Zundel Videos

Ingrid's Veterans Today Articles


File Index

Copyright (c) 1998 - Ingrid A. Rimland

May 4, 1998

Good Morning from the Zundelsite:

To catch up with the past two weeks' worth of news in my email file, I might as well start with the progression and outcome of magazine editor, Nick Griffin's, trial in the United Kingdom - dubbed the "Carlisle Two Trial".

It began on April 27 1998 at Harrow Crown Court, London, England and was loudly advertised as the "European Zundel-style Great Holocaust Trial."

I personally am vague on the details of this story except to say that the grape vine told me that Nick Griffin was just the kind of fellow to make a lot of noice about a "European Zundel Trial" - a slant the opposition fears the way the devil fears the holy water - and that he did that, in part, to keep the prosecution within bounds.

It seems to have worked, for the entire trial lasted only a few days - AFTERit was trumpeted in Europe from the rooftops that the Carlisle Two trial would finish off Revisionism in England once and for all.


Ernst's take on the Nick Griffin trial is that

". . . this trial is basically Tony Blair's nod to the Holocaust Lobby in Britain, because he knows that even prominent Jewish individuals, including former government ministers like Leon Brittan and even some rabbis were vehemently against anti-Revisionist legislation.

"He thus chose to make a high profile gesture to show that the legislation that was used against the over 80-year-old Lady Birdwood could also be against Revisionists!

"Griffin's sentence is very mild compared to the huge fines and jail terms levied on the continent, as has happened to Deckert, Walendy, Kemper, Honsik and others in Germany and Austria, or against Dr. Faurisson, Le Pen, and others in France.

"The most alarming thing about the Griffin trial is that, over and over again, the leftist prosecutrix reminded Griffin and the court that ". . . truth is no defense" - just as it is not for me before the Canadian Human Rights Inquisition."

The gist of this story is summarized and somewhat condensed in two excellent "Campaign for Radical Truth in History"/Hoffman Wire releases - an Internet service I herewith recommend highly. If you are interested in a previous AP reporter's summaries of the global nationalist struggle, especially from a Christian point of view, subscribe to the Hoffman Wire at hoffman@hoffman-info.com

· The Hoffman Wire reported on April 27, 1998:

"The jury {in the Nick Griffin trial} was chosen and has been called on to read the issue of the "The Rune" magazine for which Nick Griffin is being prosecuted.

The Crown said that any political motivation behind the prosecution was legally irrelevant, but that the defendant would be allowed to lay out his beliefs.

Griffin asked to be permitted to give evidence as an expert witness in his defence, and the Court is considering this.

Mr. Griffin said that an appeal to the European Courts would be made if he were convicted. Five reporters were present.

· The Hoffman Wire followed up on this story on April 28:

"The judge ruled that the fact that a left-wing publication had called for judges to be hung, yet had not been prosecuted, was irrelevant, after Mr. Griffin said that the law was often willing to ignore blatant calls for violence by the left, but prosecuted mere political comment by the right.

The prosecution then gave what Mr. Griffin said was a lurid overview of "The Rune" magazine.

It accepted that the defendant was sincere in his revisionist views on the "Holocaust," and was not attempting to stir up hatred.

It said that comments on Zionist control of the media might stir up resentment. Griffin replied that to do so - which he disputed in any case - was not an offense.

The jury then heard the audiotape of Mr. Griffin's interview with the police, followed by an appearance as a witness by one of the arresting officers.

The policeman agreed that the arrest of Mr. Griffin had been politically motivated, and had said so on the tape - something the defendant said had been deliberately ignored by the prosecution. The officer agreed that Mr. Griffin had no criminal record.

Griffin then answered various points raised by the Crown concerning the content of the "The Rune."

He was not a racial supremacist as claimed, but a separatist. His reference to a future Britain composed of 'mongrel slaves' was not directed as an attack on non-whites, but applied to all races.

The prosecution had objected to the phrase "wanted more white children."

Mr. Griffin wondered why white liberals hated white people so much that they could object to such a phrase.

Griffin has appealed for the following:

A news video showing a white South African being beaten by a black gang, since he wanted to use it together with film of the beating of Rodney King by white police officers in the US to indicate the deficiencies of multi-racialism.

Nick Griffin's trial is reported daily online and he and his supporters have called it the first "virtual trial."

His prosecution is clearly a politically-motivated witch hunt intended to intimidate a Cambridge-educated journalist who instead of enriching himself as a member of the establishment, is leading a movement for the re-birth of England and Wales.

The trial is online at: http://www.webcom.com/bnp/virtualtrial.html

· On May 1, 1998, the Hoffman Wire concluded:

Nick Griffin, the Cambridge-educated journalist, has been convicted of violating the "Public Order" act in Britain, for publishing revisionist and separatist statements in his magazine, "The Rune."

This in spite of brief defense testimony from revisionist historian Dr. Robert Faurisson, which the judges had allowed under the stricture of a time limit (approximately 35 minutes).

Faurisson was not allowed to show any photographs or documents whatsoever. In 35 minutes, he managed to tackle all the main points: Hilberg and his telepathy, Arno Mayer, no holes/no "Holocaust", etc.

The judges, who at the beginning didn't even try to hide that they were most hostile, ended up being dumbfounded: they certainly didn't expect the revisionist case to be so extensive or scholarly.

At the beginning, the British judges pointed out that Dr. Faurisson himself had been convicted several times (which meant that he was not a good or true witness).Faurisson answered that he had been sentenced about 15 times but couldn't say for sure, since he had never counted, and that therefore he was "a criminal, an arch-criminal".

When the lady prosecutor asked if the convictions in France had been based on a law against the "denial of the Holocaust", Faurisson said this was not the case. He said that the law in France was not about "denying" but about "contesting" the "Holocaust"; revisionists, he said, do not "deny" anything; on the contrary, revisionists have a constructive stance, since they strongly "assert", on the basis of their research work, that there was no such thing as homicidal gas chambers.

When asked why he had kept insisting for all those years on the same revisionist points, knowing that it would entail ever more trials for him, Faurisson answered, "Scottish blood!" (He is of French and Scottish extraction).

Mr. Griffin was sentenced to 9 months in jail with the sentence suspended and a fine of £2,300 (about U.S. $3,700)."

Thought for the Day:

"The Israeli power has two components: one real, based on its own strength and its real influence within the U.S., and the other imaginary, based on its cultivation of anti-Semitic myths in various countries."

Israel Shahak

Back to Table of Contents of the May 1998 ZGrams