; and private communication by publisher W. Grabert, who told me that the criminal investigation against the printer of the book was eventually dropped because he declared publicly that he did not know about the content of the book and that he was horrified when he heard about it — which was a plain lie, because he very well knew what this book was all about.
21 Private communication by W. Grabert, whose customer list was confiscated and who subsequently had well over one hundred of calls and letters by his customers bitterly complaining about this massive house search campaign.
22 Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, May 17, 1996, p. 12 (100 signatories); Stuttgarter Nachrichten, July 19, 1996, p. 6, Stuttgarter Zeitung, July 19, 1996, p. 7 (both 500 signatories); Westfalen-Blatt, Sept. 13, 1996 (1,000 signatories); though not expressively mentioned, this appeal was triggered by said book burning, see private communications of the initiator of these ads, Dr. R. Kosiek, to me, Nov. 17, 2000, and May 2, 2001.
23 In German public TV, this appeal was simply dismissed as a right-wing ex- tremist propaganda campaign, see ARD-Tagesthemen, June 5, 1996; similar the reaction of the Baden- Wurttemberg parliament, when this affair was brought to its attention, cf. Landtag (state parliament) of Baden- Wurttemberg, 12th session, Paper 12/334, Parliamentary question by Rep. Michael Herbricht (REP), re. the appeal of 500 academics protesting against book burning by the authorities ("Appell der 500", Stuttgarter Zeitung, Aug. 27, 1996, see note 22). Position of the Baden-Wurttemberg Ministry of Justice, Stuttgart, Sept. 23, 1996, Ref. 4104 - IIIV185, Dr. Ulrich Goll.
24 See Hoffmann's updated preface on this in J. Hoffmann, Stalin 's War of Ex- termination 1941-1945, Theses and Dissertations Press, Capshaw, AL 2001.
25 Personal communications from Dr. J. Hoffmann.
26 Personal communications from Prof. Dr. E. Topitsch.
27 For this, see Otto Scrinzi, "Menschenjagd bis in den Tod", Aula, 6/2000; al- so Rudi Zornig, "Zum Gedenken an Werner Pfeifenberger", Vierteljahres- hefte furfreie Geschichtsforschung 4(2) (2000), pp. 127-130.
28 Hamburger Institut fur Sozialforschung (ed.), Vernichtungskrieg. Verbre- chen der Wehrmacht 1941 bis 1944, (War of Extermination. The Crimes of the Wehrmacht, 1941 to 1945) Hamburger Edition, Hamburg 1996: Eng- lish: Hamburg Institute for Social Research (ed.), The German Army and Genocide: Crimes Against War Prisoners, Jews, and Other Civilians, 1939- 1944, The New Press, New York 1999. For criticism of this exhibition, see, e.g., Riidiger Proske, Wider den MiBbrauch der Geschichte deutscher Solda- ten zu politischen Zwecken, Von Hase & Kohler, Mainz 1996; Proske, Vom Marsch durch die Institutionen zum Krieg gegen die Wehrmacht, ibid., 1997; Joachim F. Weber (ed.), Armee im Kreuzfeuer, Universitas, Munich 1997; Walter Post, Die verleumdete Armee, Pour le Merite, Selent 1999; Klaus Sojka (ed.), Die Wahrheit uber die Wehrmacht. Reemtsmas Fal- schungen widerlegt, FZ-Verlag, Munich 1998; Franz W. Seidler, Verbre- chen an der Wehrmacht, Pour le Merite, Selent 1998; Focus, No. 16 & 17/1997, 6/1998; Bogdan Musial, "Bilder einer Ausstellung. Kritische An- merkungen zur Wanderausstellung 'Vernichtungskrieg. Verbrechen der Wehrmacht 1941-1944"', Vierteljahrshefte fur Zeitgeschichte, 47(4) (1999), pp. 563-591; cf. Bogdan Musial, '"Konterrevolutionare Elemente sind zu erschieBen'", Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Oct. 30, 1999, p. 11; Krisz- tian Ungvary, "Echte Bilder - problematische Aussagen", Geschichte in Wissenschaft und Unterricht, 50(10), (1999), pp. 584-595; cf. Krisztian Ungvary, "Reemtsmas Legenden", Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Nov. 5, 1999, p. 41; Dieter Schmidt-Neuhaus, "Die Tarnopol-Stellwand der Wan- derausstellung 'Vernichtungskrieg - Verbrechen der Wehrmacht 1941 bis 1944"', ibid., pp. 596-603; Klaus Hildebrandt, Hans-Peter Schwarz, Lothar
218
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
Gall, quote in "Kritiker fordern engiiltige SchlieBung", Frankfurter Allge- meine Zeitung, Nov. 6, 1999, p. 4; Ralf Georg Reuth, "Endgiiltiges Aus fur Reemtsma-Schau?", Welt am Sonntag, Nov. 7, 1999, p. 14.
29 His letter has been published on the internet, see, e.g., http://www.vho.Org/VffG/2000/2/Elstnerl31f.html; cf. Mark Weber, "A German takes his life to protest defamation and historical lies", Journal of Historical Review, 15(5) (1995) p. 19.
30 See www.vho.org/News/D/News4_97.html#historiker; www.vho.org/News/D/News3_00.html#nl4; www.vho. org/News/D/News3_01 .html#7; www.vho.org/News/D/Newsl_02.html#20
31 Wahrheit fur Deutschland, Verlag fur Volkstum und Zeitgeschichtsfor- schung, Vlotho 1964; also available in English: Truth for Germany.
32 Probably the best descripiton by Dr. C. Nordbruch, "Geistesfreiheit in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland", Vierteljahreshefte fur freie Geschichtsfor- schung 6(2) (2002), pp. 190-209; for the court decisions, see Federal Con- stitutional Court, ref. 1 BvR 434/87; Re-indexing by BPjM; JMS-Report, February 1/1995, pp. 52-54; new verdict of Upper Administrativ Court, ref. 17 K 9534/94.
33 The following issues of the series Historische Tatsachen (Verlag fur Volks- tum und Zeitgeschichtsforschung, Vlotho) were confiscated and lead to Wa- lendy's prison term: Nr. 1 (LG Dortmund, KLs 31 Js 270/78), 15 (BVG, 2 BvR 1645/84), 23 & 24 (ref. Currently unknown), 36 (BVG, BvR 824/90), 38 (OLG Hamm, 3 Ws 82/91), 44 (LG Bielefeld 4 KLs W 3/96), 52 & 53 (LG Bielefeld, Qs 563/94), 59 & 60 (BGH 4 StR 518/96), lnew & 64 (BGH 4 StR 524/96), 66 (AG Bielefeld, 9 Gs 1279/96), 67 (AG Bielefeld, 9 Gs 1325/96), 68 (LG Bielefeld, 4 KLs W 5/96 IV); cf. www.vho.org/News/D/News4_97.html#u; http://www.vho.Org/News/D/News3_99.html#16; http://www.vho.Org/News/D/Newsl_00.html#22
34 For more see: Claus Nordbruch, Zensur in Deutschland, Universitas, Mu- nich 1998, 320 pp.
35 The opinions about this differ slightly: acc. to Dietrich Strothmann, Natio- nalsozialistische Literaturpolitik, 3rded., Bonn: Bouvier 1985, some 12,500 books, acc. to Dietrich Aigner, "Die Indizierung 'schadlichen und uner- wunschten Schrifttums' im Dritten Reich", vol. XI of the Archiv fur Ge- schichte des Buchwesen, Buchhandlervereinigung, Frankfurt/Main 1971, the number was less than 10,000.
36 Deutsche Verwaltung fur Volksbildung in der sowjetischen Besatzungszone (ed.), 3 vols., Liste der auszusondernden Literatur, Zentralverlag, Berlin 1946-1948, 1953; reprint: Uwe Berg (ed.), Toppenstedter Reihe, Sammlung bihliograph. Hilfsmittel zur Erforschung der Konservativen Revolution und des Nationalsozialismus , 4 vols., Toppenstedt, Uwe Berg- Verlag, 1983- 1984; cf. Martin Luders, "Die groBte Buchervernichtungsaktion der Ge- schichte", Nation und Europa, 47(9) (1997), pp. 7-11.
37 Two recent studies of censorship in Germany, highly to be recommended: Jiirgen Schwab, Die Meinungsdiktatur. Wie ' demokratische ' Zensoren die Freiheit heschneiden, Nation Europa Verlag, Coburg 1997; Claus Nord- bruch, op. cit (Note 34).
38 The Federal Constitutional Court's decisions were quoted from: Karl-Heinz Seifert, Dieter Homig (eds.), Grundgesetz fur die Bundesrepublik Deutsch- land, 2nd ed., Baden Baden: Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft, 1985.
39 §130 expressively says: "Who, in a way suitable [sic] to disturb public peace, attacks the human dignity of others by stirring up to hatred against parts of the population, calling for acts of violence or despotism against them or insults them, exposes them to contempt, or slander them, will be punished with a prison term from three months to five years."
40 Cf. fo this the legal expertise of defense lawyer Dr. G. Herzogenrath- Amelung, Vierteljahreshefte fur freie Geschichtsforschung 6(2) (2002), pp. 176-190.
41 Dreher/Trondle, Strafgesetzbuch, 47th ed., MN 1 8 re. § 1 30.
42 Stefan Huster, "Das Verbot der 'Auschwitz-Luge', die Meinungsfreiheit und das Bundesverfassungsgericht", Neue Juristische Wochenschrift, 1995, pp. 487ff., here p. 489.
43 Daniel Beisel, "Die Strafbarkeit der Auschwitz-Luge", Neue Juristische Wochenschrift, 1995, pp. 997-1000, here p. 1000.
44 Karl Lackner, Strafgesetzbuch, 21st ed., Munich, 1995, MN 8a re. §130; the criticisms of this article are legion; cf: Hans A. Stocker, Neue Strafrechts- Zeitung, 1 995, pp. 237-240; Manfred Brunner, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zei- tung, Aug. 17, 1994; Ernst Nolte, ibid., Sept. 8, 1994; Ronald Dworkin, Ta- geszeitung, May 17, 1995; Horst Meier, Die Zeit, Sept. 15, 1995; Horst
Meier, Rheinischer Merkur 12/1996: 1128-1131.
45 Theodor Leckner, in: Schonke/Schroder, Strafgesetzbuch, 25th ed., Munich: Beck, 1997, p. 1111.
46 Thomas Wandres, Die Strafbarkeit des Auschwitz-Leugnens, Strafrechtliche Abhandlungen, neue Folge, Band 129, Duncker & Humblot, Berlin 2000; cf. review by G. Rudolf, Vierteljahreshefte fur freie Geschichtsforschung 5(1) (2001), pp. 100-112.
47 Federal Minister of Justice Edzard Schmidt- Jorzig, Ruge. NeunzehnZehn: "Ehrenschutz fur Soldaten - Gesetz gegen die Meinungsfreiheit?", 3-SAT, March 10, 1996, 19:10; same, Mut, no. 351, 11/1996: 32-35; Wolfgang Schauble, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, April 24, 1996, p. 41.
48 The latest "comprehensive" listing of non-secret banned media, "Ge- samtverzeichnis indizierter Biicher, Taschenbiicher, Broschiiren und Com- ics, Stand 30.4.1993", includes about 2,500 titles. Some 120 more have since joined the ranks. The list of indexed videotapes is about the same length. Added to this are several hundred electronic sound and data carriers. The current indexing lists are published in the periodical of the Federal Re- view Office for Youth-Endangering Publications, "BPjS akruell". To order: Bundespriifstelle, Postfach 26 01 21, D-53153 Bonn, Germany.
49 Eckhard Jesse, "Streitbare Demokratie und 'VergangenheitsbewaTtigung'", in: Bundesamt fur Verfassungsschutz (ed.), Verfassungsschutz in der De- mokratie, Carl Heymanns Verlag, Cologne 1990, p. 304, cf. p. 289.
50 Ibid., p. 287; cf. also p. 303: "Liberal society may not stifle or suppress the free exchange of ideas and points of view."
51 Ibid., p. 286.
52 http://www.bmfsfj.de/Anlage22804/Jugendschutzgesetz_JuSchG_ vom_23._Juli_2002.pdf
5j Wigbert Grabert, of Grabert Verlag in Tubingen, to the author; see note 11.
54 Admission of the German Federal Government, Bundestagsdrucksache 13/4222, March 26, 1996, p. 6.
55 Richtlinien fur das Strajverfahren und das Bufigeldverfahren (Guidelines for penal procedure and fining procedure), No. 208, II + IV; according to: Gerd Pfeiffer (ed.), Karlsruher Kommentar zur Strafprozeflordnung, 3rd ed., Beck, Munich 1993, p. 2174.
56 An unofficial, probably extremely incomplete list can be found on the inter- net, with links to the confiscated works available online: www.vho.org/censor/Censor.html.
57 Landtag of Baden- Wurttemberg, 12th session, Paper 12/334, see note 23.
58 R. Dworkin, "A new map of censorship", in: Index on Censorship 1/2 (1994), pp. 9-15; cf. R. Dworkin, "Forked tongues, faked doctrines", ibid., no. 3 (1997), pp. 148-151.
59 Der Verfassungsschutz, Hohenrain, Tubingen 1999.
60 Cf. his article "Ein Schritt zuruck in polizeistaatliche Intoleranz", Viertel- jahreshefte fur freie Geschichtsforschung 2(3) (1998), pp. 219ff.
61 §244 Section 3 Clause 2, German Code of Criminal Procedure.
62 Federal Supreme Court, verdict of March 15, 1994, Ref. 1 StR 179/93. c" Cf. Oberlandesgericht [Provincial High Court and Court of Appeal] at
Diisseldorf, Ref. 2 Ss 155/91 - 52/91 III; Federal Constitutional Court, Ref. 2 BrR 367/92.
64 BGH, Ref. 1 StR 193/93 (motion to prove whether evidence offered is supe- rior to any other evidence rejected due to "common knowledge"); BGH; ref. 1 StR 18/96 (sentencing of an expert witness to 14 months in jail for daring to ask to appear as a witness for the defense).
65 German Federal Supreme Court, BGH, ref. 5 StR 485/01; cf. Sigmund P. Martin, Juristische Schulung, 1 1/2002, pp. 1 127f. ; Neue Juristische Wo- chenschrift 2002, 2115, Neue Strafrechts-Zeitung 2002, 539;
66 For details, see G. Herzogenrath-Amelung, op. cit. (note 40).
67 Cf. von Schrenck-Notzing, Charakterwasche. Die Politik der amerikani- schen Umerziehung in Deutschland, Ullstein, Berlin 1993; G. Franz- Willing, Umerziehung, Nation Europa, Coburg 1991.
68 See note 5. Though most of the outlawed insignia, songs, etc, can rightfully be called "Nazi", the fact that "right" and "Nazi" have become synonymous in Germany is again underlined by the title and general choice of words in this brochure, as it is common in the media and by the authorities.
69 Der Spiegel, Dec. 4, 2000, Title.
70 Toronto Globe and Mail, Feb. 14, 2003; Boston Globe, 2/21/2003: The me- dia call Germany's laws "strict" or "tough" anti-hate laws, though they do, of course, not simply address hate as such.
71 Letter of Karl Hafen, president of Internationale Gesellschaft fur Men- schenrechte, to Germar Rudolf, Oct. 30, 1996.
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
219
Censorship of the Internet
By Germar Rudolf
In early 1996, the revisionist Web site www.zundelsite.org caused a storm in the then still relatively tiny internet- pot, since its content was hated by several Jewish lobby groups and in particular by the German authorities, who all to- gether tried with several legal and less than legal techniques to shut down this controversial site. These attempts on censorship resulted in a massive movement of solidarity in the then still quite idealistic internet community. At the end of many months of struggle, all measures to stifle the zundelsite had failed, also because many idealists around the world posted copies of the zundelsite, not because they agreed with the content of the zundelsite, but because they wanted to defend the highly regarded freedom of speech against all attempts of censorship.
Of course, governmental as well as non-governmental institutions kept trying to find more effective ways to censor the internet. The censorship case, with perhaps the most damaging impact on freedom of speech, was probably that against Dr. Fredrick Toben, who has been arrested and sentenced to a prison term in Germany for having posted revi- sionist contents on his Australian website.1
In October 2002, an academic paper about censorship of internet search engines has caused quite a stir on an inter- national level, but has unfortunately not led to a similar reaction by the internet free speech community as it did in 1996.
Background
In September 1997, 1 established the website www.vho.org, initially under the legal cover of the Belgian non-profit founda- tion Vrij Historisch Onderzoek (Free Historical Research), thus the name vho.org. Initially, this site had only some five visitors per day, and maybe most of these visits were by the webmaster, that is me. Today, this site has several thousand visitors every day, which means that within five years www.vho.org has grown to be the biggest revisionist website worldwide.
One of the first steps after creating the site was to have it listed with the major search engines, which could still be done manually and for free at that time. Today, considering the vast amount of new websites flooding the internet every day, one has to pay a fee to get registered by the noble club of the big engines.
In 1998 I learned that Germany has its own search engines concentrating only on German language material. Since at that time the content of www.vho.org was almost completely in German language, it was only logical to have the site registered with those search engines as well. To my surprise, one of the search engine companies told me that they had decided not to list my site, because after reviewing my content they had come to the conclusion that it was illegal under German law. This is so because dissenting views on the Holocaust are punishable with up to five years in Germany. Strictly formally seen, of course, this is wrong, since it is not the content of my website that is illegal but the German censorship laws. But the German bureaucrats were never really impressed by arguments about human rights and epistemological considerations. Thus, I had to accept that www.vho.org was not listed with this search en- gine.2
On an international level, Yahoo.com was the first big search engine who got in trouble primarily due to massive cri- tique from Jewish lobby groups. Yahoo is one of the biggest internet service providers worldwide, whose search engine is currently powered by a company named Google. Google itself is a search engine which has succeeded only recently to beat all
its competitors in that field, like Altavista.com, Lycos.com, and Excite.com, thanks to a very user friendly service. End of Oc- tober 2002, this service had 2.5 Billion websites indexed.
In 2000, the attacks against Yahoo escalated in that the company was sued, and on November 20, 2000, sentenced in France for having offered National Socialist memorabilia on its internet auction site and for offering access to sites with Holo- caust-revisionist content.3 Since then, Yahoo has cleaned its French search engine from almost all links to such sites. Later, due to pressure from the usual Jewish pressure groups like the Simon- Wiesenthal-Center, Yahoo announced that it would be prepared to even clean its U.S. main search engine from links to any content which is hated by those Jewish associations.4 It seems, however, that this did not happen so far.
As a result of Yahoo's conviction in France, the Central Council of Jews in Germany felt encouraged to announce that it will file similar suit cases against German search engine com- panies as well.5 It does therefore come as no surprise that Ger- man search engines or the German sections of internationally operating search engines started to clean undesired content from their engines as well.
Scientific Analysis
On October 22, 2002, Jonathan Zittrain and Benjamin Edelman from the Berkman Center for Internet & Society at the Harvard Law School published a study, in which they reported which internet sites are censored by the German and French sections of the search engine Google, in contrast to the com- pany's international, US-based main search site Google.com.6
The result of this study is that the French and German search engines of Google exclude 91 internet sites completely or partly.7 Even though such an exclusion doesn't prevent anybody from accessing these sites, this must nevertheless be considered to be a massive impediment to find these sites, because a considerable part of the population residing in Germany and France finds con- tent on the internet by using these search engines. The exclusion of search results from websites which are involved in controver-
220
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
sial debates leads to nothing less than that a majority of the popu- lation will no longer be able to take notice of the arguments of the other side of that debate.
Of course, censorship by search engines is not solely an ef- fect of governmental pressure. Even private companies and in- dividuals can pursue such censorship and might even prevail. For example, The Church of Scientology allegedly succeeded to convince Google not to list certain websites, which express critical views about Scientology.8 In other cases, organizations or individuals have the option to apply to have certain websites unlisted, if these sites commit copyright violations.9 Only a few of these censorship cases are ever published; most of them hap- pen in secrecy. No search engine likes to admit publicly that they manipulated their search results. According to Edelman, Google should at least indicate that its search results are not complete:10
"If Google is prohibited from linking to [the right-wing Website] Stormfront, they could include a listing but no link. And if they can't even include a listing for Stormfront, they could at least report the fact that they 've hidden results from the user. The core idea here is that there 's no need to be secretive. "
Censorship Victims
According to the authors of the study quoted, they have ana- lyzed several thousand websites until the end of October in or- der to find out, if the search results delivered by the three Google sections google.com (USA), google.de (Germany) and google.fr (France) differ. The censorship victims discovered by this method are divided in basically three categories. The larg- est group consists of right-wing websites, which are usually summarized under the term "White Supremacy." The second biggest group consists of revisionist websites — with one sur- prising exception: The most embattled website, carrying the name and the mission of the German-Canadian Ernst Ziindel, www.zundelsite.org, is not included! The last category consists of radical, anti- Jewish, mostly Arab groups. In the list printed in this article, I have emphasized revisionist websites in bold
face, and those consisting only partly of revisionist content in italics.
A more detailed analysis of the censored websites shows that some Christian and conservative-fundamentalist websites are victims of this censorship as well, and in one case even an anti-revisionist website (www.williscarto.com). Left-wing ex- tremist, communist, or other politically or religiously fa- natic/fundamentalist sites have either not even been considered worth an investigation by the authors, or they are simply not censored by Google.
It is also worth noting that all of the German sites censored by Google are equally censored by its French site (65), whereas 45 websites, which are accessible through the German search engine, are inaccessible through the French search engine. This means that censorship is currently tougher in France than it is in Germany.
More Censorship...
Google does not only serve as the search engine for Ya- hoo, but also for AOL, the worldwide largest internet service provider. As a consequence, all German and French AOL- customers not intentionally using a different search engine, are censored just as badly as are all users of google. de/.fr and yahoo. de/.fr. Three major other search engines with separate German and French sections — altavista, lycos and excite, cen- sor their search result as well, though apparently not quite as strict as google. For instance, webpages from the once leading revisionist websites codoh.com and codoh.org can be found when searching with these engines. All of these search en- gines have in common, however, that the worldwide largest revisionist website www.vho.org is not listed under any cir- cumstances.
Before getting upset about Google, Altavista, and all other censoring search engines, one should keep in mind that these companies do not censor voluntarily. They were forced to do this by court orders and several legal threats. The true perpetra- tors are sitting in Paris and Berlin and to a disproportionate de- gree also in synagogues.
Web Sites completely or partly censored by Google.de and/or Revisionist web sites are rendered in bold, web sites with partial revisionist content
GOOGLE.FR
are rendered in italics
www.1488.com
www. 14words.com
www.abbc.com
www.air-photo.com
www.americandefenseleague.com
www.americannaziparty.com
www.amren.com
www.aryan88.com
www. ary an-nations . org
www.barnesreview.org
www.bayouknights.org
www.blacksandjews.com
www.bnp.net
www.christianseparatist.org
www.churchfliers.com
www.codoh.com
www.codoh.org
www.compuserb.com
www.creator.org
www.crusader.net
www.ety.com
www.faem.com
www.fpp.co.uk
www.freedomsite. org
www.globalflre. tv
www.hammerskins.com
www.hangemhighrecords.com
www.harold-covington.org
www.heathenfront.org
www.hitlerisgod. com
www.hoffman-info.com
www.holywar.org
www.iahushua.com
www.ihr.org
www.jeffsarchive.com
www.jesus-is-lord.com
www.jewwatch.com
www.kingidentity.com
www.k-k-k.com
www.kkkk.net
www.kukluxklan.net
www.libreopinion.com
www.louisbeam.com
www.melvig.org
www.missiontoisrael. org
www.musicalterrorists.com
www.mysticknights.org
www.naawp.com
www.natall.com
www.natvan.com
www.nazi.org
www.nazi-lauck-nsdapao.com
www .neworderknights .com
www. noontidepress. com
www.nsm88.com
www.nswpp.org
www.ostara.org
www.ourhero.com
www.panzerfaust.com
www.patriot.dk
www.posse-comitatus.org
www.propatria.org
www.radioislam.net
www.radioislam.org
www.rahowa.com
www.resist.com
www.resistance.com
www.revilo-oliver.com
www.revisionists.com
www.seek-info.com
www.sigrdrifa.com
www. ssenterprises. com
www.ssman.com
www.stormfront.org
www2 . stormfront . org
www3.stormfront.org
www4 . stormfront . org
www.thulepublications.com
www.ukar.org
www.unitedskins.com
www. vanguardnewsnetwork. com
www.vho.org
www. wakeupordie. com
www.wckkkk.com
www.whitepower.com
www.whitepride.com
www.whitepride.net
www. whiterace. com
www.whiteracist.com
www.williscarto.com
www.wpww.com
www.yoderanium.com
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
221
... And Attempts to Circumvent it
One can of course try to use non-censoring search engines instead. For example, one could visit the uncensored.com search domains instead of going to the.de and.fr domains (aol.com, yahoo.com, google.com, altavista.com. excite.com, lycos.com). But Google has put a stop to this as well for all visitors, whose internet service providers have an IP address which can be identified as being located in Germany or France respectively. In such cases, Google redirects any attempt to ac- cess google.com automatically to google. de/.fr. Thus, all inter- net users in Germany and France are now sitting in the dark re- garding the possibility of thoroughly searching the internet with the help of the largest and best search engine that there is: google.com.
It would be desirable if all users who are upset about such totalitarian censorship would demonstrate their solidarity by no longer using the search domains.de and.fr of these search en- gines, and in particular by not using those search engines which refuse access to its uncensored international domain, like Google. After all, this is not a matter of whether or not one agrees with the content of those sites which are censored. To- morrow, when other powers rule or their interests change, other websites may be the victims of this censorship, and a totally different group of users might then face the situation that ex- actly the content he is looking for is being withheld from him, or even worse, that the content he is offering is being withheld from his potential clientele.
Dark Future
During a session of the European Council in Strasbourg on November 6th and 7th, 2002, the foreign ministers of 44 Euro- pean countries represented in the European Council agreed to a protocol, which demands from those 44 nations to outlaw the following activities:11
- Computer assisted distribution of racist and xenophobic material;
- Threats and insults with racist or xenophobic motivations;
- Denial, rude minimization, approval, or justification of genocide or crimes against humanity, in particular in context with the events of the era between 1940 and 1945 (in other words: revisionism).
All offenses mentioned in this protocol need to be commit- ted deliberately in order to be a crime, which means that an internet service provider would not commit a crime if helping to distribute such material unknowingly. During the negotia- tions for this protocol, representatives of the USA, of Canada, Japan, Mexico and South Africa were present as well.
Fortunately, the European Council has no legislative pow- ers. But it may only be a matter of time until this program is ac- cepted and cast into law in many countries around the world.
Only as an aside, it should be mentioned that the prohibition of the distribution of pedophilic material was apparently not even discussed during this Conference.
Notes
1 Cf. Willibald Grander, "Der ProzeB gegen Dr. Fredrick Toben" (The trial against Dr. Fredirck Toben), Vierteljahreshefte fur freie Geschichtsfor- schung, 4(1) (2000), pp. 97-100.
2 I do not mention any name here because now www.vho.org is listed.
3 http://news.excite.eom/news/r/000616/08/france-usa-yahoo; www.oneworld.org/ips2/june00/00_41_003.html; www.guardian.co.uk/freespeech/article/0,2763,400491,00.html; www.tomwbell.com/NetLaw/Ch03/YahooComplaint.html
4 New York Times, Jan. 3 , 200 1 .
5 German weekly news magazine Spiegel, Feb. 20, 2001 .
6 http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/filtering/google/; cf. AP news release of Oct. 24, 2002; www.sltrib.com/10252002/business/10409.htm
7 http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/filtering/google/resultsl.html; the authors men- tion 113 sites, but they have listed some sites several times, in one case with and in the other without www, in other cases they have counted subdomains as well, and some sites no longer exist, like, e.g., www.spotlight.com, www.revisionism.com.
8 www. wired.com/news/politics/0, 1283,5 1233,00.html
9 Cf. http://www.archive.org/about/terms.php
10 http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1105-963132.html
11 http://press.coe.int/cp/2003/048a(2003).htm
Book Reviews
The Israeli Masada Myth Exposed
By Robert H. Countess, Ph.D.
Nachman Ben-Yehuda, The Masada Myth. Collective Memory and Mythmaking in Israel, University of Wisconsin Press, Madison 1995, 401 pp., paperback, $24.95
Hebrew University Professor Nachman Ben- Yehuda of the Sociology Department dropped a cultural-historiographical bombshell on the Jewish State of Israel when he wrote (p. 3):
"How does one develop a sociological interpretation for an important belief system that turns out to be based on a series of deceptive and very biased (even falsified) claims? Moreover, what should one do when this belief system turns
out to be not only an important building block for the devel- opment of receptive young minds but also a cornerstone of an entire nation?
The so-called Masada mythical narrative is such a belief system: a fabricated moralistic claim. The startling discov- ery of its falsehood descended upon me in 1987. However, while the sociological interpretation presented in this book is based on an Israeli experience, it would be a grave mis- take to assume that such a mythology and deviant belief sys- tem constitutes a cultural idiosyncrasy, typical of Israel only. On the contrary, such myths and deviant beliefs are
222
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
characteristic of many cultures. Hence, the sociological les- son embedded in this particular tale has wide-ranging ramifications, as we shall see later. "
Background
Who is the Israeli academic who would write such a — see- mingly— outrageous statement as quoted above? Has he written with similar boldness in the past?
In 1993, the State University of New York Press published Ben-Yehuda's Political Assassinations by Jews. A Rhetorical Device for Justice,1 in which he focused on how Jews killed — for the most part — other Jews. He placed this in a particularly Jewish cultural matrix and described how this specific form of murder had been conceptualized so as to become an alterna- tive system for moral justice. He also authored Deviance and Moral Boundaries1 and The Politics and Morality of Devi- ance?
For several years now I have enjoyed informative, humane, and spirited correspondence with Professor Ben- Yehuda, and I hold him in the highest regard on all levels.
The Historical Masada of King Herod The Great
The fortress in the Judaean desert toward the south end of the Dead Sea — some 1290 feet below sea level and about 80 miles south of Jerusa- lem and on the western side of the Sea — has been made famous in a Hollywood style film of that name, but perhaps most of all by Israeli archaeologist Yigael Yadin in his 1996 book Masada. Herod's Fortress and the Zealots ' Last Stand? His excavation on site began in 1963 with a large team and government sponsorship.
Built by King Herod the Great be- tween B.C. 36-30, it was a marvel of en- gineering, defense, and luxuriant living for escaping the hot summer weather of Jerusalem, his capital. At the beginning of the year 66 A.D., a group of Jewish Zeal- ots took over the Roman military garrison at Masada and held it throughout the re- bellion against the Romans (66-70 A.D.). It became the final holdout for these Zeal- ots after the rest of Palestine had been restored to Rome's control. By late fall or Winter of 72 A.D., the Roman Governor
Flavius Silva marched on Masada with
sada with his Tenth Roman Legion, some auxiliary troops, and thousands of prisoners of war. The Roman siege ended on April 16th in the year 73 A.D.
The number of men, women, and children atop Masada is placed at 967 (p. 37). Joined by the Sicarii, which were Jewish rebels who used knives for their assassination of Romans and fellow Jews who would not rebel with them, the Zealots and Sicarii discussed their options in the face of the inevitable Ro- man storming of the fortress. Elazar Ben-Yair made "two fiery speeches to persuade the reluctant people to agree to be killed or to kill themselves. The two speeches succeeded, and the Si-
The asada Myth
Collective Memory and Mythmakine in Israel
v^uiiccuve me Mythmaking
m
Nachman Bei
carii killed one another and themselves." (p. 37) Ben-Yehuda terms this action "collective suicide." (p. 42)
As it turned out, seven survived: five children and two women. The murdering took place on April 15th. When the Romans entered, they found only silence. When the two women heard noises, they came out of hiding and told the Romans what had happened.
Today, Masada is a most impressive tourist site with lodging and eating facilities, an electric cable car to convey tourists who do not choose to walk up and down "the Snake Path." The tram up took about five minutes, but it took me about an hour to walk down again in 1994. The site is basically closed on the Sabbath.
Organization of the Book
Part One is "The Puzzle and the Background." In this sec- tion, Ben- Yehuda demonstrates his own existential experience with discovering the myth itself and his struggle with facing the truth of having been deceived for so many years. He writes of his denial, his anger, his resentment, and then his motivation to learn the full story. In short, this professor of sociology experi- enced what untold numbers of serious thinkers over the years have experienced about all sorts of deceptions served up by governments, organizations, religions, and individuals, but with Ben- Yehuda, his own effort to revise the Masada Myth away from its mythic ele- ments and to arrive at a complete picture of how and why the myth became so widely accepted, is filled with implica- tions for other Israeli promoted ideas and myths. Thus, the question must be asked: What other myths are Israelis believing about their "history" that may require radical revising in the future?
This, I believe, is the greatest value of this book: it opens an important door for a scientific-historiography in Israel and by Israelis and Jews of the Diaspora to re- examine and — if found necessary — to re- vise their dogmatically held concepts about 1) the Land of Palestine, 2) their special, unique "Chosenness" by YHWH, 3) the Tightness of the establishment of the Jewish State of Israel with its nar- rowly conceived Jewish-racialist ethno- centric focus, 4) the ethnic-cleansing of the indigenous Semito-Palestinians, and 5) supporting ideologies such as the Jew- ish Holocaust Story with its traditional content of enormity and qualitative uniqueness.
Part Two of the book covers "The Masada Mythical Narra- tive" and goes into great detail of development by Shmaria Guttman, youth movements, underground Jewish groups prior to 1948, the Israeli IDF (= military), school textbooks, media and tourism, children's literature and art, and the mythical nar- rative itself today. Ben- Yehuda discusses on pages 243f. "the Masada Complex" and "the Masada Syndrome."
The first has to do with suicide heroism as a last stand, a siege mentality against enemies everywhere, and more. An ex-
i Ben-Yehuda
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
223
cellent example of it was given by US Secretary of State Wil- liam Rogers (p. 244) of the Nixon administration, who re- marked that Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir displayed a "Masada complex" and that this was a chief obstacle to real peace in the Middle East.
"The Masada Syndrome" is similar in that it takes up the historical facts, wraps them in a moral covering, and then chal- lenges Israelis to die with Samson and the Philistines (Judges 16:30) rather than give up the Land.
Part Three is "Analysis, Discussion, and Summary." In it, Ben- Yehuda emphasizes that one of the "extremely important element(s) in a myth is the symbolic, awe-inspiring dimension" (p. 261). For myself, I see the Al-Qaeda Moslems to be so caught up in the myth of Islam as absolutely true and Allah as personally directing them that they give their lives freely with- out regard to personal pain or loss. The Masada Myth has worked similarly for Israelis, but for how much longer?
Ben- Yehuda writes that the myth be- gan its ascent in the early 1920s, peaked during the 1940s- 1960s, but saw a marked decline during 1970s and thereaf- ter. Again, from my own observation standpoint, the Masada Myth has been somewhat replaced recently by the 'Sad- dam Hussein is Hitler' myth, truly this is awe-inspiring to millions who beat the drums for a Bush-Sharon-Blair Axis to invade and remove this 'Hitler' who threatens 'the entire world,' as our media unceasingly inform us.
Is Nachman Ben- Yehuda a "Revisionist"?
It seems to me that my first acquaint- ance with the term "Revisionist" may have been in the 1980s when I read Al- fred Lilienthal's fine work The Zionist Connection II. What Price Peace?6 On page 190, Dr. Lilienthal refers to "the Jabotinsky Revisioinist movement of the 1930s and Menachem Begin's Irgun Za- vai Leumi of the 1940s," and he associated this with Gush Emunim (Hebrew for "bloc of the faithful"), "a paramystical, ultrachauvinist movement insisting that as the Chosen People and through biblical revelation, the Jews have the right to all of Palestine, and that Israel must hold onto all the occupied territo- ries, with the possible exception of portions of the Sinai."
This Gush Emunim was drawn from the extremely right- wing Likud party, itself being the successor of Vladimir Jabo- tinsky's "Revisionist movement."
Later, I read extensively in works by Harry Elmer Barnes and found that he and certain historians in the early 1920s had attempted to revise the background of World War One so as to display more accurately the contributing factors that brought about the World's first great war that seems to have involved so many combatant nations that it was properly called a "World War."
Follow-up: Ben-Yehuda's second assault on one of Israel's founding myths5
Then I became aware of the Institute for Historical Review and its "Revisionist History" journal The Journal of Historical Review and related occasional conferences, usually held in Southern California. The IHR promoted in its journal and con- ferences an open, unfettered forum for speakers to offer data and interpretations of the two great World Wars, the so-called American "Civil War," the Jewish Holocaust Story and espe- cially the problem of the alleged homicidal gassing chambers in German built and administered camps for detainees, prisoners, and slave workers, as well as of many other topics of 19th and 20th century.
Then I heard popular talk shows using the term "revisionist" as a sort of "four-letter word" to brush off anyone and any idea that the host did not 1 .) either agree with, or 2.) did not want to take seriously and thus allow for extensive time commitment on the show. It is this latter and quite popular use of "revisionist" that most Americans are perhaps familiar with. In Germany since the end of WW2, "revisionist" has been used for the Ger- man attempt to revise the Treaty of Ver- sailles after WWI and to regain territories and sovereignty for Germany, especially in the National Socialist years between 1933-45. But also in Germany, "revision- istisch" and "Revisionisms" have been used as a Keule (animal bone used as a club) to beat down anyone who dissents from the orthodox German philosophy of history imposed by the victorious Allies after 1945.
That orthodox German philosophy of history comprises 1.) the sacred story of the innocent Six Million Jews extermi- nated by Germans in homicidal gassing facilities of a uniquely ghastly nature al- legedly erected in several countries; 2.) the intent of Germany to exterminate physically the Jews of Europe and then on all of Planet Earth; and 3.) the historic truth that Germans have been and still are preponderantly "anti-Semitic" and must be carefully watched and controlled by the Allies and Israel and by Jews themselves living in Germany and all other countries.
Therefore, when one asks if the author of the book The Ma- sada Myth is a "revisionist," one must define the term in order to avoid a vague generality and also avoid a specifically harm- ful label to a professor at Hebrew University in Jerusalem.
In Theses & Dissertations Press' first book, Dissecting the Holocaust: The Growing Critique of 'Truth' and 'Memory'^1 one can read on page 6 the support for a mind-set of scientific revisionism as follows:
"The Natural sciences [like other scholarly disciplines, Ed.] are extremely conservative and dogmatic. Any corrobo- ration of a paradigm is welcome, whereas any innovation or revision will long meet with resistance; the instinct for pres- ervation (including self-preservation!) is stronger than the search for truth. Therefore, new findings usually gain accep-
224
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
tance only when sufficient numbers of researchers vouch for them: then the dogmatic status quo topples and a 'scientific revolution' occurs, a new paradigm replaces the old. [...] The bottom line is that no student, no researcher and no lay- man should believe any facts to be 'conclusively proven', even if the textbooks present them as such.[. . .] " This powerful statement comes from Professor Dr. Walter Nagl in his book Gentechnologie und Grenzen der Biologie8 and it is this concept so powerfully expressed here by Nagl that so-called "Historical Revisionists" I am acquainted with em- ploy when they research and write and publish books and ma- gazines such as Dissecting the Holocaust and Vierteljahreshefte fur freie Geschichtsforschung or The Revisionist.
It is Professor Nagl's definition of "revision" (-ist, ism) that I have in view when I seek to answer the question: Is Nachman Ben- Yehuda a "revisionist"?
"The proof is in the pudding," as one says, and if one re- reads Ben-Yehuda's statement on page 3 about the Masada myth, then one is most likely to conclude that he is clearly a "revisionist" in his intellectual commitment to historiography as well as in his method of research and writing. Whether or not he may be called a "Revisionist" is not for me to decide.
Conclusion.
If I may offer an illustration of the profound insight and courage of this Professor in Jerusalem, I would refer to his first book that I became aware of: Political Assassinations by Jews. A Rhetorical Device for Justice. I remember well, upon con- templating this provocative title, asking myself this question: What would be the Jewish reaction in general or in govern- ments and academia and the media if a German published a book entitled Political Assassinations by National Socialists. A Rhetorical Device for Justice!
The axis of Planet Earth would most likely have been dis- lodged from its position in space, I suggest, as a result of the uproar and tumult and rage that would certainly have followed such a book's appearance by a German!
Readers everywhere must ask themselves this question: What makes a non-Revisionist into a Revisionist? And the answer has
to be: new data, new methods of evaluating data, and a will- ingness to revise long standing orthodoxies. That is the principle that Professor Nagl lives by and, I suggest, every historiographer 'worth his salt' must live by the same principle or be judged by later generations to have been a Feigling (=coward).
I conclude with registering my complete agreement with Professor Pat Lauderdale of Stanford University who praised The Masada Myth on the book's cover:
"The Masada Myth is both scholarly and a passionate book, analyzing with great clarity the relationship between deviance and mythology. The careful descriptions and pro- vocative ideas will create new controversy, one that is timely and important for our understanding of what has be- come the new world dis-order. "
Multitudes of serious readers wonder when a Norman Fin- kelstein or Ruth Bettina Birn or a Nachman Ben-Yehuda will research, write, and publish a book with a title such as "The Jewish Holocaust Myth. Collective Memory and Mythmaking in Israel", because the time has come for serious scholars out- side the present realm of "Historical Revisionists" to produce such a book. Jews and Goyim deserve such a work that will provoke and create new controversy, as Pat Lauderdale above wrote, and a book that will advance "our understanding of what has become the new world dis-order."
Just perhaps, Planet Earth might be able to keep its course at 23.5 degrees of axis if such a book were produced. For me, I am willing to take that chance!
Notes
1 State Univ. of New York Press, January 1993.
2 Deviance and Moral Boundaries: Witchcraft, the Occult, Science Fiction, Deviant Sciences and Scientists, University of Chicago Press, reprint Sep- tember 1987.
3 The Politics and Morality of Deviance: Moral Panics, Drug Abuse, Deviant Science, and Reversed Stigmatization, State Univ. of New York Press, April 1990.
4 Random House, New York.
5 Sacrificing Truth: Archaeology and the Myth of Masada, Humanity Books, June 2002,300 pp., $35.-
6 Brunswick, NJ: North American, 1978.
7 Edited by Ernst Gauss aka Germar Rudolf, Capshaw, AL, 2000, 608 pp.
8 Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1987, pp. 126ff.
Revisionism: The Most Dangerous Topic
By Bruno Chapsky
Dariusz Ratajczak, Tematy Jeszcze Bardziej Niebezpiec- zne (An Even More Dangerous Topic), published by author, Opole 2002, 245 pp.
Already in the fall of 1998, when the historian Dr. Dariusz Ratajczak was still teaching at the University of Oppeln (Opole), he published a book with the Title Dangerous Topics. One of the chapters covered dealt with Holocaust Revisionism. For this chapter, Ratajczak was indicted1 and fortunately even- tually acquitted,2 but this did not hinder his Alma Mater from dismissing him.3
Those who feared that Dr. Ratajczak was intimidated by this persecution can breathe freely: following his first book, Dr. Ratajczak has written a second one, which deals exclusively with Holocaust Revisionism, the most dangerous of all topics covered by Ratajczak in his fiist book.
Ratajczak was born in 196, is married and has children. He stems from a patriotic Polish family. At the University of Op- peln he had a reputation of being a very popular professor and for his fun-loving humor. He used to be highly respected and frequently cited as a scholar, writer, author, and journalist. He was also known for not making any compromises with the
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
225
truth. But when Dr. Ratajczak decided to delicately question the myth of all myths, he lost his teaching job and had to face nu- merous legal assaults. This defender of freedom has been the subject of an incom- prehensible hate campaign, initiated by leading Polish publications. These papers, for the most part, are owned by non-ethnic passport Poles, many of them foreigners.
As a result of these attacks, Prof. Ratajczak was forced to live as a near- downtrodden pauper, since he has been unemployable. At present he is able to feed his children because he makes mini- mal wages as a security guard. It makes one wonder about transcontinental alli- ances and the element that tyrannizes free- dom of debate.
At any rate, Prof. Ratajczak is an indi- vidual of immense integrity. He ascribes to the responsibility of moral codes and has not succumbed to semantic accusations of those with a history of corralling majorities via blackmail and political terror. With his new book, Ratajczak has done exactly what those anti-free-speech terrorists wanted to prevent: Now he has put all of his fingers in the festering wound of all west- ern societies, on the most dangerous topic of all, the Holocaust. By so doing, he aligned himself into the worldwide front of pacemakers in this confrontation about freedom of speech, as Dr. Robert Countess used to say.
The title of his book Tematy Jeszcze Bardziej Niebezpieczne (A Subject Even More Dangerous) indicates that this book came into existence only because the author had to learn the hard way that Holocaust revisionism is indeed the most danger- ous topic of all. All other allegedly dangerous topics covered in his first book did not cause any attention, thus were not really dangerous. If Ratajczak wouldn't have been persecuted for his frist book, he would probably never have written the second. Hence, the Holocaust lobby's attack on him backfired.
In a Central European world controlled by the brethren of former communists, Ratajczak could not retain his job in a manner similar to the noble Prof. Arthur Butz. He could not continue to publish articles like Joe Sobran and Pat Buchanan. In the spirit of a Jurgen Graf, Ratajczak gives us another glow- ing example of the spirit of freedom against overwhelming odds. Let's take our hats off to him.
In his new book, Ratajczak glorifies numerous individuals who have fought against mental totalitarianisms. His language makes it obvious that he dislikes those impeding freedom of speech. This does not imply that he agrees with all the views of those he declares his solidarity with. Among the people men- tioned in his book are John C. Ball (Canadian), Jurgen Graf (Swiss), Prof. Robert Faurisson (Frenchman), Dr. Fredrick Toben (Australian), Germar Rudolf (German), David Irving (Englishman) and Carlo Mattogno (an Italian). He also refers to Americans Mark Weber and Harry Elmer Barnes.
Ratajczak explains that many scholars do not believe in much of what is articulated about the so called Holocaust in- dustry, but that they consider 'gas chamber' stories to be fables.
Among those who have pronounced such are: Thies Christophersen, Mark Weber, David Cole (a Jew) and Miloslav Dragon.
On page 29, a chapter entitled "Fal- szywi Swiadkowie" starts (False Wit- nesses), which speaks for itself. On page 35, Darek Ratajczak refers to the famous air photo analyses by Canadian John Ball,4 Report and by the time the reader reaches p. 42, he has learned quite some revision- ist arguments about Treblinka.
On page 44 Ratajczak speaks about Jan Kozielewski (Jan Karski) and his dishon- esty. The title of a chapter starting on page 48 is "Six Million," in which Ratajczak explains revisionist arguments on Jewish population statistics. He also mentions that the first time that six million Jews were al- legedly killed in Europe was as early as 1919.5 Starting on page 51, he finally reports about the views of Robert Faurisson under the title: "Rewizjonizm Holocaustu Wedlug Roberta Faurissona" (Revisionism According to R. Faurisson).
On page 69, a chapter starts with the title "Jak Adolf Israel Budowal" (How Adolf built Israel). On page 87, the reader is confronted with a chapter that reads "Amerykanska Piata Kolumna" (America's 5th Column). After that, Ratajczak turns to the Jewish religion by exposing Jewish-talmudic views about Christianity. Near the end of the book, he also elaborates on the conflict in Palestine, and he also refers to the disproportionally high participation of Jews during the Russian Revolution with all its mass murder and genocides.
Dariusz Ratajczak is living proof of Michael Hoffman's prophesy that knowledge and anger about censorship and the ongoing Holocaust propaganda is spreading and is getting fi- nally discharged into revisionism. I recommend Ratajczak's book to the 20 million Poles in exile. Not only is Prof. Darek Ratajczak carrying the shield of defence for European values like freedom and civil rights. And even if Dariusz Ratajczak is now a pauper, he has made many people mentally and cultur- ally richer by giving them the opportunity to get decisive in- sights about our world. He might be a political slave, but he is also a liberator. He may be slandered by the Poland's New York Time , the Gazeta Wyborcza, but he is a giant of a man.
Prof. Ratajczak has been unmercifully beaten down eco- nomically by the media. Anyone wishing to cheer him up would be fighting for freedom of speech and morality. The au- thor's address is: ul. Tatrzanska 48/3, Opole 45-217, Poland.
Notes
1 Vierteljahreshefte fur freie Geschichtsforschung 3(3) (1999), p. 355.
2 Cf. J. Graf, "Freisprach fur halbrevisionistischen polnischen Historiker", Vierteljahreshefte fur freie Geschichtsforschung 4(1) (2000), pp. 96f.
3 Vierteljahreshefte fur freie Geschichtsforschung 4(2) (2000), p. 239.
4 J. C. Ball, Air Photo Evidence, Ball Resource Services Ltd., Suite 160-7231, 120th St., Delta, BC, Canada, V4C 6P5, 1992.
5 Cf. about this D. Heddesheimer's article "Der Erste Holocaust anno 1914- 1927", Vierteljahreshefte fur freie Geschichtsforschung 3(2) (1999), pp. 153-158.
226
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
A Provocative History of the Aryan Race
By Robert H. Countess, Ph.D.
Arthur Kemp, March of the Titans. A History of the White Race. Volume One: 35,000 Years of History — The Complete Story of the White Race and Its Destiny, Ostara Publications, 2nd ed., Johannesburg 2001, oversize, Bound. 311 pp. (ISBN 0-620-25117-4)
While the subtitle "The Complete Story of the White Race" is question begging — no one is able to produce completeness on any subject at any time! — this highly illustrated book with its photos and drawings and maps, but no Index or Bibliogra- phy in the present edition, will be welcomed by many readers as long overdue, so as to correct the present lack of balance in social anthropological studies.
This book focuses on a racial sub-group of Homo Sapiens no less than does the Jewish writer Martin Bernal in his Black Athena volumes focus on the Negroid sub-group, nor any less than the Senegalese writer Cheikh Anta Diop focuses on Afro- centrism (more accurately, my term: "Negro-centrism") in his Kemet, Afrocentricity and Knowledge, nor any less the force- fully racial focus of multitudes of books by Jews on Jewish his- tory.
The second volume in this projected series is said (p.3 1 1) to continue "the staggering saga of the White Race, beginning with the creation of modern Russia by the Vikings and moving into the settlement of the Americas, Africa, Australia and New Zea- land." How many volumes are projected overall is not given.
Author Kemp, writing in Oxford, England, on September 14, 1998, informs the reader of the background circumstances of his study:
"The idea for writing this book came from a perusal of the history section of the Jagger Library at the University of Cape Town, South Africa, in 1983. While undertaking some unrelated research, I chanced upon a book dealing with the history of the Chinese people. Intrigued, I investigated fur- ther in that section of the library. I found rows of books dealing with the history of the Japanese, the Black race, the Incas, Aztecs, the Australian Aborigines, the Arabs, the Na- tive Americans, the Polynesians — in fact there was a history of every people and every race on earth — except, much to my surprise, the White race. This lack of a history of the White people of the world has persisted to this day: and it is to correct this imbalance that this book has been written. As it is a history of a defined race, not of any particular coun- try, its narrative follows several continents and centuries, not limiting itself to any one geographical region.
I have always felt that the point of studying history is not the memorizing of some dates and facts, but rather the search for and discovery of the forces causing the results we see before our eyes as historical events.
History lost its value through the efforts of academics producing lists of meaningless dates and names, expecting everyone else to be as interested in their lists as they are. The proper study of history is in reality a tremendously ex- citing field of endeavour — the exploits and tribulations de-
tailed in this book will hopefully convince skeptics of this! More importantly, history does indeed contain lessons — sobering ones, with massive implications. As this book will show, it raises issues which confronted past civilizations and which confront modern society — how we answer them will determine if our society will survive or vanish like those of old. "
The Titans
In Greek mythology, the sons and daughters of Gaea and Uranus were Titans and Titanesses. These sons' and daughters' children were also called Titans. Gaea got them to make war on her "husband" as it were, and they dethroned him and put Cronus on the throne of the Cosmos. In time, son Zeus suc- ceeded his father Cronus and became "The Father of gods and men" and distributed to all humans their good and bad fortunes in life. Again, in time, he battled against the Titans and con- signed them to a hellish or heavenly place, depending on which strand of the myth one accepts.
In short, the Titans have a reputation for enormous accom- plishments, but they suffer from a reputation based on warlike deeds.
Author Arthur Kemp has appropriately, it seems, selected Titans for his title's key noun: White Indo-Europeans who per- formed great feats of subduing lands and environments and cre- ating enormously advanced civilizations, but also with high negatives — frequent internecine warfare, rape, robbery, pillage, and destruction of their fellow Titans.
"The White Race"
He properly begins with defining the key term and divides Whites into three subgroupings: Nordic, Alpine, and Mediter- ranean. Nordics were originally in northern Europe, Alpines in central Europe, and the Mediterraneans in southern Europe. The Mediterraneans are no longer existent today, having been submerged for the most part into the sea of Nonwhite Arabic, Turkic, and Negroid subgroups. On page 2 is an illustration of skulls, pictures, and descriptions of these three subgroups.
The method for tracking racial history he gives as 1.) genet- ics; 2.) paleoserology ; 3.) study of art forms; 4.) linguistic af- finities; and 5.) technological achievements.
His treatment of ancient history with photos and analysis is fascinating and engages one's sense of eagerness to explore his theory in greater detail. Stonehenge, of course, provides a cen- tral clue to the megalithic capabilities of the White Race and must be compared to similar structures on other continents and islands along with the first step type pyramid, found near Marl- borough in Wiltshire, England, dating to circa 2600 B.C. (p. 15)
"Nordic Desert Empire — Ancient Egypt."
Chapter Eight allows one to enter perhaps the most contro- versial field of study in the Ancient Near East (ANE) — Egypt. "Egypt had been settled by three White groupings prior to 3500 BC, namely the Old European Mediterranean types." He writes
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
227
of evidence to support significant numbers of Semitic and Ne- groid (= Nubian) presence in the Nile Valley alongside them — "and against whom the Egyptians waged war and enslaved for nearly 2,000 years." (p. 56)
The Six Great Race Wars
The first was Europe against Attila the Hun from 372-454 AD (Ch. 18); the second was 1095-1270 AD with Christian Europe's Crusaders against the Moslems (Ch. 21); the third was the Moslem invasion of Europe and expulsion that covered 711- 1492 AD (Ch.23); the fourth was the Europeans opposing the in- vading Bulgars, Avars, Magyars and Khazars from 550-950 AD (Ch.31); the fifth was Ghengis Khan and the Mongols' invasion of Europe, 1220-1650 AD (Ch.32); and the last was 1300-1919 AD which he terms "the Ottoman Holocaust" (Ch. 35)
Aryan, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Harappa, Europe, Sumer, Tochar- ian — built on the same linguistic root? One must read the early chapters to see that the author attempts "to connect the dots," as it were, between certain terms that might point back to an origi- nal ar-/-ir root for these Titan types. Surely, there is evidence for further linguistic and archaeological study on this fascinat- ing observation to provide more verification or to falsify it.
"Born of the Black Sea — The Indo-European Invasions."
Chapter Five may well possess the most cogent thesis and data of the entire book. "Most modern Whites are to the great- est part, either direct or part descendants of a great wave of White peoples who swept into Europe from about 5500 BC till around 500 BC." (p. 22) Kemp's drawing of the Mediterranean and ANE regions of the mid-sixth millennium BC (= 5600 BC) shows the Titans moving out from the present day Ukraine plains, but now the Black Sea after the melting of ice sheets at the end of the Pleistocene era, which led to a rise in ocean lev- els to some 300 feet over centuries. The Mediterranean Sea overflowed through the narrow Bosporus neck and into the fer- tile plains of south central Russia-Ukraine and flooded the re- gion, creating the Black Sea. (Leading me to ask if extensive exploration activity has taken place in order to map out any man-made formation on the floor of the Black Sea.)
For author Kemp, this mega movement of water created the basis for the Biblical legend (not "myth") of the Noachian Flood.
And, from the steppes, now under water, Whites moved out in waves in every direction, thus establishing civilizations for
■
which words such as Baltic, German, Slavic, Celtic, Pre- Dynastic Egyptian, Sumerian, Indo-Aryan, Aryan, Tocharian, and Ainu, can be used.
"Germanic Roller Bearings— 500 BC."
This reviewer found the photographic reproduction — it ought to have been given a whole page! — on page 23 to be marvelously pregnant with meaning if it is indeed genuine and if the dating is accurate. And there is no reason to doubt what Kemp provides.
On the left is "A finely cast Bronze wagon complete with figures, from Strettweg, Austria. 700 BC." Next to it is "The Dejbjerg wagon from Denmark, circa 500 BC; includes an as- tonishingly sophisticated roller bearing system of wooden pins in a bronze brace, to facilitate the turning of the wheel on its axle."
Indeed, if all is in order here, "Such sophisticated technol- ogy shows that the Pre-Roman Empire Celts, Germans, Baits and Slavs were actually not 'barbarians' at all but highly devel- oped people capable of stunning and complicated technological feats such as these." He even has an enlarged drawing of the hub with the rolling bearings and its bearing race.
Kemp is to be faulted for not citing the present museum lo- cation of these items. Recently, I showed this picture to a Dan- ish scholar and he had never heard of "the Dejbjerg wagon." Kemp's volume suffers overall for lacking complete footnote or endnote references and a bibliography, which is, I am told, to be corrected in a third edition to be published later in 2002.
Anti-Christian Thrust
Kemp makes severe criticisms of Christianity as a non- Aryan religion and (justly) criticizes the violent spread of Christian influence from the time of Constantine the Great for- ward until all Europe became (largely) Christianized. His own positive favoring Aryan/Norse/Teutonic/Celtic pagan religion is obvious in Chapter Thirty Eight and elsewhere. In fact, his fa- vorable treatment will remind some readers of some Germans of the National Socialist era, but one, of course, must be careful not to make simple equations of religious sentiment and politi- cal sentiment of a bygone era.
Observations Derivable from March of the Titans
I made a list of observations about historical development of the White Race that Kemp might well agree with. These ob-
The Dejbjerg wagon, Museum Hollufgard in Odense, Denmark (left) and National Museum in Kopenhagen, both circa 500 BC
228
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 • No. 2
servations are based, I believe, logically on the content and spirit of his work. They are listed here and are my own interpre- tations:
1 . ) The march of human history points to a seeming superiority
of Indo-European Caucasoids in comparison to Semitoids, Mongoloids, and Negroids, when emphasis is given to the fundamental characteristics of civilization: art, architecture, technology, physical sciences, construction of buildings and roads, language, literature, and government.
2. ) The environmental theory of racial subgroup development
or non-development cannot be supported by the available data; on the contrary, DNA is of vital importance to civili- zation advances.
3. ) The present theorizing and dogmatizing about Afrocentrism
(the "Out of Africa" view) and early Egypt as Negroid can- not be verified, but rather that the physical data and artifacts point to an early settlement of the region by Indo-Europeans and their responsibility for the gigantic construction pro- jects, with their demise through racial dilution culminating in the first millennium BC and the demise of Egyptian greatness by circa 500BC.
4. ) Since Caucasoids have so frequently been migratory in their
search for land (and freedom?), they were never able to de- velop— as Jews have so successfully done — methods of
maintaining their racial integrity, and this has always spelled the demise of their civilizations. (Note: If Kemp in fact holds this principle, as I suggest that he does, then pre- sent day Caucasoid proponents of White racial integrity face a losing battle in view of the past several thousand years of reality.)
5.) The USA and Europe will be excellent models to watch for Kemp's principle (4.)); by 2200 or 2300 or 2400, one might posit that Kemp's inferences about the White Race will be verified or falsified by empirical data.
Conclusion
I look forward to the second volume and others with a criti- cal mind. Kemp's evidence is persuasive at times but unpersua- sive at others. But, the very fact that he attempts to do what, seemingly, no one else has done up to this time, is itself praiseworthy. I only hope that the technical aspects of the suc- ceeding volumes will be greatly improved in order to satisfy the higher demands of original scholars and highly adept students. The general public will profit enormously from the present state of this initial volume — already sold out, I am told — but all in all, the subject has been so severely neglected that it deserves the best treatment.
On Third Reich Flying Saucers, German Physics, and the Perpetuum Mobile
By Germar Rudolf
Nick Cook, The Hunt for Zero Point, Century/Random House, London 2001, 281 pp. hardcover, £17.99
An Introduction into the Topic
For certain book reviews one must give an explanation and justification in order not to be misunderstood or put in a false light. The review of the book in question here is one of them, because in this book history is only a byproduct, the main con- cern being revolutionary energy technologies, a subject that is not the main focus of The Revisionist. However, since the his- torical background falls in the era of the Third Reich and deals with secret weapons research in Germany, the subject will probably be of much interest to readers of TR.
Cook's book is about the suppression of revolutionary physical and technical discoveries by powerful interested par- ties, which would entail the revision of current knowledge. That this kind of proceeding is familiar to Revisionists is another reason to review the book.
A Personal Introduction
In 1989, I came across a German magazine named Code — now discontinued — which contained a long article on flying saucers supposedly developed by the Third Reich, containing authentic appearing cross-section construction drawings of fly- ing saucers named Hanebu. The article was impressive, but it suffered from the major drawback that it did not contain any
references to primary sources or to scientific or technical litera- ture which might have enabled the reader to examine the claims more closely. When I inquired at Diagnosen Verlag, the pub- lisher of Code, I received an answer from the author of the arti- cle that did not refer to any primary documents or archives nor to any technical or scientific literature, but merely asserted that one could understand the former German wonder technology only by means of an esoteric frame of mind. My own half-year lasting excursion into esoterics, however, had convinced me that believers in the idea of Third Reich flying saucers were es- sentially devotees of a religion who wanted to believe rather than wanted to know, and who used a few photographs and construction plans as devotional objects.
In 1993, shortly after my house was searched for the first time by the German Thought Police, I came in contact with a person who subscribed to this religion. He was an ingenuous patriot with little education who held the fixed conviction that the earth was hollow and that the Third Reich and its flying saucers had survived in the interior and was waiting for the right time to return and to liberate Germany. My attempts to explain to him that there were good static and tectonic reasons why the earth could not be hollow were useless — he wanted to believe.
In 1996, during my short exile in Spain, I became ac- quainted with a German war veteran who was not highly edu- cated, but who had acquired broad, though not very deep scien-
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
229
tific knowledge as a former librarian of a scientific library. He professed a compa- rable belief, namely that the moon was really hollow and inhabited. A little later he even published a book on the subject.
At the beginning of 2000, 1 received a book manuscript for publication in which the thesis of the hollow earth and a base for Third Reich flying saucers was set out. The entrance to this base was sup- posedly in Neuschwabenland (New Swabia), a place in Antarctica which had been explored and mapped by a German research team in 1938. When I enquired with the author whether he had any scien- tific or technical evidence for this base in the Antarctic, such as satellite photos, he sent me what was supposedly a satellite photo of Antarctica showing a hole sev- eral hundred kilometers wide with verti- cal walls many tens of kilometers deep. Aside from the problem that such a deep hole would break the earth's crust and expose liquid magma, there was also the problem that vertical walls of several tens of kilometers high would be statically in- stable and would doubtlessly collapse, causing earthquakes and volcanic activity such as would be caused by the impact of a giant meteor. That would be the end of all higher life forms on earth.
Why do I discuss this here? The reason is that handling the subject matter discussed in this book necessarily involves a delicate course of enquiry that can easily end in a plunge into the above-mentioned spiritual and social bottomless pits. Nick Cook's book is full of references to his own anxiety and the anxiety of many of the technical people and scientists he contacted that they would be painted as dreamers and idiots by their colleagues and the media if they let themselves become involved in investiga- tions into a tabooed area of science that had acquired a very unsavory reputation due to its historical origins and connection with political fringe groups.
THE HUNT FOR
worldwide leading journal for weapons and weapon systems Jane's Defence Weekly and editor of the air weapons sec- tion of that journal. His articles also ap- pear in many of the larger British maga- zines, and his commentaries on weapons development and security issues are broadcasted by the large TV companies of the world. He is considered one of the world's foremost experts in the area of military aeronautics.
The English-language science pro- gram Discovery Channel broadcasted a two-hour report on the subject covered in this book, written and presented by Cook, in which he introduced the audience into secrets of the US weapons industry of which he had received knowledge or just made educated assumptions.
Cook was educated at Eaton and has received a degree in Arabic and Islamic studies. The author's lack of scientific training is the weakest point of this book, for it leads him to some obvious errors and misunderstandings, which undermines his competence. It is also irritating that Cook does not make any references to source literature, but attempts to allay the reader's skepticism with a bibliography only. How-
Who is Nick Cook?
In order to forestall the impression that I have gone crazy and lost contact with real- ity, I introduce the author of the book, which by the way is published not by a hole-in-the-wall publisher, but by one of the most well-known publishing houses in Eng- land.
For 15 years or more, Nick Cook, now 42, has written articles on the newest devel- opments in the weapons industry, with em- phasis on aeronautics. He is advisor to the
The G-Engines Are Coming!
By far the most potent source of energy fs gravity. Using It as power future aircraft will attain the speed of light.
By MICHAEL GLADYCH
m KtKtetr . . be built, W already urKtcx nip4r-plan&
Cftft*4« rwfcfcn
arte/ cd^
aircraft are. ytt t& te* research projects tint will malt* th*
- before- they .
- United St*t«i*iid Ttrrs, Jtirtiustsf de^ ;n m perfects a
whEch Tit fife ha* 5ieen no escape, "^hat go« vp must come down^3 they said. The bifiS^r trie body xhe stronger the ... arAvity ■ attraction: it. rias for other ob- ject* , . . the ^larger the distance be- tween the objects, the lesser she fcrpvity pull. Defining. JthoM rigid rules was at
way to esith.
This discovery save modern scientists a new bone, *lrc*<Jy knew how tc mnke.rnp$ii*t*. fcjy. coiling, a .iriro. around nn tfttr) Cor*. Electric current running thnOfh the coiled wj» created a ma£- cseiic field and Jt could be switched or
230
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
ever, a search of the Internet showed that this bibliography, short though it may be, should be a good starting point for in- vestigation of the subject.
A Journey Through Time and Space
Nearly 10 years ago, Nick Cook found a journal article by M. Gladych, dating from 1956, at his workplace at Jane's De- fence Weekly, which reported on the advanced state of devel- opment of gravity motors that would make possible nearly ef- fortless travel and transport based on a technology which sus- pended the effects of gravity (see illustration). Nothing has come of this, as we all know. Cook was bothered by the article: who had put it on his work desk and why?
What chiefly excited Cook's interest were statements in the article of technical persons in the US aviation industry who were apparently working on a project in the mid-1950s with the purpose to neutralize the force of gravity by means of an elec- tromagnetic apparatus with which one could cause things to float in the air. Was this merely a journalistic hoax, or were leading US airplane manufacturers really working on such a project? Nick Cook tracked down the last one of the quoted technical authorities still living, but his anxious, nearly panicky, refusal to comment made the matter even more irresistible for Nick Cook. What was going on here?
In his book, Nick Cook describes his search for knowledge in this area move for move: In the US archives he found evi- dence that at the close of the war the US government confis- cated German "wonder" weapons technology and brought it to the USA, and that nothing has been heard of it since: beam weapons for antiaircraft defense (apparently lasers) and various kinds of vaguely described flying objects. He found eyewitness reports by US bomber pilots describing unknown flying objects and unusual optical and magnetic effects in German air space near the end of the war.
From diverse but obscure sources it is apparent that the Third Reich was working on the development of various ex- perimental flying devices. Names such as Schriever, Haber- mohl, and Miethe appear — they were men who worked on se- cret projects at laboratories located in Bohemia and Moravia.
This late 1950s or early 1960s picture is said to be a sub-scale electrogravitics experimental air vehicle mounted on a wind- tunnel test stand1
However, this line of inquiry led Cook into the proximity of po- litically dangerous groups who have cobbled together a substi- tute religion out of secret weapons development during the Third Reich, so he abandoned it and turned back to investigate the researches made in the USA and Canada after the war.
In the 1950s and 1960s, the Canadian firm Avro conducted experiments with "flying saucers" that were later made public. The experiments were discontinued. But was this all? For ex- ample, what can one make of the numerous sightings of un- known flying objects since the end of the war? And do the se- cret proceedings at the famous-infamous Area 51, the top-secret US air base in the Nellis military test range in southern Nevada, owe anything to the development of new technology that was carried out in Germany in the 1 940s?
With his excellent connections to the leading US weapons manufacturers, Cook attempted to get a look behind the cur- tains at the most secret projects under way, at companies and agencies such as Lockheed-Martin, Northrop Grumman, and the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center. He made contact with various aviation and weapons development experts and re- ceived the almost conspiratorial support of researchers who, while not giving him useful information, told him he was defi- nitely on the right track.
Revolution in Physics
The weakest point of Cook's book — due to the author's lack of scientific training — is at once its most fascinating: considera- tions of certain areas of scientific research that could alter our scientific worldview fundamentally, if new theories that were regarded as mere speculations should prove valid. Cook exam- ines some of these areas with the help of a number of scientists. One point is that Einstein's theory of relativity may be in need of correction, since the proposition that objects can not move faster than the speed of light (ca. 300,000 km per second, or 1 .08 million km per hour) may not hold.
The breakthrough in physical sciences anticipated for nearly a century with respect to the unification of the four natural forces (electromagnetism, gravity, strong and weak nuclear forces) may be at the point of a practical (partial) realization, because experiments carried out by physicists in the last ten years may prove that gravity can be screened by electromag- netic devices, and thus things placed "above" an electromag- netic field may be made weightless, so as to hover. Even more, one could even speak of a repelling effect here by which an ob- ject could be accelerated. The next step might be the generation of gravity beams which could cause things to have weight in certain directions.
There are a number of reasons to believe that our world is built in a way quite different than we have been accustomed to think. According to certain quantum theories, our world does not simply 'exist,' but is formed from the statistical appearance and disappearance of energy and material quanta, the so-called quantum background noise. Should it prove possible to tap this quantum noise (the so-called zero point energy) before it disap- pears again into nothingness, it would be possible to extract en- ergy quasi out of nothing. What sounds like a perpetuum mo- bile, or rather, an apparatus that takes energy from the void — which contradicts all physics as now taught (the conservation of
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
231
energy, the fundamental principle of thermodynamics) — would be relativized, since the theory assumes the existence of parallel universes, so that our 'energy from the void' pump would merely move energy from one parallel universe to another.
Moving faster than the speed of light, levitation, manipula- tion of gravity, tractor beams, parallel universes, hyperspace, zero point energy: does this all sound like the Star Trek? Yes, and if one believes it is real, that is what our future looks like. That is what Nick Cook thought when he published an article in Jane 's Defence Weekly, "Warp Drive When?" (July 26, 2000)
Science or Humbug?
One can easily imagine what our establishment physicists think of all this, as it would turn all physics from the last 2000 years upside down. Yevgeni Podkletnov, a Russian physicist, is one of the leading physicists in the area of "revisionist" phys- ics. When his gravity screening experiments had progressed to such a point that he wished to publish an article in one of the worldwide leading journals for physical science (Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics), it caused an unexpected uproar that caused a set back for the whole project of at least five years. Before the paper was published, Ian Sam- ple of the Sunday Telegraph heard of the new revolutionary research and straightaway wrote a shocking article about it (see illustration) pub- lished on Sept. 1, 1996. The term "antigravity" used in this article, which is regarded as ex- tremely unscientific, shed a negative light on the whole project and was devastating. The 'scien- tific community' launched a flurry of attacks and caused most of the other scientists involved in the project to get cold feet and withdraw their support for the article, leaving Podkletnov out in the rain. Further pressure from the 'scientific community' caused Podkletnov to lose his posi- tion at University of Tampere in Finland.2
The same thing happened to other scientists who got near this subject: they were made ri- diculous by their colleagues, ostracized, often stripped of their honor and dignity, and fre- quently even having their careers ended. These are behavioral patterns that are only too familiar to Historical Revisionists and explain why Nick Cook found it difficult to draw a technical expert into conversation, since in such matters they shun the media like the devil shuns holy water.
Podkletnov's experiments,3 however, were taken seriously enough that even NASA showed interest. Together with the University of Hunts- ville NASA carried out experiments along the lines Podkletnov had followed.4 Also, two of the world's leading aircraft manufacturers, Boeing and British Aerospace, started their own re- search projects (see illustrations).1
him that he was dealing with serious research, he took up again the pursuit of physics in the Third Reich, which, he believed, would bring him to the origin of the new 'revisionist' physics. Cook's reports on secret weapons research in the Third Reich are, as one might expect in the contemporary climate of opin- ion, colored with the usual polemic about the 'Empire of Evil,' but one should ignore it. The most interesting part of his inves- tigation brought him into contact with the son of Viktor Schau- berger, whose practical researches led to a number of revolu- tionary technologies, none of which were developed to the point of practical usefulness. Toward the end of the war, Schauberger collaborated on the development of German flying saucers. At the suggestion of a Polish researcher, Cook jour- neyed to Silesia and inspected a secret research facility whose purpose is now a mystery. Cook speculated on the basis of in- formation he had collected that the site could have been a test stand for a prototype gravity-drive flying saucer (see illustra- tion).
It is true that Schauberger was brought to America at the end of the war by Operation Paperclip, a program to kidnap leading German scientists and to bring them to the USA, but
German Physics
After Cook received an experimental demon- stration of 'revisionist' physics that convinced
Breakthrough as scientists beat gravity
by ROBERT MATTHEWS and IAN SAMPLE
HOW THE ANTI-GRAVITY DEVICE WORKS
SCIENTISTS in Finland are about to reveal details of the world's first anti-gravity device. Measuring about 12in across, the device is said to reduce significantly the weight of anything sus- pended over it.
The claim — which has been rigorously examined by scientists, and is due to appear in a physics journal next month — could spark a technological revolution. By combatting gravity, the most ubiquitous force in the uni- verse, everything from trans- port to power generation could be transformed.
The Sunday Telegraph bas learned that Mas a. the American space agency, is taking the claims seriously, and is funding research into how the anti-gravity effect could be turned into a means of flight.
The researchtefs at The Tampere Unive/sity of Tech. nology in Fioftind, who dis- covered th/ effect, sav it
A l-stone object would lose 4 5oi of its weiaflt through 'shielding' effect ol the device
Whole assembly cooled with H
Ring of super conducting ceramic (YRrium- bariufTvcopper oxide), spinning at S.000 rpm
Solenoids
magnetic Held around ring
Three solenoids, which ailow ring to levitate magnetically
Unit appro*. 12m diameter
tures. The team was carrying out tests on a rapidly spin- ning disc of superconducting ceramic suspended in the magnetic field of three elec- tric Coils, all enclosed in a
the Journal of Pht/sics-D. Applied Physics, published by Britain's Institute of Physics.
Even so. most scientists, wil/ not feel comfortable
low-temperature vessel wirti the idea of anti-gravity called a cryostat. until other teams repeal the
"One of my friends came in /experiments
Sunday Telegraph, Sept. 1, 1996
232
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 • No. 2
A test stand for flying saucers in Ludwigsdorf, Silesia?
due to his age he had little success in the replication of his re- search— that, at least, is the official version.
Cook discusses briefly the desperate research conducted by the Third Reich in remote hideaways of science in the face of extremely limited resources in order to find technical solutions to their military problems. This despair had as one result that researchers were allowed to deviate from the accepted theories and to penetrate into areas deemed impossible by established physics. According to Cook, the Germans may have succeeded in developing a technology for screening gravity and maybe even for tapping zero point energy, without being entirely aware of the theoretical basis. Cook is effusively shocked at the possibility that the Third Reich, the 'Empire of Evil,' may have been at the threshold of getting access to unlimited energy re- sources and transport methods, based apparently on the victory of quantum theory over relativity theory, the victory of applied research over theoretical science, or, as Cook puts it, the victory of 'German physics' over 'Jewish physics,' as it was then po- lemically called in the Third Reich. What a horror that would have been, indeed!
... But They Hover After All!
Podkletnov has returned to Finland and has recently pub- lished an article in which he reports on successful experiments on the generation of gravity beams.6 He told Cook in a conver- sation that he had also succeeded in completely screening grav- ity from objects, thus enabling them to hover.
It appears that this technology has reached a point where practical applications are possible. Thus, Ning Li, who has
I Xscover the Solutions To Aniericas Most rtessing Euerm; FxJoix)inic & En\Mimental Rtoolems and End Out Why You My New* Have To Pay Another Energy Bill Agiin!
Discover die Newest Breakthrough lechnologies Of die 21st Century That Are fust Now Being Made [\tblic Witness With Your Own Eyes!..
|| fan hum pun' must lu fin iliitiugli ■uyini-nin I ivi-
" See Jil fllgim- lli.il n |il ii .ur\ llii' .iwi'Minii- juim-r ni .1 tornado 111 supply
power ii our targe generator. . Wit will ili-tnimMr.iii' the wiiild's most efficient clentic . Wjsli clothes without using any Uuulry tleu-ignit nr
• Wt- n ill pmiv ili.it .1 iirmiwiit magnet [enntrarv lo popul.ir pliisus i,-.u fillip) i an and lines tin wink without any olher energy input.
• Amn'ImiM^nmACimitiirninsiviiliinri heing hooked up to any wires.
• Vw will mow you the (inly gas in ihc world that actually
rather ili.nl nf.Ufi-.
• We'll send Hie dsiciricity through the air without any win-*.
ill ii will astound imi
• 1 .ti nnrnii-M.in I*' modified |n nin mi .H^" w.ller .llHl 20% gas righi now. You fan sign up in modify vinii t.u!
" Crow a ir-udi-n with e.ilihagcs .is hig .is pumpkins & 50t> tomatoes on one plant with no need lor pesticides
• Sax die f«Tilsiiio Circuit liglrt burOsand|xixlu(ei.^Thriiy without wires or a es.-ner.iiot.
...Tbia is lust A Sample of the Itodinologr You Will Sec! Come lb Qur Tree lour Shiny and Sec Him You < ,111 Make Money Mi-lping IK In Saw llit- Iniirtinnicnl! People (Ineludinn, Skeptics ami Ilu- Scientific taiiiiniunilv) Arc Welcome or r.iH'our.vjttl In \llcntl and Hrini; Iheir Own Ieslins Instruments. Io Verify Our Claims!
(Smiim- ( inning In lest Will Seed I I I'Ii im- .ul.iin.- U.nt si, i lli.il Sli-attircs Poster factor).
5U lour Shows-One In Lwry Slate! Lncourd£e Your State I*olitidans & Scientists 'lb Be Responsible and Attend! For Show luxations and Additional National Tour
Advertisement for an apparatus that solves all problems at once with the 'new physics. ' This may be too much of a good
thing:
done research for NASA at the University of Huntsville, Ala- bama, has withdrawn from the physics faculty of the University of Huntsville in order to devote herself to applying the results of her research to practical purposes. Cook stated that Podklet- nov had received an offer from Toshiba to make his research results commercially useful.
Of course, there are many hangers-on involved here because this area of physics is new and little understood, it is difficult not just for the layman, but also for the technical specialist, to distinguish between serious research and charlatanry (see illus- tration). It should be kept in mind that specious promises of costless energy should not be lightly believed.
Reactions
During a telephone conversation, Nick Cook told me what the reactions to his latest book were, which has become a best-
Two BAe Military Aircraft Division's concepts for air vehicles employing anti-gravity1 Doesn't this look too familiar?
Boeing test stand for gravity test in Seattle1
Configuration of gravity modification experiment by Boeing1
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
233
seller in England. The book was favorably reviewed in the Eng- lish daily newspaper The Guardian, in the science magazine New Scientist, and in a number of smaller English daily news- papers. Cook's colleagues at Jane's Defence Weekly were thor- oughly approving of his work, and some of them congratulated him on its success. The reaction from the aeronautics and weapons industries was divided. While some rejected his main thesis of the emergence of a new physics, others thanked him for having opened their eyes. The 'scientific community' was also divided. Some of them dismissed Cook's work as non- sense, while others were grateful that he had popularized this interesting and controversial theme and had rescued it from oblivion. The most negative reaction came from a UFO re- searcher who called Cook a "neo-Nazi" because he said the his- torical origin of flying saucer technology was in the Third Reich. (UFO researchers want to believe in little green men.) This label is utter nonsense because Nick Cook's opinion of the Third Reich is, as has been stated, distinctly negative. Nick Cook stated:
"It would be a mistake to disregard the research in Ger- many in the 1930s and 1940s just because it was done in the Third Reich. This kind of suppression of facts would be unscientific and would be just as bad as the suppression of facts that happened during that era. "
So it may turn out that not only Otto, Diesel, Wankel, Jet and Rocket motors were invented in Germany, but also gravity motors — Nazis or no Nazis.
Notes
First published mVierteljahreshefte fur freie Geschichtsforschung, 5(4) (2001), pp. 459-463; translated by Michael Humphrey.
A comprehensive collection of primary and secondary sources on this topic can be downloaded from www.aeronautics.ru/archive/gravity/gravitsapa.pdf (41 MB!). The following internet sites are good places to locate further literature: www.inetarena.com/~noetic/pls/gravity.html; www.omicron-research.com/RecDocD/introD.htm.
1 www.aeronautics.ru/archive/gravity/gravitsapa.htm.
2 Cf. the article in Wired, 6(3) (March 1998); www.wired.com/wired/archive/6.03/antigravity.html.
3 Evgeny Podkletnov and R. Niemanen: "A Possibility of Gravitational Force Shielding by Bulk YBa2Cu307-x Superconductors", Physica C 203 (1992), pp. 441-444.
4 Cf. Ning Li and D.G. Torn "Effects of a Gravitomagnetic Field on Pure Su- perconductors", Physical Review D, (1991), pp. 457-459; Ning Li, D. No- ever et. al.: "Static Test for a Gravitational Force Coupled to Type II YBCO Super-conductors", Physica C, 281 (1997), pp. 260-267.
5 The information given at the website http://www.teslaelectric.com/ is so paltry and concentrates so much on advertising that it does not seem to be worthwhile.
6 Evgeny Podkletnov, Giovanni Modanese, "Impulse Gravity Generator Based Y Ba2Cu307-y Superconductor with Composite Crystal Structure", http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/physics/0108005.
Research News
The Sinking of the Battleship Bismarck
By Wolfgang Pfitzner
At its time, the German Battleship Bismarck was the finest, most feared warship the world had ever seen. It was a super weapon meant to help cut off the British supply lines in the At- lantic. Hence, when the Bismarck went on its first mission on May 19, 1941, the British launched the biggest hunt for a single ship the world has ever seen. Britain's finest ship, the Battle- ship HMS Hood, was the first to confront the Bismarck, but it went down after its ammunition chamber was hit by a Bismarck shell. Only 3 men of its 1,415 crewmembers survived. "Sink the Bismarck!" was then the British battle cry. Britain sent an entire fleet after the Bismarck. The British quickly managed to
I
encircle the Bismarck because its rudder had been damaged early on by a torpedo launched from a British aircraft. What followed was an uninterrupted shelling of the partly disabled Bismarck with cannon fire and torpedoes from many ships. Thus, it lasted only a few days before the Bismarck finally went down, 600 miles off the coast of France, on May 27, 1941. Only 115 of its 2,200 men survived, since the British aban- doned the area in fear of U-boat attacks.
This British victory was vastly exploited by the Anglo- Saxon propaganda machinery with books, movies, and televi- sion shows.
234
Battleship Bismarck
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
The only problem is that the story is probably untrue. Sur- vivors of the Bismarck have always maintained that they actu- ally scuttled the ship to prevent it from falling into enemy hands, which is a German naval tradition. Scuttling charges were said to have been placed to shatter water intakes and other weak areas near the ship's keel. According to those German survivors, these charges exploded about 30 minutes before the ship sank, thus being the real cause of the Bismarck's, demise.
The British Admiralty itself assumed in a report during the war that German explosives could have been one reason why the ship sank so quickly, but British zealots dismissed this idea.
Dr. Robert D. Ballard was the first one to discover the Bis- marck wreck in 1989, one mile off the point were it sank, be- cause it had slid down an under water mountain. (See his book The Discovery of the Bismarck," Warner Books, NY 1990) Since the ship was largely intact, he concluded that the scuttling must have been very effective. If scuttled incompletely, large air pockets remain within the ship, which are highly pressurized when the ship sinks and lead to the hull being crushed, as it happened with Titanic 's stern. But nothing of that sort can be seen at the Bismarck.
Of course, these claims have infuriated the British, who la- bel such research as "revisionist claptrap." They organized their own explorations in 2001 and claimed that there are major gushes in the hull, indeed, thus scuttling can only have expe-
*
HMS Hood
dited the Bismarck's fate.
In 2002, two more explorations were made, the first one in May and June of 2002 by a team of American and Canadian experts, using a Russian Mir submarine run by the P. P. Shir- shov Institute of Oceanology (Moscow). These subs can deploy remote controlled mini robots in order to explore locations where the big submarine cannot go, here in particular the inside of the ship. So far, this team has not made many public declara- tions about their findings, but what they said indicates that the Bismarck's hull has no large shell holes below the waterline that could have caused its demise, and not a single torpedo penetration.
The only damage to the hull that could have proven fatal is shown to have been the result of the ship's impact on the sea floor. Reacting like a balloon full of water, the impact of this water balloon wrapped in iron armor caused the sides of the ship to bulge out and break in places — especially at the bottom, as the ship slid down the mountain slope.
The mini robots could also verify that the Bismark's double- layered hull was never completely penetrated by torpedoes. The German engineers built the ship's hull with two armor belts and placed water and fuel tanks in between. Torpedoes which had penetrated the outer layer exploded in the water and fuel tanks, but did not penetrate the second armor belt, thus the ship's inte- rior spaces were kept dry.
In July and August 2002, a second exploration led by Dr. Alfred S. McLaren, a former instructor at the United States Na- val War College, went down to the Bismarck with the same technologies as the one described before, confirming the results of the earlier exploration. After thoroughly reviewing the mate- rial gathered during the last exploration, Dr. McLaren stated:
"We conclusively proved there was no way the British
sank that ship. It was scuttled. "
Source: William J. Broad, "Visiting Bismarck, Explorers Revise Its Story", The New York Times, Dec. 12, 2002,
www.nytimes.com/2002/12/03/science/03BISM.html?ex=1040197450&ei=l& en=8c3cc69139ca8dec
From the Records of the Frankfurt Auschwitz Trial, Part 2
By Germar Rudolf
Professional Denouncer — Witness — Criminal
As described in Part 1 of this series in the last issue, the in- vestigation of crimes allegedly committed at concentration camp Auschwitz was initiated by charges filed by criminal convict Adolf Rogner,1 whom Stuttgart public prosecutor We- ber described several times as a "contradictory and psycho- pathic professional criminal", (p. 106r, p. 85r).2
During their investigations against Wilhelm Boger, who Rogner had accused of torture and murder in Auschwitz as a member of the Gestapo, the public prosecutor's office at first had little information to rely on. Even the Central Council of Jews in Germany had no knowledge of Boger, but they offered to circulate a letter to the Jewish community if the prosecutor's
office would provide them with particulars (letter dated Aug. 25, 1958, p. 46). This letter was answered by public prosecutor Weber on Aug. 29, 1958, with details about the accusations against Boger and other SS men (p. 58). In letters to other pub- lic prosecutors and police offices, Weber had emphasized that all witnesses should be thoroughly examined before any names are made public (see pp. 73f, 78-83, 109, 117f). But with re- spect to the Central Council of Jews in Germany, he conven- iently ignored his warning — a violation of proper prosecutorial conduct, since possible witnesses should provide information on their own memory and not be influenced by detailed de- scriptions from third parties.
The subsequent appeal put out by the Central Council of
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
235
Jews in Germany with details about the alleged crimes Wilhelm Boger was accused of having committed is not in the records. However, it may be assumed that it contained the information provided by Weber — and therefore would have constituted an early suggestive influencing of possible future witnesses.
Another interesting aspect of the personality and biography of the initial accuser Rogner is his involvement in the famous- infamous show trials that the Americans held in Dachau in 1946.3 In a handwritten letter dated Match 30, 1958, to the pub- lic prosecution at the District Court Stuttgart, he mentioned these show trials (p. 53r):4
"During the 3 years of my working for various military courts and for the CIC as an identifier and informer etc., I made discoveries that struck me, for example: Camp 29 — Dachau, the so-called 'professional witnesses' who lived year-round in the camp, received housing, first-rate Ameri- can rations, cigarettes and 20 Reichsmark from the Ameri- cans and 10 from then-president Auerbach the '[illegible] Munich '; they were mainly Slavic Jews (Poles, Czechs, Hungarians, Yugoslavs, etc.); they committed perjuries again and again, were all full of hate and bent on revenge (besides, they were also work-shy). [?Every] day they com- mitted perjury and signed affidavits full of lies, made false identifications, etc. "
Rogner himself was interrogated intensively on Aug. 20, 1958. Among other things, he stated (p. 48r):
"On June 20, 1945, I was taken by the Americans in Laufen and put into Automatic Arrest because I had worked as a Kapo [supervising inmate] in various concentration camps. "
From uncounted witness statements of various camps it can be seen that the Kapos — prisoners with leadership functions — were guilty of committing many crimes against their fellow prisoners. This was especially true of those Kapos who were professional criminals.5 Rogner was one of these Kapos. Per- haps he thought he faced the choice of either ending up as a de- fendant at the Dachau show trial or of serving the Americans in some way. In any case, he was subsequently released from Automatic Arrest and then worked for the CIC (Counter Intelli- gence Corps of the US Army) as "identifier and informer" dur- ing the Dachau and later during the Nuremberg trials. He also admitted that he performed this work for pay (expenses, hous- ing, rations) until 1948 (p. 48r). What Rogner criticized others for in his handwritten letter, that is, denouncing others for money and food, that was actually what he himself had done for three whole years. Rogner was therefore not only a profes- sional criminal, but also one of those professional denouncers and professional witnesses who helped the Americans at the Dachau lynch trials. During his interrogation, he confirmed that the material he used in 1958 to bring about the Auschwitz trial mostly derived from those show trials (p. 49):
"During this time [his work for the CIC], / collected re- cords and documents on the former concentration camps for purposes of my respective evaluation work. " However, he later corrected this (p. 49):
"I want to say that in the documents I have written down and commented only my very own observations and have not written down anything that I have not seen myself. "
It is not clear from what time frame Rogner' s "original ob- servations" come, whether 1940-1945 or from 1946-1948. In any case, it is almost impossible that during his imprisonment in Auschwitz he was in a position to collect records on SS person- nel on duty amounting to over 100 pounds (his own words, p. 55r). One must conclude therefore that he collected his material in Dachau, Nuremberg, and thereafter. In one case, he mentioned that he possessed the "Allied War Crimes lists" and the "Polish original charge records from Auschwitz I and II" (p. 55rf).
Both during his interrogation and in his written declarations, Rogner provided long lists of alleged wrongdoers as well as former concentration camp comrades and possible witnesses on Auschwitz, with many personal details (pp. 49r-50r, 55-56r, 87- 101). In his handwritten letters, most of the alleged SS crimi- nals were "mass-murderers of the worst sort". These stereotypi- cal denunciations suggest that his information came from a stereotypical source, such as the Dachau show trials.
In his summary of the interrogation of Rogner, investigating police detective Brunk wrote (p. 51b):
"The accuser Adolf Rogner has a record here. Up to 1935, he had been sentenced fourteen times altogether for theft, fraud, falsification of records with fraud [...] with a total sentence time of 5 years in prison. Also he was sent to a concentration camp as a preventive measure, where he soon advanced to Kapo. "
Brunk was also skeptical with respect to Rogner' s assurance that all his statements were based on first-hand experience (p. 51b):
"It must be assumed that he acquired extensive knowl- edge from the trials, which he sometimes participated in as a witness. It must also be assumed that the material that he is putting to use against the persons he has named has come from that source. "
That Rogner had other — at times perhaps more important — motives for his actions than his political opinions is shown by his words in a handwritten letter to the public prosecution at District Court Stuttgart dated Aug. 31, 1958. In it, he tied the delivery of his documents to the prosecutor to a condition, namely, his transfer from the prison at Bruchsal to a prison in Stuttgart (p. 67r):
"It is now up to you, chief prosecutor of Stuttgart, I must either now be given humane accommodations, not these 'dirty, stinking transport cells which are teeming with ver- min '! I must be present at the analysis and evaluation of the lists, because there are thousands of names, and so on. I can not do that here in Bruchsal, because here I have the greatest trouble with the warden [...]" The rest of his letter showed clearly that Rogner was ready to do anything that would get him out of Bruchsal: serving as a witness in a trial in Munich for several days, evaluating docu- ments in Stuttgart for several weeks, and so on.
Communist Propaganda
Rogner stated repeatedly that he wished to emigrate to east- ern, Soviet occupied communist Europe as soon as he was re- leased from imprisonment (p. 25):
"I am 100% east-oriented and will go to Cracow right
after my release, which will be my permanent residence. "
236
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
For exactly this reason, public prosecutor Weber felt com- pelled to temporarily confiscate the records that Rogner had ac- cumulated in his cell, since Rogner might not be willing to sur- render them out of fear of losing them (pp. 67r., 106r):
"I remark that the confiscation should be done because there is danger in hesitation, in that the accuser Rogner, a contradictory and psychopathic professional criminal, has threatened to send his documents to the eastern zone [com- munist East Germany]. "
In a letter to the prosecution at District Court Stuttgart dated Aug. 30, 1958, the Comite International d'Auschwitz, directed chiefly by former political concentration camp prisoners — that is, Communists — enclosed a brochure that had been "sent by the international resistance organization in the concentration camp Auschwitz to Cracow" on Sept. 16, 1944 (p. 59).
It is well known that many communists and socialists were held prisoner in concentration camps during the National So- cialist era. It must be considered a certainty that these persons set up their own Organizations within the camps and worked together with underground groups outside the camps. One such communist prisoner involved in these activities was Bruno Baum. After the war he freely admitted his propaganda activity in books and journal articles in the communist Ger- man Democratic Republic.6 In addition to Baum, other com- munist camp partisans were Hermann Langbein, later presi- dent of the Auschwitz Committee, and such well known au- thors, 'Holocaust survivors,' and professional witnesses as Ota Kraus, Erich Schon-Kulka,7 Rudolf Vrba and Rudolf Wetzler,8 Fillip Mtiller,9 Stanislaw Jankoswki,10 Ella Lingens- Reiner,11 and Kazimierz Smolen, the director of the Ausch- witz Museum for many years.12 Bruno Baum wrote:
"The whole propaganda which started about Auschwitz abroad was initiated by us with the help of our Polish com- rades. "B
"It is no exaggeration when I say that the majority of all Auschwitz propaganda, which was spread at that time all over the world, was written by ourselves in the camp. "'"
"We carried out this propaganda in [for] the world pub- lic until our very last day of presence in Auschwitz. "l5 With this background, and in view of the massive propa- ganda campaign against Germany begun by the Soviets in Au- gust 1944 when the Lublin-Majdanek camp was occupied, it must be asked what value a brochure could have, which was produced by the above-named propagandists on the concentra- tion camp Auschwitz in September 1944? The translation of this Polish publication included in the trial records is crawling with descriptions of supposed barbarities. Two examples will show blatantly how much they are worth (p. 69):
"In his personal behavior, he [camp commandant Ru- dolf H6B] got carried away by sexual excesses with women in the bunker, whereby several became pregnant, which in- mate physicians were forced to interrupt [sic]. " (emphasis in original)
H6B has been accused of many immoralities, but this is not mentioned anywhere in the literature. But it gets worse (p. 65): "In interrogations, Unterscharfiihrer Quackernack Wal- ter [...] — used torture by crucifixion, stabbing the testicles with steel needles and burning tampons in the vagina. "
To my knowledge, these kinds of perversities can not be found anywhere else in the literature and have never been men- tioned by any witness. In view of such flaming nonsense, it should not be surprising that public prosecutor Dr. Bech, con- cerning some Czechian printed matter sent by Langbein to the prosecutor's office of Stuttgart, thought that these "publications from the Soviet" may be a "danger to national security" (p. 71). But the reader appreciative of Dr. Bech's conceptual ability would be disappointed, since right afterward, concerning this publication written in a language he did not understand, he asked,
"if it was only a description of Nazi crimes or if the pub- lication also contained propaganda. " Why or? From 1933 onward both have gone hand-in-hand! Dr. Bech thereupon made it quite clear that he was not con- cerned to suppress propaganda which might be a threat to na- tional security:
"If this mailing is regarded as one of the usual mass mailings, an investigation should formally be started against Hermann Langbein and subsequently quashed on a technicality. "
This is the German censor going by the book! How pleasant it would be if German public prosecutors would respond to Re- visionist mass mailings with just a formal investigation and then quash it on a technicality!
Interest from Higher Quarters
At the very beginning of the investigation in Stuttgart, the public prosecution in Stuttgart was aware that the case had at- tracted attention from the highest quarters. For example, in an addendum of Aug. 30, 1958, to the statement filed with the public prosecution at District Court Stuttgart on Sept. 29, 1958, Hermann Langbein mentioned (p. 62):
"Due to a letter dated Aug. 7, 1958, from the Minister of
Justice of Baden-Wiirttemberg, I amplify this statement
[...]."
Public prosecutor Weber was evidently not pleased with Mr. Langbein, because in a note in the records dated Sept. 1 1, 1959, he wrote (p. 76):
"Langbein makes an unsubstantiated complaint about the
methods used in the investigation, which I specifically deny.
Apparently he has also made complaints to the Ministry. "
This means that Weber was worried about Langbein' s com- plaint to the Ministry of Justice. Two days later Weber wrote (p. 102r):
"Because it concerns an important investigation case, in which the Ministry of Justice is very interested, [...]." The Ministry of Justice of Baden-Wiirttemberg was then in the hands of the conservative CDU (Christian Democratic Un- ion) government. It may therefore be assumed that their interest in this investigation case was due not to sympathy for Lang- bein's communist front organization, but rather came from higher quarters located elsewhere.
The Second Witness Statement
Several of the witnesses named by Rogner could not re- member anything of what he claimed about the supposed bar- barities of Wilhelm Boger (pp. 1 10, 1 16, 1 19). But on Sept. 24,
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
237
1958, Paul Leo Scheidel gave the investigators what they were looking for. During his interrogation, Scheidel reported that it had been his task during executions at the "black wall" in the main camp at Auschwitz to see to it that his fellow prisoners stayed in rooms whose windows did not permit a view of the events in the court with the said "black wall," so that there would be no witnesses to the executions. However, he himself had gotten to a window from which he could observe the exe- cutions allegedly carried out by Wilhelm Boger (p. 1 1 If). How he could have kept his fellow prisoners from looking on with him remains a mystery. However, there is another fact, which proves that Scheidel was not telling the truth: There is no doubt that there many executions in Auschwitz, and they were either by shooting or by hanging. The SS regularly sent dispatches of same to Berlin which were intercepted by the British.16 Ausch- witz served as an execution site also for death sentences for criminals who were not camp inmates. It is false to think the camp headquarters could have done anything to keep execu- tions in the camp a secret. Moreover, these death sentences were decided by the legal standards of the Third Reich and served as deterrence for other potential miscreants. Had it been desired to carry out the sentences in secrecy, the executions would have taken place in some remote forest, as done by the Soviets at Katyn, and not in the middle of a camp. Scheidel's report that it was his duty to keep his fellow prisoners from be- ing witnesses to the proceedings is therefore false.
Shortly thereafter, Scheidel reports about the later famous, but never clearly described "Boger swing," with which Wilhelm Boger supposedly tortured numerous prisoners (p. 112):
"After a long time Boger [...] had me tied up and hung on the Boger swing (it looks like a gymnastic horizontal bar), which everybody in the camp knew and feared. Boger invented this swing himself; that 's why it is called the Boger swing. Both hands were tied together tightly and pulled over my knees. The crossbar of the so-called swing ran through between my lower arms and knee-joints (knee-hollows). " The torture supposedly consisted in Boger abusing with a stick the naked behind of the prisoner thus strung up head downward. It has been shown that one can actually tie someone up to a horizontal bar that way, so that he can not free himself. However, it requires a securely anchored crossbar as well as the cooperation of the prisoner. That is, one can only tie someone up to a horizontal bar if he hangs on the bars with his knee- hollows, pulls his body up, and grabs his knees from beneath the bars — certainly an athletic feat — at which time he could be bound. Scheidel's report that he was first tied up and then hung on the bar could not work. It also would not be reasonable for the Gestapo to have installed an anchored horizontal bar — the beating of a prisoner bent upon a horizontal bar would have re- quired a firmly secured horizontal bar as well as stay cables which gymnastic bars also have. And in any case, one could have beaten up a prisoner with a stick without such a compli- cated construction, so why bother? As will be seen in a later in- stallment of this analysis, Scheidels description of the so-called "Boger swing" is not quite accurate, which is an indication that his account is from hearsay rather than from his own recollec- tion.
Later Scheidel added the following touch (p. 1 13):
"I had to sit with my tailbone on the edge of a chair, so that one half of the butt was on the chair and the other hung down. I had to stretch both arms and legs in the air and keep my balance by using all my strength. I felt hellish pain in my tailbone. I begged Boger to let me stand up. " This is yet another scene where the evil Gestapo man tor- tures the prisoner by virtue of acrobatic acts. Scheidel had an active imagination, but to believe that a Gestapo man bent on torture would have depended on the athletic cooperation of his victim is comic.
Scheidel got typhus in 1943 and was, like all other Ausch- witz prisoners unfit to work — not gassed or "selected" by Boger for execution, as Scheidel and others of his frame of mind never fail to claim — but placed in the sick camp at Birke- nau and cared for until he got well (his statement, p. 113). Such are Scheidel's fairy tales on the torture and annihilation camp Auschwitz.
In other words, Paul Leo Scheidel, after Adolf Rogner the second former Auschwitz inmate ready to testify, is a liar.
Notes
First published in German in Vierteljahreshefte fur freie Geschichtsforschung 6(4) (2000), pp. 473-47; translated by Michael Humphrey. A few pages of the documents mentioned were reproduced in the German version of this article.
1 Rogner had been encouraged to do this by the Comite International d'Auschwitz (Langbein) and had been supported by the Central Council of Jews in Germany and the State Museum of Auschwitz, see op. cit. (note 2), p. 49,53r,57.
2 All page numbers in the text refer to: Staatsanwaltschaft beim LG Frankfurt (Main), Strafsache beim Schwurgericht Frankfurt (Main) gegen Baer und An- dere wegen Mordes, ref. 4 Js 444/59, vol. I.
3 Cf. the summary by Manfred Kohler, "The Value of Testimony and Confes- sions Concerning the Holocaust", in E. Gauss (ed.), Dissecting the Holocaust, Theses and Dissertations Press, Capshaw, AL, pp. 85-132.
4 Rogner mentions also that witnesses testifying at allied trials were prohibited to say anything exonerating about the defendants until Feb. 7, 1947, p. 54.
5 The most reliable source for this is probably Paul Rassiniers, Die Luge des Odysseus sein, K.-H. Priester, Wiesbaden 1959.
6 E.g. : Bruno Baum, Widerstand in Auschwitz, Kongress-Verlag, Berlin 1957; unpublished works of Langbeins in the Documentation Center of the Austrian Resistance (Dokumentationsarchiv des Osterreichischen Widerstandes, DOW), Vienna: unpublished manuscript of B. Baum, "Bericht iiber die Ta- tigkeit der KP im Konzentrationslager Auschwitz" from June 1945; B. Baum "Wir funken aus der Holle" in Deutsche Volkszeitung - Zentralorgan der KPD, Berlin 31.7.1945.
7 Ota Kraus, Erich Schon-Kulka, Tovdrna na Smrt, Cin, Prague 1946, pp. 121f.
8 Authors of the famous War Refugee Board Report, see "German Extermina- tion Camps - Auschwitz and Birkenau" in David P. Wyman (ed.), America and the Holocaust, Vol. 12, Garland, New York/London 1990. Cf. also R. Vrba, / Cannot Forgive, Bantam Books, Toronto 1964.
9 Filip Miiller, Sonderbehandlung, Steinhausen, 1979.
10 Hefte von Auschwitz, special issue 1, "Handschriften von Mitgliedern des Sonderkommandos", State Museum Auschwitz, 1972, pp. 42ff.
1 1 Ella Lingens, Eine Fran im Konzentrationslager, Europa Verl., Wien- Frankfurt-Zurich 1966; H. G. Adler, H. Langbein, E. Lingens-Reiner(ed.), Au- schwitz, 3rd ed., Europaische Verlagsanstalt, Koln, 1984.
12 He was director of the Auschwitz Museum until the collapse of the Soviet Union; see Bruno Baum, Widerstand in Auschwitz, Kongress-Verlag, East Berlin 1957, chapter "Erfolg der Propaganda", p. 97; cf. Kazimierz Smolen, Auschwitz 1940 - 1945, State Museum, Auschwitz 1961.
13 "Wir funken aus der Holle", Deutsche Volkszeitung July 31, 1945.
14 Bruno Baum, Widerstand in Auschwitz, op. cit. (note 12), 1949, p. 34.
15 /Wrf.,p.35.
16 F.H. Hinsley, British Intelligence in the Second World War, Her Majesty's Stationary Office, 2nd ed., London 1990, Vol. 2, p. 673.
238
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
Letters to the Editor
About R. Countess, "Why the USA Wages War in the Gulf Region," TR 1(1) (2003), pp. 109-111.
To the Editor:
Dr. Countess is to be congratulated for writing a fine review of this book, and for bringing to your readership's attention the role played by 'Oil Concerns' in bringing the US into the Gulf War of 1991. And of course, The Revisionist is to be com- mended for their willingness to explore all sides of this issue.
However, we must always remain aware of the demonstra- ble role that Jewish-Zionist interests played in driving America into this war. It is common knowledge that the ardently pro- Israeli, Jewish Congressman Stephen Solarz helped form a pro- war pressure group, the Committee for Peace and Security in the Gulf. That Jewish-Zionist interests — and not 'Oil inter- ests'— were the driving force behind his pro-war behavior, was revealed by a comment that he made on January 17, 1991, at Georgetown University, one day after US air strikes against Iraqi targets began:
"Enough Jews have been gassed in our century. For that reason alone our [military] strike last night was justi- fied. "
At the 85th Annual Dinner of the American Jewish Com- mittee, he again admitted that the "overwhelming thought of the six million Jews killed in the Holocaust" was the ideologi- cal driving force behind his pro-war activism. Clearly, he cared little for 'Oil interests.'
The American-Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) — an organization whose primary purpose is to work for Zionist and Israeli interests — is one of the most powerful of all political lobbying organizations in the United States. In a rare but quite candid Wall Street Journal article (p. A-12, 1/28/91), it was pointed out that AIPAC 's efforts were crucial in gaining Con- gressional approval for President George H. W. Bush's war plans. But even more importantly, the article revealed this im- mensely powerful Zionist organization worked 'behind-the- scenes' and consciously disguised its efforts to garner Congres- sional approval for the war. Once again, one cannot say that 'Oil interests' were their main concern.
Sometime after the end of the Persian Gulf war of 1991, the former Prime Minister of Canada, Brian Mulroney, admitted his country's reason for joining the war effort was to protect the state of Israel:
"The ultimate ambition of Saddam Hussein was to launch an attack on Israel, which is why Canada took a stand to avoid this eventuality. "
See The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, June 1993, p. 57. Here, this official was admitting that Israeli-Zionist interests were of paramount importance.
For the interested reader, I refer them to my article (with appropriate documentation) "The Zionist Campaign for War with Iraq in Revisionist Perspective," online available at http://vho.Org/GB/c/PG/230103.html. In a future issue of The Revisionist, I will provide enough evidence that will show be- yond a shadow of a doubt that Jewish-Zionist interests were
one of the main driving forces behind the US entry into both wars with Iraq.
The Revisionist is an outstanding publication!
Paul Grubach, USA
About R. Faurisson, G. Rudolf, C. Mattogno, "Auschwitz: The Dwindling Death Toll," TR 1(1) (2003), p. 18-37.
False Mistake
On page 634 of his article (Osteuropa, 5/2002) Meyer has given 1942 as the year of his "key document," the Priifer letter of September 8 (and so does van Pelt, The Case, p. 350), but at the same time Meyer says that this letter was written "nine weeks before Bischoff s letter" (the one about the 4,756 corpses), but Bischoff s letter is dated June 28, 1943 (van Pelt, op. cit., p. 343, illustration).
On the other hand, I copied Meyer's article from the inter- net from Irving's website, and there Meyer's article reads "8. September 1943."
What is the correct year? Apparently nobody has seen this letter of the Topf company, Meyer quoted van Pelt, but why did Irving change it to 1943? Was it an error during the OCR process?
Sincerely
T.D., France
Editor's Remark:
Both Meyer and Irving are wrong: Meyer quoted the correct date, but his calculations and interpretations are wrong, and Ir- ving edited an error into the text so that Meyer's statements make sense. In his contribution, C. Mattogno has emphasized Meyer's mistake, which results in the collapse of Meyer's way of arguing.
Send the Holocaust into the Desert
Dear Germar!
Summarized, this is the astonishing thesis of Fritjof Meyer: The holy of holies has now moved from Leichenkeller I to the Bauernhauser just outside Birkenau. This is great news! If only someone would write a well-documented article (or still better, a book) that the gas chambers were actually situated in a suburb of Berlin or Switzerland, or maybe on the Channel Islands. If that is too much to ask, at least Meyer's is a move in the right direction, for obvious reasons. Gloom and doom go away!
In the future I suspect that the focus of 'exterminationism' will move to territories of the former USSR, concentrating al- most exclusively on the shootings there. Questions related to numbers, security motives and participation by local militia will become core revisionist issues.
As the 'Holocaust' moves eastward, from its vivid begin- nings in Dachau and Belsen to Buchenwald, to Auschwitz, to Treblinka, to Russia, one thing is certain: When it reaches Outer-Mongolia we can rest.
Dr. Costas Zaverdinos, South Africa
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
239
About H. Pedersen, "The Hole in the Door", TR 1(1) (2003) pp. 52-56.
Dear Mr. Rudolf!
Attached please find the pages 352f. of the book Erinnerun- gen, Gedanken und Meinungen (memories, thoughts, and opin- ions) by Dr. Bernard Naunyn, which appeared in 1925 in Mu- nich. The memories of Dr. Naunyns, a physician, are very in- teresting, but in this context not so much from a medical per- spective, but because it gives a good insight into the situation during the second half of the 19th century in Eastern Europe. To the "hysterical sufferings" mentioned in this excerpt fits a story told by Tjudar Rudolph, who grew up in Lodz, Poland. At one point, he said, some Polish boys had put several black pigeons into a synagogue. As a result of this, the local Jews went nuts, believing that these black pigeons were evil ghosts. They car- ried all the equipment out of the synagogue in order to thor- oughly clean it. It seems to be the oriental mentality which tends to exaggerate. This may be the background of those con- centration camp stories which are even believed by those who tell them. And this is also a way to explain the Jewish nonsense
argument going like this: "It was impossible, because it hap- pened."
Let me now quote the interesting passage from said book:
"A type of disease which triggered my curiosity were severe hysterical sufferings and the conditions bordering at hysteria found with children, which I called childish imagi- nation neurosis. I reported about one such case earlier. The Jewish population in Russia offered an incredibly rich ma- terial for both symptoms. I did not get myself as deeply in- volved as a thorough clinical study would have required, [...] but the confrontation with these sick individuals gave me ample opportunity to treat these people with great suc- cess with the help of a psycho-therapy of my understanding, that is, the treatment of the affected person by turning off the sickening imaginations. [...] Generally, the most impor- tant thing [during the treatment] is to keep detrimental in- fluences away from the patient, so that he can come to rest, to rest from their alleged sickness, to rest in their 'hunt for health '! "
With best regards
F.B., Germany
In Brief
Israel Threatens Human Rights Activists
With up to ten year imprisonment can be punished in Israel in the future who reports violations of human rights by Israeli authorities to the International Criminal Court (ICC) in Den Haag. Following the example of the USA, Israel does not rec- ognize the ICC. (Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Oct. 31, 2002).
Israel Sends out Killers
Israeli death squads have been authorized to enter "friendly" countries and assassinate opponents in a move that raises the prospect of political killings in Western countries. Agents of the Israeli secret service Mossad have been given free rein to kill those deemed to be a threat to the Jewish state wherever they are hiding. (Sunday Times, 1/19/03)
Skull an Outlawed Sign in Germany
Displaying a skull in Germany has been declared illegal by the German legal system, if done by individuals with right- wing views. A German who had used a skull in an advertise- ment published in the newspaper Liibscher Aufklarer was sen- tenced to a fine of 2,500 € ($2,750) for displaying symbols "hostile to the constitution" (District Court Lilbeck; ref. 2 Ns Kl. 13/01).
Filing a Criminal Complaint can be a Crime
Because he filed a criminal complaint for libel against the president of the Jewish community of Nuremberg, the German
right-wing activist Giinter Deckert was sentenced to pay a fine of 3,750 € ($4,000) by the County Court Weinheim. According to the court's view, the following words in Deckert's criminal complaint are illegal:
"I do not even allow Jews to call me a criminal. What his racial and religious comrades commit against the Arabs in Palestine for many years now is a crime. " In recent years, Deckert had been sentenced several times to a total of more than five years imprisonment for his revisionist views and comments about Jews similar to the one quoted here.
Taxi Driver Sentenced for Distributing Brochures
For distributing the revisionist brochures Holocaust and Re- visionism and 66 Questions and Answers, Denise Patricia Doyle was sentenced to a fine of 900€ ($ 1 ,000) by the County Court Stuttgart.
Disciplinary Investigation Against Expert Witness
Since 2000, many German right-wing individuals and or- ganizations faced a wave of cancellations of their bank ac- counts, initiated by lobby groups trying to destroy the liveli- hood of everything deemed politically on the right. In the wake of these cancellations, the German Governmental Director J. S. wrote an expert report about the illegality of canceling bank ac- count contracts for political reasons. As a consequence, his em- ployer, the German authorities, have now initiated a discipli- nary investigation against him with the goal to dismiss him, which indicates that even the German authorities support the
240
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
destruction of the livelihood of everybody and everything not being leftist. (Das Freie Forum, July-Sept. 2002)
House Search at Radio Islam
The apartment of the worldwide largest Islamic-revisionist website www.radioislam.org, located in Stockholm, Sweden, was raided by eight police officers at 4:30 pm on Sept. 7, 2002. All computer equipment and documents were confiscated. Sweden's Minister of Justice Thomas Bodstrom declared that this was done in order to end Rami's anti- Jewish and revisionist Internet activities and to throw him in jail for four years.
Arab Revisionist Arrested
Ibrahim Alloush, Revisionist, Palestinian freedom fighter, and president of the FreeArabVoice.org, was arrested on March 24, 2003, in his home in Amman. This arrest was part of a mas- sive clamp-down of the Jordanian authorities on the opposition movement against the US war on Iraq. Alloush was arrested because he revealed the fact that the US operates military bases in Jordan.
Another French Encyclopedia Scandal
Because the popular French encyclopedia Quid, 2002 edi- tion, also quoted an estimate by French revisionist Dr. Robert Faurisson about the number of victims of the Auschwitz camp in its list of 20 estimates (p. 594: "150,000, of which 100,000 Jews, most victims of typhus"), a storm of protest rose last year, demanding that the editor of this encyclopedia agree ro delete this entry in the 2003 edition. However, while editing this edition, it was "accidentally" forgotten to remove this en- try, causing another storm of protest. The entry has been de- leted on the internet edition, but it was too late for a correction of the printed version (www.quid.fr).
German Historian: Some Hitler comparisons okay
Some comparisons of today's politicians to Hitler are ko- sher, according to the famous German historian Prof. Dr. Ernst Nolte. Picking up on a fracas this fall when a German politician drew comparisons between President Bush and Hitler, Nolte told the German Press Agency dpa that it is acceptable to make such comparisons when talking about the pre-war Hitler. Nolte: "If one says, 'I want to compare the Hitler of 1938 with a current politician, ' that is something else, because at that point Hitler was considered a 'national lib- erator' in many parts of the world." (JTA, 1/20/03)
New Study on Unreliability of Human Memory
Elisabeth Loftus, highly renowned Expert for false mem- ory syndrome, has presented her most recent research results. After a suggestive interrogation about the sensorial experience of a confrontation with Bugs Bunny in Disneyland, 36% of all interviewed individuals claimed to remember this event. How- ever, Bugs Bunny is not a Disney-character and can therefore not by found in Disneyland.
Loftus as well as Psychologist Richard McNally of Harvard University found out that the human memory can be manipu- lated more easily the more emotional the circumstances or the
interrogation or the actual or alleged events giving rise to memories are (sexual abuse, alien abduction, etc.). Emotional media reports can lead to deformed memories as well. (AP, 2/16/03).
Reporters Without Borders support Revisionism
Robert Menard, founder and responsible person of "Report- ers sans frontieres" (Reporters Without Borders) as well as his wife Emmanuelle Duverger, responsible person of "Federation internationale des ligues des droits de l'homme" (International Federation of human rights leagues), have just published a book entitled La Censure des bien-pensants (Censorship by the Well- Thinkers). Chapter 4 (p. 69-83) carries the title: "Faurisson doit pouvoir s 'exprimer" (Faurisson must be allowed to express himself). Among others, the following statements can be found in it: "The revisionist are right. They are the object of a real witch hunt, victim of what really ought to be called a thought police, a suppression of the law." The authors refer to a "man hunt." They consider France's anti-revisionist law to be a "stu- pidity" (p. 154) and to be a "unique text unworthy of a democ- racy" (p. 163). They regret not to have "helped the revisionists already earlier, when they were punished under this law" (p. 82). However, both authors declare also that they consider the claims made by the revisionists "contradicts everything which is known today about the final solution" (p. 69).
On Jan. 16, 2003, during a TV discussion with M. Menard, Arno Klarsfeld, son of the "Nazi hunter" couple Serge and Beate Klarsfeld, lost his composure and tossed the content of a glass of water into Menard's face. At the end of this discussion, A. Klarsfeld was asked what he thought about an opinion that the State of Israel could disappear and would therefore consti- tute finally only a parenthesis in the history of the Jewish peo- ple. The water-throwing-man answered that, in this case, "the Jews would undoubtedly get themselves organized so as to eliminate the Holocaust deniers." ("Tout le monde en parle", France 2, broadcasted on Jan. 18, 2003)
Jewfish Creek to be Renamed
Florida's largest grouper species was once called "Jewfish." On request of a scientist residing in Georgia, the name was changed to Goliath grouper. Now even a small canal flowing through Key Largo carrying the name "Jewfish Creek" ^ is bound to be renamed. Arnold G. Konheim from Wa- shington, DC, has filed an application in this regard with the US office for geographical names. (AP, f'OUAlfl (JWF™ 11/25/02; goliath ^ grouper.net)
Polish Cardinal blames Jews for Communism
In September 1939, the small Polish town Jedwabne was occupied by the Red Army. As a result, parts of the Polish population, mainly members of the upper society, were de- ported to Siberia and vanished from the face of the earth.
On July 10, 1941, the German Army liberated this town from the Soviet yoke and put its own yoke on it. Shortly after
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2
241
JTHWEST REGION
the Germans moved in, some 400 Jewish inhabitants of Jed- wabne were rounded up, locked up in a barn and burned alive, an event which was brought back into public memory by the 1999 book Neighbors by Jan Gross. As a result, an investiga- tion was started, and ever since the blame game is going on. Jewish groups claim that the Christian Poles were the perpetra- tors without any German contribution. Of course, nationalistic Poles do not like that, and so for instance, catholic priest Ed- ward Orlowski claims:
"It 's the Germans who put the Jews to death. " He also claimed to have proof the real killers were a German unit commanded by a Jewish General in German uniform. While attending a Mass to honor the Jed- wabne Jews, Poland's Catholic Church leader Cardinal Josef Glemp asked Po- land's surviving Jews to apologize for having brought Communism to Poland. (The New York Times, 2/8/03)
Swiss Police Attack Anti-War Protesting Children
On March 20, 2003, hundreds of Swiss school children demonstrating peacefully against the US war against Iraq have been fired upon by riot police outside the US Mission in Geneva. The attack, witnessed by workers from the nearby World Health Organization, was unprovoked. The police were tear gassing innocent children. There were no adults among them. (www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0303 /S00 174.htm)
US Journalist Sacked for Unwillingness to be a Parrot
NBC fired veteran reporter Peter Ar- nett on March 31, 2003, because he had given the Iraqi TV an interview in which he stated that the American-led coalition's initial plan for the war had failed because of Iraq's resistance. He also explained that his reporting about civil casualties and the general destruction supports the rising re- sistance of the US population against this war. Arnett's statements were considered detrimental to the coalition's war efforts. In the meantime, Arnett was hired by the British tabloid Daily Mirror to report about the war.
(www.townhall.com/columnists/monacharen/ mc20030401.shtml;
www.ftd.de/tm/me/104893 153 1355.html?nv=c pm)
EU Officials Bugged— by US?
Telephone lines in the Justus Lipsius building in Brussels, a regular meeting
place for EU ministers, have been bugged, which caused an outrage in the EU member nations. This building houses the se- cretariat of the EU Council of Ministers, and it was also the place were the EU's foreign ministers met during the week just prior to the war. This bugging operation was first reported by France's newspaper Le Figaro, blaming the US for this, be- cause the US administration distrusts many EU nations due to their attitude against the war on Iraq.
(http://news.bbc.co.Uk/2/hi/europe/2864063.stm)
Updated: April 3, 2002
Cremated Doughboys
Rotten.com: Because the picture to the left reminds certain Jews of the Holocaust, they demanded that the website rotten.com remove it. Suddenly anything that reminds Jews of the Holocaust, even things that have nothing to do with it, verboten?
WrMwiticnlii^je*
April 4. 2W>
Rati en.com
P.O. Uux 4436
Mountain View, CA QiQM
Dear Sirtir Madam:
I iim urilin^ lo jiiu on. bdulJ" y>{ Lht Anli-rX'famution League (AI)I.J regarding VOLIf wehsilc, "Ruticn tjem " Wir havi: rtttnlly nvti veJ wjnplninLK r'mm visilors lo Iho iit£ who fell thai die (kpicLLLHi!) of [he "DuugtllMv MajimFc" iiivukixl upscuinjg aiCm^ici sif ihc Holocaust. The pitlurc of ihc Jilitli-Lal ,,LDLVU£hboy" figures reminded pftiple ls|' (host who (ii«l in cnncentrulion rumps.
As you nsuj know, ihc Anti'Dcfttmalion League is Ihc worlds IcjiJinj; ur^aitizalian combating prejudice, bifoliy und siisti-Scmslism through it* programs iuiJ services thai prmnott tolerance mid diversity.
Wfiite we resjpeet yiHii rij-h.1 lo wehuasl [In: mjtcriul lhal yon chixise, we hope thai you can alsti bv wars of your diverse audience, especially in this sensitive situation.
We understand thai this may lute been unintentional and f ihank yog for your Consideration. I would he inleietfed in di*cu«.sinu, Lhe maLter uhh >oo further. You Cart reach me :it ^^^^^^H H
Sincerely,
Amy Lev} Q Assutiate Director
242
The Revisionist ■ 2003 ■ Volume 1 ■ No. 2